Young American males, filibustering, and manifest destiny in the nineteenth century

¶ … Young American Males and Manifest Destiny: The United States Army as a Cultural Mirror," author Robert May examines the role filibustering has played in the United States nation-building activities prior to the Civil War. May contends that filibustering was a natural offshoot of the country's policy of expansion, based on the doctrine of Manifest Destiny.

In fact, May further argues, the general political and social climate of the pre-Civil War contributed to the proliferation of filibustering among the nation's young men. This gave rise to a "national filibuster culture," with an implicit goal of expanding United States territory further into Central and South America.

The author points out, for example, that filibuster expeditions continued, even though the practice was illegal. They were helped in large part by an adulating public, many of whom expressed support or even aided the filibusters directly by providing them with food and shelter as they hid from pursuing army.

The American public was still in the grip of Manifest Destiny. Like the filibusters, many believed that it was but natural for the superior Caucasian-Americans to expand their territories to areas like Mexico, Nicaragua and Cuba.

The filibusters were also indirectly aided by a sympathetic and overburdened military. Many filibusters themselves were West Point dropouts, a fact that May uses to highlight the close parallels between the mindset of an army office and a filibuster. In addition, May argues that many other factors prevented the army from actively pursuing filibusters. Laws of neutrality, for example, prevented the army from engaging filibusters unless the latter demonstrated a clear military threat to another country. In many areas, the army had to deal with more pressing problems, such as attacks from Native American fighters. Furthermore, many filibusters who were caught were simply acquitted by sympathetic juries.

May uses a number of historic examples of filibustering to support his thesis. The use of primary documents such as letters from filibusters and communiques from army officials strengthens May's claim regarding the filibusters.

The case of John Quitman, a filibuster in Cuba, embodies much of May's arguments. Quitman served as a general in the Mexican War and therefore had the respect of American troops. His stature and reputation served to make filibusters out of the some of the Army leaders who were sent to capture him.

Though he does not state it directly, May uses the series of filibuster cases to illustrate the similarity between the illegal filibuster activities of an idealistic group of young men and the government-sanctioned invasion of territories like Tejas (later Texas) and Sonora. Both activities were based on the supposed superiority of the American race and its institutions. Both groups also believed it were but natural to secure other territories to provide new sources of wealth for the fledgling United States.