big thanks to evan, steve, teryn, and danielle for the assist here.
TERMS
"City on a Hill"
XYZ Affair
-American ambassadors sent to france
-were NOT granted access to high-level officials
-instead, persons X, Y, and Z (names never released) demanded bribes
-biiiiig mistake
-this leaked to the american press, people were OUTRAGED
-bad choice, french officials
Federalist Party
The Federalist Party was a political party formed by Alexander Hamilton during the First Party System that wanted a strong centralized government, ruled by an educated elite, a strong military, and a loose construction of the Constitution. This party appealed to the merchants, bankers, landowners and industrialists. They also favored Britain over France, Anglo-phallic. The Federalist party sought to strengthen the nation state through a centralized powerful government, recognizing that if the power remained in the hands of the states it would never achieve the ability to protect itself from or assert itself in the international community.
Quasi War
Treaty of San Ildefonso
-treaty between france and spain
-spain turns over louisiana territory to france
-french were ruled by napoleon at this point
Toussaint L'Ouverture
-Leader of Haiti
-started a slave rebellion, was their leader
-Haiti was the first real rebellion after the US
-choice was for the US to support or not to support the rebellion in Haiti, because they were much like the US themselves- striving for freedom from colonial power
-US decided NOT to
-to placate the south especially, they decided that to support a slave rebellion was a baaaad idea
-eventually Haiti was retaken by the French, shanked by colonial power
Order in Council
British Privy Council order that authorized the Royal Navy to blockade French ports, and later to seize ships trading with France. France responded with a similar measure. USS Chesapeake refused to submit to British inspection, as a result, the British opened fire, killed 21 people, recovered 4 British deserters and impressed them. Thomas Jefferson responded with the embargo act banning all trade with European powers. This policy was ineffective and eliminated 80% of exports, hurting the government’s source of tax revenue (customs receipts). Embargo was later repealed. These orders were a leading cause of the War of 1812, even though they were actually repealed 2 days before the USA declared war (took a long time to reach UK from USA).
Embargo Act (1807)
-Jefferson's method of keeping the US out of the European war on one side or another (french or british)
-no trading with ANYBODY
-america has NO ships traveling to any belligerent ports
-essentially closed down american ports
-extension of isolationism proposed by washington in his farewell address
-didn't work at ALL
-shanked american economy
-didn't even get britain to respect neutrality rights, they would do ANYTHING to control the seas
-repealed in 1809, after jefferson left office
Non-Intercourse Act
-passed in 1809, alternative to the embargo act
-essentially the same thing, but with provisions for lifting the embargo
-whoever declared that they wouldn't molest US ships would get the benefit of US trade
-lifted embargoes on all but british and french ports
Henry Clay
Henry Clay was the (Founded the)Whig Speaker of the House and a war hawk, who helped push the USA towards war with Britain in 1812. He was a Vindicationalist, who believed in foreign intervention to achieve America’s goals. He was significant because he turned the Speaker of the House into a position of power, using his power to push America towards war. He was also instrumental in helping delay the Civil War through the Compromises of 1830 and 50, which maintained the balance of slave vs free states.
Ambrister and Arbuthnot
-during Jackson's invasion of florida (1818)
-they find Arbuthnot
-scottish trader, rumored to be selling guns to the indians, writing letters on behalf of the indians to the europeans
-they find Ambrister
-a 'self appointed british agent'
-both sentenced to death for aiding and abetting the enemy
-um. is there more here? i don't think so.
George Canning
He was British Foreign Minister who proposed that, as part of the Monroe Doctrine, the US and UK join to warn off Spanish and French intervention in the Americas. He was motivated to do this in order to secure the markets there. Monroe actually rejected his offer, seeing it as making the USA subordinate to the USA. "It would be more candid, as well as more dignified, to avow our principles explicitly to Russia and France, than to come in as a cockboat in the wake of the British man-of-war." The significance of his proposal was that it caused Monroe to engage in a completely independent US action, following exemplarist/isolationist thought. Important to note that Jefferson and Madison urged Monroe to accept the offer.
Sam Houston
Houston was an early leader in Texas, who advocated for Texan independence from Mexico. He defeated Mexican General Santa Ana in the Battle of San Jacinto, paving the way for Texan Independence. He was a slave-holder.
Whig Party
The Whig Party, founded by Henry Clay, believed in the supremacy of Congress over the Executive Branch, also favored programs of economic development. They were originally formed to oppose Andrew Jackson’s policies. They were opposed to American expansion because they opposed the expansion of slavery, but were Vindicationalist in their foreign policy to protect American economic interests. The party broke up over the issue of allowing slavery in the territories.
John Tyler
-ascended to presidency after Harrison was retarded and died
-most important act was annexation of texas
-people didn't treat him as having as much authority as the real president
-all the same, his firm action in the wake of Harrison's death set the precedent for future vice-presidential assumption of power
-Harrison was expected to essentially be the puppet of the Whig party
-Tyler, however, was NOT
-officially expelled from the whig party within months of taking office
-known as "the man without a party"
"54:40 or Fight"
-Battle cry taken up by US settlers who wanted the entirety of the oregon territory
-oregon was jointly settled by US and british peeps
-US expansionists wanted the whole thing for themselves
-Polk took up some serious brinksmanship here, was later criticized for it
-US and Britain eventually settled on 49th parallel
Robert Walker
An expansionist Senator from Pennsylvania who advocated the recognition of Texas. As the Treasury Secretary under Polk, he helped finance the Mexican-American War and established the Dept. of the Interior. The Walker Tariff, proposed by him in 1846, lowered the US Tariff, coinciding with a repeal of the British Corn Laws. The bill resulted in a moderate reduction in many tariff rates and was considered a success in that it stimulated trade and brought needed revenue into the U.S. Treasury, as well as improved relations with Britain that had soured over the Oregon boundary dispute. As Walker predicted, the new tariff stimulated revenue intake from $30 million annually under the Black Tariff in 1845 to almost $45 million annually by 1850. Exports to and imports from Britain rose rapidly in 1847 as both countries lowered their tariff barriers against each other.
Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo (1848)
-Laid out the terms for the Mexican Cession
-gave us California, Nevada, Utah, parts of Arizona, N.Mexico, Wyoming, and Colorado
-ended the Mexican American war
-biiiiig cession
David Wilmot
A Congressman who created the Wilmont Proviso. It advocated that slavery be outlawed in territories acquired as a result of the Mexican War. This was significant because it created greater Northern-Southern tensions, especially in relation to the oncoming Civil War.
William Walker
An American soldier of fortune who attempted to conquer Latin American countries, and was briefly President of Nicaragua before being executed. He was significant because he inspired many Southerners as to the feasibility of creating a slave holding empire in South America.
Ostend Manifesto
-Secret plan written in 1854 by US diplomats to take Cuba from Spain
-diplomats wrote that cuba was a necessary part of the union
-plan was to offer spain $130 million for cuba, if they didnt take it, then other (military) action was justified
-this was leaked to the US press, became a problem
-it was possible that Cuba would just become a slave state, tip the balance to the south, so northerners were outraged
-as such, it failed miserably
John Crittenden
-author of the Crittenden Compromise- last ditch attempt to stave off the civil war
-six unamendable amendments to the constitution
-essentially made permanent the missouri compromise and fugitive slave act, and prohibited congress from interfering in interstate movement of slaves and from interfering with slavery at all
-massive concessions to the south here
-important thing wasn't that it was rejected soundly, but that it was immediately rejected by Lincoln
-set the tone for the civil war
"King Cotton"
-southern plan for economically winning the civil war
-southern theorists argued that cotton production was so essential to the economic well-being of the european states that they'd come into the civil war on the southern side
-problem with this was that much of the 1861 crop had already been sold, so the south actually had to embargo cotton
-this did NOT work as planned
-the people it hurt (cotton workers in britain, for instance) didnt have the vote anyways, so couldn't really influence the government
-european govts just got their cotton from other places (india, for instance)
-southern economy just got shanked because of this
-led to the rise of 'king corn' by the north
-the fact that US agricultural production was massive, supplied corn for much of the world was much more influential than cotton
John Slidell
An American Ambassador to Mexico who originally offered to purchase Texas for 6 million $. He was turned away, and US troops invaded Mexico in the Mexican War. He was involved in the Trent Affair, where he was one of the two CSA Ambassadors sent to negotiate with the UK. Discuss previous ID’s: Trent Affair and Mexican War.
Alabama Claims
-US claims made that GB owed us money
-argument was that britain had built ships for the south, caused massive loss of life and property for the north
-britain was aiding a belligerent power, as well as a participant in a civil dispute, not kosher
-even after promising and legislating not to, britain is still making warships for the south (ship in one place, guns in another, move outside the country and assemble)
-US demands in compensation either $2 billion or canada
-instead, after arbitration, US gets $15.5 million
-great precedent for arbitration
Richard Olney
As SecState, He quickly elevated U.S. foreign diplomatic posts to the title of Embassy, thus making it official that the U.S. would be regarded as an equal of the world's greater nations (up until that time, the United States had had only Legations, which diplomatic protocol dictated be treated as inferior to Embassies). He became specially prominent in the controversy with United Kingdom concerning the boundary dispute between the British and Venezuelan governments, and in his correspondence with Lord Salisbury gave an extended interpretation to the Monroe Doctrine which went considerably beyond previous statements on the subject. The Olney Interpretation, which he created, states that the Monroe Doctrine gave the United States authority to mediate border disputes in the Western Hemisphere.
Open Door
-US policy with regards to china
-US believes that china should remain free of 'spheres of influence' by european powers
-essentially because we got into the game too late to have our own
-US wants to trade with china unmolested by european powers
-interesting contradiction here
-US claims right to close the western hemisphere to european powers
-HOWEVER, it denies that same right to any other country
-wooo double standards
Frederick Jackson Turner
-wrote the closing of the frontier thesis
-'the significance of the frontier on US history' or something like that
-argument was that the frontier was incredibly important to US history and policy
-expansion functioned as a 'safety valve'
-the farther west we went, the less we cared about european politics
-so closing of the frontier was a big thing
-democracy itself rests on the economic incentive gained from expansion
-first part of american history was finished
Alfred Thayer Mahan
-wrote the 'the influence of sea power on history'
-essentially argued that massive naval superiority was vital to US security and superiority
-naval prowess was measured in terms of battleships, not just commerce raiders
-our naval power just SUCKED
-after this was published, it got much much better
-we have to be able to fight other country's navies, not just their commercial interests
"Glut" Theory
-theory that explained US expansionism
-US production had permanently outstripped consumption
-we need new foreign markets to export to and exploit
-this justifies US taking over other territories- for the purpose of economic exploitation
-problems with this, however
-no real reason that we have to own the territory to trade with it
"White Man's Burden"
-another theory for US expansionism
-US had to educate the ignorant natives in the ways of civilization
-some countries and peoples just weren't ready for democracy
-we had to bring them up to our levels of civilization
-democracy was a luxury of the anglo-americans, for example
-extremely racist motivations for expansion
-another argument within this was that the natives had no real rights, because they didn't have the racial capacity for understanding these rights
Roosevelt Corollary
-amendment to the monroe doctrine
-'if any latin american nation falls into anarchy or impotence' we would intervene
-essentially we did this to deny european powers any economic pretexts for intervention in the western hemisphere
-came about after the germans used economic rationale to bombard and invade venezuela
-made the US the hegemon of the western hemisphere, essentially (well, even more so)
Lusitania
-british passenger liner with over 100 americans on board
-put into service carrying war materiel
-german U-boat sank it
-even though the germans essentially warned that they were gonna sink the ship, there was massive outrage over the 128 americans dead
Zimmerman Telegram
-final straw, brought america into the war
-telegram 'intercepted' by the british
-was from germany to mexico
-said that if mexico came into the war on the german side, they'd give mexico back the territory it lost in the Mexican-American war
-americans were PISSED OFF
Henry Cabot Lodge
American isolationist Senator, who opposed participation in the League of Nations. He argued that Article X, which required member to repel aggression with troops, would drag the USA into European affairs and risk the integrity of the Monroe Doctrine in that it would give Europe a reason to interfere in American affairs. He said that “membership in the world peacekeeping organization would threaten the sovereignty of the United States by binding the nation to international commitments it would not or could not keep. “
Kellog-Briand Pact
-pact between a bunch of nations never to go to war again
-kind of retarded
-lots of escape clauses ('self-defense')
-also, the US, for instance, reserved the right to go to war. even though they 'agreed' not to
Nye Committee
-senate committee, headed by senator nye, to investigate the reasons for going to war
-concluded that the reason we went to war was because of greedy bankers' and arms merchants' pressure
-nye was MASSIVELY non-interventionist with regards to WWII
Ludlow Amendment
-another proposed isolationist amendment
-would have required a referendum to be held in the event of a declaration of war
-majority of the people would have to approve every time we declared war
-again, MASSIVELY non-interventionist
America First Committee
-another isolationist committee
-lots of prominent people on this one (Henry Ford, etc)
-petitioned FDR not to go to war
-vigorously opposed the lend-lease act
"Arsenal of Democracy"
-FDR borrowed this term from wilson
-used in a fireside chat
-argument for intervention in WWII on the british side
-lend-lease act was part of this
-patrolling the north atlantic was another part of this
-occupying iceland and greenland so the british didnt have to was another part of this
QUESTIONS
1. Describe the essential features of the rival exemplarist and vindicationist alternatives in American foreign policy. Which has been the dominant theme, and why?
-exemplarist
-america should be model for the world
-woodrow wilson was one of these
-model for the world, spread values through people wanting to be like us
-vindicationist
-america should actively spread values throughout the world
-by military force, if necessary
-Roosevelt was one of these
-dominant theme
-for the beginning of american history, isolationism was dominant
-this means exemplarists win out
-this works up until around late 1890s, when more interventionist thoughts came into play
-after then, vindicationists gain more power
-even though wilson and them were exemplarists, they're more and more influenced by vindicationists
-this culminates with WWII and the Cold War, which is the ultimate vindicationist expression of power
In 1630, John Winthrop famously argued the notion of American exceptionalism in his “City Upon A Hill” speech, and thus set the stage for the formation of two rival foreign policies: namely, exemplarism and vindicationism. Both policies stem from the concept that America is an inherently moral force and that its liberal, democratic institutions represent the best possible model or all countries. Likewise, these two policies hold that the United States should work to spread its form of government, yet exemplarist and vindicationist views differ over how the United States should accomplish this.
Exemplarists hold that the sheer existence of the United States sets an example for the world, and that through this success it will cause other nations to adopt a democratic government. On the other hand, vindicationists hold that it is the moral responsibility of the United States to impose democracy onto other countries through imperial means, and that it must actively work to spread its values rather than set a passive example. These two ideologies have existed in various forms through the entirety of U.S. history, with exemplarism often being a dominant theme during peacetime and vindicationism often gaining support during wartime.
There are several examples of vindicationist policy in American history: the Mexican-American war, the Spanish war, and the entire history of Manifest Destiny are evidence of this fact. Democratic leaders such as James K. Polk were generally supportive of this policy, as seen in Polk’s call for the “reoccupation of Oregon and reannexation of Texas”. Exemplarism is more often seen in the isolationist policies of figures such as Henry Clay, who opposed the annexation of Texas, and is often connected with “Washington’s Farwell Address” in which Washington warns the American populace not to become involved in European disputes. This has become manifest in the series of neutrality acts and proclamations which the United States often passed in order to prevent becoming involved in foreign wars.
2. What factors in its origins led Americans to think of their nation as exceptional and how has this sense of exceptionalism influenced the evolution of American foreign policy?
-geographic location was huge
-isolated from europe
-atlantic ocean is really really big.
-allows them to be isolated from the vagaries of european power politics
-gives them time to react to threats, so preemptive war isnt necessary like it is in europe
-this gives them a feeling of moral superiority
-they had no substantive neighbors, so they can expand without check
-religion
-they feel like God has given them this massive country for their benefit
-God has isolated them from the corruption of europe
-yada yada yada
-you get the idea
The foundation of American exceptionalism is first seen in John Winthrop’s 1630 “City Upon a Hill” speech, in which he argues that America was a nation formed under the grace of God, and that it must set an example for the rest of the world. This sense of exceptionalism has had particular impacts on the evolution of American foreign policy as it led to the formation of two rival factions: the exemplarists and the vindicationists. Exemplarists believed that the United States should spread its values by setting an example for the rest of the world. This policy is generally aligned with the concept of isolationism and the Federalist/Whig/Republican parties, as seen in the example of Henry Clay or Washington’s “Farewell Address”. On the other hand, vindicationists hold that America should spread its liberal, democratic institutions and values to the rest of the world using imperial policies. This is best seen in the presidency of James Polk, and the subsequent Mexican-American war, but can also be seen in the rest of the “Manifest Destiny” movement, the Spanish-American war, etc.
3. In his 1796 “Farewell Address”, Washington pinpoints two major themes of U.S. politics which have had tremendous impact in shaping America’s foreign policy to date. Washington first addresses the notion of political factionalism, which he sees in the rise of the Federalist and Democratic Republican parties. This realization is incredibly important when discussing the nature of U.S. politics; to the present day, politics in the United States have been dominated by two political parties with similar, yet rival views. Though the modern-day conception of Washington’s bipartisan politics are the Democratic and Republican parties, the theme discussed in Washington’s farewell address was shown to be an accurate description of America’s future.
The second theme discussed in Washington’s farewell address is that of neutrality. Based on the assumption of American exceptionalism and the notion of exemplarist policy, Washington warned the American people to avoid foreign alliances and to maintain a policy of neutrality. This has been seen in the plethora of neutrality acts and proclamations which the United States generally made in its pre-modern history in order to prevent becoming involved in foreign wars. Though the United States is currently in a superpower position which prevents it from maintaining a neutral policy, Washington’s warnings towards neutrality were relevant for the greater portion of U.S. history, and echo the isolationist tendencies of certain leaders such as James Monroe and his “Monroe Doctrine”.
3. What were the key themes of Washington's Farewell Address? How influential was it in guiding subsequent US foreign policy?
-ISOLATIONISM
-fuck the europeans, we dont want any of their shit
-no 'entangling alliances'
-no permanent foreign alliances of any kind, really
-EXTREMELY INFLUENTIAL
-we didnt have any alliances up until WWI, really
-this part was really taken to heart by the country
-no factionalism
-really didnt want a 2 party system
-thought that political factions were gonna be the downfall of the American system
-this was NOT influential
-parties emerged almost immediately after he left office, with adams and jefferson
4. Why did the US choose war with Great Britain instead of France in 1812?
America’s decision to go to war with Britain instead of France in 1812 can be pinpointed to an array of political and economic decisions. In the first decade of 1800, America had still just established itself an independent state, and was struggling to gain recognition from the major European powers. To this end, a significant factor pushing America towards war (either with France or Britain) was the lack of respect displayed by these two countries; this is especially seen in the series of failed treaties that America tried to initiate prior to 1812, such as the Neutrality Proclamation, the Embargo Act, and eventually “Macon’s Bill #2”, which sought to sell its support to whatever nation first recognized American sovereignty.
At the time of America’s declaration of war against Britain, France and Britain were engaged in a life-and-death struggle which forced Britain to undertake certain foreign policies that forfeited its relationship with the United States. First, the British impressments of American sailors was a constant source of anger in America; though Britain was arguably only engaging in this policy to replenish its supply of sailors and continue the war, Britain’s failure to address this issue cause Americans to question Britain’s opinion of American sovereignty. Second, Britain’s neo-mercantilist “Orders-in-Council” created an illegitimate embargo of American trade, causing Americans to worry that they were being drawn back into a system of “no taxation without representation”.
The promise of occupying Canada also persuaded some Americans to support war against Britain, with Madison arguing that the occupation of Canada itself would be no more than a “matter of marching”. This promise of easy territorial expansion caused a number of Americans to side with the War Hawks, such as Clay or Calhoun.
5. What- if anything- did the US gain from the war of 1812
The main thing that the United States gained from the War of 1812 was a sense of recognition from the European powers. As discussed in the last essay, a considerable portion of America’s impetus to go to war with Britain was the belief that Europe did not respect American sovereignty, as seen in the European practice of impressment of American soldiers, the forced embargo of American exports, and the continued presence of the British military in the United States.
The War of 1812 was beneficial to the American sense of European recognition as it effectively ended the grievances that had been responsible for the war’s initiation. It can be argued, however, that the War of 1812 was an unnecessary display of American military power as Britain had already rescinded the “Orders-in-Council” that had provoked the war’s start.
6. Why did the US reject the British offer in 1823 to issue a joint statement opposing European intervention in the western hemisphere in favor of unilaterally issuing the Monroe Doctrine?
-didn't want to subordinate themselves to british interests
-any joint statement would be seen as coming from the more powerful of the two countries, and that was great britain
-by forcing britain to corroborate the US statement, it made them seem subordinate
-established american hegemony over the western hemisphere, rather than joint anglo-american influence
7. To what extent can the territorial expansion of the US that took place during the 18th to 19th centuries be understood as the fulfillment of America's demographic destiny?
8. Describe the three-step process by which adjacent territories would be come absorbed within the US during the 19th century. Provide at least three examples (successful or unsuccessful) of this process in action.
-3 step process:
-1)emigration
-american settlers would move in, become the majority of the population
-2)agitation
-they would start demanding independence
-3)amalgamation
-they would petition for annexation, amalgamate into the US
-3 examples
-hawaii
-american settlers went over, established sugar plantations
-got the govt to modify laws so that only they had franchise
-led a rebellion, forced the king to abdicate, became a republic, got annexed, everybody's happy
-Texas
-american settlers went over
-agitated. lots of agitation.
-went to war to establish their independence
-became a state ~12 years later
-Baton Rouge (West Florida)
-only non-american port on the mississippi river
-US settlers there decide to declare their 'state' of west florida independent from spain
-they win. establish republic of west florida
-is immediately annexed by US. win!
9. How were US Policy makers able to justify a policy of territorial expansion in terms of national security? give specific examples.
1st Paragraph: Natural growth, Self Defense, Technology, Mission, Geography, Partisan Politics
-sense of Ideal Security – want no potential threat because we are exceptional and “America the Invulnerable”
- “These threats included the possible attack by a current enemy, the possible quarrels with a powerful state replacing a weak neighbor, the possibility that a strong power might try to colonize the continent, and the possibility of political interference by a strong power.”
-Possible Injury as Possible Consequence of Possible Action of Possible Energy
-hierarchy of threats: 3 main justifications for expansion based on national security:
2nd Para: Canada and English control as a hostile power
-
From the beginning of independence, the U.S. had a provision for allowing Canada to join the U.S. at any time
-
In 1808, the consideration to annex Cuba was due to a fear of English
3rd Para: Florida as potential transfer to hostile power
--“No Transfer” Doctrine – Madison said no transfer of Spanish Florida to another power because it would be an unacceptable threat
-- the westward expansion of settlers made them increasingly vulnerable to influence by foreign powers, especially by the Spanish in the Southwest. This became the fuel behind a strong desire to annex Florida and insure control of relevant parts in the Gulf of Mexico.
4th Para: Louisiana as legal transfer to French
Other possible examples: Iceland and Danish West Indies
Sense of Ideal Security - want no potential threat because we are exceptional and "America the Invulnerable"
10. Texas applied for annexation by the US immediately upon winning her independence from Mexico but annexation was not officially achieved until twelve years later. Why was the annexation of Texas such a drawn out process?
The annexation was a drawn out process because of the ongoing debate between the admission of Slave states and Free states, as well as Texan politics. One Texan faction advocated the continued independence of Texas, and wanted to expel Native Americans and expand to the Pacific Ocean. The other faction, led by Sam Houston, advocated annexation and coexistence with Indians. In addition to these internal conflicts were the overarching debates between the Northern and Southern states. The Texan people passed a Constitution that explicitly endorsed slavery and the slave trade. The annexation of Texas needed a 2/3 majority in the Senate, difficult because of the political balance.
The original cause, in 1837, of Texan Annexation, was that Van Buren believed it would lead to a War with Mexico. However, in 1844, President Tyler decided to support annexation, in spite of the threat of Mexican War. Approving a new slave state would increase the area and power of slavery, leading to the opposition of Northern Senators. Congress finally voted to annex Texas, in part because it incurred huge debts to the federal government.
11. Why did the US not annex more territory from Mexico after defeating her in the 1846-48 war? Who led the opposition to further annexation and what was his motivation?
USA did not annex more territory because treaty ratification requires a 2/3 vote, impossible to obtain, as Northern Senators opposed the war as a quest for more slave territory. Southern Senators supported the war for that reason. Therefore, the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo ended the war without giving up major Mexican territory south of Texas. Abraham Lincoln opposed further annexation because he was opposed to Polk, and his unclear justification for the war, and the addition of more slave-owning territory.
12. Why did the drive towards US territorial expansion fizzle out in the 1850s? What domestic constituencies were in favor of further expansion, and why? What domestic constituencies were opposed to further expansion, and why?
-SLAVERY
-fizzled out because of competing interests between the north and south
-North didn't want more slave territories
-any new territories would have been slave territories, for the most part
-whenever a territory was brought in, a counterpart was as well, to keep the balance
-in favor
-SOUTH
-they really wanted expansion, cause the midwest and west were good for agriculture and slavery
-they also really wanted overseas and latin american expansion, because they'd all be slave territories by default
-against
-NORTH
-they didn't want too much expansion, or if there was any, it must be balanced
-keep the balance of power intact
-any states brought in from latin america or overseas would be slave states, because they'd pretty much definitely be below the Missouri Compromise line
13. Why did the cotton diplomacy of the South fail to coerce Great Britain into intervening on her behalf during the Civil War?
-the south wasn't actually as influential with regards to cotton as they thought they'd be
-most of the crop had already been shipped out
-this meant that GB already had a pretty decent stash to tide them over while they found another source of cotton (india)
-not only this, but the people who were adversely affected by the cotton shortages couldn't really vote anyways
-they were just the laborers
-ALSO, the british really really hated slavery, and that was kinda a dealbreaker
14. What point did the US hope to make to Great Britain in resolving the crisis over the seizure of the Trent during the Civil War?
(TAKEN STRAIGHT FROM THE NOTES OF 2/13)
the Trent was the boat Slidell and Mason were on.
john slidell
-sent to europe by CSA after Jefferson Davis wanted to recall his european ambassadors
-supposed to go to france
-never got to europe
james mason
same situation, supposed to go to england
also never got to europe
both were captured by an American naval captain charles wilkes
charles wilkes
halted the CSA/British blockade runners
-retook the two ambassadors and their staffs
this really turned the tables on britain
-british were stopping american ships and impressing any british citizens, and even slaves, into british service
-'right of search'
-Wilkes turned the tables, retook 'american citizens'
-lincoln said that if the british demanded the ambassadors back, they would return them, but force the brits to admit that they were wrong
-brits would then give up the right to impressment, admit they had been wrong for 60 years
-brits took this as a huge affront to their honor
-sent 11,000 troops to canada with instructions to attack if the british ambassador was withdrawn
-sent much more naval power to enforce a blockade if necessary
-Seward's response- bring it on
-said that he would fight the whole world if necessary to assert american independence
-british embargoed saltpeter to the US in response
-lincoln eventually returns the ambassadors, the brits essentially get morally bitched
15. What was the most significant factor inhibiting an active US foreign policy in the three decades following th end of the Civil War?
16. What theoretical imperatives were used to justify the sudden burst of US territorial acquisition at the end of the 19th century? Include summaries of the arguments made by at least two influential authors published between 1885-1895.
For Josiah Strong: Social Darwinism
For Brooks Adams: Economic impetus for expansion
For Frederick Jackson Turner: America needs a new frontier
For Alfred Thayer Mahan: Industrial expansion and exploitation (glut theory? little bit?) with the follow-up necessity of seapower
For Theodore Roosevelt: America needs a ballsy life, war strengthens the soul
(Taken directly from the notes of 2/20)
Josiah Strong (Our Country, its possible future, and its present crisis, 1885)
looked at the issue of why america needed to express itself on two terms
-not only christian and moral theories
-also social darwinism
-social darwinism was huge in this time
-Strong thought the anglo-saxon was racially and socially superior to its surroundings
-racist justification for manifest destiny
Brooks Adams (The Law of Civilization and Decay, 1895)
he was a descendent of John Adams
economic model
-adams advocated centralization of commerce
-decentralization of commerce regulation was really harming the US economically
-US needs to take control of asian markets
-US needs a REAL leader
-the presidents thrown up by the political system were unsuitable to really lead
-america needed a 'man on horseback' (TR anybody?)
Frederick Jackson Turner (The significance of the frontier in american history, 1893)
rests the entire thesis on the economic power of free land
-democracy itself rests on the economic power derived from free land
-entire american ETHOS derives from free land
-so long as free land exists, US is safe
-"for nearly 300 years, the dominant fact in american life has been expansion
-dynamic of progress
-said essentially that the frontier has GONE, and this ends the first part of american history
-this will lead to problems
-American West had served as a safety valve, opportunity to escape, no longer exists
Alfred Thayer Mahan (The influence of sea power on history, 1890)
industrial expansion
-leads to competition, leads to necessity of sea power
-leads to rivalries in a few things
-markets to sell to
-sources of raw materials
-how do you secure these?
-naval supremacy
-no one state can ensure both of these things
-a world empire is the way to do things
-'americans must look outwards
-'the growing production of america demands it'
how do you improve seapower?
-CANALS!
-specifically connecting the pacific to the atlantic
-called the 'isthmian canal'
-naval bases
-bases can be used as stepping stones that lead to the asian market
-hawaii and philippines were big here
-BATTLESHIPS are the measure of naval strength
-no more of this destroyer and privateer stuff
-america needs to prey directly on other nations' navies, not only on their commerce
Mahan has some converts
-including Hilary Herbert
-sercretary of the navy, 1893-1897
-naval appropriation acts, 1895, 1896
-HUGE increase in naval power
Theodore Roosevelt
didnt have a specific text or anything, but spoke a shitload
-promotes a 'strenuous life'
-really tries to embody the life of a real man
-looks back nostalgically at the pioneers of early american history
-many problems can be fixed with 'physical prowess'
-unless we can keep the barbarian virtues, the civilized ones mean little
-character is far more important than intellect to society
17. Was the Roosevelt Corollary a deviation from established US foreign policy under the Monroe Doctrine or merely the formal recognition of conventional practice?
Formal recognition of conventional practice
-america was intervening in places that it thought necessary anyways overseas, to protect US commercial interest
-all it is is an expansion of the Monroe Doctrine
-independence of the Western Hemisphere from european influence was a bedrock principle of American foreign policy almost since the founding of the country, and TR just cemented that
-US intervention in the western hemisphere simply becomes more prominent now
-US is forced into more of a big brother role to the western hemisphere, good to go.
18. Why did the US enter the first world war in 1917? what did president Woodrow Wilson hope to gain from US intervention?
Disputes over property with Britain can be resolved later, but lives lost cannot. The nature of submarines is that they are stealthy, so they must sink without warning unlike British surface ship dominance. The British could afford to stop neutral ships, search them, and protect American citizens if contraband is found and the ship must be sunk. German submarines, on the other hand, sunk without warning as they did not have manpower or capability to stop and search ship as british are doing. Thus American lives and property were destroyed by U-boats. German "warfare against mankind" (Pirates)
Zimmerman telegraph was intercepted by british and it was a message from berlin to german ambassador to mexico. Indicated that should mexico declare war on USA, germany would in turn help mexico regain the lost territory. This was the smoking gun needed to push declaration of war through congress.
Wilson hoped to "make the world safe for democracy". It was hoped that the war was a war to end all wars. 14 points of an acceptable peace for all. Collective security clause of league of nations. Also American honor is more important than anything else according to Wilson and Germany infringed on that.
19. What constituencies did congressional isolationists represent and what were their objectives during the interwar period?
The majority of the congressmen were from Midwestern states. They represented Italian Americans, Irish Americans, and German Americans. The Italian and germans obviously didn't want a war with their home country and the irish were traditional enemies of the british. For example the Ludlou amendment stipulated that every declaration of war except for under circumstances of self defense would have to be passed by popular referendum. Every rep from Kansas, s. Dakota, n. Dakota, Wisconsin voted in favor. All the reps for Minnesota and Nebraska except 1 voted in favor as well. Clearly the Midwesterners didn't want war.
Their goals were isolationism (anti-war), exemplarist. Believed in city upon a hill theory where America did not have to intervene. Passed neutrality acts that :
b. Prohibited arming of merchant ships
c. Prohibited use of american ships in transport of arms/munitions to a bellligerent power.
c. Gave the president discretionary cash and carry power to non embargoed goods. Non american ships.
d. Gave president discretionnary authorities to close american ports to belligerent ships.
They blamed WW1 on arms manufacturers. They favored limiting rights of American citizens in order to stay neutral.
20. Account for the evolution of US foreign policy under Franklin Roosevelt; when and why did he become committed to an agenda opposing the expansion of Germany and Japan?
-depth of American isolationism deepened post-WWI
Isolationist Trend Before Roosevelt: increasing gap between American approval of principles and its willingness to enforce them. This was especially the case with the Four-Power Treaty and the Kellogg-Briand Pact. American leaders made it clear that there would be no commitment under these treaties; indeed, when Japan invaded Manchuria the U.S. refused to participate in collective enforcement
Isolationism continues throughout 30s:
-Isolationist American Groups Include:
-Germans, Italians, Irish (wanted no attachment with British)
-Senators: Nye, Borah, Norris, Johnson, Clark, Vandenberg, Wheeler
-these groups had large amount of influence
-Election of 1940 – substantial isolationist voting patterns
-Ludlow Amendment (Progressive/Exemplarist Liberals (isolationists)
-Luis Ludlow, Democrat suggested Amendment which would require a referendum by the American ppl in order to go to war (73% of Americans in favor)
high tide of American isolationism
-America First Committee formed (Henry Ford, Charles Lindbergh)
-Nye Committee (1400 pg report blaming WWI on armaments manufacturers)
-Neutrality policies suggested curtailing travel rights of citizens and prohibit arms and ammunition to belligerents
-Neutrality Agreements 1935, 1937 (response to Spanish Civil War)
-prohibited arming of American merchant ships, no transportation of arms with munitions, discretionary “cash-and-carry,” close American forts
Roosevelt’s Response:
It was Roosevelt’s greater understanding of the German threat and his persist and decisive leadership that finally overcame the isolationists so quickly and brought the U.S. into World War II. Roosevelt walked a fine line, biding his time and constantly demonstrating an exceptional understanding of political leadership by appealing to the interests of all groups within the U.S. while also persistently educating his people and pushing towards U.S. entry into the war.
- Quarantine Speech 1937
-1939 4th Neutrality Act weakened the first 3
-allowed sale of arms to belligerents
-giveaway to British since they controlled the Atlantic
- Destroyers for Bases Deal1940
- Lend-Lease Act 1941
After proposing Lend-Lease, Roosevelt made his determination to bring about the defeat of the Nazis more explicit with every passing month… only the timing of America’s entry into the war remained yet to be settled.
- Military spending increased
- Peacetime draft
-“Arsenal of Democracy”
-“isolationism is threatening American security”
-Atlantic Occupation & Patrol 1941
-Greenland Occupation 1941
-1941: Freeze German Assets, Iceland under US umbrella
-Greer attacked by German submarine
“Piracy,-Roosevelt speech Legally and Morally,” “Outlaws,” “Rattlesnakes”
-“shoot at sight,” quasi-war
Roosevelt clearly looking for full-scale fight
-Embargo on Japan and U.S. demands
-Pearl Harbor
