Suchergebnisse

A review essay on books by (1) Michael Hardt & Antonio Negri, Empire (Cambridge, MA: Harvard U Press, 2000); (2) Niall Ferguson, Colossus: The Price of America's Empire (New York: Penguin, 2004); (3) Niall Ferguson, Empire: The Rise and Demise of the British World Order and the Lessons for Global Power (New York: Basic, 2002); (4) Ulrich Beck & Edgar Grande, Das kosmopolitische Europa ([Cosmopolitan Europe] Frankfurt am Main, Germany: Suhrkamp, 2004); & (5) Alexandre J. Motyl, Imperial Ends. The Decay, Collapse, and Revival of Empires (New York: Columbia U Press, 2001).

Many studies on u.s.-Korea relations describe the bilateral interactions to 1905 and the restored diplomatic relations after Korea's liberation in 1945. This study focuses instead on the interwar years proceeding from the premise that American understandings of colonial Korea are important to grasp u.s. wartime planning for Korea's future. It explores unofficial levels of interactions, representations, and perceptions of Japan and the United States regarding colonial Korea. On one hand, American writers and professionals portrayed Korea as a developing country needing critical help from Japanese colonizers that coincided with imperial imperatives. On the other hand, professional scholars and u.s. government officials began to look at Japan's rule in Korea from a more critical perspective, observing problems with Japanese rule in Korea in economic, political, and social affairs. u.s. officials posted in Korea, in particular, saw how Koreans were suffering from Japan's discrimination and harsh rule. This repressive colonial rule was creating appeal for communism among the Korean people. u.s. officials began to doubt the feasibility of Japan's pan-Asian doctrine, questioning if it could be a successful ruler. These varied American views of colonial Korea became the basis of u.s. policy toward post-colonial Korea after 1945.

Although empires have shaped the political development of virtually all the states of the modern world, "imperialism" has not figured largely in the mainstream of scholarly literature. This book seeks to account for the imperial phenomenon and to establish its importance as a subject in the study of the theory of world politics. Michael Doyle believes that empires can best be defined as relationships of effective political control imposed by some political societies – those called metropoles – on other political societies – called peripheries. To build an explanation of the birth, life, and death of empires, he starts with an overview and critique of the leading theories of imperialism. Supplementing theoretical analysis with historical description, he considers episodes from the life cycles of empires from the classical and modern world, concentrating on the nineteenth-century scramble for Africa. He describes in detail the slow entanglement of the peripheral societies on the Nile and the Niger with metropolitan power, the survival of independent Ethiopia, Bismarck's manipulation of imperial diplomacy for European ends, the race for imperial possession in the 1880s, and the rapid setting of the imperial sun. Combining a sensitivity to historical detail with a judicious search for general patterns, Empires will engage the attention of social scientists in many disciplines. ; https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/books/1291/thumbnail.jpg

Although empires have shaped the political development of virtually all the states of the modern world, "imperialism" has not figured largely in the mainstream of scholarly literature. This book seeks to account for the imperial phenomenon and to establish its importance as a subject in the study of the theory of world politics. Michael Doyle believes that empires can best be defined as relationships of effective political control imposed by some political societies—those called metropoles—on other political societies—called peripheries. To build an explanation of the birth, life, and death of empires, he starts with an overview and critique of the leading theories of imperialism. Supplementing theoretical analysis with historical description, he considers episodes from the life cycles of empires from the classical and modern world, concentrating on the nineteenth-century scramble for Africa. He describes in detail the slow entanglement of the peripheral societies on the Nile and the Niger with metropolitan power, the survival of independent Ethiopia, Bismarck's manipulation of imperial diplomacy for European ends, the race for imperial possession in the 1880s, and the rapid setting of the imperial sun. Combining a sensitivity to historical detail with a judicious search for general patterns, Empires will engage the attention of social scientists in many disciplines