California Gold Rush
Turner on 'The West and American Ideals' (Excerpt) (1914)
of the Era: Manifest Destiny (1845)
Corwin Criticizes Concept of 'Manifest Destiny' (Excerpts) (1847)
Polk's First Annual Message to Congress (Excerpts) (1845)
O'Sullivan Calls for the Annexation of Texas (1845)
O'Sullivan on Manifest Destiny (Excerpts) (1839)
of One Traveler's Journey Along the Oregon Trail (Excerpts) (1849)
of the United States
and Clark Expedition
History: The Debate Over Slavery
Article Written: April 10, 2006
Noble Ideal or Excuse for Imperialist Expansion?
By Phil Allard
The issue: Does the U.S. have a "manifest destiny" to expand all the way to the Pacific Ocean? Or is Manifest Destiny merely an excuse to take other people's lands?
- Arguments for Manifest Destiny:
Being more advanced and enlightened than other cultures, the U.S. has a
God-given right to expand its borders. In fact, the U.S. has an
obligation to bring its civilizing influence to the west. Expansion
will also strengthen the foundations of the Union, making it
invulnerable, and is necessary to accommodate the increasing population
of the U.S.
- Arguments against Manifest Destiny:
God would not grant any country the right to expand at the expense of
the native inhabitants whose land would be taken, and the lives of
those who would die in wars over territory. The term "Manifest Destiny"
is merely an excuse for the U.S. to take other people's lands.
Furthermore, spreading too far across the country will weaken the
country's vital institutions, making the Union vulnerable
During the 19th century the U.S. population was expanding at a rapid
pace. For a variety of reasons, intrepid Americans ventured forth to
settle western lands as they heeded the famous words commonly
attributed to New York Tribune
editor Horace Greeley: "Go West, Young Man." Meanwhile, the nation
expanded by acquiring title to more and more territory, whether by
purchase or negotiation or as a result of war. Many Americans began to
believe that it was the nation's "Manifest Destiny" to expand westward.
refers to a concept often used to explain or justify American
expansion, especially in the decades preceding the Civil War (1861-65)
and again in the late 19th century. While debate over expansion goes
back to the beginnings of American expansion in the late 18th century,
the phrase "Manifest Destiny" did not come into vogue until the 1840s. The phrase was coined by the editor of the United States Magazine and Democratic Review, John O'Sullivan.
In an article written in support of U.S. annexation of Texas, O'Sullivan referred to the "manifest destiny"
of the United States to "overspread the continent allotted by
Providence for the free development of our yearly multiplying
millions." (Texas was then functioning as an independent nation. Many
Texans favored annexation, but the territory was also claimed by
Mexico.) In other words, O'Sullivan thought it was "manifest,"
or evident, that the United States was destined by God to spread its
rule across the continent. (While he gave a religious dimension to the
idea, he might instead have said that it was simply right, or natural
for America to spread across the continent.) [See John O'Sullivan Calls for the Annexation of Texas (primary document)]
The notion of Manifest Destiny
explained the mindset of many expansionist policy makers of the time,
who sought to push the nation's borders further west. Political leaders
such as President James K. Polk (D, 1845-49), Representative James
Buchanan (D, Pennsylvania) and Senator Stephen A. Douglas (D, Illinois)
used it to justify efforts to acquire the Oregon Territory, California
and the vast Mexican lands in the Southwest.
that Americans were divinely ordained to stretch across the continent
also likely motivated many pioneers to migrate west. In any case, the
belief was partly rooted in a kind of "romanticism" of the time—an
optimistic faith in human nature and progress toward a better society
and the achievement of great dreams. The idea of Manifest Destiny
was also grounded in part in a belief that Amer