The Rise of the United States as a Global Power, 1890-1920

This work has been verified by our teacher: 15.01.2026 at 18:18

Homework type: History essay

Added: 15.01.2026 at 17:25

The United States and the World, 1890-1920

To comprehend the transformation of the United States from a self-oriented republic to a forceful actor on the world stage between 1890 and 1920, it is crucial to first appreciate its earlier foreign policy stance. Throughout much of the nineteenth century, American diplomacy was guided by the principles of the Monroe Doctrine (1823), which asserted a protective yet fundamentally defensive role for the US within the Western Hemisphere, hoping to ward off European interference rather than seek entanglement in their global rivalries. This stance was underscored by a resolute public and political reluctance to adopt imperialist policies; most citizens and political leaders viewed the nation’s destiny as a continental one, shaped by ideals of self-determination, republicanism, and a perceived duty to democracy. However, over the course of three decades straddling the turn of the century, a convergence of economic ambitions, ideological fervour, international rivalry, and evolving conceptions of national identity propelled the United States into an era of imperial acquisition and global engagement. This essay will chart the complex and contested transformation, examining the motivations behind imperialist expansion, the repercussions of the Spanish-American War, the battles over the Philippines, and the emergence of a new, internationalist role by 1920—a transformation as much contested at home as it was asserted abroad.

---

Pre-1890 American Foreign Policy and Public Opinion

Public attitudes further reinforced this restrained approach. Many Americans were suspicious of empires, having fought against one for their own independence, and considered imperialism antithetical to democratic values. Figures such as Mark Twain, later a prominent critic of America’s imperial adventures, echoed the sentiment that the US should avoid the corrupting practices of the Old World, an idea reflected in the celebrated tradition of American non-intervention, as studied in British A Level classrooms. This background is essential for understanding the profound shift which began in the 1890s.

---

Causes and Factors Behind the Shift to Imperialism (1890-1920)

Economic Drivers

By the late nineteenth century, American industry was booming, with rapid advances in manufacturing and transport leading to overproduction. The closure of the continental frontier by the late 1880s, famously articulated in Frederick Jackson Turner’s “Frontier Thesis” (1893), forced Americans to reconsider how to sustain growth. Turner argued that the closing of the frontier threatened the American spirit and economic vitality—new “outlets” would be needed. The lure of foreign markets—especially in Asia and Latin America—became an economic imperative for industrialists and policymakers alike. This parallels the experience of Victorian Britain, where industrial expansion often necessitated the acquisition of foreign markets.

Ideological and Cultural Factors

The era also witnessed the ascendance of ideas justifying expansion on moral and racial grounds. Social Darwinism, popularised by thinkers such as Herbert Spencer and, in the US, William Graham Sumner, suggested that strong societies were fated to dominate weaker ones. The notion of a “civilising mission”—echoing the “White Man’s Burden”—was invoked to rationalise American intervention abroad as benevolent, if not necessary. This period’s literature, such as Rudyard Kipling’s imperial verse—studied in British syllabi—mirrors the rhetoric utilised by American advocates for overseas expansion.

Influential Figures and Theories

Leading the charge was Theodore Roosevelt, whose robust “big stick” diplomacy and celebration of martial virtues exemplified the new assertiveness. He viewed war and expansion as means to national rejuvenation (“I should welcome almost any war, for I think this country needs one,” Roosevelt wrote in 1897). Equally significant was the work of naval strategist Alfred Thayer Mahan, whose seminal book, “The Influence of Sea Power Upon History,” profoundly influenced policy, advocating a large navy and control of strategic ports. Mahan’s arguments about the centrality of sea power found eager audience amongst policymakers and mirrored similar debates in Britain, where Alfred Mahan’s treatise was studied by the Royal Navy and imperial planners.

Opposition and Isolationists

Not all welcomed the imperial turn. The formation of the American Anti-Imperialist League in 1898, comprising notable figures such as ex-President Grover Cleveland and industrialist Andrew Carnegie, reflected powerful opposition. William Jennings Bryan, a perennial presidential candidate, denounced imperialism as a betrayal of American values: “If true republicanism is not good enough for the Philippines, how can it be good enough for Porto Rico or Cuba?” Critics raised constitutional objections, predicted the economic cost, and feared undermining democracy—debates that echoed contemporary British quarrels over the morality of imperial rule in India and Africa. This tension between expansionists and isolationists coloured all subsequent debates about America’s world role.

---

The Spanish-American War and Its Implications

At the same time, American expansionists saw opportunity in Spain’s other possessions—Puerto Rico, Guam, and, crucially, the Philippines. With Japan’s rise as a Pacific power prompting anxiety about regional competition, particularly after its defeat of China in 1895, advocates worried that the US would be left behind in the new imperial ‘scramble’.

The war's trigger—the explosion of the USS Maine in Havana harbour—exposed the power of the “yellow press” in mobilising public and political will. Sensationalist reporting by William Randolph Hearst and Joseph Pulitzer’s newspapers whipped up anti-Spanish sentiment with the cry, “Remember the Maine!” Despite uncertainty about the cause, this journalism—akin to the role of press in securing public support for the Boer War in Edwardian Britain—was decisive in shaping foreign policy.

The military campaign was swift and one-sided. The naval battles, especially the destruction of the Spanish fleet at Manila Bay under Commodore Dewey, demonstrated American technological proficiency and efficiency. The Treaty of Paris (1898) saw Spain cede Cuba (which became a US protectorate), Puerto Rico, and Guam to the US. The Philippines were bought for $20 million. This signalled America’s arrival as an imperial power, with territories spanning the Caribbean and Pacific.

---

The Philippines and the Aftermath of Imperialism

This war intensified domestic debates over imperialism. Proponents insisted on the US’s “civilising mission”, arguing that Filipinos were unfit for self-government—rhetoric reminiscent of British claims in India or Egypt. Anti-imperialists replied that such language was a transparent cover for economic exploitation and racial domination. Notable writers such as Mark Twain lampooned the hypocrisy, while African American leaders pointed out the bitter irony of a nation oppressive at home presuming to “uplift” others abroad.

---

Broader Impact on US Foreign Policy and World Role (1900-1920)

World War I provided the final stage for the assertion of America’s global role. Although President Woodrow Wilson proclaimed strict neutrality at the outbreak in 1914, a combination of economic interests, moral opposition to Germany’s submarine warfare, and the desire to shape the post-war order brought America into the conflict in 1917. The intervention of “doughboys” and resources was decisive, and Wilson’s subsequent championing of a new international order—a “world safe for democracy”, secured by the League of Nations—offered a striking new vision. Yet, the US Congress’s rejection of the Treaty of Versailles and the League reflected enduring ambivalence about overseas commitments.

---

Conclusion