23 April 2024: We are investigating problems with ecommerce on Cambridge Core. We apologise for any inconvenience and hope to have full functionality restored shortly.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 March 2014
This paper critically assesses the description ‘empire’ as applied to the United States in the twentieth century, proposing that US policy makers lack the territorial and occupation motives pre-requisite to being an imperial power. It is proposed that the USA is better described as an empire by accident than by design. Americans’ domestic experience of nation-building within the USA, since the early twentieth century, helps account for their unwillingness to permit the USA to be an imperial nation.
This article is based on the Inaugural Tocqueville Visiting Scholar Lecture delivered at the Tocqueville Center, University of Colorado, Boulder, in November 2003. The author wishes to thank Professor Sven Steinmo, the centre's director, for the invitation to speak at the centre; and the referees and editors of Government and Opposition for comments on this paper. The author currently holds a Leverhulme Trust Major Research Fellowship for his project on the American State and thanks theTrust for support while revising this paper.
2 There is, of course, a substantial historical scholarly literature addressing US imperialism before 1900, a topic beyond the scope of this essay. For valuable accounts see Anders Stephanson, Manifest Destiny: American Expansion and the Empire of Right, New York, Hill and Wang, 1995; Horne, Gerald, ‘Race from Power: U.S. Foreign Policy and the General Crisis of “White Supremacy” ’, Diplomatic History, 23 (1999), pp. 437–61;CrossRefGoogle ScholarJames H. Meriwether, Proudly We Can Be Africans, Chapel Hill, NC, University of North Carolina Press, 2002; Anthony J. C. Wallace, Jefferson and the Indians: The Tragic Fate of the First Americans, Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press, 1999; Andrew Bacevich (ed.), The Imperial Tense, Chicago, Ivan R. Dee, 2003; and William A. Williams, The Roots of the Modern American Empire, New York, Vintage Books, 1970.
3 There are some ideological and political differences amongst those employing the concept of ‘empire’ to describe US policy at present, determined by whether writers favour or oppose an American imperial role. For a valuable engagement with the literature in these terms see Cox, Michael, ‘Empire by Denial? Debating US Power’, Security Dialogue, 35 (2004), pp. 228–36;CrossRefGoogle Scholarand also Andrew Hurrell, ‘Power and the International System’, Security Dialogue, 35 (2004), pp. 254–7; and also G. John Ikenberry, ‘Illusions of Empire: Defining the New American Order’, Foreign Affairs, 83: 2 (March/April 2004), pp. 154–62; and Campbell Craig, ‘American Realism versus American Imperialism’, World Politics, 57 (October 2004), pp. 143–71.
4 David Harvey, The New Imperialism, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2003.Google Scholar
5 Niall Ferguson, Colossus: The Rise and Fall of the American Empire, London, Penguin, 2004.Google Scholar
6 Andrew J. Bacevich, American Empire: The Realities and Consequences of US Diplomacy, Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press, 2002, p. 243; and see Christopher Sanders, America's Overseas Garrisons: The Leasehold Empire, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2000; Chalmers Johnson, Blowback: The Costs and Consequences of American Empire, New York, TimeWarner, 2002; and Michael Mann, Incoherent Empire, London, Verso, 2003.Google Scholar
7 Johnson, Blowback, p. 7.Google Scholar
8 Clyde Prestowitz, Rogue Nation: American Unilateralism and the Failure of Good Intentions, New York, Basic Books, 2003, p. 23.Google Scholar
9 Neil Smith, American Empire: Roosevelt's Geographer and the Prelude to Globalization, Berkeley, University of California Press, 2003, pp. xiii, xix.Google Scholar
10 Harvey, The New Imperialism, p. 33.Google Scholar
11 Niall Ferguson, Empire: How Britain Made the Modern World, London, Penguin, 2003.Google Scholar
12 Ignatieff, Michael, ‘Empire Lite’, Prospect, 83 (February 2003), pp. 34–6.Google Scholar
13 Kristol, Irving, ‘The Emerging American Imperium’, Wall Street Journal, 18 August 1997.Google Scholar
14 Walter Berns, Making Patriots, Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 2001, p. x.Google Scholar
15 Gary Gerstle, American Crucible, Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press, 2001; and Stephanson, Manifest Destiny.Google Scholar
16 Willard B. Gatewood, Black Americans and the White Man's Burden 1998–1903, Urbana, IL, University of Illinois Press, 1975.Google Scholar
17 Stuart Creighton Miller, Benevolent Assimilation: The American Conquest of the Philippines 1899–1903, New Haven, CT, Yale University Press, 1982; and see Rubin Francis Weston, Racism in U.S. Imperialism, Chapel Hill, NC, University of North Carolina Press, 1972.Google Scholar
18 This is not to disregard the secular and quasi-religious conception of exceptionalism presumed or developed by some analysts of US foreign policy, in which anti-imperial rhetoric can veer toward a form of salvation: Berns, Making Patriots. Google Scholar
19 See James Davison Hunter and Joshua Yates, ‘In the Vanguard of Globalization: The World of American Globalizers’, in Peter L. Berger and Samuel P. Huntington (eds), Many Globalizations, New York, Oxford University Press, 2002, pp. 8–33; Harvey B. Feigenbaum, ‘The Production of Culture in the Postimperialist Era’, in David Becker and Richard Sklar (eds), Postimperialism in World Politics, Westport, CT, Praeger, 1999; King, Desmond, ‘Americans in the Dark? Recent Hollywood Representations of the Nation's History’, Government and Opposition, 38: 2 (2003), pp. 163–80;CrossRefGoogle ScholarRichard Kuisel, Seducing the French: The Dilemma of Americanization, Berkeley, University of California Press, 1993; Victoria de Grazia, Irresistible Empire: America's Advance through 20th-Century Europe, Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press, 2005; and Donald Sassoon, ‘From Buddenbrooks to Babbitt?’, New Left Review, 36 (2005), pp. 141–8.
20 Tony Smith, Foreign Attachments: The Power of Ethnic Groups in the Making of American Foreign Policy, Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press, 2000.Google Scholar
21 Michael W. Doyle, Empires, Ithaca, NY, Cornell University Press, 1986, p. 12. This is the best modern social science work on empire; of course the subjects of imperialism and of empires have received extensive attention by activists and intellectuals since the nineteenth century including such important works as those contributed by Lenin and J. A. Hobson.Google Scholar
22 Doyle, Empires, pp. 19, 30.Google Scholar
23 Prestowitz, Rogue Nation, p. 25.Google Scholar
24 Doyle, Empires, p. 30.Google Scholar
25 Ibid., p. 45.Google Scholar
26 Dominic Lieven, Empire: The Russian Empire and its Rivals from the Sixteenth Century to the Present, London, Pimlico, 2002, pp. xi–xii, xiv.Google Scholar
27 Ibid., pp. 72, 73.Google Scholar
28 This argument is one of several about the nature of US nationhood developed in Desmond King, The Liberty of Strangers: Making the American Nation, New York, Oxford University Press, 2004, to which the reader is referred for further detail.Google Scholar
29 One response to this point might be that imperialism is equally expressed in the dominance of non-colonial states, and indeed encourage under the Monroe Doctrine. But this is still distinct from possessing and directly controlling colonial states.Google Scholar
30 William Roger Louis, Imperialism at Bay 1941–1945: The United States and the Decolonization of the British Empire, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1977. See also Phillip Darby, Three Faces of Imperialism: British and American Approaches to Asia and Africa 1870–1970, New Haven, CT, Yale University Press, 1987.Google Scholar
31 Its website is: . The Bureau is under Assistant Secretary Lorne Craner, previously president of the International Republican Institute, a lobby for democracy promotion and building.Google Scholar
32 Reprinted in Thomas H. Etzold and John Lewis Gaddis (eds), Containment: Documents in American Policy and Strategy 1945–1950, New York, Columbia University Press, 1978.Google Scholar
33 Niall Ferguson, ‘The Empire that Dares not Speak its Name’, Sunday Times, 13 April 2003; Ferguson, Colossus; Richard N. Haas, The Reluctant Sheriff: The US After the Cold War, Washington, DC, Council on Foreign Affairs, 1997; and Berns, Making Patriots.Google Scholar
34 The National Security Strategy of the United States, Washington, DC, White House, 2002.Google Scholar
35 Ibid.Google Scholar
36 For two accounts of the thinking and argument behind Bush foreign policy see Robert Kagan, Paradise and Power, London, Atlantic Books, 2003; and Lawrence F. Kaplan and William Kristol, The War over Iraq, San Francisco, Encounter Books, 2003.Google Scholar
37 ‘The Divided West’, parts 1, 2 and 3, Financial Times, 26, 28 and 29 May 2003.Google Scholar
38 Jimmy Carter, ‘The Troubling New Face of America’, Washington Post, 5 September 2002.Google Scholar
39 Desmond King, Making Americans: Immigration, Race and the Origins of the Diverse Democracy, Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press, 2000; and Daniel Tichenor, Dividing Lines: The Politics of Immigration Control in America, Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press, 2002.Google Scholar
40 Tony Smith, America's Mission, Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press, 1994.Google Scholar
41 Berns, Making Patriots, p. x.Google Scholar
42 A case could perhaps be made that the kinds of values promoted by the modernization school of social science, especially political science and economics, in the 1950s and 1960s constituted an imperial approach but it was one limited to a relatively small group within US elite universities and did not undertake the cross-generational training so pivotal to the British edifice of empire.Google Scholar
43 ‘Full Security Checks “Were Bypassed for Guantanamo Translators” ’, Financial Times, 15 October 2003.Google Scholar
44 Jack Goody, The Expansive Moment: Anthropology in Britain and Africa 1918–1970, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1995.Google Scholar
45 See the essays in Philip D. Morgan and Sean Hawkins (eds), Black Experience and the Empire, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2004; and Philippa Levine (ed), Gender and Empire, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2004. And see the stimulating book, Bernard Porter, The Absent-Minded Imperialists: What the British Really Thought about Empire, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2004.Google Scholar
46 Paula Fass, Outside In: Minorities and the Transformation of American Education, New York, Oxford University Press, 1989.Google Scholar
47 Fisher, Donald, ‘The Role of Philanthropic Foundations in the Reproduction and Production of Hegemony: Rockefeller Foundations and the Social Sciences’, Sociology, 17 (1983), pp.206–33;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
48 David Caute, The Dancer Defects: The Struggle for Cultural Supremacy during the Cold War, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2003, p. 3; and see Volker R. Berghahn, America and the Intellectual Cold Wars in Europe, Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press, 2001; and Frances Stonor Saunders, Who Paid the Piper?, London, Granta, 1999.Google Scholar
49 Carol Anderson, Eyes Off the Prize, New York, Cambridge University Press, 2003; and Mary L Dudziak, Cold War Civil Rights, Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press, 2000.Google Scholar
50 Andreas W. Daum, Lloyd C. Gardner and Wilfred Mausbach (eds), America, the Vietnam War and the World, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2003.Google Scholar
51 Douglas Little, American Orientalism: The US and the Middle East since 1945, Chapel Hill, NC, University of North Carolina Press, 2002; and Anatol Lieven, America Right or Wrong: An Anatomy of American Nationalism, New York, Oxford University Press, 2004.Google Scholar
52 For a more critical view see Michael Hunt, Ideology and US Foreign Policy, New Haven, CT, Yale University Press, 1987.Google Scholar
53 For an influential approach to imperial extension see Paul Kennedy, The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers: Economic Change and Military Conflict from 1500–2000, London, Unwin Hyman, 1988.Google Scholar
54 Bacevich, American Empire.Google Scholar
55 Johnson, Blowback, p. 8.Google Scholar
56 An amendment dividing the amount half and half between loans and grants passed in the Senate despite intense efforts by the White House to make Republicans support Bush's proposal: of nine Republican senators called to a meeting with President Bush on the eve of the vote, eight voted against the reconstruction sum and supported the plan to make it partly a loan. But the initial request passed in the House by 298–121 votes (30 October 2003) and the loan provision was eliminated in the House–Senate negotiations.Google Scholar
57 Sanders, America's Overseas Garrisons.Google Scholar
58 ‘Chain of Command: Can Torture in Iraq be Linked to the White House?’, Financial Times, 17 June 2004.Google Scholar
59 Richard Kuisel, Seducing the French: The Dilemma of Americanization, Berkeley, University of California Press, 1993; Paul Hollander, Anti-Americanism, New York, Oxford University Press, 1992; and Richard Pells, Not Like Us, New York, Basic Books, 1997.Google Scholar
60 Ross McKibbin, Classes and Culture: England 1918–51, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1998, pp. 431–6.Google Scholar
61 The 9/11 Commission Report, Final Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, New York, W.W, Norton, 2004.Google Scholar
62 Bleich, Erik, ‘The Legacies of History? Colonization and Immigrant Integration in Britain and France’, Theory and Societ, 34 (2005), pp.171–95;CrossRefGoogle Scholarand Randall Hansen, Citizenship and Immigration in Post-War Britain, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2000.
63 As explicated in King, The Liberty of Strangers; and see Rogers M. Smith, Stories of Peoplehood, New York, Cambridge University Press, 2003.Google Scholar
64 David A. Hollinger, ‘The Historian's Use of the United States and Vice Versa’, in Thomas Bender (ed.), Rethinking American History in a Global Age, Berkeley, University of California Press, 2002, pp. 381–95.Google Scholar
65 Smith, America's Mission.Google Scholar
66 Dudziak, Cold War Civil Rights; and Philip Klinkner with Rogers M. Smith, The Unsteady March, Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1999.Google Scholar
67 Michael Ignatieff, Human Rights as Politics and Idolatry, Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press, 2001; and Kirsten Sellars, The Rise and Rise of Human Rights, Stroud: Sutton, 2002.Google Scholar
68 For instance, in the Helsinki Final Act of 1975 or the more recently established International Criminal Court. A more parochial example is noteworthy too: in August 2002 an Anne Frank and Human Rights memorial was opened in Boise, Idaho, funded by 44 Idaho schools to ‘make human rights integral to the education of students’, New York Times, 18 August 2002.Google Scholar
69 Crawford, Neta C., ‘Just War and the U.S. Counterterror War’, Perspectives on Politics, 1 (2003), pp.5–25;CrossRefGoogle Scholarothers see continuity in US policy – Bacevich, American Empire.
70 King, Liberty of Strangers; and Rogers M. Smith, Stories of Peoplehood, New York, Cambridge University Press, 2003.Google Scholar
71 Samuel Huntington, Who We Are: The Erosion and Renewal of American National Identity, New York, Simon & Schuster, 2004.Google Scholar
72 Arthur J. Schlesinger, ‘Eyeless in Iraq’, New York Review of Books, 23 October 2003.Google Scholar
73 Undersecretary of State Richard Armitage in the Senate, 28 October 2003.Google Scholar
74 Joseph S. Nye Jr., Soft Power, New York, Public Affairs, 2004.Google Scholar
75 Porter, Absent-Minded Imperialists.Google Scholar
76 Paul Bowles, The Spider's House, London, Abacus, 1955.Google Scholar
77 Porter, Absent-Minded Imperialists, p. 306.Google Scholar
78 See the excellent essays in Nicholas Canny (ed.), The Origins of Empire, Oxford Hisory of the British Empire vol. 1, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1998; and the important study by David Armitage, The Ideological Origins of the British Empire, New York, Cambridge University Press, 2000.Google Scholar
79 Porter, Absent-Minded Imperialists, p. 307.Google Scholar
80 Little, American Orientalism.Google Scholar
81 Henry Yu, Thinking Orientals: Migration, Contact and Exoticism of Modern America, New York, Oxford University Press, 2001, p. 190.Google Scholar
