Annexation Of Hawaii Pros And Cons

450 Words2 Pages

Summary My position in this debate is that the annexation of Hawaii is a just act that both serves our national interests and upholds our foundational ideals. Firstly, it can be said that the annexation of Hawaii strengthens our economy and our ability to trade. As noted by Arthur C. James, we are provided with three new harbours that can influence commerce and act as coaling stations for trading vessels going to and from Asia (James). Additionally, Lorrin Thurston, a member of the provisional government in Hawaii, asserts that if we do not take control of the islands, another imperial force will (Thurston). Of course, it is not in our best interests for this to happen; thus, it would serve us best to annex Hawaii to further commerce and keep the land away from other powers. Lastly, the annexation of Hawaii is in adherence with our foundational ideals, which so strongly emphasize a life of liberty. President Sanford Dole mentioned that our ways brought a Christian society to life in Hawaii, one that is honorable among other nations (Dole). Henceforth, our influence of the Natives of Hawaii is apparent; …show more content…

It would be large loss for the United States if another imperial force were to take the land of Hawaii for themselves (Thurston).
The relationship between America and Hawaii helped to develop the islands into a Christian society that is honorable among other independent nations. Because of this, and the economic benefits, a political union is the logical and necessary step in continuing the relationship of the two counties (Dole).
Along with gaining Hawaii, we would also gain three new harbours, which would aid not only economically, but also act as coaling stations for vessels coming to or from Asia. Furthermore, the islands would act as protection of the Pacific coast, against powers such as Japan