After learning about imperialism for the...third or fourth time...in my tenure at UHS I feel like I should be a professional on the matter. The reading explains surprisingly it well (Thanks, Coffin & Stacey). Essentially one power wishes to extend its sphere of influence (and bread basket, including "bread" of the coal, oil, and riches variety). In its pursuit of this task, it, inevitably, must go and crush ("save" or "help") other civilizations.
For a clearer, less subjective definition I shall simply quote class:
Since I left my binder at school, this will be inserted tomorrow.
Two things I got out of the reading were:
1. Lenin/Russia/Marxism. One of the things we (essentially) all agreed upon at the beginning of the year in MEH was that we shared a desire to learn more about Russia. After sliding through a few generations of Russian Literature with Scott Laughlin last semester I was pleased (if anyone can be pleased to read about Lenin) to find Lenin tucked into the reading. I'd never really considered Russian expansionism. I realize that in light of the recent Georgian conflict this makes me sound extremely uninformed, but I never really connected the Russian expansionism with the concept/time-period described in Kipling's "The White Man's Burden." Additionally, the connections between Marx's theory on the imminent self-destruction of capitalism were especially nice.
2. We're all being deluded by our governments. Honestly, it's not that I haven't realized this before, but be it the discussion in class or the reading's references to "self-image" (Western Civilizations, Coffin & Stacey, 792), I left school today feeling more...cynical. It kind of made me reflect on image and how we see ourselves today. For the most part, I love democracy. I was raised to love democracy, and unless a life-changing event occurs, I will most likely raise democracy-loving children. This doesn't, however, mean that I think everyone, like those poor, impoverished Iraqis, absolutely need a democracy. I look at other functioning forms of government, like Britain's constitutional monarchy, and see nothing inferior to what we have. Once again, I found myself returning to question nationalism, that pesky frenemy. This time, harnessed by the government, hitched to the wagon of imperialism, look what happened.
February 2, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
“Imperialism
ReplyDeleteI left school today feeling more...cynical. It kind of made me reflect on image and how we see ourselves today. For the most part, I love democracy. I was raised to love democracy, and unless a life-changing event occurs, I will most likely raise democracy-loving children. This doesn't, however, mean that I think everyone, like those poor, impoverished Iraqis, absolutely need a democracy.”
But what exactly was it that made you cynical? OK, the fact that we are busily enforcing democracy in a region that has little experience with it? Or the way in which WMB reading, seems to highlight a way of thinking about things today (talking heads on TV stations, i.e., Fox, that speak to the “Iraqi emerging democratic sense”, purple finger and all, with a barely hidden level of paternalistic pride. How do we resolve this cognitive dissonance between being a “great democracy” and the liberties there-in, with “enforcing” a solution we like? And how different is this from the issues facing imperialists at the turn of the century? So, what exactly is the basis for the cynicism...?
“When examining the causal relationships between war, expansionism, and creating a nation I believe the following:
-Expansionism always causes war. Someone must have lived on/owned the land that you are so intent on taking.
-Creating a nation sometimes requires war(ring). Inevitably, people (like Metternich) will be archly opposed to the unification of your nation (in his case, Germany).
-Creating a nation sometimes requires expansionism. For the previously mentioned assertion that by expanding and therefore waging a war, a nation can further unify its citizens.”
“Making Connections (sort of) ”
I woould love some examples here...
“The Pleasure of Hating (Other Nations)"
So, Nationalism appeals to the xenophobia we have—fear of that which is different to us; and to our ethnocentricity—love of that which is like us. Could nationalism be hard-wired?
“Bismarck: Machiavelli Lover”
Could the Prussian/Austrian/French(/Danish) conflicts have been resolved in a way other than war? ”
Well could they? And what of your deception? Was it necessary? Could Bismarck have just gone: Hey, we want to unify and become the strongest nation in Europe—a threat to everyone and the balance of power! Would that have gone down well?
“Nationalism: The Process
as globalization comes more and more into play, with the identity of the U.S.A. as an almost entirely Caucasian country definitely ceasing to exist, are we still a nation? With these different groups of people (much like the minority populations in Germany and Austria-Hungary), can we/do we manage to hold it together?”
So, what might explain why the USA has managed to hold together so long, in comparison with A-H? Or even Russia, which is struggling to regain former Soviets back into its orbit?