The argument that America is imperialist is still incorrect. America is the most powerful country and culture in a highly integrate world. Like any power, America is Machiavellian but that is not that same as imperial. Ignatieff is one of the few who argue American imperialism who bothers to get the big picture correct. His conclusion is wrong or, at a minimum, lazy.
I notice that you choose to assert this rather than argue it. Since you have done so, tell me what you would call replacing a regime in a region critical for the global economy if you would not call it the action of an imperial power. And the argument that this is the action of the world community won't work this time. Bush I used that argument in 91. It had a bit of grab to it then. Not much; but some. Now that's gone.
What would you call the placement of US troops around the globe?
Strikes me, Ignatieff is absolutely correct. It's time now to argue whether it's wise or not, moral or not, produces, in the net, good consequences or bad, for whom. Rather than to argue whether the US is now advancing itself into an imperial power.
The other measure might be how the US is regarded around the world. Right now, of course, it grows worse and partially because of the imperial role we have assumed but just as much, if not more, because of the attitude the US has taken about that role. |
