The study of history places the historian in a delicate situation. In many cases the result is to take current ideas and plant them in the minds of the persons that existed in the past. The question to be answered about "manifest destiny" is already loaded and now requires some examples to make a myth to explain, or even cause disdain among a group of people and their actions. This I maintain is why the so-called manifest destiny over shadows the reality of the times. In this case the reason that the "West" was settled. The term overlooks ordinary commonsense to explain that a belief that there was a "divine" sanction that caused the United States to stretch from the east coast to the west coast.
What most historians have written is this: When the Harvard educated journalist coined the term "Manifest Destiny" in 1845, it was a description of why American vision was drawn, by God's will, to stretch from coast to coast.
This idea ignores the common sense of the era, and also implies that "divinity" was not on the side of the Great Britain and Mexico. It also takes an opinion poll as to why so many Americans were influenced by two words. There was no opinion poll, and the logic that brought Americans to St. Louis, was not influenced by manifest destiny.
In 1803, Napoleon need cash to carry out his adventures in Europe and Thomas Jefferson ( an "agnostic? " ) knew a good real estate deal when he saw one. At three cents an acre, the Louisiana Purchase almost doubled the size of the United States, but France, for all practical purposes had left North America. Thus one potential adversary was gone.
The West was already in the process of being settled when the Mormons were forces west of the Mississippi. Their founder, Joseph Smith had already been murdered, so Brigham Young led his group, with very "un-American" ideas about bigamy, to Utah.
In 1844, under US President John Taylor, a treaty with China was the opening door for a prosperous trading future.
Around this same time, Mexico and Great Britain were geo-political problems for the US. The British had been negotiating with Sam Houston, trying to lure the Texas republic away from the US.
Mexico was conspiring with the British to give them a stronger hold on California.
The Mexican War in 1846, was not a religious war. The peace terms provided, which was important then as it is now, for land the Mexico could not control anyway.
1846-- US President Polk signs deal with Great Britain over the "Oregon problem". Somehow, Great Britain moved it's Canadian "territory" from coast to coast with no apparent divine approval.
!849-- Gold Rush!
The list is long. When the Federal government was giving away lands west of the Mississippi, it was a good deal for people to make a new start. The lavish land grants to railroads were not driven by the "Lord's Will".
The bottom line here is clear. Americans went on a land grabbing spree because they believed it was God's destiny that they should. This was not the case.
Manifest Destiny gave the people a chance to move west and claim land with the support of the government.
The term Manifest Destiny was first used to support westward expansion to the Pacific Ocean. Manifest Destiny was a popular concept in 19th century America.
The americans support the manifest destiny
Manifest Destiny caused the American people to expand the nation westward.
manifest destiny
Manifest Destiny gave the people a chance to move west and claim land with the support of the government.
The term Manifest Destiny was first used to support westward expansion to the Pacific Ocean. Manifest Destiny was a popular concept in 19th century America.
he belived in manifest destiny
The manifest destiny was the expansion to the waest
yess
The americans support the manifest destiny
Manifest Destiny caused the American people to expand the nation westward.
Manifest Destiny was the theory that America's destiny was to expand West
Manifest Destiny.
Manifest Destiny
manifest destiny
yes