What do imperialists believe

Although the main issue was Cuban independence, the week war was fought in both the Caribbean and the Pacific. American naval power proved decisive, allowing U. The Spanish-American War was swift and decisive. A week after the declaration of war, Commodore George Dewey of the six-warship Asiatic Squadron then based at Hong Kong steamed his fleet to the Philippines.

Dewey caught the entire Spanish armada at anchor in Manila Bay and destroyed it without losing an American life. Cuban, Philippine, and American forces obtained the surrender of Santiago de Cuba and Manila as a result of their numerical superiority in most of the battles and despite the good performance of some Spanish infantry units and spirited defenses in places such as San Juan Hill.

Madrid sued for peace after two obsolete Spanish squadrons were sunk in Santiago de Cuba and Manila Bay. A third more modern fleet was recalled home to protect the Spanish coasts. The result of the war was the Treaty of Paris, negotiated on terms favorable to the United States. It allowed temporary American control of Cuba and indefinite colonial authority over Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Philippines following their purchase from Spain.

The war marked American entry into world affairs. Since the Spanish-American War, the United States has had a significant hand in various conflicts around the world, and has entered many treaties and agreements.

The Panic of was over by this point, and the United States entered a long and prosperous period of economic and population growth and technological innovation that lasted through the s. The war redefined national identity, served as a solution of sorts to the social divisions plaguing the American mind, and provided a model for all future news reporting.

The war also effectively ended the Spanish Empire. The loss of Cuba caused a national trauma because of the affinity of peninsular Spaniards with Cuba, which was seen as another province of Spain rather than as a colony. Progressive Era evangelism included strong political, social, and economic messages, which urged adherents to improve their society.

The Social Gospel was a Protestant movement that was most prominent in the early twentieth-century United States and Canada. The movement applied Christian ethics to social problems, especially issues of social justice such as economic inequality, poverty, alcoholism, crime, racial tensions, slums, unclean environments, child labor, inadequate labor unions, poor schools, and the danger of war.

In the United States, prior to World War I, the Social Gospel was the religious wing of the Progressive movement, which aimed to combat injustice, suffering, and poverty in society. Denver, Colorado, was a center of Social Gospel activism. He established a free dispensary for medical emergencies, an employment bureau for job seekers, a summer camp for children, night schools for extended learning, and English language classes. His middle-class congregation encouraged Reed to move on when he became a Socialist, and he organized a nondenominational church.

Baptist minister Jim Goodhart set up an employment bureau, and provided food and lodging for tramps and hobos at the mission he ran. He became city chaplain and director of public welfare of Denver in Pastor Dwight Moody, ca. Rauschenbusch railed against what he regarded as the selfishness of capitalism and promoted a form of Christian Socialism that supported the creation of labor unions and cooperative economics.

While pastors such as Rauschenbusch were combining their expertise in Biblical ethics and economic studies and research to preach theological claims around the need for social reform, others such as Dwight Moody refused to preach about social issues based on personal experience. Moody claimed that concentrating on social aid distracted people from the life-saving message of the Gospel. Rauschenbusch sought to address the problems of the city with Socialist ideas that proved to be frightening to the middle classes, the primary supporters of the Social Gospel.

In contrast, Moody attempted to save people from the city and was very effective in influencing middle-class Americans who were moving into the city with traditional style revivals. The main purpose of this organization was to abolish slavery, educate African Americans, advocate for racial equality, and promote Christian values.

Its members and leaders were both black and white and chiefly affiliated with Congregationalist, Methodist, and Presbyterian churches. Among its efforts was the founding of antislavery churches.

For instance, the abolitionist Owen Lovejoy was among the Congregational ministers of the AMA who helped plant antislavery churches in Illinois before the American Civil War, aided by the strong westward migration of individuals from the East.

While the AMA became notable in the United States for its work in opposition to slavery and in support of education for freed men, it also worked in missions in numerous nations overseas. The nineteenth-century missionary effort was strong in China and east Asia. While the Social Gospel was short-lived historically, it had a lasting impact on the policies of most of the mainline denominations in the United States.

Most began programs for social reform, which led to ecumenical cooperation in during the formation of the Federal Council of Churches although cooperation regarding social issues often led to charges of Socialism.

Johnson to transform social problems into moral problems. This helps explain his longtime commitment to social justice, as exemplified by the Great Society, and his commitment to racial equality. The Social Gospel explicitly inspired his foreign-policy approach of a sort of Christian internationalism and nation building. The Open Door Policy aimed to keep the Chinese trade market open to all countries on an equal basis. The policy proposed to keep China open to trade with all countries on an equal basis, keeping any one power from total control of the country, and calling upon all powers, within their spheres of influence, to refrain from interfering with any treaty port or any vested interest, to permit Chinese authorities to collect tariffs on an equal basis, and to show no favors to their own nationals in the matter of harbor dues or railroad charges.

The Open Door policy was rooted in the desire of U. In practice, the policy had little legal standing; it was mainly used to mediate competing interests of the colonial powers without much meaningful input from the Chinese, which created lingering resentment and caused it to be seen later as a symbol of national humiliation by many Chinese historians.

After winning the Spanish-American War of , and with the newly acquired territory of the Philippine Islands, the United States increased its Asian presence and was expecting to further its commercial and political interest in China.

On September 6, , U. Secretary of State John Hay sent notes to the major powers France, Germany, Britain, Italy, Japan, and Russia , asking them to declare formally that they would uphold Chinese territorial and administrative integrity and would not interfere with the free use of the treaty ports within their spheres of influence in China.

The Open Door Policy stated that all nations, including the United States, could enjoy equal access to the Chinese market. However, by July , Hay announced that each of the powers had granted consent in principle. Although treaties made after refer to the Open Door Policy, competition among the various powers for special concessions within China for railroad rights, mining rights, loans, foreign trade ports, and so forth, continued unabated.

The Monroe Doctrine was a U. It stated that further efforts by European nations to colonize land or interfere with states in North or South America would be viewed as acts of aggression, requiring U.

At the same time, the doctrine noted that the United States would neither interfere with existing European colonies nor meddle in the internal concerns of European countries. The Doctrine was issued in at a time when nearly all Latin American colonies of Spain and Portugal had achieved, or were at the point of gaining, independence from the Portuguese and Spanish Empires.

Monroe Doctrine : A newspaper cartoon about the Monroe Doctrine. It would be invoked by many U. Grant, Theodore Roosevelt, John F. Clubs often became known for their rousing atmospheres and interesting events. Merely by being exclusive and interesting, social clubs attracted the attention of many Indians in the elite or professional classes who strove to show their own value in society. Very gradually, a few British social clubs admitted the occasional Indian.

Strikingly, however, Indians began to imitate British culture by creating their own clubs. Again, as in the case of language and sports, the Indian adoption of clubs exemplifies a wider phenomenon in which Indians co-opted British culture, in essence accepting its desirability. In short, language, sport, and social clubs reinforced British dominance over Indians by asserting British primacy in areas of culture. These were ways in which the British both implicitly and explicitly made known to Indians that British culture was superior and the correct way for civilized people to act.

As the British defined the culture, it put them in a position of power over Indians who were interested in becoming more British or finding the favor of the imperial regime. The British method of colonialism in India and around the world was relatively hands-off. In comparison, the French took a much more active role in their colonies.

More French people settled there, there was a stronger military presence, and the French colonists made a much more overt attempt to entrench their colonial superiority. A large influx of French settlers into Algeria formed the backbone of the imperializing effort. Much of the colony was organized along French administrative lines and run by Frenchmen; this contrasted sharply with the British method of rule in which they relied heavily on local leaders.

French efforts to make the Algerians French were the most direct of all the colonial powers. Algerian Muslims could become citizens of France, but only if they accepted the full French legal code, which contained clauses regarding marriage and inheritance that contradicted Muslim law.

They could, however, serve in the French army or the colonial bureaucracy without becoming citizens of France. In either case, the implication was clear that French culture, values, and administration were superior. While the French did attempt to make the Algerians French, sometimes they furthered the gulf between the colonizers and the colonized.

To a certain extent, the French attempted to create a colony for their settlers that existed separate from the already established Algerian communities. Many of the French and European colonists were poor — most came from peasant backgrounds — but they considered themselves better than any Algerians.

Because of these feelings of superiority, in the main cities the French chose to live in physically separate areas from the Algerians. Quickly, however, the locals left and were replaced almost entirely by French, Italian, and Maltese colonists who established their own Europeanized city. Such orientalism, Said argued, was part of an overall European attempt to belittle non-European cultures and replace them with European ideals. Other historians have subsequently shown that such derogatory views provided a further motivation for French imperialists to assimilate the Algerians into their own culture.

The French believed that their culture was more advanced and more civilized; it made sense to them, therefore, to propose that the Algerians adopt French culture so that they, too, could eventually make themselves more civilized as well. As first Americans and later Canadians began to settle further west, however, they began to consider how to deal with the Native Americans. In both countries, the solution was cultural assimilation. American and Canadian policies regarding the Native Americans are examples of the most naked assimilationist imperialism of the nineteenth century.

As the populations of both countries moved westward, they steadily dispossessed Native Saylor URL: www. In both countries, Native American tribes were coerced into signing treaties to move them off land that settlers wanted. Sometimes, because of the nature of Native American understandings of property, they did not realize that they were signing away their land. Eventually, Native Americans throughout North America were moved to the land that the settlers did not want; these areas of land, most of which still exist, are called reservations.

In some cases in the United States, the Native Americans rose up violently against the settlers, and they were invariably massacred. Americans assumed that part of the reason Native Americans were uncivilized, or at least backwards, was because they had no concept of land ownership. The Dawes Act of attempted to rectify this backwardness. The act provided a land grant for any Native American who wanted to become a U.

The idea of a land grant for individuals was itself a method of cultural assimilation, as it attempted to persuade Native American tribes to put aside the idea that land was held in common and instead see it as private property.

In Canada, authorities pursued cultural assimilation through the residential school system. Instead, they learned English; and, as almost all of the schools were run by Protestant or Catholic missionaries, they converted to Christianity. The program of assimilation was similar in the United States. Traditional religious ceremonies were outlawed throughout the country. Even a mere description of the residential schools gives credence to recent claims that they exemplify cultural genocide.

The schools were overcrowded and had poor sanitation, so disease was widespread. Sexual abuse and molestation was common, as was physical abuse. Globalisation and the practices of the World Bank, for example, frequently are said to serve imperialist interests.

China, India, and other large countries with regional influence are sometimes charged with imperialism as well. It is worth noting that Marx himself did not propound a theory of imperialism, and in contrast with later Marxist thinkers generally saw the colonialism of European powers as having a progressive aspect, rather than seeing it as the pillage of those countries in favour of the European centre countries.

Many countries these days that are accused of imperialistic practices do not actually embrace imperialism as a philosophy as many in the British Empire did.

Here is an edited version of the viewpoint of a subject of the British Empire: Wherever Empire has extended its borders, there misery and oppression, anarchy and destitution, superstition and bigotry, have tended to disappear, and have been replaced by peace, justice, prosperity, humanity and freedom of thought, speech and action.

Empire can only be achieved or maintained provided it has a moral basis. It must give people what they cannot otherwise or elsewhere enjoy; not merely justice, order, or material prosperity, but the sense of partnership in a great idea.

The true imperialist has a certain power that makes him master of the world.