European Imperialism In The 19th Century

At the turn of the 19th century, the concept of “new imperialism” first came onto the scene. Under the guise of this new term, Europeans began to wreak havoc on surrounding areas around them as they began their campaign to lay claim to, and bring their form of civilization to people that were otherwise considered to be something just short of savages. For varying motives, some of them being religious, some economic, and others based on Darwinism and racism, many European nations made moves into lands in Africa and Asia to get a piece of the proverbial pie for themselves. While the statement in the prompt mentions the United States’ reluctance in becoming involved in the “new imperialism” expansion, it is difficult to see any truth in this claim
because they were involved in controlling and annexing land of their own almost a decade and a half before the turn of the century. For this reason, I believe the statement can be refuted in near entirety. The main driving force behind the European nations vying for and taking over new territories was the need for more materials and resources to meet the ever-growing needs of Europe’s Second Industrial Revolution. This need/demand gave the many European nations what they felt was the justification they were needing to begin their expansion to find those resources, and they would often do so with very little regard for the ways of life for those at the receiving end of their aggression. By and large, the United States tried to keep their distance from the “new imperialism” movement, but they were not completely exempt from its impact. Although the U.S. wasn’t as involved in the expansion into the African and Asian lands, there were still resources and economic gains to be made that required some form of interaction with these places. One such example can be found in the “open door” policy, pushed largely by American secretary of state, John Hay. Under the authority of this policy, powerful countries like the United States, Japan, Russia, Germany, Britain, and France were able to reap the benefits of having commercial access to territories within the borders of China. Even though the United States wasn’t actively taking part in “new imperialism” by doing this, they were taking advantage of opportunities that wouldn’t have been available without other nations’ lust for new land. Secondly, and the main reason why I feel that the United States was drawn into “new imperialism,” is the fact that the Pacific islands were targeted and swept up by the U.S.
during the movement. The main difference is that the European nations primarily focused on Asia and Africa for their expansion, but the motives and results were quite similar in the Pacific islands. The United States began to colonize some of the islands, starting with the Samoan islands, and would soon move on to claim the Hawaiian Islands, which was used as a naval station. The similarities between the European nations and the United states can be found in the fact that the U.S. was motivated by economic gain and religious reasons. When President McKinley said that there was an obligation “to educate the Filipinos and uplift and Christianize them,” he shed some light on the general attitude towards expansion by the American people. Rather than being viewed as cruel and thoughtless, it was seen as an obligation or a duty, something that simply had to be done. There is a tremendous amount of irony in the fact that a nation could claim to value freedom and liberty so much in one breath, but then turn around and take those very things from less powerful
nations. America may have wanted to keep its hands clean and steer clear of “new imperialism,” but the fact of the matter is that they did not. In the end, it seems that the temptation proved to be too much to resist, and the United States found itself scrambling to claim more land just like the European nations had been doing. The only redeeming factor might be that the U.S. wasn’t as heavily involved in grabbing up lands in Africa and Asia, but the United States is far from being an innocent party in this case. All things considered, the United States was as guilty as any European nation in taking advantage of “new imperialism.”