Mercantilism: colonies provide the"mother country" both raw materials for production and markets to sell goods
The answer to this really depends on what prism you are viewing it from?
As a globe, we are pretty opposed to imperialism these days. China has started to dabble a little more in the South China Sea but we mostly have our nation states and there isn't really a lot of movement.
That was not the case at the time of annexation.
So, is it ethical to subsume a sovereign nation? No
Was it strategically justifiable at the time? Yes. If the United States had not annexed Hawaii, the Empire of Japan likely would have stepped in.
Hawaii has enormous strategic value and was then justifiable at the time of annexation.
That being said, and I hope this is an obvious statement, imperialism is not a good thing and is ethically problematic.
FALSE.
Portugal only had one major colony in the New World, and that was Brazil in South America.
Spain had colonies in North America, but they focused more on the rest of South America excluding Brazil more. The colonies they had in North America were quickly lost to Mexico and America.
True. <span>Most republicans in 1865 were moderates, while the radical republicans were a minority in congress.</span>
