Following the Spanish -American War. and espeacially 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.
C.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Anti-Imperialist_League
To understand and answer the question about the arguments made by anti-imperialists following the Spanish-American War and the American occupation of the Philippines, we need to examine the historical context and the viewpoints of the anti-imperialist movement. Anti-imperialists were individuals or groups who opposed the colonization and occupation of foreign territories by imperial powers. In the case of the United States, some anti-imperialists believed that it was morally wrong for the U.S. to acquire overseas territories.
Regarding the specific arguments mentioned, let's evaluate each option and explain their context:
A. The occupation would lead to unhealthy racial-mixing.
This argument was put forth by some anti-imperialists who believed that American occupation would result in intermingling between different races, specifically between Americans and Filipinos. They claimed that this would jeopardize racial purity or the social fabric in the United States. However, it is important to note that this argument reflects a racist mindset that was prevalent at the time, rather than a substantial concern about the consequences of imperialism.
B. Because all war was immoral, the fruits of war were tainted.
This argument is rooted in the broader pacifist and anti-war sentiment within the anti-imperialist movement. Anti-imperialists who held this view believed that any gains or benefits obtained through war, including territorial acquisition, were inherently tainted and morally wrong. It suggests that imperialism, being a product of war, cannot be justified on ethical grounds.
C. Installing tyranny abroad would encourage tyranny at home.
This argument reflects concerns about the impact of the United States' imperialism on its own political system. Some anti-imperialists argued that by imposing tyrannical rule abroad, the U.S. government would set a precedent and habituate its citizens to accept or even expect authoritarian practices domestically. This argument highlights fears of the erosion of civil liberties and the potential undermining of democratic principles within American society.
D. Cheap, imported Filipino laborers would take American jobs.
This argument primarily focused on economic concerns. Some anti-imperialists argued that the presence of a large pool of cheap labor from the Philippines would lead to the displacement of American workers or a decrease in wages. They believed that by exploiting the labor force in the Philippines, American corporations could undermine labor rights and standards in their own country.
In conclusion, the arguments made by anti-imperialists following the Spanish-American War and the American occupation of the Philippines varied, but they generally revolved around concerns related to racism, morality, potential political consequences, and economic implications. It is essential to remember that these arguments reflect the views and debates of that time, and we should analyze them in the context of the historical period and the broader anti-imperialist movement.