Many scholars argue that American imperialism at the turn of
the century was driven by racism. In contrast, in his book “Race over Empire”,
Eric Love argues that race was much more important as an argument against imperialism. Which view do you
find more persuasive? Why? (80-100
words, by 5pm Friday August 31).
American society had an intense and ingrained sense of racial superiority in this time period, which was used as a justification both for an against imperialism. The argument that racism led to support for imperialism is based on the idea of Manifest Destiny, that it is America's god-given right to spread civilisation and the ideas of liberty and democracy across the world. A proponent of this argument was Albert J. Beveridge who stated, '... No! [God] has made us the master organisers of the world to establish system where chaos reigns.' However, racism can also be seen as a reason against imperialism. Anti-semites across the USA cringed at the idea of more and more inferior people being brought under the influence of America. This fear was compounded by the idea that if the Philippines were to be brought in as a state, they would have equal footing in the political system. Carl Shurz declared, 'they will take part in governing the whole republic, in governing us!'
ReplyDeleteIt seems that racism was indeed a strong force in driving imperialism, as each geographical step taken by the United States was justified by the need to impose a superior society and culture on those cultures deemed less so (this appears to be 99% of societies in the world. haha) Whether it be Indians during the westward expansion, Mexicans in the annexation of Texas, or Filipinos in the annexation of the Philippines, the Americans belief of their own superiority dominated over the others suggested to them that they had the right to take control of the land and markets that these places had to offer.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, racism could have been used to justify both anti-imperialism and imperialist view points during this era of American history, however it was more often used to justify imperialist viewpoints and actions. In examples such as the Cherokee removal, the view of Mexicans and annexation of the Philippines, all of these groups are referred to as "barbaric" and "savage", and are treated with high amounts of racism and prejudice. These racist viewpoints were then used to justify removal of groups or annexation of countries or areas, and as such, racism was used as a strong tool for imperialist decisions in America.
ReplyDeleteLove raises an interesting argument, and although I tend to agree more with the first view, I still wouldn't necessarily say that imperialism was driven by racism. Certainly, American imperialism, in cases such as the Mexican-American War and the annexation of the Philippines, was oftern justified on racist grounds, with the claim that America would help to civilise the inferior occupants of the desired land. However, these racist viewpoints were rarely the driving factor in American expansion, with desire for land and resources more often being America's primary reason or, in the case of the Philippines, the prevention of European powers from taking the land.
ReplyDeleteI do not believe that racism was the driving force behind American expansionism. However, I do think it played a vital role as one of the primary justifications for it. One only has to look at the reasons given for the expansion and annexation of territories. The populations were savages and uncivilised, and only through US control could they be saved. This use of racism served the Americans well in justifying their continuing expansion for more resources and land.
ReplyDeleteRace was one of many influential factors in America's imperialistic expansion due to the belief that they were the superior race. Manifest Destiny permeated the westward expansion and the growth abroad as America felt they had a duty to "save others from themselves" and were therefore incapable of governing themselves. This was used as justification for the annexation of the Philippines and to a lesser extent motivated the Cherokee Removal. However, commercial interests were also a factor as America wanted to open up their markets and trading abroad.
ReplyDelete- Bec
Personally, I find that while racism certainly played a significant role in American expansionism during this time, of far greater motivating factor was economic growth and expansionism and religion. Racial superiority, especially over the 'less developed' cultures and peoples was a factor, but the opportunities provided by these markets, particularly the Phillipines as a gateway to Asia, was astounding.
ReplyDeleteThere is an element of truth to the Love argument; there was significant resistance to taking new peoples and cultures into the American republic, resistance to making 'inferior and savage people' into American citizens. Ultimately, the benefits of good trade pushed Empire forward, while racism dictated the method and status of entry of these countries into the Empire.
The United States have innate beliefs concerning racial superiority which is used as justification both for and against imperialism. However i believe that racial overtones are the predominant factor that has been historically involved in American expansionism. The Cherokee Removal and annexation of the Philippines are such examples that illustrate the need of America to spread their values to other groups of racially 'barbaric' and inferior people.
ReplyDeleteWhile there is substantial merit to Love’s idea that race was important to those who opposed imperialism, I still find the opposing argument more persuasive. At its heart, the process of imperialism rests on a racist notion that certain groups of people are inferior to others, and therefore can be made subservient to the metropolitan power. This consideration was clearly evident in the American decision to accept the Philippines as a formal colony. It was not just the rhetoric of imperialists regarding the inferiority of the Filipinos that justified action, but the economic argument was also driven by racial ideas. The desire to turn hundreds of millions of Chinese people into American-style consumers can be seen as an economic kind of Manifest Destiny, with all of the racial underpinnings associated with it.
ReplyDeleteAlthough there is reason to agree with Love’s claim that race was a stronger driving force against imperialism, it is still evident that American imperialism at the turn of the century was very much determined by racist beliefs. Rather than recognising and respecting the different ways of life amongst indigenous people they encountered, Americans assumed superiority over them on the basis of intellect and lifestyle, and saw them as something to be helped or ‘fixed’. The belief that these people were physically, mentally and culturally inferior to Anglo-Saxons spurred America’s imperialistic behaviour, and therefore I find the first argument more persuasive.
ReplyDelete