unit a growing global ower - learner · 2013-06-27 · profits motivated businessmen to shape...

1

Table of Contents

Unit Themes 2

Unit Content Overview 2

Video Related Materials 3

Theme One Materials 4

Theme Two Materials 29

Theme Three Materials 41

Timeline 52

Reference Materials 53

Further Reading 54

Appendix 55

SeSSion preparationRead the following material before attending the workshop. As you read the

excerpts and primary sources, take note of the “Questions to Consider” as

well as any questions you have. The activities in the workshop will draw on

information from the readings and the video shown during the workshop.

unit introduCtionThrough imperial ambitions and the mobilization for World War I, businesses

and the government established a new relationship to bolster American

business interests and build the United States military. After the war,

this relationship continued to prosper with the establishment of research

foundations for military and medical programs. Even though the United States

had increased its economic involvement with Europe by the end of the war,

the nation began to distance itself politically and socially from Europe and

focused on the Americas.

unit learninG obJeCtiveSAfter reading the text materials, participating in the workshop activities and watching the video, teachers will

• explore the period in which America extended its power overseas, learning about the experiences of the people who benefi ted from American imperialism and those who suffered from it;

• learn the ways in which World War I became the impetus for the intertwining of business and government;

• examine the evolution of diplomacy and intervention tactics used by the American government in Europe, the Caribbean, the

Pacifi c, and Central America.

thiS unit featureS

• Textbook excerpts (sections of U.S. history surveys, written for introductory college courses by history professors)

• Primary sources (documents and other materials created by the people who lived in the period) including a speech by minister Josiah Strong, an anti-imperialist cartoon from Puck magazine, and a letter to the U.S. Congress from the Central Filipino Committee

• A timeline at the end of the unit, which places important events in the history of the era of imperialism

unit 16a GrowinG Global power

�Unit 16 A Growing Global Power

Theme 1: Patriotism, missionary zeal,

and the quest for new markets

fueled the drive to establish an

overseas empire.

Theme 2: American imperial ambitions and

the events of World War I forged a

new partnership between business

and government.

Theme 3: While increasingly involved

economically with Europe, the

United States turned away

politically and socially from Europe

and focused on the Americas.

Between 1900 and 19�0, the United States changed from a nation focused

on domestic issues, to a global power that sought to influence and control

other parts of the world in order to safeguard its national interests. During

these years, the United States established an overseas empire, American

businesses played a role in expansion, and America emerged as a global

power after World War I.

The United States was part of an imperialistic drive that involved European

and Asian nations, and sought overseas expansion because of strategic

defense, patriotism, profit, politics, and missionary enthusiasm. The drive for

expansion initially came from the military; by the end of the period, however,

business led the drive for expansion. American businesses sought access to

natural resources, cash crops, and markets in Latin America and Asia.

During World War I, a new relationship developed between industry

and government to build up the military. The federal government’s huge

expenditures to finance the war produced soaring profits for American

industry, and the government came to rely on private industry’s technology

and innovation. This relationship extended to large tax breaks that the

government gave wealthy businessmen through their foundations. The

foundations also served government programs, innovating scientific

research that was useful in government military and medical programs.

After the war, the new corporate structures, which were now financially

dependent on the continuation of their established close ties to

government, focused on efficiency and planning.

Content overview

3Unit 16 A Growing Global Power

Historical PerspectivesIn the late eighteenth and early nineteenth

centuries, the United States began to

extend its power around the world.

The impetus for this global expansion

was a combination of enterprising

capitalism, a vibrant patriotism, and

missionary impulse. During this period,

which encompassed WWI, American

businesses and the government began

to bolster one another, further driving the

imperialist machine.

Faces of AmericaExamining how different groups of

people were affected by American

expansion offers a way to understand the

consequences of imperialism, both in the

U.S. and abroad.

Queen Liliuokalani was the last reigning

monarch of Hawaii. Her struggles to

defend Hawaiian sovereignty against the

Americans would eventually lead to her

imprisonment, where she continued to

resist assimilation—through poetry.

Charles Schwab headed the largest steel

company in the nation. His fortune was

largely made from wartime production,

and his experience illustrates the new

partnership between government and

industry during this period.

Zeferino Velasquez was part of the

fi rst wave of one million Mexicans to

enter the U.S. between 1910 and 19�0.

His life was spent migrating between

his home country and the U.S., where

he found abundant work. As the U.S.

restricted immigrants from Eastern

Europe and Asia, migrants such as

Velasquez found new opportunities in

the U.S., but also discrimination.

Hands on HistoryRetired high-school teacher David Cope

takes us to the Field Museum in Chicago,

where a project to photograph more than

30,000 artifacts from the 1893 World’s

Fair is underway. Through exploring

artifacts, primary sources from the fair,

and conversations with fi eld curators,

Cope gives us a better understanding of

the global “show and tell” that was the

Columbian Exposition, where the nation

that we displayed didn’t necessarily

refl ect the nation that we were.

video related materialS


theme one

Theme One: Patriotism, missionary zeal, and the quest for new markets fueled the drive to establish an overseas empire.

OverviewBetween 1900 and 19�0, the United States was part of a pattern in which European and Asian

countries imposed their imperialistic designs on the rest of the world in the scramble for colonial

expansion. Profit, missionary zeal, strategic defense location, patriotism, and a muscular Christianity

drove this expansion. Muscular Christianity centered around the idea of manliness. It was in this

context that the United States clashed with European countries in Latin America, the Caribbean,

and the Pacific. Many factors contributed to the growth of imperialism, however, including new

technologies, improved communication and transportation, and industry’s desire of cheap raw

materials and labor.

Over the course of this period, American imperialism changed from being driven by guns to being

driven by dollar diplomacy. American businesses sought profit by tapping into Latin American and

Asian markets, and gaining access to cash crops and natural resources such as sugar, coffee, fruit,

oil, and rubber. An economic depression in the last decade of the nineteenth century compounded

the situation by forcing American business to find new markets to dump their surplus goods. Huge

profits motivated businessmen to shape American foreign policy. Imperialism shifted from military

action to the thinly veiled threat of it sustained with the power of the dollar.

Some American citizens viewed expansion as a patriotic expression of American greatness;

missionary fervor guided others to save the souls of the uncivilized, and impose Western values

and culture on non-Christian countries around the world. Some imperialists supported imperial

citizenship, but racism plagued American policy and undermined the willingness of the government to

confer citizenship to racial “others.”

Questions to Consider1. What was the role of business in American imperialism, and how did it change over time?

How did the role of the U.S. military change?

2. How did religion shape public perceptions of imperialism?

3. Why did some immigrants support imperial policies?


theme one SeCondary SourCe

Global imperial aCtivitieS, 1893–1904

This table shows the nations that participated in imperial expansion between

1893 and 190�. What conclusions can be drawn about U.S. imperial expansion?

Gary B. Nash et al., eds. The American People: Creating a Nation and a Society, 6th ed. (New York: Pearson Education, 2004), 702.

theme one exCerptS


1. American Expansionism in Global Context

. . . The nineteenth century was marked by European imperial expansionism

throughout much of the world. In southern and southeastern Asia, the British were

in India, Burma, and Malaya; the French in Cambodia, Vietnam, and Laos; the

Dutch in Singapore and the East Indies; and the Spanish in the Philippines. These

and other colonial powers divided China, its Manchu dynasty weakened by the

opium trade, internal conflicts, and European pressure, into spheres of economic

influence. A China newspaper editorial complained that other nations “all want to

satisfy their ambitions to nibble at China and swallow it.” The Russians wrested

away Manchuria, and Japan took Korea after intervention in a Korean peasant

rebellion in 189�. In addition, China was forced to cede Taiwan and southern

Manchuria to Japanese influence and control . . .

Closer to home, the United States sought to replace Great Britain as the most

influential nation in Central and South America. In 189�, a boundary dispute

between Venezuela and British Guyana threatened to bring British intervention

against the Venezuelans. President Cleveland, needing a popular political

issue amid the depression, asked Secretary of State Richard Olney to send a

message to Great Britain. Invoking the Monroe Doctrine, Olney’s note (stronger

than Cleveland intended) called the United States “practically sovereign on this

continent” and demanded international arbitration to settle the dispute. The

British ignored the note, and war loomed. Both sides realized that war between

two English-speaking nations would be an “absurdity,” and the dispute was

settled when they agreed to an impartial commission to settle the boundary.

These encounters showed that by 189� the United States had neither the means

nor a consistent policy for enlarging its role in the world. The diplomatic service

was small and unprofessional. No U.S. embassy official in Beijing spoke Chinese.

The U.S. Army, with about �8,000 men, was smaller than Bulgaria’s. The navy,

dismantled after the Civil War and partly rebuilt under President Arthur, ranked no

higher than tenth and included dangerously obsolete ships. But by 1898, things

would change.

Nash et al., 681.


u.S. territorial expanSion to 1900

The map below shows U.S. territorial expansion between 18�� and 1900. What

does the acquisition of territories suggest about the pattern of U.S. expansion?

Nash et al., 685.


theme one exCerptS


2. Profits: Searching for Overseas Markets

[By the early 1900s, American government and industry had become increasingly

aware of the world economy and the importance of competing in a global

market.] Senator Albert Beveridge of Indiana bragged in 1898 that “American

factories are making more than the American people can use; American soil is

producing more than they can consume. Fate has written our policy for us; the

trade of the world must and shall be ours.” Americans like Beveridge revived

older dreams of an American commercial empire in the Caribbean Sea and the

Pacific Ocean. American businessmen saw huge profits beckoning in heavily

populated Latin America and Asia, and they wanted to get their share of these

markets, as well as access to the sugar, coffee, fruits, oil, rubber, and minerals

that were abundant in these lands.

Understanding that commercial expansion required a stronger navy and coaling

stations and colonies, business interests began to shape diplomatic and

military strategy. Senator Orville Platt of Connecticut said in 1893: “A policy

of isolationism did well enough when we were an embryo nation, but today

things are different.” By 1901, the economic adviser for the State Department

described overseas commercial expansion as a “natural law of economic and

race development.” But not all businessmen in the 1890s liked commercial

expansion or a vigorous foreign policy. Some preferred traditional trade with

Canada and Europe rather than risky new ventures in Asia and Latin America.

Taking colonies and developing faraway markets not only was expensive but

might involve the United States in wars in distant places. Many thought it more

important to recover from the depression than to annex islands.

But the drop in domestic consumption during the depression also

encouraged businessmen to expand into new markets to sell surplus goods.

The tremendous growth of American production in the post–Civil War years

made expansionism more attractive than drowning in overproduction, cutting

prices, or laying off workers, which would increase social unrest. The newly

formed National Association of Manufacturers, which led the way, proclaimed

in 189� that “the trade centers of Central and South America are natural

markets for American products.”

Despite the 1890s depression, products spewed from American factories at

a staggering rate. The United States moved from fourth place in the world in

manufacturing in 18�0 to first place in 1900, doubling the number of factories

and tripling the value of farm output—mainly cotton, corn, and wheat. The United

theme one exCerptS


States led the world in railroad construction and mass-produced technological

products such as agricultural machinery, sewing machines, electrical implements,

telephones, cash registers, elevators, and cameras. Manufactured goods grew

nearly fivefold between 189� and 191�. The total value of American exports

tripled, from $�3� million in 18�� to nearly $1.� billion in 1900. By 191�, exports

had risen to $�.� billion, a �� percent increase over 1900 . . .

Investments followed a similar pattern. American direct investments abroad

increased from about $�3� million to $�.� billion between 189� and 191�.

Although the greatest activity was in Britain, Canada, and Mexico, most

attention focused on actual and potential investment in Latin America and

Eastern Asia. Central American investment increased from $�1 million in 189�

to $93 million by 191�, mainly in mines, railroads, and banana and coffee

plantations. At the turn of the century came the formation and growth of

America’s biggest multinational corporations: the United Fruit Company, Alcoa

Aluminum, Du Pont, American Tobacco, and others. Although slow to respond

to investment and market opportunities abroad, these companies soon

supported an aggressive foreign policy.

Nash et al., 682–83.

3. Patriotism: Asserting National Power

[While imperialism appealed to some Americans for economic reasons, others

viewed expansion in terms of national glory and greatness.] In the late 1890s,

Assistant Secretary of the Navy Theodore Roosevelt and Massachusetts Senator

Henry Cabot Lodge emerged as highly influential leaders of a changing American

foreign policy. Along with a group of other intensely nationalistic young men, they

shifted official policy to what Lodge called the “large policy.” Roosevelt agreed

that economic interests should take second place to questions of what he called

“national honor.” And by 1899, a State Department official wrote that the United

States had become “a world power . . . Where formerly we had only commercial

interests, now we have territorial and political interests as well.”

Nash et al., 683.


the influenCe of Sea power upon hiStory

Question to ConsiderWhy did Mahan urge the United States to build a canal through

Central America?

The history of Sea Power is largely, though by no means solely, a narrative of contests between nations, of mutual rivalries, of violence frequently culminating in war . . .

In these three things—production, with the necessity of exchanging products, shipping, whereby the exchange is carried on and colonies, which facilitate and enlarge the operations of shipping and tend to protect it by multiplying points of safety—is to be found the key to much of the history, as well as of the policy of nations bordering upon the sea . . .

If one [a Central American canal] be made, and fulfill the hopes of its builders, the Caribbean will be changed from a terminus, and place of local traffic, or a best a broken and imperfect line of travel as it now is, into one of the great highways of the world. Along this path great commerce will travel, bringing the interests of the other great nations, the European nations, close along our shores, as they have never been before . . .

Furthermore, as her distance from the Isthmus, though relatively less, is still considerable, the United States will have to obtain in the Caribbean stations fit for contingent, or secondary, bases of operations; which by their natural advantages, susceptibility of defence, and nearness to the central strategic issue, will enable her fleets to remain as near the scene as any opponent . . .

. . . we can live off ourselves indefinitely in ‘our little corner,’ to use the expression of a French officer to the author. Yet should that little corner be invaded by a new commercial route through the Isthmus, the United States in her turn may have the rude awakening of those who have abandoned their share in the common birthright of all people, the sea . . .

Creator:

Context:

Audience:

Purpose:

Historical Significance:

theme one primary SourCe

Alfred Thayer Mahan

Some Americans

viewed territorial

expansion as an

assertion of national

power.

The State Department

and other government

officials who shaped

foreign policy

To argue that naval

supremacy determined

a nation’s power

During the 1890s, Rear Admiral

Alfred Thayer Mahan’s books shaped

American foreign policy by arguing

that national power was contingent

on control of the seas, allocation of

domestic natural resources, and the

expansion of foreign markets. He

supported the establishment of colonies

in the Caribbean and Pacific and joining

them by a U.S.-controlled canal through

the Central American isthmus. His

writings influenced Theodore Roosevelt,

Henry Cabot Lodge, and American

territorial expansion.



. . . The government by its policy can favor the natural growth of a people’s industries and its tendencies to seek adventure and gain by way of the sea . . . The influence of the government will be felt in its most legitimate manner in maintaining an armed navy, of a size commensurate with the growth of its shipping and the importance of the interests connected with it.

[Americans also became more intensely nationalistic, in part because large numbers of immigrants who spoke little English moved to cities. Americans witnessed the immigrants’ poverty in the cities but also blamed the immigrants for the poverty; they thought the diseases came from the immigrants rather than their living conditions. Some Americans regarded immigrants as radicals who embraced alarming ideologies. Paradoxically, immigrants supported imperialism as a way to proclaim their own Americanness and distance themselves from allegedly inferior peoples.

Emanating from this sense of nationalism was a new movement called “muscular Christianity” that fueled imperialism. Anxiety about manliness and gender roles was evident throughout the culture during this period. Muscular Christianity purported that participation in outdoor activities, such as camping and boxing, developed a “manly” character and contributed to Christian moral development. In the United States, Josiah Strong and Theodore Roosevelt regarded the growth of urbanization, white-collar jobs, and immigration as “threats.” They encouraged Americans to practice a “strenuous life” full of sports and other activities that espoused aggressive male behavior. Lasting from 1880 to 19�0, muscular Christianity contributed to an environment for the invention of basketball and volleyball, and the creation of organized camping and public playgrounds. Heroes such as Tarzan and organizations such as the Boy Scouts, became symbols of manliness and further strengthened the ideas of muscular Christianity.]

Alfred Thayer Mahan, The Influence of Sea Power Upon History, 1660–1805 (Boston: Little, Brown & Co., 1890), 1–5.

1�Unit 16 A Growing Global Power

Our COuntry: Its POssIble Future and Its Present CrIsIs

Question to ConsiderWhat influence did Darwin’s theory of evolution have on Strong?

It seems to me that God, with infinite wisdom and skill, is training the Anglo-Saxon race for an hour sure to come in the world’s future. Heretofore there has always been in the history of the world a comparatively unoccupied land westward, into which the crowded countries of the East have poured their surplus populations. But the widening waves of migration, which millenniums ago rolled east and west from the valley of the Euphrates, meet to-day on our Pacific coast. There are no more new worlds. The unoccupied arable lands of the earth are limited, and will soon be taken. The time is coming when the pressure of population on the means of subsistence will be felt here as it is now felt in Europe and Asia. Then will the world enter upon a new stage of its history-the final competition of races, for which the Anglo-Saxon is being schooled. Long before the thousand millions are here, the mighty centrifugal tendency, inherent in this stock and strengthened in the United States, will assert itself. Then this race of unequaled energy, with all the majesty of numbers and the might of wealth behind it-the representative, let us hope, of the largest liberty, the purest Christianity, the highest civilization-having developed peculiarly aggressive traits calculated to impress its institutions upon mankind, will spread itself over the earth. If I read not amiss, this powerful race will move down upon Mexico, down upon Central and South America, out upon the islands of the sea, over upon Africa and beyond. And can any one doubt that the result of this competition of races will be the “survival of the fittest?”

Josiah Strong, Our Country: Its Possible Future and Its Present Crisis (New York: The American Home Missionary Society, 1885), 174–175.

Creator:

Context:

Audience:

Purpose:



Josiah Strong, a

Congregationalist

minister

Territorial expansion

by nations throughout

the world

The general public

To show the Christian

justification for

American imperialism

In his book, Our Country: Its Possible

Future and Its Present Crisis, Josiah

Strong championed American

missionary expansionism by arguing

that God had “divinely commissioned”

the United States to spread democracy,

and “to civilize and Christianize”

Central and South America, Africa,

and beyond. In China alone, American

Protestant missionaries grew from �3�

in 18�� to �,�� by 191�.


the ultimate CauSe

Question to ConsiderHow does the artist satirize American imperialism?

Item 4204Frank A. Nankivell, THE ULTIMATE CAUSE (Puck, Dec. 19, 1900, cover).

Courtesy of the Library of Congress.

See Appendix for larger image – pg. 55

Creator:

Context:

Audience:

Purpose:



Frank A. Nankivell, artist

Anti-imperialism of

labor unions

Readers of Puck

magazine

To satirize the anti-

immigration sentiment

of American labor

unions

In 1898, the American Anti-Imperialist

League organized to protest the

annexation of the Philippines. Around

1900, Puck satirized American political

and social issues through political

cartoons on the magazine’s front

cover. Anti-imperialists such as these

opposed imperialism for economic,

legal, and moral reasons. Samuel

Gompers was against imperialism out

of a fear that the “hordes of Chinese

and the semi-savage races” would

become part of the United States, take

away jobs, and affect the wages of

American workers.

theme one exCerptS


4. Politics: Manipulating Public Opinion

Although less significant than the other factors, politics also played a role. For

the first time in American history, public opinion on international issues helped

shape presidential politics. The psychological tensions and economic hardships

of the 1890s depression jarred national self-confidence. Foreign adventures then,

as now, provided an emotional release from domestic turmoil and promised to

restore patriotic pride and win votes.

This process was helped by the growth of a highly competitive popular press,

the penny daily newspapers, which brought international issues before a

mass readership. When New York City newspapers, notably William Randolph

Hearst’s Journal and Joseph Pulitzer’s World, competed in stirring up public

support for the Cuban rebels against Spain, politicians dared not ignore the

outcry. Daily reports of Spanish atrocities in 189� and 189� kept public moral

outrage constantly before President McKinley. His Democratic opponent, William

Jennings Bryan, entered the fray, advocating American intervention in Cuba on

moral grounds of a holy war to help the oppressed. He even raised a regiment of

Nebraska volunteers to go to war, but the Republican administration kept him far

from battle and therefore far from the headlines.

Politics, then, joined profits, patriotism, and piety in motivating the expansionism

of the 1890s. These four impulses interacted to produce the Spanish-American

War, the annexation of the Philippine Islands and subsequent war, and the

energetic foreign policy of President Theodore Roosevelt.

Nash et al., 684.


new yOrk JOurnal and new yOrk wOrld

Questions to Consider1. How did penny presses sensationalize the news?

2. What are the similarities and differences in how the New

York Journal and New York World reported the sinking of

the USS Maine?

Creator:

Context:

Audience:

Purpose:



Item 4726 William Randolph Hearst’s New York Journal (February 17, 1898, cover). Courtesy of the Image Works.


Item 6833 Joseph Pulitzer’s New York World, (February

17, 1898, cover). Courtesy of Ross Collins.

Originally printed in New York Extra. A

Newspaper History of the Greatest City in the World from 1671 to the 1939 Worlds Fair. From

the Collection of Eric C. Caren. Edison, NJ, Castle Books, 2000.


William Randolph

Hearst’s New York

Journal and Joseph

Pulitzer’s New York

World

The penny newspapers

stirred up public

opinion in support of

international issues and

events, such as the

Spanish American War.

The readers of the New

York Journal and the

New York World

To boost circulation

and profits

Politics played a role in driving

American expansionism. Public opinion

on international issues helped to

influence presidential elections, and

spurred the growth of a competitive

press that sensationalized news

reporting for a mass readership. With

the intent of increasing circulation and

profits, Hearst’s Journal and Pulitzer’s

World attempted to stir up public

support for Cuban rebels against Spain

by blurring the line between fact and

fiction in their coverage of the news.



u.S. intereStS and interventionS in the Caribbean reGion, 1898–1939

This map illustrates the extent of American interests and military interventions

in the Caribbean between 1898 and 1939. Why did the United States military

intervene in this region?

Peter H. Wood et al., eds. Created Equal: A Social and Political History of the United States (New York: Pearson Education, 2003), 675.

theme one exCerptS


5. The Philippines Debates and War

[In 1898, a newspaper blamed Spain for sinking the USS Maine off the coast of

Cuba. Public outrage at the incident led McKinley to declare war on Spain. The

Spanish-American War displayed the power and might of the United States,

and many Americans regarded the war over Cuba in terms of national glory and

greatness. Once under U.S. control, American corporations quickly gained control

of two-thirds of Cuba’s sugar industry. Corporations wanted the freedom to go

into Cuba and purchase large amounts of land in order to grow sugar that the

United States reimported.

The U.S. also waged war in the Philippines, but expansion was more complicated

than Cuba. Public opinion toward expansion in the Philippines was different

than expansion in Cuba. There was the hope that the Cubans could become

“civilized,” but many Americans regarded the Philippines as too primitive. A

debate ensued over how to treat Filipinos. Conservative expansionists promoted

the takeover of a primitive people, while liberal expansionists wanted to “uplift”

the Filipinos — in other words, let the local Filipinos who were friendly to

American business interests be in charge. The concern among all expansionists

was what would the implications be by making Filipinos American citizens. In

spite of the differences in expansion, the need for raw materials and a desire to

Christianize Filipinos was evident in Cuba and the Philippines.]

[Even before the official end of the Spanish-American War,] McKinley immediately

began shaping American public opinion to accept the “political, commercial [and]

humanitarian” reasons for annexing all �,000 of the Philippines islands. The Treaty

of Paris gave the United States all of the islands in exchange for a $�0 million

payment to Spain. [McKinley wanted to acquire the Philippines for business

interests because it was the gateway to China and to aid religious groups who

hoped to convert Spanish-speaking Roman Catholics to Protestantism.]

Fellow Republicans confirmed McKinley’s arguments for annexation, and

many Democrats supported the president out of fear of being labeled disloyal.

Americans of both parties added arguments reflecting the openly racist thought

that flourished in the United States. Filipinos were described as childlike, dirty,

and backward; they were compared to blacks and Indians. “The country won’t

be pacified,” a Kansas veteran of the Sioux wars told a reporter, “until the

niggers are killed off like the Indians.” Roosevelt called Aguinaldo a “renegade

Pawnee” and said that the Filipinos had no right “to administer the country which

they happen to be occupying.”

Nash et al., 689.

theme one exCerptS


6. The Philippines Debate and War

A small but prominent and vocal Anti-Imperialist League vigorously opposed

war and annexation. These dignitaries included ex-presidents Harrison and

Cleveland, Samuel Gompers and Andrew Carnegie, Jane Addams, and Mark

Twain. The anti-imperialists argued that imperialism in general and annexation

in particular contradicted American ideals. First, the annexation of territory

without immediate or planned steps toward statehood was unprecedented and

unconstitutional. Second, to occupy and govern a foreign people without their

consent violated the ideals of the Declaration of Independence. Third, social

reforms needed at home demanded American energies and money before

foreign expansionism. “Before we attempt to teach house-keeping to the world,”

one writer put it, we needed “to set our own house in order.”

Not all anti-imperialist arguments were so noble. A racist position alleged that

Filipinos were nonwhite, Catholic, inferior in size and intelligence, and therefore

unassimilable. Annexation would lead to miscegenation and contamination of

Anglo-Saxon blood. South Carolina Senator Ben Tillman opposed “incorporating

any more colored men into the body politic.” A practical argument suggested

that once in possession of the Philippines, the United States would have to

defend them, possibly even acquiring more territories—in turn requiring higher

taxes and bigger government, and perhaps demanding that American troops

fight distant Asian wars.

Nash et al., 689.


the white man’S burden

Questions to Consider1. What is Kipling’s view of the “new-caught, sullen peoples”?

2. How does poem reflect the view that Anglo-Saxon nations had a

moral duty to help non-Western cultures?

3. Why does an alternative interpretation portray the poem as a

satire on imperialism?

The White Man’s Burden

Take up the White Man’s burden— Send forth the best ye breed— Go bind your sons to exile To serve your captives’ need; To wait in heavy harness, On fluttered folk and wild— Your new-caught, sullen peoples, Half-devil and half-child.

Take up the White Man’s burden— In patience to abide, To veil the threat of terror And check the show of pride; By open speech and simple, An hundred times made plain To seek another’s profit, And work another’s gain.

Take up the White Man’s burden— The savage wars of peace— Fill full the mouth of Famine And bid the sickness cease; And when your goal is nearest The end for others sought, Watch sloth and heathen Folly Bring all your hopes to nought.


Creator:

Context:

Audience:

Purpose:


Rudyard Kipling

Philippine-American

War and the ratification

of a treaty in which

Cuba, Guam,

the Philippines, and

Puerto Rico came

under U.S. control

Readers of McClure’s

Magazine

To encourage the

United States to take up

the “burden” of empire

In 1899, British poet Rudyard Kipling

enjoined the United States to take up

the “burden” of empire in his poem

“The White Man’s Burden: The United

States and The Philippine Islands.”

Senator Henry Cabot Lodge noted

that it was “rather poor poetry, but

good sense from the expansion point

of view.” For some, the idea of the

“White Man’s Burden” became a

justification for American imperialism.

An alternative reading of the poem

cautions the United States on the

heavy toll of imperialism.

�0Unit 16 A Growing Global Power


Take up the White Man’s burden— No tawdry rule of kings, But toil of serf and sweeper— The tale of common things. The ports ye shall not enter, The roads ye shall not tread, Go mark them with your living, And mark them with your dead.

Take up the White Man’s burden— And reap his old reward: The blame of those ye better, The hate of those ye guard— The cry of hosts ye humour (Ah, slowly!) toward the light:— “Why brought he us from bondage, Our loved Egyptian night?”

Take up the White Man’s burden— Ye dare not stoop to less— Nor call too loud on Freedom To cloke your weariness; By all ye leave or do, The silent, sullen peoples Shall weigh your gods and you.

Take up the White Man’s burden— Have done with childish days— The lightly preferred laurel, The easy, ungrudged praise. Comes now, to search your manhood Through all the thankless years } Cold, edged with dear-bough wisdom, The judgment of your peers!

Rudyard Kipling, “The White Man’s Burden: The United States and The Philippine Islands,” McClure’s Magazine 12 (February 1899).


the real white man’S burden

Questions to Consider1. What was the main idea of Crosby’s parody?

2. What did Crosby think would result from expansion?

Take up the White Man’s burden; Send forth your sturdy sons, And load them down with whisky And Testaments and guns . . .

And don’t forget the factories. On those benighted shores They have no cheerful iron-mills Nor eke department stores. They never work twelve hours a day, And live in strange content, Altho they never have to pay A single cent of rent.

Take up the White Man’s burden, And teach the Philippines What interest and taxes are And what a mortgage means. Give them electrocution chairs, And prisons, too, galore, And if they seem inclined to kick, Then spill their heathen gore.

They need our labor question, too, And politics and fraud, We’ve made a pretty mess at home; Let’s make a mess abroad. And let us ever humbly pray The Lord of Hosts may deign To stir our feeble memories, Lest we forget — the Maine.

Creator:

Context:

Audience:

Purpose:



Ernest Howard Crosby

Expansion into the

Philippines created

anti-imperialists who

attacked American

imperialism.

The general public and

readers of his poetry

To parody Rudyard

Kipling’s “The White

Man’s Burden” by

attacking American

imperialism

Rudyard Kipling’s poem “The

White Man’s Burden” argued that

imperialism spread the benefits of

civilization. Ernest Crosby’s poem,

“The Real White Man’s Burden,”

parodied Kipling’s, and showed

his anti-imperialist abhorrence

of war and sympathy for the

Filipinos. The anti-imperialists were

unable to stop the annexation of

the Philippines, and their efforts

went counter to the expansionist

nationalism of those in power.

��Unit 16 A Growing Global Power


Take up the White Man’s burden; To you who thus succeed In civilizing savage hoards They owe a debt, indeed; Concessions, pensions, salaries, And privilege and right, With outstretched hands you raise to bless Grab everything in sight.

Take up the White Man’s burden, And if you write in verse, Flatter your Nation’s vices And strive to make them worse. Then learn that if with pious words You ornament each phrase, In a world of canting hypocrites This kind of business pays.

Ernest Howard Crosby, “The Real White Man’s Burden,” Cleveland Gazette 16, no. 37

(April 15, 1899), 2.


pearS’ Soap advertiSement

Question to ConsiderWhy did the advertisement use the images of a ship captain and

priest to persuade readers to purchase soap?

Item 6827Pears’ Soap Company, LIGHTENING THE WHITE MAN’S BURDEN (1899).

Courtesy of the Library of Congress


Creator:

Context:

Audience:

Purpose:



Unknown

The White Man’s Burden

became an idea that

American imperialists

used to justify territorial

expansion.

Cosmopolitan readers

To show how

businesses capitalized

on the idea of the

White Man’s Burden

In October 1899, this advertisement

appeared in Cosmopolitan to

persuade readers that purchasing

Pears’ Soap would lighten the

White Man’s Burden by “teaching

the virtues of cleanliness.” The

advertisement shows Admiral George

Dewey washing his hands, ships in

the background, and the scene of a

missionary handing soap to a native.

theme one exCerptS


7. The Philippines Debates and War

As U.S. treatment of the Filipinos became more and more like Spanish treatment

of the Cubans, the hypocrisy of American behavior became even more evident.

This was especially true for black American soldiers who fought in the Philippines.

They identified with the dark-skinned insurgents, whom they saw as tied to the

land, burdened by debt and pressed by poverty like themselves. “I feel sorry for

these people,” a sergeant in the ��th Infantry wrote. “You have no idea the way

these people are treated by the Americans here.”

The war starkly exposed the hypocrisies of shouldering the white man’s burden.

After the war, Aguinaldo wrote that Americans made “vague verbal offers of

friendship and aid and then fairly drowned them out with the boom of cannons

and the rattle of Gatling guns.” On reading a report that 8,000 Filipinos had been

killed in the first year of the war, Carnegie wrote a letter, dripping with sarcasm,

congratulating McKinley for “civilizing the Filipinos . . . About 8,000 of them have

been completely civilized and sent to Heaven. I hope you like it.” Another writer

penned a devastating one-liner: “Dewey took Manila with the loss of one man—

and all our institutions . . .”

The anti-imperialists failed either to prevent annexation or to interfere with the

war effort. However prestigious and sincere, they had little or no political power.

An older elite, they were out of tune with the period of exuberant expansionist

national pride, prosperity, and promise.



letter to the ameriCan people

Question to ConsiderHow does the author of the pamphlet make his argument against

American occupation?

June 1900.God Almighty knows how unjust is the war which the Imperial arms have provoked and are maintaining against our unfortunate country! If the honest American patriots could understand the sad truth of this declaration, we are sure they would, without the least delay, stop this unspeakable horror.

When we protested against this iniquitous ingratitude, then the guns of the United States were turned upon us; we were denounced as traitors and rebels; you destroyed the homes to which you had been welcomed as honored guests, killing thousands of those who had been your allies, mutilating our old men, our women and our children, and watering with blood and strewing with ruins the beautiful soil of our Fatherland.

. . . the Spanish government, whose despotic cruelty American Imperialism now imitates, and in some respects surpasses, denied to us many of the liberties which you were already enjoying when, under pretext of oppression, you revolted against British domination.

Why do the Imperialists wish to subjugate us? What do they intend to do with us? Do they expect us to surrender — to yield our inalienable rights, our homes, our properties, our lives, our future destinies, to the absolute control of the United States? What would you do with our nine millions of people? Would you permit us to take part in your elections? Would you concede to us the privilege of sending Senators and Representatives to your Congress? Would you allow us to erect one or more federal states? Or, would you tax us without representation? Would you change your tariff laws so as to admit our products free of duty and in competition with the products of our own soil?

Emilio Aguinaldo, Central Filipino Committee, LETTER TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE (1899).

Creator:

Context:

Audience:

Purpose:



Central Filipino

Committee

Philippine-American

War

The American people

and readers of

pamphlets published by

the Cincinnati

Anti-Imperialist League

and the New England

Anti-Imperialist League

To show the outrage

by Filipinos against

American occupation

In 1899, Emilio Aguinaldo, a Filipino

general and politician, declared

Philippine independence and

proclaimed the Philippines as the

First Philippine Republic. The United

States did not recognize Aguinaldo’s

government, and Aguinaldo declared

war on the United States. Anti-

imperialists opposed United States

occupation of the Philippines and

attempted to muster support to stop

the war by publishing pamphlets

such as this one. By 1901, the United

States had captured Aguinaldo, but

sporadic resistance by Filipino rebels

continued for another decade. By

the end of the war, more than �,000

American and 1�,000 Filipino soldiers

had lost their lives.

theme one exCerptS


8. Intervening in Mexico and Central America

[Since the nineteenth century, U.S. corporations had purchased huge quantities

of land from Spanish elitists who dominated Nicaragua and were friendly to

American business. When the Nicaraguan economy worsened in the 19�0s, U.S.

corporations had difficulty accessing their goods and suffered economically; the

U.S. military intervened.]

. . . Combining the zeal of a Christian missionary with the conviction of a college

professor, [Wilson] spoke of “releasing the intelligence of America for the service

of mankind.” Along with his secretary of state, William Jennings Bryan, Wilson

denounced the “big stick” and “dollar diplomacy” of the Roosevelt and Taft

years. Yet Wilson’s administration used force more systematically than did his

predecessors. The rhetoric was different, yet just as much as Roosevelt, Wilson

tried to maintain stability in the countries to the south in order to promote

American economic and strategic interests.

At first, Wilson’s foreign policy seemed to reverse some of the most callous

aspects of dollar diplomacy in Central America. Bryan signed a treaty with

Colombia in 1913 that agreed to pay $� million for the loss of Panama and

virtually apologized for the Roosevelt administration’s treatment of Colombia. The

Senate, not so willing to admit that the United States had been wrong, refused to

ratify the treaty.

The change in spirit proved illusory. After a disastrous civil war in the Dominican

Republic, the United States offered in 191� to take over the country’s finances

and police force. When the Dominican leaders rejected a treaty making their

country virtually a protectorate of the United States, Wilson ordered in the

marines. They took control of the government in May 191�. Although Americans

built roads, schools, and hospitals, people resented their presence. The United

States also intervened in Haiti with similar results. In Nicaragua, the Wilson

administration kept the marines sent by Taft in 191� to prop up a pro-American

regime and acquired the right, through treaty, to intervene at any time to preserve

order and protect American property. Except for a brief period in the mid-19�0s,

the marines remained until 1933.

Wilson’s policy of intervention ran into the greatest difficulty in Mexico, a country

that had been ruled by dictator Porfirio Díaz, who had long welcomed American

investors. By 1910, more than �0,000 American citizens lived in Mexico, and

more than $1 billion of American money was invested there. In 1911, however,

theme one exCerptS


Francisco Madero, a reformer who wanted to destroy the privileges of the upper

classes, overthrew Díaz. Two years later, Madero was deposed and murdered by

order of Victoriano Huerta, the head of the army.

To the shock of many diplomats and businessmen, Wilson refused to recognize

the Huerta government. Everyone admitted that Huerta was a ruthless dictator,

but diplomatic recognition, the exchange of ambassadors, and the regulation of

trade and communication had never meant approval. In the world of business and

diplomacy, it merely meant that a particular government was in power. But Wilson

set out to remove what he called a “government of butchers.”

At first, Wilson applied diplomatic pressure. Then, using a minor incident as an

excuse, he asked Congress for power to involve American troops if necessary.

Few Mexicans liked Huerta, but they liked the idea of North American interference

even less, and they rallied around the dictator. The United States landed troops at

Veracruz, Mexico. Angry Mexican mobs destroyed American property wherever

they could find it. Wilson’s action outraged many Europeans and Latin Americans

as well as Americans.

Wilson’s military intervention drove Huerta out of office, but a civil war between

forces led by Venustiano Carranza and those led by General Francisco “Pancho”

Villa ensued. The United States sent arms to Carranza, who was considered less

radical than Villa, and Carranza’s soldiers defeated Villa’s. When an angry Villa

led what was left of his army in a raid on Columbus, New Mexico, in March 191�,

Wilson sent an expedition commanded by Brigadier General John Pershing to

track down Villa and his men. The strange and comic scene developed of an

American army charging 300 miles into Mexico unable to catch the retreating

villain. The Mexicans feared that Pershing’s army was planning to occupy

northern Mexico. Carranza shot off a bitter note to Wilson, accusing him of

threatening war, but Wilson refused to withdraw the troops. Tensions rose. An

American patrol attacked a Mexican garrison, with loss of life on both sides. Just

as war seemed inevitable, Wilson agreed to recall the troops and to recognize the

Carranza government. But this was in January 191�, and if it had not been for the

growing crisis in Europe, it is likely that war would have resulted.


theme one


ConclusionThe United States entered the imperialistic race to carve up the globe. Justification

for territorial acquisition was motivated by financial gain, missionary enthusiasm, and

nationalism. During this period, American imperialism evolved from military intervention

to maintaining business interests. Critics of imperialism used a variety of arguments

to counter expansion, but they were unable to slow the drive to establish an overseas

empire. Racism bedeviled both imperialists and anti-imperialists.

Questions to Consider1. What were some of the arguments for and against overseas expansion? Who

made these arguments, and how did their position reflect their own interests

and attitudes?

2. Why were business interests looking abroad to countries such as Cuba, Hawaii,

Mexico, Nicaragua, and the Philippines?

3. Why did the United States annex Hawaii but not Cuba or the Philippines?

Unit 16 A Growing Global Power

theme onetheme two

�9

Theme Two: American imperial ambitions and the events of World War I forged a new partnership between business and government.

OverviewAfter 1900, the government relied increasingly on technology and innovation from private

industries to build up its military. When the United States entered World War I, the federal

government organized public and private resources for the war effort. President Wilson

believed that centralized planning in the mass production of war materials would lead

to military victory. The government restructured the economy by creating new federal

agencies—such as the Bureau of War Risk Insurance (191�) and the United States

Railroad Administration (1918)—to manage the war effort. The BWRI was successful

in its system of federal payments to servicemen’s dependents, and the railroads ran

more efficiently under the USRA. The government also succeeded in collaborating with

the private sector when it came to building cheap, efficient ships to carry cargo across

the Atlantic. Wilson looked to Charles Schwab the world’s biggest shipbuilder to fix the

problem, just as Roosevelt would look to Kaiser Shipyards three decades later.

The federal government’s large expenditures gave businesses involved in war

production a financial windfall. Corporate earnings soared because of the industry-

government partnership and the demand for war materials from the Allies. As the war

progressed, the federal government’s reliance on industry intensified. This relationship

extended to large tax breaks that the government gave wealthy businessmen

through their foundations, such as the Carnegie and Rockefeller Foundations. The

understanding between big business and government was that these foundations

would invest their savings from tax breaks in scientific research to benefit both the

government and industry.

Questions to Consider1. How did the American economy change during and after World War I?

2. In what ways did the power of the federal government increase and redefine its

relationship to industry during and after World War I?

3. How did the modern corporation develop in the way it did after World War I?

theme one exCerptS


theme two exCerptS

30

1. Financing the War

[When World War I ended in 1919,] by one calculation, it cost the United

States over $33 billion. Interest and veterans’ benefits bring the total to nearly

$11� billion. Early on, when an economist suggested that the war might

cost the United States $10 billion, everyone laughed. Yet many in the Wilson

administration knew the war was going to be expensive, and they set out to

raise the money by borrowing and by increasing taxes.

. . . [T]he wealthy were not . . . pleased with [Secretary of Treasury William]

McAdoo’s other plan to finance the war: raising taxes. The War Revenue Act of

191� boosted the tax rate sharply, levied a tax on excess profits, and increased

estate taxes. The next year, another bill raised the tax on the largest incomes to

�� percent. The wealthy protested, but a number of progressives were just as

unhappy with the bill, for they wanted to confiscate all income over $100,000 a

year. Despite taxes and liberty bonds, however, World War I, like the Civil War,

was financed in large part by inflation. Food prices, for example, nearly doubled

between 191� and 1919.

Nash et al., 767.


boy SCoutS of ameriCa weaponS for liberty

Questions to Consider1. Why did the artist use the Boy Scouts of America to sell

liberty bonds?

2. How does this poster reflect the idea of muscular Christianity?

Item 5698J.C. Leyendecker, American Lithographic Co., THIRD LIBERTY LOAN CAMPAIGN

— BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA WEAPONS FOR LIBERTY (1917). Courtesy of the Library of Congress.


Creator:

Context:

Audience:

Purpose:


theme two primary SourCe

J.C. Leyendecker, an

artist for the American

Lithographic Company

The federal government

initiated a campaign

to sell liberty bonds at

a low interest rate to

Americans.

The general public

People bought liberty

bonds to support the

war effort.

The federal government appealed

to the emotions of citizens by

organizing a campaign to sell

liberty bonds to finance the huge

expenditures of World War I. When

redeemed, one received the original

value of the bond plus interest. The

campaign relied on celebrities and

the Boy Scouts to pitch the sell. The

public responded enthusiastically—

only to discover that the value of the

bonds had dropped 80 percent of

their face value after the war.


muSt Children die and motherS plead in vain? buy more liberty bondS

Questions to Consider1. How did the artist persuade people to buy Liberty Bonds?

2. Who financed the war? Who profited from the war?

Item 5981Walter H. Everett, for the Sackett & Wilhelms Corporation,

MUST CHILDREN DIE AND MOTHERS PLEAD IN vAIN? BUY MORE LIBERTY BONDS (1918). Courtesy of the Library of Congress.


Creator:

Context:

Audience:

Purpose:


theme two primary SourCe

Walter H. Everett

The federal government

initiated a campaign to

sell Liberty Bonds at

a low interest rate to

Americans.

The general public

People bought Liberty

Bonds to support the

war effort.

In 1918, the federal government

issued this poster as part of a

campaign to finance the war by selling

bonds. William Gibbs McAdoo, the

Secretary of Treasury, had hoped

to establish a broad market for

government bonds by rallying the

American public to purchase Liberty

Bonds. McAdoo recruited renowned

artists to sell the idea to the American

people, and orchestrated bond rallies

that featured Hollywood stars such as

Douglas Fairbanks, Mary Pickford, and

Charlie Chaplin.

theme one exCerptS


theme two exCerptS

33

2. Domestic Impact of the War

For at least 30 years before the United States entered the Great War, a debate

raged over the proper role of the federal government in regulating industry

and protecting people who could not protect themselves. Controversy also

centered on the question of how much power the federal government should

have to tax and control individuals and corporations and the proper relation of

the federal government to state and local governments. Even within the Wilson

administration, advisers disagreed on the proper role of the federal government.

In fact, Wilson had only recently moved away from what he defined in 191�

as the New Freedom—limited government and open competition. But the war

and the problems it raised increased the power of the federal government in a

variety of ways. The wartime experience did not end the debate, but the United

States emerged from the war a more modern nation, with more power residing in

Washington. At the same time, the federal government with its huge expenditures

provided immense economic advantage to businesses engaged in war production

and to the cities where those businesses were located. [After the war, the

structure of American business companies diverted increasing amounts of capital

from production into management, service, distribution, and research.]


3. Increasing Federal Power

The major wars of the twentieth century made huge demands on the nations

that fought them and helped to transform their governments. The United States

was no exception. At first, Wilson tried to work through a variety of state

agencies to mobilize the nation’s resources. The need for more central control

and authority soon led Wilson to create a series of federal agencies to deal with

the war emergency. The first crisis was food. Poor grain crops for two years and

an increasing demand for American food in Europe caused shortages. Wilson

appointed Herbert Hoover, a young engineer who had won great prestige as

head of the Commission for Relief of Belgium, to direct the Food Administration.

Hoover set out to meet the crisis not so much through government regulation

as through an appeal to the patriotism of farmers and consumers alike. He

instituted a series of “wheatless” and “meatless” days and urged housewives

to cooperate. In Philadelphia, a large sign announced, “FOOD WILL WIN THE

WAR; DON’T WASTE IT.” Women emerged during the war as the most important

group of consumers. The government urged them to save, just as later it would

urge them to buy.

Nash et al., 767.

theme one exCerptS

Unit 16 A Growing Global Power 3�

war, reGion, and SoCial welfare: federal aid to ServiCemen’S dependentS in the South, 1917–1921

In its sudden growth, wide distribution of benefits, and bureaucratic

administration, the system of federal payments to the dependents of World

War I servicemen was a milestone in the development of the American welfare

state. When the system was in effect (between November 1, 191�, and July 31,

19�1), �.1 million beneficiaries “in almost every State, city, town, and hamlet of

the United States” received such payments, officially entitled “Allotments and

Allowances” and provided under the War Risk Insurance Act (WRIA) of October

191�. The Bureau of War Risk Insurance (BWRI), a small agency established

in the Treasury Department in 191� to insure ships and crews engaged in the

Atlantic trade during the war, quickly grew into one of the largest federal agencies

after it was charged with administering benefits created by WRIA. The BWRI had

1�,�80 employees by July 1919. It dispensed almost $��0 million in allotments

and allowances, a sum equivalent to two-thirds of the federal budget for the last

fiscal year before the outbreak of war in 191�. Monthly payments amounted to

not less than $30 for wives—the largest group of beneficiaries—and as much

as $�� for wives and children. Often benefits exceeded prewar family income,

especially in rural and low-income regions such as the South. The system of

family support payments, officials of the BWRI proudly stated, represented “one

of the largest financial undertakings the country has ever known.”

Progressive reformers, Congress, and beneficiaries endorsed the system of

allotments and allowances because it, like other contemporary social policies,

conformed to established social norms regarding men’s and women’s family

responsibilities, economic roles, and citizenship. The system automatically

allotted part of an enlisted man’s pay to his wife and supplemented that

with an allowance that varied according to the size of the family . . . [F]amily

support payments were intended to allow dependent women to dedicate

themselves to the care of home and children when they could not rely on the

income of a husband . . .

Female beneficiaries, black and white, quickly realized the economic advantages

and political implications of allotments and allowances. In claiming benefits

under the War Risk Insurance Act, they drew on conventional notions of women’s

dependence to involve the national state in the welfare of families. But they did

so to increase their leverage in family affairs, to improve their financial condition,

and to create a social citizenship that included women, along with white men, in

the public sphere. Such women both submitted to, and took advantage of, the

power of the state in shaping the political economy of the family . . .

theme two Journal of ameriCan hiStory artiCle

theme one exCerptS

Unit 16 A Growing Global Power 3�

Even though the system of family support payments was dismantled in 19�1, in

its dialectic of gender and race it prefigured federal social policies of the 19�0s

and 1930s. Allotments and allowances cemented the principle, laid out in Civil

War and mothers’ pensions, that social benefits in the emerging national welfare

state would be channeled through male heads of households as a validation

of their citizenship and their role as wage earners, while women could receive

benefits only indirectly and only as mothers of future citizens. Moreover, the

system of family support payments was based on the requirement that male

heads of families make compulsory contributions from their pay if they wanted

to secure the benefit of federal protection for their dependents. In this sense

the system might well represent an important conceptual and political stage in

the transition from noncontributory Civil War pensions to the contributory Social

Security insurance implemented during the New Deal.

K. Walter Hickel, “War, Region, and Social Welfare: Federal Aid to Servicemen’s Dependents in the South, 1917–1921,” The Journal of American History 87, no. 4 (March 2001), 1362–91.

theme two Journal of ameriCan hiStory artiCle

theme one exCerptS


theme two exCerptS

3�

4. Increasing Federal Power

. . . The Wilson administration used the authority of the federal government

to organize resources for the war effort. The National Research Council and

the National Advisory Committee on Aeronautics helped mobilize scientists in

industry and the universities to produce strategic materials formerly imported

from Germany, especially optical glass and chemicals to combat poison-gas

warfare. American companies also tried to reproduce German color lithography

that had dominated the market for postcards, posters, and magazine illustrations

before the war. Perhaps most valuable were the efforts of scientists in industry

to improve radio, airplanes, and instruments to predict the weather and detect

submarines. The war stimulated research and development and made the United

States less dependent on European science and technology.

The War Industries Board, led by Bernard Baruch, a shrewd Wall Street broker,

used the power of the government to control scarce materials and, on occasion,

to set prices and priorities. But cooperation among government, business, and

university scientists to promote research and develop new products was one

legacy of the war. The government itself went into the shipbuilding business.

The largest shipyard, at Hog Island, near Philadelphia, employed as many as

3�,000 workers but did not launch its first ship until the late summer of 1918.

San Francisco and Seattle also became major shipbuilding centers, while San

Diego owed its rapid growth to the presence of a major naval base.

The government also got into the business of running the railroads. When a

severe winter and a lack of coordination brought the rail system near collapse

in December 191�, Wilson put all the nation’s railroads under the control of the

United Railway Administration. The government spent more than $�00 million

to improve the rails and equipment, and in 1918, the railroads did run more

efficiently than they had under private control. Some businessmen complained

of “war socialism” and resented the way government agencies forced them to

comply with rules and regulations. But most came to agree with Baruch that a

close working relationship with government could improve the quality of their

products, promote efficiency, and increase profits.


theme one exCerptS


theme two exCerptS

3�

5. The Rise of the Modern Corporation

The structure and practice of American business were transformed in the 19�0s.

After a crisis created by the economic downturn of 19�0–19��, business boomed

until the crash of 19�9. Mergers increased during the decade at a rate greater

than at any time since the end of the 1890s—there were more than 1,�00 mergers

in 19�9 alone—creating such giants as General Electric, General Motors, Sears

Roebuck, Du Pont, and U.S. Rubber. These were not monopolies but oligopolies

(industry domination spread among a few large firms). By 1930, the �00 largest

corporations controlled almost half the corporate wealth in the country.

Perhaps the most important business trend of the decade was the emergence

of a new kind of manager. No longer did family entrepreneurs make decisions

relating to prices, wages, and output. Alfred P. Sloan, Jr., an engineer who

reorganized General Motors, was a prototype of the new kind of manager. He

divided the company into components, freeing the top managers to concentrate

on planning new products, controlling inventory, and integrating the whole

operation. Marketing and advertising became as important as production, and

many businesses began to spend more money on research. The new manager

often had a large staff but owned no part of the company. He was usually an

expert at cost accounting and analyzing data. Increasingly, he was a graduate

of one of the new business colleges . . .

Nash et al., 785.

theme one exCerptS

Unit 16 A Growing Global Power 38

theme two SeCondary SourCe

Senate Committee inveStiGated ameriCa’S deCiSion to enter world war i

During the 1920s and 30s, many Congressmen opposed American involvement

overseas. Why was a Senate Committee investigating the role of American

businesses during World War I?

On a hot Tuesday morning following Labor Day in 193�, several hundred people crowded into the Caucus Room of the Senate Office Building to witness the opening of an investigation that journalists were already calling “historic.” Although World War I had been over for 1� years, the inquiry promised to reopen an intense debate about whether the nation should ever have gotten involved in that costly conflict.

The so-called “Senate Munitions Committee” came into being because of widespread reports that manufacturers of armaments had unduly influenced the American decision to enter the war in 191�. These weapons’ suppliers had reaped enormous profits at the cost of more than �3,000 American battle deaths. As local conflicts reignited in Europe through the early 1930s, suggesting the possibility of a second world war, concern spread that these “merchants of death” would again drag the United States into a struggle that was none of its business. The time had come for a full congressional inquiry.

To lead the seven-member special committee, the Senate’s Democratic majority chose a Republican—��-year-old North Dakota Senator Gerald P. Nye. Typical of western agrarian progressives, Nye energetically opposed U.S. involvement in foreign wars. He promised, “when the Senate investigation is over, we shall see that war and preparation for war is not a matter of national honor and national defense, but a matter of profit for the few.”

Over the next 18 months, the “Nye Committee” held 93 hearings, questioning more than �00 witnesses, including J. P. Morgan, Jr., and Pierre du Pont. Committee members found little hard evidence of an active conspiracy among arms makers, yet the panel’s reports did little to weaken the popular prejudice against “greedy munitions interests.”

The investigation came to an abrupt end early in 193�. The Senate cut off committee funding after Chairman Nye blundered into an attack on the late Democratic President Woodrow Wilson. Nye suggested that Wilson had withheld essential information from Congress as it considered a declaration of war. Democratic leaders, including

theme one exCerptS

Unit 16 A Growing Global Power 39

Appropriations Committee Chairman Carter Glass of Virginia, unleashed a furious response against Nye for “dirtdaubing the sepulcher of Woodrow Wilson.” Standing before cheering colleagues in a packed Senate Chamber, Glass slammed his fist onto his desk until blood dripped from his knuckles.

Although the Nye Committee failed to achieve its goal of nationalizing the arms industry, it inspired three congressional neutrality acts in the mid-1930s that signaled profound American opposition to overseas [military] involvement.

Richard A. Baker, Historical Minutes of the U.S. Senate, “Era of Investigations (1921–1940): September 4, 1934, ‘Merchants of Death’”;

available at http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/minute/merchants_of_death.htm (accessed July 16, 2007).

theme two SeCondary SourCe


theme two

ConclusionDuring World War I, large military expenditures gave rise to soaring business profits

in a new-found industry/government partnership. After the war, American businesses

shifted funds to research, marketing, and advertising. It also changed the organizational

structure with a new kind of manager who spearheaded the creation of new products,

controlled inventory, and integrated operations. Efficiency and planning were the

goals of this new corporate structure, and it came to depend on the continuation of

the industry/government alliance established during the war. The expansion of credit,

advertising, and the drive to increase profit stimulated the increased production of

consumer goods, while the rhetoric of efficiency justified cutting skilled-labor costs and

hiring cheaper labor.

Questions to Consider1. On the domestic front, who prospered from the war? Who suffered losses from the

war? What happened to these groups after the war?

2. How did the relationship between industry and government support corporate

expansion after World War I?

3. How did foundations reflect or shape the emerging relationship of business to

government?


theme onetheme three

�1

Theme Three: While increasingly involved economically with Europe, the United States turned away politically and socially from Europe and focused on the Americas.

OverviewHistorians have traditionally viewed the decade following World War I as a period of

isolationism in which the United States retreated from the rest of the world, but there is

evidence to support the argument that America significantly increased its involvement

in international affairs. The United States led the effort to resolve the international

financial problems attributed to the war and tried to reduce naval weapons. It also

took an active role in the regional politics of the Western Hemisphere by intervening

in Mexico, the Dominican Republic, and Panama. Before and after the war, the thread

of continuity was to maintain a climate of stability in the Western Hemisphere that

safeguarded America’s economic and military interests. After World War I, the United

States became increasingly involved with Europe economically, but the U.S. turned

away politically and socially from Europe and focused on the Americas.

Questions to Consider1. Why did the United States emerge as a global power after World War I?

2. What types of interventions did the United States initiate in Central and South

American countries? Why?

theme one exCerptS


theme three exCerptS

��

1. A Prospering Economy

[American businesses prospered while] much of the rest of the world suffered

in the aftermath of the war. Germany, wracked by inflation so great that it took

millions of marks to buy a loaf of bread, sunk into depression and was unable to

make reparation payments. Great Britain and France recovered slowly from the

war’s devastation. Although it was not clear at the time, it became obvious later

that the United States was part of a global economy and eventually would be

affected by the economic difficulties of the rest of the world.

Nash et al., 784.

2. A Patriotic Crusade

[Wilson launched a propaganda campaign to persuade the American public that

the war promoted the causes of freedom and democracy, but this campaign

turned anti-German and anti-immigrant. After the war, anti-immigration attitudes

extended to the passage of immigration acts that restricted European and Asian

immigration. During World War I, most] school districts banned the teaching of

German, a “language that disseminates the ideals of autocracy, brutality and

hatred.” Anything German became suspect. Sauerkraut was renamed “liberty

cabbage,” and German measles became “liberty measles.” Many families

Americanized their German surnames. Several cities banned music by German

composers from symphony concerts. South Dakota prohibited the use of German

on the telephone, and in Iowa, a state official announced, “If their language

is disloyal, they should be imprisoned. If their acts are disloyal, they should

be shot.” Occasionally, the patriotic fever led to violence. The most notorious

incident occurred in East St. Louis, Illinois, which had a large German population.

A mob seized Robert Prager, a young German American, in April 1918, stripped

off his clothes, dressed him in an American flag, marched him through the streets,

and lynched him. The eventual trial led to the acquittal of the ringleaders on the

grounds that the lynching was a “patriotic murder.”

The Wilson administration did not condone domestic violence and murder, but

heated patriotism led to irrational hatreds and fears. Suspect were not only

German Americans but also radicals, pacifists, and anyone who raised doubts

about the American war efforts or the government’s policies. In New York, the

black editors of The Messenger were given two-and-a-half-year jail sentences

for the paper’s article “Pro-Germanism Among Negroes.” The Los Angeles police

ignored complaints that Mexicans were being harassed, because after learning of

the Zimmermann telegram they believed that all Mexicans were pro-German . . .


theme one exCerptS

Unit 16 A Growing Global Power �3

areaS exCluded from immiGration to the united StateS, 1882–1952

The federal government excluded Chinese immigrants from entering the United

States in 188�, and Japanese and Korean immigrants in 19��. In 191�, the

government also excluded immigrants from India, Indonesia, and the Arabian

Peninsula. Why did the United States limit immigration from Asian countries?

Wood et al., 648.

theme three SeCondary SourCe

theme one exCerptS



��

3. Immigration and Migration

. . . The immigration acts of 19�1, 19��, and 19�� sharply limited European

immigration and virtually banned Asian immigrants. The 19�� law contained a

provision prohibiting the entry of aliens ineligible for citizenship. This provision

was aimed directly at the Japanese, for the Chinese had already been excluded;

but even without this provision, only a small number could have immigrated. “

We try hard to be American,” one California resident remarked, “But Americans

always say you always Japanese.” Denied both citizenship and the right to own

land, the first generation Issei placed all of their hope in the children, but the

second generation Nisei often felt trapped between the land of their parents and

the America they lived in, and they still were treated like second-class citizens. A

California politician called the Japanese a “non-assimilable people” who

threatened to make California a “Japanese Plantation” . . .

Nash et al., 796.

4. Global Expansion

The decade of the 19�0s is often remembered as a time of isolation, when the

United States rejected the League of Nations treaty and turned its back on the

rest of the world. It is true that many Americans had little interest in what was

going on in Paris, Moscow, or Rio de Janeiro, and it is also true that a bloc of

congressmen was determined that the United States would never again enter

another European war. But the United States remained involved—indeed,

increased its involvement—in international affairs during the decade. Although

the United States never joined the League of Nations, and a few dedicated

isolationists, led by Senator William Borah, blocked membership in the World

Court, the United States cooperated with many league agencies and conferences

and took the lead in trying to reduce naval armaments and to solve the problems

of international finance caused in part by the war . . .

Nash et al., 806.


SpeeCh by henry Cabot lodGe obJeCtinG to the leaGue of nationS

Question to ConsiderWhat is Lodge’s reason for not ratifying U.S. entry in the League

of Nations?

Mr. President:

. . . Contrast the United States with any country on the face of the earth today and ask yourself whether the situation of the United States is not the best to be found. I will go as far as anyone in world service, but the first step to world service is the maintenance of the United States.

I have always loved one flag and I cannot share that devotion [with] a mongrel banner created for a League.

You may call me selfish if you will, conservative or reactionary, or use any other harsh adjective you see fit to apply, but an American I was born, an American I have remained all my life. I can never be anything else but an American, and I must think of the United States first, and when I think of the United States first in an arrangement like this I am thinking of what is best for the world, for if the United States fails, the best hopes of mankind fail with it.

I have never had but one allegiance - I cannot divide it now. I have loved but one flag and I cannot share that devotion and give affection to the mongrel banner invented for a league. Internationalism, illustrated by the Bolshevik and by the men to whom all countries are alike provided they can make money out of them, is to me repulsive.

National I must remain, and in that way I like all other Americans can render the amplest service to the world. The United States is the world’s best hope, but if you fetter her in the interests and quarrels of other nations, if you tangle her in the intrigues of Europe, you will destroy her power for good and endanger her very existence. Leave her to march freely through the centuries to come as in the years that have gone . . .

Creator:

Context:

Audience:

Purpose:


theme three primary SourCe

Senator Henry Cabot

Lodge, chairman of

the Senate Foreign

Relations Committee

The senators debated

on whether or not to

ratify the League

of Nations.

Senators

To show the views of

some senators against

the League of Nations

In 1919, Senator Henry Cabot Lodge,

a Republican, argued against the

United States becoming a member of

the League of Nations. His resistance

reflected a belief by many in Congress

that the United States should distance

itself from European politics. Lodge

did not want to pledge American

economic or military aid for the security

of member nations. Lodge proposed

amendments to the League of Nations

that limited the role of the United

States, but President Wilson— who

proposed American participation in

the League of Nations—,refused to

compromise with the Republicans.

Congress, swayed by Senator Lodge,

voted against U.S. entry into the

League of Nations.


We are told that we shall ‘break the heart of the world’ if we do not take this league just as it stands. I fear that the hearts of the vast majority of mankind would beat on strongly and steadily and without any quickening if the league were to perish altogether . . .

We would not have our politics distracted and embittered by the dissensions of other lands. We would not have our country’s vigour exhausted or her moral force abated, by everlasting meddling and muddling in every quarrel, great and small, which afflicts the world.

Our ideal is to make her ever stronger and better and finer, because in that way alone, as we believe, can she be of the greatest service to the world’s peace and to the welfare of mankind.

Senator Henry Cabot Lodge, Sr., speaking against the U.S. joining the League of Nations, on August 12, 1919, to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

http://www.etsu.edu/cas/history/docs/lodgeagainst.htm (accessed February 15, 2007).

theme three primary SourCe

theme one exCerptS



��

5. Global Expansion

. . . Business, trade, and finance marked the decade as one of international expansion for the United States. With American corporate investments overseas growing sevenfold during the decade, the United States was transformed from a debtor to a creditor nation. The continued involvement of the United States in the affairs of South and Central American countries also indicated that the country had little interest in hiding behind its national boundaries. But it was not just trade and investment that increased during the decade. The United States increased its international position in cable communication, wireless telegraphy, news services, and motion pictures. In most cases, the British had controlled international communication, but by the end of the decade, the United States government had positioned itself to compete in global communications by supporting private companies; in fact, in some areas, such as film, the United States led the world. In 19��, 9� percent of the films shown in Great Britain and Canada and �0 percent of those shown in France were American made. In addition, American organizations such as the YMCA, Rotary International, and the Rockefeller Foundation increased their activities around the world during the decade . . .

American foreign policy in the 19�0s tried to reduce the risk of international conflict, resist revolution, and make the world safe for trade and investment. Nobody in the Republican administrations even suggested that the United States should remain isolated from Latin America. American diplomats argued for an open door to trade in China and in Latin America, but the United States had always assumed a special and distinct role. Throughout the decade, American investment in agriculture, minerals, petroleum, and manufacturing increased in the countries to the south. The United States bought nearly �0 percent of Latin America’s exports and sold the region nearly �0 percent of its imports. “We are seeking to establish a Pax Americana maintained not by arms but by mutual agreement and good will,” Hughes maintained.

Still, the United States continued the process of intervention that was begun earlier. By the end of the decade, the United States controlled the financial affairs of 10 Latin American nations. The marines were withdrawn from the Dominican Republic in 19��, but that country remained a virtual protectorate of the United States until 19�1. The government ordered the marines from Nicaragua in 19�� but sent them back the next year when a liberal insurrection threatened the conservative government. But the U.S. Marines, and the Nicaraguan troops they had trained, had a difficult time containing a guerrilla band led by Augusto Sandino, a charismatic leader and one of Latin America’s greatest heroes. The Sandinistas, supported by the great majority of peasants, came out of the hills to attack the politicians and their American supporters. One American coffee planter

theme one exCerptS



�8

decided in 1931 that the American intervention had been a disaster. “Today we are hated and despised,” he announced. “This feeling has been created by employing American Marines to hunt down and kill Nicaraguans in their own country.” In 193�, Sandino was murdered by General Anastasio Somoza, a ruthless leader supported by the United States. For more than �0 years, Somoza and his two sons ruled Nicaragua as a private fiefdom, a legacy not yet resolved in that strife-torn country.

Mexico frightened American businessmen in the mid-19�0s by beginning to nationalize foreign holdings in oil and mineral rights. Fearing that further military activity would “injure American interests,” businessmen and bankers urged Coolidge not to send marines but to negotiate instead. Coolidge appointed Dwight W. Morrow of the J. P. Morgan Company as ambassador, and his conciliatory attitude led to agreements protecting American investments. Throughout the decade, the goal of U.S. policy toward Central and South America, whether in the form of negotiations or intervention, was to maintain a special sphere of influence.

The U.S. policy of promoting peace, stability, and trade was not always consistent or carefully thought out, and this was especially true in its relationships with Europe. At the end of the war, European countries owed the United States over $10 billion, with Great Britain and France responsible for about three-fourths of that amount. Both countries, mired in postwar economic problems, suggested that the United States forgive the debts, arguing that they had paid for the war in lives and property destroyed. But the United States, although adjusting the interest and the payment schedule, refused to forget the debt. “They hired the money, didn’t they?” Coolidge supposedly remarked . . .

The United States had replaced Great Britain as the dominant force in international finance, but the nation in the 19�0s was a reluctant and inconsistent world leader. The United States had stayed out of the League of Nations and was hesitant to get involved in multinational agreements. However, some agreements seemed proper to sign; the most idealistic of all was the Kellogg-Briand pact to outlaw war. The French foreign minister, Aristide Briand, suggested a treaty between the United States and France in large part to commemorate long years of friendship between the two countries, but Secretary of State Frank B. Kellogg in 19�8 expanded the idea to a multinational treaty to outlaw war. Fourteen nations agreed to sign the treaty, and eventually �� nations signed, but the only power behind the treaty was moral force rather than economic or military sanctions.


theme one exCerptS

Unit 16 A Growing Global Power �9

map of mexiCan population in the united StateS, 1930

What states had the greatest concentration of Mexicans living in the United

States? Why?

Nash et al., 797.

theme three SeCondary SourCe

theme one exCerptS



�0

6. Immigration and Migration

The immigration laws of the 19�0s cut off the streams of cheap labor that had

provided muscle for an industrializing country since the early nineteenth century.

At the same time, by exempting immigrants from the Western Hemisphere, the

new laws opened the country to Mexican laborers who were eager to escape

poverty in their own land and to work in the fields and farms of California and

the Southwest. Though they never matched the flood of eastern and southern

Europeans who entered the country before World War I, Mexican immigrants

soon became the country’s largest first-generation immigrant group. Nearly one-

half million arrived in the 19�0s, in contrast to only 31,000 in the first decade

of the century. Mexican farm workers often lived in primitive camps, where

conditions were unsanitary and health care was nonexistent. “When they have

finished harvesting my crops I will kick them out on the country road,” one

employer announced. “My obligation is ended.”

Mexicans also migrated to industrial cities such as Detroit, St. Louis, and

Kansas City. Northern companies recruited them and paid their transportation.

The Bethlehem Steel Corporation brought 1,000 Mexicans into its Pennsylvania

plant in 19�3, and U.S. Steel imported 1,�00 as strikebreakers to Lorain, Ohio,

about the same time. During the 19�0s, the population of El Paso, Texas,

became more than �0 percent Mexican, and that of San Antonio, a little less

than �0 percent Mexican. In California, the Mexican population reached 3�8,000

in 19�9, and in Los Angeles, the population was about �0 percent Mexican. Like

African Americans, the Mexicans found opportunity by migrating, but they did

not escape prejudice or hardship.

Nash et al., 796.


ConclusionThe United States played an active role in the politics of Central and South American

after World War I. Although it retreated from European political affairs, the U.S.

continued to maintain economic trade relations with Europe. Immigration restrictions

from Europe not only reflected this distancing from Europe, but also illustrated fear and

hostility towards immigrants—particularly those from eastern and southern Europe with

its pockets of socialism and anarchism. The United States instead turned southward

and opened its doors to cheap labor from Mexico.

Questions to Consider1. Why did the United States pass the immigration acts of the 1920s?

2. How can we explain America’s emerging relation to the people and government of

its southern neighbor, Mexico, during an increasingly anti-immigration climate?

3. How was the United States envisioned as developing an intensely nationalistic

globalism?

Unit ConclusionBetween 1900 and 19�0, the United States joined the race to carve up the globe.

Critics of imperialism proposed many arguments against expansion, but were unable

to slow the drive to establish an overseas empire. At first, American expansion largely

involved military intervention, but by the end of the period the emphasis shifted to

protecting American business interests.

Business interests also profited from a new industry-government partnership that grew

out of the large military expenditures from World War I. After the war, a new corporate

structure came to depend on the continuation of the industry-government alliance

established during the war. After World War I, the United States played an active role in

the politics of Central and South American, but retreated from European political affairs.

The U.S. continued to maintain economic trade relations with Europe, but distanced

itself by placing immigration restrictions on Europe—particularly eastern and southern

European countries. The United States instead turned southward and opened its doors

to cheap labor from Mexico.

theme three


timeline

1891 Hawaiian Queen Liliuokalani ascends the throne

1893 World’s Columbian Exposition held in Chicago

1893 Hawaiian coup by sugar growers

1898 Sinking of the USS Maine

1898–99 Spanish-American War

1898 Annexation of the Hawaiian Islands

1898 Puerto Rico seized from Spain

1899 American Samoa acquired

1899–1902 Philippine-American War

1901 Theodore Roosevelt becomes president

1902 Chinese Exclusion Act extended

1904 Roosevelt corollary, gives the right to intervene in Latin America

1904–06 U.S. intervenes in Nicaragua, Guatemala, and Cuba

1908 U.S. Marines intervene in Panamanian election contest

1910 Mexican Revolution begins

1910–20 One million Mexicans enter the U.S.

1911 U.S. interests protected in Honduran civil war

1911 Frederick Winslow Taylor writes The Principles of Scientific Management

1911 U.S. intervenes in Nicaragua

1914 The Panama Canal opens

1914–18 World War I

1915 U.S. occupies Haiti

1916 Mexico intervention


timeline Continued

1916–24 Marines occupy Dominican Republic

1917 The Russian Revolution

1917 Immigrants from India, Indonesia, and the Arabian Peninsula restricted from entering U.S.

1917 War Industries Board formed

1919 Red Scare and Palmer raids

1920 First commercial radio broadcast

1924 Immigrants from Korea and Japan restricted from entering U.S.

1927 Sacco and Vanzetti executed

unit referenCe materialS

- Brandes, Stuart D. Warhogs: A History of War Profits in America. Lexington: The

University Press of Kentucky, 199�.

- Monroy, Douglas. Rebirth: Mexican Los Angeles from the Great Migration to the Great

Depression. Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1999.

- Nash, Gary B., Julie Roy Jeffrey, John R. Howe. Peter J. Frederick, and Allan M.

Winkler. The American People: Creating a Nation and a Society, �th ed. New York:

Pearson Education Inc., �00�. Reprinted by permission of Pearson Education, Inc.

- Silva, Noenoe K. Aloha Betrayed: Native Hawaiian Resistance to American

Colonialism. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, �00�.

- Wood, Peter, Jacqueline Jones, Thomas Borstelmann, Elaine Tyler May, and Vicki

Ruiz. Created Equal: A Social and Political History of the United States. New York:

Pearson Education Inc., �003. Reprinted by permission of Pearson Education, Inc.


further readinG

1- Lens, Sidney. The Forging of the American Empire: From the Revolution to Vietnam:

A History of American Imperialism (Human Security). London: Pluto Press, �003.

�- Loewen, James. Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Text-

book Got Wrong. New York: The New Press, 199�.

3- Samuels, Peggy, and Harold Samuels. Remembering the Maine. Washington and

London: Smithsonian Institution Press, 199�.

viSit the web Site

Explore these themes further on the America’s History in the Making Web site. See how

this content aligns with your own state standards, browse the resource archive, review

the series timeline, and explore the Web interactives. You can also read full versions of

selected Magazine of History (MOH) articles or selected National Center for History in

the Schools (NCHS) lesson plans.


appendix 1-1

THEME ONE PRIMARY SOURCEItem 4204

Frank A. Nankivell, THE ULTIMATE CAUSE (Puck, Dec. 19, 1900, cover). Courtesy of the Library of Congress.


appendix 1-2


William Randolph Hearst’s New York Journal (February 17, 1898, cover). Courtesy of the Image Works.


appendix 1-2


Joseph Pulitzer’s New York World, (February 17, 1898, cover). Courtesy of Ross Collins. Originally printed in New York Extra. A Newspaper History of the Greatest City in the World from 1671 to the 1939 Worlds Fair.

From the Collection of Eric C. Caren. Edison, NJ, Castle Books, 2000.


appendix 1-3


Pears’ Soap Company, LIGHTENING THE WHITE MAN’S BURDEN (1899). Courtesy of the Library of Congress


appendix 2-1

THEME TWO PRIMARY SOURCEItem 5698

J.C. Leyendecker, American Lithographic Co., THIRD LIBERTY LOAN CAMPAIGN — BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA WEAPONS FOR LIBERTY (1917). Courtesy of the Library of Congress.


appendix 2-2

THEME TWO PRIMARY SOURCEItem 5981

Walter H. Everett, for the Sackett & Wilhelms Corporation, MUST CHILDREN DIE AND MOTHERS PLEAD IN vAIN? BUY MORELIBERTY BONDS (1918).

Courtesy of the Library of Congress.

unit a growing global ower - learner · 2013-06-27 · profits motivated businessmen to shape...

Documents