“It was not automatically apparent how any of the filibustering targets of the post-1848 period could ‘fit’ into an American republic, or even into an American empire. . . . While it seemed only logical to some to simply take all of Mexico as booty [spoils] of the war, cut Mexico up, and turn it into new territories and states, most Americans rejected this idea. They did so because central Mexico was densely populated. . . . Many Americans feared the result of the integration of Mexico’s people into the United States. Critics also doubted whether Americans could be happy in the alien landscape of central and southern Mexico.”
Amy Greenberg, historian, Manifest Manhood and the Antebellum American Empire, 2005
“American settlers had eclipsed the Mexicans in Texas and, with ample aid from southern Whites, had rebelled and won their independence. . . . A small band of Americans, many of them merchants, lived in Mexican California when war broke out in 1846. This dispersion of hardy migrants inspired observers to insist that pioneers and not politicians won the West. . . .
“Pioneers played a role in expansion, but the historical record points to politicians and propagandists as the primary agents of empire. Racial, economic, social, and political factors coalesced [combined] to make territorial and commercial expansion enticing to American leaders. . . .
“Denying any parallels between earlier empires and their own, expansionists insisted that democracy and dominion were complementary, not contradictory. Since leaders intended to transform [territorial] cessions into states and their inhabitants (at least Whites) into citizens, they scoffed at misgivings about governing a vast domain.”
Thomas Hietala, historian, Manifest Design: American Exceptionalism and Empire, 2003
Question
Greenberg’s argument most differs from Hietala’s in that Greenberg claims that
Responses
race was a defining factor in the tensions leading up to the Mexican-American War
race was a defining factor in the tensions leading up to the Mexican-American War
pioneers, not politicians, were a major factor in building the American empire
pioneers, not politicians, were a major factor in building the American empire
most Americans believed that Mexicans in the new territories could not assimilate
most Americans believed that Mexicans in the new territories could not assimilate
the granting of citizenship to people in the territories was welcomed by many Americans after the war
Greenberg’s argument most differs from Hietala’s in that Greenberg claims that most Americans believed that Mexicans in the new territories could not assimilate. This is evident in the passage where Greenberg states, "Many Americans feared the result of the integration of Mexico’s people into the United States." In contrast, Hietala's argument focuses on the role of politicians and propagandists as the primary agents of empire and highlights the intention of transforming territorial cessions into states and their inhabitants into citizens, suggesting that the granting of citizenship to people in the territories was welcomed by many Americans after the war.
“It was not automatically apparent how any of the filibustering targets of the post-1848 period could ‘fit’ into an American republic, or even into an American empire. . . . While it seemed only logical to some to simply take all of Mexico as booty [spoils] of the war, cut Mexico up, and turn it into new territories and states, most Americans rejected this idea. They did so because central Mexico was densely populated. . . . Many Americans feared the result of the integration of Mexico’s people into the United States. Critics also doubted whether Americans could be happy in the alien landscape of central and southern Mexico.”
Amy Greenberg, historian, Manifest Manhood and the Antebellum American Empire, 2005
“American settlers had eclipsed the Mexicans in Texas and, with ample aid from southern Whites, had rebelled and won their independence. . . . A small band of Americans, many of them merchants, lived in Mexican California when war broke out in 1846. This dispersion of hardy migrants inspired observers to insist that pioneers and not politicians won the West. . . .
“Pioneers played a role in expansion, but the historical record points to politicians and propagandists as the primary agents of empire. Racial, economic, social, and political factors coalesced [combined] to make territorial and commercial expansion enticing to American leaders. . . .
“Denying any parallels between earlier empires and their own, expansionists insisted that democracy and dominion were complementary, not contradictory. Since leaders intended to transform [territorial] cessions into states and their inhabitants (at least Whites) into citizens, they scoffed at misgivings about governing a vast domain.”
Thomas Hietala, historian, Manifest Design: American Exceptionalism and Empire, 2003
Question
Greenberg’s argument most differs from Hietala’s in that Greenberg claims that
Responses
race was a defining factor in the tensions leading up to the Mexican-American War
race was a defining factor in the tensions leading up to the Mexican-American War
pioneers, not politicians, were a major factor in building the American empire
pioneers, not politicians, were a major factor in building the American empire
most Americans believed that Mexicans in the new territories could not assimilate
most Americans believed that Mexicans in the new territories could not assimilate
the granting of citizenship to people in the territories was welcomed by many Americans after the war