English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2006-07-15 01:34:35 · 11 answers · asked by charu_shrivastava 1 in Arts & Humanities History

11 answers

An empire who's goal is to expand and conquer.

2006-07-15 01:38:37 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

God is not a real estate agent. People have to develop a land or lose it. Getting there first does not give a people the right to hog the land for all eternity. Resources belong to the people who have the intelligence to develop them, even if they are foreigners.

Imperialism is democratic--it gives the most talented people opportunity to try to develop where the natives have failed. Self-determination is as stupid as the seniority system. Anti-imperialism is nothing but birth privilege, which destroys all civilizations. Ownership is only a claim that can be challenged. We developed the wealth of Saudi Arabia, so it belongs to us. The Saudis are only fit to live primitive lives in the desert. Because of the mistaken belief that imperialism is immoral, we have allowed these backward nations to finance terrorism with the oil that by natural rights should be ours.

2006-07-15 12:44:24 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Imperialism is a policy of extending control or authority over foreign entities as a means of acquisition and/or maintenance of empires. This is either through direct territorial conquest or settlement, or through indirect methods of exerting control on the politics and/or economy of other countries. The term is often used to describe the policy of a nation's dominance over distant lands, regardless of whether the nation considers itself part of the empire. The "Age of Imperialism" usually refers to the New Imperialism period starting from 1860, when major European states started colonizing the other continents.

The term 'Imperialism' was initially coined in the mid to late 1800s [1] to reflect the policies of countries such as Britain and France's expansion into Africa, and the Americas. In Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism, Lenin argued that capitalism necessarily induced imperialism in order to find new markets and resources. This theory of necessary expansion of capitalism outside the boundaries of nation-states was also shared by Rosa Luxemburg and then by liberal philosopher Hannah Arendt [1].

Since then, however, 'imperialism' has been extended by Marxist scholars to be a synonym of capitalistic international trade and banking [2].

Insofar as 'imperialism' in the non-Marxist sense might be used to refer to an intellectual position, it would imply the belief that the acquisition and maintenance of empires is a positive good, probably combined with an assumption of cultural or other such superiority inherent to imperial power (see The White Man's Burden).

Imperialism draws heavy criticism on the grounds that historically it has been frequently employed for economic exploitation in which the imperialist power makes use of other countries as sources of raw materials and cheap labor, shaping their economies to suit its own interests, and keeping their people in poverty. When imperialism is accompanied by overt military conquest, it is also seen as a violation of freedom and human rights.

In recent years, there has also been a trend to criticize imperialism not at an economic or political level, but at a simply cultural level, particularly the widespread global influence of American culture - see cultural imperialism. Some dispute this extension, however, on the grounds that it is highly subjective (to differentiate between mutual interaction and undue influence) and also applied selectively (hamburgers being imperialist as they kill people, cause obesity and the cultivation of their main ingredient - beef - causes widespread and irreversible ecological damage. In stark contrast, black tea as a completely sustainable crop with significant health benefits does not).

2006-07-15 08:41:05 · answer #3 · answered by Gabe 6 · 0 0

The practice of one country extending its control over the territory, political system, or economic life of another country. Political opposition to this foreign domination is called "anti-imperialism."
OR
the policy of imposing the rule or command of an empire or nation over foreign countries, or of obtaining and occupying colonies and dependencies. American imperialism came of age during London's lifetime, beginning with Cuba and the Phillipines, and he supported this foreign policy.
OR
Belief in the desirability of acquiring colonies and dependencies or extending a country's influence though means such as trade, diplomacy, military conquest

2006-07-15 08:39:13 · answer #4 · answered by zaaterah 4 · 0 0

Imperialism is a policy of extending control or authority over foreign entities as a means of acquisition and/or maintenance of empires. This is either through direct territorial conquest or settlement, or through indirect methods of exerting control on the politics and/or economy of other countries. The term is often used to describe the policy of a nation's dominance over distant lands, regardless of whether the nation considers itself part of the empire. The "Age of Imperialism" usually refers to the New Imperialism period starting from 1860, when major European states started colonizing the other continents.

The term 'Imperialism' was initially coined in the mid to late 1800s [1] to reflect the policies of countries such as Britain and France's expansion into Africa, and the Americas. In Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism, Lenin argued that capitalism necessarily induced imperialism in order to find new markets and resources. This theory of necessary expansion of capitalism outside the boundaries of nation-states was also shared by Rosa Luxemburg and then by liberal philosopher Hannah Arendt

Since then, however, 'imperialism' has been extended by Marxist scholars to be a synonym of capitalistic international trade and banking

Insofar as 'imperialism' in the non-Marxist sense might be used to refer to an intellectual position, it would imply the belief that the acquisition and maintenance of empires is a positive good, probably combined with an assumption of cultural or other such superiority inherent to imperial power (see The White Man's Burden).

Imperialism draws heavy criticism on the grounds that historically it has been frequently employed for economic exploitation in which the imperialist power makes use of other countries as sources of raw materials and cheap labor, shaping their economies to suit its own interests, and keeping their people in poverty. When imperialism is accompanied by overt military conquest, it is also seen as a violation of freedom and human rights.

In recent years, there has also been a trend to criticize imperialism not at an economic or political level, but at a simply cultural level, particularly the widespread global influence of American culture - see cultural imperialism. Some dispute this extension, however, on the grounds that it is highly subjective (to differentiate between mutual interaction and undue influence) and also applied selectively (hamburgers being imperialist as they kill people, cause obesity and the cultivation of their main ingredient - beef - causes widespread and irreversible ecological damage. In stark contrast, black tea as a completely sustainable crop with significant health benefits does not).

2006-07-15 08:38:59 · answer #5 · answered by Pierrot 2 · 0 0

George W. BUSH....u can use this guy as a definition of imperialism lol

2006-07-15 12:35:25 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Try this...and wikipedia.

http://www.answers.com/topic/imperialism

2006-07-15 08:39:47 · answer #7 · answered by magnamamma 5 · 0 0

The higher level of capitalism

2006-07-15 08:39:26 · answer #8 · answered by darkmoon_reddawn_folkdomination 4 · 0 0

1) a system in which one country controls other countries, often after defeating them in a war
2) the fact of a powerful country increasing its influence over other countries through business, culture, etc.

2006-07-15 08:41:15 · answer #9 · answered by Solveiga 5 · 0 0

thinking you are superior to all other nations in the world and trying to fix these other nations by colonizing them,exploiting their resources,using them as cheap laborers..as you can understand from here it's a big and ugly lie...

2006-07-15 08:39:21 · answer #10 · answered by eniyikul 2 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers