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

Answer 1

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.