American Imperialism 1875-1900
This is an excerpt from the paper...
"American Imperialism, Altruism or Aggression?" compares the interpretations of events in the United States from 1875 to the early 1900s from the perspectives of contemporary historians James A. Field, Jr., Walter LaFeber, and Robert L. Beisner. The editors cite a number of early historians, such as Samuel Flagg Bemis, Julius W. Pratt, and Captain Alfred Thayer Mahan who viewed American Imperialism as the result of a mix of religious, humanitarian, and economic ingredients. However, early historians did agree in part that foreign policy was influenced by domestic economic considerations. Both early and contemporary historians included in this chapter identified a number of issues relevant to the events which occurred during this period in American history. Depending on their orientation, some historians discussed this period based on written records, documentation, and remaining physical evidence. Other historians like William Appleman Williams, LaFeber, and Seisner to a lesser extent, viewed American Imperialism as it was influenced by American society and the leaders at the time. Charles and Mary Beard and Mahan believed that, although events were influenced by society and its leaders, economic interests exerted the greatest influence. Field agreed with Bemis' basic theory that America's success in battle shifted the public's attention to imperialism and its implications for economic growth. However, Field interprets the issues of the time as much more complex an
. . .
details, but he also suggests that Field is overlooking more substantive issues while sorting through the minutia. Two examples were cited: the issue of how citizens of the 1890s viewed foreign policy and were able to conceptualize its problems and solutions, if they were able to do this at all; and the importance of the invention of cable communications brought into use in the 1890s, Field took issue with contemporary historians as well, over their attempts to put the late 1900s into a broader historical framework. LaFeber notes that, despite his attention to accurate details and historical reference, Field, like the historians he criticized, has been unable to incorporate 1898 into the thesis of his main body of work. Field calls the events occurring in 1899 accidents in history, Bemis called the 13 years following 1898 aberrations.
Whether Field calls 1898 an accident, or Bemis calls it an aberration, the United States entered the Spanish-American War because of the sinking of the Maine. LaFeber notes that the more relevant question is why the Maine was in the Havana harbor in the first place. The explosion of the Maine in February 1898 could have very well been an accident and not an attack by the Spanish. However, Mc
. . .
Some common words found in the essay are:
American Imperialism, Field American, Beisner's LaFeber's, LaFeber Beisner, Spanish McKinley's, Darwinism Field, Social Darwinism, Beard Mahan, Field LaFeber, American University, american imperialism, social darwinism, foreign policy, american history, field lafeber, historical interpretation, contemporary historians, lafeber notes, history professor, lafeber beisner, field lafeber beisner, viewed american imperialism, written books american, american imperialism result, acquisition foreign territories,
Approximate Word count = 1723
Approximate Pages = 7 (250 words per page)
|