The US revolution and absolute independence did not come cheap. It came as a result of the immense sacrifices, determination and war waged by Americans with the colonial masters. Of course, there were oppositions, several factors set the pace for the revolution and the creation of the United States of America. A number of documents and early thinkers had influential effects in the drafting of the American Declaration of Independence. The writings of Thomas Hobbes can be classified among these early literatures that helped shaped the revolution, although with some exceptions. In the book, Leviathan, Thomas Hobbes argued that people are not capable of ruling themselves. He stated that human beings are naturally self-centered and quarrelsome. Therefore, they needed to be ruled by force. Other philosophers like John Locke, Thomas Jefferson and so forth had theories that helped shaped the US independence.
John Locke is seen as one of the persons that influenced the U.S revolution greatly. Locke adopted Hobbes’ principles of self-centeredness nature of humans, but he argued that humans have the ability to reason and therefore should not be governed by tyrants. He pointed out in his writing, the "Second Treatise of Government." The government is established to protect the right (life, liberty, and prosperity) of the people. A government that fails in such responsibility can be overthrown by the citizens (American Government, 2008).
The various states in the US drew their individual constitutions after the independence, and America lacked a national government. However, the Continental Congress observed the need for a government that would be able to make decisions with respect to war, trade, foreign policies and so forth. This led to the drafting of the US national constitution. The ratification of the US national constitution was met with serious concerns. The leaders of the Philadelphia Convention had already completed the constitution, but they had doubts that would be endorsed by the states. The Article of Confederation stated that a unanimous agreement was needed in order to ratify the constitution. The differences in views and public opinion about the constitution, two camps or groups of different views came on board that include the Federalists and the anti-Federalists (“Federalists versus Antifederalists.”). The Federalists were proponents of the national constitution who supported a strong and effective central government, and the anti-federalists were local people who feared the negative outcomes of such a strong central government portrayed by the Federalists. One of their major reasons for opposing the constitution was only that it lacked the bill of right ((“Federalists versus Antifederalists.”; “United States History”).
It is imperative to consider that the Federalist – anti-Federalist debates went a long way in shaping the process of US foreign policy. Irrespective of the Federalists' and the anti-Federalists or Democratic-Republicans' stance with respect to the constitution. It would not be easy for the US to act as free and neutral country when it comes to international affairs with the British led coalitions and the violence of the French republic. (“United States History”). US foreign policies were affected by these issues. However, with the instrument of the Jay’s Treaty, the Alien and Sedition Acts and the likes, the US was able to harness the situation to their advantage. The US foreign policy under Thomas Jefferson was a big success because it insisted on free trade with other nations and that both France and Britain would respect American natural rights and sovereignty. The foreign policy was greatly shaped by the hot debate between Federalists and anti-Federalists (" United States History").
Foreign policy is of crucial concern to the United States of America. Most US presidents were very much interested in the foreign policy. Two of the presidents of great interest here are President Woodrow Wilson and Harry Truman. President Wilson’s idea of foreign policy was different from those of his predecessors. Wilson devoted a great deal of his life on foreign policies rather than on domestic policies. His predecessors had imperialist policy in which they believed that America should extend its influence to other parts of the world. However, for Wilson, people in other parts of the world have right to self-determination and should choose their governments and not be imposed with other nation’s rule (“Sparknotes”). Like Wilson, Truman had a different foreign policy from his predecessors. He changed US policy from that of withdrawal from regional conflicts and not directly involving the U.S to intervention in such conflicts. According to him, the U.S would provide political, economic and military assistance and support to all democratic nations under threat from either external or internal force (“The Truman Doctrine.”). Truman has interesting reasons that backed up his policy. He argued that if the Soviet Union wins the Greek Civil War, political stability in Turkey would be disrupted. Hence, political stability in the Middle East, which would ultimately affect U.S national security. Truman further argued that the American security does not just depend on the physical security of the American territory. Therefore, the U.S should not allow the forceful expansion of the soviet totalitarianism. It is obvious that Truman’s stance on foreign policy was backed up with stronger points than Wilson and Truman effectively fought to ensure that the policy is backed up. Thus, one can say that he had a more effective post-war leadership than Wilson.
A careful examination of the events during the Cold War reveals the role played by the United States fundamental American liberal and democratic values. The Cold War that took place shortly after the World War II was a tussle for power between the two major world powers, the United States, and the USSR. However, in an attempt to control the entire Europe and avoid future invasion and insecurity, the USSR interfered with the political system in many European states and even stopped free election in Poland. The US, under President Harry Truman's regime, envisaged the situation as being against national self-determination, violating the people's right, betraying the democratic principles. This also threatening the entire Europe (" United States History"). The US stance can be understood clearly by taking a look at American liberal and democratic values.
An era of great concern in American history is the ante-bellum (before the war) era, which started with the expansion and migration in the western part of the continent (Sage). In the mid-1840s, Americans believed that they were given North American to occupy that they would be free from the corrupt monarchy in Britain, savagery of Native Americans and political instability in Mexico. In addition, they believed "God clearly wanted hard-working American republicans to occupy North America." This idea was termed "Manifest Destiny” by the journalist John Sullivan (" United States History"). The American constitution maintains equality of right and the protection of the people’s right. However, the “Manifest Destiny” or American expansionism led to slavery. In fact, one of the reasons why Presidents Andrew Jackson and Martin Van Buren failed to annex Texas was because annexation of Texas would cause Northern and antislavery opposition (" United States History"). Thus, the Manifest Destiny was targeted at increasing slavery in the United States that is against the basic, fundamental liberal democratic values that stressed on liberty, equality, and justice.
A study of Eisenhower’s regime revealed that he was not the kind of president Americans thought he was before he was voted into the office. It became clear after the inauguration of Eisenhower that his foreign policy was not to go on the offensive in the Korean War but rather to end it. Furthermore, Eisenhower wanted peace, and that was why on several occasions he turned down the recommendations presented by the Joint Chiefs of Staff who asked him to launch a first-strike nuclear attack. Eisenhower named his defense policy the New Look and from his approaches; it became obvious that he pursued a liberal American foreign policy (" United States History").
Dueck pointed out that Eisenhower was obviously a liberal Republican and also his foreign policy advocated peace. However, he pursued multilateral diplomacy that was committed to reining in the U.S military and also preventing international conflicts. Dueck revealed that Obama’s regime is quite akin to Eisenhower’s regime in terms of foreign policy. Just like Eisenhower, Obama is committed to a traditional Republican foreign policy approach.
Liberalism is one of the cores of the American constitution. Liberalism simply implies philosophy, attitude and movement which are concerned with the development of social progress and personal freedom. The United States pursues the concept of commercial liberalism. This can be made obvious by reviewing the U.S governmental regimens in various dispensations. It is imperative to consider that the character of the prevailing form of government in any country determines their liberality. US commercial liberality has greatly shaped the American foreign policy doctrines. A case study of at least three U.S presidents at formative periods in American history would show this.
American's support of commercial liberalism explains the reason, why it takes most of the decisions regarding foreign policies. The foreign policy doctrine of Thomas Jefferson is a good example of this. Jefferson's presidency was dominated by foreign affairs and because of this, he was pushed towards the Federalist policies that were against his political philosophy (“American President: Thomas Jefferson.”). Jefferson was of the viewpoint that the Great Britain should be forced to give the United States favorable commercial terms by placing an embargo on them. The commercial liberalism doctrine of the United States is underplayed an important role in the Jefferson's foreign policy. Americans advocate social progress and personal freedom, a form of governance that would be democratic in nature. It even extends this form of governance in its foreign affairs and activities.
President James Madison (1751 – 1826) followed the footsteps of Jefferson in terms of foreign policy. Madison frowned at the notion of neutrality that was firmly declared by President Washington in 1793. On the other hand, Madison labeled it a "most unfortunate error” He urged on retaliation with the use of commercial weapons against the interference with American shipping and foreign commerce. Much of Madison’s future political career was greatly dominated by the issue of U.S position in the conflict between France and Britain. It is quite prominent that there is a sort of trend of continuity from Thomas Jefferson to James Madison in foreign policy. In addition, the moves can be better understood by noting the fact that the United States of America upheld the concept of commercial liberalism.
James Monroe (1758 – 1831) was the fifth president of the United States of America. Monroe wrote the Monroe Doctrine, which was developed "because the United States and Britain were concerned over the possibility of European colonial expansion in the Americas." . The Monroe doctrine stressed that European powers could no longer colonize the American continents. He tried to emphasize the American independence and the existence of distinct American interest from the Europeans. It is significant to evaluate that concept of commercial liberalism played a vital role in the determination of Monroe’s foreign policy doctrine. Monroe’s doctrine tried to emphasize the essence of the U.S independence and also made sure that this is well obvious in its foreign policies.
The success of the United States today can be well understood by taking a look at the nation-building policies in the past and present. Several US presidents as discussed, enacted policies that shaped the democracy and liberalism of the United States of America. The concept of commercial liberalism was well obvious in virtually all the political regimes and governance of the past presidents. The United States understood that it is a nation under God and that the right of its citizen is important. The Bill of Right signed in as a result of the anti-Federalist movement went a long way to shaping the values of the United States of America and the importance of the fundamental human rights.
The constitution stresses the importance of the fundamental human right. Although it was still followed by fight for freedom, racism, the activities of the Ku Klux Klan and so forth, the U.S was able to emerge as a nation where liberalism and equality is greatly upheld. The United State's history from World War II to present is a very interesting one as it is characterized by a lot of policies which shaped the nation especially in terms of foreign affairs. The World War II brought the United States and the USSR to limelight as the world power, and this was followed by isolationism. A lot of wars followed afterward including the Global war, Cold war and so forth. It can be argued that the World War II made the United States of America as robust as it is today. The power of the United States federal government was immensely increased after the war. The government increased both in size and power. The US did not gain momentum only militarily but also the government increased economically. As a matter of fact, the United States emerged as both a military and economic giant in the world after the World War. This can be argued that the economic and military growth in the United States as seen after the World War II was shaped by the foundations laid by the founding fathers of the country.
President Truman's strategy of foreign policy was targeted at ensuring political stability not only in Turkey but also in the Middle East. The political stability was important to ensure security in the United States of America. It is imperative to emphasize that the same political tactics are being employed in the recent governance of the United States of America. The Bush Administration is a self-explanatory example of this. President Bush ensured that the instability in the Middle East was steadied and also he ensured that terrorism is greatly minimized. The Bush Doctrine, which emphasized on aggressive fight against terrorism, gave an overview of Bush's approaches to combat terrorism not only in the US but also in the whole world. It is imperative to consider that President Obama followed a similar trend. It has been shown that Obama took the footsteps of Eisenhower by being a liberal Republican ensuring peace in the United States of America and beyond. More so, to ensure peace in the U.S, the American government must also ensure political stability in the Middle East and countries whose political instability might affect security in America. The extensive advancement in technology and economic progress have made a lot of nations dependent on the United States of America and hence strengthened the ties in foreign policies.
In short, a careful study of the history of United States of America showed how the great nation got its independence from the colonial masters, Great Britain. It also showed the fuss that took place between the United States and Britain because of the American Revolution. The Monroe Doctrine was strategically designed to let Britain know that it can no longer colonize the United States of America.
The need for a national government became apparent after the states' independence from colonial rule, and this led to the need for a constitution. The constitution went through several amendments and finally the Bill of Rights was incorporated into it. The United States constitution emphasized liberalism that encompasses the fundamental liberal and democratic values including liberty, equality, and justice. The US is truly one nation under God, and it formulated such policies have been shaped through the various democratic regimes of governance. Each president upheld the concept of commercial liberalism, and this is greatly ensured both in the domestic and foreign policies.
Work Cited
“American President: Thomas Jefferson: Foreign Affairs”. Millercenter.org,. N.p., 2014. Web. 7 Dec. 2014. http://www.millercenter.org/president/jefferson/essays/biography/5
Dueck, Colin. 'Is Obama Like Eisenhower? - Ricochet'. Ricochet. N.p., 2014. Web. 7 Dec. 2014. http://ricochet.com/archives/is-obama-like-eisenhower/
“Federalists versus Antifederalists - AP U.S. History Topic Outlines - Study Notes” Apstudynotes.org,. N.p., 2014. Web. 7 Dec. 2014. www.apstudynotes.org/us-history/topics/federalists-versus-antifederalists-/
“Foundations of American Government” [Ushistory.Org]. N.p., 2014. Web. 7 Dec. 2014. www.ushistory.org/gov/2.asp
Sage, Henry J. U.S. History I: United States History 1607-1865. 3rd ed. Virginia: Academic American History, 2010. Print.
“Sparknotes: Woodrow Wilson: Early Foreign Policy: 1913-1917”. Sparknotes.com, N.p., 2014. Web. 7 Dec. 2014. www.sparknotes.com/biography/wilson/section7.rhtml
“The Truman Doctrine, 1947-1952 - Milestones - Office Of The Historian” History.state.gov,. N.p., 2014. Web. 7 Dec. 2014. https://history.state.gov/milestones/1945-1952/truman-doctrine
“United States History”. Microsoft Encarta 2009 Encyclopedia 2009: n. page. Print.
