The Columbian spirit has been active in the West now for over 500 years. America—the New World of virginal nature unspoiled by the tawdry hand of history—was the first European prize, but which of the Europeans would get what share of that prize was an open matter—or anyway, a matter of power politics. The Spanish dominance guaranteed by the Treaty of Tordesillas in 1494 was but a piece of paper to the people of Northern Europe after the Reformation. The New World was a vast, new market, and promised bountiful resources—and hopefully gold—to the European powers that could form some dominion there. Somewhat paradoxically, the puritans who settled for reasons not entirely pecuniary established a firmer economic grip on the continent than the rapacious, exploitative business travelers. The puritans in time became republicans, defining themselves negatively against imperialism. That we would want to explore this continent, and lay claim to what was not precisely ours, seemed only natural. As long as labor was free, our manifest destiny was of a republican ethos. We dehumanized the Indian so thoroughly that our crime seemed guiltless.
Europe’s imperial designs were set back from 1756 to1815 by a number of notable political developments: the Seven Years’ War, the American Revolution, the French Revolution, the Napoleonic Empire, the War of 1812, and the Monroe Doctrine. The French defeat left Britain in a position to consolidate its imperial holdings, but soon empire became a trans-European obsession. By the end of the 19th century, Europe dominated Africa, the Indian subcontinent, China, Southeast Asia, and the Middle East. Around 1900, America got in on the action. After World War II, this system fell apart. But because these “liberated” countries were of strategic importance as proxies in the struggle against the USSR, America did not always feel the need to leave them alone. Hence, for example, Vietnam. America had taken over for Western Europe as the new global hegemony, and its power rested upon its industrial strength. And in 1973 this strength revealed itself for the first time as a liability. The energy price shocks of that year skewed the math of imperial relations. We were no longer plainly dominant, but rather clearly dependent. The Middle East is the boiler room of modernity, and so long as this is so it exerts power over us.
That power can be attacked in two ways. The first of these regains power by taking it back. That means, as it must, America must gain political control of enough oil reserves in the Middle East to finance our energy consumption. So long as America is dependent on oil, it is dependent on foreign oil. In a world increasingly demanding more energy, oil prices will continue to rise. The American owning classes, if they can gain control of as much of this scarce, in-demand resource as possible, stand to make a hefty margin. This paradox of American dependency gained added depth in the 1980’s, when American Consumerism revealed itself as even more mammoth than American Industry. The capitalist superpower is now the world’s biggest debtor, and to maintain our lifestyle we must be able to compel access to sufficient sources of energy. So long as these sources remain crude, America will find it imperative to continue neo-Imperialist activities in the Middle East. This, need I add, will give increased motivation to terrorists who object our presence in the region.
The second way to untangle ourselves of dependency on unsavory parts of the globe is to develop alternative sources of energy. From a moral as well as a constitutional point of view, this manner is by far the more preferable, as it requires no neo-Imperial adventures. The barons of the present regime of course prefer that we remain entangled, as we are entangled in their product. Their power may dissipate if innovation is promoted instead of neo-Imperial marketing. Although they offered up “Shock and Awe” in Iraq, creative destruction terrifies them. They are fat, greedy, and wanting morally. “Drill, Baby, Drill!” has become their mantra. The problem, you see, is that we are not entrenched far enough in the fortunes of the oil market. The question of energy and the question of empire are one and the same, and on both sides of this coin McCain’s candidacy is highly discouraging.
Comments