Modern empires

[Antilogic]

On the subject of czars...why would anyone even suggest such a stupid title for an American appointed position that has been used previously to describe an autocratic emperor selected by heredity? It's America! Not Russia! But I digress.

If you use a definition of empire that is not limited to simply the title of an autocratic ruler, but rather the dominance of one country over another, non-native region in domestic and international affairs, you could say Britain, France, and Spain are still empires. They control territories in South America and various island chains that are not part of the proper country. Likewise, the United States owns Puerto Rico, Guam, and a host of other locales that are not states (and thus not participating in the United States government directly, but are still dominated by the US government). Does that make the United States an empire? I would say so, at least in a vague sense.

 

[qwert]

Queen Victoria of United Kingdom was also the empress of India

 

[Clausewitzian]

Lol, the empire of the European Union.

 

[Antilogic]

Lol, the empire of the European Union.

You mean the Fourth Reich? I have my suspicions...

 

[Ninjatrey]

Israel considering Gaza and the West Bank, Iran in a way meddling in Iraq and America gaining influince in poor Nations.

 

[StarWorms]

I would include America, as an empire, as well as China, Russia, possibly even India

Large countries are not the same as empires. The British Empire covered about a quarter of the planet.

 

[Antilogic]

An empire, at least according to the most basic idea, has to encompass non-native populations, or otherwise one government has to exert a greater, direct influence in the domestic affairs of a weaker state. So, the United States, having direct influence in Puerto Rico, Guam, and other non-US states counts as an empire. Russia would be an empire due to the Cherkessy (sp?) issue, and the non-Russians in general along that strip of land between the Caspian and Black Seas. I'm not so sure about China and India.

 

[cubsfan6506]

I'm not so sure about China and India.

Definitly china. The chinese goverment has even adminteed to haveing over 50 distinct and different cultural groups within the territorial extent. (They use this to deny Tibet independence.

 

[Dann]

Yup. Han Chinese + 50+ other non-Han Chinese. On paper the other minorities enjoy greater perks, but the situation on the ground is that everything is dominated by the majority Han.

 

[bob bobato]

Encore, ce 'thread'?

 

[Antilogic]

Definitly china. The chinese goverment has even adminteed to haveing over 50 distinct and different cultural groups within the territorial extent. (They use this to deny Tibet independence.

I had completely forgotten that little fact, or otherwise I would have thrown China in along with Russia and the US.

India itself is a conglomeration as well--there were several independent Indian kingdoms and governments at one point, then the Europeans, culminating with the British, came in and unified the region into the modern state of India. I don't know if India counts as an empire though, because it was not by its own doing, and I don't know much about the Indian political structure.

 

[Mirc]

I wonder what people in this thread think of Brazil, could it count as an empire, from the sole point of view of ethnicity? So many groups and so closely mixed, but none more native than the others.

 

[Lockesdonkey]

Queen Victoria of United Kingdom was also the empress of India

George VI abandoned the imperial title in 1948 (a year after India became an independent Commonwealth Realm). Had he retained it, the title would have become moot in 1950 when India declared itself a republic.

 

[e350tb]

Why? After the Act of Union in 1707, England and Scotland were (notionally, at least) one. If you mean that Englishmen controlled everything, it should be noted that there were plenty of Scots occupying important positions around the empire. In fact, because Scottish nobles had less domestic opportunity, they were more likely to seek opportunities in colonial administration.

In fact, the Royal Family decend from Scots and Welsh!

 

[Rambuchan]

If you use a definition of empire that is not limited to simply the title of an autocratic ruler, but rather the dominance of one country over another, non-native region in domestic and international affairs, you could say Britain, France, and Spain are still empires. They control territories in South America and various island chains that are not part of the proper country. Likewise, the United States owns Puerto Rico, Guam, and a host of other locales that are not states (and thus not participating in the United States government directly, but are still dominated by the US government). Does that make the United States an empire? I would say so, at least in a vague sense.

Agreed with your definition and examples. Russia and China included there too.

 

[ParkCungHee]

You mean the Fourth Reich? I have my suspicions...

I thought it was the Third Empire, based on who seems to be the driving force behind the EU.

 

[ParkCungHee]

Agreed with your definition and examples. Russia and China included there too.

Thats questionable. I think we can agree that if these various peoples are represented fairly, in a federative system, then its not an Empire. Germany is not an empire for ruling Bavaria, America is not an empire for ruling California etc.
With the exception of Chechnya perhaps, Russia certainly falls under this definition. Its a multi-ethnic state, not an empire, same as India.

 

[Rambuchan]

Thats questionable. I think we can agree that if these various peoples are represented fairly, in a federative system, then its not an Empire. Germany is not an empire for ruling Bavaria, America is not an empire for ruling California etc.
With the exception of Chechnya perhaps, Russia certainly falls under this definition. Its a multi-ethnic state, not an empire, same as India.

You say California, I say Dominican Republic, Guam, Haiti, Philipines, Puerto Rico, the Monroe Doctrine, the Roosevelt Corollary etc etc etc. Whilst there has been much US lip service paid to anti-imperialism, it's pretty much always been a case of fighting imperialism with imperialism.

 

[El Justo]

nice points Ram'

my take on it is that the US has indeed practiced a hybrid form of imperialism, most notably in the nations Ram' has noted. "meddlesome" and "coercive" are two buzzwords that could be associated w/ US actions in the western hemisphere.

of course, the US did not operate on the same exact premises that the Euro colonizers had done.

the one excpetion though is the Philippines which was, for all intents and purposes, a colony depsite it not having that official tag. i mean, Root and Taft and Co. all studied the British model of imperialism and each enthusuastically embraced it (for the sake of 'empire mgmt').

now, i'm surprised that the Native Indians and their conquest was not mentioned thus far in conncetion w/ American imperialism. this was imo the closest thing to the true model of divide and conquer.

 

[ParkCungHee]

You say California, I say Dominican Republic, Guam, Haiti, Philipines, Puerto Rico, the Monroe Doctrine, the Roosevelt Corollary etc etc etc. Whilst there has been much US lip service paid to anti-imperialism, it's pretty much always been a case of fighting imperialism with imperialism.

But we're only in two of those, Puerto Rico and Guam.