Tag Archives: empire

A People's History of American Empire

Click on the image to purchase this book through Amazon.com. Purchases help support MediaMouse.org.

I’m not a very big consumer of comic books, but after reading A People’s History of American Empire I had to rethink my view of that literary style. Many people have no doubt read Howard Zinn’s classic A People’s History of the United States. In fact, in progressive circles it is considered one of the most important books to read. This new graphic adaptation is an excellent companion to the original Zinn book that provides readers with a view of US history through a different lens.

The book is a collaboration between Zinn, several other researchers, and well-known political cartoonist Mike Konopacki. A People’s History of American Empire reads similar to A People’s History of the United States except the format gives you the impression that you are at a lecture by Howard Zinn. Konopackiuses a Zinn cartoon character who discusses not only how the US became an empire, but how Zinn himself was influenced in becoming a radical historian. Zinn talks about how his dad was part of a union, how he read a great deal as a kid, and how he was once beaten at an anti-fascist march. These experiences and being a pilot during WWII had tremendous influence in his decision to become a teacher and an historian.

An aspect of the book that struck me was that it began its discussion of empire with the US takeover of Native American land in the later part of the 19th Century. Zinn believes that if we are going to talk about the US as empire that it begins with the theft of land from Native nations, which was epitomized in the 1890 massacre at Wounded Knee, where the US military killed an estimated 300 unarmed Lakota indians.

Zinn also devotes some of the book to the radical labor, women’s suffrage, and civil rights movements. Throughout the book, the authors argue that we need to recognize how US empire works at home and abroad, and that quite often the struggles against US imperialism in other countries is tied to struggles for justice here. An example of suppressed history that the book illustrates is about the great American writer Mark Twain. Most people are familiar with Twain’s fictional works, particularly Huckleberry Finn, but many people are unaware that Twain wrote about US imperialism in essays such as To the Person Sitting in the Darkness and The War Prayer, which everyone ought to read. Twain was also a member of the Anti-Imperialist League and even suggested during the US slaughter in the Philippines that the government change the US flag and put skulls in place of the stars.

In regards to US foreign policy, the book begins with the US invasions and occupations of Cuba, Puerto Rico, and the Philippines. After the so-called Spanish American War, the book looks at the US involvement in WWI, WWII, the Cold War, and several examples of US intervention since the early 1950s. With each section, readers are presented the basic story line, with characters, events, and what the US policy was in each instance. Quite often, there are images of newspaper headlines or original photos that accompany the cartoon-like characters. In every instance, not only is a story being told, but original source material is being used. For example, in the chapter on how the US overthrew the democratically elected government of Iran, readers are presented with information on how the CIA help removed President Mossadegh in 1953 and put in his place the ruthless dictatorship of the Shah. All of the characters are cartoons except Mossadegh, who is represented with an actual photo from the time of the CIA coup. There is a bubble quote with an original statement from him that says, “My only crime is that I nationalized the Iranian oil industry and removed the network of colonialism and political and economic influence of the greatest empire on earth.”

A People’s History of American Empire would make an excellent text to use with middle, high school, and college age students, but is also a great resource for those wanting to understand the “unofficial” history of the US.

Howard Zinn, A People’s History of American Empire, (Henry Holt, 2008).

The Prince of War: Billy Graham's Crusade for a Wholly Christian Empire

Click on the image to purchase this book through Amazon.com. Purchases help support MediaMouse.org.

In recent decades when people think of religious right leaders that have garnered public attention, names like Falwell, Robertson, and Haggard. Often the media attention given to these religious leaders is due to scandalous sexual behavior, as in the case of Haggard, or for unacceptable comments, such as when Falwell and Robertson both blamed 9/11 on the country’s tolerance of gays, feminists and abortionists. After reading The Prince of War: Billy Graham’s Crusade for a Wholly Christian Empire, it is somewhat difficult to comprehend why Billy Graham has received a pass from the same kind of attention in the news media.

Billy Graham came from a racially and economically privileged life near Charlotte, North Carolina. His father owned a substantial amount of land and used his wealth to broker deals that afforded Graham extra privileges as a youth. In the late 1930s, Graham became active in the church and even attended Bob Jones University, but when WWII came he switched schools and went to Florida under the pretenses that his health was bad. The author suggests that Graham may have done this to avoid being drafted by the military–both with his health issues and studying for the ministry–but there is not adequate documentation to make a strong case for this assertion.

In 1940 Graham again transferred schools and went to Wheaton College. There he met his future wife, the daughter of a wealthy businessman and “one of the most powerful men in the Christian missionary world, Dr. L. Nelson Bell.” Bell was also leader of the John Birch Society in the Chicago area. In 1943 Graham began his first ministry at a church just outside of Chicago, with a congregation of about 35 parishioners. Graham also founded a Professional Businessmen’s Club that boasted membership of around 300. Bothwell says that Graham’s nurturing of relations with the business community was a constant throughout his life as a religious leader. In 1944 Graham joined the military and became a Chaplin stateside, and when his orders to go overseas came through he again argued that his health prevented him from doing so. Graham quickly received a discharge and went to Florida where he was hired as a full time employee of Youth for Christ. It was in this capacity that Graham learned his trade and developed his decades long style of preaching that mixed scripture with bits of information of current events. With increasing popularity Graham, in 1950, founded the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association in Minnesota.

Graham was one of the first religious leaders who not only used media to his advantage; he understood the importance of owning media. Graham had purchased radio stations and formed a film company. Other media owners soon took note of Graham and media baron William Randolph Hearst soon invited Graham for a personal meeting. What impressed Hearst the most was Graham’s rabid anti-communist stance. Soon, with the assistance of Hearst, Graham was preaching to audiences of 350,000. Coupled with his growing popularity and his public stance against communism, Graham found an avenue to the White House that has spanned six decades.

According to Bothwell, the most consistent message that Graham brought to his relationships with US presidents was that the US needed to remain strong and he endorsed every war this country has engaged in since WWII. In 1950, Graham sent Truman a telegram counseling him to go to war in Korea:

“Millions of Christians praying God give you wisdom in this crisis. Strongly urge showdown with Communism now. More Christians in Southern Korea per capita than any part of the world. We cannot let them down.”

After Eisenhower was elected in 1952, Graham took a more active role in his support for the war by visiting troops in Korea. When he preached at his arena evangelistic crusades, Graham became one of the best US assets in its war on communism. In 1953 he said, “Communism is a supernatural power and gets its power from the Devil. Christianity is a supernatural power too, and gets its power from the Lord.” Graham–more than any preacher of his day–popularized the notion that we were living in apocalyptic times. He affirmed this idea as he developed his theological attacks during the Cold War. Graham said, “Communism could well be setting the stage for the anti-Christ that’s spoken of in the Bible. There have been anti-god movements but never one on the scale of communism.”

As Graham’s popularity grew with politicians, it continued to gain the admiration of businessmen. Graham befriended a wealthy oilman named Russell Maguire, an anti-Semite who began to subsidize part of Graham’s ministry. In 1956 he began to publish Christianity Today, one the most influential religious publications of the 20th Century. Graham hired, as it’s first editor, father-in-law and John Bircher, Dr. Bell. By this time Bell had developed a close relationship with the Rockefellers and other oil barons who were increasingly interested in oil discoveries in Latin America. The only problem was that most of the oil was on indigenous land. Graham was on the board of the Wycliffe Bible Translators (WBT), an organization that assisted oil companies in gaining access to indigenous lands, often with the help of military dictatorships.

While not a fan of Kennedy, Graham continued is White House connection during the Johnson years, but found his biggest ally in Richard Nixon. More than any other US president, Nixon used Graham as an ambassador abroad. Graham was sent to Israel, China, and all over Latin America, working often in conjunction with Secretary of State Henry Kissinger. In 1969, Graham sent a 13-page letter to Nixon with his own plan for “ending the war in Vietnam.” In this plan, Graham advocated that Nixon bomb the dikes in the north to ruin the economy. Apparently, Graham didn’t know that this is a violation of International Law and would constitute a war crime. Graham not only was consistently in support of the war in Vietnam, he publicly denounced as anti-war protestors whom he said “gave comfort to the enemy.” This support for war was maintained through the Reagan/Bush/Clinton and current Bush administrations.

The other area of the book that deserves attention is how Bothwell juxtaposed the positions of Graham and another religious leader of his era, Martin Luther King Jr. While King denounced the war in Vietnam, Graham continued to lend his support and even criticized those who engaged in civil disobedience by saying, “I do believe we have the responsibility to obey the law. No matter what the law may be – it may be an unjust law – I believe we have a Christian responsibility to obey it. Otherwise you have anarchy.” This glaring difference between King and Graham was also evident in their stance on segregation and racial justice. Graham did not de-segregate the seating for his crusades until the later part of the 1970s and even responded to King’s 1963 “I Have a Dream” speech by saying, “Only when Christ comes again will the little white children of Alabama walk hand and hand with little black children.” Graham also suggested that the timing of the Civil Rights movement was questionable and Graham suggested that, “blacks and whites alike would benefit from a period of quietness in which moderation prevails.” King took notice of Graham’s denunciations and wrote to him in 1963 while sitting in a Birmingham jail. King wrote, “You deplore the demonstrations taking place in Birmingham. But your statement, I am sorry to say, fails to express a similar concern for the conditions that brought about the demonstrations.” Bothwell also notes that after the Watts rioting in 1965, Graham announced that the rioters were “being exploited by a small, hard core of leftists,” and he called on Congress to pass “new tough laws to curb this kind of thing.”

In The Prince of War, the author makes a strong case that Graham has been a priest of the powerful. This book is important not only because it provides a counter position to the imminent accolades that are sure to come once Graham dies, more importantly, it provides amble documentation that shows what role the religious right has played in American politics since WWII.

Cecil Bothwell, The Prince of War: Billy Graham’s Crusade for a Wholly Christian Empire, (Brave Ulysses Books, 2007).

Conversations with Tariq Ali: Speaking of Empire and Resistance

Click on the image to purchase this book through Amazon.com. Purchases help support MediaMouse.org.

Since the 1960s when he was exiled from Pakistan for his activism against the country’s military dictatorship, Tariq Ali has been one of the most outspoken critics of imperialism and religious fundamentalism for the past thirty years. In Speaking of Empire and Resistance: Conversations with Tariq Ali, Ali is given a chance to expand on the aforementioned topics and provide important insight into the United States imperialism.

In his interviews, Ali makes the case that the United States is an imperial power and that the “war on terror” is an imperialist war. Ali notes that while some may argue that the United States was once an imperial power (destroying the Native American population, taking parts of Mexico, controlling Central America) and that it no longer is, such arguments are worthless now that the United States has entered into the “war on terror” and boldly declared its imperialist intentions. Citing President George W. Bush’s 2002 national security doctrine, Ali describes how the United States has declared that it will go to war to protect free trade and access to resources, a hallmark of the classical empires. Moreover, while the United States frequently attempts to hide its imperial role behind client dictators and indirect control, it has abandoned this effort with the invasion of Iraq and continued posturing towards Iran and Syria. Of course, the United States government did not undertake this imperial policy on its own—Ali argues that there are a network of “enablers” that help the United States including Great Britain, the corporate media, Pakistan, and academia. Ali sees hope in the movements against United States imperialism and draws connections between the Iraqi resistance, the antiwar movement in the United States and England, and those resisting the occupation of Palestine, all of which are part of a global struggle against US imperialism.

Unfortunately, readers already familiar with Ali and the larger antiwar movement will find few “new” ideas in this book. For readers that already have a good understanding of the Israeli and Palestinian conflict, the war on Iraq, the “war on terror,” the most intriguing parts of the book likely will be the interview on Pakistan. The unpublished interview from November 2003 provides valuable insights into Pakistan’s internal politics, its religious fundamentalism, and its role as one of the United States’ allies in the “war on terror.” Beyond his comments on Pakistan, his interpretation of the economic collapse of Argentina in 2001 is also interesting; with Ali arguing that the popular movements in Argentina failed because they could move the country towards “socialism.” Ali argues that while once a country held up as the model of the success that can be gained when adopting International Monetary Fund (IMF) and other neoliberal programs and policies, the left in Argentina was unable to effectively gain from the country’s collapse because it did not have an alternative model of non-capitalist economy. In Argentina, Ali sees not just the failure of capitalism but also the failure of alternatives to gain mass appeal. While Ali praises the popular assemblies that organically grew out of Argentina’s collapse, he argues that they were largely symbolic since there was no larger political alternative and no plan to gain state power. The seizure of state power, while defined in the sense of “socialism” rather than the “Socialism” of the Soviet Union, is essential if people want to change the world, and according to Ali, it is naïve to talk of changing the world without taking state power.

Overall, Ali’s book offers some unique insights, but for the most part, it will reaffirm what its readers like already know. The fact that it is grounded in anti-imperialism makes it a great introductory text to understanding the “war on terror” and the need to develop a movement against it, as an understanding of the “war on terror” (and the war on Iraq) is inadequate if it does not incorporate an anti-imperialist analysis. Moreover, as Ali argues throughout his book, an anti-imperialist analysis in the antiwar movement will help focus activists on the need to stop the war rather than electing candidates from the Democratic Party who will just give imperialism a more benign façade but will continue to pursue the same imperial policies.

Tariq Ali and David Barsamin, Speaking of Empire and Resistance: Conversations with Tariq Ali, (New Press, 2005)

Imperial Ambitions: Conversations on the Post-9/11 World

Click on the image to purchase this book through Amazon.com. Purchases help support MediaMouse.org.

In the latest collection of the Chomsky/Barsamian interviews the reader is once again treated to clear analysis of the current policies and practices of the US government and their implications abroad. Chomsky continues to hammer home the point that while their are nuances in the Bush regime, the current policy is consistent with the decades long strategies that the US has engaged in around the globe. In the very first interview Barsamian asks Chomsky if the Bush administration is substantively different from previous ones? Chomsky quickly points out that the liberal Kennedy administration architect Dean Acheson said that “no legal issue arises if the US responds to any challenge to its power, position, and prestige.”

Another amazing thing about the analysis that Chomsky brings to the table is that it is not dispassionate. For example, when talking about the US military attacks on Falluja where the hospital was bombed and then occupied, Chomsky points out that this is a violation of the Geneva Convention. Then he says “the entire political leadership (of the US) should face the death penalty under US law for these actions. They’re all eligible for the death penalty, according to the War Crimes Act passed by the 1996 Republican Congress.” Much of Chomsky’s discourse and analysis leads readers to the conclusion that the US government isn’t just making mistakes like Vietnam or Iraq, rather that it is the intention, the policy, of US administrations to engage in criminal behavior in service to empire.

Another element in the interviews by Barsamian, host of the radio program Alternative Radio, is that Chomsky shares the differences between US audiences and those around the global when he speaks. A common response from audiences in the US during the Q & A is “What should I do?” Chomsky says that this is not a question he gets asked abroad. He says “when I go to Turkey or Colombia, or Brazil, they don’t ask you ‘What should I do?’ They tell you what they’re doing….It is only the highly privileged cultures like ours that people ask this question.” Chomsky tells readers that people in the US need to come to terms with the fact that we are not a beacon to the world and that what we have in the US are failed democratic institutions. These institutions look nice on paper but they are essentially ineffective when it comes to meaningful change. The last Presidential Elections are just the most recent example of that in Chomsky’s mind. People put a tremendous amount of energy into attempting to elect a candidate (Kerry) that didn’t really represent the interests of those who voted for him. Chomsky believes we have to look beyond the quick fix solutions of elections and demonstrations to building social movements that not only challenge power structures, but construct alternative realities. A good book to get you to see how are actions are influenced by our analysis.

Noam Chomsky with David Barsamian, Imperial Ambitions: Conversations on the Post-9/11 World, (Metropolitan Books, 2005).

Paul Street: U.S. Empire and Inequality

In this lecture, author and professor Paul Street explores the conflict in society between militarism and social spending. Street uses the framework of Martin Luther King, Jr.’s triple evils: economic exploitation, racism, and militarism to talk at length about U.S. empire and inequality. He discusses the relationship between race and poverty and spends some time commenting on Hurricane Katrina that forced the corporate media–however briefly–to look at the intersection of these issues.

Purchase a DVD of this video.

An Ordinary Person's Guide to Empire

Click on the image to purchase this book through Amazon.com. Purchases help support MediaMouse.org.

An Ordinary Person’s Guide to Empire is Arundhati Roy’s latest collection of essays, most of which are the text of speeches given at various speaking engagements around the world. Roy continues to be one of the more eloquent voices on the “left” continually exposing injustice and encouraging resistance in a manner that moves far beyond the typically dry nature of most political commentary. In An Ordinary Person’s Guide to Empire, Roy is able to weave together a variety of struggles and demonstrate how they are a consequence of the same “neo-liberal project,” that is being led by the United States. For Roy, there are signs of resistance around the world, and recognizing that the United States is the center of the Empire, argues that it is essential for the resistance to empire to begin in the United States. Throughout the book Roy comes back to the fact that civil society in the United States is more powerful than the government and highlights the, albeit symbolic, opposition to the invasion of Iraq; retaining a sense of optimism that few opponents of empire in the United States can maintain amidst the ongoing difficulties in organizing effective opposition to the war and providing inspiration to continue in the struggle against empire.

Much of the book focuses on unmasking the way in which empire is maintained and “sold” to the public, as Roy skillfully deconstructs and demythologizes the rhetoric of empire that pervades the political discussion in the United States. The corporate media, which as most people in the United States should know, exists primarily as a vehicle to sell products and the official policies of the United States government, is skillfully singled out by Roy as being complicit in the development of empire. According to Roy, “it is a mistake to think that the corporate media supports the neo-liberal project, it is the neo-liberal project…the chosen medium of those who have power and money,” identifying the fact that the corporate media is a direct beneficiary of the current system and will always function in a way that maintains the status quo. In empire, just like in the corporate media, facts really do not matter, and the distortions about the Iraq war—that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction, that Iraq was linked to 9/11, and that the United States must fight “the terrorists” in Iraq or in the streets of the United States, all of which are adopted by those in power and sold to the public by the corporate media. Empire is maintained by describing all opposition as “terrorist” and maintaining that resistance to the United States project of “democracy,” which Roy effectively describes as simply a euphemism for neo-liberal capitalism, is an “act of terrorism,” the United States has been able to maintain its empire.

An Ordinary Person’s Guide to Empire is what its name implies–a well-written book that both captures the essence of the new United States empire and highlights the hope of resistance that may eventually be able to defeat the empire. At only a 118 pages, it is a quick and enjoyable read and is highly recommended for anyone living in the United States and seeking a major change in both the United States and in its role in the world.

Arundhati Roy, An Ordinary Person’s Guide to Empire, (South End Press, 2004).