1115T 202 Fall 2016 McNeese State Univelsity Instructor: K. Jones

Formal Essay - American Isolationism

QUESTION: Throughout most of the 1800s, the United States was a fairly isolationist nation especially in regards to not intervening in European affairs. Contrast the arguments made by leading isolationists and interventionists (expansionists) in the U.S. from the 1890s to the 1960s. Which side made the best argument overall and why? Should the U.S. have intervened in the conflicts it did (i.e. Spanish-American War, Philippine-American War, World War I, World War II, and Vietnam) or not?
REQUIRED READINGS:

• Textbook (OpenStax) - Ch. 22 (all); Ch. 23 (p. 663-675, 680-686, 690), Ch. 24 (p. 717-719); Ch. 27 (p. 789-797, 813-818), Ch. 28 (p. 827439); Ch. 29 fp. 860-864, 870472, 881-883), Ch. 30 (p. 904-910)

• Lecture notes on U.S. Foreign Policy (on Moodie)

• Assigned primary source documents in the HIST 202 workbook (you must use specific examples from at least four of the six): Document 20 (p. 65) - William McKinley on the Philippines (1898) Document 21 (p. 66-67) - Anti-Imperialist League Platform (1899) Document 24 (p. 71-73) - Woodrow Wilson, Address to Congress (2 April 1917) Document 25 (p. 74-75) - William E. Borah, Senate Speech on the League of Nations (10 November 1919) Document 33 (p. 94-96) - Franklin D. Roosevelt, Four Freedoms Speech (1941) Document 46 (p. 126-127) -J. William Fulbright, The Arrogance of Power (1966)

PAPER COMPONENTS: I. Format (30 points)

1) Papers should be typed. Papers should be no less than 2-3 full pages long and should be double-spaced. Students should use 12 pt font and 1-inch margins.

2) A header is required and should include the following information: student's name, date, class (HIST 202), and instructor's name (Jones). There should be only one or two spaces at most between the header and the beginning of the paper.

3) Students may include a title for their papers. If they choose to include this, it should be no more than one space underneath the header in the center of the paper. The body of the paper should begin no more than one space underneath the title. Titles are optional.

4) Papers should have an introduction, body, and conclusion. The body of the paper should be divided up into separate paragraphs, one for each main topic or point made. The first sentence of each paragraph should be indented.

5) Papers should have a clear and specific thesis statement that does not just restate the main question being asked. Thesis statements can be more than one sentence long, but should also be concise. The thesis statement needs to be in the introduction of the essay.

6) Sources should be cited within the text of the essay using MLA format when appropriate. This means that students should use parenthetical documentation when directly quoting something or when paraphrasing another author's idea or argument. Sentences that convey a student's own thoughts or arguments, or state factual information, do not need to be cited. Citations should include the author's last name and the page number.

7) A Works Cited page is not required. You should only use the sources assigned in these instructions. No other outside sources are allowed.

II. Spelling/Grammar and Style (20 points)

Papers should have minimal spelling and grammatical errors. Please use spell check while writing your paper. Spell check does not catch every misspelled word, so please also proofread your papers carefully for any spelling errors. Sentence fragments, incomplete sentences, run-on sentences, misuse of words, and inappropriate use of punctuation are all considered serious grammatical errors and will negatively affect your grade. Sentences and paragraphs should be coherent, clear, and well organized. If you feel you need assistance with spelling, grammar, or style, please either turn in a rough draft to me or visit the Writing Center.

III. Content (SO points)

1) The main focus of the paper should be to contrast the arguments made for and against U.S. intervention in conflicts with foreign nations. The thesis statement should focus on whether the U.S. was correct to intervene or not and why.

2) In addition to the background information from the lectures and textbook, students must specifically use examples from at least four of the six assigned primary source documents to back up their arguments.

3) Papers should discuss the specific arguments and points made by each author in the primary sources. Students should also discuss each author's point of view (biases, background, reasons why they might have held the viewpoint they did).

4) Students should demonstrate in their paper that they have completed the required textbook readings by incorporating relevant background information into their papers. Papers should not just be a summary of the primary source documents in the workbook.

5) Students should try to address some of the following questions in their papers:

• How did President William McKinley justify the annexation of the Philippines after the Spanish American War? In the document, are his reasons cultural, religious, military, and/or economic reasons? Why did he not the support the idea of giving the Philippines independence? What were the real reasons expansionists in the government (like McKinley) and business sector wanted control of the Philippines? Was it really only for cultural and religious reasons? Or were there ulterior motives behind the annexation?

• Why did the members of the Anti-Imperialist League oppose imperialism? How did imperialism violate basic American principles in their view? What other arguments did they make against imperialism? Why specifically did they protest against U.S. actions in the Philippines? What did they want to see happen in the Philippines instead? What did they accuse the expansionists of
doing? What did they believe the expansionist leaders in the government were guilty of doing? Why did they feel American institutions were in peril?

• What was the main argument that Wilson used to support going to war against Germany? What had Germany done? What rights had Germany violated and why? What was Wilson asking Congress to do and why? What major point does Wilson make about the German people? Why does he not hold them at fault for the actions of their government? What did Wilson outline as the U.S.'s goals in entering the war? What did he hope to accomplish? Why did he believe intervention was morally acceptable position for the U.S.? What does he mention about German

•Americans? Why did he feel the need to mention them in his address? What did he believe was more "precious than peace"? What did he believe the U.S. was fighting for? What role did he envision for the U.S. in world affairs going forward?

• Why did Borah oppose U.S. membership in the League of Nations? What was his main argument against joining? What did he believe U.S. membership in the League would mean for U.S. sovereignty? Why did he not want the U.S. to be in an international alliance with European nations in particular? What did he argue had happened to President Wilson at the Paris Peace Conference? Had Wilson been able to completely uphold his idealistic principles? What warning is his offering with this comparison?

• What did Roosevelt believe was being assaulted and how? What was in jeopardy from this assault? What warning did he provide for the U.S. if it remained unprepared and unwilling to be involved In the conflict happening in other continents? What did he suggest the U.S. do in the face of this assault? What did he state as the "national policy" of the U.S.? What was the U.S. policy towards other nations fighting against aggression? What did he believe was even more important than continued peace and appeasement? What was he asking Congress to do? What did he want the U.S. to do for the other nations fighting against Germany and its allies? What sacrifices did he expect American citizen to make? What did Roosevelt envision for the world after this conflict was over? What four freedoms did he outline as freedoms the U.S. stood for? What did he see as the meaning of freedom? What kind of world order did he hope the U.S. would help create after the war was over?

• What did Fulbright mean by "arrogance of power" and was the U.S. guilty of this in his opinion? Why did he think the military efforts of the U.S. were not necessarily working well in Vietnam? What were the goals of the U.S. government according to Fulbright? Did he believe the president and his advisors to be sincere in believing in those goals? Why did he feel the US. efforts were futile, even though the U.S. clearly had military superiority over North Vietnam? If the American people, government, and military were only there to help the people of South Vietnam, why were the South Vietnamese people so hostile towards the U.S.? What were the Vietnamese people fearful of? How did Fulbright think the U.S. could better influence the smaller, less powerful nations of the world? What was the U.S. government denying the world by interfering in other countries' affairs so much? How did he think the U.S. should be promoting democracy?