IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/intorg/v73y2019i02p435-468_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Domestic Politics of World Power: Explaining Debates over the United States Battleship Fleet, 1890–91

Author

Listed:
  • Fordham, Benjamin O.

Abstract

The United States' 1890–91 decision to begin building a battleship fleet, an important point in its development as a world power, can illuminate the domestic sources of foreign policy ambition. An analysis of roll-call votes in the House of Representatives indicates that socioeconomic divisions arising from industrialization strongly influenced support and opposition to the battleship fleet. This relationship worked mainly through trade policy interests: members of Congress from import-competing states tended to support the effort, while those from export-oriented states tended to oppose it. The patriotic symbolism of battleships at a time of labor unrest also helped motivate support for the program, though evidence of this pattern is less conclusive. Although party affiliation was crucial, it was also partly a function of economic structure, which shaped the two parties’ electoral fortunes. The impact of trade interests during this period is a mirror image of what previous research has found concerning the post-World War II era, when export-oriented interests tended to support American global activism and import-competing interests to oppose it. The reason for the difference is the Republican Party's commitment to trade protection, which strongly influenced both the goals of the policy and the identity of its supporters.

Suggested Citation

  • Fordham, Benjamin O., 2019. "The Domestic Politics of World Power: Explaining Debates over the United States Battleship Fleet, 1890–91," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 73(2), pages 435-468, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:intorg:v:73:y:2019:i:02:p:435-468_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0020818318000449/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Benjamin O Fordham, 2020. "History and quantitative conflict research: A case for limiting the historical scope of our theoretical arguments," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 37(1), pages 3-15, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:intorg:v:73:y:2019:i:02:p:435-468_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/ino .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.