Anti-imperialists also criticized how the United States acted in foreign affairs. They felt that the government acted arrogantly because its citizens believed in racial superiority and had faith in their own culture. The United States foreign policy was defined by the Monroe doctrine. In, “The Monroe Doctrine As an Obsolete Principle”, Samuel Guy Inman discusses the implications and future of the Monroe …show more content…
As described by an article on pbs.org, titled “An Ideal or A Justification?”, early anti-imperialists believed that if the United States grew too large, it would not succeed in self-government, ultimately contributing to the downfall of the nation. This was the primary political position of the Whig Party in the 1840s. Soon, the East Coast and Northeast felt that they would lose power in the United States if the union admitted more states. Finally, abolitionists realized that if Texas became part of the United States, this would lead to more future incorporations of slave territories. John Quincy Adams, believed that the push for Texas was a slaveholder’s conspiracy. This article helps emphasize the idea that originally abolitionists did not identify as anti-imperialists. However, once the link between territorial expansion, and the expansion of slavery was established, abolitionists resented expansion. Expansion was a very controversial issue at the time, and it became linked with slavery. This is further demonstrated by a New York Times article published in 1863, titled “British And Northern Abolition”. The article discusses the occurrences that took place during the process of annexation, and what could have happened if Texas was not annexed by the United States. This article exemplifies that almost everyone voting against the