Re your concerns about US global domination

Come on now, enough with the hyperbole. The US has been a superpower for 60 years, the beginning of which was marked with rebuilding Europe and Japan insead of enjoying the spoils of war, then turned to creating international organizations like NATO and the UN as a response to Soviet expansion, and then worked to clean up hotspots like Yugoslavia, Kuwait, and Bosnia.

I can't say I approve every US action in that span of time (particularly in South America and Southeast Asia), but the basis of comparison is the Europeans. This is a group of people who, when they had the power to, raped and pillaged the rest of the planet for 500 years, before just about destroying themselves in two wars. Now suddenly they're the moral compass for the rest of the planet?

>>54

Even Heshepsut was a wicked "colonialist". The dynastic Egyptians were originally two kingdoms. Lower Egypt conquered Upper Egypt giving rise to the Pharaonic dynasties, which then governed other's lands as if they were their own for thousands of years.

The only non-colonial nations in this world are pre-historic. If they even had names they never survived long enough to be written down.

To clarify, I do believe that colonialism means something; there's no way to argue with that, it's a simple fact. The problem is, it is unfairly applied to some things which fit its description, but not others... and that is because when it is fairly applied to every nation who rules over people and place's that they have not ruled over since the first system of social coordination arose in that place, then it applies to everyone and every nation now living.

Hence, it is a worthless concept.