Consider the following prompt. How successful was the United States' foreign policy towards Latin America in the first two decades of the twentieth century?
Answer all or just one of the following questions: What assumption or assumptions does this prompt make? What do you need to consider to answer the prompt? How would you answer the prompt?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This prompt is assuming that the foreign policy towards Latin America was successful to a degree. One thing to be considered when answering the prompt is the success of the policy in Latin America vs the US and the effect of the policy on elites vs majority and on the country as a whole. Another thing to consider is what the US's goal with the policy was and if that goal was fullfilled.
ReplyDeleteThis prompt assumes that the foreign policy in Latin America was successful. When answering it you need to consider if you believe it was successful to begin with in any area, whether it be in the United States or in Latin America. You would have to consider what the conditions were in both Latin America and the United states before the policies were put in action and what happened in both areas while the policies were in action. To know if it was successful, you would need to know what the goal of the foreign policy was and if it was completed. Obviously the United States gained a lot due to their policies, but financial control may not define success, esspecially since Latin America didn't seem to benefit incredibly from it except for the elite members of their communities gettting richer. In general, you would have to decided what was considered success during that time, and consider all the aspects of both areas to start to answer this prompt.
ReplyDeleteThe prompt is clearly assuming that the United States foreign policy was successful to a certain degree in the first two decades of the twentieth century. Something to consider while answering the prompt would be the success of the policy you mention in Latin America and the U.S. Another thing to consider would be the effect the policy has on the minorities and the "elite" status people and how it affects the country as a whole.
ReplyDeleteWhen answering the question other stuff has to be taken into account. I think the effectivness of the policies has more to do whith when and how they were applied rather than what they were. The interactions between latin america and other countries set up how the latin americans would react to the policies. Events before the policies shaped the latin americans preception of and reaction to the policies. So, the policies could have been doomed from the start which would mean it wanst that the policies were bad but just that the president had bad timing
ReplyDeleteThe prompt assumes that there were indeed three separate policies (this isn't exactly debatable, but it is still an assumption) and that these policies were at least a a little bit successful. Otherwise the prompt would state "Were the policies successful?" instead of "how successful were the policies?" To fully answer this prompt, all three policies have to be taken into consideration, and all perspectives of the polices. The views of the US, including politicians and businessmen, the places where policy was implemented, including the elite and the common man, and if possible the rest of the world's perspective.
ReplyDeleteTo answer the prompt, I would say that the policies were generally successful for US business, especially Big Stick and Dollar Diplomacy. This is shown through the great increase of foreign investment during the time period of the policies. However, to the countries these policies were used in, they did little if anything to improve the nations. This is because it gave more power to the elite and made economies become more narrow (such as in the Banana Republics) than widening them and growing the economies. Moral diplomacy did not succeed very much at all, because the people in the nations generally did not want US intervention (such as with the Dominican Republic). While this is very general, these points would further be elaborated in the timedwrite.
The prompt makes the reader assume that the three policies were successful in one way or another. When answering this prompt, you need to consider all incidents that may have occured within the first two decades of the beginning of the policy and also how it benefitted Latin America and/or the United States. The reader would want to base their answer around the idea that these policies were actually successful.
ReplyDeleteThis prompt also suggests that the policies were only successful in the first two decades of existence and not in the years to follow.
This prompt assumes that the foreign policy was successful to an extent. When answering this prompt you must consider to what degree you believe this to be true and specific evidence to support your position.
ReplyDeleteThe prompt assumes that there was some degree of excess from the United States policies' towards Latin America. To answer the prompt you would need how successful you thought the foreigh policies were.
ReplyDeleteTo fully answer this prompt, one would have to first figure out what the goals of each of the policies were. Were they only implemented to benefit the U.S. economically or were they implemented to reform the countries and increase prosperity in them? Both would have entirely different answers. However, I think one could claim that the U.S. was not successful and still be within the parameters of the question. By asking how successful, it is asking to what degree were the policies successful. Therefore, you could answer that they were not successful to any degree and be correct.
ReplyDeleteI would answer the prompt by first deciding what I thought was the goal of these policies. From there, I would examine all of the different viewpoints and bring them together into my timewrite.
- As aforementioned, the prompt assumes that U.S. foreign policy towards Latin America in the given time period was somehow and to some extent successful.
ReplyDelete- In order to answer the prompt, one would need to consider who was involved in the application of the foreign policy, who it benefitted and therefore who it was successful for. Through this, one would determine the extent and limitations of that success.
- Answer the prompt I would (;-]) by summarizing the intent of foreign policy in general, then examining how each policy accomplished this individually. Then I would weigh the successes gained against the expense in which it took to achieve them.
There are several assumptions this prompt makes about US foreign policies. For one it assumes the policies are successful and leaves out the possibility that they have a negative affect. Also the prompt does not specify what precisely "successful" is. Success in civilizing LA countries or success in advancing US economics or both?In order to answer the prompt you must consider what the US foreign policies were and what events exemplified them in the first two decades of the twentieth century.
ReplyDeleteI would approach this prompt by first listing the viewpoints of historians and assessing the facts around events that are used as examples of the US foreign policies.
The prompt assumes that the policies were
ReplyDeletesuccessful to some extent therefore you should consider not only all 3
of the policies but also all the instances where these policies were applied and
what the goals of the policies were. Other things to take into consideration are the different views of who the
policies effected: elites, common man, businessmen, politicians, and also how
it effected the country as a whole.
The promt given assumes that the policies were successful by the way the question was worded. When answering the prompt you need to consider the conditions of Latin America after the US stepped in and if it had a benefit to them in any way, or if the policies played a negative affect on them. I would answer the prompt based on what the US's intentions are for these policies, and the different viewpoints for Latin America and the US
ReplyDeleteIf I were to answer this prompt, I would have to say that the United States undoubtedly had become a power not to be reckoned with in Latin America. In this case, the overall "foreign policy" was a success; however, some of the steps taken to get to such a level of power did fall through. For example, it is easy to state that the Dollar Diplomacy was unsuccessful. The United States was unable to attain stable control of the revolting countries that made up Latin America. Another policy that did not go as the United States had planned was the "Moral Policy". As much as the US had hoped that they would no longer need to use force to have Latin America compromise on allowing the US to "assist" them. Force was used, and the Policy fell through. In the majority of Latin America/United States affairs, there was never really a time in which everyone from the elites to the commoners and everyone in-between.
ReplyDeleteAs for America’s overall success of the government’s foreign policies over Latin America, it was a success because the US was the major power in the western hemisphere.
One could suggest the prompt does assume that the U.S.' foreign policy was successful when asking the rate of its success. This, however, does not necessarily mean you have to describe it as a positive success; you could answer the prompt by saying it was not very successful. In order to answer the prompt you must consider from whose opinion you are answering the question from, whether it is the United States or Latin America. Most members of the American government would attempt to deviate from the effects of their actions and rather acknowledge their many positive intentions. Latin American leaders, however, would focus solely on the negative outcomes of the United States’ many interventions rather than their positive hopes to stabilize and improve the region.
ReplyDeleteThis prompt assumes that the foreign policies were successful to some extent; but the prompt does not specify what policies and to what degree. I think this prompt leaves out that there were 3 specific policies, so it is necessary to consider what policies you'd like to talk about; and to what extent they were successful, instead of treating them as a whole. You also need to consider how you would define successful; how would an event/example be distinguished as successful rather than unsuccessful?
ReplyDeleteIf I were to answer this prompt, I would obviously choose the big stick policy, dollar diplomacy, and moral diplomacy. I would then chose examples that backs up my viewpoint; which includes events/people/documents that show how the policies were both successful and unsuccessful. (Before hand I would define what successful means to me, and how it applies to the policies). The examples would be chosen by the importance to each policy; the impact it had made on the Latin American region.
This prompt makes the assumption that the U.S foreign policy was successful (to a degree) in Latin America. To be able to answer the prompt I would consider how the dollar diplomacy, big stick policy, and moral diplomacy affected Latin America. Also I would need to know what Latin America's policy's were before the U.S placed their foreign policy in Latin America. And how the U.S policy's affected Latin America. If I would answer the prompt, I would do it by explaining the policy's, and giving examples. I would also tell why or why not is was successful.
ReplyDeleteThe assumption that i can make from the prompt is that, the foregin policy that the US put in place in Latin America was successful to a certain degree. I would consider all three policies, and how each one effected Latin America.
ReplyDelete---Cailie Guyant
The assumption that was clearly stated in this prompt was that the foreign policy was successful to some extent, but you would need to take into consideration how it effected the minorities as well, and to what extent exactly it was successful. In order to successfully answer this prompt, however, i would need to apply the big stick policy, dollar diplomacy, and moral displomacy in the context of latin america.
ReplyDelete-Kiara Johnson
To answer whether or not the foreign policies were successful, one must first take into account the situations that the Latin American countries had placed themselves in first with debt to European and other foreign countries as well as with the constant revolutions. Roosevelt, Taft, and Wilson all felt that they were doing the "right" thing for the Latin American countries while also benefitting the U.S. The prompt implies that foreign policy was somewhat successful, and the degree depends on the success of the "Big Stick Policy," Dollar Diplomacy, and Moral Diplomacy. Each of these three policies had flaws, however, there were also minute positives to each.... Of course one had to be a U.S citizen to benefit mostly... All in all, one would have to make the assumption for the foreign policy having been successful and for whom it was successful. The U.S or Latin America.
ReplyDeleteTo answer the prompt, i would have to consider first the inial ideals that drove the three diplomacys. then i would have to consider whre they applied in south and central america and how they affected the different classes of citizens, their economy, and the country in its entirety.
ReplyDeletethis prompt assumes that they were somewhat successful. then it fails to define what success is, whether it is economic gain or leaving that country better than it was before the foreign policy was implemented. to answer this question i would choose the measure of success that proves the foreign policys to be successful then would have to find some evidence to support that, which may be difficult
ReplyDeleteOne must consider the ambiguity of the prompt; is it asking how beneficial United States foreign policy was for the United States or how beneficial United States foreign policy was for Latin America? Once the answer to this has been determined, I would begin to answer the prompt by stating how big stick, dollar, and moral diplomacy were advantageous for North America or how these policies were hardly valuable to the Latin Americans.
ReplyDeletethis prompt assumes that the Latin American Foreign policy was in fact successful, at least in some ways, no matter how much other bed things or unsuccessful things that happened as well. when answering this prompt one must say every detail of how the US was successful in Laitn America, and then countering it with the unsuccessful things, then saying to what extent they were successful.
ReplyDeleteThe thing i'd first have to consider is whether the policies were successful in terms of economic, foreign relationship or both. i would also have to consider who it was successful for, latian america or the united states. My belief was that they were unseccessful so i would discuss the specific instances were the policies were applied and state with explict facts how they show the policies being unseccessful.
ReplyDeleteWhen answering this prompt, one would be wise to consider the intention of the foreign policys that were implimented in Latin America by the United States; the original ideas backing the policies and how those ideas grew or channged. Another point of consideration would be the presence or absence of military force in Latin America. The original aim of many, if not all, United States foreign policies was for peaceful intervension, but the presence of the United States military would suggest that the policies did not go as planned.
ReplyDeleteBefore one can answer to proposed question, the definition of 'success' in terms of foreign policy needs to be examined. This definition could be seen in two very different ways: a diplomatic light in which the US fostered a positive relationship with the latin american countries, or an economic outlook where the US was able to apply their foreign policy for their own gain.
ReplyDeleteI would answer the prompt by stating that the policies failed. They did not succeed in the terms by which they were originally described. I would then go on to give examples of when and where they failed.
ReplyDeleteThe prompt assumes that the policies were successful to an extent. I would consider all the times that the policies were used and the outcomes.When answering the prompt, I would look at the original desired outcomes for the U.S. and what the outcomes actually were.
ReplyDelete