The invasion and occupation of Iraq have sparked considerable discussion about the nature of American imperialism, but most of it is focused on the short term. The classical historical approach of this book provides a convincing and compelling analysis of the different phases of American imperialism, which have now led to America becoming a global hegemon without any serious rivals. Victor Kiernan, one of the world's most respected historians, has used his nuanced knowledge of history, literature and politics to trace the evolution of the American Empire: he includes accounts of relations between Indians and white settlers, readings of the work of Melville and Whitman, and an analysis of the way that money and politics became so closely intertwined. Eric Hobsbawm's preface provides an insight into his own thoughts on American imperialism, and a valuable introduction to Victor Kiernan's work. Together, they shed useful light on today's urgent debates about the uses and misuses of seemingly unlimited military power, a lack of respect for international agreements, and the right to 'pre-emptive defense'.

In this volume, Hamilton deals with some of the antecedents and the outcome of the Spanish-American war, specifically, the acquisition of an American empire. It critiques the "progressive" view of those events, questioning the notion that businessmen (and compliant politicians) aggressively sought new markets, particularly those of Asia. Hamilton shows that United States' exports continued to go, predominantly, to the major European nations. The progressive tradition has focused on empire, specifically on the Philippines depicted as a stepping stone to the China market. Hamilton shows that the Asian market remained minuscule in the following decades, and that other historical works have neglected the most important change in the nation's trade pattern, the growth of the Canada market, which two decades after the 1898 war, became the United States' largest foreign market.The book begins with a review and criticism of the basic assumptions of the progressive framework. These are, first, that the nation is ruled by big business (political leaders being compliant co-workers). Second, that those businessmen are zealous profit seekers. And third, that they are well-informed rational decision-makers. A further underlying assumption is that the economy was not functioning well in the 1890s and that a need for new markets was recognized as an urgent necessity, so that big business, accordingly, demanded world power and empire. Each of these assumptions, pivotal elements in the dominant progressive tradition in historical writing, is challenged, with an alternative viewpoint presented.Hamilton presents a different, more complex view of the events following the Spanish-American War. The class-dominance theory is not supported. The alternative argued here, elitism, proves appropriate and more useful. This review and assessment of arguments about American expansion in the 1890s adds much to the literature of the period.

With the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the United States' long war on communism was replaced by a perpetual war on terror. The authors posit that this neo-imperialistic phase is but the latest development in a line of thought and action established after World War II. But, they say, 2005 is not 1945. Today, they argue, the United States uses its power to deplete the resources of the developing world, and to compel the rest of the world to remain dependent on American management of the global economy. Contending that this situation is ultimately untenable, they assert that the United States is entering a period of deep crisis. The best thing for American neo-imperialists to do to avert their worst nightmare—a strategic and economic alliance among Europe, Russia, China, and OPEC—would be to arrange for the orderly withdrawal of American power before it is too late for the human and environmental security of the world. When the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, the Cold War slowly gave way to a new world order in which the United States was left as the lone superpower. But the organizing principle that would characterize the early 21st century was as yet unclear, until the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. Now it is clear that the long war on Communism has been replaced by a perpetual war on terror. Regardless of how long American troops remain in Iraq, and irrespective of further military actions, George W. Bush will continue to be a wartime president whose foreign policy is dominated by the Pentagon. And yet, the authors argue, this neo-imperialistic phase, with its emphasis on Eurasian oil supplies, is but the latest development in a line of thinking and acting in the world that was established by such men as Dean Acheson and Paul Nitze after World War II. But 2005 is not 1945, and the United States, despite Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and Vice President Dick Cheney's assertions, is not liberating Iraq and Afghanistan in the same way that U.S. forces liberated Germany and Japan; it is not reconstructing Iraq or the former Yugoslavia as it did when it rebuilt war torn western Europe with the Marshall Plan. The United States, with its thinly stretched military and deficit-laden economy, does not possess the means to do so today. Instead, the authors maintain, the United States is simply depleting the developing world's natural resources, compelling the rest of the developed world to remain dependent on American management of the global economy. This situation is ultimately untenable, the authors argue, and as a result, the United States is entering a period of deep crisis. The best thing for American neo-imperialists to do to avert their worst nightmare—a strategic and economic alliance among Europe, Russia, China, and OPEC—would be to arrange for the orderly withdrawal of American power before it is too late for the human and environmental security of the world as a whole.

By the 1970s the global hegemony established by an American Empire in the post-World War II period faced increasing resistance abroad and contradictions at home. Contextualizing that hegemony, resistance and contradictions is the focus of Dying Empire. Presenting a wide-ranging synthesis of approaches, the book attempts to shed light on the construction of and challenges to the military, economic, and cultural imperial projects of the United States in the late 20th and early 21st centuries. Opposing US imperialism and global domination, Francis Shor combines academic and activist perspectives to analyze the crises endemic to empire and to propose a vision for the realization of another more socially just world. The text incorporates the most recent critical discussions of US imperialism and globalization from above and below to illuminate the practices and possibilities for global resistance. Offering insights into the political and cultural convulsions of recent decades whilst raising profound and compelling questions, this book will be of interest to activists, students, and scholars of American political culture, US foreign policy, globalization, imperialism, international relations, and social movements.

Lewis and Able examine the economic relationship between Latin America and the 'advanced' countries since their independence from Spanish and Portuguese rule. They reinterpret the significance of Latin America's external connections through juxtaposing Latin America and the British scholars from different ideological and intellectual backgrounds. This work is of considerable importance in promoting comparative work in development studies of Latin America and the Third World.

Too often, scholarship on Anglo-American political relations has focused on mutual social and economic interests between Britain and the United States as the basis for cooperation. Breaking new ground, Anglo-American Relations and the Transmission of Ideas instead explores how ideas, on either side of the Atlantic have mutually influenced each other. In those transnational interactions, there forms a shared tradition of political ideas, facilitating “a common cast of mind” that has served as the basis for transatlantic relations and socio-political values for decades.

This book provides a study of the American anti-imperialist movement during its most active years of opposition to US foreign policy, from 1898 to 1909. It re-evaluates the movement's motives and operations throughout these years by evaluating the way in which Americans conceived the idea of 'liberty.'

In a book that Naomi Klein says could "change the world," Anthony Hall shows that the globalization debate actually began in 1492.

This book examines the language and the ideology of the Pax Romana, the Pax Britannica and the Pax Americana within the broader contexts of 'hegemony' and 'empire'. It addresses three main themes: a conceptual examination of the way in which hegemony has been justified; a linguistic study of how the notion of pax (usually translated as peace) has been used in ancient and modern times; and a study of the international orders created by Rome and Britain. Using an historiographical approach, the book draws upon texts from Greco-Roman antiquity, and sources from the nineteenth, twentieth and twenty-first centuries to show how the pax ideology has served as a justification for hegemonic foreign policy, and as an intellectual exercise in power projection. From Tacitus' condemnation of what he described as 'creating a wilderness and calling it peace', to debates about the establishment of a Pax Americana in post-Saddam Hussein's Iraq, the book shows not only how the governing elite in each of the three hegemonic orders prescribed to a loose interpretation of the pax ideology, but also how their internal disagreements and different conceptualisations of pax have affected the process of 'empire-building'. This book will be of interest to students of international history, empire, and International Relations in general.

"This anthology--bringing together political scientists, anthropologists, historians, sociologists, economists, and journalists--provides a serious and sophisticated theoretical and historical analysis of the state of the Latin American Left. The central thematic issues are addressed, followed by a number of case studies written by the most astute radical Left observers of the contemporary setting"--