A Lesson In Imperialism

Forgive me if you already know the things I am about to express. But the parent in me wants some of my younger readers, to understand some things about history, they may not remember from history class.

The United States did not invent imperialism.

I know the MoveOn.Org types and Michael Moore lovers would have you believe otherwise. To hear them, and others, you would think that the world was nothing but one big eternal bliss before Bush. But the truth is, since the beginning of time there have been conflicts.

Early in mankind's history, some clans/tribes attacked other clans/tribes for different reasons. Some did it out of necessity, but many did it out of greed and envy. And as those clans/tribes grew in strength and numbers, civilizations and empires were eventually formed. They, in turn, had their battles and wars with other civilizations for many of the same reasons.

Who can forget the mighty Egyptians, the Babylonians, the Assyrians, and the Persians? They all held parts or all of the fertile crescent at one time or another. At times, it was in their best interests to do so, because to control that area meant plenty of food for their citizens and their armies. (Food is one of the main staples in the hierarchy of needs and if their civilization was hungry, they did what they had to do. It's only human nature.)

The Assyrians were an interesting story in that, during the early parts of their civilization, they were peace loving farmers and shepherds that kept getting raided and attacked by others so much, that eventually, it made them mean. (The old principle of "being mean to a dog makes him meaner", applies in this case.)

As time ticked on, the Greeks and Romans rose out of the dust, well after the Mesopotamian Empires had killed off millions. These two, were the foundations of western civilization and both had their share of battles and wars with various other peoples, for various reasons (not unlike those that lived in the fertile crescent in previous centuries).

As Europe rode through the dark ages into the age of mercantilism and kingdoms, it too was imperialistic in nature. The wars fought over this period were bloody and ruthless, for many reasons. And again, the reasons were not too different.

There are many, many other nations/empires that I can cover. The truth is, all nations and empires (of any major consequence) have been imperialist at some point in their history. So, if this is all you know, you are probably tempted to paint the concept of imperialism with one big broad brush. But, such is not the case.

There are two types of imperialism, beneficent and exploitative.

Many empires attacked and conquered lands occupied by others, for the sole purpose of making that empire bigger and richer. They may not have done so out of pure necessity, but they did it. And they held the lands under their control, until someone took it away from them, or the people that were conquered rose up and drove the conquerers out.

The ones that enslaved and oppressed the people they conquered, were exploitative imperialists. Colonial Africa is a prime example of exploitative imperialism. During that period, European mercantilists were in such a heated competition with each other, they conquered lands in Africa for raw materials and precious metals to pad their monarchs' treasuries. They enslaved the conquered Africans, used them for labor of their own resources; only to have the spoils shipped back to Spain, Britain, Portugal, or France. There was very little benefit to those conquered.

The ones that conquered a territory, made the area a better place for the inhabitants, and eventually offered them citizenship once they proved themselves, were known as beneficent imperialists. The Romans, the Greeks, and the Persians (during certain reigns) were examples of this.

(An important point to note in all of this is, not all imperialists were strictly one form or another. At times a regime may have conquered for exploitative purposes and at others, for beneficent purposes.)

So now, why have I said all of this?

Today we hear the arguments of the left, accusing the USA of being an imperialistic bully, when it comes to the affairs of other nations. To hear them tell it, we routinely exploit other lands for our own selfish and greedy purposes. We have in the past, there is no denying that we have had some questionable periods in our history. But the important thing to remember is, basic political science teaches us, every country looks out for its own best interests above and beyond the interests of others. And I would expect us to be no different or we will get exploited, ourselves.


The U.S. was guilty of exploitative imperialism in the Indian Wars, during our early western expansion. And slavery in the south could be cited as another eaxample. But for the most part, what has the U.S. done with people that we have militarily defeated? We only need to look back to WWII to see what we do with conquered lands and their people.

Today, Japan is no longer an imperialist monarchy, conquering foreign lands, and enslaving the people they conquered. They are a modern, prosperous, democratic republic that is living in peace with its neighbors. They no longer threaten, they compete. And they do it fairly and squarely. This current generation of Japanese vote for their leaders and have far greater freedom and liberty, than their forefathers.

Why? Because the U.S. taught them, instead of enslaving them. They were taught the value of having a free society and how to manage freedom. Germany and Italy were taught the very same principles and have flourished as free and democratic societies, as well.

Italy has been a bit rocky at times with their different governments, in the years after the war. But, they always get it together and form a new one, picking up pretty much where the old one left off. They have been a valuable ally in the war on terror.

Germany (though not on the right course at this particular moment) has done well with their freedom. The Brits, the French, and the Americans combined their sectors together and transitioned a pretty stable republic, far from the fascist and nationalist state it had been in the previous centuries. The Soviets, however, turned their sector into a satellite socialist puppet government, of the exploitative type. Just the opposite, of what we were trying to do.

And America? You know we financed it all. Don't get me wrong, we paid for it in blood and sacrifice, just like our allies. And our men died right alongside the Europeans. But when it came time to repair the damage and rebuild, we carried the bulk of the load. We made it happen. We didn't keep anything as our own.

Today, instead of setting up a puppet government in Iraq, we are leading them into the infancy of a democratic age and are carrying the load in the rebuilding process. We are doing it because a free and stable Iraq is in the best interests of the USA (and the whole world). We do it not by oppressing the Iraqi people, but by liberating them.

In all cases but a few, we have left those we conquered free and in much better shape, than before. Therein lies the huge difference between the USA style of imperialism, and that espoused by the Islamic Extremists. In fact that is the difference between us and many, many other civilizations that preceded us, as well.

So the next time a leftist calls the U.S. an imperialist nation, you can explain to him/her the difference. My guess is it won't matter to them, because it is hard to convince an extremist of any fashion, they are wrong. But you will know the difference and will not be tempted to fall for their distorted perceptions.