Note: Sample below may appear distorted but all corresponding word document files contain proper formattingExcerpt from Term Paper:
imperialism is necessary for cultures to progress. The United States is not often thought of as an imperialistic nation, because we like to think that we would not subjugate or take over other countries. However, that is just what we did when our forefathers came to this country and shoved aside the Native Americans. We subjugated and eradicated a culture and way of life, and that is the textbook definition of imperialism. Imperialism is wrong and shameful, but it seems that as much it may be hard to say, it is necessary for securing our way of life, and it is crucial in developing new trade and commerce.
First, it is necessary to define imperialism. Imperialism is the name for larger, more powerful nations to take over smaller, weaker nations, usually because of the promise of wealth or resources they can exploit. There is a long history of imperialism throughout the world, from the Spanish conquest of Mexico in the 1500s, to the American conquest of the Philippines and Hawaii in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Often, it is the native peoples who suffer the most during an imperialistic takeover. They lose their way of life and their culture, and they are often put to work as slaves in the aggressor's business, whatever it is. For example, Belgium took over the Congo in Africa because of its vast resources of rubber, and they forced the natives to work for them, treating them like slaves. If the natives resisted, they simply killed them. A historic report on the Congo states, "When I asked what would become of these women if their husbands failed to bring in the right quantity of rubber . ., he said at once that then they would be kept there until their husbands had redeemed them" (Casement). That is the nature of imperialism, and why we do not like to see ourselves as an imperialist nation.
However, the American Revolution, and even before the Revolution, was a prime time for American imperialism, mostly against the Native Americans. A group of authors write, "We have betrayed the legacy of the American Revolution, or worse, that we have been living up to a darker side of that legacy, ravishing the Vietnamese just as the Founding Fathers ravished the Indians, British, French, or Spanish who got in their way" (Gerlach, Dolph, and Nicholls 127). The first colonists who stepped on to the continent from Great Britain were imperialists, because they came here for monetary gain and a better life, and they immediately pushed the Natives off their lands and created towns like they had left in England. The situation just picked up speed when the country began to expand westward. We simply regarded it as our "destiny" to take over the country, and whenever anyone disagreed, we relocated them, like the Indians from the south who were settled in Oklahoma during the "Trail of Tears" march. Was this treatment necessary? If we had not displaced the Natives and controlled them, they may have risen up against us and taken back their lands. In that case, even more violence would have been necessary, and the country might have collapsed. That type of treatment is not necessary in our modern society, but then, it seemed necessary for the good of the nation as a whole, so it became our policy without realizing it.
The Westward Expansion movement is another classic example of American imperialism. As we moved westward, we simply displaced the Natives and created towns, cities, and farms wherever we wanted them. While the population of the country was increasing, and we needed more territory, we felt somehow that we were destined to expand -- that it was our right, somehow. Another writer notes, "The problem of Indian removal that will define the imperialism of the following century. Through his frustrated attempts to conceal an ineradicable presence of imperial violence, the underlying aggression and destructiveness of the ideology of the 'empire of virtue' is revealed" (Kutchen 109). Our leaders even tried to explain it as "democratic colonialism." Another writer states, "Here Jefferson argues not only that democracy and colonial expansion are compatible, but that the former springs from the latter. Such 'democratic colonialism' is not, therefore, incompatible with membership of the British Empire" (Macphee). Thus, we attempted to rationalize our actions as somehow fitting our democracy, an idea that seems quite self-serving today. Was this behavior necessary? For the good of the nation and its…[continue]
"Historic Imperialism" (2009, December 15) Retrieved December 6, 2016, from http://www.paperdue.com/essay/historic-imperialism-16232
"Historic Imperialism" 15 December 2009. Web.6 December. 2016. <http://www.paperdue.com/essay/historic-imperialism-16232>
"Historic Imperialism", 15 December 2009, Accessed.6 December. 2016, http://www.paperdue.com/essay/historic-imperialism-16232
The faith allows for stoning of people, torture of women and the suicide bombings that the world has grown accustomed to suffering (Hoagland, 2001). Islamic fundamentalist believe that their faith instructs them to seek out and destroy Americans. They also believe that if they are suicide bombers they will be rewarded in heaven ten fold. As America continues to fight against the human rights violations that Persian Gulf nations continue
It is very dark in the cave, and everything, including the face of the person next to them, is in deep shadows. It is never mentioned whether the people are happy or sad, or whether they speak to each other. It is assumed that they speak at least enough to put names to the shadows they see on the far wall. According to some, the chains that bind the
McLaren and Farahmandpur conceive of the new imperialism as a "combination of old-style military and financial practices as well as recent attempts by developed nations to impose the law of the market on the whole of humanity itself" (2001, 136). McLaren and Farahmandpur note, too, that the concept of class division is a taboo subject within the "guarded precincts of academic discourse, leaving discussions of class out of discussions of global
Fashion Romantic Era Fashion In Europe, the Romantic Period lasted from approximately 1820-1835 and had very distinctive flavor. People were disenchanted with writing and paintings that followed dour religious subject matter for the main part and took away humanity. The Romantic Era can be seen as the birth of the humanist period that continues to this day. People wanted to express themselves as individuals with passion and emotion. This was reflected in
WOD The war on drugs is politically charged, and intimately connected with the failure of American imperialism to fizzle out and fade away. As Lazare points out, "the anti-drug crusade has emerged as a holy crusade in its own right," (14). The War on Drugs has become woven into the fabric of American identity along with catchall phrases like liberty, freedom, and justice for all. Common sense has been incinerated faster
Historians are in the business of telling a storied past based on the collection of information revealed through the search for knowledge. Now knowledge is not truth, and the application of science is to search for the truth as can be best explained testing and understanding within bounded constraints. Therefore, the forms of evidence used by historians are not based on, or not always based on, scientific merit. One must
In short, the United States became more aggressive in attaining foreign resources and access to trade. This was a result of the expansive nature of empires, and the fact that America, as characterized by Boot, was gradually becoming a "great power." Largely, the Great Powers of the modern world have come into being as emerging economic and political trends have allowed. The ever shifting tides of the world's social foundations