The Paradox Of American Power

Imperialism is a recurring theme in the history of the world. Stronger countries see themselves as superior to other societies and believe their ways are right. They force religion, government, and practices on countless foreign lands. At the very end of the nineteenth

American Imperialism has been a part of United States history ever since the American Revolution. Imperialism is the practice by which large, powerful nations seek to expand and maintain control or influence on a weaker country. Throughout the years, America has had a tendency to take over other people 's land. Authors like Frederick Jackson Turner, Alfred Thayer Mahan, Albert J. Beveridge, Mark Twain, and William James all distinctive perspectives on U.S expansion and imperialism at the turn of the 20th century.

Imperialism is when a larger, more powerful nation takes control of smaller, weaker nations. The American idea is for freedom. As a nation the United States promotes the freedom of itself and other countries. America once fought for the freedom from a larger, more powerful nation, so why would the government want to go back on what this country was started on, which was freedom.

America wanted to expand their foreign policy to help boost their economy. They felt threatened because not only did they have to compete with countries like Germany and Japan to secure access to Chinese markets. The first foreign policy the U.S. had was the Monroe Doctrine, which closed the Western Hemisphere to further colonization from European countries. This secured the U.S. foreign trade with Central America. The American foreign policy warned European nations to stay away from the Western Hemisphere while the U.S. also competed for trade in the Eastern Hemisphere.

The United States has recognized that local threats have worldwide consequences. Recognizing our global interconnectedness was essential for any foreign policy, especially in a world where traditional borders are quickly breaking down. The Doctrine highlighted that foreign intervention does not need to rely solely on military action. Today, political and economic sanctions are a key part of American foreign policy (Bolinder 2013). The Doctrine also calls for the U.S to lead the international community in spreading peace, prosperity and democracy around the world. It has become the foundation for United States foreign policy and a guidebook for international relations in a nuclear and digital age.

Americas “role” of today is involves a lot of things. They are currently the biggest economy on the planet; they have the biggest military force of all and are also the world’s number one superpower, closely followed by Russia and China. There are`s a lot of things that America havehas to do, have responsibility over and respond to. They are kind of like an example on of how countries should be, though many disagree on with that. But the reason for it is because of the economy. Loads ofMany brands of both clothing and other luxurious trademarks originate from America. They are on the big scalepredominantly a “stable” country and may be perceived asare somewhat peacekeepers. I think that maybe they also think of themselves as these “peacekeepers” or “allies of justice”. And I also think that many other also think like this.

By late the nineteenth century the world was in an Age of Imperialism. The foremost European powers were all competing and swiftly increasing their territorial claims. Americans have always felt the desire to grow and expand the United States, they ultimately proved that with Manifest Destiny, when they settled from the east to the west coast. The idea of expansion overseas was something not new to the United States. The war against Mexico had allowed the United States to be carried into the Pacific and the issuing of the Monroe Doctrine allowed the United States to expand their sphere influence well beyond the Caribbean and into Latin America. American Historian Howard Zinn (1980) says that the Monroe Doctrine was, “Issued in 1823 when the countries of Latin America were winning independence from Spanish control, it made it plain to European nations that the United States considered Lation America its sphere of influence” (p. 297). Also, the very idea of imperialism is deep rooted and is expressed through that very ideal of Manifest Destiny. Bowles (2013) states that, “Many believed it was God 's plan for the United States to control the continent from sea to shining sea” (p. 8). With the outbreak of the Civil War, the idea of expansion and Manifest Destiny would be nonexistent, but this very idea of expansion outside the continent would return into the hearts of many American politicans and leaders at the end of the nineteenth century.

Change is often something that everyone in this universe experiences at one time or another. Change can include and new technical, social, or organizational changes and or revisions. For the purpose of this paper, the technical, social, and organizational changes that occurred in the United States from 1865-1945 will be discussed to a great extent. Usually with change comes a new type of power. For the paper, the reasons for these drastic changes will be used to explain why the American government got so powerful. The first part of the essay will focus on three distinct advances in American way of life. The three items that will be discussed will be the battery developed by Edison for Submarines, The new sights for bombers, and the birth of IBM. After the conclusion of the first part of the paper, the paper will shift gears into explaining why the American government got to be a massive power. By the end of the paper, a thorough understanding of this subject matter will be established.

Professor Walter Nugent, of “California and New Mexico, 1846-1848: Southward Aggression II,” argues that the Mexican War was indeed an exercise of American imperialism. Throughout his presidency, James K. Polk made a promise to the American people to honor Manifest Destiny, expanding the territory of the United States to the Pacific Ocean. Polk was blinded by his tunnel vision, and was more than willing to pay the cost of thousands of Mexican lives (over twice as many as Americans) in pursuit of his goal. The Mexican government was weak, so, Polk took advantage by sending representatives to monitor, what he considered, the borders between their nations. Polk was aware that this would manipulate the Mexican government to strike, spilling ‘American blood on American soil’. This action resulted in support from Congress to declare war; although, many voted in favor out of fear of being considered unpatriotic. Alternatively, many voted in favor of war in order to expand the amount of representatives opposed to slavery. Polk was not considered a strong nor wise ruler, Isaiah Berlin contends that Polk was “a hedgehog, not a fox,” he explains, “Jefferson, FDR, and Bill Clinton were foxes. Jackson, Polk, and George W. Bush were hedgehogs. Whereas a fox has many ideas… hedgehogs, like Polk, have one.” For those reasons, the Mexican war was an unjust war, and a result of American imperialism.

Since the end of the Second World War the United States has arguably been considered the greatest country in the world. The supposed leader of the free world, strongest and most powerful country in the world. The definition that the United States is the ‘greatest country’ in the world is open to discussion and can be compared at many different levels, however, for the purpose of this essay, the term ‘greatness’ is measured by its economic prowess and its hard power. The term ‘hard power’ is defined as ‘a coercive approach to international political relation, especially one that involves the use of military power’. After eight years of Obama doctrine, is it time to make America great again” must be broken down into two parts. What is Obama Doctrine, does it exist and then compare his Doctrine also tackle the quote of ‘making America great again’. This essay will argue that Obama Doctrine does exist and is linked to his foreign and domestic policies. It will also argue that America is still great but for different reasons. It will provide evidence that with the Obama doctrine it has moved from the historic use of hard power to a soft power footing. ‘Soft power” is defined as ‘a persuasive approach to international relations, typically involving the use of economical or cultural influence’. However, even with this switch in posture, the United States has remained great. Albeit for

The United States experienced a period of growth and maturation during the twentieth century. Now, this is not to say that this was the only period of growth, but it was a significant time during which the United States began to establish its military force at an international level. By establishing itself during the twentieth century as one of the world’s largest superpowers, America grew to be respected by most of the world’s nations. America also grew to become much more active in foreign affairs, even in ones that had no relation to the nation. The United States began to look for chances to expand their country, as well as opportunities to benefit financially from these territories. Imperialism is the word that best describes the foreign

     America has been a world power for as long as anyone can remember. But how did it become what it is today? Through decades of racism and greed! Our country is one of the most racist country’s there has ever been! But without it America would be nothing like it is today. Slavery made America and racism made it grow. America has proven itself to be a selfish, greedy, and racist country.

In regards to international relations, power is influence and control one state has over another. Often times, state power is an indication of economic and military strength. According to Joseph Nye, the concept of using economic and military forces to coerce other political bodies is known as hard power. In contrast,

Even Nye, who so fervently espouses the use of soft power, admits to it that soft power functions to influence the ‘environment for policy’ and not the policy itself (2004a). To extend soft power beyond the realm of influence is dependent on some form of hard power to lend it credibility (Fan 2007). To exercise soft power, one must first be able have something the other party ones, be it the recipe to economic success or some form of military protection (Cooper 2004). To put it simply, soft power without hard power is ineffectual.

For the first time, the term 'soft power' has been established by Joseph Nye in the late 1980s. Joseph Nye in his book Soft Power presented a defenition of soft power as follows: ‘A country may obtain the outcomes it wants in world politics because other countries-admiring values,emulating its example,aspiring to its level of prosperity and openness-want to follow it.’(p.5) It is now used frequently and often incorrectly by political leaders, editorial writers, and academics around the world. So what is soft power? Soft power lies in the ability to persuade and attract,whereas hard power