Following the Spanish-American War, and especially in regard to American occupation of the
Philippines, most anti-imperialists argued that
A. the occupation would lead to unhealthy racial mixing.
B. because all war was immoral, the fruits of war were tainted.
C. installing tyranny abroad would encourage tyranny at home.
D. cheap, imported Filipino laborers would take American jobs.
Is it C?
I would agree with C now, but at the time I think most anti-imperialists did not think it appropriate to imitate the European empires.
its c....
To determine the correct answer, let's analyze the options one by one:
A. The option states that most anti-imperialists argued that the occupation would lead to unhealthy racial mixing. While racism did play a role in the opposition to American occupation of the Philippines, it was not the primary reason why most anti-imperialists opposed it.
B. The option states that anti-imperialists argued that because all war was immoral, the fruits of war were tainted. While some anti-imperialists did hold this perspective, it was not the prevailing argument against the American occupation of the Philippines.
C. The option states that installing tyranny abroad would encourage tyranny at home. This argument holds more weight as it reflects the concern of anti-imperialists that the United States, by exerting control over the Philippines, would undermine its own democratic values and potentially lead to the erosion of freedom and democracy at home. Therefore, this option could be a possible answer.
D. The option states that cheap, imported Filipino laborers would take American jobs. Although economic concerns did play a role in the opposition to the occupation of the Philippines, it was not the primary argument made by most anti-imperialists.
Considering the options presented, option C – installing tyranny abroad would encourage tyranny at home – aligns more closely with the arguments put forth by most anti-imperialists after the Spanish-American War.