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

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

Answer 1

To compare the goals of “big stick” diplomacy and dollar diplomacy effectively, it is essential to consider the fundamental principles behind each policy. “Big stick” diplomacy, associated with Theodore Roosevelt, emphasized military power and the readiness to use force to achieve U.S. interests, particularly in Latin America. In contrast, dollar diplomacy, primarily linked to William Howard Taft, focused on extending U.S. influence through economic means, particularly by fostering financial stability and investments.

Here’s a breakdown of what each diplomacy entails:

“Big Stick” Diplomacy Goals:

• End conflict non-peacefully (often through military intervention)
• Establish U.S. military power
• Reinforce U.S. control over Latin America
• End conflict with military force

Dollar Diplomacy Goals:

• Expand U.S. economic interests
• Establish financial stability in other nations
• Reduce the use of military intervention by promoting economic ties
• End conflict peacefully (or through economic means)

Given this context, the most suitable comparison would be one that highlights the contrasting approaches—military intervention versus economic influence.

The most accurate option that reflects these differences is:

“Big Stick” Diplomacy & Dollar Diplomacy

• Big Stick Diplomacy:

  • End conflict with military
  • Establish U.S. military power
  • Reinforce U.S. control over Latin America

• Dollar Diplomacy:

  • Expand U.S. economic interests
  • Establish financial stability
  • Reduced use of military intervention

This showcases the distinctions clearly and aligns with the historical context of both diplomatic approaches.