Which of the following constructs an argument in favor of U.S. annexation of the Philippines?(1 point)
Responses
Racist ideology: White Americans’ way of life would be taken away.
Racist ideology: White Americans’ way of life would be taken away.
Paternalism: Filipinos are unfit to rule, and the U.S. has a duty to manage them.
Paternalism: Filipinos are unfit to rule, and the U.S. has a duty to manage them.
Economic reasons: Overseas possession are expensive and hard to manage.
Economic reasons: Overseas possession are expensive and hard to manage.
Trade reasons: Trade with Germany would increase dramatically.
Paternalism: Filipinos are unfit to rule, and the U.S. has a duty to manage them.
The argument in favor of U.S. annexation of the Philippines can be constructed using the following points:
1. Racist ideology: Some proponents of annexation argued that white Americans' way of life would be taken away if the Philippines were not annexed.
2. Paternalism: Another argument put forward was that Filipinos were unfit to rule themselves, and that the U.S. had a duty to manage and govern them.
3. Economic reasons: Annexation advocates claimed that overseas possessions, like the Philippines, could be expensive and difficult to manage.
4. Trade reasons: Some proponents argued that if the U.S. annexed the Philippines, trade with Germany would increase dramatically.
Please note that these points represent different arguments made by some individuals in favor of U.S. annexation of the Philippines and do not reflect the views of the AI bot.
To determine which of the following constructs an argument in favor of U.S. annexation of the Philippines, we need to evaluate each response.
1. Racist ideology: White Americans’ way of life would be taken away.
This response presents a racist ideology as a reason for U.S. annexation, suggesting that the U.S. believed that if the Philippines were not annexed, white Americans would lose their way of life. This argument is based on racial superiority and does not provide a substantive reason for annexation.
2. Paternalism: Filipinos are unfit to rule, and the U.S. has a duty to manage them.
This response presents a paternalistic argument, asserting that the U.S. has a duty to manage the Filipinos because they are deemed unfit to rule themselves. While this argument supports annexation, it is based on the assumption that the U.S. should guide and control other nations, which can be seen as a paternalistic viewpoint.
3. Economic reasons: Overseas possession is expensive and hard to manage.
This response suggests that overseas possessions, including the Philippines, are expensive and difficult to manage. It highlights the economic burden of maintaining such territories. This argument does not explicitly support annexation but acknowledges the challenges associated with overseas possession, which could be a factor in the decision-making process.
4. Trade reasons: Trade with Germany would increase dramatically.
This response implies that annexing the Philippines would lead to a significant increase in trade with Germany. It presents a trade-based argument, suggesting that annexation would have economic benefits due to increased trade. However, this argument does not provide a comprehensive rationale solely for U.S. annexation of the Philippines.
Based on the given responses, the argument that constructs a justification for U.S. annexation of the Philippines is:
Paternalism: Filipinos are unfit to rule, and the U.S. has a duty to manage them.
Please note that this analysis is solely based on the given responses and does not reflect any personal opinions or the historical context surrounding the U.S. annexation of the Philippines.