John O'sullivan Manifest Destiny Analysis

711 Words3 Pages
“What does Manifest Destiny mean? How did this philosophy shape America from 1800-1850? Make sure to discuss the Mexican War at some point in your answer.”

In 1845 John L. O'Sullivan began the term "manifest destiny" refering to a growing idea that the United States was commanded by God to “expand throughout North America and exercise hegemony over its neighbors”. Around the time of O'Sullivan's writing, the United States saw an extraordinary territorial growth of 1.2 million square miles, meaning they expanded more than 60% Most of this growth was at the expense of the Native American Nations and Mexicans who had newly received independence. The expansion happened at such a fast pace that people like O'Sullivan thought that even larger
…show more content…
President James Monroe said that the Americas were "not to be considered as subjects for future colonization by any European powers," creating a way for an increasing United States leadership over its neighbors by trying to cut off European influence in the Western Hemisphere. Mexico opened the land for colonization, but the response was so overwhelming that Mexican authorities lost control of the divisions they created. Feeling motivated by the ideas of manifest destiny, the new English-speaking settlers rebelled in 1835 in an attempt to form an independent state. The war ended on 2 February 1848 with the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo ceding to United States the present-day Arizona, California, New Mexico, Texas, and parts of Colorado, Nevada, and Utah. Altered ideas of manifest destiny, combined with other forces of the time, but the Whig Party opposed expansion, believing that the republican experiment in the United States would fail if the nation grew too large. Politicians from the Northeast felt they would lose political power in Congress if the United States admitted more states into the union. Attempts to expand further into Mexico were put to a stop as racism began to come into play. The abolitionists also opposed expansion, particularly if it would bring slave territories into the union. Pacifists became gravely concerned with the casualties of expansion and opposed its violence. Most people
Open Document