The 1990s unipolar moment revived open imperial language in US policy

Evidence

This “neo-Reaganite” policy was called “benevolent global hegemony” because it asserted that what was good for the United States was generally good for the world as well. As an aside, we might note that this was not a radically new idea but rather a continuation of the “benevolent supremacy” that McAlister argues characterized US policy in the post–World War II era. What was new in the late 1990s was the willingness among the adherents of this policy to use the word empire more openly. Whereas the United States shied away from this designation after World War II, not least to differentiate itself from colonial powers like Britain and France, the unipolar world created new conditions for the resurrection of imperial language. — Deepa Kumar, Islamophobia and the Politics of Empire, 468

Categorization

Category: Causal Relationships

  • DEFINE: Defines “benevolent global hegemony” and traces it to post-WWII “benevolent supremacy.”
  • CANDY: A punchy conversational point: the US once avoided the word “empire” to distinguish itself from Britain and France, until the unipolar moment made it comfortable.