Log in

View Full Version : Is the U.S. imperialistic?


Iceman
February 23rd, 2011, 08:33 PM
Do you? Please explain why also.

Perseus
February 23rd, 2011, 08:37 PM
Considering we don't go around conquering surrounding lands like the Roman Empire, I do not believe we are since we are not an empire.
the policy of extending the rule or authority of an empire or nation over foreign countries, or of acquiring and holding colonies and dependencies.
If we were imperial, we would go and conquer places like Saudi Arabia for oil for cheaper prices. We don't conquer places and annex them as new territory. We are no where near imperialistic.

Sage
February 23rd, 2011, 08:38 PM
The United States has a widespread influence over the rest of the world and holds a cultural hegemony, but it is not an empire in the traditional sense of holding direct political power over other regions.

Iceman
February 23rd, 2011, 08:44 PM
The United States has a widespread influence over the rest of the world and holds a cultural hegemony, but it is not an empire in the traditional sense of holding direct political power over other regions.

It doesn't necessarily have to be political power.

Perseus
February 23rd, 2011, 08:46 PM
It doesn't necessarily have to be political power.

Uh, yeah it does. Read my definition. You can't have an empire if you have no political power of the area you conquered, because that's what makes you imperialistic - having an empire and expanding.

Iceman
February 23rd, 2011, 08:56 PM
The policy of extending a nation's authority by territorial acquisition or by the establishment of economic and political hegemony over other nations.
This is the defenition I am referring to.

Perseus
February 23rd, 2011, 08:59 PM
The policy of extending a nation's authority by territorial acquisition or by the establishment of economic and political hegemony over other nations.
This is the defenition I am referring to.

Ok? That's what I'm going by. America is nothing like that because we don't acquire territory.

Sage
February 23rd, 2011, 09:01 PM
Ok? That's what I'm going by. America is nothing like that because we don't acquire territory.

There's more to influence and authority than holding land.

Perseus
February 23rd, 2011, 09:06 PM
There's more to influence and authority than holding land.

Right. But that doesn't ascribe to imperialism. Just because you have cultural influence over someone doesn't mean you're imperialistic. That doesn't fall into the definition at all. Cultural synchronization (I forgot the word) is different than being taken over.

Bluesman
February 23rd, 2011, 09:16 PM
Imperialistic? No... not yet at least. We just don't know how to stay the fuck out of other countries' business.

Iceman
February 23rd, 2011, 09:18 PM
The policy of extending a nation's authority by territorial acquisition or by the establishment of economic and political hegemony over other nations.

China.
South Korea.
Examples of the economic hegemonoy.

KaelKaos
February 23rd, 2011, 09:23 PM
I believe we fit into more of an economic imperialism. We definitely are not imperialistic like Europe in the 1800 and 1900's who pretty much took over Africa, but we have our economic spheres of influences around the globe. However, we have Guam, Puerto Rico, Mariana Island, and the US Virgin Islands that are essentially "protectorates" to us. So yes, I believe one way or another America can be considered imperialist..but then again, for a country to be strictly non-imperlialist, they'd have to have no land outside their countries borders and they'd have to receive no economic gain from anywhere else. AKA really frickin' hard to do.

Perseus
February 23rd, 2011, 09:25 PM
The policy of extending a nation's authority by territorial acquisition or by the establishment of economic and political hegemony over other nations.

China.
South Korea.
Examples of the economic hegemonoy.

Well, gee. It's not like you said that in your OP or anything.

By that definition we are. You want to focus more on economic.

Iceman
February 23rd, 2011, 09:27 PM
Well, gee. It's not like you said that in your OP or anything.

By that definition we are. You want to focus more on economic.

:rolleyes:
I tend to not think of some things. I actually didn't plan on posting in here, just reading what everyone thinks, but you see where that went.

There's many aspects of imperialism, we are not all, but we are some.

Azunite
February 27th, 2011, 09:59 AM
They aer *this* close to rise to empire status

Perseus
February 27th, 2011, 10:10 AM
They aer *this* close to rise to empire status

Go on.

Cosmic
February 27th, 2011, 10:34 AM
In terms of the pressure and weight it throws around on a political level between itself and other countries. It pressurises countries that don't share it's philosophies on many aspects of society, it economically threatens and controls countries (think Cuba) if it sees fit, and it interferes and invades where it perceives a threat (think Iraq). In many senses, the US seeks to dominate and control other countries. It is arguable that whilst not traditionally imperialistic, the US may as well be.

Severus Snape
February 28th, 2011, 09:04 PM
Does America have an empire? No.

Perseus
February 28th, 2011, 09:45 PM
Does America have an empire? No.

Someone obviously didn't read through the thread.

Iceman
February 28th, 2011, 09:54 PM
Does America have an empire? No.

No we're just in 130 countries to sight-see.

Severus Snape
February 28th, 2011, 09:54 PM
Someone obviously didn't read through the thread.

Nope. Read the OP and replied. I have no interest in reading anyone elses' opinion on the matter.

Perseus
February 28th, 2011, 09:56 PM
Nope. Read the OP and replied. I have no interest in reading anyone elses' opinion on the matter.

Well, herp de derp. If you would have read the thread, you would have known what he meant since he decided to make his OP as vague as possible.

Iceman
February 28th, 2011, 09:57 PM
Well, herp de derp. If you would have read the thread, you would have known what he meant since he decided to make his OP as vague as possible.

Hey now. :D

Severus Snape
February 28th, 2011, 09:59 PM
Well, herp de derp. If you would have read the thread, you would have known what he meant since he decided to make his OP as vague as possible.

Vague to you. I knew exactly what he meant. Are you quite finished wasting my time?

Iceman
February 28th, 2011, 10:01 PM
Vague to you. I knew exactly what he meant. Are you quite finished wasting my time?

If you didn't want your time "wasted", you would have stopped posting by now. So to me it seems like your trying to be funny, or cool, but it didn't work.

Severus Snape
February 28th, 2011, 10:04 PM
If you didn't want your time "wasted", you would have stopped posting by now. So to me it seems like your trying to be funny, or cool, but it didn't work.

I'm not talking to you?

Iceman
February 28th, 2011, 10:05 PM
I'm not talking to you?

Talking in my thread, on VT, on the internet.

People will talk back, it's the debate forum, and I was just stating a fact that he wasn't "wasting" your time.

Severus Snape
February 28th, 2011, 10:07 PM
People will talk back, it's the debate forum, and I was just stating a fact that he wasn't "wasting" your time.

Maybe he wasn't trying, but he did. If this is a debate forum why has every response since my original one been off topic? Refute my argument that the US is not imperialistic because it doesn't have a physical empire or not, christ.

Iceman
February 28th, 2011, 10:11 PM
I did, already, and you failed to respond. First page, last post, you probably missed it, I did at first.

Severus Snape
February 28th, 2011, 10:13 PM
No we're just in 130 countries to sight-see.

We have no political control over those countries. We have limited political control over three, arguably. Anything remotely resembling administrative control does not exist. Military presence does not mean empire.

Iceman
February 28th, 2011, 10:15 PM
We have political sway in Iraq and Afghanistan, along with Pakistan.
We have economic sway over many, many more countries than that.

Severus Snape
February 28th, 2011, 10:17 PM
We have economic sway over many, many more countries than that.

So does China, so does Germany, so does Saudi Arabia. Plenty of countries can hold the world economy by the balls. Economic strength does not an empire make.

Amnesiac
February 28th, 2011, 10:17 PM
Note: 'imperialistic' does not necessarily imply an empire must be involved. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_imperialism)

Iceman
February 28th, 2011, 10:19 PM
So does China, so does Germany, so does Saudi Arabia. Plenty of countries can hold the world economy by the balls. Economic strength does not an empire make.

Ah but we are talking about contries themselves, not the world. We have the saw of countires economy. We also have the world, but this is about the countries.

Severus Snape
February 28th, 2011, 10:27 PM
You can't talk about economic "imperialism" in terms of local economies. No such thing exists. Three countries in the ME can oil starve the US into submission in a matter of weeks if they so chose. Any number of events out of US control could occur that would plunge the US economy into depression.

Iceman
February 28th, 2011, 10:30 PM
imperialism- the policy, practice, or advocacy of extending the power and dominion of a nation especially by direct territorial acquisitions or by gaining indirect control over the political or economic life of other areas

We have territories in many, many countires across the globe. We have indirect control over the political and economic life of other areas.

We are the defenition of imperialism.

Severus Snape
February 28th, 2011, 10:34 PM
We have territories in many, many countires across the globe.

Give some examples

We have indirect control over the political and economic life of other areas.

That is not a good definition of imperialism. By that definition Iraq is an imperialistic state, which it is not.

Perseus
February 28th, 2011, 10:34 PM
Vague to you. I knew exactly what he meant. Are you quite finished wasting my time?
I forgot to sign my neg rep, my b.
imperialism- the policy, practice, or advocacy of extending the power and dominion of a nation especially by direct territorial acquisitions or by gaining indirect control over the political or economic life of other areas

We have territories in many, many countires across the globe. We have indirect control over the political and economic life of other areas.

We are the defenition of imperialism.

No, we are not. The definition of an empire would be the Roman Empire or the Byzantine Empire. They are the definition. The U.S. is not. We don't go around expanding our borders, regardless if we have territories. Conquering nations are empires. We are not a conquering nation. Having just economic sway does not make you an empire.

Severus Snape
February 28th, 2011, 10:38 PM
I forgot to sign my neg rep, my b.

I care so much I could shit.

Iceman
February 28th, 2011, 10:38 PM
Empire? Where is the empire coming from. We are an imperialistic nation. We went to Iraq, and now we won't leave. We haven't left 130 countries.
And then China. We have a sway over their economic life.

Afghanistan
Albania
Algeria
Antigua
Argentina
Australia
Austria
Azerbaijan
Bahamas
Bahrain
Bangladesh
Barbados
Belgium
Belize
Bolivia
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Botswana
Brazil
Bulgaria
Burma
Burundi
Cambodia
Cameroon
Canada
Chad
Chile
China
Colombia
Congo
Costa Rica
Cote D'lvoire
Cuba
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Denmark
Djibouti
Dominican Republic
East Timor
Ecuador
Egypt
El Salvador
Eritrea
Estonia
Ethiopia
FijiFinland
France
Georgia
Germany
Ghana
Greece
Guatemala
Guinea
Haiti
Honduras
Hungary
Iceland
India
Indonesia
Iraq
Ireland
Israel
Italy
Jamaica
Japan
Jordan
Kazakhstan
Kenya
Kuwait
Kyrgyzstan
Laos
Latvia
Lebanon
Liberia
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Macedonia
Madagascar
Malawi
Malaysia
Mali
Malta
Mexico
Mongolia
Morocco
Mozambique
Nepal
Netherlands
New Zealand
Nicaragua
Niger
Nigeria
North Korea
Norway
Oman
Pakistan
Paraguay
Peru
Philippines
Poland
Portugal
Qatar
Romania
Russia
Saudi Arabia
Senegal
Serbia and Montenegro
Sierra Leone
Singapore
Slovenia
Spain
South Africa
South Korea
Sri Lanka
Suriname
Sweden
Switzerland
Syria
Tanzania
Thailand
Togo
Trinidad and Tobago
Tunisia
Turkey
Turkmenistan
Uganda
Ukraine
United Arab Emirates
United Kingdom
Uruguay
Venezuela
Vietnam
Yemen
Zambia
Zimbabwe

Perseus
February 28th, 2011, 10:41 PM
I care so much I could shit.
Hoho, someone's moody. I like to let people know it was me. Sorry for gettin' you all riled up there.
Empire? Where is the empire coming from. We are an imperialistic nation. We went to Iraq, and now we won't leave. We haven't left 130 countries.
And then China. We have a sway over their economic life.

Afghanistan
Albania
Algeria
Antigua
Argentina
Australia
Austria
Azerbaijan
Bahamas
Bahrain
Bangladesh
Barbados
Belgium
Belize
Bolivia
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Botswana
Brazil
Bulgaria
Burma
Burundi
Cambodia
Cameroon
Canada
Chad
Chile
China
Colombia
Congo
Costa Rica
Cote D'lvoire
Cuba
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Denmark
Djibouti
Dominican Republic
East Timor
Ecuador
Egypt
El Salvador
Eritrea
Estonia
Ethiopia
FijiFinland
France
Georgia
Germany
Ghana
Greece
Guatemala
Guinea
Haiti
Honduras
Hungary
Iceland
India
Indonesia
Iraq
Ireland
Israel
Italy
Jamaica
Japan
Jordan
Kazakhstan
Kenya
Kuwait
Kyrgyzstan
Laos
Latvia
Lebanon
Liberia
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Macedonia
Madagascar
Malawi
Malaysia
Mali
Malta
Mexico
Mongolia
Morocco
Mozambique
Nepal
Netherlands
New Zealand
Nicaragua
Niger
Nigeria
North Korea
Norway
Oman
Pakistan
Paraguay
Peru
Philippines
Poland
Portugal
Qatar
Romania
Russia
Saudi Arabia
Senegal
Serbia and Montenegro
Sierra Leone
Singapore
Slovenia
Spain
South Africa
South Korea
Sri Lanka
Suriname
Sweden
Switzerland
Syria
Tanzania
Thailand
Togo
Trinidad and Tobago
Tunisia
Turkey
Turkmenistan
Uganda
Ukraine
United Arab Emirates
United Kingdom
Uruguay
Venezuela
Vietnam
Yemen
Zambia
Zimbabwe

You do realize we have embassies, like most countries, and our military goes there with us? Also, some of those countries we are allied with and some we went to to war with.

Iceman
February 28th, 2011, 10:42 PM
But why would we still want to be over there? We have no reason to be in half of those countries.

Severus Snape
February 28th, 2011, 10:43 PM
Empire? Where is the empire coming from. We are an imperialistic nation. We went to Iraq, and now we won't leave. We haven't left 130 countries.

Iraq also caused massive political shifts in the US and then of course there is this cool little gadget. (http://costofwar.com/en/)


And then China. We have a sway over their economic life.


Maybe you didn't know, but China is the largest holder of US debt. We owe them over a trillion dollars. (http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2011/02/28/china-owns-a-lot-more-u-s-debt-than-previously-thought/?mod=google_news_blog)


I also don't know where you copy/pasted that list from. link?

Hoho, someone's moody. I like to let people know it was me. Sorry for gettin' you all riled up there.

You honestly think I care that someone with absolutely no idea what they are talking about and a severe case of hubris deleted some virtual points from a website I hardly visit? Cupcake, I have a lot of other things to worry about.

Perseus
February 28th, 2011, 10:46 PM
But why would we still want to be over there? We have no reason to be in half of those countries.

Because we were war with them. We beat them, and it makes plenty of sense to leave some of our military there. And like I said, embassies and the military go hand in hand. It's just how it works.

And Severus, it's just a thing I like to do. I find it pathetic to hid behind a system such as that, so I leave my name. I don't take it seriously, but it's how I give people my opinion without derailing a thread, though I did derail this slightly, so I apologize, cupcake.

Iceman
February 28th, 2011, 10:47 PM
Oh, my bad.
Here's the link
http://www.lewrockwell.com/vance/vance8.html (http://www.lewrockwell.com/vance/vance8.html)

Sure we owe them, but they will never go to war with us, and we are their economy.

But there is no real excuse for us to stay there. It doesn't make since to leave our military there, unless we plan on pressuring them into decisions.
Pakistan basically had to deal with us, when we came chasing the "terrorist" across the border.

Severus Snape
February 28th, 2011, 10:51 PM
Sure we owe them, but they will never go to war with us, and we are their economy.

They are our government funding.

Them not going to war with us doesn't mean we are somehow exercising control over them.

Iceman
February 28th, 2011, 10:52 PM
We control their economy. If we stopped buying from them, what would they do?

Severus Snape
February 28th, 2011, 11:00 PM
We control their economy. If we stopped buying from them, what would they do?

Can you prove that? Also, if they stopped loaning us money, what would we do? You aren't thinking critically about this dichotomy at all.

Iceman
March 1st, 2011, 06:53 AM
Can you prove that? Also, if they stopped loaning us money, what would we do? You aren't thinking critically about this dichotomy at all.

If they stopped loaning us money, we would take drastic measures, to find a way to bring in the money again. But then again think, if they stoppped loaning us money, we would stop buying from them, which in turn would hurt them.

Severus Snape
March 1st, 2011, 10:31 AM
If they stopped loaning us money, we would take drastic measures, to find a way to bring in the money again.

Even if every US citizen was taxed at 100% of their income the government's yearly budget wouldn't be balanced.

embers
March 1st, 2011, 12:56 PM
Pakistan basically had to deal with us, when we came chasing the "terrorist" across the border.

We pretty much invited you in, actually. Our country's leaders wipe your arses with such enthusiasm you can see red marks begin to form. If the US stopped loaning money to Pakistan's government (as they did when we helped drive the Soviets out of Afghanistan; they're still loaning money now), we'd care more than if they pulled their drones out of our tribal regions. The bastards we are.

Also, with regards to your list, I don't notice any American presence in the rest of the subcontinent (India, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh).

Azunite
March 1st, 2011, 03:44 PM
First Iraq, then Afghanistan. USA will follow the smell of oil and track it to Turkish Nations east of Caspian Sea. We all know that

Perseus
March 1st, 2011, 04:04 PM
First Iraq, then Afghanistan. USA will follow the smell of oil and track it to Turkish Nations east of Caspian Sea. We all know that

You never responded to my statement.

Azunite
March 1st, 2011, 04:09 PM
You never responded to my statement.

And what was that?

Perseus
March 1st, 2011, 04:11 PM
And what was that?

They aer *this* close to rise to empire status

Go on.
This.

Iceman
March 1st, 2011, 05:35 PM
Even if every US citizen was taxed at 100% of their income the government's yearly budget wouldn't be balanced.

That's why their are other countries. It's not like we are the only one's that exist.

Severus Snape
March 1st, 2011, 07:48 PM
That's why their are other countries. It's not like we are the only one's that exist.

Oh I forgot. We can simply impose an income and property tax on the citizens of other countries.

You are living in a fantasy world painted red, white and blue.

Iceman
March 1st, 2011, 08:00 PM
Oh I forgot. We can simply impose an income and property tax on the citizens of other countries.

You are living in a fantasy world painted red, white and blue.

Don't say things about you don't know. Number one I don't really like my country. So how in the hell am I in a fantasy world of red, white,and blue, completely blows my mind.
Also I don't know where your getting this income tax thing. I didn't say we would push an income tax on them, I just said we would take more drastic measures, and now your putting words in my mouth.

Severus Snape
March 1st, 2011, 08:02 PM
Don't say things about you don't know. Number one I don't really like my country. So how in the hell am I in a fantasy world of red, white,and blue, completely blows my mind.
Also I don't know where your getting this income tax thing. I didn't say we would push an income tax on them, I just said we would take more drastic measures, and now your putting words in my mouth.

Alright then what fucking "drastic measures" could be taken when the US goes utterly bankrupt?

Iceman
March 1st, 2011, 08:13 PM
1) We won't go bankrupt because China will lend us money or else loose their economy
End. Of. Story.

Severus Snape
March 1st, 2011, 08:32 PM
That is the most simple minded answer ever. You don't understand the global market at all.

Iceman
March 1st, 2011, 09:03 PM
Yah, ok. Most of China's exports are to us. If we didn't buy they would be stuck in a hole. It's ovbious.

Severus Snape
March 2nd, 2011, 12:48 AM
Yah, ok. Most of China's exports are to us. If we didn't buy they would be stuck in a hole. It's ovbious.

China trades about just as much with us as they do with Japan. (http://www.uschina.org/statistics/tradetable.html)

Not to mention they are debt free, have had surpluses in their budget for years, and continue to grow economically at an astounding rate despite a global recession.