Looking back over weeks 7-9, what in your view was the 1)
most common and 2) most effective strategy for American expansion abroad in the
period 1890-1920. Formal empire? Dollar diplomacy? Americanization? Or an
interplay of all three? (80-100 words, by 5pm Friday October 5)
Formal empire was the most common strategy to further American expansion before 1900, as seen when the United States formally annexed the Philippines. After 1900, American influence came to be furthered by dollar diplomacy due to opposition towards imperialism. Dollar diplomacy was the most effective method of extending American influence during this period, because it could be presented as benefitting the states in which America is trying to obtain control. There were states such as the Dominican Republic, that were more receptive to receiving the assistance of the United States when they received a tangible economic benefit and retained sovereignty. The Dominican Republic then became an example of the success of dollar diplomacy, and this example of dollar diplomacy was then modified and applied in Nicaragua, Liberia, and Haiti.
ReplyDeleteAmerica’s experience in the Philippines, where it had to fight a bloody insurgency, ensured that it did not repeat the attempt to establish Formal Empire elsewhere. Informal empire building, by a mixture of dollar diplomacy and threatened (or actual) military intervention on a smaller scale than full invasion (e.g. Panama, Nicaragua, Mexico) were the preferred ways of foreign expansion: in effect, creating countries dependent on the US in America’s geo-political sphere. Americanization was a by-product of this, as the American belief in exceptionalism led to the USA pushing what it believed was a superior way of life – the American one – on foreign cultures.
ReplyDeleteDollar Diplomacy was definitely the most effective means for the US in achieving their expansionist and foreign policy objectives between 1890-1920. Formal empire in the Philippines was established with the primary goal of a foothold in Asian markets but the subsequent bloody pacification of its people and lack of commercial gain made it a Pyrrhic victory. Dollar Diplomacy was a practical policy for advancing US economic leverage and strengthened its ties in the region. It satisfied the US's goal to maintain political and economic stability in the continent under the tradition of the Monroe Doctrine whilst pursuing its own commercial interests without needing to deal with the consequences of formal empire.
ReplyDeleteFormal Empire had been trialled with little success in the Philippines and was discarded because of its failure to secure a niche in the Asian markets and the bloodshed that ensued. The most successful strategy for American expansion up until 1920 within a confined sphere of influence, predominantly in Latin America, was Dollar Diplomacy. This boasted for the United States not only political influence but stabilised commercial interests as well as bringing some advantages to the countries in which the policy was carried out. However in order to reach the wider globe Americanisation became a successful tactic and reached places that Dollar Diplomacy could not. This was more subtle leading up to the 1920s and became vastly more common later on.
ReplyDeleteWhile America did create a formal empire, a more effective and common means of expansion was dollar diplomacy within the American continent. Dollar diplomacy was the preferred mechanism for dealing with countries in Latin America and enabled America to expand its influence throughout the continent. While this was largely successful within this geographical area, America gained influence in Europe through a different approach: Americanization. Through avenues such as international exhibitions and increased world trade, America was able to export American products and ideologies to Europe. Therefore, American expansion was a combination of formal empire, dollar diplomacy and Americanization, with different methods adopted in different continents in order to have the most effect.
ReplyDeleteIn the period from 1890 to 1920 a number of different techniques were utilised to expand American influence overseas. The effective strategy was Americanisation. Formal empire was utilised infrequently, and while it allowed for greater control there was often little economic payoff. Formal empire also faced significant opposition at home and in the Philippines. Dollar diplomacy, the most common strategy, was useful in enhancing leverage in South American countries, ensuring American commercial interests were fulfilled. However, limited military intervention was often required (in the cases of Nicaragua and Cuba). There was also limited spread of American cultural influence through dollar diplomacy. While cultures often adapt American products and ideas to their local market, American products and brands such as Kodak (and consequently ideas about design, lifestyle, values, etc.) spread across the world. Americanisation has also been the most resilient and effective strategy, continuing to this day.
ReplyDeleteIt seems the responses to this question have been fairly consistent, and I tend to agree with what has been said. Initially, the US attempted to establish a formal empire, but the Philippines experience proved costly and generated little benefits in return. This saw dollar diplomacy emerge as the dominant form of empire-building in the period 1890-1920. Dollar diplomacy enabled the US to secure commercial interests within its sphere of influence, and was underpinned by the idea that the threat of the “big stick” could be just as effective – and nowhere near as costly – as actual military force. Elsewhere, the US was beginning to spread its ideologies through Americanization, which became even more prominent after the First World War.
ReplyDeleteInitially, America sought to expand its international presence with a strategy of formal empire. However after this policy achieved little success in the Philippines, generated widespread internal debate and failed to produce the economic profitability expected, it was effectively discarded. America consequently shifted towards Dollar diplomacy as a means of increasing its political presence in the Western hemisphere through use of its economic power. This policy led to the creation of not colonies, but ‘dependencies’ (Rosenberg) and saw America emerge as a dominant power over the Latin American countries. This strategy was particularly effective as it asserted American presence as a stabilising force in the region while fulfilling its economic ambitions. However, Dollar Diplomacy could also be viewed as a means of assisting the Latin American countries in developing and therefore portrayed an image of America as not purely seeking unilateral benefits, but as providing the wider region with stability and prosperity.
ReplyDeleteAmerican expansion abroad during the years 1890-1920 was a result of an interplay between dollar diplomacy and Americanization- it cannot simply be narrowed down to one strategy. Indeed, dollar diplomacy was significantly successful in stabilising the U.S. economy whilst precluding other countries from profiting. This strengthened the U.S. relationships abroad. American advancement of marketing and technology was demonstrated by the significant U.S. presence at World Fairs. The exportation of American technology and culture continues in today’s society- an indication of the effectiveness of Americanization.
ReplyDeleteThe use of soft power has proven to be the most effective strategy in America’s expansion into the international arena. While soft power has not secured further territorial or resource gains, as was seen in previous land acquisitions in the early nineteenth century, it has allowed the United States to cement itself as a dominant international power in the twentieth century and beyond. The acquisition of ‘formal empire’ as a strategy for American expansion has been problematic both in terms of the economic and political outcomes, and in the United States’ ability to reconcile the notion of empire with its historical struggle for freedom and independence.
ReplyDeleteFormal empire was the main strategy for American expansion in Philippines. However it proved to be ineffective and costly due to the vicious war against local insurgents. As a result, American shifted its strategies to Dollar diplomacy and Americanization, the interplay of these two policies helped American to secure its economic and political interests in Latin America. Dollar diplomacy ensured American to gain economic control in Latin America by guaranteeing loans. Americanization as a ‘soft power’ helped to promote the superiority of America cultural and ideas. Therefore American spread its economic and cultural influence to America continent by the combination of Dollars diplomacy and Americanization.
ReplyDeleteIn my view the use of formal/informal empire was the most common strategy employed by America. However, the spread of soft culture was by far the most effective strategy for American expansion. The spread of American culture and products reinforced ideas of American supremacy. Although perhaps this strategy wouldn’t have been so effective if it wasn’t preceded by experiences of formal empire and dollar diplomacy. Particularly the use of dollar diplomacy; making countries dependent on US economic power. I believe this dependence and the ability to view America as saviours of Latin America from big bad Europe warmed the world to the reception of American soft culture.
ReplyDeleteThe use of soft power enabled the successful expansion of american culture and products that reinforced america's dominance amongst the modern world. america's hard power or military tactics helped to reinforce their ideals however it was the informal soft power that proved more dominant out of the two. The successful reception of american culture came from their involvement in latin america, preventing european expansion into the region, the good neighbour policy helped open up surrounding nations reception to american culture and products. Had the united states not intervened in lating american affairs and gained a positive reinforcement from other nations as a saviour, like the worlds police, the nation would not have succeeded in international marketing. ultimately the combination of dollar diplomacy, formal empire and Americanization all proved vital to americas growth both internally and internationally, the reception of their culture and ideals was due to the positive effect they had on these nations through trade, protection and intervention.
ReplyDeleteThe policy of Dollar Diplomacy was the most common form of international expansion for the United States at this time. America desired control over foreign markets in order to expand economically, and so reached out to places like the Dominican Republic and the Philippines in hopes of gaining access to both the Latin American and Asian markets. However, although it was greatly effective, in my opinion America's most effective form of expansion abroad was Americanization, as the soft power effects on foreign nations' culture, education and product consumption have lasting effects even today, whilst Dollar Diplomacy is less evident.
ReplyDeleteThe rise of Dollar Diplomacy as the most constant and effective strategy for American expansion abroad during the period 1890-1920 came in the wake of failures to create a formal empire. Formal empire failed due to widespread uncertainty about whether or not America should expand. The costly encounter with the Philippines, which reaped no substantial reward for America, cast doubt over American imperialist intentions and undermined the strategy. Dollar diplomacy was a soft tactic that saw America engage effectively with the region. Notably, however, dollar diplomacy provided America with regional political and economic advantages, but not widespread international domination. International domination came through Americanization. Dollar diplomacy was the most effective strategy from 1890-1920, but Americanization should be judged to have had the most lasting impact.
ReplyDeleteFrom 1890 to 1920, various methods were employed to further American expansion. Of the three main forms, Americanisation can be viewed as the most common. Americanisation exerted influence over cultural elements abroad through means such as hybridisation. Whilst formal
ReplyDeleteempire expanded American borders across the Pacific to the Philippines, and where dollar
diplomacy proved effective in Central and South America, these foreign policy actions were not as common as Americanisation. In terms of the most effective strategy, this can be seen in dollar diplomacy which had improved relations with the United States' neighbours far better than any other policy during the period. However, it was increasingly effective with the support of the ideas of formal empire and Americanisation during the period.