answersLogoWhite

0


Best Answer

Members of the Whig Party in congress during the Mexican War

User Avatar

Wiki User

12y ago
This answer is:
User Avatar

Add your answer:

Earn +20 pts
Q: Which of the following would most likely have expressed opposition to the idea of Manifest Destiny?
Write your answer...
Submit
Still have questions?
magnify glass
imp
Related questions

What concept of manifest destiny was first expressed by?

John L. O'Sullivan


What is when Americans thought they had the right to expand from the Atlantic Ocean to the Pacific Ocean?

Manifest Destiny.


Who moved in the Oregon country?

groups of settlers who were following the manifest destiny.


What describes the idea that it was God and plan for US expand across the continent?

manifest destiny


What was the belief that God intended for America to extend from the Atlantic to the Pacific?

Manifest Destiny


The phrase Manifest Destiny expressed a popular attitude favoring?

territorial expansion


The belief that Americans had a right or duty to migrate westward was referred to as?

manifest destiny


What was the belief that the US should expand its territory from the Atlantic Ocean to the Pacific Ocean?

It was known as Manifest Destiny and was a factor in American foreign policy during the 19th century.


President Andrew Jackson reflected policies and practices surrounding the following?

Indian Removal, the Democratic party, and "Manifest Destiny"


Does the map represent the old Manifest Destiny or the new Manifest Destiny?

.


The belief that the US should extend from the Atlantic Ocean Pacific Ocean was know as?

Manifest Destiny was the idea that Americans had the right to all the land from the Atlantic Ocean to the Pacific Ocean.


Use the primary sources attached to answer the following question: Was Manifest Destiny Justified?

Manifest Destiny was the belief that it was the United States' destiny and duty to expand its control and influence from the Atlantic to the Pacific. The primary sources attached to this question provide different perspectives on whether Manifest Destiny was justified. The first primary source, a speech given by John L. O'Sullivan in 1845, is in support of Manifest Destiny. O’Sullivan argues that the United States has a right and a duty to expand its control and influence, as the country was founded on the principles of freedom and democracy. He states that it is the United States' "manifest destiny to overspread the continent allotted by Providence for the free development of our yearly multiplying millions." The second primary source, a speech given by Chief Seattle in 1854, is in opposition to Manifest Destiny. Chief Seattle argues that Manifest Destiny is an imperialistic endeavor that will bring destruction and death to the Indigenous peoples of North America. He states that the "White Man” will take their land and resources, and that their culture will be destroyed in the process. It is difficult to determine whether Manifest Destiny was justified, as it depends on the individual's perspective. Some may argue that Manifest Destiny was justified, as it allowed the country to expand its influence and spread democracy throughout the continent. Others may argue that Manifest Destiny was not justified, as it brought destruction and death to Indigenous peoples and their cultures.