This paper compares and contrasts Theodore Roosevelt's "New Nationalism" and Woodrow Wilson's "New Freedom" as competing progressive visions in the early twentieth century. Roosevelt's philosophy centered on aggressive federal intervention to break up monopolies and eliminate unfair business practices, while Wilson favored regulating industry through federal agencies while maintaining a more market-friendly posture. The paper examines what became of Wilson's New Freedom once he took office, highlighting three areas of reform — tariff, business, and banking — including the controversial creation of the Federal Reserve in 1913 and the passage of the Federal Trade Commission Act of 1914.
In the early twentieth century, the United States was undergoing a period of unprecedented change. Industry was booming, and the country was becoming increasingly urbanized. In this climate of transformation, two prominent politicians emerged with very different visions for the future of the nation. Theodore Roosevelt, a Republican, championed what he called the "New Nationalism." Woodrow Wilson, a Democrat, countered with a platform he called the "New Freedom." Though both agendas could be considered progressive, they differed substantially in their approach to federal power, business regulation, and economic reform.
Roosevelt's New Nationalism focused on an assertive role for the federal government in eliminating monopolies. Roosevelt was staunchly opposed to unfair dealings in business and wanted to break up the trusts that dominated the American economy. In his view, concentrated corporate power was a threat to democratic life, and only a powerful federal government could counteract it. This philosophy placed Roosevelt firmly in the tradition of using government as an active instrument of social and economic justice.
Woodrow Wilson campaigned on his New Freedom platform in 1912 seeking to be seen as friendly to both big business and workers. Rather than simply breaking up monopolies, Wilson preferred to regulate industries through federal agencies. Those who supported the New Freedom saw it as a more hands-off approach to business — one that big business proprietors welcomed, as it allowed them to compete within the free market system they had long used to their advantage. Despite this more measured stance, Wilson's program was still considered a progressive reform agenda.
"Wilson's three reform areas and their contested legacy"
On the business front, however, the Federal Trade Commission Act of 1914 was passed to give the federal government the authority to investigate and stop illegal or unfair business practices. This represented a concrete legislative achievement of the New Freedom agenda and demonstrated that Wilson's regulatory approach did result in meaningful institutional change, even if the overall legacy of his reforms remained a subject of debate.
Both Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson advanced progressive agendas that reshaped the relationship between the federal government and American industry. Roosevelt sought to dismantle concentrated corporate power directly, while Wilson preferred a regulatory framework that preserved market competition. Once in office, Wilson pursued reform across tariff, business, and banking policy, with mixed and sometimes contested results. Together, their competing visions defined the boundaries of Progressive Era thought and left a lasting imprint on American political and economic life.
You’re 80% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 1 section.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.