View Single Post
  #37  
Old 01-07-2012, 06:17 PM
Sulla the Dictator Sulla the Dictator is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 1,364
Default Re: Ask LBJ, To Rebut Paul

Quote:
Originally Posted by Florian View Post
As long as you say, "subordinated beneath a single government" I have no objection to calling the US an empire. Multi-ethnic? Not really. Anglo-Saxon culture absorbed all the other ethnic groups--the melting pot. To non-Americans this is perhaps more obvious than it is to you.
Well clearly an Empire doesn't have to be "multi-ethnic", even though America is. I believe what you mean is "multi-cultural". Germany under the Kaiserreich was pretty much a singular ethnic conglomerate, with the exception of some number of Poles. It was justifiably an Empire in that it was composed of former real states.

The Romans also assimilated subject peoples. Your language speaks to this, as does a large portion of mine. Yet no one would argue against the Roman Republic being an Empire in a real sense. The Japanese and Chinese have also been Empires even while their domain has been relatively ethnically and culturally homogenous.

Quote:
I was thinking mainly in terms of past, truly multi-ethnic empires--the Ottoman Empire, the Austro-Hungarian Empire, to say nothing of the Dutch, the British, the French empires etc. In the contemporary world situation, the US is not by any means an empire in relation to other states. It is simply the military hegemon after the collapse of the (multi-ethnic) Soviet Empire.
The British and French Empires are probably the most standard modern conception of Imperium, you're right. But those are actually exceptions to the norm in the scope of history. Colonial Empires are unusual and seem to be products of a unique time of technological and social development. The United States is not a colonial Empire, but is an Empire in the more traditional sense of the word.
Reply With Quote