THE SPECIAL ISSUE ARTICLES CONTRIBUTORS ABOUT THE JOURNAL
Bernard Porter, Empire and Superempire: Britain, America and the World, Yale University Press, 2006. ISBN 9780300110104, 224 pp. The status of the United States (US) as the world's only super power has led to inevitable comparisons with countries who have found themselves in similar positions in the past, most notably Britain. However, this latest attempt takes a different perspective. Bernard Porter, an imperial historian, argues that much of what has been written to date does not offer a true depiction of nineteenth century Britain. Nor does it adequately take into account a modern day understanding of empire. For Porter, the similarities between the British experience and the United States point towards a modern America in denial of their empire status. The only significant difference he argues, is that today's empire is even more powerful and most importantly of all, more ideologically driven. If we are therefore to freely label nineteenth century Britain as an empire, we should feel equally free to label the United States as not just an empire, but a "Superempire". The reader can sense Porter's irritation with what he sees as the misuse of the British precedent when discussing American imperialism from the start. He begins by suggesting the British Empire is too often portrayed as powerful, racist and brutal which is to "misunderstand it utterly" (p15). Instead, the British Empire was a great deal less imperialistic than America's in particular, are prone to image. A more accurate depiction is a fundamentally weak system of control, based on local rulers. Control which lasted as long as it did only through a combination of luck, bluff and repression of local peoples. It's a skillful attempt to alter the negative perception of empire but ultimately lacks compelling evidence. In particular, his assertion that the Victorians were unconcerned with their Empire status day to day is less than convincing. You only have to take a short walk in central London and view the endless monuments to nineteenth century imperialism to see this was not the case. More convincing is his rebuke of America's exceptionalism. Porter adopts a broader, updated definition of "Empire" which is not restricted to the possession of colonies but extends to influence and dominance over other nations. By examining the indigenous historical roots of American Imperialism under these terms, he argues the US has shown tendencies in its history which are not regarded as imperialistic, but are similar to features of Britain's history which are accepted and denounced as imperialist without question. The US colonization of Indian territory, war with Mexico and US expansionism in the nineteenth century are all examples he gives as part of a sophisticated analysis. The result is a compelling case that the notion that American history has been significantly less imperialistic than Britain's is nothing more than a myth. Porter suggests the case against America's exceptionalism is even more convincing today. The passing of 9/11, Porter argues, has allowed the US to pursue an even more imperialist foreign policy which has now utterly transcended that of Britain's past. The US' global dominance of today should be regarded in fact as a "Superempire". Why? Because it is even greater militarily and culturally and economically more pervasively than anything we have experienced before. But most significantly of all it is ideologically driven. For Neo-conservative America foreign policy can be the agency of God's salvation by spreading democracy and "creating a world order in its own image" (p95). It is this clever interpretation of modern American Imperialism which is the most engaging part of the book. His reassessment of nineteenth century Britain imperialism may seem ineffectual but the same cannot be said of his denouncement of US exceptionalism. It is compelling. Thought provoking is an over used phrase by reviewers but the second half of this book really is. Porter skillfully makes you reassess your perception of imperialism before offering a sophisticated and informed comparison of present day America and Imperial Britain. In particular, his denouncement of US exceptionalism and his assessment of post 9/11 US imperialism and its ideological motivation is impressive. Readers take note however, there are weaknesses. His reflection on the British Empire may have even the most die hard patriot wincing. True, Britain should stop apologizing for its imperialistic past but you can't help but feel that Porter the imperialist historian may have become a little blinkered by his subject. His style can also be a little raw. Porter doesn't pull any punches in suggesting that 9/11 was a "form of blowback" for informal US imperialism (p99). None the less, he should be congratulated on delivering both a useful comparative historical inquiry and a topical insight into present day American foreign policy. Adam Stevens
BOOK REVIEWS BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCHES POLICY PAPERS