Imperialism is defined within the terms of political science as a stronger nation imposing its will on a weaker nation.
To answer the question, yes under this administration particularly, we have not only aspired to but acted upon
imperialistic goals. Our second invasion and illegal occupation of Iraq is a very clear example as the first thing we
did after installing a puppet "interim" government was nullify all oil contracts (none of which went to us)
and change Iraq's economic and foreign policy to that of an American puppet state with the economic policy of
globalization and economic rape of the people of Iraq (i.e removing Agricultural tariffs that hurt farmers, etc).
Aside from that conflict in Vietnam we made sure to keep Ngo Dinh Diem in as leader of South Vietnam despite his obvious
corruption and ill-intention until he was assasinated; as stated by another poster we did not rebuild in Vietnam because
we lost. The cause of this war? The United States wishing to allow its ally France to keep hold over her colony; form
southeast asian capitalist markets in which they could then exploit labor, use the states as political tools against the
USSR and PRC, and propagandize the capitalist system to other disenfranchised colonies of European powers.
A few other recent examples would be the 1989 Invasion of Panama and overthrow of General Manuel Noriega because he
wanted to nationalize the Panama canal and was beginning to put pressure on US citizens and military personnel who were
occupying the canal.
The Shah of Iran was another puppet for the United States, implementing many economic deals, keeping his country free of
socialists and communists, and exploiting the citizens of his country until his ouster in 1979 by the Ayatollah
Kommenei.
If anyone else would like me to cite even more US imperialist policies I will be more than happy to do so.
Quote by EternalParadox
To say that the United States is practicing commercial imperialism is to blame the entire system of free market economy
and ignore domestic failures. In an increasingly free global market, a firm lives and dies by its ability to remain
competitive and satisfy consumer demand. American firms have largely succeeded while many other firms have not.
That's not the fault of America nor those firms. If the domestic organizations in any given country cannot measure
up, then tough for them.
For example, the French especially are vehemently opposed to American cultural hegemony, especially in film. Yet they
have continually failed to produce any good quality films themselves. Is it Hollywood's fault that they simply make
films that French people like better while the French film industry is incapable of the same? I say
not.
Besides, there is no such thing as "conquering the world of business and trade." Business's bottom line
is profit. If profit can come from expansion into the international market, then firms will expand.
"Commercial imperialism" is essentially globalization and what has been hailed by the United States and its
puppet instutions, The World Bank, and International Monetary Fund, as "economic liberation" is no more than a
scam favoring only multinational corporations. What globalization essentially amounts to is the tearing down of tariffs
(and if domestic companies can't compete and there were no tariffs around then you could say goodbye to many
American companies too, like Harley-Davidson back in the 70's and 80's when the Japanese were first beginning
to export their motorcycles) the immunization of these companies to the laws of the country they are operating in, and
the privatization of many public works (such as sewers, water supplies, etc). This has also shown to have cataclysmic
effects for countries such as Zambia (1983-Present). The US has even tried it with the no-bid contracts within Iraq, a
particular example comes to mind of Haliburton being discovered that it was not properly filtering the water both
civillians and our troops were using, drinking, cooking and bathing in; there was still sewage as well as other harmful
bacteria caused by years of contamination within the water.
Also, when was the last time you saw a French movie Eternal Paradox? Granted they do not seem nearly as popular in the
US as they do in per se, the EU, but just like US movies they are a mixed batch. If you're getting this assumption
from the fact that French movies aren't very big here, not many foreign movies are unless they've been remade
into english-language films. If you're judging this by a French movie or two you've seen and hated, sorry you
didn't like it. But movies like Amelie, Monsieur Ibrahim, Les trois coleurs: Bleu, Blanc, et Rouge, Poupées Russes
(Russian Dolls), L'Espagnol, Les pacts des lupes (Brotherhood of the Wolf), et cetera, are all fantastic movies and
I encourage anyone to check them out.
As for the french resistence and bitterness to American culture, they're like that with everyone. They are
extremely proud of their culture and just like mainstream Americans, find their culture better than everyone elses
(disclaimer: this is a general statement, don't think of it as anything else).
