To best compare the goals of "Big Stick" diplomacy and Dollar diplomacy, we should examine the primary objectives and methods associated with each approach.
"Big Stick" diplomacy, associated with President Theodore Roosevelt, emphasizes the use of military power to influence international relations, especially in Latin America, while also maintaining a readiness to engage in peaceful diplomacy. Key points often include:
- End conflict with military intervention/force
- Establish U.S. military power
- Reinforce U.S. control over Latin America
In contrast, Dollar diplomacy, commonly associated with President William Howard Taft, focuses on using financial means to extend U.S. influence abroad, particularly through investments and economic control. Key points under Dollar diplomacy include:
- Establish financial stability
- Expand U.S. economic interests
- End conflict by paying off aggressors
Considering these distinctions, the chart that accurately reflects the comparison includes aspects of military intervention for Big Stick diplomacy and financial interests for Dollar diplomacy, with points related to reducing military intervention aligning more closely with Dollar diplomacy’s emphasis on financial means over force.
Thus, the best chart would include:
"Big Stick" Diplomacy
- End conflict with military intervention/force
- Establish U.S. military power
- Reinforce U.S. control over Latin America
Dollar Diplomacy
- End conflict peacefully (through economic means)
- Establish financial stability
- Expand U.S. economic interests
- Reduced use of military intervention
If any of the provided options closely resembles this structure, that would be the best choice for comparison. However, if no option fits perfectly, the one that highlights military aspects for Big Stick diplomacy and economic strategies for Dollar diplomacy would be the most appropriate.