James K. Polk and the expansionist impulse

Capitalism

James K. Polk and the Expansionist Impulse. New York: Pearson/Longman, 1997.

James K. Polk remains largely forgotten today in the popular imagination -- dwarfed by the memory of America's more famous 19th century presidents like Andrew Jackson and Abraham Lincoln. If he is remembered, he is likely to be more reviled than memorialized as a leader who sought to expand American territory by any means necessary, ethical or not. This reputation is alluded to in the title of University of Texas Arlington history professor Sam W. Haynes's biography James K. Polk and the Expansionist Impulse (Pearson/Longman, 1997). Polk added more than 522 acres to America as President, most famously that of Texas, which was once part of Mexico. In reviewing his controversial actions and philosophy of Manifest Destiny, historian Haynes attempts to present a balanced view of the president whose tenure in office oversaw such a seismic change in the topography of America. Polk, even during his own era was celebrated and defamed, celebrated for bringing new land into the American outreach across the West, but also for fighting what was seen even then as an unnecessary, illegal war.

According to the University of Texas Arlington history department website, author Sam W. Haynes' specialty is the early history of Texas and also the history of America as a postcolonial society. His most recent area of research is "Unfinished Revolution: Anti-British Sentiment and an Emerging American Identity, 1815-1850" and seeks to draw comparisons between the United States and other post-colonial societies that struggled to define themselves after winning their independence from European powers. This makes him uniquely qualified to deal with the issues of Polk's life, given his studies in American racial and class tensions, colonialism, and Americas sense of uniqueness and 'self' as a nation. Polk created the idea of Manifest Destiny, or America's right as a unique philosophical experiment in democracy to dominate the Western territories. Polk took this idea of expansion even a step farther than his predecessors such as Andrew Jackson. Haynes' area of specialty in the years leading up to Polk's ascent to office as well as his long-standing research into Polk's policy and life informs the text. Haynes has gone on to write webpage overviews for PBS on both Polk and the concept of Manifest Destiny in American history. Professor Haynes has a strong interest in educating undergraduates and young people about this period of history, which is reflected in the intended audience of the test -- the book is marketed as suitable for undergraduates.

Polk was elected as a Jacksonian Democrat, and according to Haynes' central thesis, much of Polk's actions can be seen as a manifestation of the Jacksonian tradition, with its belief in the value of American expansion as a method of extending land to all newly enfranchised but landless citizens. Haynes writes that Polk was the "consummate Jacksonian, embodying the strident, self-righteous republicanism of that age" and sense of American exceptionalism as rooted in its national faith democracy. True, Polk lacked the warm demeanor of 'Old Hickory' and was instead famous for possessing a rather chilly and aloof personality that was often described as alienating. However, his administration was equally colored by racism as was Jackson's and its infamous 'Trail of Tears.' According to Haynes, Polk sneered that Mexico was "ill-equipped" to deal with a foreign adversary, and did all he could to bait Mexico into war because he felt that Mexico was not fit to administer or possess its valuable Northern territories (Haynes 116).

Polk was a one-term governor of Tennessee, but Haynes strives to use the context of Polk's life to highlight America's changing view of itself as a nation, even while the Mexican-America war was called "Mr. Polk's War." At the beginning, Haynes thus takes a fairly straightforward biographical approach, although he strives to use Polk's life not merely as a curiosity in and of itself, but as emblematic of an era, when America had redefined itself as a regional power. This sense of power was based in racial terms and in democratic terms. Men had been newly given the right to vote who did not own land, and the displacement of the Indians and the colonizing of the West excited new interest in the potential of the territory to generate growth, often at the expense of nonwhite people. One of the most interesting and perhaps controversial aspects of the book is the way that Haynes casts virtually Polk's entire career as a lead-up to the presidency and the Mexican War. On some level, this is understandable -- this is Polk's most famous effort as President. However, it could be questioned if validating the usual lens with which a subject is viewed is a laudable goal for a historian. Haynes may make his decision partially because the later half of Polk's career was far more interesting than the first half. Polk's success as a congressman was hampered because of the divisions in the Democratic Party at the time, and his personality won him few friends -- his tenure in Tennessee as Chief Executive was also quite brief. Polk rose to power as a kind of a compromise candidate -- and Haynes chronicles this in only the first section of the book. Polk was popularly supported by a variety of factions in the nation, and he did emerge, ultimately as a nationally-focused president, although his acquisition of Texas notably exacerbated tensions between slave and free states. The book concludes noting Polk's seismic impact on history in terms of territorial expansion and his contribution to the Civil War is remarkable given that he only served one term, dying in office -- Haynes evidently wished to restore Polk to prominence in history, for good or for ill.