The term was partly revived in the 1890s, this time with Republican supporters, as a theoretical justification for U.S. expansion outside of North America. Opponents such as Abraham Lincoln wanted vertical modernization with greater complexity and specialization, instead of the horizontal expansion of simple farms. As Lincoln explained, he "did not believe in enlarging our field, but in keeping our fences where they are and cultivating our present possession, making it a garden, improving the morals and education of the people."[1] Historian David Potter concludes that in 1854 the Ostend Manifesto and the Kansas-Nebraska Act were "the two great calamities of the Franklin Pierce administration. Both brought down an avalanche of public criticism." More importantly, says Potter, they permanently discredited Manifest Destiny and popular
The term was partly revived in the 1890s, this time with Republican supporters, as a theoretical justification for U.S. expansion outside of North America. Opponents such as Abraham Lincoln wanted vertical modernization with greater complexity and specialization, instead of the horizontal expansion of simple farms. As Lincoln explained, he "did not believe in enlarging our field, but in keeping our fences where they are and cultivating our present possession, making it a garden, improving the morals and education of the people."[1] Historian David Potter concludes that in 1854 the Ostend Manifesto and the Kansas-Nebraska Act were "the two great calamities of the Franklin Pierce administration. Both brought down an avalanche of public criticism." More importantly, says Potter, they permanently discredited Manifest Destiny and popular