EDITORrnThomas FlemingrnMANAGING EDITORrnTheodore PappasrnSENIOR EDITOR, BOOKSrnChilton Williamson, ]r.rnASSISTANT EDITORrnScott P. RichertrnART DIRECTORrnAnna Mycek-WodeckirnCONTRIBUTING EDITORSrnHarold O.J. Brown, KatherinernDalton, Samuel Francis,rnGeorge Garrett, Paul Gottfried,rn].0. Tate, Michael Washburn,rnClyde WilsonrnCORRESPONDING EDITORSrnBill Kauffman, William Mills,rnJacob Neusner, Momcilo SelicrnEDITORIAL SECRETARYrnLeann DobbsrnPUBLISHERrnThe Rockford InstituternPUBLICATION DIRECTORrnGuy C. ReffettrnCIRCULATION MANAGERrnCindy LinkrnA publication of I’he Rockford Institute.rnEditorial and Advertising Offices:rn928 North Main Street, Rockford, 11. 61103.rnEditorial Phone: (815) 964-5054.rnAdvertising Phone: (815)964-5813.rnSubscription Department: P.O. Box 800,rnMount Morris, IE 61054. Call 1-800-877-5459.rnU.S.A. Newssland Distribution by Eastern NewsrnDistnbutors, Inc., One Media Wav, 12406 Rt. 250rnMilan, Ohio 44848-9705rnCop>Tight © 1998 by The Rockford Institute.rnAll rights resen’ed.rnChronicles (ISSN 0887-5731) is publishedrnmonthly for $39.00 (foreign subscriptions add $12rnfor surface delivery, $48 for Air Mail) per year byrnThe Rockford Institute, 928 North Main Street,rnRockford, IL 61103-7061. Preferred periodicalrnpostage paid at Rockford, IL and additional mailingrnoffices. POSTMASTER: Send address changesrnto Chronicles, P.O. Box 800, Mount Monis,rnIL 61054.rnThe views expressed in Chronicles are diernauthors’ alone and do not necessarily reflectrnthe views of The Rockford Institute or of itsrndirectors. Unsolicited manuscripts cannot bernreturned unless accompanied by a self-addressedrnstamped envelope.rnChroniclesrnVol. 22, No. 3 March 1998rnPrinted in the United Slates of AmericarnPOLEMICS & EXCHANGESrnOn Foreign PolicyrnOne phrase leaps out of Paul Gottfried’srnreview of Walter McDougall’s PromisedrnLand, Crusader State (January), and thatrnis the strange idea than an American empirernencompassing Latin America, thernPhilippines, and points beyond arosern”without much popular opposition.”rnContrary to McDougall and Gottfried,rnthe anti-interventionist tradition startedrnwith the Founders of this nation, who abhorredrnthe empire-builders of Europernand explicitly warned against the temptationrnto imitate them. McDougall is naturallyrnforced to recognize this —he acknowledgesrnthe “mugwumps” of thernAnti-Imperialist League, but dismissesrnthem as “bizarre” — yet manages to getrnaround it by transmuting “isolationism”rnand “American exceptionalism” intorn”unilateralism”—the idea that we needrnnot consult with anyone while we ravagernour perceived enemies and pursue looselyrndefined “nahonal interests.” This is arnfar cry from the principled policy of thernFounders.rnSecondly, Gottfried ignores the contradictionrnin McDougall’s book: whilernclaiming to oppose “global meliorism”rn(i.e., empire-building under the rubric ofrninternational do-goodism), McDougallrnendorses every war the United States wasrnever dragged into, including both worldrnwars. He also loves NATO and all thernother entangling alliances that are therntripwires of future wars.rnThe hidden assumption behind thernidea that “the United States was never reallyrn’isolationist’ in its relations with thernrest of the world” is that there is no distinctionrnbetween the American governmentrnand the American people: this isrnnaturally a vital difference to a libertarianrnsuch as myself, but one easily overlookedrnby commentators concerned solely withrnelites and power politics. McDougallrnwrites in the Machiavellian mode: hisrnbook is meant as advice to princes, not asrna populist manifesto.rnWith NATO extension (which McDougallrnalso endorses), the UnitedrnStates is about to commit itself to the defensernof the Balkans as irrevocably as it isrncommitted to the defense of Akron,rnOhio —and Paul Gottfried is worriedrnthat we might go to war over “a universalrnright to homoerotic self-fulfillment.”rnThis fear is misplaced at a time whenrnNATO extension means that the UnitedrnStates is about to extend its “defense”rnperimeter to the Polish-Ukrainian border.rn”Unilateralism” and invocations ofrn”national self-interest” do not disguisernthe same old Anglophilic dreams ofrnempire. American nationalists such asrnGottfried, who are likely to be taken in byrnthis sirens’ song, would do well to rememberrnthat the real enemy, the federalrnLeviathan, is right here at home.rn—]ustin RaimondornSan Francisco, CArnDr. Gottfried Replies:rnJustin Raimondo conjectures that thernauthor of Promised Land, Crusader Staternbelieves that the American governmentrnwas justified in entering every majorrnstruggle into which it plunged. This toornwas my reading of McDougall’s qualifiedrncriticism of the style though not substancernof American interventionism.rnWhile McDougall does not openly endorsernan expansion of NATO, he probablyrntakes this position as well. And whilernI do not “ignore” this “contradiction,”rnRaimondo is on target when he notesrnthat McDougall’s opposition to “globalrnmeliorism” seems less than sincere.rnBut McDougall is correct to find continuityrnbetween American continentalrnexpansion and the later American empire.rnAmerica’s development as a confinentalrnpower involved intricate dealingsrnand military encounters with foreignrnstates. Indeed, by the mid-19th century,rna large bloc of Southern planters andrnDemocratic politicians favored territorialrnexpansion into Latin America. (As late asrn1860, the Breckenridge and DouglasrnDemocratic presidential platformsrncalled for the immediate annexationrnof Cuba.) A noteworthy difference betweenrnearlier and later American expansion,rnhowever, has been the more powerfulrncoalition of forces that now drivesrnAmerican globalism: e.g., a national mediarnnetwork, multinational corporations,rnand a steadily expanding managerialrnstate. Nonetheless, it is naive to believernthat an American empire is a totallyrn4/CHRONICLESrnrnrn