June 27, 2006
Should the United States sacrifice its republican institutions in order to fulfil an imperial vocation?
Robert Sidelsky in the New York Review of Books:
The question of how the world should be run, and America's part in its running, is the subject of much academic and political discussion in Washington these days. The factual questions are: Is the United States on the road to becoming an empire like the Roman and British Empires before it? What are the prospects for such an enterprise in today's world? More speculatively, does globalization require an imperial underpinning? There are also questions of value: Is imperialism a good or bad thing? Should the United States sacrifice its republican institutions in order to fulfil an imperial vocation? Gregor Dallas's 1945: The War That Never Ended can be read as setting the scene for this discussion. The Second World War cleared away the European empires, actual and aspiring, leaving the United States and the Soviet Union as the two contending superpowers. The collapse of the Soviet Union concluded the "unfinished business" of the war, by leaving the United States the sole superpower and simultaneously creating a single world economy. The dynamics of postwar US supremacy and the question of whether they are pushing the United States toward formal empire are the subject matter of Charles Maier's Among Empires: American Ascendancy and Its Predecessors.
Posted by S. Abbas Raza at 12:58 AM | Permalink
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c562c53ef00d834d1b55d69e2
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Should the United States sacrifice its republican institutions in order to fulfil an imperial vocation?: