How to Hide an Empire: A History of the Greater United States

America still maintains hundreds of military bases around the world and this, too, is another one of those unspoken, hidden indicators of empire that no one wants to talk about. Many would argue that this is different, that it isn’t exactly like the empires of the past, and they are correct. But it is still a form of empire, in the economic sense at least, because these bases are there to protect our interests.
--Bryan Carey comment on Amazon.com

How to Hide an Empire: A History of the Greater United States by Daniel Immerwahr is a comprehensive exploration of American Imperialism focusing on the often overlooked territories and dependencies of the United States. 

We're all familiar with maps that outline our fifty states. And we are also familiar with the idea that the United States is an “empire,” exercising power around the world. But what about the actual territories—the islands, atolls, and archipelagos—this country has governed and inhabited?

Here's a brief overview:

Thesis: Immerwahr argues that the traditional narrative of U.S. history as a continental story is incomplete. He introduces the concept of the "Greater United States," which includes not just the 50 states but also territories like Puerto Rico, Guam, and the U.S. Virgin Islands, among others.

Historical Context: The book traces American expansion from the early days of the republic, through the acquisition of territories like the Philippines during the Spanish-American War, to the strategic military bases and territories post-World War II. 

Pointillist Empire: Immerwahr uses the term "pointillist empire" to describe how U.S. territories are scattered across the globe, often hidden from the national consciousness. This contrasts with the more contiguous land empires of old.

Impact on History: The book examines how these territories have shaped American history, including their role in military strategy, economic benefits, and social policies. It delves into the legal and cultural implications of U.S. rule over these areas, particularly in terms of citizenship, rights, and representation.

Cultural and Political Oversight: Immerwahr discusses how these territories are often excluded from common American narratives, maps, and even the national imagination. He critiques the portrayal of the U.S. as a nation without colonies, highlighting the contradictions and moral questions this raises.

Modern Relevance: The book also looks at more contemporary issues, such as the treatment of residents of these territories during crises like natural disasters (e.g., Hurricane Maria in Puerto Rico) and the implications of this "hidden" empire in global politics.

Narrative Style: Immerwahr's writing is engaging, blending historical analysis with storytelling, which makes complex geopolitical issues accessible. He uses personal stories, legal battles, and cultural references to flesh out his arguments.

Conclusion: "How to Hide an Empire" challenges readers to reconsider what it means to be part of the United States, urging a reevaluation of the nation's identity, responsibilities, and historical narrative.

The book has been both praised for its insightful reframing of American history and criticized by some for its perspective on U.S. imperialism. Nevertheless it remains a significant contribution to understanding the scope and nature of American influence around the world. I've not seen anything quite like it. One reviewer called it "A pathbreaking history of the United States’ overseas possessions and the true meaning of its empire.

My 9th grade Civics teacher and 11th grade History teacher Mr. Griffith would have liked this book, and would have included it in our History curriculum. 

Here's an endorsement from another teacher:

I'm a professor at the University of California San Diego and I'm assigning this for a graduate class. No other book out there has the level of breadth on the history of US imperialism that this work provides. Even though it packs 400 pages of text (which might seem like a turnoff for non-academic readers), "How to Hide an Empire" is highly readable given Immerwhar's skills as a writer. Also, its length is part of what makes it awesome because it gives it the right amount of detail and scope.

I could not disagree more with the person who gave this book one star. Take it from me: I've taught hundreds of college students who graduate among the best in their high school classes and they know close to nothing about the history of US settler colonialism, overseas imperialism, or US interventionism around the world. If you give University of California college students a quiz on where the US' overseas territories are, most who take it will fail (trust me, I've done it). And this is not their fault. Instead, it's a product of the US education system that fails to give students a nuanced and geographically comprehensive understanding of the oversized effect that their country has around our planet.

Author Daniel Immerwahr (PhD Berkeley, 2011) is an associate professor at Northwestern University, specializing in U.S. and global history.

Throwback Thursday: Setting the Trajectory (Revisited)

THROWBACK THURSDAY
Republished with comments

July 23, 2009

I've been reading Joseph Ellis' Founding Brothers, a book about the first decade of our Republic. Ellis, who wrote a National Book Award-winning bio on Jefferson did this piece as a follow up, no doubt because of his love for that period, but probably also to utilize all the research he'd dug up to produce the first book.

Ellis argues that of all the decades in our history, the first one was preeminent in importance because it set the trajectory our country would take. From the manner in which conflicts were resolved to the manner in which power was wielded, there is probably some truth to Ellis' assessment.

Take, for example, the matter of Washington stepping down as president after two terms. This was unheard of in the era of monarchies. King George III said Washington was the greatest man ever if he could do that. Well, he did it. The torch was passed to another, John Adams. It was unprecedented, but served as just one example of how things were different over here.  (Contrast this with Xi Jinping or Fidel Castro.) Instead of being about power, Washington's presidency was about service.

The book begins with the story of the duel between Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr. It is inconceivable today that a sitting Vice President would kill a man in a duel -- though our previous VP did shoot a lawyer. The significance of the Burr-Hamilton event is this: even though Burr won he lost. When he shot Hamilton, his reputation was shot. The real significance is that the old order, the code of the duel, and all those "gentlemanly" things that were vestiges of old British ways, fell to the wayside and from this instance on were no longer acceptable in the New America.

Another major chapter in the book is about the manner in which the founding fathers avoided resolving the slave issue. In thinking about how to tell it I was reminded of a dream I once had.

In the dream there was a giant tortoise in my small house. It was making a mess as turtles do, but it was also so enormous that I could not get it out of the house because it was wider now than the doors. I was in despair, and I prayed to God for help. A ray of light came down from above and shone on the tortoise, and almost immediately the critter began to become translucent, then transparent and a misty nothing... but just before disappearing altogether, she gave birth to four more baby turtles which were just so cute. Then I woke up.

The meaning of the dream for me was this: deal with a bad habit or situation when it is small and you can maybe get rid of it, but allow it to stick around and you have a major problem on your hands. The only way to get rid of that tortoise would have been to tear a wall out.

Well, the slave issue was not cute like those little baby turtles, but it was a much smaller problem in 1790 than in 1850. The founding fathers would have been better off facing it, and dealing with it while there were fewer slaves and a lesser economic impact. Instead, though they knew sooner or later it was going to tear the fabric of the Republic, they shuttled it off for another time the way many groups and individuals deal with their problems. Try to put a good face on it, try not to make waves.

Aside: How about in your life? Is that an elephant in your living room?

The book goes on to underscore a number of key observations. Foremost, the country was quite fragile in its infancy. Success was not guaranteed, and the men who helped shape it were are aware that they were putting everything on the line, making consequential decisions that would be costly should they fail. 

These people were also human, therefor flawed. Ellis doesn't ignore their struggles with issues of personal integrity, political expediency and the temptations of power.

For sure, reading Founding Brothers has me eager to find the Jefferson book by Ellis. I very much enjoyed David McCullough's insightful John Adams a couple years ago and recommend it to you as an intro to this period of our history. They were remarkable times and remarkable men. They were not passive about the world they lived in. The issues they wrestled with and how they resolved them set the tone for what made America the influential nation it would later become.

Remembering Ely S. Parker, Friend of U.S. Grant and First Native American Commissioner of Indian Affairs

Ely S. Parker

U.S. Grant, for many reasons, has been an inspiration to me. The story of his friendship with Ely S. Parker is one of many examples.  Interestingly enough, I was thinking about Mr. Parker this weekend and thought he'd make a worthy blog topic because a lot of people are unfamiliar with this Native American who served with General U.S. Grant in the Civil War and was later appointed Commissioner of Indian Affairs when Grant became president.

He wasn't just a soldier. He served as an officer, an engineer and as adjutant secretary to General Grant. In that capacity he wrote the final draft of the Confederate surrender terms at Appomattox. (I'll bet you didn't know that.) He later went on to achieve the rank of brevet brigadier general.

When he was appointed Commissioner of Indian Affairs, he was the first Native American to hold that position. Inasmuch as he was a full-blooded Seneca of the Iroquois tribe, his marriage to a white woman created a scandal at the time. Evidently there is no end to the amount of stupidity in the world.

With these thoughts in mind I sought to fin a little more to share here and struck gold. 20 years ago this week, on December 18, the new Bureau of Indian Affairs’ (BIA) facility in Reston, Virginia was named the Ely S. Parker Building. Here are some excerpts from the press release announcing the event, which included a plaque in his honor:

"The Bureau of Indian Affairs and the National Business Center are pleased to have the opportunity to recognize Commissioner Ely S. Parker, a man of great talent and intellect who strived against bigotry and racism to serve his people and his country," said Assistant Secretary Gover, "I consider it a tremendous honor that the Tonawanda Seneca Nation and the Department of the Interior have supported our efforts to remember Do-Ne-Ho-Geh-Weh, Ely S. Parker - in this way."

U.S. Grant flanked by his staff. Ely Parker seated left.

Ely Samuel Parker (1828-95), a citizen of the Tonawanda Seneca Nation, was born into the Wolf Clan on the Tonawanda Reservation in New York State. Parker, who was made the sachem for his tribe in 1852 and given the title Do-Ne-Ho-Geh-Weh, or "Keeper of the Western Door of the Haudenosaunee (Iroquois Confederacy)," was a remarkable person for his era. In a time when American Indians could not become U.S. citizens and were rarely seen in the professions, Parker represented his nation in treaty matters before the federal government and earned degrees in law and engineering.

While his lack of American citizenship prevented him from practicing law, Ely Parker’s engineering degree led to a career supervising public works projects in Galena, Illinois, in the late 1850s. It was there that he met and formed a personal friendship with the future general and president, Ulysses S. Grant. When Grant became commander of the Union Army during the Civil War, he chose Ely Parker as his military secretary, and it was Parker who recorded the terms of surrender that ended the war at Appomattox Court House in Virginia on April 9, 1865. After his election as president, Grant appointed Ely Parker as Commissioner of Indian Affairs in April 1869, where he served until August 1871.

You can read the full press release here. 

Grant was elected in 1868, with Parker being one of his first appointments when he took office in 1869. Parker served as Commissioner from 1869 to 1871, and though the number of military actions against Native tribes was reduced, and efforts to support tribes in their transition to reservations, the ugly reality is that people in power generally don't relinquish that power easily. The size of the country and the as-yet-to-be-developed communications channels restricted some of his ability to achieve the objectives he envisioned.

* * * 

For more about  Ely Parker, here's a great place to start. 
The last Grand Sachem

Related Links

Ely S. Parker Appointment Under Grant

Ely Parker: Iroquois Chief and Union Officer 

Bio of Ely S. Parker in Galena History