Reflections on Class Discussion 2/5

While the discussion in class was nice I felt that something was overlooked. I will agree Manifest Destiny is mainly American, however it has existed in humanity for much longer than the term was coined. I'll go back to the beginning when man's most prized possession was land. Countries in Europe and elsewhere went through constant struggles over land, religion, and everything else war could fall under. When man has shelter, man feels safe. In order to be safe one must know enemies, or "others" are far away. The best way to do this is to increase the space between you and your neighbor by acquiring land. Why else did castles have trenches filled with alligators? Germany wasn't a united country until Bismarck came around, and before that it was nothing but over 100+ principalities in constant land-grab struggles. On religion, Europe went on numerous Crusades to try and reclaim the holy land. I feel what we defined as Manifest Destiny is a universal trait, not solely American but not truly universal.

Professor Jackson mentioned when my group was looking for counterpoints to Manifest Destiny, as described by Stephanson, that it is hard to argue against something dubbed as common sense. Why did manifest destiny become common sense? We all know that the whole thing centered around going from coast-to-coast. Yet again, Americans wanted more land, and who wouldn't with the "savage" Native Americans, the British to the north, the Spanish to the south, and the French to the west. America fought numerous wars with all, and what better way to legitimize war with "aggressive" neighbors than by creating a mandate from God to expand West. We found some data showing that not all Americans bought the idea, but the masses still did.