The Spanish-American war: how America devised her dizzy empire

By Nicolas Bonnal

We must take the whole earth in order to be safe on any part of it!

In 1898, with the pretext of an attack in La Havana - a false flag or a mere incident of combustion - the US declared war to Spain, and, taking advantage of a superior navy, destroyed the fleet of this country. The US then controlled or annexed Cuba and the Philippines.

The atmosphere was electric thanks to the yellow press. William Randolph Hearst (citizen Kane) had promised that he would get his war. In a few weeks, there were one million volunteers to "defend Cuba" (doomed to a gloomy fate under American and post-American and neo-American rule) and we remember that there were only 6000 volunteers to help France and England in 1917 before Wilson decided the draft.

This was the debut of the American empire. Debts, wars, democracy, morality, nuclear bombs, invasions, the Tartuffe shop of horror and deception!

Joseph R. Stromberg, a libertarian historian, studied this war in a wonderful book written in collaboration with others Murray Rothbard's disciples (*). It is full of lessons for those who resist or rather comment (what else can we do?) the frenzied American empire nowadays.

The racist prose of American leaders in these not far remote times is remarkable. Of course it reflects the racism of France or England (the FUKUS!) and the necessary "white man's burden", a burden that became a problem for many whites. Ask the Serbs, the Ukrainians, the Syrians, the Iraqis, the Libyans, and Donbas' Russians.

The democratic and antiracist white man is more dangerous than the imperialist one.

It is just a matter of temper; and the temper of these western white men is always very bad!

Let's savour Stromberg best findings:

Said columnist Henry Watterson in order to encourage and promote that humanitarian war (free poor Cuba!): "From a nation of shopkeepers we become a nation of warriors...We risk Caesarism, certainly; but even Caesarism is preferable to anarchism."

Famous Teddy Roosevelt agreed, celebrating "the mighty civilized races which have not lost the fighting instinct, and which by their expansion are gradually bringing peace into the red wastes where the barbarian peoples of the world hold sway."

One hundred and twenty years later, the barbarian Chinese, Russians and Arabs know that they are meddling with the dark side of the Good!

Talking of the Chinese, it is opportune to remember the reason of the grabbing of Cuba and the Philippines. Says Mr Stromberg:

"The United States consolidated its power in the western hemisphere and gained a forward position in Asia. This was especially important to those who saw the Chinese markets as America's economic destiny."

Adds Mr Stromberg:

"The outer doctrine, proclaimed to the less adept, stresses U.S. benevolence and adherence to international law. This exoteric doctrine is a horrible amalgam of American exceptionalism, political messianism, and retail Puritanism.

The inner doctrine, known to the elect, takes in the frontier-expansionist view of history, Open Door Empire, and neo-mercantilism, and deals in statism and power."

The "outer doctrine, proclaimed to the less adept" (the average global twat), is today exposed by Fox News and CNN.

But of course violence, racism and cruelty gleefully escorted this helpful crusade in the Philippines:

"From then until July 4, 1902-and later in some outlying islands-the United States government waged a colonial war whose "marked severities" eventually surpassed those of the Spanish in Cuba.

An officer wrote to a reporter: "We exterminated the American Indians, and I guess most of us are proud of it, or, at least, believe the end justified the means; and we must have no scruples about exterminating this other race standing in the way of progress and enlightenment, if it is necessary."

A racist officer maybe, but at least a sincere man!

Spain (I am not here to defend any colonial empire) had Christianized all the lands it conquered. I won't call Dostoyevsky and his great inquisitor, but President McKinley who had the chutzpah to tell the following lines:

"There was nothing left for us to do but take them all and educate the Filipinos, and uplift and Christianize them, and by God's grace do the very best we could by them, as our fellowmen for whom Christ also died."

What an honourable Samaritan! This is typically American, I guess. Do they know in Washington that Spain and Filipinos are catholic? What do these American leaders and politicians know indeed apart from their skills in humanitarian killing?

Less lyrical, but pragmatic, Mrs Jefferson Davis, widow of the confederate president, declared gently - but bluntly:

"For my own part, however, I cannot see why we should add several millions of Negroes to our population when we already have eight millions of Negroes in the United States. The problem of how best to govern these and promote their welfare we have not yet solved."

The problem is still "not yet solved", dear First Lady!

Ask the black victims of American police and economical system under Obama!

An ecstatic senator named Albert J. Beveridge had the best part in this obnoxious show. He lectured at the senate one hundred years after the declaration des droits de l'homme:

"Mr. President, this question is deeper than any question of party politics. . . . It is elemental. It is racial. God has not been preparing the English-speaking and Teutonic peoples for a thousand years for nothing but vain and idle self-contemplation and self-admiration! No! He has given us the spirit of progress to overwhelm the forces of reaction throughout the earth."

Then Senator Beveridge abandons his proto-hitlerian elan and he just demands for the conquest of new markets:

"Mr. President, the times call for candour. The Philippines are ours forever. . . . And just beyond the Philippines are China's illimitable markets. We will not retreat from either. We will not repudiate our duty in the Orient: We will not renounce our part in the mission of our race, trustee, under God, of civilization of the world."

As we know one century later, western civilization means CNN, airports, malls or highways everywhere.

The Yankee elite always talk of their "national interest" since they exterminated or robbed their unlucky black, southern or redskin citizens. This perilous "national interest" turned global and even universal - since Neil Armstrong allegedly set foot on the moon.

Another American, Mr William Graham Sumner, wrote during these unhappy times for the Filipinos (200000 dead during the pacification):

"We were told that we needed Hawaii in order to secure California. What shall we now take in order to secure the Philippines? No wonder that some expansionists do not want to "scuttle out of China." We shall need to take China, Japan, and the East Indies, according to the doctrine, in order to "secure" what we have. Of course this means that, on the doctrine, we must take the whole earth in order to be safe on any part of it, and the fallacy stands exposed."

Yes, we must take the earth. And Japan is now ordered to wage a war against China.

Mr Stromberg concludes with humour and realism:

"There is virtually no situation anywhere in the world that can't be made worse by U.S. intervention."

Who could say better than him? Shakespeare?

Modern History is a tale full of sound and fury, signifying nothing and written by the Americans.

(*) The Spanish-American war as trial run or empire as its own justification, in The Costs of War

Nicolas Bonnal