Dbq Territorial Expansion Analysis

In every United States’ government policy or law, there are supporters and opponents. Specifically, the United States experienced much controversy over territorial expansion policies and strategies from 1800-1855. Differences in opposition and support of expansion policies were largely sectional, meaning that different areas of the United States had divergent opinions. The most prominent sectionalism occurred between northern, western, and southern states. Western and southern states believed in manifest destiny, the inevitable expansion of the country, whereas northern states did not. This increased sectionalism was a direct repercussion of the clashes between different regions of the United States over the growth of the country. Moreover, …show more content…
Jefferson strictly followed the Constitution, and it did not specifically allow the purchase of land from other countries. Instead of declining the offer, he bought the land and extended the size of the United States. Jefferson was a Democratic-Republican, and angered members of the opposing political party, the Federalists. While many Americans were in favor of expansion, Federalists saw many drawbacks that could potentially devastate the nation. The Federalists deemed the Louisiana Purchase unconstitutional and thought it would expose the United States to Spanish forces. They feared that the unconstitutionality of the Louisiana Purchase would detriment the existing states in the union and cause more unconstitutional laws in Congress
(Doc. A). Soon came divisions between Federalist supporters in the north and the Democratic-Republican supporters in the southwest. The north believed that the southwest was bypassing the laws in the constitution and putting the United States in danger. This first expansion conflict showed the first political divisions in the different regions of the …show more content…
Lands to the west were occupied by Native American tribes, making the land unable to be settled by American citizens. Not only did President Andrew Jackson agree with southern expansionists, but he aided them by authorizing the Indian Removal Act. Since the Native Americans did not acculturate to American society, they were seen as inferior and disadvantaged the United States (Doc. C). Native Americans had neither rights as United States’ citizens nor an advantage to stay in the states. Southern expansionists could easily take Native American land because in their eyes, the land was theirs. As a result, thousands of Native Americans were forced to relocate from southern states to western territories (Doc. D). Anti-Jackson supporters, northern states, and even some western states opposed the Indian Removal Act. Opponents sensed that Jackson and his proponents were trying to eradicate the Native Americans as if they were a pest or disease. The southern and northern treatment of Native Americans in the Indian Removal Act demonstrated contrasting ideals for expansion and an increase in tensions between the different

Show More

Related Documents: Dbq Territorial Expansion Analysis

Essay on Apush Dbq's