Would We Be Willing to Give Up Imperialism to Combat Terrorism?

Are you willing to give up the notion that an ideology is infallible and cannot be prone to criticism and that criticism of an ideology is not bigotry?

 

What's sad is that imperialism - even if it doesn't result in terrorism - is not viewed negatively by Americans. It has to result in death of Americans and non-Americans alike to be questioned, and even then it's a hard sell.

Imperialism is wrong because it's imperialism. The fact that it produces increased terrorism makes it more urgent, but imperialism is wrong by definition regardless of that. Even if it provides economic stability, even if it provides some positive things... imperialism is wrong and Americans would never accept even a "good" imperialist in their country. This is the subconscious American exceptionalism at work: never thinking that maybe, non-Americans don't like invasion of their sovereignty either.

Just having a military base in another country based on the ostensible threat of force or chaos is wrong. That's why we nearly entered nuclear war when Russia attempted to furnish a base in CUBA. It's not acceptable to Americans for anyone else to do it, EVEN if people sing the praises of that foreign entity, to have a base near America.

Heck, Americans are uncomfortable with UN monitors at US-run elections on the basis of protecting sovereignty. How the same people can turn around and act like their bases are not causing any problems (some even think it's a FAVOR begrudgingly offered by US gov't!!!!) is beyond me.

The US should NOT withdraw their bases just because foreigners want them to. They should shut those bases down because most Americans do not see a dime from the trillions being protected by those bases, and the money needed to run hundreds of imperial bases can be much better spent on health, education, research, development, infrastructure, fighting drug gangs and cartels at home, funding campaigns (rather than candidates relying on corporate money), etc.

This is simply a practice perpetuated by your 1%ers for our 1%ers. These are the people who benefit, no one else.

So many people are lacking things in the richest country ever. In every other empire ever, this is the chapter before the last. But you guys can change history if you want to. I have faith in Americans, you've changed the course of history before, you can do it again.

 

'Entertain'? No, I've never debated that American overreach is an issue on this message board Jesus Christ.
I asked you the question because you actually literally don't entertain the idea that Islam is a large motivating factor for Islamic terrorists. I've 'entertained' the idea that American interventionism is a failed policy since the Vietnam war plenty of times on this message board.

Stop with your **** false equivalency. I've 'entertained' your thread's premise hundreds of times on this message board. It's you who is unwilling to entertain the notion that Islam is partly to blame.

 

Is America actively controlling the countries where US bases are located?

How is this related to imperialism?

 

It would just be filled by the Chinese and Russians.

 

It's too late.

 

In terms of past hegemons and past empires, the Unite States is probably relatively the most benign.

I think a question needs to be asked is that being a world power/hegomon/empire inherently entails interventionism/colonialism.

Can anyone name a previous world power that didn't try to expand their influence in expense of lesser powers?

 

See, this is exactly it.

It doesn't matter what happens, you don't own it.

The Russians and Chinese say "well, they're doing it too!" and the Americans say "well if we don't, they will!". This is like a thief making the case that if he doesn't do it someone else will.

It's still thievery. It's still wrong.

Plus, anyone would prefer Russian or Chinese imperialism, it's a much easier relationship to get out of, it's a much better negotiating dynamic cause these are weaker countries, and it would diversify the power dynamics in the region for the better.

Right now, the US dominates regional politics without any significant challenge and this has worsened things considerably in the last 10 years. Autocrats or the leaders of our Shamocracies are turning that corner and starting to turn more Hitleresque, which is typically what happens in every place where imperialism rules. Plenty of lessons in recent history even. And of course, when leaders turn Hitleresque, their opponents go full r****d aka terrorism.

 

This is what every empire says, that it is kinder than the previous ones so that makes it ok.

British, Chinese, Persian, Roman, all the empires, same statement. Doesn't make it ok, it's imperialism. And it's only more benign because each fall of the previous empire taught taught the next empire to work more behind the scenes. Also because people are more powerful today more able to organize. That's why no one is following the British Raj system anymore, just doesn't work because people associate it directly with imperialism. The fact that the new Raj is from the same race and speaks the same language as the people doesn't make them any less of a foreign imperialist.

Also, let's not forget, you are a soldier of the empire. I don't mean that as an insult, I'm sure you've legitimately saved countless people and killed many dangerous people and you want what's best for you and your country, however you must recognize your bias here. You are without question more moderate than the average veteran, but you are still literally from the most biased group in the world to speak about this.

We're all biased in some way of course, but the bias of being a soldier of the empire is particularly important and I only say this so that you consciously mitigate that bias in these discussions because I respect your POV.

 

But that's not my question. Yes, we all have biases, but the important question to ask is being a world superpower inherently entail overreach? Are we asking too much to expect it not to happen?

Do you think there is any part of the globe, any nation-state, group of people etc that could do it better?

 

While that might be true, what the U.S. did to Latin America was pretty severe and damaging. Many many people died from our actions.

We and the UK screwed a lot with the middle east, taking comfort that we were not as bad as the Romans or the British Empire is not something to rest our hats on.

 

Yes, imperialism is wrong and very expensive.

 

Number 1, I don't think we can choose to stop.

Assuming we stop anyway though, I don't think it requires us to drop as many attitudes as you enumerate. The Cold War narrative can stay if we regard it as history and see ourselves entering a new era. American exceptionalism can remain if you neuter that part of the idea that we must promulgate our exceptional values across the earth. We can still call ourselves special and be isolationist. If we're worried about the clash with the Muslim world, I think we could actually allow ourselves to keep the Monroe Doctrine and maintain an imperial attitude about the Americas (though hopefully more beneficent than it has been in the past).

But anyway, I don't think it's possible to stop doing it, and perhaps less and less possible as the world becomes more interconnected. And it'd be a mistake to think of ourselves as monolithic as if the government could just set a policy. Some aspects of American imperialism are military and geopolitical. But, much of it is economic (through international corporations) and even cultural, and we can't just choose to stop.

 

What we can do is apply pressure on Arab and other gov'ts to modernize their countries away from backwardness and work to fight extremism.

Take Pakistan for instance. we need to work with them to help destroy the radical Islamic movement culturally, militarily, economically, and politically.

 

Define the modern day imperialism first.

 

[Premium Post]
The real beneficiaries of "American Imperialism" are the unorganized, unstructured people groups living in these places that so desperately need our assistance. These people need a voice in a democracy. They need dollar based economies, not black market, drug-based economies filled with corruption and cronyism. They need policing, property rights and rule of law. They also need to be shown how to manage their energy and natural resources through farming, power development, mining, and oil & gas extraction. They need schools and infrastructure. These suffering people in places like Detroit, Cleveland, and most urban areas in the population centers need to be liberated from their populist, democratic oppressors.

Look at how many lives can lifted out of poverty when an American's touch reaches these impoverished lands. Imperialism over the years has created some of the best economies in Asia and in sub-sahara Africa (until they are turned back over to the locals like what we've seen in Zim and now South Africa). The same is true in the United States, until such point as the takers outnumber the makers and the system collapses on itself through liberal rule. So until this situation is corrected, the honest, hard-working Americans will continue to build their houses far away from public transportation and apartment complexes to avoid any degradation to their quality of life.



GOOD DAY

 

The average American benefits through cheaper credit, gas, imports, and things. Whether that materialist, consumerist society is a benefit depends on where you are socially and intellectually.

The world has been living in a state of globalism and transnational corporations. I don't think government or even nationality will influence how these companies are slipping through national laws to impose their goals of exploitation, extraction, and suppression.

Defending against this will require a multinational effort between strong governments not to accede to race to the bottom policies such as tax shelters/havens or dangling legal national loopholes other nations have to respect through international treaty.

Same old ****. Different toilet.