
:''For other uses, see American Empire (disambiguation)'' The American Empire is a politically-charged, informal term used to describe the current political, economic and cultural influence of the United States on a global scale. It is generally, though by no means always, used with a negative connotation. Proponents of the term claim that it is an appropriate one, based on American history and an evident American expansionism ideology, as conveyed in the cultural ethos of "Manifest Destiny" —often called "American exceptionalism." ==Expansion== As one of the motivations underlying the American Revolution and secession from Great Britain was the constraint imposed by the British government on westward territorial expansion beyond the Appalachian Mountains, an expansionist tendency was thus present in the United States at the beginning of the nation. At first, the focus was on expansion within North America and internal agricultural and industrial development. Some 130 years after independence, however, the Spanish American War (which was partially provoked by American politicians and businessmen, like William Randolph Hearst, interested in overt European-style imperialism) initiated the period of overt empire-building involving the annexation of territory formerly held by foreign governments. After the war, the defeated Spanish Empire ceded most of its colonial possessions (including, for example, the Philippines and Puerto Rico) to the control of the United States. ===American colonial posessions=== The following areas have at one time or another been part of a sort of "American Empire," that is to say colony that were annexed to the United States, yet not granted statehood or self-rule during the period of U.S. rule: *American Samoa (1900-) *Cuba (1899-1909) **(now independent; however, Guantanamo Bay remains under the control of the U.S. military) *Dominican Republic (1916-1922) (now independent) *Guam (1898-) *Hawai'i (1898-) (now a U.S. state) *Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands (1944-1990) **(now comprising the independent states of the Marshall Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia, and Palau; as well as one commonwealth—the Northern Mariana Islands) *Panama Canal Zone (1903-1979) (now part of Panama) *Philippines (1898-1946) (now independent) *Puerto Rico (1898-1952) (now a commonwealth) *U.S. Virgin Islands (1917-) Further, although never under the sovereignty or control of the government of the United States, colonization of areas along the western coast of Africa by former slaves and free African American from the United States led to the creation of the nation of Liberia starting in 1823. Because this colonization was at various times either tacitly or explicitly supported by the U.S. government, and because the colonizers consisted of American nationals, Liberia may also be considered among the results of American colonialism. Also, the occupations of Occupied Germany and Occupied Japan and subsequent deployment of large contingents of military forces therein, or even the close cooperation and support of the Republic of Korea along with the substantial, long-term presence of the U.S. military there, have been suggested to constitute a ''de-facto'' military colonization of those countries. However, absent an intention to incorporate parts of those countries into the national territory of the United States or to exercise political sovereignty over them, such long-term military presence falls short of the characteristics of traditional colonization. Many of America's former colonies have since become independent countries, states of the American union, or self-governing commonwealths. However, despite the fact that these countries are legally independent, the US has often intervened military or otherwise influenced their domestic affairs. Examples of military intervention are the US invasion of the Dominican Republic in 1965 or the Operation Just Cause in 1989. An example of non-military intervention in former U.S. colonies are the assassination attempts on Fidel Castro and the CIA-supported Bay of Pigs Invasion in 1961. ==Contemporary use of the term== Today, what many consider to be the "American Empire" is much more informal. Critics allege that although the United States no longer colonizes countries in the traditional sense, the nation's government still engages in psuedo-colonial "patron-client" relationships with many states. The allegation is that such relationships undermine the sovereignty of such states, and make their governments subsidiary or submissive to the persuit of US interests. This phenomenon is not new, nor necessarily a sufficient condition of imperialism, but has always been one facet of imperialistic control. Critics have likened this form of "American imperialism" to similar actions taken by European nations such as Britain and France in relation to soverign states such as China and Egypt in the late 19th Century. America's military presence by itself is widespread and influential. According to researchers [http://www.inthenationalinterest.com/Articles/Vol2Issue29/Vol2Issue29Ferguson.html], around the world, the United States maintains 750 military bases or installations staffed by American military personnel in roughly 130 countries. The economic and cultural influence of the United States is also substantial, which has engendered resentment of Americanisation of many countries. It has been suggested that America has achieved the status of world hegemon (in the sense of a superpower lacking opposition of comparable power or influence, similar to Rome after the Punic Wars or Britain after the Napoleonic Wars). Put another way, the United States's power is such that it can act unilaterally without fear of substantial reprisal because of the superiority of its military forces in any relevant theater of operations. The term "American Empire" is today most often used as a derogatory expression to criticize America's military and cultural effects in various parts of the world. At the same time, many Statesman, scholars, and historians within the United States insist that America ''is'' an empire in the sense that the country holds tremendous power over the world, comparable to other great empires of history. Many thus argue that the United States should thus not shy away from using this power as a way of maintaining order, peace, and safety for both America and the world at large. This is ideology is exemplified by the neoconservatism (United States) Project for the New American Century, which became influential in the 2003 decision to invade Iraq. As recited among the PNAC's statement of principles: :''We need to accept responsibility for America's unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles.'' [http://newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm] While supporters cite such ideology as one with motivations of global peace and stability, many in opposition view it as harmful to diversity, and reject the notion of a single dominating superpower in order to maintain "balance", "equality", "mutual respect", and "harmony" among all nations around the world. Another criticism is that recent List of U.S. foreign interventions since 1945 has shown that despite US claims to the contrary US foreign policy has much more often brought war and conflict than peace. As an example of the viewpoint commonly expressed by those accusing the United States of imperialism, William Blum wrote in his book [http://www.killinghope.org Killing Hope - US Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II] that "From 1945 to 2003, the United States attempted to overthrow more than 40 foreign governments, and to crush more than 30 populist-nationalist movements fighting against "intolerable" regimes. In the process, the US bombed some 25 countries, caused the deaths of several million people, and condemned many millions more to a life of agony and despair." ==Books== There has been much literature in recent years about the current state of what some consider to be the "American Empire." In ''American Empire: The Realities and Consequences of U.S. Diplomacy'' (2002), Andrew J. Bacevich argues that the end of the Cold War did not mark the end of an era in American history, because (he says) American foreign policy did not fundamentally change after the Cold War. Bacevich argues, like historians Charles Beard and William Appleman Williams before him, that American foreign policy has long been driven by the desire to expand access to foreign markets in order to benefit the domestic economy. Bacevich believes that the moralistic reasons given for American foreign intervention mask the true economic reasons, and he warns that American economic imperialism (in the guise of globalization) may not be in the best interests of the United States. In the book ''Empire'' by Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri, the USA is seen as central for the development and constitution of a new global regime of Power (international) and sovereignty, termed ''empire'' by Hardt and Negri. The book builds on neomarxism, postcolonialism, postmodernism ideas and globalization theories. Because the ''empire'' of Hardt and Negri is decentralized and global, not the rule of one sovereign state over another, it may be differentiated from the ''American Empire'' described in this article. Though many critics and analysis of "American Imperialism" tend to be on the left side of the political spectrum, there are right-wing critics as well. Prominant American conservative activist Patrick Buchanan discusses American foreign policy in his book ''A Republic, Not an Empire'' and argues that the modern United States has betrayed its founding principles by engaging in excessive "meddling" around the world. Buchanan in turn argues that acts of terrorism against the United States, such as the September 11, 2001 attacks are the direct result of America's ill-fated attempts to intervene in places where she should never have been involved in the first place. Buchanan's arguements have been interpreted as the latest form of American isolationism, long a critical counter-voice in American foreign policy discussions. In his books ''Empire: How Britain Made the Modern World'' (2003) and ''Colossus: The Price of America's Empire'' (2004), historian Niall Ferguson has drawn parallels between the British Empire and the imperial role of the United States in the late 20th and early 21st centuries. However, he describes the United States political and social structures as more like those of the Roman Empire than of the British. In contrast to Hardt and Negri, Ferguson views ''empire'' as a neutral description, with both positive and negative aspects. ==See also== *American Century *Bush Doctrine *Carter Doctrine *History of United States Imperialism *Military history of the United States *Monroe Doctrine *Truman Doctrine *Pax Americana Foreign relations of the U.S.
==Removal of Okinawa from list of colonies== I removed Okinawa from the list of former U.S. colonies recited in the article, because as far as I can discern no one ever intended Okinawa to become part of the national territory of the United States. That territory is occupied by a military of a particular country, does not itself cause the occupied territory to be a "colony;" rather, at least some intention to make the occupied territory a part of the occupying country (or at least an intention ''never'' to relinquish control of the occupied territory) should be present in order for the term "colony" to properly apply. Thus even Gibraltar might be termed a colony, or even Holstein in Germany (a stretch perhaps) because these territories (which were formerly under the administration of a foreign sovereign) are now either under permanent occupation or integrated into the national territory of the occupier, but I've seen no evidence that the U.S. ever planned to make Okinawa a U.S. territory or possession (or even to occupy it forever). --User:Ryanaxp 22:39, May 6, 2005 (UTC) ==Iraq== Shouldn't the list of former colonies include Iraq? :Iraq was never officialy a colony. And besides it is not a former one ;-) :User:Turrican ==Dispute of neutrality== I hereby dispute the neutrality of this article. While the author mentions that "America's military presence by itself is breathtaking and influential", I as an uninformed Reader would believe that the term is only used by some freightened people who do not want the US to bring Peace just because they prefer some undefinable form of diversity. Look how much the US has messed with the interior politcs of "Former" Colonies like Cuba or the Dominican Republic. There is a difference between calling a state independent and being independent - the current example is the recent "indepence" of Iraq. I also believe that the millions of live lost because of american wars of agression and because they supported questionable regimes, for example in order to support the financial goals of US Companies ( United Fruit) should be mentioned in this article. User:Turrican 22:07, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC) :So, go ahead and do it. Remember: Wikipedia:Be Bold in Editing. --User:Ryanaxp 22:39, May 6, 2005 (UTC) Someone wrote: "Most of America's former colonies have since become independent countries, states of the American union, or self-governing commonwealths" Ahem. While this is true, it is still false. Most of these (notably the Philippines) didnt get to be "independent countries" by the simple tutorship of America. Nonsense -- read up on the Phillipine-American war, Cuba.-User:Stevertigo It never said "thanks to America most of these former colonies have since become..." user:J.J. ==Meaning of paragraph?== What exactly does this passage mean: "Often by exporting America's self popularized political system to a conquered territory with false promises of self-government, only in exchange for America's military occupation and total control of its natural resources. Such can be seen where America's post Cold War military involvements are primarily focused on mineral rich regions of the world." I think I understand the gist, but its wording is a little confusing. user:J.J. ''Today, what many consider to be the "American Empire" does not fit historical definitions of imperialism and colonialism, but the United States influence takes on different and discrete forms.'' Did you mean discreet as in secretive? Discrete also would make sense because of the modular, sequential nature of US intervention. ==Further dispute of neutrality== I also dispute the neutrality of this article. Its thesis is that the United States is in actuality or effect, or acts like, an empire. It then proceeds to offer support for this argument. While I would not argue with most of the points made here, I don't think that this sort of polemics has a place in an encyclopedia.
#REDIRECT American Empire
See other meanings of words starting from letter:
Words begining with American_Empire:
American_Empire
American_Empire
American_empire
American_Empire:_Blood_and_Iron
American_Empire:_The_Victorious_Opposition
American_Empire_(disambiguation)
American_Empire_(Harry_Turtledove)
American_Empire_(style)
American_Empire_Project
American Empire
:''For other uses, see American Empire (disambiguation)'' The American Empire is a politically-charged, informal term used to describe the current political, economic and cultural influence of the United States on a global scale. It is generally, though by no means always, used with a negative connotation. Proponents of the term claim that it is an appropriate one, based on American history and an evident American expansionism ideology, as conveyed in the cultural ethos of "Manifest Destiny" —often called "American exceptionalism." ==Expansion== As one of the motivations underlying the American Revolution and secession from Great Britain was the constraint imposed by the British government on westward territorial expansion beyond the Appalachian Mountains, an expansionist tendency was thus present in the United States at the beginning of the nation. At first, the focus was on expansion within North America and internal agricultural and industrial development. Some 130 years after independence, however, the Spanish American War (which was partially provoked by American politicians and businessmen, like William Randolph Hearst, interested in overt European-style imperialism) initiated the period of overt empire-building involving the annexation of territory formerly held by foreign governments. After the war, the defeated Spanish Empire ceded most of its colonial possessions (including, for example, the Philippines and Puerto Rico) to the control of the United States. ===American colonial posessions=== The following areas have at one time or another been part of a sort of "American Empire," that is to say colony that were annexed to the United States, yet not granted statehood or self-rule during the period of U.S. rule: *American Samoa (1900-) *Cuba (1899-1909) **(now independent; however, Guantanamo Bay remains under the control of the U.S. military) *Dominican Republic (1916-1922) (now independent) *Guam (1898-) *Hawai'i (1898-) (now a U.S. state) *Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands (1944-1990) **(now comprising the independent states of the Marshall Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia, and Palau; as well as one commonwealth—the Northern Mariana Islands) *Panama Canal Zone (1903-1979) (now part of Panama) *Philippines (1898-1946) (now independent) *Puerto Rico (1898-1952) (now a commonwealth) *U.S. Virgin Islands (1917-) Further, although never under the sovereignty or control of the government of the United States, colonization of areas along the western coast of Africa by former slaves and free African American from the United States led to the creation of the nation of Liberia starting in 1823. Because this colonization was at various times either tacitly or explicitly supported by the U.S. government, and because the colonizers consisted of American nationals, Liberia may also be considered among the results of American colonialism. Also, the occupations of Occupied Germany and Occupied Japan and subsequent deployment of large contingents of military forces therein, or even the close cooperation and support of the Republic of Korea along with the substantial, long-term presence of the U.S. military there, have been suggested to constitute a ''de-facto'' military colonization of those countries. However, absent an intention to incorporate parts of those countries into the national territory of the United States or to exercise political sovereignty over them, such long-term military presence falls short of the characteristics of traditional colonization. Many of America's former colonies have since become independent countries, states of the American union, or self-governing commonwealths. However, despite the fact that these countries are legally independent, the US has often intervened military or otherwise influenced their domestic affairs. Examples of military intervention are the US invasion of the Dominican Republic in 1965 or the Operation Just Cause in 1989. An example of non-military intervention in former U.S. colonies are the assassination attempts on Fidel Castro and the CIA-supported Bay of Pigs Invasion in 1961. ==Contemporary use of the term== Today, what many consider to be the "American Empire" is much more informal. Critics allege that although the United States no longer colonizes countries in the traditional sense, the nation's government still engages in psuedo-colonial "patron-client" relationships with many states. The allegation is that such relationships undermine the sovereignty of such states, and make their governments subsidiary or submissive to the persuit of US interests. This phenomenon is not new, nor necessarily a sufficient condition of imperialism, but has always been one facet of imperialistic control. Critics have likened this form of "American imperialism" to similar actions taken by European nations such as Britain and France in relation to soverign states such as China and Egypt in the late 19th Century. America's military presence by itself is widespread and influential. According to researchers [http://www.inthenationalinterest.com/Articles/Vol2Issue29/Vol2Issue29Ferguson.html], around the world, the United States maintains 750 military bases or installations staffed by American military personnel in roughly 130 countries. The economic and cultural influence of the United States is also substantial, which has engendered resentment of Americanisation of many countries. It has been suggested that America has achieved the status of world hegemon (in the sense of a superpower lacking opposition of comparable power or influence, similar to Rome after the Punic Wars or Britain after the Napoleonic Wars). Put another way, the United States's power is such that it can act unilaterally without fear of substantial reprisal because of the superiority of its military forces in any relevant theater of operations. The term "American Empire" is today most often used as a derogatory expression to criticize America's military and cultural effects in various parts of the world. At the same time, many Statesman, scholars, and historians within the United States insist that America ''is'' an empire in the sense that the country holds tremendous power over the world, comparable to other great empires of history. Many thus argue that the United States should thus not shy away from using this power as a way of maintaining order, peace, and safety for both America and the world at large. This is ideology is exemplified by the neoconservatism (United States) Project for the New American Century, which became influential in the 2003 decision to invade Iraq. As recited among the PNAC's statement of principles: :''We need to accept responsibility for America's unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles.'' [http://newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm] While supporters cite such ideology as one with motivations of global peace and stability, many in opposition view it as harmful to diversity, and reject the notion of a single dominating superpower in order to maintain "balance", "equality", "mutual respect", and "harmony" among all nations around the world. Another criticism is that recent List of U.S. foreign interventions since 1945 has shown that despite US claims to the contrary US foreign policy has much more often brought war and conflict than peace. As an example of the viewpoint commonly expressed by those accusing the United States of imperialism, William Blum wrote in his book [http://www.killinghope.org Killing Hope - US Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II] that "From 1945 to 2003, the United States attempted to overthrow more than 40 foreign governments, and to crush more than 30 populist-nationalist movements fighting against "intolerable" regimes. In the process, the US bombed some 25 countries, caused the deaths of several million people, and condemned many millions more to a life of agony and despair." ==Books== There has been much literature in recent years about the current state of what some consider to be the "American Empire." In ''American Empire: The Realities and Consequences of U.S. Diplomacy'' (2002), Andrew J. Bacevich argues that the end of the Cold War did not mark the end of an era in American history, because (he says) American foreign policy did not fundamentally change after the Cold War. Bacevich argues, like historians Charles Beard and William Appleman Williams before him, that American foreign policy has long been driven by the desire to expand access to foreign markets in order to benefit the domestic economy. Bacevich believes that the moralistic reasons given for American foreign intervention mask the true economic reasons, and he warns that American economic imperialism (in the guise of globalization) may not be in the best interests of the United States. In the book ''Empire'' by Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri, the USA is seen as central for the development and constitution of a new global regime of Power (international) and sovereignty, termed ''empire'' by Hardt and Negri. The book builds on neomarxism, postcolonialism, postmodernism ideas and globalization theories. Because the ''empire'' of Hardt and Negri is decentralized and global, not the rule of one sovereign state over another, it may be differentiated from the ''American Empire'' described in this article. Though many critics and analysis of "American Imperialism" tend to be on the left side of the political spectrum, there are right-wing critics as well. Prominant American conservative activist Patrick Buchanan discusses American foreign policy in his book ''A Republic, Not an Empire'' and argues that the modern United States has betrayed its founding principles by engaging in excessive "meddling" around the world. Buchanan in turn argues that acts of terrorism against the United States, such as the September 11, 2001 attacks are the direct result of America's ill-fated attempts to intervene in places where she should never have been involved in the first place. Buchanan's arguements have been interpreted as the latest form of American isolationism, long a critical counter-voice in American foreign policy discussions. In his books ''Empire: How Britain Made the Modern World'' (2003) and ''Colossus: The Price of America's Empire'' (2004), historian Niall Ferguson has drawn parallels between the British Empire and the imperial role of the United States in the late 20th and early 21st centuries. However, he describes the United States political and social structures as more like those of the Roman Empire than of the British. In contrast to Hardt and Negri, Ferguson views ''empire'' as a neutral description, with both positive and negative aspects. ==See also== *American Century *Bush Doctrine *Carter Doctrine *History of United States Imperialism *Military history of the United States *Monroe Doctrine *Truman Doctrine *Pax Americana Foreign relations of the U.S.
American Empire
==Removal of Okinawa from list of colonies== I removed Okinawa from the list of former U.S. colonies recited in the article, because as far as I can discern no one ever intended Okinawa to become part of the national territory of the United States. That territory is occupied by a military of a particular country, does not itself cause the occupied territory to be a "colony;" rather, at least some intention to make the occupied territory a part of the occupying country (or at least an intention ''never'' to relinquish control of the occupied territory) should be present in order for the term "colony" to properly apply. Thus even Gibraltar might be termed a colony, or even Holstein in Germany (a stretch perhaps) because these territories (which were formerly under the administration of a foreign sovereign) are now either under permanent occupation or integrated into the national territory of the occupier, but I've seen no evidence that the U.S. ever planned to make Okinawa a U.S. territory or possession (or even to occupy it forever). --User:Ryanaxp 22:39, May 6, 2005 (UTC) ==Iraq== Shouldn't the list of former colonies include Iraq? :Iraq was never officialy a colony. And besides it is not a former one ;-) :User:Turrican ==Dispute of neutrality== I hereby dispute the neutrality of this article. While the author mentions that "America's military presence by itself is breathtaking and influential", I as an uninformed Reader would believe that the term is only used by some freightened people who do not want the US to bring Peace just because they prefer some undefinable form of diversity. Look how much the US has messed with the interior politcs of "Former" Colonies like Cuba or the Dominican Republic. There is a difference between calling a state independent and being independent - the current example is the recent "indepence" of Iraq. I also believe that the millions of live lost because of american wars of agression and because they supported questionable regimes, for example in order to support the financial goals of US Companies ( United Fruit) should be mentioned in this article. User:Turrican 22:07, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC) :So, go ahead and do it. Remember: Wikipedia:Be Bold in Editing. --User:Ryanaxp 22:39, May 6, 2005 (UTC) Someone wrote: "Most of America's former colonies have since become independent countries, states of the American union, or self-governing commonwealths" Ahem. While this is true, it is still false. Most of these (notably the Philippines) didnt get to be "independent countries" by the simple tutorship of America. Nonsense -- read up on the Phillipine-American war, Cuba.-User:Stevertigo It never said "thanks to America most of these former colonies have since become..." user:J.J. ==Meaning of paragraph?== What exactly does this passage mean: "Often by exporting America's self popularized political system to a conquered territory with false promises of self-government, only in exchange for America's military occupation and total control of its natural resources. Such can be seen where America's post Cold War military involvements are primarily focused on mineral rich regions of the world." I think I understand the gist, but its wording is a little confusing. user:J.J. ''Today, what many consider to be the "American Empire" does not fit historical definitions of imperialism and colonialism, but the United States influence takes on different and discrete forms.'' Did you mean discreet as in secretive? Discrete also would make sense because of the modular, sequential nature of US intervention. ==Further dispute of neutrality== I also dispute the neutrality of this article. Its thesis is that the United States is in actuality or effect, or acts like, an empire. It then proceeds to offer support for this argument. While I would not argue with most of the points made here, I don't think that this sort of polemics has a place in an encyclopedia.
American empire
#REDIRECT American Empire
See other meanings of words starting from letter:
A
AB | AC | AD | AE | AF | AG | AH | AI | AJ | AK | AL | AM | AN | AO | AP | AR | AS | AT | AU | AW | AX | AY | AZ |Words begining with American_Empire:
American_Empire
American_Empire
American_empire
American_Empire:_Blood_and_Iron
American_Empire:_The_Victorious_Opposition
American_Empire_(disambiguation)
American_Empire_(Harry_Turtledove)
American_Empire_(style)
American_Empire_Project
Sponsored links: praca.
These materials are based on Wikipedia and licensed under the GNU FDL
YouTube.com videos better site than Turbo Tax 2007
