Post two responses to the following prompt: The desire for expansion into the west/southwest completely disregarded any possible consequences that would stem from actually acquiring the land.
Be clear in your stance, and use the days you have to come up with a good response.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
When Polk wanted to claim land in the west, he did not once think what he would do with the land or how to enforce laws in the west. Polk seemed to want an American empire similar to England. Polk didnt care the consequences of taking the land, he just had the desire for land
ReplyDeleteIt seems that Polk became 'obsessed' with gaining territories. At no point did he think of the consequences that would ensue as a result of his frenzied land grab. He damaged American relations with Mexico and by the time he obtained the land in Oregon, the main reason for expansion; the fur trade, had started to dwindle. Overall, Polk did not think his actions through. Instead, he made a desperate grab at any land available and went to all means to secure it
ReplyDeleteI agree with Ricky that America resembled England on their quest for more land. Both countries went to all means in order to get as much land as possible and although it was profitable, it came at a cost.
ReplyDeletePolk definitely did not think about expansion thoroughly. While it might be great for US power and influence, there are many consequences and responsibilities that go along with it. Gaining land, particularly Texas, would cause a lot of unwanted tension between the US and Mexico, and not to mention it would bring up the issue of slavery yet again. Plus, Polk failed to consider the fact that more land would mean the need for a stronger government, better law enforcement, and an even more complicated legislating system. Had Polk not been so set on expansion, he might have thought before he acted.
ReplyDeleteI think Tyler brings up a good point about Oregon, and how fur had started to dwindle. This even further proves how Polk did not think of the consequences of expansion.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Tyler, Polk's greed destroyed any chance of beig allies with Mexico. I also agree his land grab was frenzied and useless
ReplyDeleteBritain did not go out into the world to mindlessly acquire land around the world as suggested above. Instead, we set out to establish an international trade network which did more good for the world than anything else by bringing countless cultures and peoples together for the common good and the benefit of being part of the most powerful empire the world had ever seen. This was working out quite well until the members of the empire somehow convinced themselves that breaking away was a good idea, which basically created the third world. Plus, I fail to see how there was any cost to this, there were no negative aspects.
ReplyDeleteAs to the actions of J. Polk and westward expansion; I really do not think that a president of this country would be foolish enough to blindly takeover land without any forethought of possible consequences. In my opinion, with the situation of the country during Plok's presidency, it made sense to expand to California as the US already had control over the Louisiana Territory, the Oregon Territory, and Texas. In actual fact, there really weren't any consequences so that just proves how the expansion of the country was quite successful.
Because "completely" is a defining and extremely strong word, it is unfair to say that the expansion out west/southwest totally neglected possible consequences. Although there definitely is negative that stemmed from the expansion (and probably more than the positive), such as the slavery issue and international affairs, it must be remembered that expansionism drove America to her current manner—50 proud states.
ReplyDeleteBecause I mostly agree with this statement, except for the use of the word “completely”, it must be remembered that the decisions to expand, as made by Polk and other leaders, did neglect the issue of slavery. The acquisition of land west and southwest increased such tension as there was no clear cut solution as to whether the new land should allow slaves. The Monroe Doctrine did not apply to such land as it was west of the Rockies, and the balance was disrupted. This was seen in the Texas issue, where the north refused to admit Texas because her people used slaves. Whether or not slavery should be allowed in the new land reignited the old issue, thus allowing regional differences to cause division among the nation, once again.
The other consequence that was not thought about was foreign affairs. As a result of the War with Mexico the hostile relationship between the U.S. and Mexico increased in tension. America saw Mexico as land that could be conquered, therefore threatening the security of Mexico. A solid relationship would never truly manifest, especially because Polk continuously desired the land....
...But as I said, the statement is not “completely” true because there was also some positive that Polk's expansionism created. Even if Manifest Destiny was somewhat immoral, it did rekindle national pride. Additionally, even though Polk was obviously unaware that America would end up with 50 states; his expansionist ideas fostered the beginning of America as we know it. Most people acknowledge that acquiring the land in the west/southwest ended up being positive for America...except for of course those ardent haters of the Bush family…but that's trivial in the scheme of things.
ReplyDeleteTo be honest, I am disturbed/confused with first Joe’s remark. I understand that he truly reveres Great Britain, and I have no objection to that, but where is the connection between the British Empire and our question. Our prompt did not suggest that Britain “mindlessly” acquired land, nor did it state that America did that. Polk’s decisions may not have been the brightest at the time, but he was conscious of what he was doing—he was obsessed with the west and acquiring that land was where his passion lay. Furthermore, Joe said that the British Empire did “more good for the world than anything else” however that must be neglecting the effects of imperialism which continue to hinder developing nations.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Joe’s second paragraph Polk actually was somewhat foolish. Although I do agree with Joe that gaining California makes sense, I think it is only because that is how we know America today. While I’m sure there are some Americans who want to continue to spread our culture (as seen in our occupation of Iraq and implementation of the Monroe Doctrine in the 20th Century) that is not in the best interest of the global community. Polk’s decision reflected his personal ambitions, not what he thought was best for America.
If his reign as president was solely judged based on how much land he could acquire, Polk would be arguably the greatest president ever. However, in terms of making well thought out decisions that ultimately benefit the welfare of the nation, Polk was by no means the greatest. Polk expanded the nation vigorously, which did help the international presence of the U.S. However, the great expansion caused various problems for the nation. It damaged U.S. relations with Mexico, and heightened the demand for a larger and less centralized government.
ReplyDeleteI both agree and disagree with Joe. I believe that it is true that the rapid expansion did not cause any serious long term problems for the U.S. However, it did make for some difficulties, in taking care of for the vast amount of newly acquired land.
ReplyDeleteEveryone is blaming Polk for all the fuss that occurred because of westward expansion. But what sparked Polk's interest out there in the first place. Society, that's what.
ReplyDeleteIt was society that forced all those people to move out there. Society formed this manifest destiny nonsense. It was our society, not James K. Polk/his sexy mullet, that encouraged thousands of individuals to move out west, willingly emigrating from the United States. And it was society that made them think that they could just take a stake of land, say "mine" and expect nothing to come of it. Not only that, but the American social dogma made them believe that the government would be at their beck and call, even after they left the country.
People didn't care about maybe inciting war with Mexico. Society just pushed them into playing an intense game of Oregon Trail. Except they really DID die of dysentery!!
Random tangent: I played the Fall Out Boy version of Oregon Trail (Fall Out Boy Trail). It was surprisingly difficult. Patrick died of starvation :(
My response was in defense of a previous comment, just to be clear that im not insane.
ReplyDeleteI believe that Polk did not consider the consequences for his actions of westward expansion. He took fast and careless actions. All he was thinking about was just gaining power and land. He did not once think what he would do with the land or how to enforce laws in the west. And in the end it did nothing but get him into fights with other people.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Taylor that his drive to expand blocked his common sense and had he thought through his actions he probably would not have wanted to expand so badly
ReplyDeleteYes, the expansion seemed to be a first-reaction decision. They were thinking "oh great we'll get more land and then we'll be more powerful," without considering that more land means more responsibility. Polk didn't think about how new land would require new policies regarding issues like slavery which could consequently hurt national unity.
ReplyDeleteI think that the presidents who believed in expansionism were rash in their pursuit of more land and weren't completely sure of the consequences of these actions, some of which included the legality of slavery and the aquisition of Native American land.
ReplyDeleteAlso, I think Joe's use of "we" in reference to Britain is very confusing, and even a little sad. But apart from that, I feel like he is very one sided in his argument...no bad side to Britain's colonization? There's always a bad side to expansion, and it includes those who are being conquered. One cannot actually believe that expansion comes at no cost to others.
During his presidency, many Americans perceived Polk's actions towards gaining new territories in the south and on the West Coast to have been irresponsible and not completely thought out. However, faced with the history of our nation and its past with expansionism, Polk actions actually seem justified. One of the most well-known and celebrated acquisitions was the Louisiana Purchase of the Jefferson administration. It was well known that Jefferson did not plan in advance for this annexation, but instead made the decision on the spur of the moment, which ended up being one of his most beneficial actions in office. Though Polk probably was aware that a repetition of the outcome of the Louisiana Purchase was not likely, the past provided evidence that a rash decision may sometimes be the best one.
ReplyDeleteDuring Polk's presidency he was only focused on aquiring land for the United States. But he did not think of the consequences. He did not once stop to think how he would enforce rules in this new Westward land and this caused problems for him. He soon was left with a vast amount of land and no way to control it.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI also agree with Taylor because Polk's need for new land did not let him think straight and use his commmon sense. He did not think his plan through and the result was chaos in the West.
ReplyDeletePolk's main concern was acquiring land in the west. He proceeded to do this without considering long term consequences. The expansion only led to more issues concerning slavery and international relations with Mexico. He seemed to make his decisions quickly and only for his own benefit. It seems he only wanted to gain the land in order to expand the country and make it more powerful. Unfortunately his impulsive decision only ended up making complicated issues for the government to handle.
ReplyDeleteI disagree with the majority everyone's opinions that Polk acted irrationally. His sentiments may not be popular to us now and his behavior towards the Mexicans may have been unjustified, but he was in reality reacting to the growing number of migrating Americans out west.
ReplyDeleteBasically, it was the people's fault.
I agree with Carly on the idea that Polk would never secure a solid relationship with Mexico. He had already created tension with Mexico by allowing Texas into the US. Then he continuously tried to conquer their land after the war. There was no hope for a strong alliance.
ReplyDeleteI don't think any president has ever "completely" disregarded any possible consequences or complications of his actions. While Polk did provoke war with Mexico, who is to say we wouldn't have acquired the territory anyway? It is true that after claiming California, Polk grew extreme in expansionism. waning to take all of Mexico, but is that really his fault? As Mehlin said, it was society that pushed expansionism. Throughout the 1840s, millions of Americans were migrating west in hopes of buying cheap land and establishing themselves. It was ordinary citizens, not government bureaucrats, who came up with the term "manifest destiny". That said, as Texas, California, and Oregon entered into the union, the issue of slavery was pushed aside. Northern states were worried about increased representation of slave states, and the southern states vice versa. The existing political system began to crack as slavery once again divided people, this time leading to the Civil War.
ReplyDeleteI found it very amusing to read what Joe had to say, especially since he uses "we" to refer to Britain, even though, last I checked, this was America. I also thought it was interesting how he tried to place all blame of current problems from imperialism on the nations that broke away from the British empire. Since we are talking America, iI will say no more on that.
ReplyDeleteMehlin's comment was also amusing to read, just because of the way she says things.
Americans had nothing but consequences in their mind amidst western expansion. The belief in Manifest Destiny, asserted that America had the God-given obligation to expanded its civilization across the world. Pioneers and politicians alike subscribed to this quest, and set out a campaign with nothing but expansion in mind. The pattern they developed was to infiltrate foreign and disputed lands with settlers who retained American values and culture. When the opportune moment came, people like Polk would use the need to protect Americans as justification to take foreign lands. For example, Texas, California, New Mexico, and Oregon were all acquiesced in this manner.
ReplyDeleteMany above think that Polk acted foolishly and impulsively. However, the consequence of war with Mexico was hardly a problem. In fact, knowing the weakness of Mexico even encouraged Polk to instigate war. When the stakes were higher with Britain in Oregon, Polk was much more cautious and used diplomacy instead of war. Thus, it can be seen Americans did evaluate the consequences, it's just that those consequences weren't so terrible.
ReplyDeleteMy opinion on Polk is very rational. Many historians say that the biggest ideal during the mid 1800s was expansionism however I believe he was simply just an elected official gone power hungry. Once he saw the possibility of annexing California and Texas to the union from mexico, he thought "why not more" then before everyone knew it the US Army had captured all land all the way down to the nation's capital, mexico city. Then once he asked congress to annex all of mexico Polk had lost much popularity, the US ended up reaching an agreement with mexico making the Rio Grande the international border between the US and mexico.
ReplyDeleteI think Polk went about gaining land irrational. He had a strong desire to acquire land and did so. However, he had done little future planning. His enforcement of laws lacked and he ended up ruining the US's relations with Mexico. His rash decisions to expand out west/southwest left him with conseqences he did not think twice of.
ReplyDeleteI liked how Tyler mentioned how it was ironic that the fur trade, the main reason Polk wanted to expand to Oregon, started to dwindle when he finally acquired the land. It must have been seen as a waste back then.
ReplyDeleteAlthough he accomplished gaining an immense amount of land for the United States, Polk did not think about the consequences that would occur as a result of his actions. For example, by pursing all of Texas, Polk fractured our relationship with Mexico and the Mexican people. However, I believe that the pros out weigh the cons in this situation because the United States gained so much territory through his expansionist ways. Without all of this land, our nation would not be so successful and diverse.
ReplyDeleteI also like how Tyler brought up the fur trade in her answer. It shows that Polk's main reason for expansion wasn't really concrete and suggests that maybe he should have planned out his actions better.
ReplyDeleteI think it is too harsh to say that the expansionist policies of Polk ignored the consequences that would come from acquiring the land. As we discussed in class, Polk was the last "strong" president before Lincoln, mostly because of his straightforwardness and personal agenda for the country's growth. I think that in order to advocate his policy of expansion, he had to show an uncompromising attitude, but at the same time he did at least consider the consequences of his actions. For example he knew that the Oregon border dispute could provoke a war with Britain and that the Texas affair could start a war with Mexico. He realized that we were better off fighting against Mexico than Britain, so he resorted to a compromise with Britain while he started fighting the Mexicans because it was an easy victory. In the end he acquired both the Texas and Oregon territories. Also, his actions pertaining to California sparked a debate over slavery, but similar to Jefferson's Louisiana Purchase, the sale of land was too enticing. He recognized the possible consequences, but the land was just much more important.
ReplyDeleteThe growing sentiment of manifest destiny inspired people to expand America's borders, pushing society south- and west-ward. They believed they had the divinely given right to extend their territory across the entire continent, seeing absolutely no reason to stop at the borders of the Louisiana Purchase. This mindset was not forced upon the people by Polk. As president, he was supporting the citizens' will by gaining new territories for statehood for their benefit. At first, most people that went to Texas left for more farming land, and because it was cheaper. As for the west, the land was cheaper there as well, and this acted as an incentive for people to move to new areas. The establishment of new states would rouse controversy between states over the issue of slavery, and between nations over territorial borders. However, the drive of expansionism remained, and Polk acted only in favor of what he believed to be beneficial to his country.
ReplyDeleteIn response to AJ, it's a good point to recognize Polk's loss of popularity among the people as a result of the expansion. Although many people were in favor of expanding due to Manifest Destiny or sheer convenience, the conflicts it caused turned many away. The mini-war in the south with Mexico over Texas dragged on, exhausting the support of the general population who kept wondering when the fighting would end.
ReplyDeleteAs others have said, saying Polk completely disregarded the possible consequences of expansion is a little too extreme. The acquisition of Oregon county and California and New Mexico were all items on his personal agenda that he set out to accomplish. Throughout the whole process of expansion, Polk did consider the possibility that consequences would arise, though he also saw the many benefits such as a new access point for trade with Asia. Also, I think the many consequences that did arise, such as the war with Mexico and party conflicts, were more than Polk expected. Nonetheless, the expansion did end up having many positive economic and political long term results.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Melinh’s point that Polk was simply reacting to the political and economic climate set by the people at that time. By adjusting to how society was changing and developing new ideas such as Manifest Destiny, Polk was just doing his job as president.
ReplyDeletePresident Polk definitely did completely ignore the possible consequences. When he was trying to lure the Mexicans into handing over California and New Mexico, but his desire for expansion caused him to lose all rationality and just push the armed forces further and further. Obviously, Polk did not foresee the future issues to come involving the slavery controversy, but if he had I'm not so sure he wouldn't have expanded anyway.
ReplyDeleteAdditionally, why would Polk want to continue fighting if the war was already over? He was already experiencing so many problems involving slavery, yet all he focused on was expansion.
I do see where Tracy is coming from in her response, however she fails to mention the immediate impact of the expansion. Such movement involved the government to try and find a way to solve the free or slave state issue that plagued the other states before entering the United States. Such issues are what led to the Civil War and the unforgettable time when our country was completely divided.
ReplyDelete