Why I Am Opposed
to Imperialism
By Ernest Crosby
The
Arena 28 (July 1902).
I
am opposed to the modern imperialistic course of our Government:
(1)
Because it is based upon physical force. The real history of the world is a
history of ideas, and true leadership of mankind is in the realm of thought and
character. The dream of wide influence is a grand dream, but it must be an
influence on a higher plane than that of arms. The idea of political equality
that we championed in the eighteenth century gave us for a time the right kind
of leadership, and if now we could solve the problem of industrial democracy we
might again have the world following in our train. To substitute a big navy for
big ideas is stupid and puerile. When we really have a message worth delivering,
we shall instinctively feel that the methods of Caesar and Mohammed are not
adapted to its delivery.
(2)
Because expansion by force fills the world with hatred. We have already made the
Filipinos hate us as much in four years as the Spaniards did in four hundred,
and our troops had hardly entered Manila and Santiago before they began to call
the natives "niggers" and "monkeys." What hate, jealousy,
wounded pride, and sullen misery on the one hand, and cruelty, disdain, and
oppression on the other, that word "Imperialism" has denoted ever
since the dawn of history! We have two complicated race problems on our hands
already, both of which have led us into a disgraceful and still continuing
course of crime and sin. Are we lightly to sow the seeds of new race-hatreds,
and, under the pretense of uniting the world, insure its lasting division?
(3)
Because it is founded on a false pride of race. The "chosen people"
idea is a silly one, and out of place in the twentieth century. All races have
their place, and attempts at subjection should give way to a generous rivalry.
We have a wide enough field for influence in the exercise of persuasion and
example. Other peoples must develop naturally. Some have preceeded us and appear
to be on the wane; others follow in our wake and may be expected to surpass us
in the future. In either case the effort to superimpose our ideas and customs by
force must be disastrous.
(4)
Because it is steeped in cant and hypocrisy. There is something fine in the
unsimulated strength of a wild beast, but when a nation steals the soil from
under your feet and enslaves you to its own uses, and in the meantime prates of
Christianity and civilization and benevolent intentions, it turns the stomach of
an honest man. We have lied to Cuba point-blank and misled the Filipinos, and
our warfare has been distinguished by the most astounding cruelties
("conducted with marked severity" is the eupemistic expression of
General Miles); yet we go on boasting of our philanthropic work as if falsehood
were bred in our bones. Why cannot a nation behave like a gentleman?
(5)
Because it distracts our attention and our material resources from the problems
that beset us at home. We should reform ourselves before we undertake to preach
a crusade. How can we to-day, with our slums, our lynchings, our race and labor
questions -- how can we decently assume the right to teach mankind? We are the
only civilized people who practise burning at the stake at the present time, and
we wish to soften the manners of the isles of the sea!
The
true expansion should spring from love for neighbor, and its methods would be
peaceful, democratic, and transparently sincere.
