|WikiProject International relations|
- 1 Good page
- 2 St. Gingolph
- 3 "jingo" in the American vernacular
- 4 Basque origin of Jingo
- 5 Suggested Edits
- 6 Minuteman Project
- 7 Kipling was jingoistic
- 8 WWI ADD
- 9 Ad to article
- 10 The Great Game
- 11 Word quite a bit older than previously thought?
- 12 Bullying?
- 13 Differences between jingoism and patriotism
- 14 Job-Trade "Myth"
Good work all. I'd nominate it as a featured article, but I think they'd want it longer. Anyways I am impressed by the neutrality. Being rather a Jingoist myself, I find it fair and balanced ;) Sam [Spade] 02:36, 29 May 2004 (UTC)
Italic text''' Not fdgfgdsure if this is pertinent, but the dict project mentions St. Gingoulph as another possible source.'
==weiner-Psychic crisis caused largely by great depression that started in 1893 and was still occurring -Depression alone would not cause such a crisis: -Populist movement (the free-silver agitation) campaign of 1890 was a radical movement caused by the depression and caused a "drastic social convulsion" -Maturation and bureaucratization of American business, the completion of its essential industrial plant, and the development of trusts on a scale that made it seem like the current era of economic opportunity was ending -The continent was filling up and the frontier line was [seemingly] gone -To people of 1890's, it seemed resources previously available were used up -Things looked bad to middle class citizens brought up thinking in terms of 19th century economics -Farmers had "gone mad over silver and Bryan" -Workers were stirring in bloody struggles (i.e. strikes) -Supply of new land seemed to be gone -Trusts threatened spirit of business enterprise -Civic corruption was high in cities -Huge numbers of immigrants formed slums -New tendencies in public thought fell into two basic moods -Intensification of protest and humanitarian reform -Populism, Utopianism, Christian Social gospel, the growing intellectual interest in Socialism, and protest in the realistic novel all express this mood. JUSTIN JUSTIN ? McKinley had said the he might be "obliged" to go to war as soon as he entered the presidency, and had expressed a preference that the Cuban crisis be settled between his election andinauguration. ? Wanted to have victory under his belt for next election ? Newspapers sympathized with Cubans and hated Spain -Propaganda aided in changing American public while viewing the Cuban situation--Spain portrayed as waging heartless and inhuman war, Cubans as the victims of this war -Sectional and political elements most enthusiastic about war--Bryan sections of the country, in the Democratic party, patrons of yellow journals -some thought people wanted a costly war in Cuba so we could return to free silver, press said those who did not support it were heartless -economic motives made by both sides -war was an outlet for aggressive impulses but also an idealistic and humanitarian crusade -American public did not want material gains in Cuba, nor did they think war would go to Philippines--yet war soon had imperialistic motives Movement for Imperialism ? Made up of mostly a small group of politicians, intellectuals & publicists ? Most of men in imperial movement were well-off financially ? Committed to expansion ? Wanted imperialism for fear of US losing militarily ? Strategic places were necessary for the US military ? Acquire naval basses in the Caribbean and the Pacific ? Annexation of Canada ? Interested in far east for trade investments ? Roosevelt responsible for the US entering into the Philippines ? 1st attempt at Philippines was a defensive action- protected the west coast from Spain ? The last step taken in controlling the Philippines was having the US military invade the rest of the Philippines from their stronghold of Manila ? Public opinion of the Filipino's attacking the Americans forced Congress to be biased in making a decision to go to war ? Business man began to side w/ the expansionist movement - Protestant clergy--seeking potential enlargement of missionaries - Business---Philippines become a possible gateway 2 markets of East Asia - 4 ways to fix Philippine problem o 1. Return islands to Spain o 2. Sell/alienate Philippines 2 another power (invited European war) o 3. America could leave the Philippines, giving independence 2 Aguinaldo's men o 4. American "colony" - Could be considered as a naval base - American public is not informed about Philippines o Literary Digest (leading Republican paper) writes about expansion o President McKinley: wanted public sentiment o Peace Commission negotiating treaty in Paris (asked 4 all Philippine Islands) - 2 Phases of Debates of Philippines o 1st-Decemner 1898 o 2nd ?February 1899 -American policy toward the Philippines becomes matter of general pubic discussion - Republicans were for expansion - Democrats were against expansion - America is geographically divided o South has a strong liking toward expansion - Decision for expansion is made by Theodore Roosevelt - Americans are divided in making a choice. -reasons for taking Philippines: -potential markets, White Man's Burden, struggle for existence, racial destiny, traditions of Expansion, dangers of war if left to Europeans, incapacity of Filopinos for self-gov't. -Duty and Destiny -to reject annexation = would be 2 fail fulfilling an obligation -expansion was inevitable and irresistable -God made whites organizers to establish systems where there was chaos
- Americans believed that the theme of destiny was similar to the theme of duty - Destiny always arrived and was believed to be in the "inexorable logic of events" - People believed that expansion had long been familiar to Americans - Albert Weinberg said that American expansion took on a new meaning in the nineties - Previously, when we "willed" expansion, nobody could resist us at all - During the nineties it was evident that Americans could not resist expansion themselves - President McKinley said that Duty determines Destiny - Duty meant that we had a moral obligation and destiny meant that we would certainly fulfill it - It is not surpising that the public was familiar with the concept of inevitable destiny when the United States involved itself with the fate of the Philippines - Senator Lodge wrote to Teddy Roosevelt saying that "the whole policy of annexation is growing rapidly under the irrestible pressure of events" - It was evident that the idea of destin was effective even on people that had grave doubts about the United States' occupation in the Philippines - Not only were high moral and metaphysical concepts employed in the imperialistic argument - Our right to hold the Philippines was the right of the conquerors -American imperialism in the 1890s should not be interpreted in terms of rational economic motives -Markets and investments were factors but not the only ones -The ideal of the war being a "newspaper's war" has some point but does not explain the war -The press is not powerful enough to impose a view on the public -Newspapers must work with preexisting predispositions -Not all newspapers were yellow journals -Newspapers themselves could not create public opinion -Newspapers decided they could increase sales by exploiting jingo sentiment -Newspapers cannot turn opinion into action -Complex political interests created action -Public opinion was affected by the depression, the closing of the frontier, trusts, and social conflict, and the defeat of Bryan -Statesmen ant publishers were worried by the growing imperialism of Russia, Germany, and Japan -Expansionists were upper middle-class conservative reformist -Psychological people tend to respond to frustration with aggression -Underdogs were more anxious for war with Spain than the upper class -Conservatives were indifferent so Cuban freedom but interested in Filipino markets -Anti-expansionists considered imperialism a betrayal of American ideals -Anti-imperialist did not have numbers, morale, or unity -No effort has been made to compare the war with other parallel expansion crises -Parallels can be found in other nation's histories in the role of the press in starting foreign crisis -Historians should study how our behavior compared -business--gigantic markets of East never materialized, value of Philippines is arguable--absorb only a little over one percent of all US investments abroad -1907--Philippines were strategical for the war b/c of positioning
- The above text, posted by User:188.8.131.52 without explanation, was obviously pasted from some other work. (Non-Wiki formatting with special characters and truncated lines give it away.) This may be a copyright violation. — Jeff Q 08:05, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- I think he was taking notes on something and put those notes here fore some reason [Dwarf Kirlston] 15 Feb Middayish.
"jingo" in the American vernacular
Near the end of the article, it is stated that '"Jingoism" did not enter the U.S. vernacular until the 20th century.' However, Roosevelt used it in 1895, and stated outright that others did as well.
1895 T. Roosevelt in _N.Y. Times_ 24 Oct. 8: There is much talk about "jingoism." If by "jingoism" they mean a policy in pursuance of which Americans will with resolution and common sense insist upon our rights being respected by foreign powers, then we are "jingoes."
Sure, 1895 is close to the 20th century, but why not be accurate?
-- Ben Rosengart <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Two questions: Why is "jingoism" only applied to Yankees (British and Americans)? Didn't any other nationalities at the time have any "patriotic or expansionist, arrogant and belligerent" feelings and emotions? What about the "hot-blooded" Latin Spaniards and the Latin-gallic French (both proud peoples)? And, when South American nations fought it out, over territory and minerals, was there no national pride involved? Why isn't it called "jingoism" then? It's just like the history of the word "racism", which means "to apply any single statement or attitude to all the members of one 'race'"; seldom is it, if ever, applied to minorities, who are and were often every bit as racist as Anglo-Americans. Also, was there any truth to the "Black Legend"? Did the Spaniards not exploit the native American Indian populations under their control? (For example, in some Spanish territories, the native population practically disappeared, or became extinct.) Why not mention it then? Was there not any validity toward anti-Spanish feelings at the time? If so, then why is it called "yellow journalism". Who treated their colonists and subjugated peoples better, the United States, or Spain? Which one would you have rather lived under at the time? And, for that matter, what did the native American peoples do to the enemy tribes that they subjugated (often, this involved human sacrifice)? For instance, the Aztecs and the people that they defeated. Hundreds of these Aztec tributaries joined Hernando Cortez in his march on what became Mexico City. (Sept.)
Basque origin of Jingo
The basque world for God is "Jaun", and the particle -go or -ko behind usually means "belonging to" in a physical or territorial way. When referring to God in an exclamation, basques would say "Jauna!", where -a acts as a determinant. I assume that the word could anyway be a corrupted form, but does not sound plausible...
So... basically, Jingoism is Jesusism ;-)
I think the following paragraphs should be moved from the introduction and put under a new etymology heading: "Through much of the Victorian period, Russia was persistently viewed as a threat both to the European order and, sporadically, to British interests in India. The crisis ended at the Congress of Berlin when a group of powers, including British Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli, forced the newly created Bulgarian state to restore much of the land awarded at the peace treaty of San Stefano, including Macedonia, to Ottoman rule. This episode also reflects the conservative element of jingoism that forms a characterizing part of the movement.
The chorus of a song by MacDermott and G. W. Hunt commonly sung in pubs at the time gave birth to the term. The lyrics had the chorus:
We don't want to fight but by Jingo if we do, We've got the ships, we've got the men, we've got the money too, We've fought the Bear before, and while we're Britons true, The Russians shall not have Constantinople.
The expression "by Jingo" is apparently a minced oath that appeared rarely in print, but which has its origins as far back as the 17th century in a transparent euphemism for "by Jesus". Origins have also been claimed for it in languages that would not have been very familiar in the British pub: in Basque, for example, "Jainko" is a form of the word for "God". A claim that the term referred to Jingu of Japan has been entirely dismissed. It is also an exclamation uttered by Arthur Birling in An Inspector Calls."
Any comments? Jirt 05:12, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
I've reverted an anon. user's edit who listed the Minutemen project under the "See Also" heading. I don't think that the organization quite fits in this article and it seems a little POV. I'm sure you will let me know if I was wrong. - Jirt 13:36, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Kipling was jingoistic
Rather shocked to see Rudyard Kipling listed as 'not jingoistic'. Firstly Jingoism is something that anyone could do from time to time so one 'misunderstood' poem isn't really relevant (I don't think it is sarcastic anyway which brings POV into question). Secondly Kipling was the imperial poet, he pulled strings to get his sickly son into the army for world war I (having brought him up to believe 'Dulce et decorum est...'), now he may not have been as crassly jingoistic as a politician but of a more jingoistic life and literature it is hard to conceive. Kipling's most famous poem If— was written in honour of a British criminal Leander Starr Jameson who perpetrated atrocities against the Dutch in South Africa before the Boer war, in context it was a jingoistic poem. I cut the reference.Aach 23:36, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
Checking the history this looks like 184.108.40.206 changed the original section on Kipling to have the opposite meaning. Anyway I cut the reference on Kipling because I don't think it really fits in any of the formulations.Aach 23:50, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
To first establish the little bit of creditability that I have I would first like to state that I am an AP World History student. I believe that jingoism played a major role during the outbreak of WWI and this should be added to the article. During the war, due to the use of war propaganda, civilians hated the enemy more than they supported their country, which I believe is a perfect example of “extreme patriotism in the form of aggressive foreign policy.” My source for this information comes from chapter 28 of World Civilizations The Global Experience Fourth Addition AP Edition DBQ Update. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 00:01, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
Ad to article
Add to article: nations accused of Jingoism.
The Great Game
- Through much of the Victorian era, Russia was persistently viewed as a threat both to the Western/European order and, sporadically, to British interests in India. The crisis ended at the Congress of Berlin when a group of powers, including British Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli, forced the newly created Bulgarian state to restore much of the land awarded at the peace treaty of San Stefano, including the region of Macedonia, to Ottoman rule. Jingoism is today generally employed as a deprecatory term for the confident expressions of a Western, and particularly Anglo-American, culture that viewed its superiority as both self-evident and merited.
This text appears to be disputed, since it's been added and deleted twice. Please note that it was proposed and discussed last year on this page, #Suggested Edits. While the first two sentences appears unrelated to the article, they explain elements of the song that follows:
We don't want to fight but by Jingo if we do
We've got the ships, we've got the men, we've got the money too
We've fought the Bear before, and while we're Britons true
The Russians shall not have Constantinople.
Perhaps the references in the lyrics can be explained in a simpler fashion? The third sentence is out of place, and would belong n the intro but it may be repetitive to existing material already there. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 00:21, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
Word quite a bit older than previously thought?
- Google Books has got the date wrong. Parliamentary Debates volume 89 is from 1901. That is a quote from a speech by John Bryn Roberts dated 19 February 1901.--Britannicus (talk) 11:30, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but I really fail to see why this is categorized as bullying aside from some political grandstanding. There is no mention of it, nor any citation of anything related to it in the article. I'm removing it for the time being and would like to open a channel for discussion here regarding it. -Deathsythe (talk) 14:40, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
Differences between jingoism and patriotism
This section needs to either go or get a proper reference. It's only reference (is it just for the last sentence or does it apply to the whole paragraph?) is someone's paper for ENG 3050, presumably a school essay. (Lcohalan (talk) 06:16, 19 September 2013 (UTC))
This is a heavily debated topic, and this sentence sounds biased. Is the word "myth" proven? Needs to be cited (with a valid source proving that foreign trade *never* damages domestic jobs) or edited. PettyKate (talk) 17:14, 12 January 2014 (UTC)