Stalemate to Crisis the Imperial Republic

¶ … Stalemate to Crisis" and "The Imperial Republic."

Questions From "From Stalemate to Crisis" and "The Imperial Republic"

Brinkley, Alan. (2004) The Unfinished Nation: A Concise History of the American people. Volume II. 4th Edition. New York: McGraw-Hill.

What were the great social issues creating deep divisions in American life in the 1880s and 1890s? Discuss unionization of workers and the discontent felt by the farmers?

Political corruption, America's increasingly marked shift from an agrarian to an industrialist society, and the tariff questions surrounding the sale of American goods abroad, were all the important issues that served to tear the American nation apart during the latter half of the nineteenth century. The rise of agrarian discontent was manifested in the vocal Granger Movement, the formulation Farmers' Alliances, and the Populist movement that swept the American Midwest. Although agrarian discontent declined, after 1898, the origins, purposes, and effectiveness of the Interstate Commerce Act and the Sherman Antitrust Act became manifestations of the need for urban workers to enact legislation that empowered them against powerful corporate entities, despite hostility to their unionization.

How did economic issues play a roll in the political scene of America?

The silver question also known as the "Crime of '73" as well as the Gold Standard Act of 1900 both had major impacts upon the political as well as the economic life of ordinary Americas. The political pitting of the banking vs. The farming industries specifically highlighted the divisions between farming America and the increasingly politically powerful and population dense urban centers, as well as the emerging capitalist elite of the American nation. Imperialism and the rallying cry of instigations abroad would provide unity to the divisions of populist and capitalist powers in the American political discourse and fabric of the land.

How would you define imperialism? Why would a nation object to having the label "imperialistic"?

Imperialism is the assumption that one's own nation has superior needs and superior ways of life and political ideologies to those of other nations, often nations one wishes to conquer. Because imperialism is seen as a justifying ideology that uses xenophobia to excuse military interests nations often object to the use of the term to describe actions within and without of the national borders.

Based on your reading, was the United States imperialistic during the late 1800s? Cite specific examples for your answer.

During the late 1800s, the U.S. clearly used the old continental concept of Manifest Destiny across the American West to justify a new form of American expansionism across the seas, from Hawaii to Sama, the Philippines, and China. A strong stress on Social Darwinism within American intellectual circles that pitted White vs. non-White peoples, combined with the inevitable closing of the American frontier contributed to the self-justifying aspect of American imperialist ideology for politically unifying and economic reasons.

How did the media contribute to the start of the Spanish American War? Why did they refer to this war as "a splendid little war"? What do you believe was their motive and how do you compare the media today in its handling of reporting world events?

The term 'yellow journalism' was coined during the Spanish American War. This form of journalism was deployed in relation to the Spanish American War largely by the media outlets of William Randolph Hearst. Through yellow journalism, the American popular media used national events to sell newspapers. Although some have seen such journalism, as the misuse of the de Lome letter and the misrepresentation of the sinking of the Maine as evidence of the newspaper's use as a tool of the American government, the practice had the more immediately self-serving effect of encouraging readers to root for the American 'good guys' in a splendid little war of imperialism, and encouraging readers to follow the 'little' and presumably easily won war as a story, rather than as a difficult political decision and series of consequential action of the American government. Although the multiplicity of current media outlets has made the American media more accountable to the truth, the black and white view of U.S. versus foreign powers, that is, of yellow journalism, is reflected in some media outlets of today, such as Fox News.

In your view was the taking of territories by the United States justified? Explain. What groups and/or individuals benefited from the annexation "fever" of the late 1800s?

The taking of territories by the United States was hardly justified according to standards of either moral or formal international law, then or now. But the annexation "fever" of the late 1800s clearly benefited politicians wishing to create a greater sense of cohesive unity in an increasingly divided America, an America characterized by warring political and geographic interests and greater levels of economic stratification.

As you look at how the media dealt with the Spanish American War reflect on how the media today deals with both domestic and foreign affairs stories. What is their agenda in 2005 when reporting? Have they handled Afghanistan and Iraq in a similar fashion to the way the press reported the sinking of the battleship Maine? Is the media trustworthy in 2005? Please be more specific on this question.