The United States of the early 20th century was one with a booming economy and a hunger for power. They had expanded westward and were looking to continue to expand their territory across the seas, in order to assert their dominance as a global superpower among the powerful nations of the time. The poor relations between Cubans and their Spanish rulers eventually led to the Treaty of Paris, which is when Spain surrendered the Philippines to the United States. It was at this point that another major divide between the American people was created. Many Americans believed that attempting to gain power over as many territories as possible was a bad idea and one that went against what America was built on. However, there were also many supporters …show more content…
If they didn’t, they would be going against God. Supporters would also believe that the United States is a completely superior country. When describing America, Beveridge said it is, “...a land set like a sentinel between the two imperial oceans of the glove, a greater England with a nobler destiny. It is a mighty people that He has planted on this soil…” (Beveridge, 1900, pg. 97). By using words such as ‘nobler’ and ‘mighty people,’ it shows the superiority Beveridge and other imperialists feel over other countries. Critics of this document would be those against the annexation of the Philippines. These would be people that believe the ideals that America was built on would be lost, and it was not their duty to intervene with another country’s right to self-government. Another possible reason that one might be against the annexation was the fear of changing the economy for worse. For example, “Trade unionists worried that poor Filipino workers would flood the U.S. labor market and depress wage rates” (Murrin, pg. 727). People were also worried about what the cost of the navy could do to the economy. The cost did prove to be high: “In 1890, naval expenditures exceeded $22 m” (Cortes, Feb
After the Civil War, the second Industrial Revolution swept the US and the country began to flourish. Baring the economic prosperity, many Americans grew the urge to expand overseas. In the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, foreign policy was the hot topic among citizens and government officials. There were two sides to the argument; some Americans pushed for the aggressive foreign policy while others favored for the US to keep their nose out of foreign affairs. Notable figures in government took bold stands for and against foreign affairs.
During the period of 1800-1848, the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo made peace between America and Mexico where securing territorial goals was America’s drive. With the strong belief of Manifest destiny arising, the U.S took the opportunity to bargain and assume possession of western territory dominated by their southern neighbor. In turn, preceding the Mexican-American War and leading to the aftermath of The Civil War. The historical causation of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo from the period of a New Nation leading up to The Civil War in regards to America in the World, show the habitual act of the United States wanting to expand, being dissatisfied in its position in the world and remaining the ‘International Superpower.’
For a short period, the United States tried to stay on good terms with Mexico however, this period didn't last and eventually, the Mexican War broke out. These events were all justified by the Manifest Destiny and the American Settlers who believed in it. The manifest destiny continued to increase the size throughout the 19th century. (The Annexation of Texas, the Mexican-American War, and the Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo,
The American Revolution was the first of its kind. It opened the ways an oppressed country could be liberated through sacrifice and dedication. It’s message inspired other oppressed groups to revolt, no matter how bad the odds, such as the Mexican and Haitian Revolutions. They all reinforced the ideas that the spirit of the people and of the oppressed could overcome all odds, whether its economic might, military might, or any other invisible strength. In Texas, American colonists also felt that they were oppressed by Santa Anna and the Mexican government.
During the year leading up the war with mexico the united states used major disputes and reasons for going to war being manifest destiny, Rio grande boundary dispute, and slidell 's mission. Manifest Destiny was the word used throughout the 1840s which is the belief that Americans had the right and the duty, to expand westward across the North American, from the Ocean to Ocean. In order to have this destiny, Americans would have to go to war with Mexico. so in 1844, James K. Polk who won the election, He and the Democrats went with Manifest Destiny, a concept that stated that the U.S. was destined to expand across the continent and get as much land as possible. In Polk prestindestce he promised in his four step plan to get land westward and he did getting california and oregon.
During the 19th century, the people of the United States of America had a belief that they had a justifiable right to expand its territory; otherwise known as manifest destiny. This belief of inevitable conquering land in North America led to conflicts with the indigenous people already occupying the land. One of the conflicts the Americans had with the indigenous people of North America was the Mexican-American War (1846-1848) in which Mexico fought for their territory that the Americans thought was rightfully theirs in the attempt to expand west. There may be several reasons to the cause of the Mexican-American war, however, the two major causes of the war were consequences resulting from the Texas War of Independence and the American’s desire
They truly hoped that a war would be enough to turn the tide. Perhaps the most weighty opinion was the one of sitting president, William McKinley. He tried to persuade a decidedly religious group that taking over the Philippines was the Christian thing to do because America would simply be saving them from themselves and evil countries that would do far worse (Doc 3). McKinley had also advocated for the Spanish American War for much of the same reason, it would be saving these poor, repressed people from the despicable Spaniards. There were many that agreed with McKinley.
“We hold with Abraham Lincoln, that ‘no man is good enough to govern another man without that other’s consent’... ‘that is despotism (rule by a tyrant),”(document A). Even though he was not alive, Abraham Lincoln posed a great point as to why the Philippines should not be annexed; they did not give their consent. The Philippines was taken over and annexed against their will by the US. Document A also says that annexing the Philippines extinguishes “the spirit of 1776 in those islands”.
Eventually, this led to US intervention in the Cuban War of Independence. At the start of the 20th century, an immense number immigrants flocked to America in hopes of achieving the American Dream so many wished to achieve. Unfortunately, with racism becoming such a prevalent issue in the nation, specifically towards African Americans, segregation and a belittling
It was their claim that the expansionists were destroying the “America institutions”, the constitution. On these grounds they tried to prevent the further war and bloodshed in the Philippines and other countries that might bear the same fate in the future if America continued to expand. (Docs A, D) The departure from expansionism was relatively small during this time period while its continuation and progression flourished.
2 years later, a treaty was signed, but Mexicans still had to obey the Americans. Flash forward to 1898, and America once again had its eyes on another territory. This time, it was Cuba. Like with Texas/Mexico, Cuba used to be a Spanish colony. Cuba had a good location and resources, so it would be a great gain for the
William McKinley in his thoughts on American Expansionism has identified the reasons why America had no other choice but to incorporate Philippines as a part of it. This writing has been lifted from the excerpts of an interview with William McKinley soon after Spain had surrendered in the Spanish-American war. McKinley cleverly talks in this interview about how Philippines just came and fell into the laps of America thereby suggesting the helpless stance of America. He talks about how America’s sole intention and purpose had only been to safeguard its own interests as a country. He had to order that the Spanish fleets in Manila be destroyed because if left unattended, they would have crossed the Pacific and wreaked havoc in the American states
On the other hand, Hoganson had a different outlook on the annexation of The Philippines. She saw the takeover as way of dictatorship. Hoganson said,” The savage, childlike, and feminine stereotypes appealed to imperialists because they not only suggested the Filipinos' incapacity for selfgovernment, but also enabled imperialists to cast themselves as civilizers and authoritative heads of household—that is, as men who wielded power” (Hoganson). American viewed the people of the Philippines as simple minded and easy to control. She interpreted the annexation as a way for white business men to feed their hunger of power.
The Louisiana Purchase was a “land deal” made between France and the U.S. in December of 1803, where France sold America 828,000 miles of land along the west side of the Mississippi River for 15 million dollars (approximately 4 cents per acre). People regard it as Thomas Jefferson’s greatest achievement because of how drastically it changed the United States. The purchase greatly expanded America and brought many other benefits along with it. Although it was definitely a major benefit to the United States, even Jefferson had his doubts about the purchase. But despite many doubts, the U.S. made the decision to ratify the purchase, and because of that decision, America has changed for the better.
When we made allies of the Filipinos and armed them to fight against Spain”. In my opinion, I think that the people of America had just gone based off of what President Lincoln had stated so greatly before. Yes, he may have expired from this Earth, but based of of what he had been saying corresponds very well to the situation at hand. To me, I think that Abraham Lincoln was one of the greatest Presidents of all time. The wonderful saying that Abraham Lincoln said (Based off of the article in Document A): “no man is good enough to govern another man without that other’s consent.