Apr 062008
Empire or Humanity? What the Classroom Didn’t Teach Me About the American Empire – by Howard Zinn.
Related posts:
Follow Me
Empire or Humanity? What the Classroom Didn’t Teach Me About the American Empire – by Howard Zinn.
Related posts:
 Open Thinking by Alec Couros is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. |
Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha |
What a powerful piece of writing. Imagine what that guy has seen being involved in WWII and then furthering his education after the war. I think the fifth estate did a similar piece of work about the US and its “warring roots.” It was very good about linking the past history to present day policy. Scary!
Great video,
I’m fascinated by the roots of imperialism during the national period, during the 1780s and 90s. In particular, on the least known US wars, the Tripolitan War that took place, on and off, from the mid1790s until 1815. It is a fascinating early encounter with the Muslim worlds, and traces many of the same national fears and impulses toward empire. In fact, I think the invoking the US as an empire outside of its context within a North American and European frame tends to create the cartoonish vein of narrative “evil” that the above video kind of falls prey to.
It is easy to vilify a government or a nation, it is much more difficult to trace the relations between governments and nations that afford such a striking divide between what what might call “Western Civilization” and the rest of the world. I often find tracing the relations of power far more interesting that framing an historical bogeyman that we can all hiss at, and while many of those relations flow back to Washington DC, and US capital more generally, as they astutely note in “The Wire,” when you start tracing the money anyone is fair game. In part, it is why some way of imagining these things outside of our strict, and often limiting, national stereotypes that afford some powerful ways of forging a way of mapping the world anew. Which is what I have always been interested in, is the US the only nation with “warring roots”? And can any European colony in North America or elsewhere really divorce itself from those roots so neatly? I’m not sure what the answer is to such a question, but I know a concepts like the “US” and/or “Canada’ aren’t nearly precise or nimble enough to begin to explain it.
Here is the edited version of the above comment. I’m a terribly irresponsible commentator when it comes to grammar, coherence and the like :)
Great video,
I’m fascinated by the roots of imperialism during the United States’ national period. In particular, one of the least known US wars, the Tripolitan War (aka the Barbary Wars), that took place on and off from the mid 1790s until 1815. It is a fascinating early encounter with the Muslim world, and traces many of the same national fears and impulses toward empire we are encountering currently. In fact, I think invoking the US as an empire outside of the context of North America and Europe frame tends to create the cartoonish vein of narrative “evil” that the above video falls prey to at moments.
It is easy to vilify a government or a nation, it is much more difficult to trace the relations between governments and nations that afford such a striking divide between what we might call “Western Civilization” and the rest of the world. I often find tracing the relations of power far more interesting that framing an historical bogeyman that we can all hiss at, and while many of those relations flow back to Washington DC, and US capital more generally, it is important to remember (as they astutely note in “The Wire”) that when you start tracing the money and power anyone is fair game. In part, this is why some way of imagining these things outside of our strict, and often limiting, national stereotypes might afford some powerful ways of re-imagining (and re-mapping) the world anew. Is the US the only nation with “warring roots”? And can any European colony in North America or elsewhere really divorce itself from those roots so neatly? I’m not sure what the answer is to such a question, but I know a concepts like the “US” and/or “Canada’ aren’t nearly precise or nimble enough to begin to explain it.
Pure drivel. Being the biggest, most powerful country on the block is a terrible thing, obviously. Nevermind the millions of lives we as a nation have saved through military intervention (even the a-bomb), physical support, financial aid, or material aid. Forget the invitation we were given to join in the imperialist party of World War II by the Japanese. Continue to pity the Native Americans and Mexicans, whose territory we “stole”. Ignore the fact that they, too, acquired their land through immigration and violent clashes with other “native” peoples, or the fact that this is how it worked throughout history–the stronger people overtook the weaker. It was the way things were done, and it was considered acceptable at the time. I, for one, am unapologetic that I live in the U.S., that we continue to be the dominant military power (although China may be taking that title), or that we desire to maintain our position of influence throughout the globe. The list of countries, peoples, leaders, and ideologies that owe their continued existence to the “imperialism” of the U.S. is long and illustrious. The academic, artistic, and technological developments endless. No country is perfect, but the ideal model is still the U.S.
I don’t believe “It was the way things were done” is an excuse or open invitation to continue in that respect. I would also proposition that we could be a much better role model to the world, still be powerful, still be respected but without the slimy undercurrents that currently exist when we help others. Read Confessions of an Economic Hit Man – very interesting and puts most of this “helpfulness” by the U.S. into perspective.
Just my thoughts
The ideal model is the U.S. – where they don’t even provide health care for their citizens, unlike any other country in the industrialized west.
Yep, sounds great.
We’ll get back to you after we try out some of the imperfect models, if you don’t mind.
Anyway why not try to refute specific facts from the video – if you can. And if you can’t take the truth, step aside – there are lots of Americans who can, like your distinguished historian Howard Zinn, for example.
In fact, reading Zinn might make a good way for you to begin your deprogramming. Try “The People’s History of the United States” for starters. If you’ve got the guts, that is.
Randy, I suspect there’s no point arguing with you. But one small observation. You write:
“we continue to be the dominant military power (although China may be taking that title), or that we desire to maintain our position of influence throughout the globe.”
The Pentagon’s own figures estimate that China’s total military spending in 2007 was between $97bn and $139bn. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/7276277.stm)
The Pentagon sharply criticized this level of spending, even though US spending on the military (which is scattered amongst official Defense budgets, ‘supplementary’ budgets for wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, money for “Energy” that maintains nuclear warheads, and Veterans benefits) is at least 1 Trillion dollars per year. More money on weapons than the rest of the world put together.
And of course, this ruinous amount of spending — financed with money borrowed from those Chinese you mention — is bankrupting the United States. Which would be of no concern to others were it not destroying the global economy and prospects for peace in the process.
http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/174884/chalmers_johnson_how_to_sink_america
Tobias,
I appreciate your point that “the way things were done” is not an excuse. It was a dramatically different period of American history, however, and spending time regretting the past is wasteful. What powerful nation does not have a brutal, distasteful history? One would like to think that we can learn from it and evolve, but not spend energy lamenting events of forefathers gone for decades or centuries. We should, indeed, do better, as you suggested.
Evan,
Ah, healthcare. Yes, ours is a pricey, insurance-dominated system. Yet, countless visitors from other nations still travel to the U.S. to seek the best care (Canada included). I would support any plan to make it more affordable, so long as the quality doesn’t suffer. In fact, I’d readily agree that the current system surely has a negative impact. Sadly, I haven’t heard any politicians share plans that would reassure me of this. Incidentally, I can offer a firsthand account of the fact that healthcare is already available to all, although not as easily as would be desired. My own sister’s family has received a great number of services, including hospital stays, without insurance or the means to pay. The idea that free healthcare doesn’t exist is a myth created by politicians.
As for your suggested readings, I’ll take them under consideration, although I think you are naive if you consider Zinn to be the prophet of the pure truth. Other historians, such as Oscar Handlin, argue that Zinn misrepresents the facts, that he fails to take events into the context of the time they occurred, and that he over-simplifies everything into a haves vs. have-nots struggle. Of course, I’m sure Handlin has his own slant to put on things, as well. Zinn is a radical who sees most of American history as a series of crimes against humanity, from what I can gather about the man. Regardless, I will look for his book–I do have the guts. ;)
Brian,
Great points–I was referring primarily to size of the force, rather than expenditures. It is staggering, to be sure, and I think most of us would surely rather see this amount reduced and/or diverted to other causes. The question that I would ask, is what is the right amount? Reducing our spending or our presence overseas–does that eliminate our enemies? Does that stop events such as 9/11 from happening? Do we also have to sever ties with allies such as Israel to appease its enemies? I’m not trying to be sarcastic, but I don’t think the answers are as simple as saying we are destroying the global economy through military action. There are forces and peoples that will be in conflict with one another for all time. We certainly need to find a better way, to be sure. I don’t have the answers, but I’d gladly vote for anyone who I thought did, from any party. I’m just arguing, I guess, that I don’t think I would choose to live in any other country, warts and all.