The US gets its fair share of bad press these days. Much of it is, no doubt, deserved. But courtesy of some relation of mine whose connection I cannot fathom, by way of my father and his Tutor Tales, I offer the following narrative snippets to provide some perspective. I can't determine if they're true (via snopes, e.g.), but they are still something to think about, even if they are a little hard on the French.
------------
When in England at a fairly large conference, Colin Powell was asked by the Archbishop of Canterbury if our plans for Iraq were just an example of empire building. He answered by saying, "Over the years, the United States has sent many of its fine young men and women into great peril to fight for freedom beyond our borders. The only amount of land we have ever asked for in return is enough to bury those that did not return." [full snopes story]
--------------
There was a conference in France where a number of international engineers were taking part, including French and American. During a break one of the French engineers came back into the room saying, "Have you heard the dumb stunt America has done? They've sent an aircraft carrier to Indonesia to help the tsunami victims. What do they intend to do, bomb them?"
A Boeing engineer stood up and replied quietly, "Our carriers have three hospitals on board that can treat several hundred people; they are nuclear powered and can supply emergency electrical power to shore facilities; they have three cafeterias with the capacity to fee 5000 people three meals a day, they can produce several hundred thousand gallons of fresh water from sea water each day, and they carry half a dozen helicopters for use in transporting victims and injured to and from their flight deck. We have eleven such ships."
---------------
A US Navy Admiral was attending a naval conference that included Admirals from the US, England, Canada, Australia, and France. At a cocktail reception, he found himself standing with a large group of officers that included personnel from those countries. Everyone was chatting away in English as they sipped their drinks but a French Admiral suddenly complained that, "whereas Europeans learn many languages, Americans learn only English." He then asked, "Why is it that we always have to speak English in these conferences rather than speaking French?" Without hesitating, the American Admiral replied, "Maybe it's because the Brits, Canadians, Aussies and Americans arranged it so you wouldn't have to speak German."
---------------
A group of Americans, retired teachers, recently went to France on a tour. Robert Whiting, an elderly gentleman of 83, arrived in Paris by plane. At French customs, he took a few minutes to locate his passport in his carry on. "You have been to France before, monsieur?" the customs officer asked sarcastically. Mr. Whiting admitted that he had been to France previously. "Then you should know enough to have your passport ready." The American said, "The last time I was here, I didn't have time to show it." "Impossible. Americans always have to show their passports on arrival in France!" Mr. Whiting gave the customs officer a long hard look. Then he quietly explained, "Well, when I cam ashore at Omaha Beach on D-Day in 1944 to help liberate this country, I couldn't find a Frenchman to show it to."
--------------
Like I mentioned, a little hard on the French, yet worth mentioning, perhaps, for a little additional perspective.
The Pool Party
Jim, Megan, Eli, Esther, Eden and Olive
4 comments:
good point and good stories. although, don't you think that empire building these days is not so much about land but about commodities and debt. i was reading "tales of an economic hit man" (wouldn't necessarily recommend it) but his point is that now we just try to get countries in debt so that they are in turn "indebted" and will oblige to our bidding in international political matters. and in the middle east, i don't think the u.s. wants land just oil.
anyway, not your point but something worth exploring when talking about empires in this century.
CLC,
i appreciate your insight. i actually deleted and then retyped that colin powell story like three times, but decided to leave it in the end. i also cut it because his comments are a little simplistic. i ended up keeping it because: 1) it was the story that originally grabbed me; 2) it was the only one I could verify was true; 3) I've seen it firsthand in places like the US memorial cemetery at Omaha Beach. The sacrifice of soldiers is fertile ground for my reflections on the life of the Kingdom. As a former soldier, I think there is something about this that really resonates with me.
You do make good points about empire. I think governments engage in projects of empire for a few reasons. a big one, as you've said, is commodity (which has often included people): the actual commodity itself, access and control over the logistics channel of their commodity, and even people for labor in the production of the commodity. this may or may not involve any land. a second major reason for empire is more straight up power - securing strategic advantages for projection of power and/or protection of the core (territorial) interests of the home country. this one often does involve at least some land. these two - commodity and power/strategic advantage - very often go together. think britain with the east india company, much of the african empire-building, spain and gold, the US and oil, etc. a third reason for empire building is ideology. maybe we're trying to do that now. i also think of the islamic expansion in the 7th and 8th centuries. even the imperial expansion of the third reich was a combo of protection of the fatherland mixed with ideology. finally, and this would be harder to document, but there is the very personal element - the empire built by ego. an empire built on pride. think of alexander the great. or think of what was going on in europe in like the 15th and 16th centuries - these monarchs knew one another, got mad at one another out of pride or spite, and hurled their people into war and empire over it.
so, in this instance of the US, my hunch is that we're engaging in a layered and complicated project. certain parts of our efforts are being directed by the perceived need to protect a strategic asset/commodity and project our power forward strategically. another part of our policy is being guided by those more motivated by ideological concerns. and, of course, there are the human elements of pride and fear and greed. and the ones who have to implement all this, who actually carry it out, are the soldiers - who almost always only ask for the ground to bury their friends who don't come home.
those are my thoughts.
very nice summation. and well thought out. i agree that it's layered and complicated. and that you could teach a class on empire building!
i don't know where all that empire-building talk came from. the thoughts just sort of formed in my head as i went for a walk. man, am i nerd!
Post a Comment