Skip to main content

What is a reason that America should be imperialistic?

Of course, not everyone would agree that the US should act in an imperialistic manner today.  There are many people who would say that we should not.  If, however, we do need to give a reason why the US should be imperialistic, we can say that the US is the country that is most able and most likely to act in the best interests of the world.  Therefore, if we control more of the world...

Of course, not everyone would agree that the US should act in an imperialistic manner today.  There are many people who would say that we should not.  If, however, we do need to give a reason why the US should be imperialistic, we can say that the US is the country that is most able and most likely to act in the best interests of the world.  Therefore, if we control more of the world things will be better.


If the US were imperialistic, it would mean that we would control more of what happens in the world.  We would have much more influence over what various countries do and what happens in those countries.  If we had this, there would be fewer bad things happening in the world.  If we controlled Syria, ISIS would not be able to have a stronghold there and Bashar Al-Assad would not be able to commit atrocities against his people.  If we controlled Pakistan, it would stop committing terrorist attacks against India.  America has, you can argue, better values than most other countries in the world.  We care more about justice and human rights than they do.  Therefore, the world might--at least in that sense--be a better place if we were in control.


The US is the country with the greatest amount of military and economic power in the world.  We are the only country that could really be imperialistic in a large-scale way.  We are also a country that values good things in the world.  If we controlled more of the world, we would use our power to work for justice and the benefit of humanity.  Therefore (you can argue) the US should be imperialistic.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

What is the meaning of "juggling fiends" in Macbeth?

Macbeth is beginning to realize that the three witches have been deceiving him since he first encountered them. Like jugglers, they have kept changing their forecasts in order create confusion. This is particularly apparent when the Second Apparition they raise in Act IV,   Scene 1 tells him that no man of woman born can overcome him in hand-to-hand battle--and then Macbeth finds himself confronted by the one man he has been avoiding out of a... Macbeth is beginning to realize that the three witches have been deceiving him since he first encountered them. Like jugglers, they have kept changing their forecasts in order create confusion. This is particularly apparent when the Second Apparition they raise in Act IV,   Scene 1 tells him that no man of woman born can overcome him in hand-to-hand battle--and then Macbeth finds himself confronted by the one man he has been avoiding out of a sense of guilt, and that man tells him: Despair thy charm. And let the angel whom thou still hast serve...
Post a Comment
Read more

What are some external and internal conflicts that Montag has in Fahrenheit 451?

 Montag, the protagonist of Fahrenheit 451, faces both external and internal conflicts throughout the novel. Some examples of these conflicts are: External Conflicts: Conflict with the society: Montag lives in a society that prohibits books and critical thinking. He faces opposition from the government and the people who enforce this law. Montag struggles to come to terms with the fact that his society is based on censorship and control. Conflict with his wife: Montag's wife, Mildred, is completely absorbed in the shallow and meaningless entertainment provided by the government. Montag's growing dissatisfaction with his marriage adds to his external conflict. Conflict with the fire captain: Montag's superior, Captain Beatty, is the personification of the oppressive regime that Montag is fighting against. Montag's struggle against Beatty represents his external conflict with the government. Internal Conflicts: Conflict with his own beliefs: Montag, at the beginning of th...
Post a Comment
Read more

In A People's History of the United States, why does Howard Zinn feel that Wilson made a flimsy argument for entering World War I?

"War is the health of the state," the radical writer Randolph Bourne said, in the midst of the First World War. Indeed, as the nations of Europe went to war in 1914, the governments flourished, patriotism bloomed, class struggle was stilled, and young men died in frightful numbers on the battlefields-often for a hundred yards of land, a line of trenches. -- Chapter 14, Page 350, A People's History of the United States Howard Zinn outlines his arguments for why World War I was fought in the opening paragraph of Chapter 14 (referenced above). The nationalism that was created by the Great War benefited the elite political and financial leadership of the various countries involved. Socialism, which was gaining momentum in Europe, as was class struggle, took a backseat to mobilizing for war. Zinn believes that World War I was fought for the gain of the industrial capitalists of Europe in a competition for capital and resources. He states that humanity itself was punished by t...
Post a Comment
Read more