Picture 1 of 1
Stock photo
Picture 1 of 1
Stock photo
Race over Empire : Racism and U. S. Imperialism, 1865-1900 by Eric T. L. Love (2004, Trade Paperback)
E
evang4061 (56)
100% positive feedback
Price:
$28.99
+ $5.22 shipping
Returns:
Condition:
Race over Empire: Racism and U.S. Imperialism, 1865-1900 is a historical and political science book written by Eric T. L. Love. The book, published by the University of North Carolina Press, explores the relationship between racism and American imperialism during the late 19th century. It is a trade paperback with 268 pages, measuring 9.2 inches in length, 6.1 inches in width, and 0.6 inches in height. The book is written in English and is a new edition. It covers topics such as discrimination and race relations, imperialism, and international relations.
- Buy It NowRace over Empire : Racism and U. S. Imperialism, 1865-1900 by Eric T. L. Love...
Oops! Looks like we're having trouble connecting to our server.
Refresh your browser window to try again.
About this product
Product Identifiers
PublisherUniversity of North Carolina Press
ISBN-100807855650
ISBN-139780807855652
eBay Product ID (ePID)30781298
Product Key Features
Book TitleRace over Empire : Racism and U. S. Imperialism, 1865-1900
Number of Pages268 Pages
LanguageEnglish
TopicDiscrimination & Race Relations, United States / 19th Century, History & Theory, Imperialism, International Relations / General, United States / General, Ethnic Studies / African American Studies
Publication Year2004
FeaturesNew Edition
IllustratorYes
GenrePolitical Science, Social Science, History
AuthorEric T. L. Love
FormatTrade Paperback
Dimensions
Item Height0.6 in
Item Weight14 Oz
Item Length9.2 in
Item Width6.1 in
Additional Product Features
Intended AudienceTrade
LCCN2004-009096
Reviews"Love has forcefully captured the rough and tumble world of Washington politics. . . . Convincingly demonstrates that imperialists consciously remained silent on race when pitching annexation." _ Journal of the Gilded Age and Progressive Era, "A brief, clearly argued, thesis-driven study. . . . [A] competent work." -- American Historical Review, "Love has forcefully captured the rough and tumble world of Washington politics. . . . Convincingly demonstrates that imperialists consciously remained silent on race when pitching annexation." —Journal of the Gilded Age and Progressive Era, "Both interesting and well documented. . . . Presents alternative ways of looking at racism and imperialism. When one thinks of imperialism, one tends to believe that racism actually abetted it. Love takes the contrary view, but at the same time, he emphasizes that many imperialists were racists and does an excellent job of proving it." -The Historian, "A brief, clearly argued, thesis-driven study. . . . [A] competent work." —American Historical Review, "Well-written and accessible. . . . Written in an engaging, fluid prose, and punctured by useful, often lucid insights, [Love's account] is certainly a worthwhile read." -- Itinerario, "Love has forcefully captured the rough and tumble world of Washington politics. . . . Convincingly demonstrates that imperialists consciously remained silent on race when pitching annexation." -- Journal of the Gilded Age and Progressive Era, "Both interesting and well documented. . . . Presents alternative ways of looking at racism and imperialism. When one thinks of imperialism, one tends to believe that racism actually abetted it. Love takes the contrary view, but at the same time, he emphasizes that many imperialists were racists and does an excellent job of proving it." —The Historian, "Both interesting and well documented. . . . Presents alternative ways of looking at racism and imperialism. When one thinks of imperialism, one tends to believe that racism actually abetted it. Love takes the contrary view, but at the same time, he emphasizes that many imperialists were racists and does an excellent job of proving it." -- The Historian, "Well-written and accessible. . . . Written in an engaging, fluid prose, and punctured by useful, often lucid insights, [Love's account] is certainly a worthwhile read." -Itinerario, "Well-written and accessible. . . . Written in an engaging, fluid prose, and punctured by useful, often lucid insights, [Love's account] is certainly a worthwhile read." —Itinerario, "Love has forcefully captured the rough and tumble world of Washington politics. . . . Convincingly demonstrates that imperialists consciously remained silent on race when pitching annexation." — Journal of the Gilded Age and Progressive Era, "A brief, clearly argued, thesis-driven study. . . . [A] competent work." -American Historical Review
Dewey Edition22
Dewey Decimal325.32097309034
Edition DescriptionNew Edition
SynopsisGenerations of historians have maintained that in the last decade of the nineteenth century white-supremacist racial ideologies such as Anglo-Saxonism, social Darwinism, benevolent assimilation, and the concept of the white man's burden drove American imperialist ventures in the nonwhite world. In Race over Empire , Eric T. L. Love contests this view and argues that racism had nearly the opposite effect. From President Grant's attempt to acquire the Dominican Republic in 1870 to the annexations of Hawaii and the Philippines in 1898, Love demonstrates that the imperialists' relationship with the racist ideologies of the era was antagonistic, not harmonious. In a period marked by Jim Crow, lynching, Chinese exclusion, and immigration restriction, Love argues, no pragmatic politician wanted to place nonwhites at the center of an already controversial project by invoking the concept of the white man's burden. Furthermore, convictions that defined whiteness raised great obstacles to imperialist ambitions, particularly when expansionists entered the tropical zone. In lands thought to be too hot for white blood, white Americans could never be the main beneficiaries of empire. What emerges from Love's analysis is a critical reinterpretation of the complex interactions between politics, race, labor, immigration, and foreign relations at the dawn of the American century., Generations of historians have maintained that in the last decade of the nineteenth century white-supremacist racial ideologies such as Anglo-Saxonism, social Darwinism, benevolent assimilation, and the concept of the "white man's burden" drove American imperialist ventures in the nonwhite world. In Race over Empire , Eric T. L. Love contests this view and argues that racism had nearly the opposite effect.From President Grant's attempt to acquire the Dominican Republic in 1870 to the annexations of Hawaii and the Philippines in 1898, Love demonstrates that the imperialists' relationship with the racist ideologies of the era was antagonistic, not harmonious. In a period marked by Jim Crow, lynching, Chinese exclusion, and immigration restriction, Love argues, no pragmatic politician wanted to place nonwhites at the center of an already controversial project by invoking the concept of the "white man's burden." Furthermore, convictions that defined "whiteness" raised great obstacles to imperialist ambitions, particularly when expansionists entered the tropical zone. In lands thought to be too hot for "white blood," white Americans could never be the main beneficiaries of empire.What emerges from Love's analysis is a critical reinterpretation of the complex interactions between politics, race, labor, immigration, and foreign relations at the dawn of the American century., Generations of historians have maintained that in the last decade of the nineteenth century white-supremacist racial ideologies such as Anglo-Saxonism, social Darwinism, benevolent assimilation, and the concept of the "white man's burden" drove American imperialist ventures in the nonwhite world. In Race over Empire , Eric T. L. Love contests this view and argues that racism had nearly the opposite effect. From President Grant's attempt to acquire the Dominican Republic in 1870 to the annexations of Hawaii and the Philippines in 1898, Love demonstrates that the imperialists' relationship with the racist ideologies of the era was antagonistic, not harmonious. In a period marked by Jim Crow, lynching, Chinese exclusion, and immigration restriction, Love argues, no pragmatic politician wanted to place nonwhites at the center of an already controversial project by invoking the concept of the "white man's burden." Furthermore, convictions that defined "whiteness" raised great obstacles to imperialist ambitions, particularly when expansionists entered the tropical zone. In lands thought to be too hot for "white blood," white Americans could never be the main beneficiaries of empire.What emerges from Love's analysis is a critical reinterpretation of the complex interactions between politics, race, labor, immigration, and foreign relations at the dawn of the American century., Generations of historians have maintained that in the last decade of the 19th century white-supremacist racial ideologies such as Anglo-Saxonism, social Darwinism, and the concept of the ""white man's burden"" drove American imperialist ventures in the nonwhite world. Eric T. L. Love contests this view and argues that racism had the opposite effect.
LC Classification NumberE661.7.L685 2004
