Chomsky: History of US Imperialism -3/7
Uploader Comments (KashifHKhan)
Top Comments
-
an amazing man
-
9:02 Kissinger called independent nationalism "a virus". Interesting... McCain just said the same thing about Egyptian and other Middle Eastern uprisings the other day.
All Comments (3)
-
The average person is brave, selfless, and caring. People are fearful, selfish, and callous.
When dealing with a person, use the model of solidarity, generosity, and benefit of the doubt. When dealing with organizations, use the model of hard bargaining and skepticism of grand ideals.
Cui bono? Who benefits? Proof the class struggle will never end.
-
PART II:
The expansionist strategy was best described by the 6th US President John Quincy Adams as "expansion is the path to security". In early days, it involved geographic expansion in North American continent with ruthless suppression of natives. (Of course, this phase includes attempts to acquire Canada.) Later, the expansionist strategy morphed from direct geographic expansion to first hemispheric, and then global, access to resources, goods, and markets (with force, if necessary).
-Kashif
PART VIII:
One of my favorite Chomsky moments is his dissection of former US secretary of state Condoleezza Rice's conditions for withdrawal from Iraq: "stop the flow of foreign arms and stop the flow of foreign fighters". US is the biggest "foreign fighter" as it is the invader and occupier. Similarly, it represents the largest flow of "foreign arms" to maintain occupation. Media cannot point this out as US policy presumes that US "owns the world" and only "acts with best intentions."
-Kashif
KashifHKhan 3 years ago
PART VII:
Finally, I believe it is important to note the role played by the powerful US media in helping US maintain and execute its hegemonistic policies. The media - including major left-wing papers - tightly control discussion and never point out any contradictions between US policy and its public proclamations.For instance, in Iraqi natives fighting US occupation are described as "insurgents" or "renegades" who are committing "aggression"! Never mind that US invaded their country.
-Kashif
KashifHKhan 3 years ago
PART VI:
Given above-noted US historical policy, is it any wonder that neo-cons demanded "full spectrum dominance" (over land, sea, air, and space!) for America after collapse of Soviet Union? As Chomsky points out, the Cold War was nothing more than a tacit agreement between US and Soviet Union to not interfere in each other's areas of influence. With all checks on US power gone with the collapse of Soviet Union, the US was free to attempt to extend its hegemony to the entire world.
-Kashif
KashifHKhan 3 years ago
PART V:
Keenan further strategized that Africa would be given to Europeans to exploit for post-war reconstruction while European colonial powers would be paid in US dollars for resources so that dollars could be recycled back to US via purchase of goods. The US policy explicitly called for it to "ensure limitation of exercise of sovereignty" by any state that might resist US plans. In plain English, this meant that there would be no free, democratic states in resource rich regions.
-Kashif
KashifHKhan 3 years ago
PART IV:
As another illustration of US empire-based expansionist strategy, consider US's central policy after WW II as enunciated by State Department's George Kennan. According to him, the US - which had 6% of the world's population and 50% of the world's wealth at that time - would focus on how to maintain this disparity! In practical terms, this meant that US would secure access to oil in Middle East and resources in Southeast Asia. (It already had access to Latin and South America).
-Kashif
KashifHKhan 3 years ago
PART III:
As an illustration of expansionist access to resources beyond US borders, consider America's hold on Latin and South America. US President, James Monroe, in his famous "Monroe Doctrine" stipulated that any attempt to influence Latin and South America by an outside power would be viewed by the US "as dangerous to our peace and safety" and would be checked with force. This meant that the US was free to set up pliant dictatorships in Latin and South America to do its bidding.
-Kashif
KashifHKhan 3 years ago