DBQ Imperialism

From the late nineteenth-century to the early twentieth-century, the United States
expansionism can be characterized as both continuations and departures from past

practices. Politically, America shifted from an isolationist tendency to one of increased
foreign engagement. However, America continued its practice of treating conquered
people poorly. What did not change was America’s desire to acquire wealth. The
acquisition of land in the North American continent was completed, so America looked to
lands across the oceans. While there was a shift in the location of geographic expansion,
the desire to add real estate continued as before.
The departures from past expansionism ways grew on a parallel with US power.
The growth of the navy gained bargaining power for the US, and with our big stick we
were able to venture into lands such as the Philippines and even China. Document C
underlines the importance of naval power, as well as outlining the three necessary
obligations. “First, protection of the chief harbors, by fortification and coast-defense
ships…Secondly, naval force, the arm of offensive power, which alone enables a country
to extend its influence outward. Thirdly, no foreign state should henceforth acquire a
coaling position within three thousand miles of San Francisco…”(Doc C). With our new
found naval power we began to take control. The importance of naval dominance and the
Pacific Ocean was further stated by Senator Albert J. Beveridge in his speech to the 56th
Congress. “The Pacific is our ocean… and the Pacific is the ocean of the commerce of
the future…The power that rules the Pacific, therefore, is the power that rules the world.
And, with the Philippines, that power is and will forever be the American Republic” (Doc
E). With North America already ours the navy became the new ways of expanding.
Another very important departure to note is the Roosevelt Corollary. It made the
acquisition of foreign lands not only possible, but socially acceptable. Under Teddy
Roosevelt, the people of the United States were all for expansion. Our country had
changed since 1885 when, as Thomas Nast depicted, the United States was nowhere to be
found in the game of “World Plundering” (Doc A). Now, due to the Roosevelt
Corollary, Manifest Destiny, and our newfound naval power we were part of the “world
plunder(ers).” As shown in the cartoon of “American Diplomacy” in 1900, Uncle Sam is
standing at the forefront of China’s “open door” holding the key which opened China up
without China’s permission (Doc G). The departures from past expansionism practices
were major and they changed the way we were viewed in the world.
The continuations of United States expansionism were limited compared to the
departures. However, the continuations were just as important. All of the major
departures showed hints of our previous ideals. The expansion into foreign lands came
from Manifest Destiny and the idea that the Anglo-Saxons were mandated by God to
expand into these territories. The belief was that the Anglo-Saxon race was “The race of
unequalled energy, with all the majesty of numbers and the might of wealth behind it—
the representative, let us hope, of the largest liberty, the purest Christianity, the highest
civilization…will spread itself over the earth” (Doc B). This had been the view in
America for a long time, viewing our religion as superior was no new notion. The
Roosevelt Corollary, another major departure, came directly from the Monroe Doctrine,
which protected the rights of struggling Latin American countries and their fights for
freedom. As Roosevelt said, “Chronic wrongdoing, or an impotence which results in a
general loosening of the ties of civilized society… require intervention by some civilized
nation, and…the adherence of the United States to the Monroe Doctrine may force the
United States, however reluctantly… to the exercise of an international police power”
(Doc F). And another obvious continuation, was just America’s desire for wealth and
expansion of our markets, which we found in foreign lands. The continuations weren’t as
abundant as the departures from past expansionism, but they were just as important.
Most people in America saw the expansionism as a great thing, but some
disagreed, and expansionism did have downsides. There was the Anti-Imperialist
platform that spoke out against imperialism. Document D illustrates a key opinion of the
group, "Much as we abhor the war of "criminal aggression" in the Philippines, greatly as
we regret that the blood of the Filipinos in on American hands, we more deeply resent the
betrayal of American institutions at home...” But the voices against imperialist policies
went largely unheard. And one of the major downsides to this new expansion was how
immigrants were treated. Immigrants were sometimes treated badly, along with new
territories not achieving citizenship (Doc H). However, in most American’s eyes the
upsides of expansionism outweighed the downsides.
In conclusion, the expansionism in the late nineteenth century and early twentieth
century shared some policies and ideas with earlier expansionism. The belief that God
had destined America to spread throughout the land had never faltered. Yet the
differences between the two periods are numerous enough to say that the later policies
and ideas were more of a departure from the early policies and ideas. Americans had no
longer looked to the West by the 1890's; instead they looked to the world.

DBQ Imperialism

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

DBQ Imperialism

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

DBQ Imperialism

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

From the late nineteenth-century to the early twentieth-century, the United States

expansionism can be characterized as both continuations and departures from past

You might also like