Archbishop of Canterbury: "US is ‘worst’ imperialist"

[Errigal]

From The Sunday Times
November 25, 2007
US is‘worst’ imperialist: archbishop



THE Archbishop of Canterbury has said that the United States wields its power in a way that is worse than Britain during its imperial heyday.
Rowan Williams claimed that America’s attempt to intervene overseas by “clearing the decks” with a “quick burst of violent action” had led to “the worst of all worlds”.


In a wide-ranging interview with a British Muslim magazine, the Anglican leader linked criticism of the United States to one of his most pessimistic declarations about the state of western civilisation.


He said the crisis was caused not just by America’s actions but also by its misguided sense of its own mission. He poured scorn on the “chosen nation myth of America, meaning that what happens in America is very much at the heart of God’s purpose for humanity”.


Williams went beyond his previous critique of the conduct of the war on terror, saying the United States had lost the moral high ground since September 11. He urged it to launch a “generous and intelligent programme of aid directed to the societies that have been ravaged; a check on the economic exploitation of defeated territories; a demilitarisation of their presence”.


He went on to suggest that the West was fundamentally adrift: “Our modern western definition of humanity is clearly not working very well. There is something about western modernity which really does eat away at the soul.”


Williams suggested American leadership had broken down: “We have only one global hegemonic power. It is not accumulating territory: it is trying to accumulate influence and control. That’s not working.”


He contrasted it unfavourably with how the British Empire governed India. “It is one thing to take over a territory and then pour energy and resources into administering it and normalising it. Rightly or wrongly, that’s what the British Empire did — in India, for example.


“It is another thing to go in on the assumption that a quick burst of violent action will somehow clear the decks and that you can move on and other people will put it back together — Iraq, for example.”


In the interview in Emel, a Muslim lifestyle magazine, Williams makes only mild criticisms of the Islamic world. He said the Muslim world must acknowledge that its “political solutions were not the most impressive”.
He commends the Muslim practice of praying five times a day, which he says allows the remembrance of God to be “built in deeply in their daily rhythm”.

I agree with what the Archbishop says in this interview. The full version is worth reading too.

US is‘worst’ imperialist: archbishop -Times Online

The full interview:
http://extras.timesonline.co.uk/arch2.pdf

[Marulus]

Thesis - antithesis...

[Errigal]

Originally Posted by Plethon

Thesis - antithesis...

I think the Anglosphere is a little more complicated than you allow.

[Marulus]

Originally Posted by Errigal

I think the Anglosphere is a little more complicated than you allow.

OK, then please elaborate, I am eager to hear your opinion.

[Errigal]

Originally Posted by Plethon

Ok, then please elaborate, I am eager to hear your opinion.

Yes, I'd like to discuss this in detail too. For now though I'll just say that anti-British sentiment is literally one of the defining characteristics of the United States and its people. The American republic was created by and for people who rejected European monarchies and established Churches, and the British monarchy and Church in particular. The Americans saw it as their right and duty to break up the overseas empires of France, Spain, Portugal and especially England. Donald Rumsfeld's "Old Europe" versus "New Europe" comes from that tradition.

Here's a recent article which illustrates American Exceptionalism in everyday modern America:

William PFAFF-Reflections for a Thanksgiving Weekend - Columns - News

The split between the Republican Puritans and Royalist Anglicans goes back to the time of America's first colonies:

Wars of the Three Kingdoms - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

THE Archbishop of Canterbury has said that the United States wields its power in a way that is worse than Britain during its imperial heyday.

I am sorry, but was it the Americans that destroyed the Incan, Aztec, or Mayan civilizations? Oh but then again, they were just a bunch of brown people, right? You 'saved' them from theirselves. They weren't happy to be Pagans, they needed to be strict catholics and having some European church rule over their lives. Theres your great empires. Even in America, the natives celebrate their own religion and have their own reservations. Ah, but if Americans or god forbid Anglo-Saxons were to wipe outa few native civilizations-- then they are murderers. Its because all these 'nationalists' movements need some kind of major super-human enemy to fight against. So they beef up America as some kind of 'Imperielist' nation run by Freemasons with superman strength and unlimited money.

The Americans saw it as their right and duty to break up the overseas empires of France, Spain, Portugal and especially England. Donald Rumsfeld's "Old Europe" versus "New Europe" comes from that tradition.

This post has to be a joke. It was Washington that started the non-interventionalist foreign policy in America. He had no interest to break up France, Spain, or Portugual. And why would America break up 'England'. Thats like saying someone would like to break up California. Don't you mean Britain? Great Britain and France were both major trading partners with early Americans. So it wouldn't make sense to break them up.

And anyways-- The Spanish empire broke up because Latin Americans realized how screwed over they were from a government that could care less about them. They rebelled like North Americans did. Go ahead and blame it on Americans, but it was the Spanish monarchs that were to blame for ignoring their colonies. I would like to see a serious arguement that the founding fathers set out on a mission to attack the awful empires of Europe.