Talk:Manifest Destiny
From Academic Kids
Copyright (C) 2002 Bryce Harrington. Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License.
There was question regarding the copylefting statement used with this article, since most wikipedia articles do not have explicit copyright statements. The original statement included mention of the notice being an 'invariant section', which was confusing, and has been removed by the author to make it simpler. Since all work submitted to Wikipedia is by default copyrighted by its author, and licensed under the GFDL, this is exactly the same terms as all other Wikipedia material, except for being explicitly stated instead of implicit. It's exactly analogous to putting the boilerplate copyright and license grant in every source code file, as opposed to simply leaving it "assumed".
See Wikipedia:Copyright for more information.
It is the authors opinion that explicit statement of license grant is better for Wikipedia than leaving it merely assumed.
It was agreed by LDC and BryceHarrington that once suitable modifications to the Wikipedia software to include traceability to the original author and permanent attachment of explicit copyright notices to the article without making the original article appear "cluttered" with this extra info, this copylefting will be moved there.
I know nothing about the legalities of this question, so I can't comment on that aspect of it, but I can imagine a situation in which an initial article posted in this fashion could be edited to such a degree that it eventually is not recognizably derived from the original copyrighted material; meanwhile, the copyright notice (the "invariable" section) remains for the original source. This is an extreme case but is theoretically possible given the nature of Wikipedia. That means that the copyright notice becomes attached in perpetuity to an article name (and its editing history) rather than to the text itself, and bears no real correlation to the content of the article. Or am I misinterpreting what is going one with the copyright notice? soulpatch
Regarding having articles heavily edited to the point that they bear absolutely no resemblance to the original article, yes I agree that's a good question, and have wondered about that myself. Now, technically, in order for Wikipedia articles to be available under the GFDL, *someone* needs to hold ownership of the article copyright, so I suppose it makes as much sense that the article originator be that holder, as anyone. If Wikipedia were to be formally organized as a legal non-profit, it could receive transfer of copyright like GNU does, though this would be a lot of paperwork for someone (I wonder if GNU would be willing to accept transfer of copyrights for Wikipedia?) -- Bryce Harrington
--- Soulpatch commented "Article sas way too glowing in favor of Manifest Destiny. Tried to make it more balanced."
Hmm, while I am decidedly not a supporter of Manifest Destiny (is anyone?) I think the article will be difficult to make balanced. I may have made it too glowingly in favor of it to try to tone down my own opinions on it. I've revised it to hopefully eliminate aspects requiring balacing and to make it more neutral. For instance, I don't think the "supporters say / critics say" approach should be used, since its supporters have been dead for about a century. ;-)
While I do agree and am of the belief that the effects upon the Native Americans by U.S. expansionism was genocidal and one of history's most (unfortunately) successful ethnic cleansing events, I'm uncertain if that's an appropriate slant for this article, and have toned down those statements. Like the Spanish-American War, while it was a direct outcome of Manifest Destiny, it's such a thick and deep subject that it really deserves its own article; I'd like this article to simply overview those issues and provide links to the more detailed topics.
Similarly, while I also agree and believe that a lot of the U.S.'s actions of the 20th (and unfortunately, 21st it looks like) century can still essentially be characterized by the philosophy of "Manifest Destiny", they're not conducted under that terminology anymore, so we probably don't want to go into details and instead leave those for Globalism or other appropriate topics, with links there from here. -- BryceHarrington
Proposal... I am new to the Wiki community and would like your thoughts on this idea. Would it be appropriate to add a link to this online novel about Manifest Destiny: [[1] (http://www.etext.org/Zines/Quanta/issues.html)] which is also available as a Quanta magazine pdf at: [[2] (http://www.etext.org/Zines/Quanta/PDF/quanta-jan1995.pdf)].
In the pdf introduction the author states: 'This work concerns the first days of the Mexican-American War, except in this story, Mexico is the Moon, and it takes balloons to get there. I have sought to express the ideology of the "Young American" movement of the 1840s using the unusual model of the solar system of Tycho Brahe. In Brahe's system, all of the outer planets of the solar system - Mars, Jupiter, Saturn - orbit the Sun, but all the inner planets - Venus, Mercury, and our Moon - orbit the Earth, as does the Sun itself. I see this model as an unusual attempt to appease the contradictory ideologies of science and religion of Brahe's era. Similarly, I see the hyperbolics of Manifest Destiny a product of the contradictions of democracy and slavery.'
'During the war, there was much proud democratic sneering at European monarchies and her class slaves, but a bizarre blindness toward the chattel slavery in the USA. This contradiction skews the universe of latter-day Jacksonian Democracy, which repeatedly calls to the American Revolutionary Heritage, expressed not as a revolution within, not emancipation and civil war, but as pyrotechnics of patriotism, as a mob demand to push the uncertain national borders onward into well-defined foreign land. This Napoleonic styled imperialism was an attempt to resolve the intolerable national contradiction through expansion, but only served to make revolution-within inevitable.'
I was noticing that the article needs some major organization. It is entirely void of headlines, and needs some care and attention. I might get back to it later, but could someone pick this task up? - Pingveno 03:09, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)
The war of 1812, and Canadian Confederation in 1867 should be mentioned in this article. The doctorine of Manifest Destiny was a driving force behind both events. See for example: National Library of Canada (http://www.nlc-bnc.ca/2/18/h18-2005-e.html). I need to learn more about wikipedia and the historical details before making changes to the article myself.
From an American perspective, the War of 1812 was fought to prevent the British from kidnapping Americans of American-flagged ships, and to make the British leave the Northwest Territory, which they had ceded to to the US following the American Revolution. Of course, a former friend of mine, raised in Canada, said that she was taught that the war was fought to keep America from conquering Candada. Make sure that you do this in an NPOV fashion. RickK 03:22, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Interesting. Britain banned the slave trade in 1807 nearly sixty years before Lincoln. In 1815 in "The War of 1812 and Slavery" John Quincy Adams specifically complains that the War of 1812 was instigate by "British Naval Commanders" who "carried away from the United States " and liberated slaves". In 1856 Benjamin Drew documents the practices of the British giving refuge to slaves in the War of 1812 in "Narratives of Fugitive Slaves in Canada. Related by Themselves, with an Account of the History and Condition of the Colored Population of Upper Canada".
I can't imagine able to put that into the Wiki and it staying though! --Daedelus 10:20, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Actually, Britain and the United States officially banned the external slave trade at the same time (1807), though the extent to which the laws were enforced is questionable. Slavery itself was not abolished in the British Empire until 1834, following a massive Jamaican slave revolt. Canada never had slavery, but this had less to do with moral goodness of the people and a lot more due to the fact that its cold climate did not support cash crops like cotton, rice and tobacco. (This is also why slavery did not catch on in the Northern states.)
| Contents |
Section/Subject headings?
It seems to me that this article is long enough to be arranged by sections or subsections; does somebody want to perhaps restructure it and put the formatting in? Then it woud have a spiffy table of contents to make the article much more useful. Matt gies 21:17, 6 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Divine?
that stated the United States was divine A preposterous remark!!. Wetman 07:51, 18 May 2004 (UTC)
Not Dead
Some *@$%^!s will not give up the idea. (http://www.unitednorthamerica.org/home.htm) 142.177.24.253 14:18, 9 Jun 2004 (UTC)
- Did you check that site out? It's interesting to read. It gives you the pros and cons of Canada being annexed into the Union. You have to admit, annexation is a mixed bag. It wouldn't be *all* bad for Canada--or else 20% of Canadians wouldn't support the idea, now would they? (see 51st state.)
Large, mainly irrelevant section
Most of "Westward Expansion" does not actually fit under the headline of Manifest Destiny. In fact, the opposite is true. --YixilTesiphon
===Philosophical Underpinnings===
Its obvious to the most casual observer that the JudeoChristianization of the European colonies, including the New World, during the Age of Exploration was a result of a fundamental tenant of JudeoChristianity reflected first in the Covenant with Abraham, which is also the foundation of Zionism. My edits were toward this end but were reverted without comment. If it needs to be made more neutral that's fine but to ignore the referenc to the doctrine of world-wide dispersion and dominion make the section on philosophical underpinnings lack any real depth of philosophical underpinnings at all.
Here is the section I added and I'd appreciate it if people would describe how it could be more neutral and/or appropriate to the article.
The divine imperative of Manifest Destiny was rooted in the seminal Judeo-Christian_tradition tradition of Zionism as evidenced by this quote from the chief rabbi of Amsterdam, Menasseh Ben Israel, in his letter (http://www.jewish-history.com/Occident/volume3/may1845/menasseh.html) to Oliver Cromwell, petitioning for readmission to the United Kingdom:
My second Motive is, because the opinion of many Christians and mine doe concurre herein, that we both believe that the restoring time of our Nation into their Native Countrey, is very neer at hand; I believing more particularly, that this restauration cannot be, before these words of Daniel, Chap. 12. ver. 7. be first accomplished, when he saith, And when the dispersion of the Holy people shall be compleated in all places, then shall all these things be compleated: signifying therewith, that before all be fulfilled, the People of God must be first dispersed into all places and Countreyes of the World. Now we know, how our Nation at the present is spread all about, and hath its seat and dwelling in the most flourishing parts of all the Kingdomes, and Countreys of the World, as well in America, as in the other three parts thereof; except onely in this considerable and mighty Island. And therefore this remains onely in my judgement, before the Messia come and restore our ration, that first we must have our seat here likewise.
Indeed, the Puritans, who would prove instrumental in prevailing upon Cromwell to readmit Jews to the United Kingdom, were the first Protestant sect to settle in the New World, and they did so after having taken refuge, from religious persecution, in Amsterdam. Amsterdam was the same refuge taken by Jews when they were expelled by the Spanish Inquisition coincident with the start of Christopher Columbus's New World exploration in 1492. Thus Manifest Destiny's spiritual origin is to be found in the competition between Catholics vs the alliance between Protestant separtists and Jews seeking refuge in the religious tolerance of Holland (http://www.pilgrimhall.org/holland.htm) at the dawn of the Age of Exploration.
- Wikipedia does not publish original research, which includes novel interpretations and syntheses of primary sources. This is not a reflection on the merit of any given interpretations — Wikipedia is simply not the proper venue. We have to stick to material and interpretations already well-established in traditionally reviewed publications. —Steven G. Johnson 21:29, Jan 1, 2005 (UTC)
- I'll agree that the section I added requires citations but so does the rest of the article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Manifest_Destiny#Cite_sources). To call it uncited POV may be somewhat reasonable but to call it "original research" is rather ludicrous. Its de rigeur to link JudeoChristianity to western expansionism. Moreover Columbus's voyages in conjunction with the Spanish Inquisition's expulsion of Sephardic Jews to Holland, primarily Amsterdam, is frequently cited as the seminal event of western, hence, JudeoChristian expansionism. Jim Bowery 17:42, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Cite sources
The complete lack of references in this article is a serious problem (in an article that is otherwise clearly the product of a lot of work). Especially troubling, to me, is the fact that the article is not simply a recitation of facts, but is rife with synthetic/interpretive statements such as:
- (The Young America movement encouraged by Franklin Pierce had much to do with this.) The Second Great Awakening had much to do with Manifest Destiny.
Or:
- It should also be noted that the doctrine almost always described the white man as "God's chosen" who was bound to displace the "primitives" in his way.
(Whom are we quoting here?). Or:
- The turmoil of the American Civil War and freeing of the slaves stimulated further migration westward to new lands, and it can be argued that incompatibilities between differing ideals of whether slavery had a part in Manifest Destiny lay at the heart of that conflict.
It would be a shame to have to presume this sort of thing to be original research and remove it.
—Steven G. Johnson 03:14, Jan 4, 2005 (UTC)
what?
How could the Madison administration hold that "doctrine" when the phrase was coined decades later?
- Short answer: Because the article isn't very good and needs to be rewritten. --Kevin Myers 16:27, Mar 18, 2005 (UTC)
- Another answer: because the doctrine existed before 1845. People just called it different names.
An Active practice?
In the former years the U.S. spread from one sea to another. My grandparents may recall Hawaii and Alaska - but I've never researched that. It seems that Replication of government style is the only thing that's active. In my opinion, there's a lot of "white noise" the USA is harboring. I'm probly rambling, but is it important that Manifest Destiny stay alive, or is it truly fullfilled? Is this why recent wars have incited the media to imply new teritories will be developed? clearly not if we're only leaving them with their a copy of our government style.
