Are the US currently an empire?

Jan 2014
1,738
Portugal
What is the "imperialistic politics as classicaly defined"? And why can't influence abroad be seen as imperialism?
I think that traditionally empire as a territorial conotation.

per ex. David Abernethy considers that, empire is a state (metropole) that controls legaly or possess one or more territories (colonies) conquered, ruled and possessed by the imperial state outside of its boundaries.
External influence that US has can be hardly classified (following this traditional interpretation) as imperialism.
 
Last edited:
Dec 2017
212
Florida
I think that traditionally empire as a territorial conotation.

per ex. David Abernethy considers that, empire is a state (metropole) that controls legaly or possess one or more territories (colonies) conquered, ruled and possessed by the imperial state outside of its boundaries.
External influence that US has can be hardly classified (following this traditional interpretation) as imperialism.
Ok then according to that definition the US is still an empire because it still possesses Puerto Rico.

Honestly though, I think that definition is severely lacking and does not do justice to the intricacies of imperialism. Imperialism today does not follow traditional views of colonial acquisition because it realized that it creates its own revolution and it does not bring with it the economic values of which many thought it did.
 
Last edited:
Dec 2017
212
Florida
Yes. But that point enters point 2 in my post.
Today I think the definition is slighty diferent, that's way I point it out.
Ok, I guess what I am having an issue with is your statement that you made in which you stated that exerting influence in a region is not a form of imperialism. How can you claim that it's not imperialism when the definition of imperialism is the oppression of a weak nation by a stronger nation whether it is politically, culturally or economically. Imperialism can be broken up into 3 major categories colonialism, protectorates, and spheres of influence.

Hypothetically, if the United States were to go to Cuba and say to them "If you don't get rid of your Communist government we are going to place trade embargos on your country," how is that not imperialism? How is that not an attempt to exert force/control over a foreign government?
 
Last edited:
Jan 2014
1,738
Portugal
Ok, I guess what I am having an issue with is your statement that you made in which you stated that exerting influence in a region is not a form of imperialism. How can you claim that it's not imperialism when the definition of imperialism is the oppression of a weak nation by a stronger nation whether it is politically, culturally or economically. Imperialism can be broken up into 3 major categories colonialism, protectorates, and spheres of influence.

Hypothetically, if the United States were to go to Cuba and say to them "If you don't get rid of your Communist government we are going to place trade embargos on your country," how is that not imperialism? How is that not an attempt to exert force/control over a foreign government?
I agree with you, if we follow traditional definition.

No I don't agree. That's just agressive diplomacy. Imperialism would be invading Cuba to force them to follow that politics.


Yet the fronteirs between what it is and what is not, are hardly static.
Like I wrote before: we still can see traces of imperialism, but not imperialism per se (excluding territories like Alaska, Puerto Rico):

3) The represantion of American bases in several countries all over the world, can be inserted on the definition of neo-imperialism/neo-colonialism, joined by the strongest force in the world in terms of Soft Power.
 
Dec 2017
212
Florida
I agree with you, if we follow traditional definition.

No I don't agree. That's just agressive diplomacy. Imperialism would be invading Cuba to force them to follow that politics.


Yet the fronteirs between what it is and what is not, are hardly static.
Like I wrote before: we still can see traces of imperialism, but not imperialism per se (excluding territories like Alaska, Puerto Rico):
So it's only imperialism if the US actually enters the country? That is bupkis
 
Jan 2011
372
Indiana, USA
Ok, I guess what I am having an issue with is your statement that you made in which you stated that exerting influence in a region is not a form of imperialism. How can you claim that it's not imperialism when the definition of imperialism is the oppression of a weak nation by a stronger nation whether it is politically, culturally or economically. Imperialism can be broken up into 3 major categories colonialism, protectorates, and spheres of influence.
If someone in America makes a movie about a despotic space regime and those that oppose it in favor of another alternative form of governance - that is not imperialism. Even if some view it as a lesson applicable to their own lives and and take action against their own government.

Even the case where a foreign power might take steps to influence an American election is not Imperialism. It is, perhaps, other things, but not Imperialism.
 
Last edited:
Dec 2017
212
Florida
If someone in America makes a movie about a despotic space regime and those that oppose it in favor of another alternative form of governance - that is not imperialism. Even if some view it as a lesson applicable to their own lives and and take action against their own government.

Even the case where a foreign power might take steps to influence an American election is not Imperialism. It is, perhaps, other things, but not Imperialism.
Why are you bringing up Star Wars?

So you think that the purposeful action of a government to influence the election of another government for various reasons and through various means is NOT imperialism?

What then is imperialism?