ican political and
social institutions and American culture, particularly that of white
America, were superior to the institutions and cultures of other
nations and peoples. [See Historian Turner on 'The West and American Ideals' (Excerpt) (primary document)]
But in order for Americans to keep going west, lands had to be acquired
through negotiation or war. It was also accepted by many that huge
numbers of Indians could be uprooted to make room for settlers and a
transcontinental railroad to link east and west. In addition, struggles
over which new territories should be free and which should be open for
slavery helped to fuel the Civil War.
By the late 1840s, the quest for Manifest Destiny
had led Polk to threaten war with Britain over Oregon. It also led him
to wage war with Mexico in 1846. As a result of negotiations with
Britain and military victory over Mexico, the U.S. completed its
westward expansion. Its landmass, which had already almost doubled with
the purchase of the Louisiana territory in 1803, now grew by more than
one-third with the acquisition of the Oregon Territory, California,
Texas and the New Mexico and Utah territories.
As the notion of Manifest Destiny
played out the country grew by leaps and bounds, and Americans settled
the vast western regions of the continent. In this vein, a Philadelphia
newspaper proclaimed the United States to be a nation rightfully
bounded on the "East by sunrise, West by sunset, North by the Arctic
Expedition, and South as far as we darn please." But expansion was not
unanimously hailed; there were many critics who argued against what
they saw as imperialist expansion, and who warned that Manifest Destiny had a darker side, such as the forced relocation of Indians to make way for white settlers.
Did the U.S. have a "manifest destiny"
to expand its borders to stretch from ocean to ocean? Or was the
concept simply an excuse for an unjust "land grab" of territory that
rightfully belonged to others?
Supporters of Manifest Destiny
used two main arguments. Some advocates believed that the U.S., as a
more advanced culture, had a God-given right to expand its borders.
Such expansion would have a civilizing influence in the west, they
argued. Many asserted in particular that such expansion benefited
Indians and people in newly acquired territories by spreading American
democratic, cultural and religious values and institutions.
Others argued that the territorial expansion that Manifest Destiny
entailed strengthened the foundations of the new union, making it
invulnerable. In addition, they said, expansion into new territories
was necessary to accommodate a dramatic increase in U.S. population.
Opponents of Manifest Destiny,
on the other hand, argued that a just God would not grant a right to
American expansion at the price of the rights and lives of tens of
thousands of innocent native people. They protested that the idea of "Manifest Destiny"
was extremely dangerous since it gave the U.S. an excuse to commit
barbarous acts at will. When expansion led to war, opponents became
even more vocal.
Other critics argued that the
Constitution did not give the country the right to acquire new lands.
They also warned of the dangers of expansion under Manifest Destiny: that the country's vital institutions would suffer as the country spread itself too thin. Abolitionists also criticized Manifest Destiny because they believed it would increase the possibility of the spread of slavery.
When the Constitution was adopted in 1787, the nation consisted of 13
colonies located in the East. In 1803, the country's landmass nearly
doubled when the U.S. bought two million square miles of land from
France in the Louisiana Purchase. The purchase extended the U.S. from
the Mississippi River to the Rocky Mountains and from the Gulf of
Mexico to the Canadian border. The following year, President Thomas
Jefferson (D, 1801-09) commissioned Meriwether Lewis and William Clark
to explore the territory, and accounts of their exploration began to
enthrall much of the country.
Many Americans were happy with the land p