Imperial America Part II

Previously we concluded that America does not meet the criteria for an Imperial Power in the classical sense because it does not have a policy of territorial expansion, domination, or power, yet America is widely viewed by others as Imperialistic. Many liberals and non-Americans reject this classic definition of Imperialism because America doesn’t fit the definition therefore; they have elected to redefine Imperialism. The basis for this new definition for Imperialism is to ensure America can be described as Imperialistic because it includes “influence” and on this basis American can indeed be accused of Imperialism. But even with this expanded definition, America may not actually be Imperialistic because this would require America to have a formal and announced policy to influence or change other countries and cultures. But the question becomes, if others choose of their own accord to emulate America, does that represent Imperialism?

Within this new framework the New Imperialism includes economic, political, and cultural influence. Certainly America is an economic superpower not only through our vast expenditures worldwide, which range in the trillions of dollars and touch almost every country, but through our consumption as well. If the American market were to collapse, the entire world would drop into global depression and whole countries would be ruined economically. This actually happened in 1929 when the American Stock Market crashed it brought the whole world to its knees and that was before America became the economic powerhouse it is today.

There is no doubt but that the American economy represents a major part of the world economy if not the actual foundation of it. But the reality is that it is our purchasing power that makes us such a formidable economic force, not some policy of economic domination. Our purchasing power is a direct result of our productivity and capitalist system. It is capitalism that is shunned by much of the world because it permits a great disparity in wealth, and this brings us to the concept of Imperialism via political domination. This charge is leveled at the US primarily by the various dictators and Marxists around the world, because the very word “democracy” is a threat to their power.

America is frequently accused of attempting to impose democracy – American style democracy – on the rest of the world, but this is really not the situation. America’s policy has always been one of self-determination by the people being governed. Now having a policy and being able to enforce it are two separate things entirely, hence the USSR was able to subjugate Russia and most of Eastern Europe through intimidation. This is also true in Cuba, Venezuela, and various countries around the globe. The US has chosen not to intervene because these governments at least appear to be self-detemined. However, when it is possible the US has consistently acted in the interest of the people being governed and when military force is used, that military is withdrawn as soon as practical. But that just means that the US is not Imperialistic in the classical sense, yet American politics influences much of the world.

The concept of equal rights for women or equal rights for all was initiated by America and voluntarily adopted by various other countries. The same is true for the concept of sexual harassment, hate crimes, environmental protection, and many more. These political changes have been freely adopted by other countries – primarily in the west. It was the US that pioneered the concept of human rights and human rights violations which are widely recognized today. However, these were changes that the US adopted internally and never inflicted on other governments. These concepts were freely adopted by other governments reflecting America’s drive for equal treatment for all. So America’s political views are widespread but spread through influence not through any policy that inflicts these on others. But America’s influence isn’t restricted to the political arena but it extends culturally as well and perhaps this is the one area that causes the most criticism around the world.

America exports our culture through movies, television, language, the internet, and business. There is a long list of American companies whose names and logo’s appear around the world; companies such as Coca Cola, McDonalds, Burger King, IBM, Disney, Microsoft, and many others. These are businesses which are expected to make a profit and represent investment and employment in the countries where they exist. Yet, many regard these businesses as a form of American Imperialism, when in fact they are an example of American entrepreneurship and capitalism. If these businesses didn’t have customers they would go out of business, so the critics of these American companies do not represent the feelings of the majority of the citizens. This is particularly true in France where English words are creeping into the language, in spite of strenous efforts by the government to prevent it.

Of course television has played a dramatic role in the cultural influence of America. When the USSR ran a television show that showed poverty in America it backfired on them because the poor in America had TV sets, automobiles, nice clothes, food, and generally a home, things missing for many citizens of Russia and other countries. The result of television and movies has been the spread of American style of dress, food, and language which are being adopted worldwide, especially by the youth of these countries. It isn’t that people want to be Americans as much as they want to be LIKE Americans. Consequently, America is seen as Imperialistic by many liberals and governments, when in fact the influence of America is being voluntarily absorbed by the people to the chagrin of the governments. America is not Imperialistic by policy but there is no doubt that America’s influence is impacting virtually every country in the world and it is this influence that offends many governments who fear that influence, the Muslim countries in particular see American culture as destabilizing. America is seen as the great Satan because of the temptations it offers in the form of freedom.

Is McDonald's an Imperial Power

Classic imperialism is defined as a policy of extending control or authority over foreign entities or countries as a means of acquisition and maintenance of empires. Usually this applied to the direct territorial conquest of these entities or countries. This form of imperialism describes the Roman and Persian Empires as well as the European Empires of the 19th Century. These empires were essentially the expansionist adventures by stronger nations over weaker ones primarily for the purpose of monetary gain via taxes or enslavement. None of these empires proved stable or enduring although to some extent they did have a residual cultural influence.

The term “Imperialism” was actually coined in the mid-1800’s to reflect the expansionist policies of the European countries – primarily France and England. It was argued by Lenin as well as other anti-capitalists that capitalism induced imperialism because these capitalist countries had to find new markets for their goods and new sources for the needed raw materials. However, this argument rings hollow because no demonstration is offered showing that capitalism is the root cause of expansionist policies. Even if these countries had not been capitalist but instead socialist, communist, or even some other alternative, could they have grown and prospered without looking externally for resources and markets? The historical fact is that the greatest of the Communist Regimes, founded by Lenin was imperialistic and became the USSR, so the logical conclusion is that capitalism is not the driver of imperialism or expansionist policies.

More recently it has been argued by Marxist scholars who are unwilling or incapable of abandoning their view that capitalism is the root of all evil, that capitalistic international trade and banking is the driver of Imperialism. This argument seems to be mounted in order to forgive the USSR its demonstrated imperialism. Unfortunately it seems the USSR fragmented but prospered once it abandoned the Marxist policies of central planning and government control and introduced capitalism. Now it can be argued that it is capitalism that drives political freedom as well as economic vitality. This has been illustrated more recently as the Peoples Republic of China moves increasingly to a capital orientation. In fact the current PRC more closely resembles the old Imperial China than it does the People’s Paradise that the Marxist apologists would have you believe.

Furthermore, if international trade is an indicator of imperialism then the most imperialistic nation on the planet is the PRC. They manufacture and export more goods than they import and they dominate the world markets. This view of international market expansion is true of other nations as well so international trade per se does not seem to be a good indicator of either imperialism or expansionism. So this brings us to the issue of the World Trade Organization and the impact open markets have on the international community. Products are financed by country A, manufactured in country B, and sold in countries C and D, by country A. The implication is that country A is exploiting the workers in country B by paying wages lower than they would have paid in Country A and that by selling their products in countries C and D they are denying work to the people in those countries. Obviously the inference is that had not country A sold their products in these countries someone would have produced the same product locally. Unfortunately this isn’t quite how it works. Work is being generated in all of these countries because people must organize and distribute these products. The focus is on the manufacturing rather than on the selling, distribution, or the law of supply and demand. It is also worth noting that the greatest beneficiary of these trade policies has been the PRC and third world countries whose revenues have increased while the trade deficit of the most capitalist country in the world has increased. And this brings us to the nub of the problem and that is the growing Americanization of the world. Those who feel that America is to blame for the world’s ills, have now coined a new version of imperialism and that is “Cultural Imperialism”

This form of imperialism is associated with America primarily although both Russia and China have not only practiced classic imperialism but have also forced their culture onto other countries who they have occupied. However, even though these countries have received some condemnation for these actions, they have largely been ignored by the international community while the United States is viewed as the epitome of an imperialistic nation. France in particular has adopted strong measures against “Americanization” and much of the Islamic violence is being justified on the basis of resisting the erosion of Islamic values by America’s cultural imperialism.

Clearly the US is not a classic imperialist nation and this is evidenced by the withdrawal of American forces from every country they have had to liberate from invaders and this includes France as well as Haiti and it can be argued that the Haitians would be a great deal better off under American control. Instead this charge against the US rests on the spread of American culture through the internet, Television, Cinema, and of course food, with McDonalds being the visible manifestation of American domination. American English has become the lingua franca of the world. Virtually everyone in the world speaks English and protesters write their signs of protest in English so when their protests are broadcast via satellite television everyone will be able to read them. After all not many people can read Chinese, Swahili, or Urdu, but virtually everyone can read English. Because American television and movies are seen worldwide, American customs and styles are in great demand. Hence you see people in some very remote places wearing sweatshirts and T-shirts carrying the names of American Universities and wearing baseball caps. Usually these products are not manufactured in the United States and may not even be sold by an American company, but they represent America and the desire by others to be “American”, which is actually a state-of-mind”.

Then of course we have McDonalds and Coca Cola who represent the physical imperialism of America. These products are in great demand and the largest McDonalds in the world is in Russia. Obviously the local people want these products or these companies would simply close up shop and leave, but these companies are growing and expanding everywhere. What is not noted is that they also create jobs in the host country and generate revenues via taxes. Since these companies as well as Burger King, Starbucks, Microsoft, and others are in great demand and expanding with demand we can conclude that the people do not view America as either evil or imperialistic, so who does? Certainly the French government sees America as imperialist and is fighting a losing battle against the “Americanization” of the French Language. American English – like America itself is a polyglot – where words from virtually every language in the world are simply adopted and used which has made English the most subtle and expressive language in the world. The French government wants to keep French “pure” but that is impossible because they cannot compete with the sheer volume of new words. But the French are rather silly and don’t really represent any serious threat to the US.

The greatest threat to America comes from Islam and it is the spread of American culture and ideals which drive their violence toward America. America is called the “Great Satan” which is a term generally misunderstood by the West. Satan is the tempter – the evil one who corrupts and leads souls astray and in this context it is easy to see how America can be viewed as the Great Satan. We have freedoms unheard of in other parts of the world and these are viewed and demonstrated in television and movies everyday. We have great wealth and this is demonstrated as well and it is these things that motivate others who covet a better life. Virtually everything – good and bad – is available in America and it is freedom to pursue individual happiness that sets America apart and drives the man-in-the-street to be more “American”. So it isn’t the average citizen who sees America as Imperialistic but rather it is the power elite and the religious leaders who oppose America and who accuse America of being imperialistic. The people want what they see America has and it is this demand that drives the demand for American culture, not some deliberate effort by America to obliterate the local culture. In fact, this resistance to Americanization is simply an example of Cultural Fascism where the local governments are using force both directly and indirectly to thwart the desires of their people.

So while Russia and China practiced forced cultural imperialism, America’s cultural domination is not via any government policy of the United States but is the result of the desires of the local populace to have the freedoms and wealth they see in the US. So is Ronald McDonald an imperialist? It seems a better question is “can imperialism be self-induced”? If people are voluntarily seeking to adopt American products and culture that hardly qualifies as imperialistic while the active resistance of their governments to their desire to be more American is cultural fascism.