Imperialists
Opponents of Imperialism Have No Clue
By Daniel G. Jennings
Lately it has become fashionable for intellectuals of the left such as Gary Hart and Molly Ivins and of the right, such as Pat Buchanan, to denounce the idea of an American Empire. That is they are opposed to any American attempt to impose order upon the world, or any use of our military forces to make positive change in other countries.
Yes these critics have some valid points but their argument falls flat because they offer no alternative to American Imperialism. Neither set of opponents of imperialism offers any constructive or realistic alternative to the imperialistic agenda of the Bush administration.
The answer offered by the leftist critics of the war, who are the most visible and vociferous critics of Bush, is an extremely vague and dangerous one. The leftists believe that we must place our faith in diplomacy, the United Nations and the international community. This solution would work if every other country in the world were a civilized place and every government and group in the world willing to play by the rules and obey the laws.
It won?t work in a world full of people like Osama Bin Laden, Saddam Hussein, Mohamar Khadafi and Mr. Kim of North Korea. The only thing that these people understand is brute force we can?t communicate with them unless we speak their language. These criminals are not going to obey the rules and follow the law unless a large policeman is going to come and force to them to do so.
The right wingers? answer is an even worse one, they want America to start behaving as if it were the year 1903 or 1923 when the US could retreat into Fortress America and quietly ignore the rest of the world. This strategy worked fine before the advent of Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles and jet airliners. No matter what America does it can?t hide from the bad guys and there is no defense we can build that they won?t be able to penetrate. The only way to keep our country safe is to fight the evil at its source and prevent the conditions that lead to the rise of terrorism.
The anti-imperialists then are not realistic critics of Mr. Bush?s policies they are wishful thinkers who refuse to accept the ugly realities of today?s world. The leftists are arrogant Eurocentric elitists who like to think that the rest of the world is Europe or Canada. The people who believe that Fidel Castro is a good social democrat and that third world thugs and terrorists can be trusted to play by the rules. The right wingers want to return to an earlier simpler time that only existed in books and movies. A pristine pure America uncorrupted by the evil world around it.
To the silliness and stupidity of the anti-imperialist arguments we can add a rather nasty note of hypocrisy. Howard Dean, the anti-imperialist standard bearer in the elections, believes it was wrong for America to conquer Afghanistan and Iraq but thinks those countries are now our responsibilities in his own campaign literature. In other words, Dean is saying that the wars of conquest were wrong but it is right to keep what we conquered. (This assertion is made in the standard Dean campaign flyer now circulating around the country)
Gary Hart, who demands that Democrats defend the ideal of an American republic against an Empire, wrote that America should form a constabulary in an editorial the Jan. 18, Denver Post. A constabulary would be a militarized police force specifically formed and trained to police the empire. In the same commentary Hart advocated reforming the military to make it more mobile and flexible. In other words a leaner meaner fighting force that would make it easier for America to use its military to impose its will on other nations. Hart, the critic of Empire, is advocating the creation of the institutions necessary to conquer and police an empire.
Hart and Dean seem to be accepting the necessity and inevitability of American imperialism, they just don?t want to admit it. Or more likely they don?t want to say because they don?t want to loose the anti-war vote.
Given the shallowness of their arguments and the note of hypocrisy in their rhetoric, it is safe to dismiss the ant-imperialists as moral cowards who are trying to hide their cause?s lack of substance with high-sounding rhetoric.