Discussion Topic
John O'Sullivan's Manifest Destiny and Support for Expansion
Summary:
John O'Sullivan coined the term "manifest destiny" in 1845, asserting that the United States was divinely destined to expand across North America. He believed this expansion would spread American ideals of liberty and representative government. In his article "Annexation," O'Sullivan supported the U.S. annexation of Texas and eventual expansion into California, arguing that such actions were aligned with God's will and the natural rights of people seeking self-governance. He also advocated for continental railroads to unify the nation.
What did John O'Sullivan mean by "manifest destiny"?
John O'Sullivan first used the term in 1845 in an article for the Democratic Review. In his article, he argued for the United States to annex the Republic of Texas because the United States had a divine purpose to spread across the entire continent. At the time, the nation was in the midst of a fierce debate over the direction of the nation. Many Democrats, of which O'Sullivan was one, advocated a vision first articulated by Andrew Jackson which was rooted in conquest and territorial expansion. On the other side, Whigs advocated moral and social reform, not imperialism, and therefore opposed annexing Texas and the war with Mexico. Abraham Lincoln, who was a young lawyer at the time, fell into this camp.
O'Sullivan believed the United States had a destiny not only to spread its borders but to bring its people and to "civilize" the lands inhabited by Indians...
Unlock This Answer Now
Start your 48-hour free trial and get ahead in class. Boost your grades with access to expert answers and top-tier study guides. Thousands of students are already mastering their assignments—don't miss out. Cancel anytime.
Already a member? Log in here.
and Mexicans by spreading liberty through representative government.
Why did John O'Sullivan support expansion in his 1845 article "Annexation"? How did "manifest destiny" factor into his argument?
In 1845, journalist John O'Sullivan coined the term “manifest destiny” to argue that the United States was destined to spread across North America and introduce its customs and government to all parts of the continent. Let's look at his arguments in more detail.
A few years before, in 1839, O'Sullivan had already declared that the United States was “destined to be the great nation of futurity.” Its principles were the highest and most perfect. Its laws and morals were the best. Its government was closest to the ideal. It was a “friend of human liberty, civilization, and refinement.” Therefore, its greatness was bound to spread. This was God's will, O'Sullivan declared.
Then in 1845, O'Sullivan supported the annexation Texas by the United States. Texas had freed itself from Mexico, and the United States was under no obligation toward Mexico with regard to Texas any longer. The people of Texas had spoken, and the choice was theirs. O'Sullivan speculated that California would likely be the next area to gain independence from Mexico. The people there were Americans, and they wanted self-government and freedom to practice their own customs. Such was their right, O'Sullivan argued. Then, when they had taken their independence, they could choose to unite with other Americans. Such was their right. Mexico would have no say in the matter.
O'Sullivan advocated the expansion of railroads across the continent to help connect various locations and make “the Empires of the Atlantic and Pacific...flow together into one.” This railroad “cannot remain long unbuilt,” he noted, for it would bind the country together and make for easier expansion.
References