What themes stood out most to you in the assigned readings and lecture this week? What questions did the lectures and readings raise for you? Please post your responses in the comment section below.
The theme that stood out to me most in the lecture was the theme of imperialism during the Spanish-American War. I could see how the US would justify interfering in Cuban affairs because the country is located very close to ours and any threat to Cuba would be a threat to the US. But, I do not think the US had any reason to conquer the Philippines, it is on the other side of the globe and the US suffered casualties and resources in order to obtain it.
A theme this week that stood out to me was the formation of Populism and how it combined with the Democratic Party. The Republicans tended to like hard money, where the Democrats were split. The Democrats tended to like soft money, but the group called the Gold Democrats were in favor of hard money. The split among the Democratic Party opened up room for the famers’ alliances and the populous movement. In 1892, the Southern Farmers’ Alliance, Northwestern Farmers’ Alliance, and the Colored Farmers’ Alliance combined to form the National Farmers’ Alliance, which was the main proponent of the Populous Movement. My question is if James Weaver received as many as 1 million votes, who were the people who turned to vote for the Populist Party candidate, Democrats (who preferred soft money), Gold Democrats (who preferred hard money) or Republicans (who preferred soft money)?
The major themes that stood out to me this week were populism and imperialism. Farmers across the nation felt as though they were at the mercy of railroads and created Farmers' Alliances to help protest unfair practices and protect their interests. Political platforms, as well as a national party grew out of these alliances and the populist cause.
In terms of imperialism, we discussed the consequences of the Spanish American war and the expansion of the US into Cuba, Guam, Puerto Rico and the Philippines. We also learned about the Monroe Doctrine, which defined the Western Hemisphere as the US sphere of influence. This in part explained why the US entered the war with Spain. Lastly, I found it interesting to hear Emilio Aguinaldo's criticism of the US's actions after the war and consider the possible hypocrisy of the US's actions.
The theme that stood out the most to me in the lecture was the beginning of imperialism in the US. I thought that it was strange that they occupied the Philippines as they did. As hard as we fought for our independence, it is very hypocritical that we would do such a thing. Why did we feel the need to occupy the Philippines so harshly? How did the American people feel about this at the time?
The thing that stood out to me the most this week were the politics behind the Spanish-American War. I found it funny, in a sense, that McKinley had to give untrue reasons to start the war in Cuba. Ultimately, the frustration was that Spain violated the Monroe Doctrine, yet McKinley's proposal for war spoke of Spain's wrong-doings and how Cuba deserved better. Somewhat ironic because of the war's original intentions, at the end of the war the US ended up in possession of the Philippines. I think that the war was, in some strange way, all about America showing its power.
One theme that stood out particularly for me this week was the Populist Movement and People’s Party, formed in 1892 by the Farmers’ Alliance. This was interesting because it rejected previous ideas about politics and sought to represent the common people rather than the “wealthy few” of the United States. Most predominantly the Populists advocated increased involvement of the federal government for “economic democracy”, and encouraged the idea of government owned railroads and telegraph systems. Populists sought to empower common people through ideas such as subtreasury for farmers and the eight hour work day for labourers. Furthermore, the Populists supported soft money and direct elections for a more representative selection of politicians.
Did the populist movement continue in a different form after the Republican victory of 1896?
The theme that stood out to me was the power of newspaper magnates in the Spanish-American war. William Randolph Hearst's New York Journal and Joseph Pulitzer's New York World were able to drive public support for war, which put pressure on the United States to intervene. I was left wondering how the difficult management of oversees colonies like the Philippines would play into the isolationist policy of the early twentieth century, especially in the lead up to the Great War.
The major theme that stood out to me the week was American Imperialism. What really fascinated me was how the "Splendid Little War" sparked the spread of US influence across the globe. Although we wanted to free Cuba, we ended up mistreating the Philippines when we bought them from Spain. Additionally, the only reason we gave Cuba independence is because they let us set up Guantanamo Bay. My biggest question is why we gave Cuba independence, but not the Philippines?
One theme that stood out to me this week was the development of the populist movement and the eventual merger of their party with the democrats. The populists ran on a few key points including the desire for a sub treasury plan, free and unlimited coinage of silver, the end to national banks, graduated income tax, direct election of senators, and the reclamation of lands acquired by railroads and corporations. Although these themes are interesting by themselves, I was more intrigued by the distribution of votes during the presidential elections of 1892 and 1896. In 1892, despite winning in five states, Weaver lost by about 4 million popular votes. When the populists and the democrats combined, support for the new candidate, William Jennings Bryan, increased significantly in the election of 1896. I think it was interesting that despite having pooled support and winning over a larger geographic area, it still wasn't enough to overcome the republican candidate. Was it "fair" that less densely populated areas were once again at a disadvantage against the industrialist northern states?
One of the most interesting things that occurred during this time period was the fact that all of these movements- labor movements, the rise of populism, importance of imperialism and US colonialization, and early instances of civil rights movements. We've already discussed the labor and early civil rights movements, so I'll focus on the other two. The rise of political movements such as populism was important in the late 1800s as farmers and laborers rallied behind the ideas of the populists, such as a silver standard. The populist party had several aspects of their platform actually become law in the next several decades: direct election of senators and a graduated income tax. Also, imperialism in the Spanish American War show that, regardless of Washington's urging to stay isolationist, that the US would have political and social influence in other parts of the world, specifically in Latin America, where Europe was focused in Asia and Africa (the US had some claims in Asia, but mostly Latin America- Puerto Rico.). These were important themes that were all clashing during this time period, and the relatively weak, forgotten presidents did little to show conviction towards any of these big ideas. They were competing, while not inherently conflicting.
The major theme that stood out to me this week was the beginning of Imperialism in America that came with the Spanish American War. This was more a spectacle of American economic and industrial power than an actual war, and it was the first time Americans engaged in conflict with other nations since Industrialization began. The acquisition of land including Guam, Puerto Rico, and the Philippines gave America a taste of imperialism and established it as a world power.
A theme that stood out to me was the theme of imperialism of America. America had obtained Puerto Rico, Guam, and Philippines after the Spanish-American War. America became an empire. Although America did not reach the size as the British or German empire, the acquisition of these territories established America as an imperial force. How did this affect other countries' view of America?
The theme that stood out to me most in the lecture was the theme of imperialism during the Spanish-American War. I could see how the US would justify interfering in Cuban affairs because the country is located very close to ours and any threat to Cuba would be a threat to the US. But, I do not think the US had any reason to conquer the Philippines, it is on the other side of the globe and the US suffered casualties and resources in order to obtain it.
ReplyDeleteA theme this week that stood out to me was the formation of Populism and how it combined with the Democratic Party. The Republicans tended to like hard money, where the Democrats were split. The Democrats tended to like soft money, but the group called the Gold Democrats were in favor of hard money. The split among the Democratic Party opened up room for the famers’ alliances and the populous movement. In 1892, the Southern Farmers’ Alliance, Northwestern Farmers’ Alliance, and the Colored Farmers’ Alliance combined to form the National Farmers’ Alliance, which was the main proponent of the Populous Movement. My question is if James Weaver received as many as 1 million votes, who were the people who turned to vote for the Populist Party candidate, Democrats (who preferred soft money), Gold Democrats (who preferred hard money) or Republicans (who preferred soft money)?
ReplyDeleteThe major themes that stood out to me this week were populism and imperialism. Farmers across the nation felt as though they were at the mercy of railroads and created Farmers' Alliances to help protest unfair practices and protect their interests. Political platforms, as well as a national party grew out of these alliances and the populist cause.
ReplyDeleteIn terms of imperialism, we discussed the consequences of the Spanish American war and the expansion of the US into Cuba, Guam, Puerto Rico and the Philippines. We also learned about the Monroe Doctrine, which defined the Western Hemisphere as the US sphere of influence. This in part explained why the US entered the war with Spain. Lastly, I found it interesting to hear Emilio Aguinaldo's criticism of the US's actions after the war and consider the possible hypocrisy of the US's actions.
The theme that stood out the most to me in the lecture was the beginning of imperialism in the US. I thought that it was strange that they occupied the Philippines as they did. As hard as we fought for our independence, it is very hypocritical that we would do such a thing. Why did we feel the need to occupy the Philippines so harshly? How did the American people feel about this at the time?
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe thing that stood out to me the most this week were the politics behind the Spanish-American War. I found it funny, in a sense, that McKinley had to give untrue reasons to start the war in Cuba. Ultimately, the frustration was that Spain violated the Monroe Doctrine, yet McKinley's proposal for war spoke of Spain's wrong-doings and how Cuba deserved better. Somewhat ironic because of the war's original intentions, at the end of the war the US ended up in possession of the Philippines. I think that the war was, in some strange way, all about America showing its power.
ReplyDeleteOne theme that stood out particularly for me this week was the Populist Movement and People’s Party, formed in 1892 by the Farmers’ Alliance. This was interesting because it rejected previous ideas about politics and sought to represent the common people rather than the “wealthy few” of the United States.
ReplyDeleteMost predominantly the Populists advocated increased involvement of the federal government for “economic democracy”, and encouraged the idea of government owned railroads and telegraph systems. Populists sought to empower common people through ideas such as subtreasury for farmers and the eight hour work day for labourers.
Furthermore, the Populists supported soft money and direct elections for a more representative selection of politicians.
Did the populist movement continue in a different form after the Republican victory of 1896?
The theme that stood out to me was the power of newspaper magnates in the Spanish-American war. William Randolph Hearst's New York Journal and Joseph Pulitzer's New York World were able to drive public support for war, which put pressure on the United States to intervene. I was left wondering how the difficult management of oversees colonies like the Philippines would play into the isolationist policy of the early twentieth century, especially in the lead up to the Great War.
ReplyDeleteThe major theme that stood out to me the week was American Imperialism. What really fascinated me was how the "Splendid Little War" sparked the spread of US influence across the globe. Although we wanted to free Cuba, we ended up mistreating the Philippines when we bought them from Spain. Additionally, the only reason we gave Cuba independence is because they let us set up Guantanamo Bay. My biggest question is why we gave Cuba independence, but not the Philippines?
ReplyDeleteOne theme that stood out to me this week was the development of the populist movement and the eventual merger of their party with the democrats. The populists ran on a few key points including the desire for a sub treasury plan, free and unlimited coinage of silver, the end to national banks, graduated income tax, direct election of senators, and the reclamation of lands acquired by railroads and corporations. Although these themes are interesting by themselves, I was more intrigued by the distribution of votes during the presidential elections of 1892 and 1896. In 1892, despite winning in five states, Weaver lost by about 4 million popular votes. When the populists and the democrats combined, support for the new candidate, William Jennings Bryan, increased significantly in the election of 1896. I think it was interesting that despite having pooled support and winning over a larger geographic area, it still wasn't enough to overcome the republican candidate. Was it "fair" that less densely populated areas were once again at a disadvantage against the industrialist northern states?
ReplyDeleteOne of the most interesting things that occurred during this time period was the fact that all of these movements- labor movements, the rise of populism, importance of imperialism and US colonialization, and early instances of civil rights movements. We've already discussed the labor and early civil rights movements, so I'll focus on the other two. The rise of political movements such as populism was important in the late 1800s as farmers and laborers rallied behind the ideas of the populists, such as a silver standard. The populist party had several aspects of their platform actually become law in the next several decades: direct election of senators and a graduated income tax. Also, imperialism in the Spanish American War show that, regardless of Washington's urging to stay isolationist, that the US would have political and social influence in other parts of the world, specifically in Latin America, where Europe was focused in Asia and Africa (the US had some claims in Asia, but mostly Latin America- Puerto Rico.). These were important themes that were all clashing during this time period, and the relatively weak, forgotten presidents did little to show conviction towards any of these big ideas. They were competing, while not inherently conflicting.
ReplyDeleteThe major theme that stood out to me this week was the beginning of Imperialism in America that came with the Spanish American War. This was more a spectacle of American economic and industrial power than an actual war, and it was the first time Americans engaged in conflict with other nations since Industrialization began. The acquisition of land including Guam, Puerto Rico, and the Philippines gave America a taste of imperialism and established it as a world power.
ReplyDeleteMy question was how did the different factions and political parties react to the new concept of American Imperialism?
DeleteA theme that stood out to me was the theme of imperialism of America. America had obtained Puerto Rico, Guam, and Philippines after the Spanish-American War. America became an empire. Although America did not reach the size as the British or German empire, the acquisition of these territories established America as an imperial force. How did this affect other countries' view of America?
ReplyDelete