Penny Thoughts: The Reluctant Empire

A few weeks ago, the force of the United States of America imposed itself on one of the world’s most vicious and horrendous figures – Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the leader of ISIS. No need to chronicle his unspeakable horrors.  They have all been reported via media outlets.

All this caused me to ponder a very simple but profound question: who else could have or, indeed, would have exercised such a mission?  I can think of no other nation on Earth – and that prompted another query: is our United States of America a latter-day empire?

One of the great benefits of having an intelligent spouse is that intelligent conversations naturally ensue. I am blessed to have such a spouse, and those of you who know my wife, Elizabeth, know that not only is she beautiful, she is educated, perceptive, and articulate. Many of you remember and miss her column, “Only in My Kitchen”, which appeared regularly years ago in the Blackbelt Gazette.

Our conversations cover the gamut of issues – local, national, and international – and often last into the wee, small hours of morning.

At the same time, most of you are aware that our politics lay somewhere to the right of both Ghengis Khan and the legendary Celtic queen, Boudicca.

Our most recent examination engaged whether or not America is an “empire” and is regularly reviled for it by our enemies – both domestic and foreign.

The Britannica World Language Dictionary gives us this definition of “empire”: “A union of dispersed territories, dominions, colonies, states and unrelated peoples under one sovereign rule; wide and supreme dominion.”

We associate the concept with the “Roman Empire” or the “French Empire” under Napoleon or the “British Empire.” Their excesses and disintegrations are often emphasized in historical critiques, which rarely admit of any positive residual effects. Clearly Rome’s empire left the world a great deal – solid roads, architecture, literature and political structures which are emulated even today.

Americans all bristle at the mention of an “American Empire” because is runs counter to the fundamental fabric of what we believe – individual freedom – since it was the British Empire which spawned America.

But the question emerges:  Is America an empire? This prompts a further question:  If America is an empire, why does it not consistently behave as one? Why do we act as an empire in some senses and not in other senses?  And this is what launched a three-hour discussion between Elizabeth and myself – another excursion into “preaching to the choir”.

There have been two locutions which have framed America: 1) praise of “rugged individualism” with all its implicit freedom and success; and 2) help they neighbor, our Biblical exhortation to assist those in need. This clearly presents a dichotomy of exponential proportions, for when exclusively exercised they are diametrically opposed.

The problem lies in the fact that we seem to try to do both.

As I see it, we have become the “reluctant empire.” I use this phrase because it was America who saved the entire world in the two world wars of the 20th Century. There was strong opposition to our entry into both World War I and World War II, vestiges of the strong undercurrent of isolationism engrained in us. “Jeffersonian Isolationism” has always been a significant part of our tapestry. It is evident today in my political party, the Libertarian Party.

For lack of a better benchmark, then, we might point to the emergence of America as a true world power after World War II, when the industrial might of our ingenious and industrious citizenry created an economic machine which became the standard for the world. “Made in USA” was the hallmark of excellence and success. And we exported that product and that attitude throughout the world. It presented a clear differentiation to the other system being impressed upon the world – communism. The free world came to depend upon America to defend against the aggrandizement of communist nations. Ultimately, we prevailed, but we were thrust into the role of the “world’s police” – very reluctantly!

Once there, however, we acknowledged the role and did what Americans always do – the best that we can! THAT is when we began to be disliked and even hated, but the ugly reality is that if we had not stepped up, we would all be praising Karl Marx today!

And yet, we still seem to walk the tightrope between our “rugged individualism” and our desire to “help our neighbors” in the world.  To illustrate the point, let me pose these questions.

Whenever there is a disaster in the world, which nation offers the most, the first, and the best assistance? Who underwrites the financial security of the United Nations? And which nation has helped emerging nations, even those who would destroy it? History knows the answer – WE have!

At the same time, which nation has explored and exploited the natural resources of the entire world? Which nation has disbursed security forces around the world to keep those who would destroy it from attacking its very shores? History would respond with the same answer.

The real problem is this:  IF, and I emphasize that conditional term, we are, indeed, an “empire,” why do we not act like it? Why are we afraid to BE it? The answer is simple and twofold: first, we still believe that we can do anything “on our own,” which is a form of isolationism; and, second, contrary to Lederer and Burdick’s 1958 novel, The Ugly American, we abhor arrogance with respect to world politics.

Elizabeth prefers Jeffersonian Isolationism, which is very appealing.  After all, we do have enough of our own natural resources to take care of ourselves. The 800-pound-gorilla in the room, however, is that we now participate in a global economy which demands to be acknowledged.

So, here we teeter on the precipice – hoping that our rugged individualism can help our neighbors, and that they will love us for it. Ah, the “slings and arrows” of being the “Reluctant Empire”