Blog Post 5- Mission and Manifest Destiny: Fact versus Myth

I enjoy watching and reading detective mysteries and trying to solve the mystery with the detective. One thing that is interesting to observe is the way a good detective will examine all of the facts and try not to allow what he or she thinks to be the truth to impact the discovery of the actual truth. This leads the detective to solve the mystery and the audience is filled with a sense of victory for its discovery.  Similarly, Frederick Merk tries to uncover the facts from the myth related to Manifest Destiny, the likely suspect in the mystery of American Western expansionism, and uncovers Mission as the truth to solving the case.

In Manifest Destiny and Mission in American History: A Reinterpretation, Frederick Merk seeks to present a factual analysis of the events and issues related to the expansionist movement in the United States known as Manifest Destiny. Merk is a historian with some admirable qualifications. He was a student of the eminent historian of the West, Frederick Jackson Turner. He even took over Turner’s place at Harvard University (xi).  Throughout this work, he contends that many Americans were not in support of the idea of Manifest Destiny, but the politicians and newspapers used it as a ploy for their agendas, especially in dealing with the Mexican War (1846) and the Spanish American War (1899). He expresses that a “thesis that continentalist and imperialist goals were sought by the nation regardless of party or section, won’t do. It is not substantiated by good evidence. A better-supported thesis is that Manifest Destiny and imperialism were traps into which the nation was led in 1846 and in 1899, and from which it extricated itself as well as it could afterward” (p. 261). He further notes that a “truer expression of the national spirit was Mission. This was present from the beginning of American history, and is present, clearly, today. It was idealistic, self-denying, hopeful of divine favor for national aspirations, though not sure of it. It made itself heard most authentically in times of emergency, of ordeal, of disaster. Its language was that of dedication—dedication to the enduring values of American civilization” (p. 261). Merk clearly states throughout this book that the goal of expansion was not a matter of consensus. Therefore, he references sectionalism as a driving force in the attitudes of the American people towards expansion.  Moreover, Merk uses many newspaper sources and other such accounts and records to present his claims.

Merk notes the arrival of Manifest Destiny to the American idea of expansion, “In the mid-1840’s a form of expansionism novel in name, appeal, and theory made its appearance in the United States. It was ‘Manifest Destiny.’ The term was not wholly new. Phrases like it had been used before, but this precise combination of words was novel and right for a mood, and it became part of the language. It meant expansion, prearranged by Heaven, over an area not clearly defined” (p. 24). Moreover, “It meant opportunity to gain admission to the American Union. Any neighboring peoples, established in self-government by compact or by successful revolution, would be permitted to apply. If properly qualified, they would be admitted” (p. 24). Merk notes that the annexation of “Texas was a perfect example of how Manifest Destiny would work, a pattern to be copied by the remainder of the continent” (p. 46).

Merk notes that the penny press conveyed the propaganda of Manifest Destiny to the American people. It was “the chief purveyor of Manifest destiny to the nation” (p. 57). However, he states that Manifest Destiny “was a product, thus, of many forces, and the vigor with which it was disseminated was a product of others almost as numerous and powerful. But a single force is credited in some writings with having generated Manifest Destiny—a nationalism in an invigorated form, dating from the early 1840’s. This view has been suggested rather than carefully developed or defended. It is out of accord with the temper of the era” (p. 57).  

Merk argues that Manifest Destiny was not a ubiquitous movement with full support. Different sections of the country championed it at different times for different purposes. It was politically divisive as well. He states that “If the test of nationalism be public sentiment, the era was marked by sectionalism—sectionalism emerging from such issues of expansionism as Texas …and the Mexican War” (p. 57-58). Moreover, Merk asserts that: “The period of the Texas crisis was the foreground of the presidential election of 1844. It was filled with the extravagances of party campaigning, of the venom among Democrats, of factional infighting, and of bitterness produced in the sections by a clash over slavery. That a national spirit so strong and unified as to generate Manifest Destiny could have emerged from such a composite of disharmonies is inconceivable. The forces that produced Manifest Destiny were domestic for the most part. They were ample in number to account for Manifest Destiny, and among them one was undoubtedly powerful—the strong taste of expansionists for the doctrine of states’ rights” (p. 60).

Merk’s approach throughout is to present the historical facts and to counter the claim that most Americans shared the same views relating to Manifest Destiny. Moreover, good historical research is of paramount importance. In “American Nationalism and American Historians,” Edward Pessen states, “Since historians at whatever level must not merely recite the historical facts but must appraise them as well, we cannot confine ourselves to reporting the evidences of nationalism in the American past. We must ponder the implications and evaluate the significance of these evidences” (p. 5). However, Pessen mentions that bias is a fact that historians have to recognize. He states, “Anyone who thinks interpretation of nationalism can be done dispassionately or in a value-free or ideology-free way labors under a delusion” (p. 5).

Discovering the truth and trying to discern its implications is an important Biblical principle as well. For example the Bible references speaking truthfully in Ephesians 4:25, “Therefore each of you must put off falsehood and speak truthfully to your neighbor, for we are all members of one body.” Jesus also noted the truth’s result in John 8: 32, “And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.”

                                                          Works Cited:

Merk, Frederick. Manifest Destiny and Mission in American History: A
      Reinterpretation. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1963.

Pessen, Edward. “American Nationalism and American Historians.” OAH Magazine
     of History 2, no. 4 (Fall 1987): 4-7, 19. http://www.jstor.org/stable/25162558.