Racism And US Imperialism Record Essay

American copy writer and missionary Pearl S. Buck once had written, "Contest prejudice isn't only a shadow above the colored, it is just a shadow over all of us, and the shadow is darkest over those who feel it least and invite its evil effects to be on. " For years, historians have concluded that the last ten years of the nineteenth hundred years bred white-supremacist racial ideologies such as Anglo-Saxonism and the concept of the "white man's burden" and in turn drove the American empire in to the non-white world. In Race Over Empire, Eric T. L. Love contests this perspective and will be offering instead that racism acquired almost the contradictory result. From Grant's attempt to annex the Dominican Republic in 1870, to the annexations of Hawaii and the Philippines in 1898, Love illustrates that the imperialists' connection with the racist ideologies of the time were antagonistic, not harmonious. In an era designated by the Jim Crow laws, policies of Chinese language exclusion and immigration restriction, no sensible politician wanted to place non-whites at the center of your already divisive design by invoking the concept of the "white man's burden. " Furthermore, convictions that described "whiteness" created great barriers to imperialistic ambitions, particularly if Anglo-Saxon empire inserted into the exotic parts of the Atlantic and Pacific. Otherwise, Love contends that plan aims needed to be cloaked in more covert goals than racism.

In the first section, Love creates his main line of discussion that while racism may have been an natural part of American population and ideology from 1865 to1900, it would have been a major obstacle to add it as a stated objective in expansionism. The American people got no desire to see more foreigners associated with America, so competition could only ever before play an implicit motivator in imperialism relating to Love. Love spends much of the rest of his work providing examples of how race and racism were required to have a "backseat" to more overt coverage objectives. Love illustrates the obstacles brought on by the invocation of contest in three different circumstance studies in Santo Domingo, Hawaii, and the Philippines.

The affair in Santo Domingo offers a very interesting example that gives credence to Love's thesis. President Ulysses S. Give, inheriting many expansionist strategies passed on from Johnson and Seward, turned down practically all expansionist is designed in his international insurance policy; except the acquisition of Santo Domingo. Grant, while never talking about race, wished to annex Santo Domingo as a "racial security valve, " for BLACK resettlement regarding to Love. While the implicit purpose was plainly racial, there were very mixed thoughts throughout Congress and the general public when it comes to BLACK relocation; therefore these implied seeks were never stated directly. Instead, Give preaches about the necessity to acquire Santo Domingo for commerce and security reasons. The island possessed plentiful timber and other natural resources and its position in the Caribbean managed to get a prime advantage to guarantee the safety of People in america. In the long run, Congress rejects the decision to annex Santo Domingo, and Give needs this as a very personal beat. In writings from his child we're able to clearly observe that Grant wanted frantically to annex Santo Domingo, and this desire was probably led by the implicit racial motivation. Grant actually stated his drive for annexation was "for the progress of your white America. " Grant never made peacefulness with this beat. Words spoken by Offer reveal the churning disappointment and bitterness he noticed. His bitterness was actually continued by his son Jesse Grant who explained: "I think of San Domingo and of father's persistent efforts to bring about annexation each time I ride upon the Elevated or in the Subway, and see white women stand while negroes occupy the car seats. "

The Santo Domingo tv show is only one example of Love's thesis in action; however, I really believe the clearest facts to Love's credit will come in his evaluation of Hawaiian annexation. Love argues that america didn't want to annex Hawaii, and also do so under a "plan of last resort. " After the rule of Liluokalani was subverted and the queen was overthrown in 1893, america chose not to annex Hawaii due to the occasions that precipitated the overthrow by People in america on the island. It was not before island was plagued by disease and battling under a "government" that cannot protect or provide for its individuals who we annexed Hawaii. The reason why, Love argues, that we did not annex the island immediately is due to its large indigenous human population. Race in this case was a highway block to annexation; a testament to Love's thesis. "Once the imperialists renewed their goal for taking Hawaii they empty the rhetoric of cultural uplift and the Christian mission. " Annexation in 1898 was achieved by changing the explicit motives for annexation. It was portrayed to the American individuals who Hawaii was an island of white American majority that was under threat of an insidious Asian invasion that can only be checked by American occurrence and annexation in Hawaii. Race and racism was an inhibitor to empire in this case, equally Love speculates in his thesis.

Love's Race Over Empire is an interesting text that can be abundantly linked to the historians and texts we have talked about in class. From your views of Michael Hunt to Walter Lafeber, it seems that Love contests the normal view of the role of race in relation to American Empire by asserting that competition was not the travelling factor behind American imperialism in the late nineteenth century. Love issues the views of these historians and a compelling case that while race might have been an implicit purpose, the use of contest as an explicit motivator would have caused many of the U. S. imperialistic endeavors to fail.

We have read that historian Michael Hunt feels that a generating pressure behind U. S. overseas relations is racism. From our interactions with Haiti to American development in to the Philippines, Hunt reads these happenings as a continuation on the timeline of Anglo-Saxon racial hegemony. Love counters that even though many People in the usa were in truth racists during the late nineteenth century, the fact they are racist is the reason that racial imperialism cannot happen in this country. Love essentially areas that the American people wouldn't normally have supported any extension that was sold to them under the framework of competition because the very last thing southerners needed were more folks of color for the government to look after. The harbingers of expansionism possessed to sell the American people the monthly bill of goods differently because to blatantly tell them we were increasing in to the islands of the Pacific to obtain more foreigners to be under our control wouldn't normally have been a powerful reason for the average American (and since Love argues not convincing for the average politician either).

In addition, Walter Lafeber in his work The American Age argues that america moved into and annexed Hawaii under the presumption of providing trade and monetary reciprocity to the natives of Hawaii. This common trade contract quickly became one-sided as america began to import cheap sugar from Cuba which stranded the Hawaiian market that possessed become so reliant on U. S. imports. Love argues that this financial goal was only a pretext to type in Hawaii. What sort of annexation of Hawaii was "sold" to the American people was that the island was predominantly settled by white Us citizens, and these white People in america were under threat by Asian intruders. Unless we liberated the island of Hawaii we would see the Asian hazard spill over into America's edges. Also, it was argued that Hawaii could serve as a valuable pacific naval bottom part to help expand pacific extension of American empire. Race was completely deserted as an explicit motivator due to the fact that annexation of Hawaii was blocked for years due to the large indigenous population on the island.

Those who guaranteed the annexation of Hawaii failed at their endeavors until they quite virtually took up William Appleman Williams's thesis and put it into action; we attempted to help make the Hawaiian's "like us. " To be able to attain our coverage objective the government essentially lied to our citizens and informed them that the natives that comprised the island were white People in america like the rest of us. It was this blatant lie, not the supposed aid and get spread around of Christianity that finally compelled our people to consider annexation appropriate; this is in turn what J. Garry Clifford was trying to convey in his article "Bureaucratic Politics and Policy Final results. " Clifford argues that policy isn't made just on the whim of one person in our bureaucratic system, it in reality takes many visitors to enforce policy also to that end in order to go policies often compromise must occur, as Love discusses Hawaii a compromise becomes quite evident. The fact that the usual "Christian objective" needed to be abandoned in the case of Hawaii is a huge compromise from those who at first were pressing the annexation, however through compromise the desired result was achieved (annexation).

Standing as opposed to Love's idea is historian Walter L. Williams. Williams in his essay "United States Indian Insurance plan and the Issue over Philippine Annexation: Implications for the Roots of American Imperialism" outlines an argument that seems to immediately counter Love's theory of contest as a blockade to annexation. Williams areas that america has an extended background of invading land managed by foreigners and coping with the indigenous society by denying them citizenship. Otherwise, Williams expresses they become "wards" of the United States and as such are situated at a level below citizens. To demonstrate his research he shows the way the Native Us citizens and indigenous people of the Philippines are essentially restarted once America annexes the natives land. Williams offers a strong respond to Love's thesis and both Williams and Love's arguments are "well-built" through careful historical research of the American experience.

Furthermore, historian Samuel Flagg Bemis in his work "American Foreign Policy and the Blessings of Liberty" argues that the American experience is inserted in a long history of spreading the blessings of liberty to those individuals and nations who do not enjoy everything we consider basic liberties. Love would tend to agree that spreading the blessings of liberty is a sizable explicit rationale of American imperialism from 1865-1900. However, Love would not go so far as to really postulate that distributing the blessings of liberty was a major motivator for empire. From Love's possible it's very simple to note that growing liberty was a convenient means of masking plans that had at heart more menacing objectives.

In conclusion, Contest Over Empire benefits from the strong data that Love reveals to support his argument. Looking over the situations in Santo Domingo, Hawaii, and the Philippines it is hard to disagree with Love's evaluation; that a simply race motivated method of imperialism in these areas would have failed miserably for North american expansionists. The main strengths of this work are that it is rooted in sound logic and the author uses pertinent evidence that really helps to give "real-world" illustration to aid his thesis. There are a few issues with this reserve however. All too often it feels that Love is trying to totally dispel race as a motivator in American overseas policy. I believe this makes his debate unbelievable at times. The period from 1865-1900, is proclaimed in evidently racist procedures and mindsets in america, and to dispute that imperialist procedures didn't have at least some racism in the back of its mind will be a very naЇve point to dispute. Furthermore, in his talk of Hawaii Love does not speak about the desire of American policymakers to increase U. S. affect into Asia. Hawaii was annexed due to its position in the Pacific that allowed it to be a staging centre to both control Asian migration into America, and to expand American effect into the far-east. I feel that by working so hard to show the insidious inspiration behind the humanitarian angle (which he will very well), he neglects a major reason for Hawaiian annexation.

The significance of Love's work, Competition Over Empire, is rather monumental. First, Love's work troubles the contemporary view of race and racism and its own correlation to North american imperialism. Whenever a credible debate can be brought against the generally accepted view of background the historical community is benefitted by featuring its beliefs challenged. Second, the information that Love provides on the ulterior motives of insurance policy is a point that resonates with American foreign insurance plan still today. Frequently we take plan at its face value, and we do not look for the implicit motivations behind the coverage we placed into effect. If anything, Love encourages examining policy in its original context and checking out the hidden motives behind it. Finally, Love's work is significant since it illustrates a theme that is frequently forgotten ever sold (especially in American classrooms today), there are always different interpretations of background and we are often taught to think about history in a single way. Love troubles the accepted view and provides compelling evidence as to why the views of generations of historians need to be challenged. In closing is competition prejudice a continual shadow after the United States as Pearl Buck indicate? I am compelled by Love's argument that within an openly and belligerently racist south individuals and politicians could not accept policy that allows for the mass migration of foreigners into our country, and it is because of this race was cloaked as an implicit motivator, but turned down as the primary motivation of American imperialism.

Also We Can Offer!

Other services that we offer

If you don’t see the necessary subject, paper type, or topic in our list of available services and examples, don’t worry! We have a number of other academic disciplines to suit the needs of anyone who visits this website looking for help.

How to ...

We made your life easier with putting together a big number of articles and guidelines on how to plan and write different types of assignments (Essay, Research Paper, Dissertation etc)