Imperialism And War : American Foreign Affairs

American imperialism has undergone varying transitions through its developmental stage in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century, and it was interpreted to be many things, including controversial to the original colonial beliefs. The United States rapidly took up the sport of becoming involved with foreign nations, and it was clear that through influence on these nations, the United States would grow in both territorial size and power in the global sense. America helped many Polynesian, Latin American, and Asian nations during this period, and most of the conversed issues was trade and foreign relations. The desire of territorial expansion was also in response to the blossoming ideal of Social Darwinism, where expansionism was justified if the United States was aiding struggling nations with their foreign and domestic policies. Although justified, Social Darwinism was an unethical approach to world power, and many perceived this step in American Imperialism as corrupt. The Panama Canal also held a large part in building American Imperialism. Creating this canal would determine which nation dominated the sea, and the United States was more than eager to pounce on the opportunity to increase their global influence. The United States dipped its hand into many global issues during and following the Gilded Age, and these hold the honor of molding American Imperialism, but its change over time was held up to debate by scholars in the Gilded age and by contemporary

Throughout the history of the United States, America had a desire to expand its boundaries. The United States acquired most of it's land during the nineteenth and early twentieth century with a brief break during the Civil War and Reconstruction. However, the way America went about graining new lands drastically changed from non-aggressive means in the beginning to extremely aggressive means towards the end. This essay will depict the extent to how late nineteenth-century and early twentieth-century United States expansionism was a continuation

Prior to the late 19th century, the United States was preoccupied with domestic affairs and simply used the Monroe Doctrine as their lone foreign policy. By the late 19th century, however, domestic concerns suppressed just enough to let foreign issues take the spotlight. The Industrial Revolution brought mass production, which forced the United States to seek a new global market for trade. America also became increasingly concerned with intervening in Latin American affairs and spreading democracy to less powerful nations. Due to the aforementioned factors, imperialism played a pivotal role in shaping American foreign

During the 1890’s, the United States began building and advancing their economy, as well as focusing more independently on becoming an even more powerful nation. Not only did the Americans begin to create a stronger national military and navy, they also began to look overseas towards the Pacific Ocean for resources and territories; this is when America began to look less like a national power and more like an imperial power. There were many reasons as to why the United States began to expand between 1880-1929, two of which include the military opportunities countries abroad had to offer, such as Pearl Harbor, as well as the domestic and political objectives the U.S. felt obligated to fulfill. Although, there were many important reasons for the United States to began to expand, the most significant reason for the expansionist foreign policy was the economic resources and opportunities other foreign countries had to offer the U.S.

The United States has progressed economically and as a result methods of expansionism have evolved but it also tried to stay with the ideals of the forefathers. In Document C the importance of naval power is expressed and it outlines the obligations: the

There are people today who think that the United States of America’s boundary was created by fate; however, much complexity was involved in the gaining of our country’s boundaries. Manifest Destiny comes from the desire that Americans had to expand their borders. Americans wanted a distinct expansion from the Atlantic to the Pacific Ocean. The term “Manifest Destiny” originated when John L. Sullivan published an article on the annexation of Texas. O’Sullivan believed that the expansion of the United States would be beneficial and better our nation. The American settlers became very determined to expand their civilization across North America. The Second Great Awakening, the belief that God would bless the growth of the country, created another reason for Americans to want to expand. “The Democratic Review asserted that God had preordained expansion across the continent” (Greenberg, 15). Manifest Destiny has played a very important role in our country’s past, its present, and it will have a significant role on its future. “Without Manifest Destiny, the territorial expansion of the United States from a strip of Atlantic coast colonies to a continental empire in less than a -century would have been, literally, unthinkable” (Greenberg 2). If our country continues to expand its perimeter, the concept of Manifest Destiny will always play a role in history.

to further their supply of land and profits. To fulfil the demands of the American expansionists,

At the end of the nineteenth century an elite group containing Christian missionaries, intellectuals, business leaders, commercial farmers, and navy careerists, lobbied the White House, Congress, and the State and War departments for the United States to be more active abroad. In the 1880’s, Congress started a program to modernize the United States’ navy. With the improved navy, the country had what it took to turn into an imperial power.

Numerous motivating factors contributed to US overseas imperialism, but the fundamental underlying cause was the fact that powerful men within the US government, military and business strata craved power, expansion, wealth, and most of all, world dominance. It began subtly, as prominent businessmen like Rockefeller and J. P. Morgan began to realize that US consumership alone would not sufficiently sustain the growing industries, volume of production and produce generated within the US. In order to achieve the expansion and exponential growth of wealth they aspired to, a larger market was needed; a market capable of absorbing the abundant surplus. The solution, they believed, was expansion into foreign markets around the world.

Through the strong foundation of Isolationism and the policies enacted such as The Monroe Doctrine, the United States played a largely neutral role in foreign affairs. The Monroe Doctrine passed in 1823 was to forbid European nations from colonizing any territory in the Western Hemisphere. Although the United States didn’t have the authority or firepower to back this up, it resulted in almost four decades of compulsory US involvement in any foreign affair. After the Civil War, Isolationistic practices grew stronger as the government had to find a way to re-unite the torn nation. President Grover Cleveland promised to avoid committing the nation to form any alliances with other countries while also opposed to the acquisition of new land. The climate of post Civil War US prevented us from deep involvement in foreign affairs. Our navy was also weakened by the war. Our natural resources were scarce and our diplomatic relations with other countries had been neglected. With the attention of our government focused solely on our nation, we proceeded to develop our interior. One of the biggest reasons for growth in US land mass was the public idea of Manifest

Strong trade, control over certain countries, and military. During Roosevelt's term he accomplished a lot to make it known that the U.S was a global power. Roosevelt supported the fact that a strong military, especially navy was important in expanding and becoming a world power. One way he did this was by sending “The Great White Fleet” on a world tour. It was a fleet of 16 ships that would travel around the world to protect our trade and enforce treaties. Another supporter of imperialism, Henry Cabot Lodge, also agreed that a strong navy is key to expanding and the U.S should look outward and help others to spread our power. A.L Lowell, president of Harvard, said “imperialism is successful, the way for other countries to succeed is for us to control them.” The controlled countries will be set because the U.S will spread their successful ways of culture and government, which is “White Mans Burden”. The more successful countries we have control over, the more global authority the U.S has. Countries that the U.S control can serve as a way of travel, bases for military, and refueling

Mahan's vision for a U.S. Empire in the Pacific and Caribbean was realized by Teddy in the form of Pearl Harbor and the Panama Canal, an absolutely essential project for U.S. business and military hegemony. By the early part of the 20th century, the intertwining of commercial and military interests, especially at sea, was finally complete.

Firstly, the Asia-Pacific region offered the United States a chance to grow economically, secure valuable resources and expand trade. At the outset of the nineteenth century, the majority of the United States was concentrated in North East due to European migration across the Atlantic

States felt obligated to expeditiously and decisively assert itself in a world predicated on imperial power. America’s first foray into European-style intervention, the rash and jingoistic Spanish-American War proved vital in catalyzing American interventionism. This victory whet the appetites of the American commercial lobby creating an urgency to secure trade interests in the Caribbean, the Americas, and the Pacific. Integral to establishing American power and hegemony in Western hemispheric trade was a transisthmian canal. A return to Monroe Doctrine foreign policy bolstered by interventionist Manifest Destiny revived the Panama Canal Project, America’s Suez Canal.

Afred Thayer Mahana was a great realist, a U.S naval officer and a historian. Mahan was also a professor in the Naval War College and lectured on naval history and naval strategy. Out of his lectures grew his two major works on historical