Isolationism to Imperialism - Lecture 3a
Descriptions of U.S Power Abroad
When the U.S is present in other states other than their own, it is often to do with helping their own strategic interests to expand their power and control.
(is this correct?)
These methods include:
→ Isolationism:
Where keeping neutrality is main focus along with protecting their economy and being self-efficient. This way avoids any obligations with having to deploy their military but also separates them from their allies.
→ Non-Interventionism:
Where keeping neutrality is main focus along with avoiding any obligations with having to deploy their military, however, differs from isolationism as it is more to do with not involving themselves in the affairs of other countries.
→ Interventionism:
Unlike the other two, this method directly involves engagement with other countries affairs’ in order to influence U.S power and control over them, done by militia or covert ways.
→ Imperialism:
Control in other areas outside U.S that is ongoing, understood as the U.S as the center of the power and everyone else in the margins for the U.S to take hold of
Territorial Expansion and Manifest Destiny
The United States of America was originally composed of thirteen states / colonies before it adopted the ‘manifest destiny’ approach and expanded, occupying other indigenous lands on and off-shore. ‘Manifest destiny’ was a saying used to justify the territorial expansion of the U.S.A and deem it as inevitable and good to do so, even though the land they did colonise was occupied already. Yet, the logo map that we see today of the United States territory is not actually accurate to the land and territories that the U.S has taken control of / colonised.
→ The justification behind colonising and conquering all the native lands of mainland North America leads back to the ‘White Man’s Burden’ - the belief that all indigenous peoples of the land were in need of saving and modernisation but were simply also waiting for someone to come and show them direction. This is evidently false thinking because the indigenous groups did in fact have their own form of leadership and governance, but because it wasn’t what the American imperialists knew as, it was considered savage and in need of reformation.
States and Territories
The expansion continued into Mexico in 1848 in which the U.S government, ran by President James K. Polk, ordered militia (led by Zachary Taylor who became the next President after Polk), and demanded majority of their territory which includes all of present-day California, Nevada, and Utah, majority of Arizona, and parts of Colorado, New Mexico, and Wyoming.
→ This was later signed off and given legality to in the form of a treaty called ‘Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo’
Leading up to 1861, when the Civil War started, the U.S.A still had occupied territories, differing from the logo map image. Some of these areas were occupied by purchase from the U.S government, or by force from U.S militia. Any states controlled by slavery or considered ‘free’ were added to the U.S union too.
(is this right?)
The Monroe Doctrine and Regional Power
President James Monroe made a declaration to the U.S public and rest of the world that any sort of interference from other states in the Americas (Both North and South) soil or to do with U.S affairs would be considered hostility and a threat. However, this declaration wasn’t always enforced, for example, when Haiti, a U.S colony, was forced into debt and reparation by France, there was no intervention from the U.S. Worldwide, this meant that the Americas became a separate, distinct power region away from Europe.
Reluctant Empire
As the states became integrated within the logo map of the U.S.A, it influenced more expansion to occur to gain as much monopoly over power and militia as they could. This meant U.S influence and control over Caribbean and Pacific territories. However, this was all still done under the premise and belief of the U.S government of democracy, liberty, freedom, and equity, not through an imperial mindset as it were seemingly beginning to look like.
The first clear example of the U.S acting as an empire rather than their self-proclaimed republic, was the initiation of the Spanish-American war in 1898, as they took over territory already claimed by the Spanish imperialists. However, this does not mean any evidence of imperialism wasn’t found on American soil - it very much was, just hidden under a veil of so-called republicanism.
Questions:
Does the non-interventionist approach just mean no military or no involvement in other affairs at all?
→