During the late nineteenth and early twentieth century, the United States was the most dominant power in the Western Hemisphere. European nations conceded to the United States their right of any intervention in the Western Hemisphere and allowed the United States to do whatever they wanted. The United States took this newly bestowed power and abused it. The United States intervened in many Latin American countries and imposed their policies on to these countries against their will. A perfect example of this aggression is what occurred in the Dominican Republic in 1904. The United States intervened in this sovereign nation and took control of their economy and custom houses. A memorandum from Francis B. Loomis, the United States Assistant Secretary of State, to the Secretary of States illustrates the United States’ goals, interests, attitudes and assumptions in the Dominican Republic and how the United States policy makers felt towards Latin America during this time period.
The United States had a wide variety of goals and interests in the Dominican Republic and in Latin America. In the Dominican Republic, Americans were heavily invested in the Dominicans’ industries. Americans invested in an area of six million dollars just in the Sugar industry alone (Loomis 2). And “the total American investments in the Dominican Republic of an important and active sort are estimated to be worth about twenty million dollars (Loomis 2). Also, many American citizens owned and operated many vast and major plantations and railroads in the Dominican Republic. American citizens’ owned and operated 60 miles of important line of railway (Loomis 3). Also at Sosua, the American company, United Fruit Company owned some twenty thousand acres of land which...
... middle of paper ...
...l power in Latin American. The United States didn’t engage in classic direct imperialism which is colonialism, but engage in indirect imperialism which focused on controlling and intervening in the economic and social institutions of Latin America. The United States only cared for their economic well-being. They didn’t care the suffering the people of Latin America were going through. The United States only cared that their economic interests were thriving in Latin America. The policies the United States government undertook clearly show this. The policies of Roosevelt’s corollary and Taft’s dollar diplomacy only mention the United States’ interests. There is nothing about the Latin American’s interests and well-being. Many people suffered because of the United States’ policy that only supported and protected the rich and powerful corporations.
Throughout the course of history, nations have invested time and manpower into the colonizing and modernizing of more rural governments. Imperialism has spread across the globe, from the British East India Company to France’s occupation of Northern Africa. After their founding in 1776, the United States of America largely stayed out of this trend until The Spanish-American War of 1898. Following the war, the annexation and colonization of Guam, Puerto Rico, and the Philippines ultimately set a precedent for a foreign policy of U.S. imperialism.
In his book Contesting Castro: The United States and the Triumph of the Cuban, Thomas G. Patterson explores Cuban relationships with the United States during the Batista and Castro regimes. In the 1950’s, when Fulgencio Batista was in power, the United States had an almost imperialistic dominance over Cuba. Patterson uses the word “Hegemony” to describe this dominance. He defines hegemony as “the dominance or preponderant influence that permitted U.S. decisions to condition Cuba’s politics, economy, culture, society, and military. U.S. hegemony empowered North Americans to set and maintain most of the rules by which Cubans lived and by which the Cuban – American relationship was governed” (7). At this time, the U.S. was imposing it self on Cuba without really understanding the people or the culture. The U.S. viewed Cubans as an “emotional, romantic, and childish people suffering from excessive pride” (6). There was obviously little respect for Cubans from the U.S. Moreover, Cubans felt that the strong, multifaceted U.S. influence was causing Cuba to loose its “independent identity” (8).
Section I,2. Analyze the consequences of American rule in Puerto Rico, Cuba and the Philippines. Did the citizens prosper? Enjoy freedom? Accept American rule? Comment on the consequences for the United States with regard to the statement made by Eric Foner in the text, “Thus, two principles central to American freedom since the War of Independence – no taxation without representation and government based on the consent of the governed – were abandoned when it came to the nation’s new possessions.
Today I bring to your forefront of thought, the island of Hispaniola. This island is the namesake for the two countries who run the land, the Dominican Republic and Haiti. Both nations hail from a joint introduction into the world market and post-European colonization, but as time progressed, each one had a different outlook to the world stage. The present day Dominican Republic and Haiti are worlds apart on an island which keeps them together. Their culture is separated by the colonial residuals that lay imbedded into their communities. They are on different sides of the spectrum of structural growth due to the resulting outcomes from decades of political ruling and policy making. On one side we have the second independent state of the Americas,
The United States of America has always done good even without gaining anything in return.Imperialism at the time was a word that was common among not only politicians but also in the possession of American citizens, this proves that the influence was a major plus to America’s global imperialism and expansionism. The Dominican Republic during the 20th century suffered from being in the temptation of Communism. The U.S was able to occupy the Dominican Republic and because of this their actions were viewed as imperialistic to Americas inhabitants and foreign nations as well. Although some believe that the United States is an imperialistic because of past interaction with the D.R it was not the same case this time around.
THESIS : “ The United States didn’t want to get involved in the Spanish-American War, but was dragged into it due to yellow journalism, they wanted to control the seas, and wanted complete control over Cuba.”
After the civil war, United States took a turn that led them to solidify as the world power. From the late 1800s, as the US began to collect power through Cuba, Hawaii, and the Philippines, debate arose among historians about American imperialism and its behavior. Historians such as William A. Williams, Arthur Schlesinger, and Stephen Kinzer provides their own vision and how America ought to be through ideas centered around economics, power, and racial superiority.
One of the first foreign policies in the twentieth century was the Roosevelt Corollary. This policy asserted U.S. authority to intervene in the affairs of Latin American nations; an expansion of the Monroe Doctrine. Also known as the cornerstone of American foreign policy, the Monroe Doctrine was the first time the United States had declared their own foreign policy without following the foreign policies of other countries. The doctrine declared that we (the United States) “are henceforth not to be considered as subjects for future colonization by any European power” (Out of Many Pg. 765), meaning the Western Hemisphere was to be closed off to further European colonization and that the U.S. would not interfere in the internal affair of European nations. The Roosevelt Corollary, however, was an amendment stating that the United States of America was the superior culture, and Roosevelt wanted to spread value and influence in Latin America and keep the Europeans out. President Roosevelt was very fond of the West African proverb, “Speak softly and carry a big stick, you will go far.” Throughout his presidency and the Roosevelt Corollary, the president used the “big st...
Before the coup, the United States had already invested heavily in Chilean democracy, starting with the Alliance for Progress initiated by John F. Kennedy in 1961, aimed at establishing economic cooperation between the U.S and Latin America. On pg. 12 of the introduction Kornbluh discusses how Chile had long been a country that attracted a case
Roosevelt made the decision to formalize a policy started by Herbert Hoover by which the United Sates rejected the right to intervene militarily in the internal affairs of Latin American countries (Foner 853). Moreover, this Good Neighbor Policy, had mixed results. The United States withdrew its troops from Haiti and Nicaragua during the 1930s (Foner 853). What is more, Roosevelt accepted Cuba’s repeal of the Platt Amendment, which permitted American military interventions on that island. These steps offered an overdue recognition of the sovereignty of American neighbors (Foner 853). On the other hand, while Roosevelt criticized wealthy businessmen at home, like previous presidents he was left feeling uncomfortable and dealing with undemocratic governments friendly to American business interests abroad (Foner 853). Equally important, the United States extended support to dictators with the likes of Anastasio Somoza in Nicaragua, Rafael Trujillo Molina in the Dominican Republic, and Fulgencio Batista in Cuba (Foner 853). However, in the 1930s the international crisis deepened, the Roosevelt administration had taken steps to counter German influence in Latin
A) During the late 19th century Latin America had just begun entering the race to industrialization. Currently winning that race was the United States of America and Europe. Latin America was still evolving, they were culturally and economically oriented toward the outside world, highly accessible of European influence, especially from France and England. In Latin America both conservatives and liberals regarded the United States worthy of imitation. Together, the United States, England, and France began to define Latin America's growing relationship with the outside world.
America has been a country of great power for years, and that power has come not only from years of hard work and fighting, but also from years of audacity. About one hundred fifty years ago, the United States began sending armed forces to foreign countries in an effort to attain each individual country’s opulent resources. This commanding attitude taken by the United States government spread into the American people as well, with corporate giants such as Rockefeller and Morgan, who controlled large parts of American business with monopolies over the railroads and oil industry. Events such as the SpanishAmerican War and interference in the Philippines marked the indisputable beginning of American imperialism. Invasions such as these propelled United States capitalist expansion and produced the ideas of economic expansion in government as well as in homes.
However the US played a much larger role in Cuba’s past and present than the building of casinos and the introduction of the first taints of corruption. In the past, even before Batista, Americans were resented by Cubans because the Americans made a lot of Cuba’s decisions. Under Batista, 80% of Cuban imports came from the US, and the US controlled at least 50% of sugar, utilities, phones and railroads. If Cuba was a business in the stock markets, then the US would have been close to owning 50% of its shares. When combined with a long history of US-backe...
American foreign policy directed and influenced its activities in Chile. United States although contradicted its firm belief of democr...
In Emily Rosenberg's book Spreading The American Dream: American Economic and Cultural Expansion, she chronicles the history of American expansionism throughout the Western Hemisphere, Europe, and the Far East. I contend that not only does the United States disregard their path towards liberalism when it suits their interests, but also that the United States' intervention in Latin America was meant to undercut European competition while boosting their own economic supremacy throughout the world. The conflicts between global economic expansion and classic liberalism presented themselves beginning with McKinley's presidency, evolving but still conflicting all the way through the Truman administration. With an increased government role in foreign