Post-Modern Imperialism

The greatest of historical periods have been named after a crisis, be it a war, biological catastrophe or even a natural disaster. It is clear that we - in the 21st century - have a growing number of crisises on our hands. The quake in Japan. The post-9/11 world: the spread of terrorism (Islamic and other). The geo-political spread of Western (American) power into the East. What are we supposed to call this era?

Well, frankly, I think the latter-most point is of the greatest importance. The gravest of issues - the survival of mankind, as a whole, as in our planet Earth - depends, whether some of us like it or not, on the wellness of certain countries over others. Its almost like the "Too Big to Fail" idea that spawned up during the 2007 recession. Some countries are just too big to fail.

Now, what are these countries? Easy. Saudi Arabia - for producing over 50% of the world's oil (1998, sustainer.org). The United States -  a leader in designing innovative technologies. China - notorious, yet productive manufacturer of many, many, many technologies. Japan - for its political prowess (one of the first developed countries to delve into Socialsim) and its importance to the Global Market. And India - a leader in modern Computer Technology. And the list continues.

It seems like all of the World's countries are "Too Big to Fail." It is for this reason that US and her "allies" went to war in Iraq and Afghanistan. If these countries failed, then the entire World would fail. But, alas, its more complicated than that.

Its not that Iraq or Afghanistan - or for that matter - Libya are too big, its that their too small. Time and time again, these countries have shown that a weak, un-authoritarian government cannot survive the environments provided. Consider Iran - a puppet state reporting to the all-mighty Anglo-American Alliance. But, it wasn't after the Qajars, as they called themselves, were deposed by the Pahlavian shahs that Iran ate the fruit of their Nation: oil. In these areas, Authoritarian States seem necessary to oust any unwanted (like Western) influence.However, because these countries are dwarfed by political super-powers like the United States and Britain on the Global Stage, they have no room to voice their opinions. The minds of the Global Communities' members are brainwashed by these countries who call themselves super-powers, but are nothing more than 21st-century Imperialists.

Whatever the case, let it be known that these countries - Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya - were/are sovereign states. As I stated previously, the "hero" who had appeared after the smoke settled on the Revolutionary Battlefield in Iraq was the unpopular Coalition. Despite what many Americans may think, the Iraqi people much rather wanted a dictator who would imprison a few rather than a foreign conqueror who imprisoned all.(Link: http://current.com/shows/this-american-life/93019794_talk-to-an-iraqi-this-american-life.htm)

So, why do I call the conquering Western stataes (namely the United States) Imperialists? Unlike the European Powers of the 18th and 19th centuries, these new powers due not try to even hide the reason for their invasions. They say that it is being done to "protect American Interest." What is this interest? If you were to say Democracy, then it would be a story similar to that of the Imperial Age - "The White Man's Burden." However, if you argue that "American Interest" is oil and other lucrative natural resources that are critical to the American economy, then you probably think the Western Coalition is not invading the East. Lastly, if you think American Interest is material and you agree that it is invading other countries, then you belong to one of two groups: either you agree with me and plan to do something about it or you are not aware of why Imperialism is bad. For the latter, follow this (Link: http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=364752). For everyone else, read along.

If we are in these countries to further Democracy, why haven't we yet touched Saudi Arabia (a monarchy) or Bahrain (a monarchy)? Simply because they give us oil and are pro-West--they same reason why the US and Britain did absolutely nothing and said nothing about Iran or Iraq in the 20th century.

But why does this constitute as Imperialism? Because we are forming what was known as a "sphere of influence." By definition, such a sphere is "an area or region over which a state or organization has significant cultural, economic, military or political influence." (Wikipedia) Yup, that's right. Economic, military AND political influence.

So, in this era of Post-Modern Imperialism it is clear who is the "ubermensch" and the "untermensch." The American Coalition is just too big for this world. Gasp, maybe history is NOT moved a single ubermensch but a true Coalition of States that form such a ubermensch-note: there is no such thing as an untermensch, just an entity outside the Ubermensch.