The Benevolence of the Manifest Destiny

[johan_steele]

Bill, put simply... God is not a politician. I don't believe in historical accidents; political ones yes. History is written by men w/ an agenda (of one kind or another) and a hindsight view at events. In short considering history as fact is wrong. It is at best editorial and at worst mythology.

The US was founded by men of faith, faith has played an important role in our nation since... yet the freedom of religion is distinct in the US. I personally know Agnostics, an athiest, Wiccans, Buddhist, muslims, Catholics & Protestants and consider myself a simple Christian. US Religious views like everything have evolved w/ both high and low points.

I would think the the percentage of religious people today is considerably less than in the 1940's and dramatically less than in the CW.

Today... THe US, England, Poland, Australia and quite a few other nations are working together to create a stable Democratic govt in Both Iraq & Afghanistan as they managed to do in Asia & Europe after WW2. Whether you agree or disagree w/ the intent I don't see how any individual willing to look to facts can say the US is doing/have done so alone and I don't see how it bears any relation to the ACW.

[thea_447]

Well I see another thread that started off with such hope is being mired down with posters who want to change the topic entirely, or just want to accuse Southerners or our pro-Southern friends of being "America Haters". WHY does this always happen?
Remember this: the South was part of this country at the beginnning and it is still considered part of this country. We prove that by paying taxes and sending our young men off to war among other things.

In the beginning the United States was NOT just the North! At that time the South played a tremendous role in this country. Needless to say the WBTS and other sundry things have changed all that. I'm not even here to get into that boring stuff. It's been done. I do want us to try and stay true to this topic: in other words, if you don't have an ax to grind on this particular thread, there are plenty of others out there where you can tout "slavery, slavery,slavery", evil Southerners, and all that other stuff but please don't dilute this thread because of your personal vendettas.

I take it personally when my friends, Dawna and Bill are pulled down, insulted, and generally treated the way I've been treated by some in the past. We can certainly stand the heat, but it's so unnecessary for grown-ups to revert to this.

Having just finished reading this thread I find it quite interesting that from the first opening shot there was absolutely no thought of discussing this topic logically.

Manifest Destiny: I found this just looking around under Answers.com...quite revealing. Here's a quote:
At its start, the United States was a collection of small colonies on the eastern seaboard with little international import. What was to become the United States had existed for almost two centuries as part of the British Empire.

Further reading explains that over the next centuries the United States first spread across the North American continent, then rose to become the world's most dominant power. And here some argue this was the means by which the United States expanded, which in my mind would be a classic example of imperialism, a situation not unlike Russia. This would mean expanding your own country by taking over countries touching your borders.

The first step was the savage way we dealt with the Native Americans, which as one poster has noted can never be forgiven. Don't drop dead here but I agree with that point.

Another quote here but which is also noted for the pure form of hypocrisy isthe Louisiana Purchase : (See Louisiana Government Bill for a real laugh!)
The &">Having just finished reading this thread I find it quite interesting that from the first opening shot there was absolutely no thought of discussing this topic logically. </FONT></FONT></I>

Manifest Destiny: I found this just looking around under Answers.com...quite revealing. Here's a quote:
At its start, the United States was a collection of small colonies on the eastern seaboard with little international import. What was to become the United States had existed for almost two centuries as part of the British Empire.

Further reading explains that over the next centuries the United States first spread across the North American continent, then rose to become the world's most dominant power. And here some argue this was the means by which the United States expanded, which in my mind would be a classic example of imperialism, a situation not unlike Russia. This would mean expanding your own country by taking over countries touching your borders.

The first step was the savage way we dealt with the Native Americans, which as one poster has noted can never be forgiven. Don't drop dead here but I agree with that point.

Another quote here but which is also noted for the pure form of hypocrisy isthe Louisiana Purchase : (See Louisiana Government Bill for a real laugh!)
The Louisiana Purchase, the 1803 transaction of the gigantic western Louisiana Territory from France (Napoleon Bonaparte) to the United States (Thomas Jefferson), is often considered the first major event in American expansion, although it is rarely cited an act of imperialism. (And yes, before you jump through the looking glass, the South wanted that one.)

I could site more details about the Mexican-American war but my comrade Dawna has dealt with it successfully. But instead here's another quote:
Today, there is some question over the nature of the Mexican-American war. Most claim that it was aggressive in nature, prompted by Manifest Destiny. Among these, some historians claim that it was simply a grab for more territory, whereas others see it as part of a concerted expansionist movement, reminiscent of imperialism.

At the time of the WBTS the South looked on the North's actions towards them as imperialistic, and they were right. At war's end the South had been "annexed" and was forever after looked upon in that vein.

Definitions: manifest destiny
n.

1. A policy of imperialistic expansion defended as necessary or benevolent.
2. often Manifest Destiny The 19th-century doctrine that the United States had the right and duty to expand throughout the North American continent.

END PART I

[thea_447]

How in the world does "necessary" mean "benevolent"? Unbelievable!

From Houghton Mifflin Company:
manifest destiny

A popular slogan of the 1840s. It was used by people who believed that the United States was destined — by God, some said — to expand across North America to the Pacific Ocean. The idea of manifest destiny was used to justify the acquisition of Oregon and large parts of large parts of the Southwest, including California. (See Mexican War.)


WordNet

Note: click on a word meaning below to see its connections and related words. The noun manifest destiny has one meaning:

Meaning #1: a policy of imperialism rationalized as inevitable (as if granted by God) (The hypocrisy here mystifies me!)

Manifest Destiny
This painting (circa 1872) by John Gast called American Progress is an allegorical representation of Manifest Destiny. In the scene, the lady Columbia—a 19th century personification of the United States—carries the light of "civilization" westward with American settlers, as American Indians and wild animals are driven before them. The Mississippi River is behind them, and Columbia strings telegraph wire as she travels.


Manifest Destiny was a nineteenth century belief that the United States had a divinely-inspired mission to expand, particularly across the North Americanfrontier towards the Pacific Ocean. The phrase, which means obvious (or undeniable) fate, was coined by New York journalist John O'Sullivan in 1845, when he wrote that "it was the nation's manifest destiny to overspread and to possess the whole of the continent which Providence has given us for the development of the great experiment of liberty and federated self-government entrusted to us." Manifest Destiny was never a specific policy or ideology; it was a general notion that combined elements of American exceptionalism, nationalism, expansionism, and racism. Some commentators believe that aspects of Manifest Destiny still form an underlying part of American outlook and policy. (THIS, in my opinion is the scariest part of the underpinnings of these United States.

From the very beginning of these United States there have been certain sections of this country who have always believed they were destined and deserved to rule over others. Whether they actually, in the beginning, thought that they could bring a better life, a better culture, GOD to the heathens....whatever, somewhere in the very early years they crossed a line: the very line that had founded this country. Self-government, equality....all these things went out the window if the "national interest" was more important and it has always been more important.

[unionblue]

Thea,

And all of the above equates to the causes of the American Civil War in what way?

Unionblue

[dawna]

Thea:

Thanks for your posting and the photo - a picture truly worth a thousand words.

"From the very beginning of these United States there have been certain sections of this country who have always believed they were destined and deserved to rule over others. Whether they actually, in the beginning, thought that they could bring a better life, a better culture, GOD to the heathens....whatever, somewhere in the very early years they crossed a line: the very line that had founded this country. Self-government, equality....all these things went out the window if the "national interest" was more important and it has always been more important."

'A better life and God to the heathens' must have been a flash in the pan ideal, since death seemed to be the end result, regardless of original motives. I see the terms manifest destiny and capitalism as being synonymous, with religion as the bogus moral authority behind the principles of these two phrases. Moral superiority and a greater sense of worth stokes the insatiable fire of Manifest Destiny, and can rationalize almost anything; whether it is to fuel the slaughter of innocent people, theft of land, or government by coercion. The 'will of God' can and does express itself in many strange shades of 'nationalism.'

For those who did not meet the standards of "God's chosen," ideals such as liberty, human dignity, and self-determination were suffered as little more than lip service from those who carried the Manifest Destiny torch. And as a result of this, religion, white supremacy, and capitalist expansionism worked together to create an able, exclusive empire.

Wrote one Union soldier: "I believe our cause to be the cause of liberty and light . . . the cause of God, and holy and justifiable in His sight, and for this reason, I fear not to die in it if need be."

A Pennsylvania officer wrote to his wife that he had to fight it out to the end because, "sick as I am of this war and bloodshed [and] as much oh how much I want to be home with my dear wife and children.... every day I have a more religious feeling , that this war is a crusade for the good of mankind... I [cannot] bear to think of what my children would be if we were to permit this hell-begotten conspiracy to destroy this country."

In the same way that the 'divinely inspired Manifest Destiny' carved, plundered, and trampled it's way across America, so too did the lofty ideal of the Union cause; sanctioned and ordained by a 'benevolent' God.

I don't know about you Thea, but I could use a good cigar and a round of whiskey - maybe even a game of 'Texas hold 'em.'

Dawna


"To see the period as it is, is to witness uninspired spectacles of prejudice, error, intolerance, and selfish grasping" ~James G. Randall~

[unionblue]

Dawna,

And yet another view can be espoused from the very same letters of those Union soldiers you use to support this Manifest Destiny theory of the South being invaded by imperialistic, fanatical religious, Northern Capitalists.

The idea that they were battling a process of thought at home and comfortable with the rest of the world. That a few in a priviliged class who held humans in chains and viewed the idea that the unwashed masses could never really look after or lead themselves with out a paternal hand to guide them, that the idea of something better than that might be achieved at the end of all that bloodshed and carnage was something more than $13 a month.

It's funny, but the quotes you give from those Union soldiers reminded me of another quote I had read from the same time, July 14, 1863.

"With Union, and energy, the rallying of every man able to bears arms to the defense of his country, we shall succeed, and if we leave our children poor we shall also leave them a better heritage than wealth--Trusting that God will bless our good cause and that we shall soon have brighter days I am as ever very truly your friend."

Unionblue

[Calicoboy]

Originally Posted by johan_steele

What can I say... America prefers winners; always has. Second place=first loser.

American Empire? Interesting, is Germany, France, S Korea, Japan, North Africa etc US States or properties? No European, Asian, Iraqi or African town liberated by US troops ever feared summary execution, mass rape etc. as they did from German, Russian & even apparently from Brit troops. No city US troops have ever taken has been put to the sword. Something the Russian, Japanese, Germans and English cannot say.

Ask the Italians etc of 1944 who they preffered as liberators...

The US & Manifest Destiny has made us, US, the country everyone else comes screaming to for help. From the useless UN to the inept NATO.

THe stain on the US is our treatment of the Native American and Slavery. The stain slavery was paid for in blood. THe treatment of Native Americans... is a crushing, unforgivable stain that shall haunt us for ever. Though the only consulation is we were neither the first nor the last to exterminate a culture for the "greater good." Aka "Pacification by force" in Ireland, Scotland, Australia, India, the Opium Wars, etc.

Canada, Dawna I'll give Canada credit... Innocent for the most part.

Democracy, is four wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch.

Never put to the sword. I'd bet the people of Hiroshima and Fallujah might beg to differ

Calicoboy

[unionblue]

Calicoyboy,

There are exceptions to every assumption.

Col. Tibbits and his crew from the Enola Gay had met for a reunion out in the western United States, I cannot recall which one. There, the Colonel was approached by a Japanese-American whose family had come to the US after WWII. He thanked Col. Tibbits and his crew for their dropping of the atomic bomb. Upon explaining, he said he and his family and the entire civilian population of the nation was starving slowly to death because the fanatical military elements, who held sway in Japan at the time, would not contemplate surrender on any terms or conditions.

The man stated that the dropping of the bombs during the war ended up saving millions of lives, both Japanese and American, once they realized they could not face up to the utter destruction they would incur.

As for Fallujah, we may have to wait on history's judgement once more to see if any one wants to beg to differ.

Unionblue

[ole]

Neil and Callicoboy:

I've always understood the meaning of "put to the sword" as whup them; then kill them all. Kind of like Lawrence, Kansas. That is: post battle.

[bill_torrens]

Shane,

Perhaps now I see the rub, I was referring to a host of incidents in India and in China in the 19th Century from Wellingtons troops onto the end of the century.

I would like to accept your explanation, but I remind you of what you said:

No European, Asian, Iraqi or African town liberated by US troops ever feared summary execution, mass rape etc. as they did from German, Russian & even apparently from Brit troops.

The inclusion of the word “Iraqi” places your statement firmly in the present day. Whether you meant to or not, you effectively claimed that people living today have more cause to fear British soldiers than American ones.

I invite you to consider whether you can justify this statement.

Bill