Arguments for and against overseas expansion raised a foreign policy debate in the late years of the 19th century to the early years of the 20th century. People favored overseas expansion because they wanted the American economy to grow. Missioners, who wanted to convert the inhabitants of the new lands, also propelled this new policy, and theories such as the Social Darwinism and the Manifest Destiny made people believed it was right for America to expand its frontiers and help the less fortune. But there were some who disagreed with overseas expansion because they looked at it as a hypocrisy act among Americans, or as a way of subjugating other nations just for America’s benefits. Some others were concerned that making contact with under-developed nations would eventually dilute their racial stock and the strength of America.
At the end of the 19th century the growth in population and in production led many people to look outward. By expanding, America would ensure that there would always be access to foreign markets for America’s surplus products to be sold. To fuel America’s industrial economy, people found expanding very beneficial. Overseas territories offered a cheap labor force allowing American goods to be made at a lower cost and were full of natural resources and raw materials, which could be very useful in American manufacturing. These foreign territories could serve as possible coaling stations for the battleships, or as military basis. Many businessmen found very advantageous this idea because they saw it as investment opportunities. They were willing to use their surplus capital to invest in the mines of Philippines or to start producing in Hawaii because they knew this would give them higher returns that investin...
... middle of paper ...
...also disagreed in subjugating other nations just because America thought is was superior, and there were some who did not want to see their blood mixed up with those of inferior cultures.
Works Cited
Brody, David and Henretta, James A. America a Concise History volume 2: Since
1865. Boston MA: Bedford / St. Martin’s, 2010. Print.
"Imperialism, 1890-1914 (Overview)." American History. ABC-CLIO, 2010. Web. 19
Feb. 2010. .
Lewis, Chris H. “The Spanish- America- Philippino War.” Colorado.edu. University
of Colorado at Boulder, 07 Aug. 2002. Web. 18 Feb. 2010.
"Spanish-American War." American History. ABC-CLIO, 2010. Web. 19 Feb. 2010.
.
Williams, William. “Non-Self Governing Territories.” Reader’s Companion to
American History, (1991): 364. Print.
Throughout most of the nineteenth century, the United States expanded its territory westward through purchase and annexation. At the end of the century, however, expansion became imperialism, as America acquired several territories overseas. This policy shift from expansionism to imperialism came about as a result of American's experience in the Spanish American War and the Congressional debates that followed the American victory.
American taking part in imperialism gained its motion from both economic and cultural justifications that stemmed from America's history of expansion; American imperialism only varied slightly in the first few generations of presidents as we will explore sampling from Theodore Roosevelt's presidency on into Woodrow Wilson's presidency. American's previous western expansion became the breeding grounds for American imperialistic justification. Though cultural justifications were used to keep the public interest in support of imperialism economic justifications were viewed as more important throughout the history of imperialism, even in uniting the similarities of Theodore Roosevelt's and Woodrow Wilson's imperial agendas.
At the turn of the century, and after gaining our independence, the United States land mass more than doubled through the use of purchasing, annexing, and war. However, the foreign policy of our government took a predominately isolationist stand. This was a national policy of abstaining from political or economic relations with other countries. General Washington shaped these values by upholding and encouraging the use of these principles by warning to avoid alliances in his farewell speech. The reasoning behind these actions was that the Republic was a new nation. We did not have the resources or the means to worry about other countries and foreign affairs; our immediate efforts were internal. Our goals that were of primary importance were setting up a democratic government and jump-starting a nation. The United States foreign policy up to and directly preceding the Civil War was mainly Isolationist. After the war, the government helped bring together a nation torn apart by war, helped improved our industrialization, and helped further populate our continent. We were isolationist in foreign affairs, while expanding domestically into the west and into the north through the purchase of Alaska. However, around 1890 the expansionism that had taken place was a far cry from what was about to happen. Expansionism is the nations practice or policy ...
The United States believed that by using economic expansion method they could expand and explore their economy; their economy was dependent on foreign trade due of increasing agriculture and manufacturing exports. America paid money to Panama to get control of the Panama Canal. It begun in 1904 and completed in 1914. They did this because they needed strong power over the world to protect its trading interests and it also empowered America to expand its economy and military influence. US believed that control over sea was the answer to the world preemi...
The nineteenth century America was a period of history following a number of long lasting wars and also a whole new start to new changes in society. With the collapse of multiple nations that were in contact towards the United States, it paved the way for the growing influence and development for the United States, spurring military imperialism and conflicts, and advances in scientific exploration and technologies. Because of the ideas and resources that were began to spread, develop and flourish in areas of the western hemisphere, the nineteenth century also saw opportunities in construction, communication, and in particular the transportation systems. But as different aspects of society began to improve and that more and more freedom were in the hands of the citizens and government, the competitive market not only expanded in profit and wealth, but simultaneously faced minor conflicts due to the abuse of their rights and property. Because of the rise of new technological advancements and resources, railroads in the 19th century American society quickly boomed cities and came across as the most dominant source of transportation, as it predominantly played a role in the expansion of industry across the United States. Also, it was a movement most efficient in creating their own monopoly and was quickly adopted by many other countries that sought influence.
From western expansion to foreign imperialism the United States has always been an expansionist country. Early America’s focus was to conquer the natives and obtain western land within North America, but in the latter of America’s history, specifically in the nineteenth and twentieth century, foreign imperialism became the new focus. America’s activity in foreign imperialism was a continuation and departure of the United States’ early expansionism. It was a continuation in terms of manifest destiny, the spread of Christianity, and by the concept of “the city on a hill” and a departure in terms of foreign involvement.
United States expansionism in the late nineteenth-century and early twentieth-century is both a continuation and a departure of past United States expansionism. Expansionism in the United States has occurred for many reasons. Power (from land), religion, economics, and the ideas of imperialism and manifest destiny are just a few reasons why the U.S. decided to expand time and again throughout the course of its 231 year history. Expansionism has evolved throughout the years as the inhabitants of the country have progressed both socially (the Second Great Awakening, the women's suffrage movement, the populist party and the early 19th and 20th century social reformers) and economically (factories, better farms, more jobs, etc.) Expansion changed from non-interference policies to the democratic control of the government as the United States grew in both size and population. Through the use of the documents and events during two major-expansion time periods (1776-1880) and 1880-1914), I will display both the continuation and departure trends of United States expansionism.
How do you see progress, as a process that is beneficial or in contrast, that it´s a hurtful process that everyone at one point of their lives has to pass through it? At the time, progress was beneficial for the United States, but those benefits came with a cost, such cost that instead of advancements and developments being advantageous factors for humanity, it also became a harmful process in which numerous people were affected in many facets of life. This all means that progress is awsome to achieve, but when achieved, people have to realize the process they had to do to achieve it, which was stepping on other people to get there.
The United States of America has never been content with stagnation. The landmass of the Thirteen Colonies was enough to rival that of the Mother country from which they separated. The forefathers believed that it was the manifest destiny of this nation to eventually claim the expansion from the Atlantic to the Pacific Ocean. By 1890, nearly a hundred years following the original claim of Manifest Destiny, the land that was once open, was now under American control. But no sooner was the Great American Frontier closed, than was the door to East Asian expansion opened with the great gold key of American diplomacy. In a world where imperialism was contagious, and cartographers had to work around the clock to keep up with an ever-changing geopolitical landscape, the United States seized the opportunity to establish herself as a significant world power. With great expansionist minds at her helm, such as Theodore Roosevelt and Howard Taft the United States began to grow beyond her border to claim stake in this wide-open world. This new expansionism of the late nineteenth and early twentieth century was a different institution than its early to mid nineteenth century counterpart. Still, the drive to exercise the sovereignty of the United State and to propel itself over the world’s stage was the same then as it was in the time of Thomas Jefferson. In order to understand this assertion, attention must be given to three levels of analysis. First, the similarities that exist between the drive and purpose of old and new expansion must be taken into account. Second, the differences in the global political scene must be considered. Finally, there exits differences in the means by which expansion occurred.
The United States, as a young nation, had the desire to expand westward and become a true continental United States that stretched from the Atlantic to the Pacific. Various factors, strategic and economic, contributed to the desire to expand westward. According to John O’Sullivan, as cited by Hestedt in Manifest Destiny 2004; "the U.S. had manifest destiny to overspread the continent allotted by Providence to the free development of our yearly multiplying millions" (¶2). As Americans ventured westward to settle the frontier, their inherent superior beliefs, culture and the principles of democracy accompanied them. America’s ruthless ambition to fulfill its manifest destiny had a profound impact on the nation’s economy, social systems and foreign and domestic policies; westward expansion was a tumultuous period in American History that included periods of conflict with the Native Americans and Hispanics and increased in sectionalism that created the backdrop for the Civil War.
Expansionism in America during the late nineteenth and early twentieth century shared many similarities and differences to that of previous American expansionist ideals. In both cases of American expansionism, the Americans believed that we must expand our borders in order to keep the country running upright. Also, the Americans believed that the United States was the strongest of nations, and that they could take any land they pleased. This is shown in the "manifest destiny" of the 1840's and the "Darwinism" of the late 1800's and early 1900's. Apart from the similarities, there were also several differences that included the American attempt to stretch their empire across the seas and into other parts of the world.
As the United States grew in power, so did her ideas of expansion. The foreign powers were beginning to move out of their continents and seek land in other countries. The United States soon followed. They followed in their founder’s footsteps and tried to occupy lands in the far seas. However, in the beginning, this need for more land was called Manifest Destiny. This idea claimed that God was forcing them to occupy the new western lands. The expansionism that occurred in the late 1800’s was not a result of Manifest Destiny, and thus this "new" idea of expansionism was different from the expansionism ideas of early America. For the most part, the United States’ need for more land was primarily to keep other nations (mainly European powers) out of the western hemisphere. However the United States began to see reason behind change towards the "new" expansionistic ideas.
Economics becomes a large factor in the American imperialism; but more specifically that expansion in foreign markets is a vital part in the growth of America. As historian Charles Beard puts it, “[it] is indispensable to the prosperity of American business. Modern diplomacy is commercial. Its chief concern is with the promotion of economic interests abroad” (Kinzer 81). Williams provides that the people of United States wanted this change to culminate in the business. “A great many farm businessmen were in trouble, and if they voted together they could control national policy. There was, in truth, a crisis before the Cri...
Like previous American expansion, American imperialism in the late 19th and early 20th centuries was motivated by desire for new economic gains and improvements. However, the social justification, diplomatic and military approach and geographical aspect of imperialist expansionism varied greatly from previous American growth. Therefore, American expansionism underwent more change in this period than continuity. For many years, the American boundaries expanded as people moved, at the governments urging, westward for new economic opportunities and later imperialist expansion was no different. While many factors contributed, economic possibility was a driving factor in the expansionist aspirations.
In 1898, in an effort to free Cuba from the oppression of its Spanish colonizers, America captured the Philippines. This brought about questions of what America should do with the Philippines. Soon, controversy ensued both in the American political arena as well as among its citizens. Throughout its history, America had always been expansionistic, but it had always limited itself to the North American continent. Beginning in the mid-nineteenth century, however, there emerged a drive to expand outside of the continent. When America expanded to the Philippines, the policy it followed was a stark break from past forms of expansionism. Despite much controversy, America followed the example of the imperialistic nations in Europe and sought to conquer the Philippines as an imperialist colony that they would rule either directly or indirectly.