Looking back over weeks 7-9, what in your view was the 1)
most common and 2) most effective strategy for American expansion abroad in the
period 1890-1920. Formal empire? Dollar diplomacy? Americanization? Or an
interplay of all three? (80-100 words, by 5pm Friday October 5)
Each strategy played a role in different events, for example dollar diplomacy is best associated with America furthering their interests in Latin America, and formal empire was characteristic of earlier stages in American expansion, for example formal empire in the Philippines, whereas later on, informal empire was much more common. Americanisation, however, and notions of white American exceptionalism and manifest destiny tended to permeate all strategies engaged in American expansion. It justified conquests from the Cherokee removal to the establishment of a formal empire in the Philippines, Hawaii and Alaska by arguing that it was America's civilising mission to conquer native and superior peoples so as to elevate them or eliminate them.
ReplyDeleteAll three were important, however Americanisation was the most widespread and effective example of America expanding abroad. Formal empire was limited to relatively small territories, effecting only a handful of states such as the Philippines. Dollar diplomacy had a wider area of influence particularly in the Americas, however the touch of Americanisation had a pervasive influence resulting in global impact. Regardless of whether the American products and culture were welcomed or forced upon the newly opened world markets, they spread rapidly. The success of Americanisation was a result of a combination of factors including enterprising business, government support, superior products, economic power and the allure of American culture.
ReplyDeleteFormal empire, dollar diplomacy and Americanisation were all effective strategies for American expansion abroad in the period 1890-1920. However, Americanisation was both the most common and also the most effective. For example it was used in conjunction with the concept of ‘manifest destiny’ to justify the removal of Cherokee and attempts to assimilate them into American society. It was also used in the spreading of American culture throughout the world by means of sports, food and social practices. Formal empire and dollar diplomacy were also a successful strategy, though they were implemented on a much more restricted basis, such as in the annexation of the Philippines and spreading influence in Latin America.
ReplyDeleteAmericanisation was likely the most common and pervading strategy of expansion, that allowed for the subtle domination of another country's culture and economy.This was evident in the spread of American products and the English language in Europe. It was also present in Asia especially as Japan developed modern technology and a strong sense of nationalism. Furthermore, Americanisation was evident in the formal colonies of the Philippines and Hawaii, in terms of building schools to transform their subjects to live like Americans.
ReplyDeleteIn terms of what was the most effective strategy, Dollar Diplomacy was successful in maintaining control over the Americas where formal empires were out of the question. Formal empires worked in some ways to serve the American business interests in Hawaii, by supplying Filipino labourers to plantations in Hawaii and allowing free trade. However, the continued resistance of the Filipinos for an independent state can serve to show that formal empire was not the most effective strategy. Americanisation was perhaps the most prevalent in terms of outreach, and the successful acquisition of Hawaii is a prominent example of this. However, the US opening of Japan threatened American interests in the later period as Japan became a world power leading into World War II.
The United States employed dollar diplomacy, formal empire and Americanisation to bring about expansion. Of the three, Americanisation was arguably the most common and effective. The United States was reluctant to be seen as assuming a policy of formal empire, thus this was seen less commonly largely in the Philippines. Dollar diplomacy was seen more widely, particularly in Latin America. It was effective for the United States particularly against nations such as Nicaragua. Americanisation was arguably the most pervasive and effective means of American expansion for a number of reasons. American products such as Kodak cameras were sold abroad. As the US was technologically advanced it was able to expand its sphere of commercial dominance over the rest of the world. Further, American culture was spread through the national pastime, baseball. Countries like Cuba and Japan adopted the sport and thus, American culture took a grip on the rest of the world. Finally, values were exported through Buffalo Bill and his Wild West extravaganza. The impact of Americanisation was long lasting, wide reaching and extremely significant thus for these reasons it was the most common and effective means of US expansion.
ReplyDeleteAfter the experiments with formal empire in the late 19th century there was a definite trend away from lengthy military occupations towards dollar diplomacy. Roosevelt’s “big stick” policy avoided many of the costs and controversies associated with governing annexed territories while still achieving the strategic aims of expansionism. Dollar diplomacy was effective in facilitating and consolidating American economic hegemony and also spreading American cultural values, but this type of intervention in Latin America has also led to a backlash. ‘Soft power’ arguably is more common and effective because American cultural products can be dissociated from any direct political agenda. But on the other hand, the embrace of American culture can often co-exist with anti-American political sentiment, which calls into question the effectiveness of this type of expansionism. Overall, I would say that dollar diplomacy was the more important mechanism for expansionism because it secured the economic primacy of America, something which then enabled the spread of American culture.
ReplyDeleteAmerican expansion abroad during the period 1890-1920 initially utilized formal empire as a method of expansion abroad. However the political issues that emerged from formal empire resulted in America turning towards the dollar diplomacy which was a more effective means of exerting power, particularly in Latin America. The role of Americanization can be recognized as the more common and effective strategy for America as it remained present throughout the period as a means of imposing American culture and civilization upon the annexed territory. This can be seen through the importing of American brands such as Kodak and cultural past times such as baseball. Americanization remained a crucial aspect of the American expansion abroad as it was a more pervasive method of control over the country and its society.
ReplyDeleteThe most common strategy employed initially appears to be dollar diplomacy and formal empire. It seems that Taft and Roosevelt believed that buying Latin American debts, and expanding American empire in places such as the Philippines, was the most effective method of American growth. These tactics would guarantee American ports close to Asian markets, whilst also ensure Europe’s growing influence would not reach the Americas. However eventually, without doubt the most effective and common strategy proved to be Americanzation. American business was spread around the world, proving to be an unstoppable juggernaut that dominated foreign markets. This strategy increased American standing around the world, whilst reinforced American self-proclaimed superiority. The claim that this strategy was the most effective is supported when looking outside the 1920’s, and into today’s market.
ReplyDeleteAmericanization and exceptionalism are central to both formal empire and dollar diplomacy. Both indicate an American preoccupation with manifest destiny, the idea that the united states was under a god given duty to spread their superior visions of democracy and economics across the world.
ReplyDeleteDollar diplomacy became a more effective and particle means of asserting US economic dominance overseas. Importantly this strategy to open up foreign markets in Latin America proved a more palatable political form of control than formal empire, which was seen as a betrayal of traditional American isolationism.
The most common and effective form of American expansion is difficult to pinpoint. A combination of these factors, an interplay of all three, certainly were effective strategies of expansion abroad. However when considering the three, to allocate one of the most common/effective, it would ultimately be Americanization. Americanization provided for a cultural influence and the spread of American products and thus aspects of their values/ideas (‘Wild West,’ Kodak and various other cultural products). While formal empire and the dollar diplomacy provided somewhat effective forms of expansion, they were limited by comparison.
ReplyDeleteIt can be argued that Formal empire and dollar democracy were effective forms of American expansion, however Americanisation proved to be the most successful strategy for American expansion abroad in the period 1890-1920. Americanisation had a global impact, meaning the spread of American culture, products, business and the spread of the English language particularly in Europe. This was due to many reasons including superior economic power and the self-imposed notion of white American exceptionalism and superiority. It was this belief that it was America’s duty to conquer and civilise inferior races that justified the Cherokee removal and the intervention and establishment of formal empire in Hawaii, Alaska and the Philippines. Notably dollar democracy gave America considerable influence in Latin America, but Americanisation was more so a global influence for America to promote their national ideals and values.
ReplyDeleteWhile it is undeniable that formal empire, dollar diplomacy, and Americanisation have all had a significant impact on American expansion, the later was arguably the most effective. Despite territorial limitations of formal empire and the success of exerting American authority through dollar diplomacy, Americanisation remains the most far reaching and long-lasting. Utilising technology, economic resources and cultural appeal, this strategy profoundly assisted American dominance. Whether Americanisation was implemented through force, as seen in the Phillipines, or taken on willing, its influence throughout the period of 1890 and 1920 remains to be seen today and as such, is deemed the most common and effective strategy.
ReplyDelete