The Cultural Concept Of The Economic ' Open Door '

America’s role in the international arena during the 1900s is best captured in the poem by Kipling, “The White Man’s Burden” and had been clearly articulated in the speeches of Roosevelt and Beveridge. The American government believed that it is the American duty to interfere and be an influential power in the civilizing of nations that American’s perceived as unable to rule over themselves or as savages, illiterate, and the cause of chaos which ultimately affects the America’s vision of successful world commercial activities. However, it must be clarified that this goal is characterized by conflicted opinions within the American nation itself. Some believed that America should not interfere with the fate of other nations and argue for their

Besides, it was all very necessary after the depression of the 1890s; people sought to find a route for recovery and “…strong majority agreed that foreign policy could and should play an important – if not crucial – part… in forestalling future difficulties… explained the depression and social unrest as the result of not having enough markets for their specific product… an outlet for surplus stocks becomes an imperative necessity” (Williams 30). This engendered the Open Door Policy which “was in fact a brilliant strategic stroke which led to the gradual extension of American economic and political power throughout the world” (Williams 45-6). But not all historians agreed with Williams for Schlesinger attacks Williams concerning his ideas on the Open Door Policy. “[T]his zeal for foreign trade and for territorial expansion predated the general agricultural surplus....[A]fter the Civil War, the passion to promote trade and exports subsided, instead of intensifying as it should have done according to the Open Door thesis” (Schlesinger 132). He satirically criticizes Williams’ economic reasoning by saying, “vast new markets in the solar system” (Schlesinger 149) and furthermore, firmly states “the American empire was produced not by the economic system...but by the political

Intervention involves a more powerful country working with a less-developed country to solve problems, but in the process preserving the country’s valued traditions and working with cultural differences. This was first and most famously seen in China through the economic spheres of influence set up by foreign countries. However, these interventions in China and contemporary foreign policy in America are not alike because China changed from being the “victim” in this trade situation to one of the most powerful and largest trading nations today. In the past, countries trading with China, such as the United States, Britain, and France, were in a more powerful position as China as a whole was weakened and vulnerable after several rebellions within the provinces. These rebellions gave foreign countries a chance to intervene and set up “spheres of influence” along China’s coast to be used for trade. The quintessence of the method of intervention in China was the Open Door Policy, which was created by the United States to ensure equal trading opportunities in China. According to the database website, ABC-CLIO, a publisher of reference works for the study of history and social studies, “The McKinley administration responded to the scramble for concessions by enunciating what would become known as the Open Door Policy (...) the United States called for equal opportunity for all nations to trade freely in that country, and for the powers to respect China's territorial integrity. (...) and were designed to assure U.S. access to ports, investment opportunities, and natural resources located within these new spheres of influence.”. This passage shows how interventions in China were very much run by the foreign countries and for the most part, China was at the hands of these countries and had little power in the situation.

Much like in Japan when Matthew Perry of the United States came in and insisted in having Japan open up its ports to diplomatic and commercial relations with the US, and since the shogun felt he had no other option, he complied with Perry’s order. As the westerners had their way with both east Asian nations, the threat of western industrialization became a reality, and due to the amount of hunger and economic depression in their societies, their people began to crave industrialization seeing the amount of success in the western societies that were industrialized. There began to be an increased amount of rebellion, and a fight for change in these two nations, but the results that came from these rebellions and the main argument for these rebellions differed.

Since 1899, America has maintained an open door policy with China. Throughout the years, relations between the United States and China have changed with several effects on both countries caused by the open door policy.

Source 1 is an image that is showing a man in a washroom washing his hands with soap. It can be made out that the man is white and of high social class. It is an advertisement about Pears’ soap and its advances in cleaning purposes. But on the other hand we can read the saying “The White Man’s Burden” which is used to indicate that white men have a responsibility o0f being paternalistic towards the first nations. In this case it is most likely first nations since in the background there are signs of ships and imperialism. The ideological perspective presented in the source is globalization. If there was no competition between the European countries it was most likely that America would have never been found. The links between the principles

This had led to British completely outmuscling the Chinese with their far superior technology, as well as forcing the Chinese into a treaty that opened up numerous ports in China, allowed Westerners to move to China, as well as pay reparations to the British. This utter defeat showed the Chinese that they needed to adapt, and our second document, a map forecasting the partition of China amongst various nations, showed them that they needed to make those changes quick. All of this led to arguments between groups who felt China needed to self-strengthen and those who feared the increasing influence of Western ideals that could be brought on by learning more about the West in order to better defend against it. This is shown in our third document on self-strengtheners, such as Feng Guifen who argues for youths to be taught in Western languages and sciences in order to best defend against them. This document shows further the nationalism within China, as well as the importance of traditions, ideals, and values, as both sides argue their points based on protecting them from Western

As early as 1932, the United States began warning Japan about its aggression toward China (Doc. A). The U.S. claimed they would not recognize new territories because it violated the Kellogg Briand Pact that made war illegal. They also chose to not recognize new treaties as the open door policy with China was violated. FDR would later deliver his famous “Quarantine Speech” regarding the Japanese invasion of China in which he encouraged the peace-loving nations to take action against military expansionism (Doc. 1).

During the Sino-Japanese War (1894-1895), China had tried to fight hard to resist the foreigners, but had lost, due to its lack of modernized technology. In the year of 1900, the Boxer rebellion had surfaced. During this time the Boxer movement had shifted to Beijing, where they killed millions of Chinese Christians and Christian missionaries, as well as destroying churches and railroad stations. During this time America had feared that the Boxers would apprehend Beijing, and the US would lose all access to their resources. This idea had been drafted by the current Secretary of State at the time, John Hay. Hay and his team concluded that America’s interests; economic, strategic, and cultural, were best served in the preservation of the Chinese Empire. This led to the US’s involvement in the Boxer Rebellion. While we did not send troops to help fight in the war, we did voice our disapproval of any crimes against the Chinese

During an imperialistic era, America looked to expand its horizons and create more trading opportunities with China. China was a booming resource of trade that every nation wanted a hand in. Thus, the Open Door Policy stated that each nation would have an equal part of China while it would still remain sovereign. It tried to protect China from any nation trying to become too powerful, but in actuality, it had no legal basis. America’s constant interest with foreign nations was a huge departure from its original isolationist exchange

The U.S. government used many known approaches in order to gain control over other countries. Some foreign policies that were enacted was the two Open Door Policies, Roosevelts Corollary, and the Dollar Diplomacy. The first Open Door policy guaranteed that all nations had the rights to trade with China on an equal basis. The Second Open Door Policy stated in a stronger way, American’s intentions were to preserve trade with China, and

With this, the policy and principles of the Open Door appeared to be threatened. It was on the 3rd of July, in 1900, that John Hay sent a message to the other countries that were involved in China reminding them of the importance of respecting the “territorial and administrative integrity” within eastern continent. The main goal was to prevent the countries from the other countries from breaking China into individual colonies and using the Boxer Rebellion as an excuse, there was no formal agreement or assurance that the other countries would not do

Rudyard Kipling’s 1899 poem “The White Man’s Burden” epitomizes the European man’s view on imperialism, Euro-centrism and social Darwinism. Four centuries before 1899, such ideas were briefly hinted in the letter from Christopher Columbus to King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella, however by 1899 these attitudes strengthened and developed fully into their complete meaning. The U.S and Europe’s imperialism in the nineteenth century were the most influential ever in the history of human civilization. The immense motive for imperialism came from social factors including religion and Social Darwinism.

The People’s Republic of China (PRC) has become more integrated and willing to cooperate within the global political and economic systems than ever in its history. However, there is growing apprehension in the Asia-Pacific region and the U.S. in regards to the consequences of rising in economic and military power in China. Descriptions about Chinese diplomacy in the policy and scholarly are less positive lately concerning China’s obedience to regional and international rules. There was little debate in the U.S. and elsewhere in regards to whether China was or was not part “the international community.” Scholars and experts in the early 1990s have contended

Realism assumes that under a balance of power, the overriding aim of all states is to maximize power and become the only hegemony in the system. States only help themselves in the anarchic international system. Therefore, China’s rise is regarded as a disconcerting threat to the U.S.’s primacy of power in the present international stage. The power shift in East Asia is creating security dilemmas; the U.S. thus demands more security to its Asian allies including Philippines, Japan and South Korea. The rapidly-rising Chinese power would inevitably challenge the current international balance of power and appear aggressively in the eyes of weaker power such as the Philippines. Therefore it seeks help to its ally, the U.S., to counterbalance the power of China. China intends to gain more resources and to transform current international order to its favor according to its national interests. The 2010 Chinese White Paper on National Defence states that: “Contradictions continue to surface between developed and developing countries and between traditional