The Monroe Doctrine and the imperial thrust
The Monroe Doctrine is undoubtedly the most hallowed — and longest lasting — of America's foreign policy doctrines. Pronounced initially by President James Monroe in a speech to Congress on 2 December 1823, the doctrine — mainly a product of Secretary of State (and later President) John Quincy Adams's thinking — had three key parts.
First, Monroe stated that the various parts of the Western Hemisphere were no longer ‘to be considered as subjects for further colonization by any European Powers'. Second, the Monroe Doctrine stressed the differences that existed between the political systems of Europe (monarchies) and the Western Hemisphere (democratic republics). Third, in return for the non-intervention of European Powers in the Western Hemisphere, the United States would not interfere in European affairs. Given the context of 1823 it was a bold statement; after all the United States, although it had recently acquired Florida from Spain, was militarily no match for the major Powers of Europe. While the Monroe Doctrine remained, at the time of its proclamation, a doctrine that held little practical consequence, it did, however, emerge as a justification for growing American involvement in the affairs of its neighbours to the south. At the same time, the Monroe Doctrine lost much of its original ‘democratic’ message and became, in the eyes of many South and Central Americans, a smokescreen for a new kind of colonialism directed from Washington.As the United States completed its westward expansion in the last decades of the nineteenth century and embarked on unprecedented economic growth, the debate about America’s role in the world began to go beyond the confines of the Western Hemisphere. As the United States acquired bases in Hawaii, and as influential Americans pushed for Congress to support the financing of the Panama Canal, it became clear that the anti-imperialist and isolationist tradition was facing a growing challenge from those arguing for an expansionist foreign policy.
By the 1890s disagreements between the so-called imperialists and anti-imperialists dominated the domestic debate about foreign policy.The imperialists drew on some of the most popular ideas of their time. One influential historian, Brooks Adams, advanced the notion of social Darwinism by simply declaring that among nations, as among animals and plants, the principle of ‘the survival of the fittest’ applied. Hence, Adams maintained in his 1895 book The Law of Civilization and Decay that if the United States did not continue its expansion in the new century, it would enter a period of decline. This belief was reinforced by popular theories about racial inequality and the ‘inherent superiority’ of the English-speaking peoples; it was America’s ‘Manifest Destiny’, John Fiske declared in the 1890s, to expand the ‘blessings’ of Anglo-Saxon civilization. Another historian, Frederick Jackson Turner, in 1893 warned about the negative impact that the loss of a continental frontier — a wilderness to be tamed — would have on the American character; the Americans needed future frontiers to conquer to set them apart from the rest of the world.
social Darwinism
A nineteenth-century theory, inspired by Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution, which argued that the history of human society should be seen as ‘the survival of the fittest’. Social Darwinism was the backbone of various theories of racial and especially ‘white’ supremacy.
While such ideas undoubtedly had their impact, economic arguments were equally important in persuading many Americans of the need for overseas expansion. In the last quarter of the nineteenth century exports constituted about 7 per cent of the national output; when a sudden economic downturn hit the United States in 1893 the remedy, many industrialists argued, was to sell more abroad. Two problems stood in the way. First, in Europe protectionism reigned and threatened to cut the United States off from lucrative continental markets.
Second, at the height of imperialism in the 1880s and 1890s, the Europeans transferred their protectionism to cover much of the rest of the world. Of particular interest to Americans was China, which was viewed, already in the 1890s, as holding the key to future prosperity. Thus, the United States needed, many argued, to make sure that it was not cut off from access to the Chinese market.protectionism
The practice of regulating imports through high tariffs with the purpose of shielding domestic industries from foreign competition.
America’s leading naval strategist, Alfred T. Mahan, presented another argument for overseas expansion. As early as 1890 Mahan argued that the United States had to look at the world’s seas as being vital to America’s prosperity and security; hence he advocated the building of a strong navy, additional investment in a vast merchant marine and, perhaps most significantly, the acquisition of overseas bases that could be used to protect American interests which, he argued, had become global.
isolationism
The policy or doctrine of isolating one's country by avoiding foreign entanglements and responsibilities. Popular in the United States during the interwar years.
Thus, the intellectual underpinnings of expansionism drew on numerous sources. At the time, in the 1890s, they still ran into strong opposition from those who viewed isolationism as a better way to protect American interests and democracy in a world that was still ruled mostly by imperialist monarchies. The anti-expansionist cause was, however, increasingly on the defensive and, to many, out of date. As the new century approached, the majority of influential Americans were ready to support US entry into world affairs. All they needed was a suitable pretext.