Notes:Para 01 : What was happening in the year 1898 in context of the 1898-USA
Para 02 : The prelude events - 1898 - how USA remained isolationist
Para 03: The reasons for change : Isolationist to Imperialist ; Major : Economy & Minor: Defense
1. Which of the following statements best explains America’s sudden shift from isolationism to imperialism?A) America was becoming a manufacturing nation, requiring markets for the disposal of surplus products. - this is partly true , they were also looking out for foreign investments.
B) The United States had an over-exaggerated opinion on the progress made towards industrialization. - USA's opinion is not mentioned in the passage . The passage only says USA mfg o/p is growing and getting surplus.
C) Markets and investment fields of the world were being divided up among the United States' rivals in Europe. - Again this is not explicitly mentioned.
D) America required overseas territorial possessions in order to encroach on the lands of its enemies. - this is true , but according to the last paragraph this is not the only reason.
E) The United States changed its foreign policy because the country was undergoing a commercial and industrial revolution. - The passage clearly says
"Economic motives played a greater part. As a result of the Industrial Revolution, merchants had begun to think in terms of foreign markets and the US financiers in terms of foreign investments. The growing population had made increasing demands upon food products, leaving less to be exported, and at the same time exports of manufactures had increased."2. Which of the following best describes the purpose of the third paragraph of the passage?A) to explain how military considerations were responsible for the rise of imperialism. - Defense is only a part of the third paragraph.
B) to describe the foundations of the Industrial Revolution and its effect on America. - Again this is only a part of what of the third paragraph intends to say.
C) to outline the territories affected by America's foreign policy decisions in the post-Civil War years. - more outlined in 2nd paragraph. Some of those teretorries were acquired , but that is a part of defense strategy which is again the secondary reason for the aggregate policy shift.
D) to use the Monroe Doctrine as a metaphor for America's growing imperialism. - This is just an example to reason some new acquisitions as a part of defense strategy which is again the secondary reason for the aggregate policy shift.
E) to provide the major and minor reasons behind the United States' policy shift in 1898. - Third paragraph truly mentions two reasons. It also inherently classifies them as major and minor.
"this change in foreign policy was due to military considerations..........................Such strategic considerations, however, do not explain the whole of the new imperialistic policy. Economic motives played a greater part.............................." ......
Thus Major : Economy & Minor: Defence3. Which of the following inferences is best supported by the passage?A) The United States did not actively pursue new territories until 1898. - The whole RC starts exclusively saying that USA started its imperialistic view from 1898. Later the passage mentions that earlier than 1898..... USA declined all the opportunities to become imperialist. Hence, neither actively nor inactively it pursued imperialism. Rather , it remained isolationist. SO this option is going in the other way.
B) America declined Sweden's proposal to purchase its West Indian territory for largely economic reasons. - Although the 2nd paragraph mentions USA's denial to purchase WIT , but never mentioned the reason for denial.
C) The United States was threatened by the economic success of countries such as Panama and Cuba. - No !! The passage mentions that those two were defence strategic points.
D) Prior to 1898, the United States political leadership had largely pursued an isolationist strategy. - The 2nd para(entire) & the first paragraph(in part) mention the isolationist view of USA prior to 1898. Moreover, the whole RC starts exclusively with
"In the year 1898, the United States made its earliest plunge into imperialism. For the first time, the nation secured overseas lands,....... ".........
Hence the answer.E) The motivations of American financiers were influenced at least in part by the military. - This is not mentioned in the passage. For policy shift, the author , however , has shown two clear causes : namely, economy & defense.
4. Which of the following is the author's overall goal in composing this passage?A) To discuss the various changes in the US foreign policy at the end of the 19th century. - Definitely this is a reason, But this is a partial reason. The passage mainly wanted to discuss a policy change. In doing so it first explained the situation at a time frame,1898.... then provided some historical context & reasoning of the same prior to that time frame. And then finally have explained reasons why the change happened at that particular time.
B) To present the reasons responsible for a new foreign policy development in a historical context. - The passage mainly wanted to discuss a policy change. In doing so it first explained the situation at a time frame,1898.... then provided some historical context & reasoning of the same prior to that time frame. And then finally have explained reasons why the change happened at that particular time.
AS per my analysis below is the structure of the RC:
Para 01 : What was happening in the year 1898 in context of the 1898-USA
Para 02 : The prelude events - 1898 - how USA remained isolationist
Para 03: The reasons for change : Isolationist to Imperialist ; Major : Economy & Minor: DefenseC) To ascribe a shift in the US foreign policy to economic as well as militaristic considerations. - This is explained in 3rd paragraph only.
D) To contrast two different causes for a major adjustment in US foreign policy - Again, this is explained in 3rd paragraph only.
E) To highlight the unfair annexation of three countries by the US during the late nineteenth century. - In the whole passage nowhere it was mentioned that any acquisition happened unfairly. Mentions of acquisitions are there ....... but that is not what the passage is about.