US anti-colonialism aimed to supplant old empires for its own economic access
Evidence
Scholar-activist Sidney Lens summarized US aims as follows: to establish an “open door” policy that allowed it to enter into otherwise blocked-off markets and establish multinational trade as the pillar of economic policy; to weaken and isolate forces that opposed the open door (which included both the former colonial powers as well as radical nationalists and communists); and to gain, as President Kennedy put it, “influence and control” over pliant governments, typically right-wing, through “grants and loans with conditions attached to them, military aid, equipment and training of puppet armies, military pacts, CIA-sponsored revolts, and on occasion, when these other methods were inadequate … direct intervention by U.S. armed forces themselves.” — Deepa Kumar, Islamophobia and the Politics of Empire, 246
Categorization
- XREF: Corroborates the vault’s Islamophobia-as-imperial-policy cluster by establishing the foundational Cold War pattern of US interventionism this chapter argues 9/11-era policies extend. — connects to: US postwar imperialism was framed as benevolent supremacy via free-market capitalism — Deepa Kumar, Islamophobia and the Politics of…, 245; US anticolonialism selectively served its own market access goals; US anti-colonial rhetoric was selective, serving economic access over genuine liberation (+3 more)
- corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Deepa Kumar, Islamophobia and the Politics of…, 246
Broader Connections
- US support for decolonization served its own imperial aims
#corroborates(0.97) — Deepa Kumar, Islamophobia and the Politics of Empire, 207 - US anti-colonial rhetoric was selective, serving economic access over genuine liberation
#corroborates(0.95) - Self-determination threatened Western access to colonial raw materials
#corroborates(0.85) — Jessica Whyte, The Morals of the Market, 294 - The US drew anti-Western hostility without territorial colonialism
#complicates(0.75)