New American Imperialism

[seeker123]

After the recent Attacks on America, should America be allowed to take vengeance on other nations besides Afghanistan, such as Iraq, Iran or North Corea? Should the World allow America to become it's sovereign?

[USAgentleman]

Your question is inadequately phased at best, inherently flawed at worst. You ask if the America should be 'allowed' to take certain actions. Allowed by whom? I assume you mean the United Nations, as that as the only body that would have any hope of inhibiting American actions. You use the term 'take vengeance' against other countries. Vengeance? Thta is not at all the position of the US government. It states it's purpose as removing terrorists, or at least preventing them from carrying out future terrorist attacks. Now, as to the 'world sovereign' query..it has long been said that America, which threw of the shackles of one empire (namely, Britain) was never comfortable in starting it's own. What you may call 'Imperialism' is simple HEGEMONY; a natural occurrence when one countries political, economic, and military might far exceeds those of its closest rival. Take heart, though...this will change. Like economies, world leaders come in cycles; America will not maintain its position of dominance forever. In the meantime, though, education will help allay many of your fears. I suggest either reading American newspapers and/or magazines, or tuning into American news channels, like Fox News (which is strictly American in the UK) or CNN international (an adequate, although severely watered down version of a great American news channel). Peace.

[incitatus]

The notion that there was no revenge implicit in the recent war is risible. That situation was one thing, but attacking a whole range of countries because you feel threatened by them is indicative of exactly how paranoid the american world view is. Imperialism has always been a fair way to describe the methods used by the yanks, if not the end result. Their behaviour in asia, south america, the phillipines etc. shows this quite clearly. How anyone from the us has the gall to suggest learning about other countries is beyond me. The insular attitude of the US in general and this administration in particular is notorious. I have seen the networks to which you refer, and read the NYT and Washington post. It reinforces our fears. They clearly show the US as an overemotional, immature, xenophobic nation with an inflated idea of its own worth. You twit us over having an empire...we gave ours up, largely voluntarily. You are expanding yours. Who's got the high ground?

[USAgentleman]

First off, let's keep it civil. Invectives are not becoming in any discussion. Now, as for your statements. My statement about vengeance not being a factor applies only to the question posed...that of POSSIBLE US activities in "Iraq, Iran or North Corea[sic]." Was there an element of vengeance in the U.S. actions against the Taliban in Afghanistan? OF COURSE! Who could deny otherwise? But against other countries...I doubt it. That is for the security of America, no matter what action is taken. It should be remembered, of course, that the U.S. has not publicly stated any plan to attack ANY OTHER COUNTRY! Simply naming countries as part of an 'Axis of Evil' is not a prelude to military action against them. What you see as a nation of "overemotional, immature, xenophobic" people, I see as a nation of passionate, realistic, concerned and dedicated people. I am not just 'anyone from the U.S.' as I, like many Americans, live abroad. Nor is your opinion of Americans being insular accurate. Naturally, we are concerned about ourselves...indeed, it behooves Limeys to be MORE concerned about the state of their own "union" (Northern Ireland, railway inadequacies, failing NHS, racial tenions as evidence by last summer of riots) than to criticize the U.S. for taking care of IT's citizens, as it is doing, with overwhelming support from the people it was elected to serve and represent. As for American Imperialism...again, a sign of the U.S. taking care of it's citizens. Of course, I must say, that if the U.S. doesn't act internationally, it will be seen as isolationist. By acting, it is seen as imperialist. When you are a wold superpower, the only one at the time, any action will be criticized by some nation abroad. (continued...)

[USAgentleman]

Learning about other countries is sound advice from anyone, and because of who I am, I am quite qualified to suggest just that, as I endure the horrible weather in London that I am sure led to English colonialism. Finally, as to the decline of the British Empire...one can admit that it was dismantled in the "white" colonies, but not at all in the non-white ones! Not until a LOT of protests, and wars (include "white" Ireland) forced the British to withdraw. Two world wars severly hampered British ability to maintain the "non-white" colonies...the so-called "white man's burden." The solution? Withdrawal. You get to save face, to some extent, and pull out without losing much. The action itself served only British interests, not those of the colonies, as the manner of withdrawal is (at least in part) why many former (non-white) colonies are in the poor shape they are in today; out of British selfishness. Is that wrong? I can't say, but that is POLITICS. To learn more about this, you should start with PRINCIPE (The Prince) by Machiavelli. Until that time, keep on reading. I wouldn't concern yourself too much with 'the high ground or the low ground'; just about WHY nations do what they do. Peace

[USAgentleman]

One final thought... America is the foremost economic and military power in the world. It has political weight that is far greater than any other nation on the planet. It is abundant in resources, is the most technologically advanced, and is the birthplace of many modern day inventions(internet, airplane, etc.). In addition, American television shows and movies are seen abroad, and it's musicians heard all around. American products are wanted in all areas of the globe, and America boasts the largest, most profitable Companies of all nations. Is recognition of these very real facts a sign of an over-inflated view of ourselves? Or is the lack of such credentials a sign of insecurity of other nations, especially those that long for their own brutal Imperial days once again? You decide.

[incitatus]

Who started the invective, colonial boy? Analyse us news programs for foreign content. Do the same with any other western country. You will find that the US does not know or care about the outside world. In a recent survey the majority of americans could find their state on a map of the us, but 40% could not find their country on a globe. Tell you something? The state of our union is our business. True we havent got a good railway, but given the massive american (non-government adimttedly) funding of terrorist activities in ulster I really wouldnt mention Northern Ireland if I were you. Americans are concerned when they feel threatened. OK who isnt. But the way in which you conduct foreign affairs ensures further outbreaks of the type of violence you fear. Acting internationally does not mean strongarming. Read Chomsky's Managua lectures sometime for a breakdown of some of Americas finer moments in her own backyard

[incitatus]

but for starters...Chile (overthrew a democratically elected government of a freindly nation because it was not of the right political spectrum)..thePanama canal (forced treaty through at gunpoint)...The Phillipines (trained to power then supported fascist thug government)....Mexico (continual cross border bullying, too numerous to list. You behave worse than we ever did. You see yourself as the land of the free but wherever your economic tendrils spread are slavery and injustice. America may be rich in resources, but it is a vast net CONSUMER not producer. In fact citizens of the US use 1/4 of all earths resources, and refuse to sign up to any international treaties limiting unsustainable use. You invented the plane. Or raher the manned one, as the unmanned plane was a German invention. Possibly the internet, though there are patent battles with BT ging on over this. What else? the computer (britain) antibiotics (britain) vaccines (britain) modern medicine (Germany and france tie for it). the motor car (germany) rocketry (russia or germany) the guided missile (germany) the jet engine (britain).....any more? Also check out the number of european scientists working on those american inventions!

[incitatus]

I read IL Principe (you forgot to include the article, tush tush) when I was eleven. I also read The Discourses, a much longer work. Apparently you have not. In this Macchiavelli (I think you will find he normally used the double c) states clearly that although he demonstrates how to run a dictatorship (the essence of Il Principe) he himself prefers the democratic republic, the guidelines for which form the text of the Discourses. As you seem so concerned with your republic perhaps you should give it a whirl? "politics" is a description not an excuse. Stalin, Franco and Hitler practiced politics superbly, but one would not admire them. It is by the way we use politics that we are judged.

[incitatus]

It is precisely because we no longer practice impeialism of the strong sort (and I wish we didnt at all) that we tend to sigh and roll our eyes when we see others doing it. We know what sort of trouble you get into. But then you can't put an old head on young shoulders. It isnt the industrial bit where your head swells. Its this stuff about exporting democracy. You didnt. The greeks did, we did, even the germans did. You havent so far, and in fact actively suppress it in manycient states. Would be fair enough if you didnt claim to be so lillywhite.

[USAgentleman]

Who started the invective? Not I. I have no need nor desire to do so, particularly not on a UK message board! Colonial boy...are we back in 1775 now? I think not! I have lived in so many Western countries, that I have seen first hand what you are referring to. There isn't a lot of news about other countries...which frustrated me, to an extent. But truth be told, other countries are largely irrelevant to us. UK news mostly focuses on US and UK. German news focuses on US and Germany. Do we see a pattern? In times of war and international crisis, there is more international news. But ordinarily, yes...the occurrences in other spheres are NOT completely relevant. Now, just how much is reported on your beloved Isle about Asia? Africa? Latin America or Canada? Heck, even UK news on Europe focuses mainly on the EU ( or should I say Union of the Socialist States of Europe) issue. We are not completely unlike other countries in that regard. And I'll grant that the majority of Americans are lacking in some key academic disciplines...geography among them. But then, we don't have ad campaigns like "it's time to leave the country" hovering over us; reminding us that there are better places to go to, if only for a brief vacation or "holiday." I'm sure a lot of English could point out Ibiza on a map, while most Americans have never heard of it. But take heart...the average American may not be that bright, but by far, those of us who should know, must know, and want to know are familiar with places outside of our union.

[USAgentleman]

Continuing...you state that the state of your union is your business. Fair enough. I pointed that out just to show, that there are many issues whose cause you should take up within your borders, rather than crossing the Atlantic to take pot-shots at the U.S. Of course, the railways here are an issue for all who are here, and do business here. Two years ago, I was stuck in France because there was a storm, and the UK tracks were so inadequate, that they wouldn't let the trains run on them! France had the same storm, so the Eurostar could go to the Channel, but not to England, as all the trains had been halted. As I am living here, the railways and all the other problems are my problems now, too, for better or for worst. Americans support a united Northern Ireland, no doubt. In part, because a great many Irish escaped English oppression and we took them into our society. As the first nation to overthrow English tyranny, we know what it's like for those who have yet to do so. Am I advocating a return for the six counties of Ulster to Eire rule? Not necessarily, but I can say, many Americans empathize with the Irish.

[USAgentleman]

As for International politics....I don't agree with every action taken by the U.S. government, no doubt. But I do support the current actions thus far, as do an overwhelming majority of Americans. Noam Chomsky, whom I assume you are referring to, is an interested read. As an American, he is entitled to his opinions of the Fed, as he can vote in our elections, form PACs (political action committees), and engage in grassroots activism to express his opinion politically. Non-Americans lack that luxury. Thus, his complains can amount to something, if followed by the appropriate action. Non-Americans can appeal to the government, but that won't do too much. Sanctions, then? Against the U.S.? What country wants to do that? The best course of action, IMO, that they could take, would be to appeal to Americans. Let their ideas be known, in the hopes of changing the opinion of voting americans. Vocally condemning the U.S. abroad (especially when contrary to what your own government is saying and doing) is very counterproductive. In part, that's why I'm here. An American gains little by debating American politics with people from Britain, China, or Ghana. I value the opinions of other folks, because seeing a different angle of the picture gives one a fuller view of the surroundings. Yet, all I see are American bashing complaints, that I attribute (perhaps unjustly) to an inability to move on from the loss of the Empire in limeys, and jealousy over the deterioration of European might on the world stage. Am I wrong? Perhaps. But that's not what I see.

[USAgentleman]

Let it be noted, that there are actions that the U.S. has taken that I am not only not proud of, but condemn. Let it also be noted, that the U.S. is not a perfect country, although it does adhere to the international treaties that it signs (and ratifies) and does not sign up to treaties (like Kyoto) that are not in its interests. Does that mean that the U.S. is selfish? Not necessarily. Global warming affects us all, too...we just choose to take a different route to reduce emissions, rather than one that would cripple our newly recovering economy. Again, a nation looking after its own interests. I mentioned our accomplishments not so much to boast, but to show, that the U.S. has a GREAT deal to be proud of. Others see this as arrogance, or at least an overly high opinion of our nation. Our accomplishments speak for themselves. Of course, other countries have reason to be proud, too; I never even suggested otherwise. We are also very appreciative of those europeans (many who adopt to live in the U.S. and become citizens) who have worked on our projects. We are a nation of immigrants, after all..from the Native Americans who came across the Bering Straits (whose blood runs through a great many of us), to those from Europe, Africa, and Asia (well, those who didn't come across the Bering Straits). To be succint: recognizing ones accomplishments (and although I am tempted to mention the many others...that is not the focus of this dialog) does not necessarily equate to arrogance. BTW, read a history of the internet. The BT patent suit is for hyperlinks, one of many aspects of the internet. It is OVERWHELMING known, that creators of the internet are various U.S. agencies (military, National Science Foundation, etc.).

[USAgentleman]

As for "Principe" by Machiavelli. Let's not be so pedantic, especially with foreign tongues. The article "IL" is not necessary in this case, although if you translate from English, I can understand why you would instictively add one. Here's an Italian library site that omits the article, as I did. http://www.liberliber.it/biblioteca/m/machiavelli/
principe/html/sommario.htm Articles are odd things. In the U.S., we say, "I am going to THE hospital." In England, I hear, "I am going to hospital." In other words, the article "the" is omitted in British English. Is this less correct? To me it is, and I wince every time I hear it. But as it is acceptable to the natives, it is a perfectly acceptable variant (at least on this island). As for names...Machiavelli is an appropriate spelling of the man's name. Again, check out the website link...It's in Italian, but you should be able to see how it illustrates my point. Now, again, don't be so pedantic! The age that you read it is irrelevant; the lessons you took home from it are. Politics isn't an excuse, but when you understand politics, you understand why politicians act as they do. The lessons therein are invaluable to a politician, and generally accepted as required reading. Again, the state of our union is strong; and democracy abounds. If I disagree with government actions, I can write my state senators, and local representatives, form PACs, start petitions, lobby government, etc. But that wasn't my point at all...

[USAgentleman]

Surely, with your monarchy and hereditary peer in the House of Lords, you aren't suggesting that WE are undemocratic? While Imperial strongarming may no longer be the norm now by a severely weakend Britain, the Empire's new clothes -the Commonwealth- are being quite comfortably worn. Subjugating others is not what I call exporting democracy. It can be argued that it developed in spite of, or even in response to, British subjuagation.

[USAgentleman]

If America's tendrils sow the seeds of economic slavery, why is it so prominent in European society? And elsewhere? People complained in the 80's about the Japanese buying our country; the neglected to think about how we are selling it to them.. But, Americans are not primarily concerned with exporting democracy. Hell, I disagreed with Clinton's stance as 'World Policeman' and the policy of 'Nation-building' advocated by the previous administration. So does the current administration, which is why we aren't doing that now. I never claim the U.S. has been lilywhite. We have very lofty ideals, but perfection can not be created by imperfect human beings. Has the U.S. exported democracy? That's debatable. But my point through all of this, is just that the U.S. is not deserving of the extremely harsh anti-American down with America sentiments that I am reading. If you disagree, make it known...I will defend to the death your right to your opinions. But slander and libel, defamation and continual condemnation of the U.S...directly or indirectly...is not productive. I didn't spend an hour typing to alienate folks...and heck, I live in London, for crying out loud, so I am not anti-British (or anti-limey, which I do not see as a derogatory term, btw). I am just advocating a greater understanding of the world in general, and the U.S. in particular through a greater understading of...us. My cause is just, and if I am to be criticized for doing so, so be it. Try to remember...we are on the same side. We are ALLIES, but you treat us like enemies. To quote Rodney King, "Can't we all just get along?" I believe we can. Peace.

[incitatus]

I can be as peacefull as you like. To me your original answer read as a sermon: the text being We are powerfull, you are not we can do as we like, learn to love it. Until I read this I had no interest in responding to the question. I consider it to be invective. The point with Il Principe (and the manuscript has the article) is that it is a directive on how to run a dictatorship. It is absolutely amoral, which is why Macchiavelli was villified for so long. All that it allows you to understand is that politicians behaave that way to gain power, or that countries behave that way to dominate others. It does not grant a licence. It also does not say why. Power by itself is an empty thing. At home you may be democratic. Abroad you are not. If you atke a glance at the monarchy you will see it has no power. The house of lords is being reformed....with mixed results

[incitatus]

However if you believe we have a controlling interest in the Commonwealth you are bizarrely misinformed. We can't even get them to agree sanctions over Zimbabwe. We have no real influnce over them, do not form the largest part of their economies, no power at all. In some of the states a governor general signs the laws, but this is ceremonial, he has no power of veto. The commonwealth is more of an excuse for a sporting event than anything else. In English, by the way, the article was never necessary to accompany a noun. It was added largely when you began to mutilate our language. In fact going to hospital and going to the hospital are two different cases, the general and the specific. We have been allies. Probably will be for a good while, but the point is that we don't have to like or approve of the rhetoric of your leaders or your behaviour any more than you do ours. You are not always in the right. No one is.

[incitatus]

The anti american feeling has a root cause. Some of it is unfair. Some of it isnt. The economic slavery I am referring to is not of the sort found in the EC. Here we just have the kind of thing Marx and Engels disapproved of. In places like India and Pakistan American (an some European I admit) companies perform acts that have not been seen in the west since the 1700's. Does the name Union Carbide ring a bell? America does have things to be proud of, but you did not invent the world. You are the richest nation on earth (possibly) and the strongest (probably) but not the most ethically advanced by a long shot. (I reckon its the swedes). Be proud but do not preach. It will ALWAYS raise hackles. We can disagree with our government as you can disagree with yours. Personally I think that the war in Afghanistan was the most shortsighted and morally bankrupt foreign policy decision of the last three hundred years, but what do I know. You say we tyrannised you.....do you have any idea how loose the control over the American colony was? Or how spurious the Boston tea party was as portrayed? And you werent the first to fight us off. The Scots did. For a while. And the French. We used to do that sort of thing a lot. Slander and llibel require untruth. I believe that my statements rest within the bounds of fair comment. It has been pointed out to me that if I dont play nicely with my americans I wont be allowed to keep them, so perhaps we should agree to differ. I fear we will not see each others point of view, but such is the case where ethics meet realpolitik. And I dont continually bash Americans. You make quite good ice cream