The Sorrows of Empire : Militarism, Secrecy, and the End of the Republic [The American Empire Project ]

Rating:
Summary: Only a Few Dare Call It Empire
Review: Chalmers Johnson is one of the few willing to call the Empire an Empire. The U.S. Empire is nothing new -- after the initial period of imperialism which involved defeating Spain and seizing her colonies (opposed by Mark Twain and the Anti-Imperialist League), the decisive moment was victory in WWII and the establishment of a planetary network of military bases. Since then "the sun has never set on the American Empire."

Noam Chomsky has been pointing this out for years, of course. What is quite important and was obscured during the so-called "Cold War" is that opposition to Empire comes not only from the Left but also the Right. Johnson is a nationalist, and a reflection of this most interesting phenomenon. It is big business, multinational corporate capital, that benefits from the Empire, while the sons and daughters of working people do the soldiering for the Legions (the Oil Police). So all of us, regardless of ideology, who are not wealthy or Thomas Friedman have reason to oppose Empire.

The point is, what to do about it? For now, the obvious goal is to remove Bush and the neoconservatives. The Democrats will basically get us back to "a kinder Empire" and/or "a smarter Empire," but realistically that's all we can hope to accomplish for the moment. Don't let the opportunity pass -- real lives hang in the balance! For a solid argument that supporting Nader or other third party presidential candidates is not the way to go, see "Changing the Powers That Be" by G. William Domhoff (see my review).

Rating:
Summary: DEMOCRACY AS WE KNOW IT
Review: Chalmers Johnson's The Sorrows of Empire is a title of the American Empire Project, whose authors in addition to Johnson include Noam Chomsky and Michael Klare. The Project's name sufficiently explains its main perspective, and its website homepage asks simply, "How did we get to this point? And what lies down the road?" Dating the American Empire's birth as 1898, Johnson provides highly discomforting answers to those questions, from the viewpoint of a leftist military-analyst academic. I would date the birth as December, 1942, but Johnson's views are eminently justified, and Sorrows is an excellent and much-needed book. It is written in clear and lively declarative sentences, which will make it a fast read even for non-intellectual readers. In sum, Johnson's outlook and information may literally change minds about the subjects he discusses. So I give his book five stars. Nonetheless, I see no basis for Johnson's optimism when he writes that Congress could still turn the country around. It's already too late. The American Empire, aka Democracy As We Know It, will be stuffed down the planet's throat like it or not until the Empire goes bankrupt, which could be quite a while.

Sorrows is a gold mine of interesting historical and sociological information, and readers with open minds will find their own most absorbing sections. Chapter 8 - Iraq Wars -- recalled for me that the "no-fly zones" over Iraq were creations of the U.S. government and never sanctioned by the United Nations. Oh, well. What's a United Nations? Chapter 8 also occasioned a connection in my mind which the book's author did not make. Many have wondered why Bush-1 did not push on to Baghdad and capture Saddam Hussein or have him murdered in 1991. Well sure, for more than one reason, Bush-1 wanted to set up all those American bases in the Persian Gulf outside Saudi Arabia. Having a live and still "threatening" Saddam Hussein made accomplishing that objective much easier.

Johnson says the American Empire is notable in being based on military bases instead of on the occupation of territory (compare and contrast the Portuguese Empire). And he identifies five sorrows of empire, the first being "racism" on p28. Rightly, the author says racism is inherent in the attitudes required to dominate other cultures militarily. The other four sorrows Johnson lists almost 260 pages later. They are a state of perpetual war, the loss of domestic democracy, destruction of public truthfulness, and finally financial bankruptcy. ....'tis true 'tis pity; And pity 'tis 'tis true....So expect now apparently endless, enormous military-expenditure-based crony (for family and friends) capitalism, and whatever mutant forms of domestic governance are required to sustain it. Chickens a-la-Marcos coming home to roost, as it were. Evidently, apart from knowing the virtually infinite variations on applying violence and coercion to other countries, the only thing our Empire's leaders know how to do is behave like the caudillo crooks they propped up - with arms and clandestine state-terrorism programs for repressing communists and their sympathizers - in other countries around the globe throughout the cold war. Regrettably for the rest of the world and regrettably for America, Democracy As We Know It is unlikely to fade away in our lifetimes like the Soviets' control of much of the Asian land mass did.

Rating:
Summary: Extremely Brilliant Book - a must read!
Review: From the perspective of Central Europe experts in International Relations Prof. Chalmers Johnson is an undeniably brilliant mind. "Empire of sorrows" should be read in contrast to Prof. Nial Ferguson`s "Collossus" about American Empire. Ferguson`s argumentation seems stupid and provincial compared to the souvereign mastership of Johnson. Prof. Johnson is highly accalimed among German scholars of American International Relations...

Rating:
Summary: 'War is a Racket' - General Smedley Butler USMC
Review: Am I the only one who thinks the the rest of his countryman are nuts? For the past 60 years and three generations, Americans have been led to believe that that spending billions for the Defense of the country is not only necessary but patriotic.

Forget conspiracy theories and ideological agendas, just contemplate one fact: The USA spends more on military and intelligence funding in 2004 than it has spent at any one time in history. Fourteen carrier groups to defeat the two remaining countries of the axis of evil, N. Korea and Iran? 750 and counting military bases outside the USA? However, the government tells us it is powerless to defend the country against an attack from a terrorist group with WMD??? So, the next time you watch television and the commentator tells you why we need another aircraft carrier, more tanks, more F-16's, etc., ask yourself: Who are we defending ourselves against? And, as Chalmers Johnson points out, follow the money!

This book is an excellent primer on how our beloved country is being led down the road to ruin by a group of people who are lining the pockets of themeselves and their friends and supporters. All of this is being done in the name of Democracy, Freedom and Globalization. But, why do we want to liberate people who sit on oil while those countries being ruthlessly exploited and practcially enslaved are ignored since they can contribute little or nothing to the "world economy" (pick any poor third world country)?

This review is written by a conservative American, cold war supporter and US Navy veteran (like Chalmers Johnson)who believes in the old Republic (when is the last time you heard that word mentioned in the era of the imperial presidency). Forget whether you are democrat or republican, take the blinders off and seek the truth, excellently told by Chalmers Johnson.

Rating:
Summary: Thoughtful Critique of our Militarism from a True Patriot
Review: I bought The Sorrows of Empire thinking it would focus almost exclusively on the 9/11 attacks and the Bush administration's response. It turned out to be a broader history of US military expansion and the rise of the military-industrial complex that Eisenhower warned about in his farewell address, with a particular emphasis on our penchant for planting military bases of questionable usefulness just about anywhere on the planet we can elbow our way in.

The historical record of expansionist empires (and don't kid yourself - semantic niceties aside, we've become the latest in a series) is ugly indeed, and Johnson's book implies that we are not likely to be history's sole exception.

In certain chapters Johnson is critical of the Bush administration and its armchair theoreticians, to be sure, for the unspoken "Oil and Israel" agenda they've roped us into, but does not dwell on it throughout the book. He instead puts into better historical perspective than most writers the fact that we did not arrive at hegemony overnight, and seems to despair at the possibility of change given how far we've strayed from our anti-imperialist republican roots.

Johnson's take on economic matters is for me less solid than he is on military and diplomatic affairs. He seems to link free trade with imperialism but I find his logic a little fuzzy on the connection. I am no economist, but it sure looks to me like the successful nations all trade a great deal.

The book is very well-written and makes an excellent read, and for all Johnson's criticism of our policies, at no point did I doubt that this self-described former "spear carrier for the empire" (he worked for the CIA years ago) is a true American patriot who cares deeply about his country.

Highly recommended.

Rating:
Summary: This is an important book! Well researched
Review: This is an important work and some of the author's conclusions are controversial. But Johnson is a recognized and skilled historian who backs up his theories and writings with accurate detailed research and persuasive arguments. The direction of U.S. influence in the world, the direction it's taking, should concern us all.

Johnson discusses the history of American militarism, the rise and extent of the military-industrial complex, which President Eisenhower warned us about. Troublesome is the close ties between arms industry (DoD contractors) executives. high-level politicians, and the President.

More information is classified in the government, military, and intelligent agencies than ever (by 100 fold) and the DoD has extended national security into all areas of its responsibilities, even those that are purely political. The DoD, NSA, DIA, CIA are all-intrusive into our lives and personal business. There is no privacy; our Constitutional rights are levied at the whim of these agencies. Our Black Program's Budget is larger than ANY other countries total military spending? Why?

Having read the TOP books in the Government Cover-up Genre; "Unconventional Flying Objects" (NASA UFO Investigator for 30 years) by the scientist Dr. Paul Hill; my FAVORITE is "Alien Rapture" by Edgar Fouche (Top Secret Black Programs Insider) and Brad Steiger (Great fiction-soon to be a movie); "Alien Agenda" by the best selling author of 'Crossfire' Jim Marrs (Best reference on UFOlogy); and "The Day After Roswell," by Colonel Corso - I'd say this book is a MUST READ also!

Why would a respected, decorated, connected Military Officer (Corso) swear in a Court of Law that the UFO Conspiracy is real and that the facts and agenda in these books ARE TRUE? Why did NASA try to ban Dr. Paul Hill's book? Why were Fouche's home, car, and hotel rooms broken into? Why did he go underground after delivering his 'insider presentation to the International UFO Congress? Why has the great researcher and bestseller, Jim Marrs, been slandered? Why are there still questions about the deaths of Corso and Hill? Were their sudden demise a product of this conspiracy?

Why? If you read this excellent book and the others, you will know that they are indeed true. Two well-respected American Astronauts have come forward to proclaim they had seen evidence of the Roswell UFO crash and stated they know the cover-up is real. You be the judge. Read this book and check out the reviews of the other TOP books I have mentioned.

Rating:
Summary: LOL LOL LOL How big was that fish?
Review: A very tall tale, that speaks to all the conspiracy buff's in the world. People love this stuff the same way they love scary campfire stories and UFO's. It is good page turner but should definitely go in the historical fiction section of your home library. Personally, I sold mine to a used book dealer after I read it.

Rating:
Summary: Extremely Brilliant Book - a must read!
Review: From the perspective of Central Europe experts in International Relations Prof. Chalmers Johnson is an undeniably brilliant mind. "Empire of sorrows" should be read in contrast to Prof. Nial Ferguson`s "Collossus" about American Empire. Ferguson`s argumentation seems stupid and provincial compared to the souvereign mastership of Johnson. Prof. Johnson is highly accalimed among German scholars of American International Relations...

Rating:
Summary: Empire of Sorrows
Review: The Sorrows of Empire performs a blowback on the mind. Some the material has been covered in Johnson's last, prophetic book. We can no longer ignore the impact of the archipelago of US military bases upon the perceptions of citizens in other countries. Having family in and having visited South Korea a few years ago, I became quite aware of the resentment towards the US military bases there (and by extension the US) - particularly among the younger generation. The events of the last month in Iraq allows us to see the folly and hubris of the neoconservative vision and "warrior ethic." Johnson does an excellent job detailing the slide of the republic (ironically by many "Republicans") into a form of what Richard Rorty has recently called "benevolent authoritarianism." I recommend Michael Mann's Incoherent Empire as a companion to this book and as a better exploration of the economic and ideological components of the current administration's attempt at empire - and the weaknesses therein. In particular, he does an excellent job of detailing a realist assessment of the possibilities of establishing democracy in Iraq. David Harvey's book, the New Imperialism, is also highly recommended in its exploration of the differences, congruences, and contradictions between the "logic of capital" and the "logic of territory."

To the reader from Kentucky: what are your criteria for empire? Would the British after the end of the Napoleanic period have qualified? Certainly they practiced a form of free-trade or informal imperialism in Latin America during this period, even as they promoted independence in those countries. What do you say to neoconservatives such as Robert Kagan who openly call for empire in name, stating that we are already one de facto? What of Michael Ignatieff's call for the US as "empire-lite"? If self-described conservatives, such as Kagan, and moderate left liberals, such as Ignatieff, are calling for empire, surely there must be something to the claim?

Rating:
Summary: Priss
Review: This little priss said on cspan, in so many words, that our solders, fighting for his right to free speech, are doing so because it is the best dead-end job that they can get. Enough said about this ungrateful and super arrogant piece of stuffing. What else could be expected from a dumbed-down liberal California pro-fessor. Help to his captive students.