Assess American policy regarding treating the wounded during the Mexican War versus the American Civil War

by | May 20, 2025 | Analysis

 

Assess American policy regarding treating the wounded during the Mexican War versus the American Civil War. What are some similarities and differences?

Sample solution

Dante Alighieri played a critical role in the literature world through his poem Divine Comedy that was written in the 14th century. The poem contains Inferno, Purgatorio, and Paradiso. The Inferno is a description of the nine circles of torment that are found on the earth. It depicts the realms of the people that have gone against the spiritual values and who, instead, have chosen bestial appetite, violence, or fraud and malice. The nine circles of hell are limbo, lust, gluttony, greed and wrath. Others are heresy, violence, fraud, and treachery. The purpose of this paper is to examine the Dante’s Inferno in the perspective of its portrayal of God’s image and the justification of hell. 

In this epic poem, God is portrayed as a super being guilty of multiple weaknesses including being egotistic, unjust, and hypocritical. Dante, in this poem, depicts God as being more human than divine by challenging God’s omnipotence. Additionally, the manner in which Dante describes Hell is in full contradiction to the morals of God as written in the Bible. When god arranges Hell to flatter Himself, He commits egotism, a sin that is common among human beings (Cheney, 2016). The weakness is depicted in Limbo and on the Gate of Hell where, for instance, God sends those who do not worship Him to Hell. This implies that failure to worship Him is a sin.


This question has been answered

God is also depicted as lacking justice in His actions thus removing the godly image. The injustice is portrayed by the manner in which the sodomites and opportunists are treated. The opportunists are subjected to banner chasing in their lives after death followed by being stung by insects and maggots. They are known to having done neither good nor bad during their lifetimes and, therefore, justice could have demanded that they be granted a neutral punishment having lived a neutral life. The sodomites are also punished unfairly by God when Brunetto Lattini is condemned to hell despite being a good leader (Babor, T. F., McGovern, T., & Robaina, K. (2017). While he commited sodomy, God chooses to ignore all the other good deeds that Brunetto did.

Finally, God is also portrayed as being hypocritical in His actions, a sin that further diminishes His godliness and makes Him more human. A case in point is when God condemns the sin of egotism and goes ahead to commit it repeatedly. Proverbs 29:23 states that “arrogance will bring your downfall, but if you are humble, you will be respected.” When Slattery condemns Dante’s human state as being weak, doubtful, and limited, he is proving God’s hypocrisy because He is also human (Verdicchio, 2015). The actions of God in Hell as portrayed by Dante are inconsistent with the Biblical literature. Both Dante and God are prone to making mistakes, something common among human beings thus making God more human.

To wrap it up, Dante portrays God is more human since He commits the same sins that humans commit: egotism, hypocrisy, and injustice. Hell is justified as being a destination for victims of the mistakes committed by God. The Hell is presented as being a totally different place as compared to what is written about it in the Bible. As a result, reading through the text gives an image of God who is prone to the very mistakes common to humans thus ripping Him off His lofty status of divine and, instead, making Him a mere human. Whether or not Dante did it intentionally is subject to debate but one thing is clear in the poem: the misconstrued notion of God is revealed to future generations.

 

References

Babor, T. F., McGovern, T., & Robaina, K. (2017). Dante’s inferno: Seven deadly sins in scientific publishing and how to avoid them. Addiction Science: A Guide for the Perplexed, 267.

Cheney, L. D. G. (2016). Illustrations for Dante’s Inferno: A Comparative Study of Sandro Botticelli, Giovanni Stradano, and Federico Zuccaro. Cultural and Religious Studies, 4(8), 487.

Verdicchio, M. (2015). Irony and Desire in Dante’s” Inferno” 27. Italica, 285-297.

The Lewis and Clark Expedition (1804-1806)

  • Overview: Commissioned by President Thomas Jefferson after the Louisiana Purchase, the Lewis and Clark Expedition (the Corps of Discovery) explored the newly acquired territory and sought a navigable water route to the Pacific Ocean. Its goals included mapping the territory, studying its flora, fauna, and geology, and establishing relations with Native American tribes.
  • Effects of Manifest Destiny:
    • Precursor to Manifest Destiny: While the term “Manifest Destiny” hadn’t been coined yet, the expedition embodied its nascent spirit. Jefferson’s vision for an “empire of liberty” and his desire to expand U.S. influence and commerce across the continent directly reflected the expansionist impulse that would later be formalized as Manifest Destiny.
    • Paving the Way for Settlement: The detailed maps, journals, and observations by Lewis and Clark provided crucial information about the vast western lands, making them less mysterious and more appealing for future settlement. They highlighted the potential for trade, resources, and agricultural expansion, directly encouraging westward migration.
    • Asserting U.S. Sovereignty: Lewis and Clark were instructed to inform Native American tribes and any European traders they encountered that the land now belonged to the United States. This act of asserting American sovereignty over vast, largely unexplored territories was a foundational step in the process of continental expansion central to Manifest Destiny.
    • Displacement of Native Americans: Although the expedition often relied on Native American assistance (most notably Sacagawea), its long-term consequence was to open the door for increased American settlement, which ultimately led to the displacement, dispossession, and devastating impact on indigenous populations, a dark side of Manifest Destiny’s implementation.

2. The Missouri Compromise (1820)

  • Overview: The Missouri Compromise was a legislative agreement that attempted to resolve the growing dispute over the expansion of slavery into new western territories acquired through the Louisiana Purchase. It admitted Missouri as a slave state and Maine as a free state, maintaining the balance of power in the Senate, and prohibited slavery in the remaining Louisiana Purchase territory north of the 36°30′ parallel.
  • Effects of Manifest Destiny:
    • Intensified Sectional Conflict: The very act of territorial expansion, fueled by the desire to fulfill Manifest Destiny, immediately brought the contentious issue of slavery to the forefront. Each new territory acquired demanded a decision on its slave status, threatening the delicate balance between free and slave states.
    • A Temporary “Solution” for Expansion: The Missouri Compromise was a direct response to the pressures created by westward expansion. It was a political maneuver to allow for continued territorial growth (a core tenet of Manifest Destiny) without immediately fracturing the Union over slavery. It essentially drew a line, implicitly acknowledging that westward expansion would continue, but attempting to manage the internal conflict it caused.
    • Limited the “Empire of Liberty”: While Manifest Destiny promoted the spread of an “empire of liberty,” the Compromise highlighted the inherent contradiction: for many, liberty extended only to white settlers, while for enslaved people, expansion meant the potential continuation or expansion of bondage. The Compromise thus revealed the profound moral and political challenges posed by an expansionist ideology that did not fully resolve the issue of human freedom.
    • Seeds of Future Conflict: By setting a precedent for congressional authority over slavery in territories and creating a clear sectional divide, the Compromise, though a temporary peace, merely postponed and exacerbated the eventual conflict over slavery that would lead to the Civil War. The desire for more land, driven by Manifest Destiny, would repeatedly challenge and ultimately dismantle such compromises.

3. Independence of Texas (1836)

  • Overview: American settlers, invited into Mexican Texas by the Mexican government, eventually outnumbered the Tejano population. Cultural differences, disagreements over slavery (which Mexico had outlawed), and Mexico’s centralized governance led to rebellion. Texas declared independence in 1836 after military conflict, forming the independent Republic of Texas.
  • Effects of Manifest Destiny:
    • Justification for American Settlement: The initial migration of American settlers into Texas was driven by economic opportunity (especially cotton farming) but also by the underlying belief in the inevitable westward movement of American civilization. This implicitly reflected an early form of Manifest Destiny, where American presence would naturally lead to American control.
    • Rhetorical Support for Independence: While the Texans’ fight for independence was rooted in specific grievances against the Mexican government, the narrative of Manifest Destiny provided a powerful rhetorical justification for American support of the Texas Revolution. It framed the struggle as a natural progression of American liberty and expansion into land “destined” for them.
    • Drive for Annexation: After achieving independence, the Republic of Texas immediately sought annexation by the United States. This desire was strongly fueled by Manifest Destiny. Many Americans, particularly in the South, saw Texas as a natural extension of the United States, essential for their “empire of liberty” and, crucially, for the expansion of slavery. The annexation debate was fiercely tied to this expansionist ideology.
    • Trigger for Mexican-American War: The U.S. annexation of Texas in 1845, directly driven by Manifest Destiny sentiment, significantly aggravated relations with Mexico, which still considered Texas a rebellious province. The border dispute that followed (Texas claimed the Rio Grande, Mexico the Nueces River) became a direct pretext for the Mexican-American War, a war explicitly driven by Manifest Destiny.

4. Mexican-American War (1846-1848)

  • Overview: Fueled by border disputes after the annexation of Texas and President James K. Polk’s expansionist ambitions, the United States provoked and won a war against Mexico. The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo (1848) ended the war, resulting in the Mexican Cession, where Mexico ceded vast territories, including California, Nevada, Utah, Arizona, and parts of New Mexico, Colorado, and Wyoming, to the U.S.
  • Effects of Manifest Destiny:
    • Primary Driving Force: The Mexican-American War is perhaps the most direct and aggressive manifestation of Manifest Destiny. President Polk explicitly sought to acquire vast territories from Mexico, and the belief that it was America’s “destiny” to control the continent provided the primary ideological justification for the conflic

The Lewis and Clark Expedition (1804-1806)

  • Overview: Commissioned by President Thomas Jefferson after the Louisiana Purchase, the Lewis and Clark Expedition (the Corps of Discovery) explored the newly acquired territory and sought a navigable water route to the Pacific Ocean. Its goals included mapping the territory, studying its flora, fauna, and geology, and establishing relations with Native American tribes.
  • Effects of Manifest Destiny:
    • Precursor to Manifest Destiny: While the term “Manifest Destiny” hadn’t been coined yet, the expedition embodied its nascent spirit. Jefferson’s vision for an “empire of liberty” and his desire to expand U.S. influence and commerce across the continent directly reflected the expansionist impulse that would later be formalized as Manifest Destiny.
    • Paving the Way for Settlement: The detailed maps, journals, and observations by Lewis and Clark provided crucial information about the vast western lands, making them less mysterious and more appealing for future settlement. They highlighted the potential for trade, resources, and agricultural expansion, directly encouraging westward migration.
    • Asserting U.S. Sovereignty: Lewis and Clark were instructed to inform Native American tribes and any European traders they encountered that the land now belonged to the United States. This act of asserting American sovereignty over vast, largely unexplored territories was a foundational step in the process of continental expansion central to Manifest Destiny.
    • Displacement of Native Americans: Although the expedition often relied on Native American assistance (most notably Sacagawea), its long-term consequence was to open the door for increased American settlement, which ultimately led to the displacement, dispossession, and devastating impact on indigenous populations, a dark side of Manifest Destiny’s implementation.

2. The Missouri Compromise (1820)

  • Overview: The Missouri Compromise was a legislative agreement that attempted to resolve the growing dispute over the expansion of slavery into new western territories acquired through the Louisiana Purchase. It admitted Missouri as a slave state and Maine as a free state, maintaining the balance of power in the Senate, and prohibited slavery in the remaining Louisiana Purchase territory north of the 36°30′ parallel.
  • Effects of Manifest Destiny:
    • Intensified Sectional Conflict: The very act of territorial expansion, fueled by the desire to fulfill Manifest Destiny, immediately brought the contentious issue of slavery to the forefront. Each new territory acquired demanded a decision on its slave status, threatening the delicate balance between free and slave states.
    • A Temporary “Solution” for Expansion: The Missouri Compromise was a direct response to the pressures created by westward expansion. It was a political maneuver to allow for continued territorial growth (a core tenet of Manifest Destiny) without immediately fracturing the Union over slavery. It essentially drew a line, implicitly acknowledging that westward expansion would continue, but attempting to manage the internal conflict it caused.
    • Limited the “Empire of Liberty”: While Manifest Destiny promoted the spread of an “empire of liberty,” the Compromise highlighted the inherent contradiction: for many, liberty extended only to white settlers, while for enslaved people, expansion meant the potential continuation or expansion of bondage. The Compromise thus revealed the profound moral and political challenges posed by an expansionist ideology that did not fully resolve the issue of human freedom.
    • Seeds of Future Conflict: By setting a precedent for congressional authority over slavery in territories and creating a clear sectional divide, the Compromise, though a temporary peace, merely postponed and exacerbated the eventual conflict over slavery that would lead to the Civil War. The desire for more land, driven by Manifest Destiny, would repeatedly challenge and ultimately dismantle such compromises.

3. Independence of Texas (1836)

  • Overview: American settlers, invited into Mexican Texas by the Mexican government, eventually outnumbered the Tejano population. Cultural differences, disagreements over slavery (which Mexico had outlawed), and Mexico’s centralized governance led to rebellion. Texas declared independence in 1836 after military conflict, forming the independent Republic of Texas.
  • Effects of Manifest Destiny:
    • Justification for American Settlement: The initial migration of American settlers into Texas was driven by economic opportunity (especially cotton farming) but also by the underlying belief in the inevitable westward movement of American civilization. This implicitly reflected an early form of Manifest Destiny, where American presence would naturally lead to American control.
    • Rhetorical Support for Independence: While the Texans’ fight for independence was rooted in specific grievances against the Mexican government, the narrative of Manifest Destiny provided a powerful rhetorical justification for American support of the Texas Revolution. It framed the struggle as a natural progression of American liberty and expansion into land “destined” for them.
    • Drive for Annexation: After achieving independence, the Republic of Texas immediately sought annexation by the United States. This desire was strongly fueled by Manifest Destiny. Many Americans, particularly in the South, saw Texas as a natural extension of the United States, essential for their “empire of liberty” and, crucially, for the expansion of slavery. The annexation debate was fiercely tied to this expansionist ideology.
    • Trigger for Mexican-American War: The U.S. annexation of Texas in 1845, directly driven by Manifest Destiny sentiment, significantly aggravated relations with Mexico, which still considered Texas a rebellious province. The border dispute that followed (Texas claimed the Rio Grande, Mexico the Nueces River) became a direct pretext for the Mexican-American War, a war explicitly driven by Manifest Destiny.

4. Mexican-American War (1846-1848)

  • Overview: Fueled by border disputes after the annexation of Texas and President James K. Polk’s expansionist ambitions, the United States provoked and won a war against Mexico. The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo (1848) ended the war, resulting in the Mexican Cession, where Mexico ceded vast territories, including California, Nevada, Utah, Arizona, and parts of New Mexico, Colorado, and Wyoming, to the U.S.
  • Effects of Manifest Destiny:
    • Primary Driving Force: The Mexican-American War is perhaps the most direct and aggressive manifestation of Manifest Destiny. President Polk explicitly sought to acquire vast territories from Mexico, and the belief that it was America’s “destiny” to control the continent provided the primary ideological justification for the conflic
    • Territorial Fulfillment: The war achieved the territorial goals of Manifest Destiny, extending the United States from “sea to shining sea.” The Mexican Cession dramatically expanded U.S. territory, almost completing the contiguous United States.
    • Racial Justification: The ideology often included racist undertones, portraying Mexicans as inferior and incapable of self-governance, thereby justifying the conquest and annexation of their lands. This dehumanization made it easier for many Americans to support the war and its outcomes.
    • Exacerbation of Slavery Debates: While fulfilling the territorial aspect of Manifest Destiny, the acquired lands immediately reignited and intensified the debate over the expansion of slavery, ultimately leading to the Compromise of 1850 and pushing the nation closer to civil war. Ralph Waldo Emerson famously warned that “Mexico will poison us,” foreseeing the sectional strife the new territory would bring.

5. The California Gold Rush (1848-1855)

  • Overview: Just days before the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo was signed, gold was discovered in California. The news triggered a massive influx of “forty-niners” (prospectors) and entrepreneurs from across the U.S. and around the world, leading to rapid population growth and the swift development of California.
  • Effects of Manifest Destiny:
    • Acceleration of Westward Migration: The Gold Rush provided an immense, immediate, and tangible incentive for individuals to embody the spirit of Manifest Destiny by moving west. It transformed a gradual westward trickle into a torrent of migration, dramatically accelerating the settlement of California, which had only just become U.S. territory.
    • Economic Justification for Expansion: The discovery of vast mineral wealth in California added an economic imperative to the ideological drive of Manifest Destiny. It proved the “value” of the newly acquired western lands, reinforcing the belief that America’s expansion was economically beneficial and divinely blessed.
    • Rapid Statehood for California: The explosive population growth driven by the Gold Rush quickly made California eligible for statehood. This pushed the issue of its slave status to the forefront, as its admission as a free state (part of the Compromise of 1850) further upset the balance of power and intensified sectional tensions.
    • Reinforcement of the “Empty Land” Myth: Despite the presence of Native American and Mexican populations, the Gold Rush perpetuated the Manifest Destiny narrative of vast, open, and unsettled lands awaiting American exploitation. The rapid influx of prospectors often led to further displacement and violence against indigenous and non-white populations in California.
    • Demand for Infrastructure: The Gold Rush created an urgent demand for improved transportation and communication across the continent (e.g., transcontinental railroad, telegraph), which further solidified the U.S. commitment to developing and integrating its vast western territories, a direct consequence of its expansionist ideology.

In conclusion, Manifest Destiny was not just a historical concept; it was a powerful ideological engine that drove U.S. expansion, shaping its territorial boundaries, fueling economic ambitions, and profoundly influencing the national discourse, particularly on the divisive issue of slavery, with consequences that reverberated for decades.

This question has been answered.

Get Answer