Thats why recently they were up in arms about Obama bwoing tot hat japanzes emporer...soemthing about it makes us look weak...he should be strong and firm. Please...
Most people don't understand what Imperialism is really.
the creation and maintenance of an unequal economic, cultural and territorial relationship, usually between states and often in the form of an empire, based on domination and subordination
Thats why recently they were up in arms about Obama bwoing tot hat japanzes emporer...soemthing about it makes us look weak...he should be strong and firm. Please...
Nothing wrong with good posture. And Obama has blown his posture on many occaisions.
i hear a lot of ppl here complain about american imperialism, but i never hear anyone advocating giving back the "American" west to any indian tribes... what about texas or hawaii? maybe even florida...
lame...
The issue of giving back lands to the Native Americans is very complex. The lands weren't all taken by force. Some were taken by deceitful treaties. Since the 1970's Indians have been actively trying to reclaim those lands, or at least buy them back because of rightful claims that those old treaties were broken. They are even being backed by the Justice Department! Many tribes in the Northeast have been successful, to the disdain of the citizens in those areas. It's virtually impossible to give back land to the Indians that has already been developed and settled. It's not in its original condition and it can't be reversed. The claims are mostly on unpopulated tracts of land in which the Indians want to develop.
I also think there is a difference between imperialism and the process of civilization. I would argue that the pioneers who headed west were not trying to expand an American empire, but exploring and spreading out a civilization that was still in its fledgling stages. The true American empire did not begin till after the Civil War when the Union swallowed up the South and created the United States of America as we know it today, which continued to expand West. Some even attribute this to a Manifest Destiny - "a term that was used in the 19th century to designate the belief that the United States was destined, even divinely ordained,[1] to expand across the North American continent" [wikipedia]
The issue of giving back lands to the Native Americans is very complex. The lands weren't all taken by force. Some were taken by deceitful treaties. Since the 1970's Indians have been actively trying to reclaim those lands, or at least buy them back because of rightful claims that those old treaties were broken. They are even being backed by the Justice Department! Many tribes in the Northeast have been successful, to the disdain of the citizens in those areas. It's virtually impossible to give back land to the Indians that has already been developed and settled. It's not in its original condition and it can't be reversed. The claims are mostly on unpopulated tracts of land in which the Indians want to develop.
I also think there is a difference between imperialism and the process of civilization. I would argue that the pioneers who headed west were not trying to expand an American empire, but exploring and spreading out a civilization that was still in its fledgling stages. The true American empire did not begin till after the Civil War when the Union swallowed up the South and created the United States of America as we know it today, which continued to expand West. Some even attribute this to a Manifest Destiny - "a term that was used in the 19th century to designate the belief that the United States was destined, even divinely ordained,[1] to expand across the North American continent" [wikipedia]
haha... i started thinking about manifest destiny when you were talking about the pioneers heading west. manifest destiny is imperialism. had we not stopped when we hit the ocean i think America would be much stronger than it is today. we could have taken what is now canada and mexico rather easily, yet for some reason we did not. can you imagine if America had the added rescources of Mexico and Canada??? intensity...
I think we can attribute the downfall of the sioux to imperialism. also the wrongful acquisition of georgian lands from the cherokee nation can be attributed to imperialism(read national greed). To be honest the list is huge... Kiowa, Cheyenne, Arapaho, Ute, Shoshone, Paiute, Nez Perce, Apache, Navajo, etc.
We could even talk about the great indian leader tecumseh. His lands(term used loosely) were taken from him by the american gov't. Like a lot of indians, the shawnee believed the concept of "owning" land was rather silly. This didn't stop a minority of tribal leaders from turning over the land to the white man(Just like the sioux). Since tecumseh believed nobody owned the land and hence couldn't give it away he formed an alliance of indians stretching from canada to the gulf of mexico. He died in the war of 1812. If Tecumseh and chief joseph were alive at the same time and had comms the USA would be a lot smaller lol
The mexican american war even reaks of imperialism...
When we annexed Hawaii we almost put the former Queen, Liliʻuokalani back on the throne instead. Apparently Grover Cleveland was friends with her. Too bad Bill McKinley took office after Cleveland. We all know what hawaii is today... a state. Annexation FTW!!! love dole pineapples
haha... i started thinking about manifest destiny when you were talking about the pioneers heading west. manifest destiny is imperialism. had we not stopped when we hit the ocean i think America would be much stronger than it is today. we could have taken what is now canada and mexico rather easily, yet for some reason we did not. can you imagine if America had the added rescources of Mexico and Canada??? intensity...
I think we can attribute the downfall of the sioux to imperialism. also the wrongful acquisition of georgian lands from the cherokee nation can be attributed to imperialism(read national greed). To be honest the list is huge... Kiowa, Cheyenne, Arapaho, Ute, Shoshone, Paiute, Nez Perce, Apache, Navajo, etc.
We could even talk about the great indian leader tecumseh. His lands(term used loosely) were taken from him by the american gov't. Like a lot of indians, the shawnee believed the concept of "owning" land was rather silly. This didn't stop a minority of tribal leaders from turning over the land to the white man(Just like the sioux). Since tecumseh believed nobody owned the land and hence couldn't give it away he formed an alliance of indians stretching from canada to the gulf of mexico. He died in the war of 1812. If Tecumseh and chief joseph were alive at the same time and had comms the USA would be a lot smaller lol
The mexican american war even reaks of imperialism...
When we annexed Hawaii we almost put the former Queen, Liliʻuokalani back on the throne instead. Apparently Grover Cleveland was friends with her. Too bad Bill McKinley took office after Cleveland. We all know what hawaii is today... a state. Annexation FTW!!! love dole pineapples
For the record, I'm not for giving the land back.
I disagree that manifest destiny is imperialism. First and foremost, manifest destiny is just the idea that our nation was destined or ordained to spread all the way to the west coast. Imperialism is a policy of expansion by taking foreign lands and controlling them by force. I know, it's all semantics.
I think I agree with you about imperialism though. And I'm glad we've made the distinction between imperialism in the sense of expanding territories and "imperialism" that is used in the sense of one nation getting into the affairs of other nations. There's a difference. Today's imperialism is no longer about expanding our territories or acquiring new, foreign lands. It's about dipping out hands into the honey jar.
Linear Mode
