How did these two democratic nations who valued """""""""""""equal rights""""""""""""""" and """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""liberty"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" managed to join in the Colonial Imperialism game of the 19th century?
Pretty hypocritical of these two, yeah?
Other urls found in this thread:
books.google.it
twitter.com
The US had literally one colony and they gave it independence pretty quickly.
France had a colony before the revolution, and went back at it under the Empire. By the time of the Republic, they refashioned their rhetoric as people who were out to spread "the Empire of Liberty" to lesser races.
The US is more interesting since a lot of Americans called their own government out on their colonializing shit, most particularly when it took the Philippines from Spain and subsequently became their biggest colonial holding. Dissenting voices ranged from people who cared about the inhabitants of the Philippines, who decried their government's invasion of what was quite literally the first Republic in Asia, from people who decried colonialism due to the threat posed to WASP America by non-white Catholics, and then those who simply thought that colonialism was a betrayal of the US Constitution.
Frankly the Anti-Imperialism league in the US is confusing.
>Expand into Native American territory
Anti-Imperialists: *crickets*
>Occupy Cuba and annex the Philippines
Anti-Imperialists: OMG IMPERIALISM!
manifest destiny
Expanding into the rest of North America wasn't seen as imperialism because it was mostly empty and devoid of people, despite native memes.
It was considered that it was all basically US territory as it was, and the aboriginals were viewed as either savages lacking civilization and/or unruly citizens who haven't quite gotten the message.
The philippines was a harder sell, since the opposition was christian (even if catholic) spanish educated liberals with a constitution capable of fielding an almost functional conventional army. It was very clear cut imperialism.
Is this nigga serious? Google "Banana Wars".
If those count as colonial occupations then fucking Iraq was an American colony from 2003-2017.
>Be welcomed into America
>Suddenly not welcomed
>They start burning young girls and pregnant women alive and scalping young boys
>Fight back
>This is apparently Imperialism and bad
Being fair there were good tribes, but honestly the fucking Comanche deserves smallpox and it was justified if it was even used on them.
niggers ain't human
>Cuba
>Puerto Rico
>Philippines
>Hawaii (face it, we colonized them)
>Guam
The French Revolution wasn't even consistent with its ideals inside of France.
>France
>don't get colonies
>get crushed by the anglo when (not if) it decides to attack
>have even less power against Germany
The colonies were pretty useful to France. And it's not like natives were badly treated, since in the end colonialism was a net loss of, if I remember right, 2b of french Francs of 1911. And it's still basically paying them welfare. Wouldn't You say they were freer and more equal then, with the advantages of western civilization, such as schools, hospitals, roads, airports, harbors?
Both in Cuba and the Philippines, they were fighting westernized, Christian, people who were doing what their founding fathers were doing a century before.
That was bound to trigger some Americans.
>not knowing how the term man has changed
>not knowing democracy has changed
Just wew lad
Colonialism was mostly corporate welfare. The government shelled out money for the acquisition of profitable territory and its protection while private entities reaped the benefits.
Also Haiti under Wilson, too many textbooks tend to shift the blame away from him.
Since when is all intervention 'colonialism'?
>democratic nations
You mean democratic states
The French did not care about, and Americans aren't a nation at all
"After U.S: marines invaded the country in 1915, they forced the Haitian legislature to select our preferred candidate as president. When Haiti refused to declare war on Germany after the United States did, we dissolved the Haitian legislature. Then the United States supervised a pesudo-referendum to approve a new Haitian constitution, less democratic than the constitution it replaced"
Also
"It is not that Wilson failed in his earnest efforts to bring democracy to these little countries. He never tried. He intervened to impose hegemony, not democracy." Piero Gleijeses.