Which of the following charts best compares the goals of “big stick” diplomacy and dollar diplomacy?(1 point)

Question

Responses

“Big Stick” Diplomacy Dollar Diplomacy
End conflict with military
Establish financial stability
Reduced use of military intervention
Expand U.S. economic interests
End conflict by paying off aggressors
Establish U.S. military power
Reinforce U.S. control over Latin America
“Big Stick” Diplomacy Dollar Diplomacy End conflict with military Establish financial stability Reduced use of military intervention Expand U.S. economic interests End conflict by paying off aggressors Establish U.S. military power Reinforce U.S. control over Latin America

“Big Stick” Diplomacy Dollar Diplomacy
End conflict peacefully
Establish U.S. military power
Reinforce U.S. control over Latin America
End conflict peacefully
Reduce use of military intervention
Establish financial stability
Expand U.S. economic interests

Answer 1

To compare the goals of "big stick" diplomacy and dollar diplomacy effectively, it's important to outline their primary focuses and methodologies. Below is a chart that reflects the main objectives and characteristics of each approach.

| “Big Stick” Diplomacy | Dollar Diplomacy | |--------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------| | Establish U.S. military power | Establish financial stability | | End conflict with military intervention | End conflict by paying off aggressors | | Reinforce U.S. control over Latin America | Expand U.S. economic interests | | Reduced use of military intervention | Utilize financial power to prevent conflict |

Explanation:

• "Big Stick" diplomacy, associated with President Theodore Roosevelt, emphasized the use of military might and the threat of force to achieve U.S. goals. It aimed to establish military power and control over Latin America while favoring military intervention as a means to resolve conflicts.

• Dollar diplomacy, associated with President William Howard Taft, focused on economic influence rather than military intervention. It aimed to promote U.S. financial interests abroad and resolve conflicts through economic incentives, effectively "paying off" potential aggressors to prevent conflict.

This chart succinctly presents the fundamental differences and similarities between the two diplomatic approaches.