What if, in the last years of the Nineteenth Century, the United States decided to embark upon an Empire, but one of democratic ideals, unlike all the other despotic ones before. It was to be an Empire of Liberation, where the Peoples of the American Empire, regardless of their birth, were to enjoy the rights which were once won by the Founding Fathers. And thus, with such grand thoughts & deliberate planning, the Spanish-American War of 1899 was merely the beginning in order to envisage such remarkable inspiration…
Discuss.
When I read this kind of stuff, I feel a bit
I know it’s written without any bad intention, but it implies what I consider a serious misconception: there are NO democratic empires. You can have empires AND democracies, …but not both.
If a democracy conquers an empire her herself, that doesn’t mean she now rules a “democratic” empire. Britain was democratic in 1900, but her empire wasn’t a democratic one, because most of its inhabitants couldn’t vote. If the US conquered parts of South or Central Amercia, he wouldn’t have allowed their new inhabitants to be full citizens. And thus, it wouldn’t be a “democratic” empire.
Why wouldn’t the US allow their new subjects to be citizens? Why wouldn’t he allow them to form states within the US federation? Because these “subjects” simply DIDN’T WANT to be part of the US. If the Filipinos, who were just a colony before 1898, fought so hard against the Americans when they tried to annexed them, think how much harder would had fought any Latin American nation, all of which had at least 80 years of being Independent states, and had achieved their independence after a long and bloody struggle.
If, in spite of this, the US decided to let these new subjects form “states” and vote to elect federal representatives, the US democratic system would collapse immediately. Because they wouldn’t have voted for democrats or republicans, but for the “Partido independentista Latinoamericano”, who would immediately obstruct the functioning of the federal government. Democratic institutions just don’t work when ethnical loyalties are more important than ideologies, and national parties can’t gain supporters “nationally”. Think in the Irish voting massively for the Sinn Fein when they were under the British rule, instead of voting for a national UK party; or in what happened in the Austro-Hungarian Empire before its dissolution. Or, to a lesser extent, in what happens now in Belgium.
That’s why a “democratic” American empire in 1900 is completely ASB. The only way it could be achieved is through the genocide of most Latin-Americans. Latin American was (and still is) a poor region, with a lot of inequalities and injustices. But its peoples simple don’t want (and didn’t wanted back then) to become part of the US. They had fought very hard to become independent, and wanted to keep what they had gained.
They had intellectuals, writers, poets and thinkers. They had a history of their own, and a strong consciousness of what they weren’t: the US. Even in the poorest regions, when the US intervened, nationalist anti-imperialist movements appeared (like the one of Sandino in Nicaragua). If the US had tried to openly annex Cuba in 1900, a Guerilla war would have started inmediatly. It’s true that the US annexed Northern Mexico easily. But it would have been a different story if it had choiced to conquer the densely populated core of the country.
And, let’s be fair, how likely was for a Black or a native Americacan, or even a Catholic Irish to become an US president in 1900? Well, Benito Juarez, a mestizo Indian, became president of Mexico in 1863. 1863!!!!!!! Would he even be a “governor” if Mexico was an US state? I don’t think so.
I firmly believe that, back then, an US intervention wouldn’t have improved the situation of the poor in Latin America. I think it might have been the opposite.
If you want to make a scenario of the US conquering most of South America, fine. But please don’t call that a “democratic” empire. Because the only way in which this statement could have been true is if the original inhabitants were massively exterminated, and replaced by settlers who are then given the right to vote. A very doubtfull democracy.