yesnoWas this document helpful for you? Thank you for your participation!

* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof man-made knowledge, which develops the content of this project




You are watching: Compare and contrast views of united states overseas expansion

*

*



See more: Bob Marley Baby I Love Your Way, Baby I Love Your Way

Compare and also comparison views of USA abroad growth in the late nineteenth and also earlytwentieth centuries. Evaluate just how understandings of nationwide identification, at the moment, form these views.ThesisDocument contentDocument evaluation (POV, historical conmessage, intfinished audience, purpose)Analysis of exterior examples*Contextualization**tright here may be some overlap in between these twoSynthesisAfter the Civil War, the United States began to prosper because of the second Industrial Radvancement. With thisdomestic financial prosperity, the urge to expand abroad spreview among many Americans. Throughout the latenineteenth and also early twentieth centuries, international policy came to be a critical controversy amongst prominentAmericans. While some Americans puburned forward for aggressive international policy, others wanted the UnitedStates to not gain connected in international affairs. Politicians, such as William McKinley and Theodore Roosevelt,believed that the prosperous United States must spreview its excellent fortune to other claims, such as the Philippines,Cuba, and Puerto Rico. They believe imperialism was a good thing for the USA, while others, likeWilliam Jennings Bryan and Mark Twain condemned imperialism. They believed it violates Amerideserve to ideals,and also that it did not fit via the nation’s identity. Advocates suggested that the USA served to civilizeothers, prefer an global policeman, while enemies said that the United States should focus more ondomestic troubles and keep its conventional identity.Imperialism came to be a trouble throughout the Spanish Amerihave the right to War. In essence, the war really did not needAmerican treatment. Yellow journalism and the intended strike on an American ship were what led toAmerican treatment. As quickly as Americans intervened, the question about the future of these new coloniesemerged. Some Americans wanted to fight the battle to carry adjust at home. In particular, African Americanssupported the battle bereason they thought it would certainly carry them civil rights (Doc. 2). If they battled through whitesoldiers, if they risked their lives through white soldiers, then perhaps they would be treated choose white soldiers. Thisis what E. E. Cooper argues in the Colored American, and his thoughts pushed Afrihave the right to Americans to advocatefor war. Others advocated for war bereason they thought the new nations might prosper from American assist.Theodore Roosevelt, an aggressive imperialist, criticized anyone that opposed annexation of the Philippines(Doc. 5). Before becoming president, he supported for the United States to “parent” over the Philippines. Heignored the opposition from the Filipinos, something adversaries of imperialism would later point out. Afterbecoming president, his views from 1899 were brought over to his foreign policy. He treated the USA asan international police and also advocated for his “Big-Stick” policy. This contains his Roosevelt Corollary to theMonroe doctrine, which argued that the USA can and should intervene in Latin Amerideserve to affairswhenever before its interests were endangered. Not everyone was happy with this. In reality, Rubén Darío, a LatinAmerican poet, created a poem targeting Roosevelt and also condemning his Big Stick plan. José Martí, anotherLatin American writer, wrote around Latin America coming together to stand up to the United States. Roosevelt,but, ignored them both and spread his ideas around.Roosevelt was not the just president advocating imperialism. William McKinley did as well, for he was thepresident that linked the Philippines. He thought the Filipinos necessary the Americans to aid them becomecivilized, that the Filipinos can not govern themselves (Doc. 3). This principle was reflected in some senator’s“March of the Flag” speech, which suggested that the USA can annex these territories because theseterritories weren’t fit to govern themselves yet, that uncivilized people did not have the exact same legal rights as civilizedhuman being. As time passed by, the USA had actually even more abroad nests besides the Philippines, tright here wasCuba and also Puerto Rico. The require for these colonies was supported by Alfred Mahan a pair of years previously.He thought that the USA need to have actually colonies for its broadening Navy. This Navy would certainly protectAmerican interests, and it required bases, or else it would certainly be choose a bird without wings. These bases would certainly benests.Other Americans, however, were strictly opposed to imperialism. They did not watch the UNITED STATE as someglobal police, and a lot of of them stuck to the principles expressed in George Washington’s farewell attend to.They opposed ventures favor the Panama Canal and endeavors prefer the United Fruit Co. They opposed the SpanishAmerihave the right to War, and they opposed the principle of the USA becoming a realm. One scholar, WilliamGraham Sumner, was strictly opposed to the Spanish Amerideserve to War. He believed that the United States wascomplying with Spain’s footsteps and that the U.S. would ultimately shed these territories in the exact same means Spain did(Doc. 2). Sumner was more worried about troubles at house, not the future of other peoples. He thought theseswarms would be a trouble. Other adversaries thought imperialism resulted in problems at residence. Jane Addamsbelieved advocating imperialism was advocating militarism. Within time, Americans regarded the SpanishAmerican War as a great point, but Addams argued that it resulted in worries at home (Doc. 4). People openly hatedSpaniards and also supported killing them. For Addams, this wasn’t what America stood for. Becoming an empirewas not the democratic thing to execute. How could a just republic be an empire? Presidential candidate WilliamJennings Bryan said this principle in his campaign (Doc. 6). He believed the federal government might not represent thedesires of citizens and foreigners (from the annexations) equally. The colonies would certainly hurt America’s reputationand also they would reason troubles. Racism was a vast trouble at the moment, and tbelow was no way that Americanswould acquire in addition to even more races (such as Filipinos) and check out them equally. It would lug humiliation.Opponents of imperialism thought this wasn’t the Amerihave the right to means. To some, it may have actually looked like the UnitedStates spcheck out the wings of liberty abroad, yet some kbrand-new that this was not the case (Doc. 7). Mark Twain, forexample, fiercely opposed annexation of the Philippines for he knew the U.S. had actually no appropriate to decide thelifelayouts for various other peoples. The UNITED STATE was abutilizing the Philippines at the moment through approaches like the water cure.Opponents said that this wasn’t liberty, it wasn’t democracy, quite it was a realm that didn’t represent theideas set by the forefathers of the United States.All these conflicting views arose because some Americans thrived greedy, and also they thought that the UnitedStates must safeguard its interests. They viewed the U.S. as a nation that required to supervise “lesser” countries.Opponents said that this wasn’t the situation. They thought that if the UNITED STATE were being successful, then it shouldprosper at house, not get affiliated in international affairs. In the finish, it all came down to views of national identification.