Manifest Destiny

Manifest Destiny


We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

Tõenäoliselt langeb California järgmisel aastal lõdvast haardumisest, mis sellises riigis nagu Mehhiko on kaugel provintsis, mis on metropolist kergelt ebaselge sõltuvusega. Ebamõistlik ja hajameelne Mehhiko ei saa sellise riigi suhtes kunagi tõelist valitsusvõimu avaldada. Ühe impotentsus ja teise kaugus peavad muutma suhte virtuaalseks sõltumatuseks; välja arvatud juhul, kui türannia võib provintsi kogu loomuliku kasvu pidurdades ja keelates sisserändel, mis suudab üksi oma võimeid arendada ja selle loomise eesmärke täita, säilitada sõjalise ülemvõimu, mis ei ole valitsus selle mõiste õigustatud tähenduses.

California puhul on see nüüd võimatu. Anglosaksi jalg on juba oma piiridel. Juba on anglosaksi väljarände vastupandamatu armee eelvalvur hakanud sellele alla voolama, relvastatud adra ja vintpüssiga ning tähistama selle rada koolide ja kolledžite, kohtute ja esindussaalide, veskite ja koosolekuruumidega. Elanikkond on peagi tegelikus California okupeerimises, mille üle Mehhiko ei jõua unistada domineerimisest. Nad muutuvad tingimata iseseisvaks. Seda kõike ilma meie valitsuse volituseta, ilma meie inimeste vastutuseta - sündmuste loomulikus voos, põhimõtete iseeneslikus toimimises ning inimkonna kalduvuste ja soovide kohandamises elementaarsete oludega, mille keskel nad leiavad. ise paigutatud.

Ja neil on õigus iseseisvusele - enesevalitsemisele - kodudele, mis on vallutatud kõrbest nende endi töö ja ohtude, kannatuste ja ohverdustega - parem ja tõesem õigus kui kunstlik suveräänsuse tiitel Mehhikos, tuhande miili kaugusel, pärides Hispaaniast tiitli hea ainult nende vastu, kellel pole paremat. Nende õigus sõltumatusele on loomulik õigus omavalitsusele, mis kuulub piisavalt tugevasse kogukonda, et seda säilitada - positsioonilt, päritolult ja iseloomult erinev ning vaba ühistest poliitilistest organitest kuulumise vastastikustest kohustustest, sidudes selle teistele lojaalsuskohustus ja avaliku usu kompaktsus. See on nende tiitel iseseisvusele; ja selle pealkirja järgi ei saa olla kahtlust, et elanikkond voolab nüüd kiiresti Californiasse

kinnitab ja säilitab selle sõltumatuse.

Seda, kas nad siis liituvad meie liiduga või mitte, ei saa kindlalt ette ennustada. Kui kavandatud raudtee üle mandri Vaiksesse ookeani ei rakendata, siis võib -olla ei tehtagi seda; kuigi isegi sel juhul pole kaugel päev, mil Atlandi ookeani ja Vaikse ookeani impeeriumid taas ühte voolaksid, niipea kui nende sisepiir peaks üksteisele lähenema. Kuid see suurepärane töö, mis on kolossaalne, nagu esmapilgul plaan näib, ei saa kaua jääda ehitamata.

Selle vajadus just sel eesmärgil siduda ja hoida oma raudklambris kinni meie kiiresti settivat Vaikse ookeani piirkonda

Mississippi oru - trassi looduslik rajatis - lihtsus, mille abil saab Euroopa ülerahvastatud elanikkonnast ehitamiseks vajalikku tööjõudu sisse nõuda, et maksta töö edenemisega väärtuslikuks muutunud maadel - ja selle tohutut kasu maailma kaubandusele kogu Aasia idarannikuga, ainuüksi sellise tee toetuseks peaaegu piisav - need kaalutlused annavad kinnitust, et päev ei saa kaugel olla, mis võib olla tunnistajaks Oregoni esindajate saatmisele ja Californiasse Washingtoni vähem kui mõne aasta eest pühendasid sarnasele teekonnale Ohio reisijad; samas kui magnetiline telegraaf võimaldab toimetajatel San Francisco liit, Astoria õhtupostitusvõi Nootka hommikuuudised, et presidendi ametisseastumise esimene pool enne teise poole kajasid kirjalikult sisse seada, on Kapitooliumi kõrge veranda all, nagu ta huultelt räägiti, surnud.

Eemal siis kogu tühja prantsuse jutuga Ameerika mandri jõudude tasakaalust. Hispaania Ameerikas pole kasvu! Ükskõik milline rahvastiku areng Briti Kanadas võib toimuda, on see vaid nende endi varajane katkestamine nende praegusest kolooniast suhtega väikese saarega 3000 miili kaugusel Atlandi ookeanist; millele peagi järgneb annekteerimine ja mille eesmärk on paisutada meie edusammude endiselt kuhjuvat hoogu.

Ja kes iganes suudab tasakaalu hoida, kuigi nad peaksid heitma vastupidises mõõtkavas kõik tääkid ja kahurid, mitte ainult Prantsusmaa ja Inglismaa, vaid kogu Euroopa jaoks, kuidas see lööks tala vastu 250 lihtsat ja kindlat kaalu või 300 miljonit - ja Ameerika miljoneid -, mis on määratud kogunema triipude ja tähtede lehvimise alla Issanda kiirel kiirendusaastal 1945!

Iowa Mesopotaamia undine ja fluvial piirkondades; Mississippi kontsentreeritud pagasiruumi grand delta; imelises Piemontes, mis kaldub Kaljumägede idapõhjast alla ja saadab neid läbi kogu meie territooriumi; ja ennekõike on preerialagendike üleval lagendikul, mille ümber need on kogunenud, kotkadena oma daami rinnale, looja lõpmatu maitse, mis on rühmitanud särava hiilgusega oma loomingu pehmemad ja säravamad ilud. Vähemate valikute ja ülenduste ületamisega pole ta taeva poole kuhjanud basaalist titaanlikke struktuure, mis kõrguvad meie lääneranniku kohal ... Selle uue riigi imelise suursugususe ja väärtuse tundmine ja hindamine on isamaalistele ja mõistlikele kuulsusrikas. Kitsast südamest ja kauplemispoliitikust on iseloomulik eitada selle tipptaset ja hinnata selle väärtust.

Rahulik ja tark mees asub end põhjalikult uurima ja mõistma selgelt Providence'i sügavaid kavatsusi - skaneerima looduse suurt mahtu - mõistma võimaluse korral Looja tahet ja võtma lugupidavalt vastu seda, mis talle ilmutatakse.

Kaks sajandit on meie kontinendil meie rassi üle veerenud. Mitte millestki oleme saanud 20 000 000. Eimillestki kasvatatakse meid põllumajanduses, kaubanduses, tsivilisatsioonis ja loodusjõus esimeseks olemasolevate rahvaste või ajaloo seas. Nii palju on meie saatus siiani; kuni selle hetkeni - tehing tehtud, saavutatud, kindel ja selle üle ei tohi vaielda. Sellest lävest loeme tulevikku.

Ameerika välja lahendamata saatus on mandri alistamine - kiirustada üle suure välja Vaikse ookeani äärde - elavdada oma sadu miljoneid inimesi ja julgustada neid ülespoole - kehtestada enesevalitsuse põhimõte. - nende herakuliste masside äratamiseks - uue korra kehtestamiseks inimasjades - orjastatud vabastamiseks - üleelanud rahvaste taaselustamiseks - pimeduse muutmiseks valguseks - saja sajandi une äratamiseks - vanade rahvaste uue tsivilisatsiooni õpetamiseks. - kinnitada inimkonna saatust - viia inimkonna karjäär oma kulminatsioonipunkti - panna seisma jäänud inimesed uuesti sündima - täiuslik teadus - kaunistada ajalugu rahu vallutamisega - heita uus ja hiilgav hiilgus inimkond - ühendada maailm ühte sotsiaalsesse perekonda - lahustada türannia võlu ja ülendada heategevust - vabastada needus, mis raskendab inimkonda, ja valada õnnistusi kogu maailmas. Jumalik ülesanne! surematu missioon! Astume kiiresti ja rõõmsalt avatud rada meie ees. Las iga Ameerika süda avaneb laialdaselt, et patriotism helendab helendamatult, ja usaldage usuga oma armastatud riigi ülevasse ja imelisse saatusesse!

Mis on territoorium, härra president, mille te kavatsete Mehhikost võita? See on pühitsetud Mehhiko südamele paljude hästi peetud lahingutega oma vana Kastilia meistriga. Tema Bunker Hills ja Saratogas ja Yorktowns on seal! Mehhiklane võib öelda: "Seal veritsesin ma vabaduse eest; ja kas ma pean loovutama oma kiindumuste pühitsetud kodu anglosaksi sissetungijatele? Mida nad sellega tahavad? Neil on juba Texas. Nad on vallutanud territooriumi Nueces ja Rio Grande. Mida nad veel tahavad? Millele osutada oma lastele mälestusmärke sellest iseseisvusest, mille ma neile pärandan, kui need lahinguväljad on minu valdusest möödunud? " Härra, kui üks oleks tulnud ja nõudnud Massachusettsi elanikelt Bunker Hilli, kui Inglismaa lõvi oleks end seal kunagi näidanud, kas on üle kolmeteistkümne ja alla üheksakümne mehe, kes poleks olnud valmis temaga kohtuma; kas sellel mandril on jõgi, mis poleks verest punaseks jooksnud; kas seal on põld, kuid oleks tapetud ameeriklaste matmata luudega kõrgele kuhjatud, enne kui need pühitsetud vabaduse lahinguväljad oleks pidanud meilt välja lööma? Kuid see sama ameeriklane läheb sõsarvabariiki ja ütleb vaesele, nõrgale Mehhikole: "Loobuge oma territooriumist, te ei ole seda väärt vallutama; mul on üks seis juba peatatud ja kõik, mida ma teilt palun, on teisest loobuda?" Sama hästi oleks Inglismaa minu kirjeldatud tingimustes tulnud ja nõudnud meilt: "Loobuge Atlandi ookeani nõlvast; loobuge sellest tühisest territooriumist Alleghany mägedest mereni; see on ainult Maine'ist Maarjamaani; ainult umbes kolmandik teie vabariigist ja selle kõige vähem huvitav osa. " Milline oleks vastus? Nad ütleksid, et peame selle John Bullile loovutama. Miks? "Ta tahab tuba." Michigani senaator ütleb, et tal peab see olema. Miks, mu vääriline kristlik vend, mis õigluse põhimõttel? "Ma tahan ruumi!"

Härra, vaadake seda teesklemist ruumipuuduse pärast. Kahekümne miljoni inimesega on teil umbes tuhat miljonit aakrit maad, mis kutsub iga mõeldava argumendiga lahendust leidma, alandades neid veerand dollari aakri võrra ja lubades igal mehel kükitada, kus talle meeldib. Kuid Michigani senaator ütleb, et mõne aasta pärast oleme kakssada miljonit ja me tahame ruumi. Kui ma oleksin mehhiklane, ütleksin teile: "Kas teil pole oma riigis ruumi oma surnud meeste matmiseks? Kui te minu juurde tulete, tervitame teid veriste kätega ja tervitame teid külalislahketel haudadel."

Põhja -Ameerika esitab silmale ühe suure geograafilise süsteemi, mille iga osa praeguste suhtlusvõimaluste alusel võidakse muuta kättesaadavamaks kõigile teistele, kui olid esialgsed riigid teineteisele konföderatsiooni moodustamise ajal; sellest saab peagi maailma kaubanduskeskus. Ja see periood pole sugugi kaugel, kui inimene oma soovide ja impulsside osas ning alistudes seaduste mõjudele, mis on tugevamad kui need, mis määravad kunstlikud piirid, määrab, et see ühendatakse nii poliitiliste kui ka looduslike sidemetega, ja see moodustab vaid ühe poliitilise süsteemi ning vaba, konföderatsiooniga iseseisev vabariik, mis on esindatud lääne suure oru ühises saalis - ja näitab imetlevale maailmale vägevaid tulemusi, mis on saavutatud läänepoolkera vabaduse nimel .

Siis luuakse täiuslikum liit ja luuakse õiglus püsivatele alustele - tagatakse kodune rahu, tagatakse ühine kaitse, edendatakse üldist heaolu ja tagatakse vabaduse õnnistused järglastele.

Meie valitsemisvorm on suurepäraselt kohandatud laiendatud impeeriumiga. Rahva voorus ja intelligentsus on rajatud ning selle õiglased volitused pärinevad valitsetavate nõusolekust ning selle mõju on kaugeimates piirides sama hea kui poliitilises keskuses.

Me oleme erinevalt kõigist kogukondadest, kes on enne meid käinud, ja meiega nendega võrdlemisel saadud illustratsioonid on ebaõiglased ja ekslikud.

Meie süsteemi iseloomustav ühiskonnakorraldus erineb teiste aegade sõjaväevabariikidest, nagu ka inimeste Päästja religioon Mahometi pealesurumisele. Meie süsteem võidab oma õiglusega, samas kui nende süsteem püüdis oma jõuga hirmutada. Meie territoriaalne piir võib ulatuda mandrile, meie elanikkond neljakordistuda ja meie osariikide arv kahekordistuda ilma ebamugavuste ja ohtudeta. Kõik Konföderatsiooni liikmed säilitaksid end endiselt ja annaksid oma mõju üldisele hüvangule; iga sammas seisaks püsti ja annaks ehitisele jõudu ja ilu. Riikliku seadusandluse küsimustes kavatseb arvukas elanikkond, laiendatud territoorium ja mitmekesised huvid reformida kuritarvitamisi, mis muidu jäävad reguleerimata, et säilitada riikide õigused ja tuua õigusaktide käik tagasi tsentralismist kiirustamine.


Manifest Destiny - ajalugu

Manifesti saatuse religioosne päritolu

Donald M. Scott
Ajaloo professor
Queensi kolledž ja New Yorgi linnaülikooli kraadiõppekeskus
& copyNational Humanities Centre

Aastal 1845 ilmus allkirjastamata artikkel populaarses Ameerika ajakirjas, kauaaegne Jacksoni väljaanne, Demokraatlik ülevaade, esitas eksimatu üleskutse Ameerika ekspansionismile. Keskendudes peamiselt Texase Vabariigi liitmisele, kuulutas ta, et laienemine kujutab endast meie ilmse saatuse täitumist, hõlmates Providence'i eraldatud mandri meie iga -aastase mitmekordistuva vaba arengu jaoks. & Rdquo Nii sündis võimas Ameerika loosung. & ldquoManifest Destiny & rdquo sai ennekõike kutseks ja õigustuseks ameerikalikule imperialismi vormile ning võttis kenasti kokku Mehhiko sõja eesmärgid. Ta väitis, et Ameerikal on saatus, ilmne, s.t iseenesestmõistetav, Jumalalt, et ta okupeeriks Põhja-Ameerika mandri Kanadast lõuna pool (samuti nõudis ta õigust Oregoni territooriumile, sealhulgas Kanada ossa). & ldquoManifest Destiny & rdquo oli samuti selgelt valgete ülemvõimu rassiline doktriin, mis ei andnud Põhja -Ameerika mandril olevatele aladele ühtegi põliselaniklast ega mittevalget nõuet ja õigustas valgete ameeriklaste India maade sundvõõrandamist. (& ldquoManifest Destiny & rdquo oli ka võtmetähtsusega loosung, mida kasutati Ameerika Ühendriikides ja rsquo keiserlikes ettevõtmistes 1890ndatel ja kahekümnenda sajandi algusaastatel ning mis viisid Hawaii ja Filipiinide saarte omandi või kontrolli alla.)

Kuid Manifest Destiny ei olnud lihtsalt Ameerika imperialismi kuub ja Ameerika ja rsquose territoriaalsete ambitsioonide õigustus. Samuti oli see kindlalt kinnitatud Ameerika erilise ja ainulaadse saatuse pikaajalise ja sügava tunnetusega, uskumusega, et ajaloolase Conrad Cherry sõnade järgi on & ldquoAmerica rahvas, mille Jumal on kutsunud erilisele saatusele. & Rdquo provintsiaalne eesmärk Euroopa maade avastamiseks ja lõpuks vallutamiseks ning Christopher Columbuse avastatud ja avastatud rdquo oli algusest peale olemas. Nii Hispaania kui ka Prantsuse monarhid lubasid ja rahastasid & ldquoUus World & rdquo uurimist, sest muu hulgas pidasid nad oma jumalikult määratud missiooniks levitada kristlust uude maailma, muutes põliselanikud ristiusku. Hiljem ettevõtmise juurde tulles kandsid britid ja eriti Uus -Inglismaa puritaanid endas nõudlikku ettekujutuse eesmärgi tunnet.

Massachusettsi lahe koloonia kuberner John Winthrop esitas kõige selgema ja kaugeleulatuvama avalduse ideest, et Jumal oli Uus-Inglismaa asunikele esitanud erilise ja ainulaadse Providential missiooni. & ldquo Laeval Arrabella, Atlanticki ookeanil, Anno 1630, ja rdquo Winthrop esitasid plaani selle kohta, mida Perry Miller on nimetanud & ldquoerrand kõrbe ja rdquo, mis pani raamistiku enamikule hilisematele versioonidele ideest, et & ldquoAmerica oli esialgu valitud eriline saatus. & rdquo Winthrop pidas oma ilmaliku jutluse vahetult enne seda, kui ta koos kaasreisijatega Bostoni sadama kaldal maha astus, Winthrop pakkus välja koha, kuhu Jumal oli kutsunud neid üles ehitama eeskuju Piibli jaoks Inglismaal ja mujal asuvatele protestantidele. jäljendama. & ldquoSeega seisab põhjus Jumala ja meie vahel. Selle töö jaoks oleme sõlminud temaga lepingu, oleme võtnud tellimuse, ja ta kuulutas, lisades: „Issand palun meid kuulata ja tuua meid rahu kohta, kuhu me soovime, siis on ta selle lepingu ratifitseerinud ja pitseerinud meie komisjon ja ootab selles sisalduvate artiklite ranget täitmist. & rdquo Seejärel täpsustas ta täpsemalt, mis truudus sellele komisjonile kaasneb: Uus -Inglismaa inimesed peavad & ldquof järgima Miika nõu, et teha õiglaselt, armastada halastust, kõndida alandlikult koos meie Jumalaga. Sel eesmärgil peame selles töös kokku saama kui üks mees, me peame üksteist vendlikus kiindumuses lõbustama, me peame olema valmis lühendama oma üleliigset vajadust teiste vajaduste rahuldamiseks. & Rdquo Kuid see on lähedal kõne, mille ta mõtles välja fraasi, millele on ikka ja jälle viidatud (viimati president Ronald Reagan), et väljendada ideed Ameerikast ja rsquose provintsiaalsest ainulaadsusest ja saatusest. Kui oleme oma missioonile truud, leiame, et Iisraeli Jumal on meie seas, kui kümned meist suudavad tuhandele oma vaenlasele vastu seista, kui ta teeb meile kiituseks ja au, mida inimesed ütlevad järgnevatest istandustest: isand teeb selle nagu Uus -Inglismaa, sest peame arvestama sellega, et oleme nagu linn mäe otsas, kõigi inimeste pilgud meie peal. & rdquo

Winthropi ja rsquose kõnele järgnenud aastakümnetel jutlustasid enamik Uus -Inglismaa jumalikke vähem Uus -Inglismaast ja rsquose jumalikust missioonist, kui avaldasid sügavaid, hädaldavaid ja maldavaid sõnu. Jeremiad, hilisemad ajaloolased on neid nimetanud & mdashabout, kui kaugele olid uued inglased langenud oma Jumalaga sõlmitud lepingu nõuete täitmisest ja kuidas kõik hädad segadus, mis neid oli tabanud & mdash Prints Phillipi ja rsquose sõda, Uus -Inglismaa ja rsquose harta kaotamine, nõiduse nähtus, põud ja kohutavad talved jne. & mdash olid Jumala ebaõnnestumiste märgid ja tagajärjed. Kuid keset seda, mida hiljem hakati nimetama & ldquothe suureks ärkamiseks & rdquo (kuid sel ajal peeti seda ebatavaliseks Jumala väljavalamiseks ja armu päästvaks armuks), mis levis 1740. aastatel üle Uus-Inglismaa ja teiste Briti kolooniate, et Jumal oli valinud Ameerika eriliseks saatuseks, äratati üles uuel kujul. Ärkamisaja keskel, suur Uus -Inglismaa teoloog ja taaselustaja, Jonathan Edwards kirjutas, et & ldquothe viimase päeva hiilgus & rdquo lühidalt, aastatuhande, & ldquoend korda & rdquo, mis tooks maa peale Kristuse teise tulemise ja Jumala kuninga leviku maailmas, algaks Ameerikast. & ldquoEi ole tõenäoline, et see Jumala töö ja rsquose vaim [ärkamised] oleksid nii erakordsed ja imelised, kinnitas Edwards, & ldquois koidik või vähemalt selle kuulsusrikka Jumala töö eellugu, mida pühakiri nii sageli ette kuulutas. selle teema uuendab inimkonna maailma. & rdquo

Teise suure ärkamisaja juhtivad jutlustajad, kes rändasid üle Ameerika Ühendriikide suure osa 19. sajandi esimesest poolest, nagu Lyman Beecher (Harriet Beecher Stowe ja Henry Ward Beecheri isa) ja Charles Grandison Finney kinnitasid taas väidet, et Ameerika aastatuhande koht ja et ärkamine oli selle kindel märk. Siiski andsid nad oma ettekujutusele aastatuhandest Ameerika erilise keerdkäigu. Nii nagu Winthrop sidus Uus -Inglismaa ja rsquose providentiaalse missiooni idee kristliku ühisriigi iseloomuga, mille nad olid kohustatud looma, kirjeldasid ka tuhandeaastased, nagu Beecher, ühiskonda, mis tooks aastatuhande esile kui Ameerika vabariik, seostades seega Ameerika Ühendriikide tulekuga. aastatuhandel Ameerika vabaduse ja demokraatia leviku ja võidukäiguga. Tema 1832. aasta traktaadis Väide Läänele, Märkis Beecher, et algul oli ta arvanud, et Edwards & rsquo ennustus & ldquochimerical, & rdquo, aga nüüd arvas, et & ldquoall providential areng alates ja kõik olemasolevad aja märgid kinnitavad seda. Aga kui revolutsiooni ja kodanikuvabaduse marssiga valmistatakse ette Issanda tee, siis kust leitakse keskenergia ja millisest rahvast tuleb uuendav jõud? & Rdquo Beecher & rsquos vastus oli selge: see rahvas on Jumala hoolitsuse järgi määratud juhtima teed maailma moraalsel ja poliitilisel emantsipatsioonil. & rdquo Jumala ja rahva vaheline suhe on selles tuhandeaastases sõnastuses nii peen kui ka mõnevõrra ebaselge. Ühinemine Jumala ja tahte ning rahvuse ja rsquose demokraatliku iseloomu vahel annab jumaliku sanktsiooni Ameerika Ühendriikidele ning rsquo ilmalikele vabaduse ja demokraatia korraldustele. Samal ajal muudab see rahva iseendaks aastatuhande tuleku instrumendiks. Veelgi enam, eriti konfliktiolukordades hõlmas väide, et Jumal oli ühel ja teisel poolel, sageli vaenlase demoniseerimist. Beecheri jaoks oli deemonlik vaenlane või & ldquoother & rdquo roomakatoliku vandenõu levitada & ldquoRomanism & rdquo üle kogu Ameerika lääne.

Mormoonid andsid aga täieliku väljenduse Ameerika kui aastatuhande paiga ideele. Prohvetiennustused ja Mormoni Raamat, mis edastati Joseph Smithile ja tema järgnevale Mormoni Kiriku organisatsioonile, tähistasid lõppeva aja algust & rdquo uue religiooni ametliku nimetusena, & ldquo Viimse Aja Pühade Jeesuse Kristuse Kirik & rdquo teeb eksimatult selgeks. Pärast vägivaldset tagakiusamist Ohios, Missouri osariigis ja Illinoisis juhtis Brigham Young mormoonid Utahi kõrbe ja rajas seal mäele uue linna, uue Siioni, mis Conrad Cherry sõnul pani selle pühasse linna kõrbes [see] oli Noorte jaoks pühakute kogunemiskoht, kust nad kiirgaksid mõjutusi, mis muudaksid kogu Ameerika mandri ja lõpuks maailma Jumalaks ja rsquos Siioniks. & rdquo

Mõte, et Jumal oli valinud Briti kolooniad eriliseks saatuseks, sai suure ümberkujundamise koos Ameerika revolutsiooniga ja USA kehtestamisega uueks ja ainulaadseks iseseisvaks riigiks. Novus Ordo Seclorum& mdasha uus ilmalik kord. Vaimulikud, eriti kalvinistlikud Uus-Inglismaa vaimulikud, olid suurel määral patriootlikud vaimulikud, kellel oli revolutsiooni toetamise mobiliseerimisel tõenäoliselt suurem roll kui aastatel 1765–1776 koostatud lugematul hulgal Briti-vastaseid brošüüre. patriootlik põhjus esitati Jeremiaadi tuttavas vormis: jutlustes nõuti, et Jumal oleks külastanud ebaõiglust ja türanniat, mida parlament ja Crown kasutasid kolonistide & ldquoreduce & rdquo & ldquoslaverdamiseks, & rdquo nende kohutava patususe tõttu. Jumal nõudis meeleparandust ja uut truudust, et & ldquothe Püha Vabaduse Põhjus. & Rdquo Aastaks 1789, põhiseaduse vastuvõtmise ja George Washingtoni presidendiks saamisega, oli uus rahvas ise erilise tähenduse ja missiooniga. Ameeriklased ei pidanud oma uut rahvast lihtsalt teiseks rahvuseks rahvaste seas, vaid provintsiaalselt õnnistatud üksuseks, kelle ülesandeks oli ennast arendada ja hoida maailma vabaduse ja demokraatia majakana.

Nagu teada, ei olnud USA mitte ainult religioosselt mitmekesine, vaid ka tema uus põhiseadus koos õiguste seaduse esmase muudatusega kehtestas kiriku ja riigi selge lahusoleku, keelates selgesõnaliselt väljakujunenud kiriku asutamise. See oli formaalselt ilmalik rahvas ja kuigi samal ajal sügavalt religioosne ühiskond, mida hoidis jumalik tahe ja mille kodanikelt oodati usulise pühendumusega oma asutajaliikmete liitumist. Tegelikult tekkis sakraliseeritud arusaam uuest rahvast ja selle arendamine, mida erinevad teadlased on nimetanud võimsaks kodanikuusundiks, ja kultuurilise natsionalismi erivorm, millele kõik ameeriklased, olgu põliselanikud või sisserändajad sündinud ja olenemata nende isiklikust usust uskumusi ja kuuluvusi, eeldati järgimist. Selles mõttes võib Ameerika Ühendriike pidada & ldquocreedal & rdquo ühiskonnaks, mida ühendavad vähem geograafilised piirid, mis pidevalt muutuvad, ja rohkem kindlate doktriinide kogum, mis on kirjas iseseisvusdeklaratsioonis ja põhiseaduses, millele kõik rahva kodanikud oma truudust andsid. Uus, demokraatlik vabariik, mis kuulutati ainulaadseks, oli Jumala poolt määratud ja erilise ülesandega olla uus & ldquocity on the hill & rdquo, et särada maailmale vabaduse majakas ja mdashand, mõnikord, kui seda peetakse vajalikuks, levitada oma demokraatia vormi relvade abil mujale maailma. Revolutsioonilised juhid, eriti George Washington ja Thomas Jefferson, tõsteti kiiresti asutajateks ning deklaratsioon ja põhiseadus muutusid peaaegu pühadeks säilmeteks. Loo jaoks oli muidugi hädavajalik jumalalaadse & rdquo Washingtoni apoteoos ameeriklaseks Mooseseks, kes viis oma rahva orjusest vabadusse. Nii oli uus rahvas ja mingil määral ka tema rahvas. & Ldquochosen. raamib ja seab nende tõelise sisu, on Iisraeli tüüp Jumala ja rsquose valitud rahvaks. Seega on [nende fraaside] ilmselt ilmalikel väljenditel sügavam vastukaja, mis tuvastab Ameerika missiooni päritolu väga täpselt isegi siis, kui neid pole selgesõnaliselt välja töötatud. & Rdquo

Sellised on Ameerika ja rsquos & ldquochosenness & rdquo ning provintsiaalse saatuse ja missiooni idee põhijooned, mis mitte ainult ei toeta rahvast, vaid ka rsquos & ldquoManifest Destiny & rdquo kui põhjendus, miks Ameerika Ühendriigid laiendavad oma piire Vaiksele ookeanile. See on ka ideede tähtkuju, mis on Ameerika natsionalismi ja selle tegevust kodu- ja välismaal tänaseni informeerinud. Nagu märgitud, kasutati seda selgesõnaliselt Hispaania -Ameerika sõja ja sellega kaasnevate imperialistlike eesmärkide õigustamiseks. President Woodrow Wilson kutsus seda üles kutsuma ameeriklasi võitlema, et muuta maailm ja ldquosafe demokraatia eest, ja rdquo, nagu tegi president Franklin Roosevelt, kui ta II maailmasõjas koondas Ameerika avalikkust fašistlike ja natsistlike eurooplaste ning keiserliku Jaapani vastase sõja taga. See oli ka külma sõja alustala: tegelikult lisati fraas & ldquounder God & rdquo alles 1954. aastal külma sõja haripunktis truudusetõotusele. Ameerika ainulaadsuse ja missiooni tunnetuse aluseks on ka John F. Kennedy ja rsquose avakõne. Ja president George W. Bush, pidades end jumaliku tahte agendiks, on kaitsnud oma poliitikat Iraagis, viidates ideele, et Ameerika ja rsquose kohustus ja saatus on võita terrorism ja kindlustada Iraagi demokraatia ning aidata seda levitada teistele riikidele. Lähis -Idast.

Kuid pole üllatav, et Abraham Lincolnil oli kõige keerulisem, kuid siiski selge avaldus ideest, et Ameerikal on enda ja maailma ees püha kohustus säilitada ja kaitsta vabadust ja demokraatiat. Aastal 1837, 28 -aastase noormehena, pidas Lincoln pöördumise Illinoisi lütseumi Springfieldi poole. See oli suurte sotsiaalsete ja poliitiliste segaduste aeg. Illinois oli orjuse kaotamise küsimuses vägivaldne. Altonis Illinoisis mõrvas abolitsionistide vastane rahvahulk hiljuti abolitsionistliku toimetaja Elijah Lovejoy, hävitas tema trükipressi ja põletas tema kontori ja maja. Selles intensiivse poliitilise vaidluse õhkkonnas kutsus Lincoln oma lütseumi pöördumist, et kutsuda oma Illinoisi kaaslasi (ja ameeriklasi), et pöörduda demokraatlike ja liberaalsete põhitõdede poole, milleks on Ameerika rahvuslik usutunnistus, ja Ameerika kodanikuusund ning omaks võtta ja hoida neid sama sügavalt kui oma eraelu usulisi tõekspidamisi. Ta väitis, et ainult selline ühine rahvuslik usk võib anda tõelise ja püsiva aluse, mis hoiaks laialivalguvat, mitmekesist ja konfliktidest vaevatud rahvast koos.

Kodusõja ajal leidis Lincoln, et need uskumused on järsult vaidlustatud ja samal ajal väljendas neid kõige kõnekamalt ja võimsamalt. Lincoln oli oma püüdlikke ja sageli skeptilisi vaimsusi alati tähelepanelikult hoidnud, kuid sõja lakkamatult jätkudes ei võtnud tema tõekspidamised ja kõned mitte sektantlikku, vaid sügavalt Vana Testamendi tooni. Tema Gettysburgi pöördumise kadents ja sõnad rõhutavad tema sõnumit: Liit ja viimane maa parim lootus ning rdquo võitles vabaduse püha asja eest. & ldquoSee on elavate jaoks, & rdquo kuulutas ta, & ldquoto olgu siin pühendatud meie ees seisvale suurele ülesandele & mdasht, et nendelt austatud surnutelt võtame me suurema pühendumuse sellele põhjusele, mille nimel nad andsid viimase tõelise pühendumuse. . . et see rahvas Jumala all saab uue vabaduse. . . ja see rahva valitsus rahva ja inimeste pärast ei hukku maa pealt. & rdquo

Lincoln uuris oma lühikesel teisel avamiskõnelusel, mis peeti vaid kuus nädalat enne mõrva, Ameerika vabaduse ja jumaliku tahte vahelist suhet. Ta teadis, et rahvad nõudsid sageli, kui mitte alati, Jumalat või jumalaid oma poolele. Niisiis, tunnistades, et kumbki pool ei oodanud sõja jaoks selle ulatust ega kestust, mille ta on juba saavutanud, & rdquo Lincoln käsitles tõsiasja, et nii põhi kui ka lõuna kutsusid Jumalat oma partisaniks: & ldquo Mõlemad lugesid sama Piiblit ja palvetasid sama Jumala poole ning kumbki kutsub oma abi teise vastu. & rdquo Kuid ta tegi eksimatult selgeks, et kuigi ta ei tundnud ega suutnud tegelikult Jumalat ja rsquos Willi tundma õppida, teadis ta siiski, et Jumal kavatseb orjuse lõpetada, olenemata sellest, mida see nõuab. Lincoln kutsus jõuliselt esile Jeremiaadi nägemust kõikvõimsast ja sügavalt solvunud Jumalast, kes valitseks ja ldquowoe & rdquo rahvaste kaudu, kes solvavad. '' Jumala ettehooldus peab tulema, kuid mida ta on oma määratud aja jooksul jätkanud, tahab ta nüüd kõrvaldada ja et ta annab nii põhja- kui ka lõunaosale selle kohutava sõja kui häda neile, kellele süütegu tuli, me näeme selles igasugust kõrvalekaldumist nendest jumalikest omadustest, mille elavasse Jumalasse usklikud Talle omistavad? & rdquo & ldquoTeiseks loodame, et palvetame tulihingeliselt, ja jätkas rincquo Lincoln, & ldquot et see võimas sõjasaak võib kiiresti kaduda. Kui aga Jumal soovib, et see jätkuks, kuni kogu võlakirjamehe ja rsquose kogutud rikkus kakssada viiskümmend aastat vastamata vaeva uputatakse ja seni, kuni iga ripsmetega võetud veretilga maksab teine ​​mõõgaga tõmmatud, öeldi ,. . . so still it must be said &lsquothe judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether.&rsquo&rdquo Here it all is: the idea that the United States represents &ldquothe last best hope&rdquo that&mdashthe belief that an all powerful, not fully comprehendible God, governs the affairs of humankind, and that this God held the whole nation, not just the South, accountable for the existence of slavery in its midst, for the violation of its appointed mission. Finally, unlike most proponents of the idea that &ldquoAmerica is a nation called to a special destiny by God,&rdquo he refrains from claiming God as the agent of Northern victory, even though as the second inaugural makes clear he had come to believe the Almighty was the ultimate agent of &ldquothe mighty scourge of war&rdquo that He had visited upon the nation for the sin of slavery.

Guiding Student Discussion

At first glance, it may seem rather difficult to engage students in a discussion of religion and Manifest Destiny. I usually do not like to start with contemporary issues and perspectives or with the students&rsquo beliefs, but on this topic I have found it to be effective. Teaching strategies will obviously depend on the particular composition of your classes. In a classroom in Queens, New York (the most diverse political jurisdiction in the country) well over half its students or their parents are likely to be born outside of the United States and at least half will adhere to faiths other than Christianity. Clearly a very different student population than a teacher in Troy, Ohio, for example, might face. Perhaps the best initial strategy is to open up the issues the topic raises: questions of nationalism and cultural unity questions of the relationship between belief in an all powerful, superintending God and the actions of nations questions of what happens when nations claim an expansive mission and justify this with a claim to Divine favor?

You might begin by asking your students if they think that the various peoples of the United States with all their ethnic, religious, and racial diversity subscribe to anything that might be called &ldquoa common faith&rdquo and what beliefs it consists of and how it operates as a faith, does it seem to require some kind of belief in God. You could ask how many of them participate in various rituals of America&rsquos supposed Civil Religion, e.g. Fourth of July, Memorial Day, the Pledge of Allegiance. At this point a particularly astute student might point out that the stars and stripes of the flag only refer to the original 13 and the present 50 states of the union and that the flag doesn&rsquot seem to have any religious references at all. Do they consider the United States to be unique in its basic values of liberty and democracy and to have a &ldquomission&rdquo to preserve and promote them? Do many or any of them believe that God does play a role in the action and fate of nations? What have been various consequences when the United States (and other nations) claims a special providence and mission from God?

This discussion should lead into a more historically oriented discussion that can best be conducted through the use of key primary documents. Winthrop&rsquos speech on the Arbella, the Declaration of Independence, and Lincoln&rsquos Gettysburg Address and his second inaugural address work especially well. Conrad Cherry, God&rsquos New Israel: Religious Interpretations of American Destiny, is a superb anthology with three centuries of primary documents on religious interpretations of American destiny. The introductions to the various sections and documents are also especially helpful.

The vast scholarly literature that bears on this subject is less a debate than a range of works on different periods and from different disciplines and perspectives. An indispensable source and the best place to begin is Conrad Cherry, God&rsquos New Israel: Religious Interpretations of American Destiny (1998). On Manifest Destiny itself, two older books, Albert K. Weinberg, Manifest Destiny (1958) and Frederick Merk, Manifest Destiny and Mission in America (1963) remain useful. But see also Sam Haynes and Christopher Morris, eds. Manifest Destiny and Empire (1977). Perry Miller, Errand into the Wilderness (1956) remains an essential source for the Puritan sense of mission. The concept of &ldquoCivil Religion&rdquo was introduced into American scholarship by Robert N. Bellah, &ldquoCivil Religion in America,&rdquo Daedalus, Winter 1967. Sidney E. Mead, &ldquoThe Nation With the Soul of a Church,&rdquo Church History, Sept. 1967, is a beautifully written and illuminating article. See also John Wilson, Public Religion in American Culture (1979) and Martin Marty, ed. Civil Religion, Church and State (1992). See also Nathan Hatch, The Sacred Cause of Liberty: Republican Thought and the Millennium in Revolutionary New England (1977) Earnest Lee Tuveson, Redeemer Nation: The Idea of America&rsquos Millennial Role (1968) and H. Richard Niebuhr, The Kingdom of God in America (1959). On particular topics, Jan Shipps, Mormonism: The Story of a New Religious Tradition (1985) and James H. Moorhead, Yankee Protestants and the Civil War, 1860-1869 (1979), are particularly useful.

Donald Scott was a Fellow at the National Humanities Center in 1985-86. He has taught at the University of Chicago, North Carolina State University, Brown University, the New School, and is currently Dean of Social Science and Professor of History at Queens College / City University of New York. Tema on autor From Office to Profession: The New England Ministry, 1750-1850 (1978) America's Families: A Documentary History (1982, with Bernard Wishy) The Pursuit of Liberty (1996, with R. J. Wilson, et al.) and he is the co-editor of The Mythmaking Frame of Mind: Social Imagination and American Culture (1993). He is currently at work on a book entitled Theatres of the Mind: Knowledge and Democracy in 19th-Century America.

Address comments or questions to Professor Scott through TeacherServe &ldquoComments and Questions.&rdquo


James K. Polk

Bill passed when the United States acquired the Oregon Territory, one of the driving goals of Polk's presidency.

James K. Polk, President of the United States 1845-1849.

While Andrew Jackson was an expansionist and his Indian Removal Act was incredibly influential in fulfilling the Manifest Destiny, it was his protege, Democratic president James K. Polk, who built his campaign around this idea of Manifest Destiny. Not only was Polk concerned over acquiring the Oregon territory (his camapaign slogan "54'40 or fight" made it clear that he was a proponent of Manifest Destiny), but he was also crucial in acquiring Texas, igniting an easily-won war with Mexico that gave the United States not only Texas with their preferred borders, but also much more territory in the Southwest, including Arizona and California. By 1849, around the same time as Polk's death, the Manifest Destiny was near complete and the United States of America controlled land from sea to shining sea.


What is Manifest Destiny? The Controversial History of Westward Expansion

The White House Twitter page quoted President Trump's Fourth of July speech at Mount Rushmore in a tweet that said: "Americans are the people who pursued our Manifest Destiny across the ocean, into the uncharted wilderness, over the tallest mountains, and then into the skies and even into the stars."

Manifest Destiny is a philosophy that originated in the 19th century. It is the idea that the U.S. is destined to expand its territories and ideals across the North American continent, and that the country has the God-given right to do so.

"Americans are the people who pursued our Manifest Destiny across the ocean, into the uncharted wilderness, over the tallest mountains, and then into the skies and even into the stars." pic.twitter.com/AYCgAC5oN0

&mdash The White House (@WhiteHouse) July 7, 2020

The term "Manifest Destiny" was coined in 1845 by magazine editor John L. O'Sullivan, who wrote about the annexing of Texas and the supposed inevitability of American expansion.

Manifest Destiny was used to validate the Westward Expansion and the acquisition of Oregon, Texas, New Mexico, and California before the Civil War and was used to justify the removal of Native American people from their land.

However, the concept of Manifest Destiny existed before it had a name, which can be seen in the history of Westward Expansion. The Westward Expansion began with the Louisiana Purchase in 1803, which nearly doubled the size of the U.S., and was continued with the Florida Purchase Treaty in 1819.

President James Monroe used the concept of Manifest Destiny to warn European countries against interfering in the Westward Expansion of the U.S., declaring that any attempt by Europe to colonize America would be seen as an act of war.

In 1846, James K. Polk's administration negotiated the Oregon Treaty with Great Britain, which divided the territory between the U.S. and Canada.

In 1848, the Mexican-American war ended and the U.S. acquired 525,000 square miles of territory, including all or parts of what is now California, Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, Nevada, Utah, and Wyoming. The Wilmot Proviso was designed to eliminate slavery within this new territory.

The acquisition of more land exacerbated tensions between slaveowners and abolitionists, as the North and South states had to decide whether the newly-acquired territories would be slave states or free states&mdashthis conflict eventually resulted in the American Civil War.

The idea of Manifest Destiny was revived with the purchase of Alaska in 1867 and gained popularity again in U.S. foreign policy in the 1890s. The Spanish-American War occurred in 1898, with the U.S. acquiring Puerto Rico as a territory, as well as the Philippines, which was a Spanish colony at the time.

The Westward Expansion worsened the conflict between the white settlers and Native Americans, Hispanic people, and other non-European occupants of the territories.

A little after Trump mentioned Manifest Destiny in his speech, he said: "We are the culture that put up the Hoover Dam, laid down the highways, and sculpted the skyline of Manhattan.

"We are the people who dreamed a spectacular dream&mdashit was called: Las Vegas, in the Nevada desert who built up Miami from the Florida marsh and who carved our heroes into the face of Mount Rushmore."

Trump's speech taking place at Mount Rushmore was controversial, with leaders of two tribes of the Sioux Nation speaking out against it, but using the term Manifest Destiny at Mount Rushmore made it even more so considering how the concept was used to justify the removal of Native Americans.

The faces of George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Theodore Roosevelt, and Abraham Lincoln were carved into the Black Hills &mdashan area considered sacred by the Sioux people&mdashby Gutzon Borglum, a Ku Klux Klan-linked artist, in 1941.

The president of the Oglala Sioux tribal council, Julian Bear Runner, said that Trump's Fourth of July celebration will cause an "uproar." Bear Runner cited an increase in coronavirus cases and a lack of resources as reasons why Trump's Fourth of July event should not take place at Mount Rushmore.

But Bear Runner also said: "The lands on which that mountain is carved and the lands he's about to visit belong to the Great Sioux Nation under a treaty signed in 1851 and the Fort Laramie Treaty of 1868 and I have to tell him he doesn't have permission from its original sovereign owners to enter the territory at this time."

The land was given to Native Americans after the Fort Laramie Treaty of 1868 was signed, but following the discovery of gold, the federal government reclaimed the land in 1874.

The chair of the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe in South Dakota, Harold Frazier, called for the removal of the Mount Rushmore monument and even offered to remove it himself, saying in a statement: "Nothing stands as a greater reminder to the Great Sioux Nation of a country that cannot keep a promise or treaty than the faces carved into our sacred land on what the United States calls Mount Rushmore.

"This brand on our flesh needs to be removed and I am willing to do it free of charge to the United States by myself if I must."

But the Manifest Destiny philosophy still seems to be favored by Trump, as later in his speech, the president said: "Americans harnessed electricity, split the atom, and gave the world the telephone and the Internet.

"We settled the Wild West, won two World Wars, landed American astronauts on the Moon&mdashand one day very soon, we will plant our flag on Mars."


Origin of the Manifest Destiny Phrase

John O’Sullivan- Editor of the Democratic Review Newspaper (c.1845)

During the mid-19th century, John O’ Sullivan (an editor of the Democratic Review and the New York Morning Review newspapers) became the first man to coin the concept of “Manifest Destiny” – the strong belief that the U.S.A. was blessed by God to be a superior power that had to expand throughout North America- and even march into areas on the Pacific. In other words, he had coined a term for the Continental Expansionism. Some historians have argued that, the concept was a direct proposition for the extermination of American Indians.

From one point of view, “Manifest Destiny” appeared as a new term. But deep beneath historical facts, its underlying ideas of colonialism and subjugation were as old as Methuselah.


The Annexation of Texas

When Mexico gained its independence from Spain, Texas was a sparsely settled frontier province bordering the United States. Texas, explored by the Spanish as early as the 1500s, was largely neglected in the centuries that followed. Only a few thousand Mexicans—known as Tejanos—lived in the province by the early 1820s, most of them clustered around the mission at San Antonio. The Mexican government encouraged Americans to emigrate to Texas in an effort to create a military buffer between marauding Indians and the more southern provinces. The Americans were required to give up their citizenship, convert to Roman Catholicism, and become Mexican citizens. In return, they were granted huge tracts of land in the region bordering Louisiana, along the Sabine, Colorado, and Brazos Rivers.

The first American empresario was Moses Austin, a former New Englander who had traded with the Spanish for decades. Austin was granted 18,000 square miles, with the understanding that he would settle 300 American families on his lands. His son, Stephen F. Austin, had the grant confirmed by Mexican authorities after his father’s death, and by the mid-1830s there were about 30,000 Americans ranching and growing cotton with the aid of several thousand black slaves. Despite the fact that the Mexican government had abolished slavery, Americans continued to emigrate with their “lifetime indentured servants.” The Americans in Texas greatly outnumbered the native Mexicans, and they sought full statehood for the province in order to gain home rule.

The American-born Texans supported Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna for the presidency of Mexico in 1833, because they believed he would support statehood. But after his election, Santa Anna proclaimed a unified central government that eliminated states’ rights. The Texans, with some Tejano allies, revolted against Santa Anna’s dictatorship. The revolutionaries declared their independence on March 2, 1836, and adopted a constitution legalizing slavery. David G. Burnet, a native of New Jersey who had lived with the Comanches for two years, was chosen president of the new republic. Sam Houston, a former Tennessee congressman and governor who fought under Andrew Jackson during the War of 1812, was selected as Commander-in-Chief of the army.

The Mexican government responded swiftly to put down the Texas rebellion. Santa Anna raised a force of about 6,000 troops, and marched north to besiege the nearly 200 rebels under the command of Colonel William B. Travis at the Alamo, the abandoned mission at San Antonio. The final assault was made on March 6, and the entire garrison was annihilated, including the wounded. Among the dead were frontier legends Davy Crockett and Jim Bowie. A few weeks later at Goliad, Santa Anna ordered the slaughter of 300 Texas rebels after they surrendered.

The Texas Revolution struck a sympathetic chord in America. Hundreds of southwestern adventurers responded to the romanticized heroism of the Alamo and promises of bounty lands. Ignoring American neutrality laws, they rushed to join the Texas army. With fewer than 900 men—about half the size of Santa Anna’s force—General Houston surprised the Mexicans at the San Jacinto River, near the site of the city that bears his name. “Remember the Alamo!” and “Goliad!” were the rallying cries of the Texans as they overwhelmed the veteran Mexican army.

Santa Anna was captured after the Battle of San Jacinto and forced to sign a treaty recognizing Texas as an independent republic, with the Rio Grande River as its southwestern boundary. Upon his return to Mexico City, Santa Anna repudiated the peace treaty. The Mexican Congress likewise refused to acknowledge the independence of Texas, and continued to claim the Nueces River as the boundary of its “rebellious province.” Mexico warned of war should the United States attempt to annex Texas.

Following the revolution, Sam Houston was elected president of Texas, and diplomatic envoys were sent to Washington seeking admission to the Union. President Andrew Jackson, concerned that the annexation of Texas might mean war with Mexico and knowing it would upset the sectional balance between free and slave states, merely extended diplomatic recognition to the new republic on March 3, 1837. His immediate successor in the White House, Martin Van Buren, also managed to sidestep the question of annexation.

President Van Buren was defeated for re-election by William Henry Harrison in the famous “Tippecanoe and Tyler Too” campaign of 1840. Tyler was a former Democratic senator from Virginia who resigned his seat rather than vote to expunge a resolution of censure directed against Jackson. This made him an attractive running-mate for Harrison, but it did not make him a Whig in principle. Harrison became the first president to die in office (only a month after his inauguration) and President Tyler soon broke with the Whigs over two key issues—the constitutionality of a national bank and the annexation of Texas.

Tyler selected South Carolinian John C. Calhoun as secretary of state, and instructed him to negotiate a treaty of annexation with the Texas envoys in Washington. Expansionists feared that an independent Texas would blunt America’s march into the southwest. Calhoun subsequently submitted a treaty to the Senate, but also made public his correspondence with the British minister, Richard Pakenham. In his letter, Calhoun chastised British officials for pressuring the Texans to abolish slavery in return for Mexican recognition of their independence. The Republic of Texas had established close diplomatic ties with several European nations, including Britain and France, in an effort to protect itself from Mexico. After defending slavery as a benign institution, Calhoun claimed that the preservation of the Union required the annexation of Texas. By linking the expansion of slavery with the admission of Texas, Calhoun doomed the annexation treaty.

The annexation of Texas and the Oregon boundary dispute were major issues during the election of 1844. While President Tyler was plotting to annex Texas, the leading contenders for the presidential nominations of the Democratic and Whig Parties did their best to defuse the explosive controversy. Former president Martin Van Buren and Henry Clay published letters expressing their opposition to the immediate annexation of Texas. Their anti-expansionist views cost Van Buren the Democratic nomination, and Clay the presidency.

Manifest Destiny was so strong among northwestern and southern Democrats, that the party’s national convention nominated James Knox Polk of Tennessee for president. “Young Hickory” ran on a platform calling for the “re-annexation of Texas” and the “re-occupation of Oregon.” Clay received the Whig nomination by acclamation, but westerners remembered his Texas letter and some northeasterners refused to support a slaveholder. James G. Birney, the candidate of the Liberty Party, polled enough Whig support in New York to swing that state’s electoral vote to Polk, who was elected president.

President Tyler viewed the Democratic victory as a mandate to annex Texas. Recognizing the difficulty of securing the two-thirds Senate vote necessary to ratify a treaty, Tyler hit upon an ingenious ploy. He sought a joint resolution of annexation from Congress that required a simple majority in each house. This was accomplished shortly before Tyler left office. After a state convention agreed to annexation on the Fourth of July, Texas was formally admitted to the Union in December 1845. President Polk, meanwhile, ordered General Zachary Taylor and about half of the United States army—some 3,500 men—to take up a defensive position on the Nueces River.


The Western Frontier

As the nation expanded westward, settlers were motivated by opportunities to farm the land or “make it rich” through cattle or gold.

Õppe eesmärgid

Describe the conditions common in western frontier towns

Võtmekohad

Võtmepunktid

  • While the motivation for private profit dominated much of the movement westward, the federal government played a supporting role in securing land and maintaining law and order.
  • The rigors of life in the West presented many challenges to homesteaders, such as dry and barren land, droughts, insect swarms, shortages of materials, and lost crops.
  • Although homestead farming was the primary goal of most western settlers in the latter half of the 19th century, a small minority sought to make fortunes quickly through other means, such as gold or cattle.
  • The American West became notorious for its hard mining towns, such as Deadwood, South Dakota and Tombstone, Arizona, and entrepreneurs in these and other towns set up stores and businesses to cater to the miners.

Võtmesõnad

  • Homesteading: A lifestyle of self-sufficiency characterized by subsistence agriculture and home preservation of foodstuffs it may or may not also involve the small-scale production of textiles, clothing, and craftwork for household use or sale.

Advanced Placement history nixes ‘racial superiority’ from Manifest Destiny

Right now, Advanced Placement United States History teachers are preparing about a half million high school students for an exam that could give them college credit and a leg up in university applications. But that test won’t be the same their predecessors took last year, or even the same as the one the year before. The College Board, which administers the course framework and exam , has changed the parameters for many important concepts and themes.

The course, widely adopted by high schools and taken by college-bound students, hasn’t been updated since 2006. The 2014 update, all things considered, didn’t go so well. The specific changes — to Manifest Destiny, World War II, Ronald Reagan and European settlement — inspired so much backlash that the College Board’s committee in charge of rewriting it, went back to the drawing board. In July, they released the final change that is a more “conceptual approach as opposed to specificity required for memorization,” says Maria Montoya, a New York University history professor that helped rewrite the framework.

Here’s how that change looks:

2014 version: “The idea of Manifest Destiny, which asserted U.S. power in the Western Hemisphere and supported U.S. expansion westward, was built on a belief in white racial superiority and a sense of American cultural superiority, and helped to shape the era’s political debates.”

2015 version: The movement west was due to “the desire for access to natural and mineral resources and the hope of many settlers for economic opportunities or religious refuge.” Advocates of annexing lands “argued that Manifest Destiny and the superiority of American institutions compelled the United States to expand its borders westward to the Pacific Ocean.”

But now a new set of critics are decrying the change. The College Board says A.P. history teachers widely accept the change, but the changes have become a political issue, especially the Manifest Destiny portion. Conservatives called the 2014 edition not patriotic enough critics, however, say the 2015 definition of Manifest Destiny ignores important racial connotations. Amy Greenberg, a historian at Penn State and the author of Manifest Destiny and American Territorial Expansion, worries the new definition will skew the understanding of a dangerous concept. Greenberg explains why these battles matter.

High Country News: How did Manifest Destiny play out in the American West?

Amy Greenberg: Manifest Destiny presented a certain vision of the American West of this so-called “virgin land.” It was an idea of the American West as open, free, unsettled territory that was ootamas for U.S. citizens to conquer and properly make use of. The whole idea of the American West — and the way we think about it today — emerges out of a vision of Manifest Destiny.

HCN: How has the perception of this concept evolved?

AG: The first uses of manifest destiny (in the 1830s) were propaganda from a very particular perspective: We need to go take these territories from the other nations because it’s our manifest destiny. God has basically proclaimed that it’s our destiny to take over because the United States had a lot to offer people in these areas. So, it’s not just our manifest destiny to take that land, but it’s also our manifest destiny to bring the blessings of American civilization to areas that it doesn’t exist. It justifies land acquisition by asserting that America is exceptional, and we’re actually doing a favor to the people who live in these places. In the 1840s and ‘50s, the concept becomes very popular. You can see ordinary people writing letters talking about manifest destiny. In the 1950s and ‘60s, — this was during the Cold War — you had a whole strain of historians that were very invested in proving that the United States was essentially different from the Soviet Union. One way to do that is to say that because of Manifest Destiny, we naturally moved into contiguous territory, brought the blessing of democracy to the residents there. A lot of violence and war that was involved in this was completely obscured.

HCN: Did American exceptionalism impact how Native Americans were treated?

AG: There’s a great image by John Gast called “American Progress” from 1873 that really sums it up. If you look in the corner, you see Indians running away in fear because they’re afraid of this fantastic, scantily clad, flying white woman. She’s carrying the telegraph line, she has a book that is likely the Bible or a book or learning and you have all of the settlers just following her. This photo represents a justification of what I would argue for basically a series of wars against Indians. It’s not like anybody is even attacking these Indians. They are just running away. Even the dog is running away. But if you look at what tegelikult happened during settlement of the West, those guys would be killing the Indians.

HCN: Some opponents say the new framework is a watered down version of history. Is that fair?

AG: It doesn’t strike me as watered down, so much as just totally different. There’s nothing factually wrong in the new version, but it’s really beside the point. The racial superiority and cultural superiority are more important and certainly helped shaped the era’s political beliefs and debates. Everyone wants economic opportunities and everyone wants natural resources, but that’s not essentially what [Manifest Destiny] is about.

HCN: What does it mean to have a more sterilized version at this moment in time?

AG: It seems like a step backwards in recognizing the role of race in American history. It makes Indians invisible. It’s really odd. This is the difference between what people say, and miks they’re saying it. And I think the original definition gets more into why people were saying it, and the new framework of manifest destiny is staying more on the surface.

HCN: Why is an accurate understanding of Manifest Destiny important?

AG: The importance of understanding what Manifest Destiny was really about is realizing what roles things like racism have played in the past. What’s at stake is people’s ability to logically and realistically critique political discourse today. In other words, at the time of the Iraq war, people were using Manifest Destiny a lot, and mostly in a positive way. They were saying our manifest destiny is to bring democracy to these places. It’s very interesting and also troubling, because you see a slippage between the way in which the discourse of Manifest Destiny is justified and [the way it] allowed people to forget about things like killing all of the Indians. If you actually know what Manifest Destiny was and what it did, one would hope that you are more able to see the problems with that discourse today. Manifest Destiny is not this benign force. It’s an ideology that’s been mobilized in order to justify a lot of bad stuff.

HCN: How does a valorization of Manifest Destiny shape students’ understanding of history?

AG: I think this new framework is doing the students a disservice. It’s providing them with what I would say is a historically inaccurate view of what Manifest Destiny is. I wonder what those students are going to deal with when they get to college and take more advanced history classes that have a totally different framework. You’re going to have to look really hard to find a college professor who focuses on western expansion and manifest destiny that is going to agree with this framework.


John L. O’Sullivan on “Manifest Destiny”

The American people having derived their origin from many other nations, and the Declaration of National Independence being entirely based on the great principle of human equality, these facts demonstrate at once our disconnected position as regards any other nation that we have, in reality, but little connection with the past history of any of them, and still less with all antiquity, its glories, or its crimes. On the contrary, our national birth was the beginning of a new history, the formation and progress of an untried political system, which separates us from the past and connects us with the future only and so far as regards the entire development of the natural rights of man, in moral, political, and national life, we may confidently assume that our country is destined to be the great nation of futurity.

It is so destined, because the principle upon which a nation is organized fixes its destiny, and that of equality is perfect, is universal. It presides in all the operations of the physical world, and it is also the conscious law of the soul — the self-evident dictates of morality, which accurately defines the duty of man to man, and consequently man’s rights as man. Besides, the truthful annals of any nation furnish abundant evidence, that its happiness, its greatness, its duration, were always proportionate to the democratic equality in its system of government. . . .

What friend of human liberty, civilization, and refinement, can cast his view over the past history of the monarchies and aristocracies of antiquity, and not deplore that they ever existed? What philanthropist can contemplate the oppressions, the cruelties, and injustice inflicted by them on the masses of mankind, and not turn with moral horror from the retrospect?

America is destined for better deeds. It is our unparalleled glory that we have no reminiscences of battle fields, but in defence of humanity, of the oppressed of all nations, of the rights of conscience, the rights of personal enfranchisement. Our annals describe no scenes of horrid carnage, where men were led on by hundreds of thousands to slay one another, dupes and victims to emperors, kings, nobles, demons in the human form called heroes. We have had patriots to defend our homes, our liberties, but no aspirants to crowns or thrones nor have the American people ever suffered themselves to be led on by wicked ambition to depopulate the land, to spread desolation far and wide, that a human being might be placed on a seat of supremacy.

We have no interest in the scenes of antiquity, only as lessons of avoidance of nearly all their examples. The expansive future is our arena, and for our history. We are entering on its untrodden space, with the truths of God in our minds, beneficent objects in our hearts, and with a clear conscience unsullied by the past. We are the nation of human progress, and who will, what can, set limits to our onward march? Providence is with us, and no earthly power can. We point to the everlasting truth on the first page of our national declaration, and we proclaim to the millions of other lands, that “the gates of hell” — the powers of aristocracy and monarchy — “shall not prevail against it.”

The far-reaching, the boundless future will be the era of American greatness. In its magnificent domain of space and time, the nation of many nations is destined to manifest to mankind the excellence of divine principles to establish on earth the noblest temple ever dedicated to the worship of the Most High — the Sacred and the True. Its floor shall be a hemisphere — its roof the firmament of the star-studded heavens, and its congregation an Union of many Republics, comprising hundreds of happy millions, calling, owning no man master, but governed by God’s natural and moral law of equality, the law of brotherhood — of “peace and good will amongst men.”. . .

Yes, we are the nation of progress, of individual freedom, of universal enfranchisement. Equality of rights is the cynosure of our union of States, the grand exemplar of the correlative equality of individuals and while truth sheds its effulgence, we cannot retrograde, without dissolving the one and subverting the other. We must onward to the fulfilment of our mission — to the entire development of the principle of our organization — freedom of conscience, freedom of person, freedom of trade and business pursuits, universality of freedom and equality. This is our high destiny, and in nature’s eternal, inevitable decree of cause and effect we must accomplish it. All this will be our future history, to establish on earth the moral dignity and salvation of man — the immutable truth and beneficence of God. For this blessed mission to the nations of the world, which are shut out from the life-giving light of truth, has America been chosen and her high example shall smite unto death the tyranny of kings, hierarchs, and oligarchs, and carry the glad tidings of peace and good will where myriads now endure an existence scarcely more enviable than that of beasts of the field. Who, then, can doubt that our country is destined to be the great nation of futurity?
Allikas


Manifest Destiny - History

Manifest Destiny
Digital History ID 362

In 1845, John L. O'Sullivan (1813-1895), editor of the Democratic Review, referred in his magazine to America's "manifest destiny to overspread the continent allotted by Providence for the free development of our yearly multiplying millions." The idea that America had a special destiny to stretch across the continent motivated many Americans to dream big dreams and migrate West. "We Americans," wrote the novelist Herman Melville, "are the peculiar, chosen people--the Israel of our time." Aggressive nationalists invoked manifest destiny to justify Indian removal, war with Mexico, and American expansion into Texas, California, the Pacific Northwest, Cuba, and Central America. More positively, the idea also inspired missionaries, farmers, and pioneers who dreamed only of transforming plains and fertile valleys into farms and small towns.


Dokument: The American people having derived their origin from many other nations, and the Declaration of National Independence being entirely based on the great principle of human equality, these facts demonstrate at once our disconnected position as regards any other nation that we have, in reality, but little connection with the past history of any of them, and still less with all antiquity, its glories, or its crimes. On the contrary, our national birth was the beginning of a new history, the formation and progress of an untried political system, which separates us from the past and connects us with the future only and so far as regards the entire development of the natural rights of man, in moral, political, and national life, we may confidently assume that our country is destined to be the great nation of futurity.

It is so destined, because the principle upon which a nation is organized fixes its destiny, and that of equality is perfect, is universal. It presides in all the operations of the physical world, and it is also the conscious law of the soul -- the self-evident dictates of morality, which accurately defines the duty of man to man, and consequently man's rights as man. Besides, the truthful annals of any nation furnish abundant evidence, that its happiness, its greatness, its duration, were always proportionate to the democratic equality in its system of government. . . .

What friend of human liberty, civilization, and refinement, can cast his view over the past history of the monarchies and aristocracies of antiquity, and not deplore that they ever existed? What philanthropist can contemplate the oppressions, the cruelties, and injustice inflicted by them on the masses of mankind, and not turn with moral horror from the retrospect?

America is destined for better deeds. It is our unparalleled glory that we have no reminiscences of battle fields, but in defence of humanity, of the oppressed of all nations, of the rights of conscience, the rights of personal enfranchisement. Our annals describe no scenes of horrid carnage, where men were led on by hundreds of thousands to slay one another, dupes and victims to emperors, kings, nobles, demons in the human form called heroes. We have had patriots to defend our homes, our liberties, but no aspirants to crowns or thrones nor have the American people ever suffered themselves to be led on by wicked ambition to depopulate the land, to spread desolation far and wide, that a human being might be placed on a seat of supremacy.

We have no interest in the scenes of antiquity, only as lessons of avoidance of nearly all their examples. The expansive future is our arena, and for our history. We are entering on its untrodden space, with the truths of God in our minds, beneficent objects in our hearts, and with a clear conscience unsullied by the past. We are the nation of human progress, and who will, what can, set limits to our onward march? Providence is with us, and no earthly power can. We point to the everlasting truth on the first page of our national declaration, and we proclaim to the millions of other lands, that "the gates of hell" -- the powers of aristocracy and monarchy -- "shall not prevail against it."

The far-reaching, the boundless future will be the era of American greatness. In its magnificent domain of space and time, the nation of many nations is destined to manifest to mankind the excellence of divine principles to establish on earth the noblest temple ever dedicated to the worship of the Most High -- the Sacred and the True. Its floor shall be a hemisphere -- its roof the firmament of the star-studded heavens, and its congregation an Union of many Republics, comprising hundreds of happy millions, calling, owning no man master, but governed by God's natural and moral law of equality, the law of brotherhood -- of "peace and good will amongst men.". . .

Yes, we are the nation of progress, of individual freedom, of universal enfranchisement. Equality of rights is the cynosure of our union of States, the grand exemplar of the correlative equality of individuals and while truth sheds its effulgence, we cannot retrograde, without dissolving the one and subverting the other. We must onward to the fulfilment of our mission -- to the entire development of the principle of our organization -- freedom of conscience, freedom of person, freedom of trade and business pursuits, universality of freedom and equality. This is our high destiny, and in nature's eternal, inevitable decree of cause and effect we must accomplish it. All this will be our future history, to establish on earth the moral dignity and salvation of man -- the immutable truth and beneficence of God. For this blessed mission to the nations of the world, which are shut out from the life-giving light of truth, has America been chosen and her high example shall smite unto death the tyranny of kings, hierarchs, and oligarchs, and carry the glad tidings of peace and good will where myriads now endure an existence scarcely more enviable than that of beasts of the field. Who, then, can doubt that our country is destined to be the great nation of futurity?


Manifest Destiny

James K. Polk’s first State of the Union Address, on 2 December 1845, promoted the concept that the US should encompass all of North America.

James Polk was the first president to vocalise the concept that the US should stretch ‘from sea to shining sea’.

This concept of Manifest Destiny was not Polk’s own. The first use of the term has been credited to newspaper editor John O’Sullivan. It was embraced by the Democrats, who saw white Anglo-Saxon America as a civilising Christian influence with a rightful claim to the whole continent, regardless of the long histories of the native peoples or European powers they found there.

Under Polk, Manifest Destiny was put into action with the annexation of the nominally independent Texas and the ceding from Mexico of parts of nine states. Having announced this huge increase in the size of the US, which he rather bewilderingly referred to as a ‘bloodless achievement’, his address went on to assert ‘our title to the whole Oregon Territory’, which was followed by a claim that ‘The civilized world will see in these proceedings a spirit of liberal concession on the part of the United States.’ This might have left the British a little baffled, but the aggressive stance did lead to them backing down and signing the Oregon Treaty the following year, dividing the whole territory along the 49th Parallel.

Polk ended with the battle cry of Manifest Destiny:

It is to the enterprise and perseverance of the hardy pioneers of the West, who penetrate the wilderness with their families, suffer the dangers, the privations, and hardships attending the settlement of a new country . that we are in a great degree indebted for the rapid extension and aggrandizement of our country.

But as tensions rose between slave and non-slaving owning states over who should control these vast new lands, Polk’s nationalism was sowing some of the first seeds of the Civil War.


Vaata videot: El dogma de la política exterior que. aplica en Latinoamérica