preview

American Imperialism Analysis

Decent Essays

My entire life I was taught that education is a major key to success. This notion was embedded in me, just like many others to receive an education so you can support yourself and truly experience the quintessential American Dream. At a very young age in America we are taught to compete in every aspect of life, to fight for ourselves (metaphorically), don’t take “no” for an answer, always “get better”, and never “accept mediocrity”, these two phrases are what my high school football coach would preach to the team daily. Having this competitive mindset of always wanting more and stopping at nothing to achieve our personal goal might seem great especially for student athletes, but what if our government had this same mindset? There are wars happening …show more content…

stop at nothing to achieve its goal? Well, as a hegemony the goal is to maintain power by “making the world safe for democracy” (Johnson, 71). Chalmers Johnson defines hegemony “as a substitute for imperialism without colonies” (Johnson, 29). Though he has noted that this definition is of many writers, not just his own. Johnson goes on by stating that Americans have used euphemisms to “soften and disguise the U.S. version” of imperialism (Johnson, 29). Imperialism, which Johnson defines as “exploiting weaker states” by Western states causing what says the worst infliction, racism, which I will go more in depth later …show more content…

government has done an excellent job of dividing and conquering civilians by humanitarian versus militaristic imperialism (neocons) in politics. The neocons of the Reagan and Dubya’s administration was a mixture of “military imperialism of Theodore Roosevelt and the idealistic imperialism of Woodrow Wilson” (Johnson, 70). This, as you would imagine is the “Right” or conservative Republican side. On the other dividing side, is what is referred by Johnson and Kumar as the “humanitarian imperialist” (Kumar, 59; Johnson, 71). Even though this phrase has a positive connotation in the word “humanitarian, it also has the word imperialist, which contradict the phrase all together. The Clinton and Obama administrations would be referred to as humanitarian imperialists (Kumar, 59; Johnson, 71). These administrations use rhetoric such as “making the world safe for democracy” (Johnson, 71). These “soft” imperialists as Johnson describes are not in any way anti-war. The neocons “espouse preventative war” (Johnson, 70), while the humanitarians consent to war due to “an act of force of humanitarianism” (Kumar, 59). The September 11th attacks were not due to any sort of humanitarian effort it was an all-out nationalistic effort to go to war with the middle east. As far as politics in America is concerned, these two ideologies are used to gain votes or support the agenda the administration is trying to uphold. Whether it be, America trying to save a country from

Get Access