The  Official  Teacher’s  Companion  Guide  for  Oliver  Stone’s  Untold  History  of  the  United  States  

 designed  by    

 The  Untold  History  Education  Project  

Eric  S.  Singer  M.Ed.,  Ph.D.      

Lesson  Plan  for  Prologue,  Chapter  A      

 

President  McKinley’s  Rationale  for  U.S.  Imperialism  and  The  Untold  History  of  Anti-­‐Imperialism    This  lesson  plan  is  designed  to  address,  in  part  or  in  full,  the  following  California  History-­Social  Studies  Content  Standard(s):    11.4    Students  trace  the  rise  of  the  United  States  to  its  role  as  a  world  power  in  the     twentieth  century.       2.   Describe  the  Spanish-­American  War  and  U.S.  expansion  in  the  South       Pacific.       3.   Discuss  America’s  role  in  the  Panama  Revolution  and  the  building  of  the       Panama  Canal.           5.   Analyze  the  political,  economic,  and  social  ramifications  of  World  War  I       on  the  home  front.       6.   Trace  the  declining  role  of  Great  Britain  and  the  expanding  role  of  the       United  States  in  world  affairs  after  World  War  I.      11.5    Students  analyze  the  major  political,  social,  economic,  technological  ,  and     cultural  developments  of  the  1920s.       2.   Analyze  the  international  and  domestic  events,  interests,  and       philosophies  that  prompted  attacks  on  civil  liberties,  including  the       Palmer  Raids,  Marcus  Garvey’s  “back-­to-­Africa”  movement,  the  Ku  Klux       Klan,  and  immigration  quotas  and  the  responses  of  organizations  such       as  the  American  Civil  Liberties  Union,  the  National  Association  for  the         Advancement  of  Colored  People,  and  the  Anti-­Defamation  League  to         those  attacks.      Class  Time:  90  minutes,  or  2  traditional  class  periods  (This  lesson  is  designed  to  immediately  follow  the  screening  of  the  prologue,  chapter  A  of  Oliver  Stone’s  Untold  History  of  the  United  States.    The  episode  is  58  minutes  in  length.    Assuming  45  minute  class  periods,  teachers  should,  for  example,  plan  to  air  the  episode  on  Monday,  complete  it  during  the  first  twenty  minutes  of  Tuesday’s  class,  begin  this  lesson  on  Tuesday  after  the  screening  and  complete  it  on  Thursday.      Objectives:        Students  will  be  able  to  examine  President  McKinley’s  rationale  for  U.S.  annexation  of  the  Philippines  in  1899.  

Students  will  be  able  to  assess  the  opposition  that  anti-­imperialists  mounted  to  U.S.  annexation  of  the  Philippines  and  analyze  their  rationale.      Materials:    Supplement  A-­‐1:  President  William  McKinley’s  Defense  of  U.S.  Imperialism    Supplement  A-­‐2:    Platform  of  the  Anti-­‐Imperialist  League,  1899      Focusing  Questions:    What  rationale  did  President  McKinley  give  for  annexing  the  Philippines?    Why  did  Anti-­‐Imperialists  reject  his  rationale?    On  what  Constitutional  basis  did  the  Anti-­‐Imperialists  base  their  platform?    What  was  the  ultimate  outcome  of  the  Philippine  War?    What  were  the  human  costs?      The  Action:    In  order  to  activate  prior  knowledge,  teacher  asks  students  if  they  know  the  meaning  of  the  world  “imperialism.”    Students  have  a  few  minutes  to  answer.        Teacher  defines  imperialism  using  whichever  definition  he/she  likes  best.    For  reference,  Merriam-­Webster’s  definition  is:    Imperialism:    the  policy,  practice,  or  advocacy  of  extending  the  power  and  dominion  of  a  nation  especially  by  direct  territorial  acquisitions  or  by  gaining  indirect  control  over  the  political  or  economic  life  of  other  areas;  broadly:    the  extension  or  imposition  of  power,  authority  or  influence.    Teacher  asks  students  to  come  up  with  examples  of  U.S.  imperialism  based  upon  their  viewing  of  the  Prologue,  Chapter  A.    Students  will  hopefully  identify  American  economic  and/or  political  dominion  in  Hawaii,  Guam,  Puerto  Rico,  Cuba  and  the  Philippines  among  other  examples.    If  students  do  not  come  up  with  those,  teacher  fills  in  the  blanks.    Teacher  asks  students  whether  American  westward  expansion  should  be  an  example  of  imperialism  given  the  definition  of  the  term.    Teacher  asks  students  what  “nations”  were  victims  of  U.S.  westward  expansion,  which  should  lead  to  a  brief  discussion  about  the  demise  of  Native  American  societies  and  cultures.        

Teacher  explains  to  students  that  most  mainstream  interpretations  trace  the  beginning  of  American  imperialism  to  1898,  when  the  United  States  defeated  Spain  and  asserted  control  over  its  former  colonies,  Cuba,  Puerto  Rico,  Guam  and  the  Philippines,  thus  expanding  beyond  contiguous  borders.    Teacher  explains  that  the  class  had  just  challenged  that  mainstream  interpretation  by  entertaining  the  idea  that  U.S.  imperialism  began  much  earlier.        Teacher  explains  that  since  1898,  U.S.  imperialism  has  allowed  American  companies  to  assert  control  over  shipping  lanes,  natural  and  human  resources  across  the  world,  but  many  times  at  the  expense  of  the  health  and  prosperity  of  people  who  lived  in  those  places.    (20  minutes)    Lights  are  turned  off.    Teacher  explains  that  American  imperialism  has  prompted  worldwide  backlashes  and  unintended  consequences.    Teacher  explains  that  one  of  those  backlashes  was  Fidel  Castro’s  eventual  1959  revolution  in  Cuba,  a  reaction  to  what  he  and  many  other  Latin  Americans  deemed  heavy-­handed  and  oppressive  American  policies  and  actions  across  Central  and  South  America.        Teacher  explains  that  leaders  of  revolutionary  movements  worldwide  embraced  Communism  throughout  the  twentieth  century  as  an  antidote  to  American-­style  capitalism,  which  they  believed  was  an  oppressive  system  designed  to  concentrate  resources  and  wealth  in  the  hands  of  a  few  at  the  expense  of  many.    One  of  the  most  vociferous  critics  of  American-­style  capitalism  and  anti-­American  revolutionary,  Che  Guevara,  expressed  his  perspective  in  the  following  clip.    Teacher  shares  with  the  class:    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wj0Fqi0-­KiA    Teacher  explains  that  while  it  is  tempting  to  believe  that  all  anti-­imperialist  sentiment  originated  outside  the  United  States,  the  reality  is  that  a  strong  anti-­imperialist  movement  emerged  immediately  after  the  U.S.  declared  war  on  Spain  in  1898.        Teacher  explains  that  prominent  Americans  including  Mark  Twain,  Andrew  Carnegie,  Jane  Addams,  Grover  Cleveland,  John  Dewey,  Samuel  Gompers  and  William  Graham  Sumner  formed  the  Anti-­Imperialist  league  in  response  to  American  annexation  of  Hawaii  and  political  and  economic  control  over  the  former  Spanish  colonies  of  Cuba,  Puerto  Rico,  Guam  and  the  Philippines.      (20  minutes)    Teacher  divides  class  into  two  equal  groups.    Teacher  passes  out  copies  of  Supplement  A-­1  to  the  “pro-­imperialist”  group;  and  copies  of  Supplement  A-­2  to  the  “anti-­imperialist”  group.    Teacher  asks  students  to  read  through  the  documents  for  homework  and  to  record  what  they  determine  to  be  the  five  most  important  arguments  that  their  respective  documents  make.              

Day  2    Teacher  asks  each  student  in  the  “pro-­imperialist”  group  to  pair  up  with  one  student  in  the  “anti-­imperialist”  group.    Each  student  has  five  minutes  to  convince  the  other  in  his/her  pair  that  the  arguments  outlined  in  their  respective  documents  are  correct.        Teacher  asks  for  volunteers  who  would  like  to  share  their  perspectives  with  the  class.    Students  present  their  positions  and  teacher  opens  up  a  wider  discussion  using  the  focusing  questions  above  as  a  guide.        Teacher  shows  Philippine  War  and  Anti-­Imperialist-­related  images:  http://www.gettyimages.com/Search/Search.aspx?EventId=123400452&EditorialProduct=Archival      For  more  background,  see:    http://history.state.gov/milestones/1899-­1913/War  http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/macarthur/peopleevents/pandeAMEX87.html                                                            

Oliver  Stone’s  Untold  History  of  the  United  States  

Untold  History  Education  Project  

Supplement  A-­‐1:    President  William  McKinley’s  Defense  of  U.S.  Imperialism    

Hold a moment longer! Not quite yet, gentlemen! Before you go I would like to say just a word about the Philippine business. I have been criticized a good deal about the Philippines, but don’t deserve it. The truth is I didn’t want the Philippines, and when they came to us, as a gift from the gods, I did not know what to do with them. When the Spanish War broke out Dewey was at Hong Kong, and I ordered him to go to Manila and to capture or destroy the Spanish fleet, and he had to; because, if defeated, he had no place to refit on that side of the globe, and if the Dons were victorious they would likely cross the Pacific and ravage our Oregon and California coasts. And so he had to destroy the Spanish fleet, and did it! But that was as far as I thought then.

When I next realized that the Philippines had dropped into our laps I confess I did not know what to do with them. I sought counsel from all sides—Democrats as well as Republicans—but got little help. I thought first we would take only Manila; then Luzon; then other islands perhaps also. I walked the floor of the White House night after night until midnight; and I am not ashamed to tell you, gentlemen, that I went down on my knees and prayed Almighty God for light and guidance more than one night. And one night late it came to me this way—I don’t know how it was, but it came: (1) That we could not give them back to Spain—that would be cowardly and dishonorable; (2) that we could not turn them over to France and Germany—our commercial rivals in the Orient—that would be bad business and discreditable; (3) that we could not leave them to themselves—they were unfit for self-government—and they would soon have anarchy and misrule over there worse than Spain’s was; and (4) that there was nothing left for us to do but to take them all, and to educate the Filipinos, and uplift and civilize and Christianize them, and by God’s grace do the very best we could by them, as our fellow-men for whom Christ also died. And then I went to bed, and went to sleep, and slept soundly, and the next morning I sent for the chief engineer of the War Department (our map-maker), and I told him to put the Philippines on the map of the United States (pointing to a large map on the wall of his office), and there they are, and there they will stay while I am President!

Source: George Mason University “History Matters” U.S. Survey Course on the Web,” http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/5575/, General James Rusling, “Interview with President William McKinley,” The Christian Advocate 22 January 1903, 17. Reprinted in Daniel Schirmer and Stephen Rosskamm Shalom, eds., The Philippines Reader (Boston: South End Press, 1987), 22–23.

Oliver  Stone’s  Untold  History  of  the  United  States  

Untold  History  Education  Project  

Supplement  A-­‐2:  Platform  of  the  American  Anti-­‐Imperialist  League,  1899  

We hold that the policy known as imperialism is hostile to liberty and tends toward militarism, an evil from which it has been our glory to be free. We regret that it has become necessary in the land of Washington and Lincoln to reaffirm that all men, of whatever race or color, are entitled to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. We maintain that governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed. We insist that the subjugation of any people is "criminal aggression" and open disloyalty to the distinctive principles of our Government.

We earnestly condemn the policy of the present National Administration in the Philippines. It seeks to extinguish the spirit of 1776 in those islands. We deplore the sacrifice of our soldiers and sailors, whose bravery deserves admiration even in an unjust war. We denounce the slaughter of the Filipinos as a needless horror. We protest against the extension of American sovereignty by Spanish methods.

We demand the immediate cessation of the war against liberty, begun by Spain and continued by us. We urge that Congress be promptly convened to announce to the Filipinos our purpose to concede to them the independence for which they have so long fought and which of right is theirs.

The United States have always protested against the doctrine of international law which permits the subjugation of the weak by the strong. A self-goveming state cannot accept sovereignty over an unwilling people. The United States cannot act upon the ancient heresy that might makes right.

Imperialists assume that with the destruction of self-government in the Philippines by American hands, all opposition here will cease. This is a grievous error. Much as we abhor the war of "criminal aggression" in the Philippines, greatly as we regret that the blood of the Filipinos is on American hands, we more deeply resent the betrayal of American institutions at home. The real firing line is not in the suburbs of Manila. The foe is of our own household. The attempt of 1861 was to divide the country. That of 1899 is to destroy its fundamental principles and noblest ideals.

Whether the ruthless slaughter of the Filipinos shall end next month or next year is but an incident in a contest that must go on until the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States are rescued from the hands of their betrayers. Those who dispute about standards of value while the foundation of the Republic is undermined will be listened to as little as those who would wrangle about the small economies of the household while the house is on fire. The training of a great people for a century, the aspiration for liberty of a vast immigration are forces that will hurl aside those who in the delirium of conquest

seek to destroy the character of our institutions.

We deny that the obligation of all citizens to support their Government in times of grave National peril applies to the present situation. If an Administration may with impunity ignore the issues upon which it was chosen, deliberately create a condition of war anywhere on the face of the globe, debauch the civil service for spoils to promote the adventure, organize a truth-suppressing censorship and demand of all citizens a suspension of judgment and their unanimous support while it chooses to continue the fighting, representative government itself is imperiled.

We propose to contribute to the defeat of any person or party that stands for the forcible subjugation of any people . We shall oppose for reelection all who in the White House or in Congress betray American liberty in pursuit of un-American ends. We still hope that both of our great political parties will support and defend the Declaration of Independence in the closing campaign of the century.

We hold, with Abraham Lincoln, that "no man is good enough to govern another man without that other's consent. When the white man governs himself, that is self-government, but when he governs himself and also governs another man, that is more than self-government-that is despotism." "Our reliance is in the love of liberty which God has planted in us. Our defense is in the spirit which prizes liberty as the heritage of all men in all lands. Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves, and under a just God cannot long retain it."

We cordially invite the cooperation of all men and women who remain loyal to the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States.

"Platform of the American Anti-lmperialist League," in Speeches, Correspondence, ard Political Papers of Carl Schurz, vol. 6, ed. Frederick Bancroft (New York: G.P. Putnam's Sons, 1913), p. 77, note 1.

Accessed on 9/20/2013 from Fordham University, Modern History Sourcebook, http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1899antiimp.asp