Half Free and Half Dependent: Race and U.S. Empire

• In Event: Race and U.S. Foreign Policy (Virtual Session)

Abstract

This article substantially revises the explanation for why the United States rejected opportunities to expand territorially in the early 20th century, an unusual choice for a Great Power at the time. Scholars have argued that such imperialism violated Americans’ republican principles. However, the fact that Americans had long thwarted republicanism in domestic policy, often on the basis of racial animus, casts doubt on this leading explanation. This article argues that Southern senators halted imperialism because it (paradoxically) threatened their white supremacist order. Southerners viewed themselves as a recent colony of the US federal government and feared that imperialism abroad would enlarge the military and create precedents for using it domestically. To test the theory, the article analyzes historical data on roll calls, lynching, and constituency demography of the 55th Congress (1897-1899). It also offers an in-depth qualitative study of the same Southern senators in 1899, when they both ardently opposed annexing the Philippines and enthusiastically welcomed the Open-Door notes, a declaration to support open trade in China and not seek territory there as European powers had just done. The article thus revises foundational US mythology. It demonstrates that elite Southern US anti-imperialism was motivated by racism, just as racism motivated imperialism elsewhere. It also suggests that white-power politics engendered a signature pattern in “imperialism by other means,” in which US military intervention was used to support indirect rule; a pattern that continues until today (e.g., Iraq, Afghanistan).

Author

• Desh Girod, Georgetown University