Final answer:
Wilson's policies have been critiqued for not being fully progressive, especially regarding racial segregation and initial hesitation towards women's suffrage. While advocating for a non-interventionist foreign policy, Wilson's actions in practice, especially in Latin America, tended toward intervention to protect American interests.
Step-by-step explanation:
Some historians argue that Woodrow Wilson's policies were not completely progressive, citing several aspects of his tenure.
A significant concern relates to B. Handling of racial segregation, as Wilson's administration saw the reversal of previous progress on race relations, notably with the segregation of federal government offices, which had been racially mixed up until that point.
Additionally, Wilson's reluctance on women's suffrage casts a shadow on his progressive label. It wasn't until the strong momentum of the women's suffrage movement and the public pressure that Wilson changed his stance and supported the 19th Amendment.
When considering Wilson's foreign policy, some may argue that his decisions were not entirely in line with his professed philosophy. Although Wilson initially advocated for minimal American involvement abroad, based on moral imperatives rather than American self-interest, he eventually took actions that contradicted this vision.
For instance, during his presidency, he sent troops into countries like Haiti, the Dominican Republic, and Cuba, often to protect American interests, reflecting a more interventionist stance than he had originally advocated.