one
It can be said that wars have existed in the history of many countries, including China. However, the impact of war on a country's development, especially on the promotion of American history, should be analyzed in detail.
/kloc-The American War of Independence in the late 8th century was the beginning of the founding of the United States, and it was undoubtedly a prerequisite for the development of the United States at that time and in the future. However, many Latin American countries, both colonies, later got rid of the colonial rule of European powers through the war of independence, but never embarked on the road of prosperity. It can be seen that war can create a new country, but other factors are needed to build a new country, including the United States. There are countless examples of this.
When the United States was founded, its territory was small. /kloc-After the middle and late 9th century, the territory of the United States extended westward from the east Atlantic coast, across the American continent, and directly extended to the west coast of California, Oregon and Washington, covering the entire North American continent except Canada and Mexico. Undoubtedly, territorial expansion exists objectively in American history. /kloc-there are many ways for the United States to expand its territory in the 20th century, including diplomatic means (the Jay Treaty between the United States and Britain in 1794), capital purchase (Louisiana purchase in 1803, Alaska purchase in 1867), and war (1846-it can be seen that. More important and fundamental,19th century American westward expansion movement. /kloc-At the beginning of the 0/9th century, most of the inland and western parts of the United States were sparsely populated, even desolate undeveloped virgin land. By the end of 19 and the beginning of the 20th century, after nearly a hundred years of economic development, the United States has become the world's leading agricultural, industrial and commercial power. Construction, not war, is the source and mainstream of America's rise and strength.
I remember more than 20 years ago when I was a college student in China, there was a popular view that the strength of the United States was the result of making a lot of war money in World War I and World War II. In fact, long before the outbreak of World War I, the economic strength of the United States began to surpass the European powers such as Britain and France, ranking first in the world. In the two world wars of the 20th century, except the United States, no other country had the strength to meet the huge demand for industrial and agricultural products and arms during the war, except the countries and regions directly ravaged by the war. Once the world ignites a bonfire of war, only the United States has enough economic strength to meet the needs of war, and at the same time, it uses war to turn war into an opportunity for economic development. The so-called "opportunity favors those who are prepared", that's right. In short, the military strength of the United States in the two world wars was based on the economic strength that the United States had formed before the war. Economic strength comes first, and victory on the battlefield is irreversible.
As for the Cold War, NATO led by the United States and Warsaw Pact led by the former Soviet Union once engaged in an arms race. The Soviet Union is no less than the United States in nuclear weapons, conventional weapons and equipment, and the number of military personnel, and has a huge military industrial system. Finally, the Warsaw Pact disintegrated, the former Soviet Union fell apart, and the mess of the national economy was exposed. It can be seen that military and war are by no means decisive factors in the development of a modern country. "War made America" is an exaggeration.
two
Some articles believe that the gene of American civilization is military, and the center of American history is war. "War" is not only a tool of American foreign policy, but also the purpose of American foreign policy. It is inferred that the United States should provoke foreign wars many times in history. As we all know, there are just and unjust wars. 1775 The American War of Independence was a just war of the colonial people against colonial rule. 18 12 The Second American-British War was a war to defend American independence. In the American Civil War, the federal government and army led by Lincoln maintained national unity and abolished slavery in the South. Controversial is the "American-Mexican War" of 1846- 1848. The warring parties held different opinions on the ownership of Texas, and finally Mexico lost its political power. /kloc-The last major American war in the 9th century, the Spanish-American War (1898), was caused by the independence movement against colonial rule in Cuba and other places. The United States took the opportunity to intervene, drove out Spain and took control of the Philippines, Guam, Puerto Rico and other places. This is a rare war in American history to directly compete for and establish overseas colonies. There is no doubt that the participation of the United States in the Second Opium War and Eight-Nation Alliance's war against China was an ignominious act of aggression. /kloc-the most unfortunate military action in American expansion in the 0 th and 9 th centuries was the war against Indians. The major wars and military actions in the United States in the above19th century and before, whether right or wrong, are the products of various factors at home and abroad in a specific historical environment and are part of American history, but they are not enough to represent the theme and basic content of American historical development.
It is said that mankind entered the 20th century, World War I hit the third year, and World War II lasted for two years, but the United States did not participate in the war. If the First World War was an unjust war between imperialist powers, then during the Second World War, the United States stood on the side of justice and fought against the Japanese aggressors and German fascists together with the people of China and the world anti-fascist people. Asserting that "military is the gene of American civilization" is not an objective and fair historical attitude ... War is the center of American history ... ",which reminds people of Japanese militarism and fascist Germany, who used to be militaristic and provoked war disasters. In recent years, some American military actions have aroused great opposition from the international community (including the United States). Especially the Iraq war since 2003 is the most wrong and stupid war in American history. However, looking at American history comprehensively, we should not attack its present life and easily draw the conclusion that "war is the center of American history".
three
Influenced by the "gunboat policy" of European powers in the middle and late19th century, it is easy for people to associate American overseas commercial expansion with military expansion, and think that commercial interests must be "opened by force and realized by force". This is a one-sided understanding of American overseas business expansion. In fact, for a whole hundred years from the19th century, American foreign economic activities were based on agricultural trade with Britain and Europe. Before the civil war, relying on cotton and other agricultural products for export; Since then, cereal products (such as wheat), cattle and pork products have become the main agricultural export commodities. It can be said with certainty that in the19th century, the main source of foreign exchange income of the United States was the export trade of agricultural products, which had nothing to do with overseas military operations.
/kloc-in the late 20th century, American industrial power rose, and some industrial enterprises began to seek business opportunities overseas. At first, products were exported, and later, direct investment was made to set up factories. By the beginning of the 20th century, American emerging multinational companies had factories and sales departments in developed countries and regions such as Britain, Europe and Canada. In the words of an agent of an American company in Britain, it is "peaceful work (meaning industrial and commercial trade) to conquer the world". Opening the way by force, "trade follows the banner" does exist when the United States interacts with underdeveloped regions such as Latin America and Asia, but it does not represent the whole picture and mainstream aspects of American foreign business history.
As for the influence of the war on the formation and growth of American enterprise management system, don't exaggerate and add links at will. The modern enterprise management system in the United States originated from the railway company in the19th century. /kloc-in the late 20th century, large-scale industrial and commercial enterprises began to appear, the unique American modern industrial R&D mechanism came into being and was gradually institutionalized, and the modern management system was gradually formed. The simultaneous progress of industrial technology revolution and enterprise management revolution was a major feature of the industrial revolution at that time. The modern management structure and mechanism established according to the development strategy and needs of enterprises/companies were further improved and standardized in the 1920s. On this point, alfred Chandler, an American corporate history expert, has made a very detailed and systematic exposition. The modern enterprise management system in the United States was later adopted by American government agencies, universities, trade unions and other organizations. Overexaggerating the influence of military affairs and wars can easily mislead us into a correct understanding of the country's development path.
four
As the ancients said, soldiers are also weapons. War has brought endless disasters to mankind, and the United States is no exception. No matter how many people died in the American Civil War, World War I and World War II. The Vietnam War in 1960s and early 1970s not only caused casualties, but also caused internal turmoil and social division in the United States. The high inflation in the 1970s, the embarrassment of stagflation and the rising national fiscal deficit were all related to the long Vietnam War. In the 1990s, the strong position of the US dollar was not the result of American foreign military action, as some articles said, but the long-term economic slump in Japan, the economic downturn in Germany after the merger of East and West Germany, the Mexican currency panic 1994- 1995, the Asian financial crisis 1997- 1998, and the United States. If the foreign military actions of the United States in the11990s had a positive impact on its economic prosperity, it was mainly because it maintained a relatively stable international order conducive to economic development. This is in line with the trend of global economic integration. A few years ago, the author wrote that due to the internal and external policies of the Bush administration, the United States seems to be taking the old road of "guns and butter" during the Vietnam War, which is bound to bring a heavy burden to the American economy. Since the Iraq war, the United States has consumed huge financial, material and human resources, and its international reputation has plummeted. In the trembling voice of anti-terrorism, Americans do not feel safer, but more dangerous. For the United States, military and war do not always "mean expansion and prosperity."
It is far more important for the United States to maintain the existing and relatively stable international order and business environment with the consistent economic innovation ability of the United States than to "expand by force and seize economic benefits." After two world wars in the last century, mankind has matured a lot in dealing with economic interests between countries. The act of seizing economic interests and spheres of influence by force has not disappeared, but it has been spurned by the vast majority of countries in the international community. The strength and good use of the United States are conducive to world peace and stability; Improper use can easily bring disaster to the world. Regrettably, many foreign policies and military actions of the US government in recent years have increased uncertainty, instability and even further hostility to the international community. The arrogance of a superpower, unilateralism, "preemptive strike" and other hegemonic styles, the lingering cold war mentality in the minds of a few people, and the growing tendency to rely on force in international affairs are all deeply disturbing. It remains to be seen whether the U.S. government, like more and more Americans, can recognize the mistakes of the Iraq war and learn from them, and promote the cooperation, stability, peace and development of the international community in a cooperative, diplomatic and equal way.
five
Sino-US relations are crucial. An objective understanding of the historical process of the United States and a correct understanding of the current situation in the United States will help us to handle Sino-US relations more rationally and constructively. Advocating that the essence, purpose and historical center of the United States is war can only further arouse the mood of confrontation between China and the United States, which is not good for yourself and others. The main reason for exaggerating the role of war in the rise of the United States and confusing the country's prosperity is not to lead the country's development path astray. A deep understanding of the real source and road of a country's growth and development can strengthen our confidence in building as the center and peaceful rise. 2/kloc-the burden of human peace and development in the 20th century will still be borne by a few big countries such as China, the United States, the European Union and Russia. Choosing a good burden is a blessing for mankind; The burden has been lifted, and the world is actually very fragile.