Best regards, Andrew Stewart
Begin forwarded message: > From: H-Net Staff via H-REVIEW <[email protected]> > Date: March 21, 2021 at 1:17:24 PM EDT > To: [email protected] > Cc: H-Net Staff <[email protected]> > Subject: H-Net Review [H-Nationalism]: Hill on Hopkins, 'American Empire: A > Global History' > Reply-To: [email protected] > > A. G. Hopkins. American Empire: A Global History. America in the > World Series. Princeton Princeton University Press, 2018. > Illustrations, tables, maps. 1,008 pp. $27.95 (e-book), ISBN > 978-1-4008-8835-1; $27.95 (paper), ISBN 978-0-691-19687-9; $39.95 > (cloth), ISBN 978-0-691-17705-2. > > Reviewed by Michael A. Hill (University of Kansas) > Published on H-Nationalism (March, 2021) > Commissioned by Evan C. Rothera > > The field of American Empire is littered with studies of specific > imperial genres, places, and peoples, but few scholars have had the > audacity to attempt to produce a synthetic work exploring the > totality of American Empire. Even fewer have attempted to place such > a study in a global context. A. G. Hopkins, the noted historian of > British Empire, has done both in American Empire: A Global History. > In a sweeping history covering more than three hundred years, Hopkins > argues that while the United States is unique, as are all countries, > it is not exceptional. American history conforms to the broader swath > of imperial history, especially imperial European history, of the > past three centuries. > > Hopkins breaks the history of American Empire, which is merely a part > of the larger project of globalization, into three phases, each of > which was punctuated by a crisis that inaugurated the next phase. The > first phase of American Empire that Hopkins identifies is the > American colonial period, when the future United States remained a > collection of British colonies on the North American mainland. The > successful prosecution of the American Revolution inaugurated the > second phase of American Empire, which lasted until 1898 and the > Spanish-Cuban-American War. Hopkins argues that during much of this > period, at least until the end of the US Civil War, Great Britain > actually exercised structural power over the United States by means > of its tremendous economic power. Britain's power was nonexploitative > but real nonetheless. The Civil War weakened Britain's grip and > encouraged the growth of industrialization, nation building, and > independence. Thus, writes Hopkins, the United States became one of > the world's earliest examples of successful decolonization. The > Spanish-Cuban-American War ushered in the next phase of American > Empire, during which the United States established an overseas empire > in the Caribbean and Pacific. Changes in the character of > globalization after World War II inspired waves of decolonization > around the globe and effectively brought the United States' > territorial empire to an end. > > According to Hopkins, each of these phases corresponds to roughly > equal imperial phases in Europe. The American Revolution was merely > one of many challenges to Europe's military-fiscal states during the > final decades of the eighteenth century. After 1865, the United > States' efforts to build a national-industrial state, which > encouraged militant imperialism, matched those of many European > states, including Britain, Germany, France, and Italy. After 1898, > the United States managed its insular empire in a manner that > resembled the strategies and tactics of its European peers. And > finally, decolonization after World War II brought the US Empire to > an end at the same time as the remaining European empires. > > American Empire is a tour de force. Hopkins builds on more than forty > years of professional historical experience to deliver a work that > can only be described as exceptional. In particular, Hopkins combines > a career's worth of British and African imperial knowledge with over > a decade of reading what feels like nearly everything ever written > about US Empire (with one important thematic exception, which this > review addresses below). The depth and breadth of Hopkins's knowledge > is truly daunting. > > Nonetheless, there are quibbles to be had. The first, and probably > most obvious, is the book's sheer size. Checking in at over one > thousand pages (including notes), the length of American Empire can > be overwhelming. There is literally an intermission halfway through. > The book could probably be half its current size and make its > argument just as effectively. While one appreciates Hopkins's goal of > placing US Empire within a global context, the argument gets lost at > times for nearly entire chapters (such as chapter 4), some of which > focus too exclusively on the global situation rather than on how the > United States fit within that context. Additionally, one wonders if > it should take nearly four hundred pages to arrive at the time when > the United States actually becomes an empire, according to Hopkins, > in a book titled American Empire. > > Which leads to Hopkins's arguments: his claim that the United States > was not an empire prior to 1898 is far from novel. Neither is his > argument that it took the Civil War to bring the United States > together as a truly unified nation-state. What is more unique and > more interesting is Hopkins's argument that the United States failed > to gain full independence until after the Civil War. Scholars like > Jay Sexton, in Debtor Diplomacy: Finance and American Foreign > Relations in the Civil War Era 1837-1873 (2005), have previously > drawn attention to the economic influence of British capital in the > United States prior to the Civil War, but none have claimed that > influence amounted to a lack of American political independence. > Interestingly, Hopkins compares the subsidiary relationship of the > United States to Great Britain during the first half of the > nineteenth century to similar relationships between decolonizing > Asian and African countries to their former colonial masters during > the twentieth century. The comparison is, at times, quite convincing > but ultimately fails to take account of the United States' > relationship with North American Indigenous peoples. > > Hopkins's rejection of US Empire prior to 1898 needs more explication > in light of the research of the last two decades arguing that > American westward expansion amounted to continental empire. Beginning > with historians like Gerald Nash (The American West Transformed: The > Impact of the Second World War [1985]) and Patricia Limerick (The > Legacy of Conquest: The Unbroken Past of the American West [1987]), > carrying through the works of scholars like Margaret Jacobs (White > Mother to a Dark Race: Settler Colonialism, Maternalism, and the > Removal of Indigenous Children in the American West and Australia, > 1880-1940 [2010]) and Anne Hyde (Empires, Nations, and Families: A > New History of the North American West, 1800-1860 [2011]), to studies > by historians like Andrew Torget (Seeds of Empire: Cotton, Slavery, > and the Transformation of the Texas Borderlands, 1800-1850 [2015]) > and William Kiser (Coast-to-Coast Empire: Manifest Destiny and the > New Mexico Borderlands [2018]), the most current at the time of > Hopkins's research, historians of the North American West have long > argued that American continental expansion, by virtue of its > dispossession of Native Americans, constituted empire. Hopkins > quickly notes but rejects such arguments because of his focus on the > imbalanced economic relationship between the United States and Great > Britain at the time. > > Thus, it seems that Hopkins rejects arguments of American Empire > prior to the Spanish-Cuban-American War because the United States > remained politically and economically weaker than Great Britain, > despite his argument that Americans did not perceive 1898 as a > departure from past imperial expansion. Inferiority alone does not > negate an imperial reality. Empires of varying power have always > existed simultaneously; why should the fact that Great Britain was > the world's strongest empire of the nineteenth century, described by > Julian Go as one of only two global hegemons ever (Patterns of > Empire: The British and American Empires, 1688 to the Present > [2011]), mean that the United States was not a North American empire? > If economic influence is the standard of measure, would that mean > that after World War I, Great Britain was no longer an empire because > the United States had surpassed it as the world's leading economic > power?[1] > > Finally, Hopkins's readiness to discount the possibility of an > informal or economic American Empire after World War II is puzzling > in light of the imperial significance he places on British economic > dominance of the United States prior to the Civil War. If, between > 1783 and 1865, the United States remained a decolonizing vassal of > the British Empire, why then would the decolonizing states of the > twentieth century not remain imperial appendages of the United > States? What also, one asks, of the current relationship between the > United States and its territorial possessions? Does American > dominance of Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, the US Virgin > Islands, and the Northern Mariana Islands--as well as these lands' > 3.5 million inhabitants who have no electoral voice in > Washington--represent empire? If not, why not? > > These are legitimate questions raised by American Empire, but make no > mistake, the book is excellent. While looking at the book in its > totality is daunting, Hopkins's hard-won skill as a writer ensures > that each chapter reads quickly and easily. Taking advantage of his > British imperial expertise, Hopkins reveals how the global exercise > of British power in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries made > other empires possible. His frequent reminders that empire is, at > root, often an economic venture are well-taken. Hopkins's insistence > that World War I did not challenge the global imperial structure is > refreshing and illuminating. His claims that global capitalism made > formal territorial colonies cost prohibitive and eased some of the > fears of decaying empires is of note, as is his argument that the > lack of American bipartisan policy hampered the effective creation > and administration of US Empire. Even the sometimes-distracting > comparisons between the United States and its European peers serve to > usefully dispel myths of American exceptionalism and are always > informative. > > American Empire is one of the best overviews of the topic in print. > It is certainly not a book appropriate for undergraduate classrooms, > and whether or not it is even appropriate in graduate seminars is > perhaps up for debate. Nonetheless, this is a work that all serious > historians should read at some point. Hopkins's approach is general > enough to ensure non-Americanists understand the unique elements of > American history that form the backbone of the book, while also > providing Americanists with the context necessary to understand the > United States' place in the world. Moreover, the volume's engagement > with wide swaths of scholarship is sure to provide starting points > for those wishing to follow more specific paths of inquiry regarding > American history and empire as well as global history. Finally, > Hopkins raises questions in need of further study, pointing toward an > important future for those studying the history of American Empire. > > Note > > [1]. Jay Sexton, A Nation Forged by Crisis: A New American History > (New York: Basic Books, 2018), 143. > > Citation: Michael A. Hill. Review of Hopkins, A. G., _American > Empire: A Global History_. H-Nationalism, H-Net Reviews. March, 2021. > URL: https://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=55921 > > This work is licensed under a Creative Commons > Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States > License. > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#7428): https://groups.io/g/marxmail/message/7428 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/81505500/21656 -=-=- POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. -=-=- Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://groups.io/g/marxmail/leave/8674936/21656/1316126222/xyzzy [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
