Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Noel de Leon who wrote (50006)	10/7/2002 2:11:59 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

I'm from New York City. You really ought to reconsider your assumptions. I grew up in Manhatten. That's Manhattan... (with an "A") And if you grew up there and are an American, then I find it fascinating that you consider the US an "imperialistic nation"... That makes you an imperialist as well by birth, right?? Living on an island that the imperialist Dutch purchased for $24 bucks in goods from the Lenape indians (who likely obtained it themselves through imperialism.. :0) We obviously have two different definitions of Imperialism. And maybe you've written your own dictionary, but I prefer to use those "imperialistic" dictionaries which I believe best convey the meaning of the word and the actions that can be defined by it: the-prince-by-machiavelli.com Now imperialism of an economic nature can be defined as the following: Imperialism can also refer more generally to a country's efforts to have a lot of power and influence over other countries, esp. in political and economic matters. Source: Cambridge International Dictionary of English But in the case of the US, we really have little ability to exert power and influence over a country or region unless those governments/rulers perceive it is in their interest. Sure.. we have lots of money and we "buy access" to that country, but with every purchase, there has to be a seller. And that means for the US to have influence, someone currently possessing control has to grant or sell that right. Now if the US is merely "imperialistic" because it seeks to gain access to a nation's economy (creating businesses, subsidiaries, or to sell products there), then I would have to state that EVERY NATION, no matter how rich or poor they are, are economic imperialists. For each nation seeks to penetrate the economic and cultural barriers of another country in order to persuade them to purchase products and services. Thus, each nation seeks to expand its economic and cultural influence at the "expense" of the the existing cultural "order".. But you see.. I welcome foreign cultural imperialism to a certain extent, because I believe it makes the US a much stronger nation (as well as a place with some great cuisine).. But US "imperialism", as I stated before, if it exists, is an imperialism of ideas that promote the right of individual choice over the dictates of indigenous "traditionalists" adverse to change. And so is catholic Philipino oppression against the muslims of the southern Islands..." Once again you tacitly admit that American Imperialism is a fact of life. Hmmm.... no... I believe that Catholic Filipino "imperialism" is being advanced because the muslims in the region opted to choose the path of Islamic militancy, making Filipino and American interests "dovetail" temporarily.. But I have no doubt that Catholic Filipinos will continue to "oppress" the Muslim population, making it very difficult for them to live unless they convert to Catholicism... And the last time I checked, the Catholic church was based in the Vatican (its own country with representation in the United Nations)... So would it not be more appropriate to state that the Filipino government is a tool for Catholic "imperialism"?? Hawk