It's common on the left and even more
common among isolationist libertarians to charge that the United States is, or
is becoming, an "empire" because of interventions abroad. Hearing it the other
day, I was struck by how utterly absurd the term is. If this is an empire, where's
the emperor? Where's the territorial control? Where's the tribute flowing from
overseas possessions? Saying the word empire is the wrong one doesn't
imply that U.S. foreign policy is correct, merely that another term is needed.
A 21st-century representative democracy with a large regulatory bureaucracy and
many overseas involvements may be problematic. But it isn't an "empire" unless that term just means "a government I don't like." [Posted
3/18.]
