Two secondary sources are Nell Irvin Painter, “The White Man’s Burden” (1989) and Kristin L. Hoganson, “The National Manhood Metaphor” (1998) The 4 primary sources are Theodore Roosevelt, “National Duties,” Speech at Minnesota State Fair (September 2, 1901), Albert Beveridge, “Our Philippine Policy,” Speech in the U.S. Senate (January 9, 1900), Henry Cabot Lodge, “The Retention of the Philippine Islands,” Speech in the U.S. Senate (March 7, 1900), and William McKinley, “Annual Message of the President to Congress” (December 5, 1899) After reviewing the two secondary and four primary sources about annexation, which historian’s argument seems more convincing to you, and why do you think so? If you think they’re equally convincing, how might you combine the arguments?

Two secondary sources are Nell Irvin Painter, “The White Man’s Burden” (1989) and Kristin L. Hoganson, “The National Manhood Metaphor” (1998) The 4 primary sources are Theodore Roosevelt, “National Duties,” Speech at Minnesota State Fair (September 2, 1901), Albert Beveridge, “Our Philippine Policy,” Speech in the U.S. Senate (January 9, 1900), Henry Cabot Lodge, “The Retention of the Philippine Islands,” Speech in the U.S. Senate (March 7, 1900), and William McKinley, “Annual Message of the President to Congress” (December 5, 1899) After reviewing the two secondary and four primary sources about annexation, which historian’s argument seems more convincing to you, and why do you think so? If you think they’re equally convincing, how might you combine the arguments?