In the end, though, the decision of the majority was to attempt to expand, or assist foreign countries.
In order to expand, sea power was believed to be a necessity. Mahan, three things were necessary to become more powerful at sea: protection of harbors, control of coaling stations around the United States, and naval force (Document C).
Post naval strengthening, the United states was not only able to compete with foreign countries, but dictated foreign policies.
The political cartoon titled “American Diplomacy” clearly displays how the United States controlled the influence of other countries on China.
During the end of the eighteen-hundreds and throughout the beginning of the nineteen-hundreds, America tried to colonize and reform less fortunate nations.
Following a social-Darwinist point of view, Americans took their “God-given” superiority to those who were incapable of establishing their own self-government (Doc. After much debate, American foreign policy towards the Philippines and Cuba was that it is our duty to rule them until they could rule themselves.Dorfman’s readers could be forgiven if they did not recognize Allende’s name. history textbooks, these leaders, all of whom were overthrown with the help (and sometimes at the direction) of the U. government, are mentioned only in passing, if at all. And if you want to understand what motivated the overthrow and assassination of Allende in Chile, or Lumumba in Congo, you are out of luck. When one looks for El Salvador in the index, that country is mentioned exactly once, in the final chapter, and there is no mention about U. military or political interference there: “Although Mexico continued to provide the largest group of Spanish-speaking immigrants, large numbers also arrived from El Salvador and the Dominican Republic.” The textbook offers no explanation for why large flows of Salvadorans might flee their country and what role a destabilizing U. Even when these textbooks do include important events, readers come away less than enlightened. In Guatemala, the leftist government was upsetting the United Fruit Company. says the Guatemalan government was “upsetting” the United Fruit Company; it fails to explain that United Fruit controlled 42 percent of Guatemalan land and that Jacobo Arbenz’s policies of nationalization threatened its profits. Instead of relying on the textbooks, students in my class investigate a single site of U. aggression, sharing what they have learned with each other to collaboratively write an essay comparing U. interventions in Cuba, Guatemala, Afghanistan, Congo, Nicaragua, Chile, and Iran. Students do not mistake any single example of anti-democratic wrongdoing by the United States as anomalous when the patterns are so stark. The political, economic, racial, and religious rationales used to justify the theft of Native land on this continent were the very same trotted out in 18 to steal the faraway lands of Hawaii, the Philippines, Puerto Rico, and Guam. imperialism cannot be neatly periodized; it is not an era to be bounded by the pages of a chapter.They might never have heard of these either: Patrice Lumumba, Mohammad Mossadegh, Jacobo Arbenz. The textbook entirely leaves out the nefarious meddling of the United States in these places. Though its Cold War chapter extends all the way to 1960, somewhat accurately describes U. Take this paragraph, which appears under the heading “Containment in Action” in : Twice during Eisenhower’s first term, the CIA subverted democratically elected governments that seemed to threaten U. When Guatemalans accepted weapons from the Communist bloc in 1954, the CIA imposed a regime friendly to U. The authors seem unconcerned with asking students to think about why a private business might be directing U. In this way, students surface the basic features of U. Cold War policy and reckon with the vast reach of U. The same insatiable greed for resources that led U. sugar barons to overthrow Queen Lili‘uokalani also fueled United Fruit’s seizure of land across Central America and its collaboration with the CIA to install business-friendly regimes there. As long as the drive for profits remains paramount to U. foreign policy, imperialism will be central to the very existence of the United States.When textbooks reduce this threat to “communist subversion,” they downplay the power and promise held out to people all across the globe by the Guatemalan example.If we want our students to imagine a world where resources are not hoarded by a few, to the detriment of the many, we have to show them people who resisted that inequality, found ways to confront and restructure it, and indeed, were so successful as to invite the wrath of the most powerful government and military in the world.Due to the aforementioned factors, imperialism played a pivotal role in shaping American foreign Intervention in Latin America, mainly Cuba, also led to the Spanish-American War.When the American naval ship, the USS Maine, exploded in the Havana Harbor, President Mc Kinley immediately decided to go to war after being labeled a coward by yellow journalists. Max said: “Why is the media making such a big deal about this?CNN, for example, ran a piece by Chilean author Ariel Dorfman about the U. role in overthrowing the democratically elected Chilean leader Salvador Allende in 1973. Cold War interventions, the official curriculum is sanitized and disjointed, leaving students ill-equipped to make sense out of their nation’s global bullying. Today, Congo and Afghanistan are among the most unstable places in the world. The Cold War history of these nations is nowhere to be found in our textbooks. If you want to learn about Cuba, Vietnam, or Nicaragua, you will need to dig through other chapters, which follow the stale and triumphalist march of presidencies. policymakers tended to support stable governments, no matter how repressive, as long as they were overtly anti-communist.”), and at least CIA-directed coups in Guatemala and Iran, there is no reference to the coup in Chile or other Latin American interventions of the 1970s and ’80s. This omission is especially egregious today, as Trump strips Temporary Protected Status from Salvadorans and immigrants from other countries. The Shah then cooperated with the United States until his overthrow in 1979. Surely these two words would be equally unfamiliar to most U. says the CIA “backed” a coup in Iran; in reality that “backing” involved Kermit Roosevelt, CIA agent and grandson of Theodore, arriving in Tehran with suitcases full of cash to manufacture an opposition movement by hiring people to protest, bribing newspaper editors to print misinformation ( says the Shah “cooperated” with the United States; it leaves out that such “cooperation” was defined by Iran’s purchase of billions of dollars of weapons from the United States as well as the CIA’s training of Savak, the Shah’s secret police force infamous for its human rights violations. history — in most textbooks and curricula — would have us learn something called “Westward Expansion,” separately from “U. Imperialism,” separately from “The Cold War.” In reality, these are better understood as a continuum.This is a prime example of how incidents in Latin American countries forced presidents to act rapidly and without much thought, causing America to form a bold and aggressive foreign policy.According to the United States, democracy and Christianity were principal elements of a successful society.