Justifying Empire: Self-Righteous Claims to Moral Superiority
Empire is nothing but
“this obscene accumulation of power"
The penchant for engineering coups
and regime changes throughout the world
The invasion and occupation of Iraq was
the brutal barbaric destruction of
a civilization by the American army
All under the excuse of
‘championing the cause of freedom’
Empires all reach a point where aggression,
plunder and subversion become an unquestioned entitlement,
an inherent prerogative fed by self-declared
and self-serving claims to moral superiority
The American empire is not original
in embedding itself in the self-serving
morality of "taming the savages"
Jingoistic NationalismUnquestioned Right to DominateFlags are bits of coloured cloth that governments use first to shrink-wrap people's minds and then as ceremonial shrouds to bury the dead.
Arundhati Roy enumerates the innumerable crimes committed by the United States government against humanity right from Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945.
The penchant for engineering coups and regime changes throughout South America, the wars in Korea and Vietnam, and finally the staunch support to Israel in order to prevent an equitable solution to the issue of Palestine issue.
All under the excuse of ‘championing the cause of freedom’!! She accurately points out that the real reason for the war against Iraq is to grab control of its oil resources.
After an incisive analysis of the corporate globalization project and its end results, she concludes that just like Soviet–style communism, the American style market capitalism is doomed to failure- because it allowed too few people [“a handful of bankers and CEOs whom nobody elected”] to usurp too much power.
Confronting Empire
Arundhati Roy identifies the many arms of the monster called the New American Empire- the US government, organizations like the IMF, the World Bank and the WTO, and the multinational corporations.
Using India as an example, she elucidates how dangerous byproducts like jingoistic nationalism, religious bigotry, fascism and terrorism are created by the corporate globalization project.
Thus, empire is nothing but a “loyal confederation, this obscene accumulation of power, this greatly increased distance between those who make the decisions and those who have to suffer them.”
Roy depicts the invasion and occupation of Iraq as the brutal barbaric destruction of a civilization by the American army.
Agreed, Saddam Hussein was a dictator, but the fact is that the American and British governments supported him during his military excesses, against Iran and during the extermination of Kurds.
It was only when he invaded Kuwait that he turned into a liability- a dog who wouldn’t obey his master anymore. And so, he deserved to be killed. The enormous level of double standards that the United States committed during the war is appalling.
Bombing civilian areas is just one example. Western ‘embedded’ journalists are called heroes for doing their duty from the front lines of war but Iraqi viewpoints were denounced. In fact, the Allies even bombed the Iraqi television station.
The American Empire is a superpower’s self destructive impulse towards supremacy, global hegemony.
America is a modern Rome: an arrogant empire that does not understand the limits of power. I guess no empire really does. This is why they rise and fall. It is not an American trait; it is the nature of unchecked power.
Yet the right wing attempts to construct a moral ethos for American hegemony and aggressive drive to dominate the world. Unfortunately the basic premise of his argument goes against history.
The comparison between Rome and America is void of historical perspective. It nullifies world history of social, economic and political development. Humanity has gone through many struggles to move toward democratic systems and expand universal rights.
The fact the Rome was not a democracy should be seen in the context of human development and not the self-serving lens of American exceptionalism.
It took centuries to abolish slavery, and America has only recently shed the shame -- if we are comparing with the Roman Empire timeline, this is an important element.
Modern technology, oil and advanced sciences have enabled our latest global empire to become the most powerful in history, the most devastating, the most dominating and domineering.
Again the right claims that the U.S. is different in its moral imperative and system. They argue that although the country could be veering towards self-destruction, it still has a chance to learn from Rome.
There is no doubt that at least in theory, democratic institutions should provide a moral if not a political check on excesses of imperial power.
But the empire has been subverting those institutions, international law and its own declared values to ensure its hold on power and continue its expansion. One would like to take solace in the fact that an elected Congress could end the war in Iraq -- that is a clear difference between a democratic American empire and slave-driven Rome.
But if we read well into the dominant American discourse -- with the exception of the anti-war movement -- there is no questioning of imperial notions and goals. The talk is all about whether America can succeed or not; the main point is whether America is winning or losing.
There is little discussion in the establishment about whether and why America is entitled to win and to dominate.
Empires all reach a point where aggression, plunder and subversion become an unquestioned entitlement, an inherent prerogative fed by self-declared and self-serving claims to moral superiority.
The American empire is not original in embedding itself in the self-serving morality of "taming the savages;" old Rome needed no high-tech computers or laser-guided weapons to justify its conquests and its cruelties.
In the end, empires share the same imperative of power.