Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The importance of monroe doctrine
Assess the significance of the Monroe doctrine to the development of the United States. research paper
Assess the significance of the Monroe doctrine to the development of the United States. research paper
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The importance of monroe doctrine
Dollar Diplomacy
Ever since the 17 republics of mainland Latin America emerged from the wreck of the Spanish Empire in the early 19th century, North Americans had viewed them with a mixture of condescension and contempt that focused on their alien culture, racial mix, unstable politics, and moribund economies. The Western Hemisphere seemed a natural sphere of U.S. influence, and this view had been institutionalized in the Monroe Doctrine of 1823 warning European states that any attempt to "extend their system" to the Americas would be viewed as evidence of an unfriendly disposition toward the United States itself. On the one hand, the doctrine seemed to underscore republican familiarity, as suggested by references to "our sister republics," "our good neighbors," our "southern brethren." On the other hand, the United States later used the doctrine to justify paternalism and intervention. This posed a quandary for the Latin Americans, since a United States strong enough to protect them from Europe was also strong enough to pose a threat itself. When Secretary of State James G. Blaine hosted the first Pan-American Conference in 1889, Argentina proposed the Calvo Doctrine asking all parties to renounce special privileges in other states. The United States refused.
After the Spanish-American War in 1898 the United States strengthened its power in the Caribbean by annexing Puerto Rico, declaring Cuba a virtual protectorate in the Platt Amendment (1901), and manipulating Colombia into granting independence to Panama (1904), which in turn invited the United States to build and control the Panama Canal.
The secretary of war, Elihu Root, formulated the Platt Amendment; Sen. Orville H. Platt of Connecticut presented the amendment to the Senate. By its terms, Cuba would
Moen 2 not transfer Cuban land to any power other than the United States, Cuba's right to negotiate treaties was limited, rights to a naval base in Cuba (Guantanamo Bay) were ceded to the United States, U.S. intervention in Cuba "for the preservation of Cuban independence" was permitted, and a formal treaty detailing all the foregoing provisions was provided for. To end the U.S. occupation, Cuba incorporated the articles in its constitution. Although the United States intervened militarily in Cuba only twice, in 1906 and 1912, Cubans generally considered the amendment an infringement of their...
... middle of paper ...
... European influence in Latin America but was itself moving slowly toward the "Good Neighbor" policy of the 1930s.
The efforts made by the administration of U.S. president Franklin D. Roosevelt to improve relations with Latin America were known as the Good Neighbor Policy. Roosevelt pledged to be a "good neighbor" in his inaugural address in 1933, and the phrase was soon linked to American policy in the Western Hemisphere. At the Pan American Conference in Montevideo, Uruguay, in December 1933, the United States signed a convention forbidding intervention by one state in another's affairs. The following year Roosevelt ended the 19-year occupation of Haiti by U.S. Marines and abrogated the Platt Amendment, which had made Cuba a virtual U.S. dependent. The United States continued to adhere to the policy of nonintervention when Bolivia and Mexico expropriated American property in 1937-38. The Good Neighbor approach and cultural exchange programs improved hemispheric relations and paved the way for cooperation on security during World War II. However, relations deteriorated again, despite the creation of the Organization of American States (1948) and the Alliance for Progress (1961).
Abraham Lincoln’s original views on slavery were formed through the way he was raised and the American customs of the period. Throughout Lincoln’s influential years, slavery was a recognized and a legal institution in the United States of America. Even though Lincoln began his career by declaring that he was “anti-slavery,” he was not likely to agree to instant emancipation. However, although Lincoln did not begin as a radical anti-slavery Republican, he eventually issued his Emancipation Proclamation, which freed all slaves and in his last speech, even recommended extending voting to blacks. Although Lincoln’s feeling about blacks and slavery was quite constant over time, the evidence found between his debate with Stephen A. Douglas and his Gettysburg Address, proves that his political position and actions towards slavery have changed profoundly.
In June of 1895, President Grover Cleveland took a stance of neutrality toward the Cuban conflict, though many American citizens grew concerned that the fight was too close to home. (Spanish-American) By December of the next year, Cleveland declared that the U.S. might be forced to take action if Spain was unable to solve the Cuban crisis alone. (Library of Congress) Spain granted Cuba limited autonomy in January of 1897, but the natives were not satisfied. As the Spanish resorted to ruthless tactics to keep the Cubans in line, their brutality created much sympathy in the United States. Tensions rose between America and Spain. The other shoe dropp...
In 1903, the U.S. published the Platt Amendment, which was a set of guidelines for Cuba to follow (Blight 165). The Platt amendment was named after Senator Orville Platt of Connecticut. The U.S. had been occupying Cuba since the Spanish American war in 1898, and Cuba wanted them out, so the U.S. set up eight rules for Cuba to agree to before the U.S. would leave them alone to establish and run their government (http://www.state.gov/r/pa/). The first three articles of the Platt Amendment can be seen after this paper. Americans and Cubans seemed to have a different approach to the Platt Amendment:
Thomas J. DiLorenzo is professor of economics at Loyola University Maryland. He is also a member of the senior faculty of the Mises Institute. DiLorenzo has also written Lincoln Unmasked; How Capitalism Saved America; and Hamilton 's Curse: How Jefferson’s Archenemy Betrayed the American Revolution — and What It Means for Americans Today. So DiLorenzo is a well known writer and an economics professor who is highly educated and qualified to write on the economic positions of the civil war. The purpose of this book The Real Lincoln is to prove that a lot of the good credited to Lincoln is merely “myth.”(DiLorenzo 1) The Author Thomas J. DiLorenzo attempts to do this by writing of Lincoln’s motives based upon quotes from Lincoln’s speeches and
United States invaded Cuba, Puerto Rico and Philippines not to gain wealth, but for the purpose of getting trades. Americans wanted to project their power to the entire hemisphere and the only way to exercise it is by acquiring republics. Citizens of three countries did not fully acquire the independence they thought they were entitled. Cuba got nominal independence because of Platt Amendment, Puerto Rico became a territory but was not called as citizens of America, and instead they were called Puerto Ricans, while Philippines were denied in statehood. They only had fundamental rights, but United States could govern the country as long as they wanted to. Furthermore, holding the countries from self-government prevent these countries to get the chance to apply what they have learned and adopted from American rule and exercise it for their country’s prosperity.
Each year, there are thousands of children that are misplaced from their families and are seeking a permanent living placement. Their permanent placement may be found with family members or friends, or even through a private adoption. There are federal laws and state mandates that are implemented to ensure that the best interests of all children involved in an adoption or placement proceedings are heard. The best interests and needs of a child may include educational needs, medical needs, housing/placement preferences, or finding a family that reflects the ethnic and cultural heritage of the child in question. One federal mandate ensures that the heritage and familial background of children is protected and the best interests of the children are served. The Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) of 1978 is a federal law that seeks to keep Indian-American children with Indian-American families. This law was created in response to an overwhelming population of Indian-American children being displaced from their families. This law was created to protect youth and help keep Indian-American children with their native tribes. In this paper, we explore the historical factors leading to the implementation of the Indian Child Welfare Act and the purpose of this Act. Further, we explore the development of this law, implementation of this federal law, and the contemporary debates that relate to the implementation of this law.
Thomas DiLorenzo’s purpose in writing The Real Lincoln: A New Look at Abraham Lincoln, His Agenda, and an Unnecessary War is to portray the idea of a different side of one of America’s greatest presidents. Abraham Lincoln is indeed one of the most written about “American political figure[s]” (1). However, The Real Lincoln is devoted to revealing the true mindset and agenda of Abraham Lincoln during his time of presidency. DiLorenzo, in one single book, undermines the political choices and strategies of Abraham Lincoln. He challenges the decisions Lincoln made; specifically stating that Lincoln “could have ended slavery just as dozens of other countries in the world did” (4).
Just like the durian, my Vietnamese culture repulsed me as a young child. I always felt that there was something shameful in being Vietnamese. Consequently, I did not allow myself to accept the beauty of my culture. I instead looked up to Americans. I wanted to be American. My feelings, however, changed when I entered high school. There, I met Vietnamese students who had extraordinary pride in their heritage. Observing them at a distance, I re-evaluated my opinions. I opened my life to Vietnamese culture and happily discovered myself embracing it. `
In the Dominican Republic, the United States intervened by occupying it and making it a protectorate.... ... middle of paper ... ... Furthermore, it was strongly detrimental to Latin America, for the reason that it eliminated the possibility of increasing Latin American exports to the United States, thereby destroying the hopes of Latin American countries focused upon President Nixon’s policy of “trade rather than aid.” During this time, the government justified itself by proclaiming that the United States needed to focus on avoiding involvement and learning from the mistakes made in Vietnam.
For 113 days during the summer of 1898, the United States was at war with Spain. Neither the president of the United States, nor his cabinet, nor the the queen of Spain, nor her ministers wanted the war wanted the war. It happened eventhough they made their best efforts to prevent it. It happened because of ambition, miscalculation, and stupidity; and it happened because of kindness, wit, and resourcefulness. It also happened because some were indifferent to the suffering of the world’s wretched and others were not (O’Toole 17). By winning the war the United States proved the the rest of the world and to itself that it could and would fight against foreign nations. For many years, world power had been concentrated in the countries in Europe. Nations such as Great Britain, France, Germany, and Spain had the most influence in global affairs. But a shift in power was gradually taking place as the United States matured. The young nation gained wealth and strength. Its population grew immensely, and many people believed it would become a major world power (Bachrach, 11) Spain was one of the many European countries that had territory in the United States. Spain controlled mostly some islands off the coast of Central America. The most important of these were Cuba and Puerto Rico. The United States was led to believe that the Spanish mosgoverned and abused the people of these islands. In fact, Spain did overtax and mistreat the Cubans, who rebelled in 1868 and again in 1895. Thus, the American people felt sympathetic toward the Cuban independence movement. In addition, Spain had frequently interfered with trade between its colonies and the United States. Even though the United States had been a trading partner with Cuba since the seventeenth century, Spain sometimes tried to completely stop their trade with Cuba. In Spain doing so, this sometimes caused damage to U.S. commercial interests. The United States highly disagreed with Spain’s right to interfere with this trade relationship. (Bachrach, 12) The United States was also concerned that other trading and commercial interests were threatened by the number of ships and soldiers Spain kept in the area. If the United States had to fight a war with Canada or Mexico, these Spanish forces could quickly mobilize against the United States.
The Alliance for Progress program was initially met with open arms by most Latin Americans leaders and immediately boosted U.S. relations throughout the hemisphere.1 The alliance’s charter was signed by all members of the organization except for Cuba at a special meeting at Punta del Este, Uruguay, on August 17, 1961.2 The drafters of the charter emphasized that the twin goals of economic development and social injustice should be pursued simultaneously and that both should be paralleled by efforts to expand political freedom in the hemisphere. One of the most important factors of the program was the promotion of self-help. Under the alliance’s charter, the participating Latin American countries would provide eighty percent of the funding and the remaining twenty would be pledged by external sources, which would be furnished by the United states, other wealthy countries, and a variety of public and private groups. Though created to ensure the improvement of Latin America, there were many dilemmas within the Alliance for Progress. The program was not really an alliance and it did not progress satisfactorily.
Immediately following the war with Spain, the United States had both the political will to pursue imperial policies and the geopolitical circumstances conducive to doing so. But the way in which these policies would manifest was an open question; was the impulse to actively remake the world in America’s Anglo-Saxon image justified? Hence, there were several models of American imperialism at the turn of the twentieth century. In the Philippines, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and Samoa, the United States asserted unwavering political control. In Cuba, and later throughout most of the Caribbean basin, the economic and political domination of customarily sovereign governments became the policy. Ultimately, the United States was able to expand its territory
The United States, honoring the Teller Amendment of 1898, withdrew from Cuba in 1902. The U.S. forced the Cubans to write their own constitution of 1901 (the Platt Amendment). The constitution decreed that the United States might intervene with troops in Cuba in order to restore order and to provide mutual protection. The Cubans also promised to sell or lease needed coaling or naval stations to the U.S.
In his work, The Real Lincoln, economic historian Thomas J. DiLorenzo tells quite the different tale. Daring to criticize this beloved president, DiLorenzo defends his antithetical statements with several key points: Lincoln was more similar to a dictator than an American President. Arguing that the War Between the States was wholly unconstitutional, DiLorenzo corrects the popular misconception that Lincoln’s war was one of abolition. War was not necessary to end slavery, but it was necessary to fulfill Lincoln’s true agenda – to destroy the most significant check on the powers of the central government: the right of secession.1
As part of American agreement to the independence of Cuba, it was agreed to that