30 Signs You Might Be An Empire Simp

[lukethethird]

Read the list and add up your score.

I scored a big fat zero out of 30 so I guess I'm not an empire simp.

1. You get triggered whenever anyone highlights the well-documented western provocations that paved the way to the war in Ukraine.

2. You think Putin invaded Ukraine solely because he is evil and hates freedom and the US is pouring weapons into the nation because it loves Ukrainians and wants to protect their freedom and democracy.

3. You’re more interested in Trump’s mugshot than the western-backed atrocities in Yemen or starvation sanctions in Syria.

4. You can listen to Tony Blinken talk without wanting to throw trash at his head.

5. You understand that the last time there was a credible foreign military threat near the US border the US responded so aggressively that it almost ended the world, yet you demand that Russia and China accept US military threats on their borders.

6. You think the US is filling Australia with war machinery because it loves Australians and wants to protect them from China.

7. You believe the world’s most destructive military force is encircling its #1 geopolitical rival with war machinery as a defensive measure.

8. You live in the most propagandized population on earth and make jokes about North Korean propaganda.

9. You live in the most propagandized population on earth and spend your time fretting about Russian propaganda.

10. You think the title of most murderous and tyrannical regime on earth belongs to any government besides Washington.

11. You live under the most murderous and tyrannical power structure on earth and yet spend your time shrieking about tyranny in Asian countries.

12. You want to see Vladimir Putin tried for war crimes before George W Bush.

13. You believe western interventionism has ever had anything to do with spreading freedom and democracy or protecting humanitarian interests.

14. You find protests in places like Iran, Venezuela or Cuba much more interesting than protests in places like France, Haiti or Chile.

15. You unironically call NATO a “defensive alliance”.

16. You rend your garments about China preparing to seize control of Taiwan by military force without ever acknowledging that the US empire is preparing to do the exact same thing.

17. You’ve ever believed for even one second that the US government gives a **** about Muslims in China.

18. You oppose guns except when they’re being used to kill foreigners overseas.

19. You claim you oppose the misdeeds of all governments equally but find yourself spending most of your time yelling at people who criticize US foreign policy online.

20. You’ve ever accused anyone who criticizes US foreign policy of secretly working for Russia or China.

21. You’ve ever accused someone who criticizes Israel of being an anti-semite.

22. You think being anti-war means putting a Ukraine flag in your Twitter bio.

23. You think “the troops” have ever fought for your freedom at any time since you’ve been alive.

24. You think the invasion of Iraq had anything to do with liberating the Iraqi people.

25. You think the destruction of Libya had anything to do with protecting Libyans.

26. You think the west arming Al Qaeda in Syria had anything to do with advancing the interests of Syrians.

27. You think US escalations against Russia and China have anything to do with “national security”.

28. You think the Department of Defense has anything to do with defense.

29. You think it’s okay for the US to keep waging wars, destroying nations, starving civilian populations with economic sanctions, instigating proxy wars, arming neo-Nazis and violent jihadists, staging coups and persecuting journalists, because if it doesn’t do those things the world might be taken over by evil tyrants.

30. You were bothered by any item on this list.





30 Signs You Might Be An Empire Simp

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Caitlin Johnstone is great. I'm on her email list.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

I scored 14 points. Lol.

 

[Augustus]

31. You think the height of independent thought it to reflexively take the “America bad” position on any complex issue

 

[Stevicus]

31. You think the height of independent thought it to reflexively take the “America bad” position on any complex issue

No not "America bad." It's just that the government is just not so "good" as they often try to pass themselves off as.

Instead of approaching geopolitics in a rational, matter-of-fact manner, our government chooses to turn it into some great melodramatic epic fight between good and evil. That's what is bad.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

31. You think the height of independent thought it to reflexively take the “America bad” position on any complex issue

When it comes to American foreign policy, America certainly is bad.

 

[Augustus]

No not "America bad." It's just that the government is just not so "good" as they often try to pass themselves off as.

Yes, I agree.

Things are not quite as facile as the Team America schtick or the OP.

 

[Augustus]

When it comes to American foreign policy, America certainly is bad.

They have certainly done bad things.

Tu say they are “bad” assumes the alternatives would have likely been better.

I’m very sceptical about that.

I doubt people will find the multipolar world of the furure much more benevolent, peaceful and altruistic.

 

[Stevicus]

Yes, I agree.

Things are not quite as facile as the Team America schtick or the OP.

I read the OP as merely a satire or parody of the Team America schtick.

 

[Stevicus]

They have certainly done bad things.

Tu say they are “bad” assumes the alternatives would have likely been better.

I’m very sceptical about that.

I doubt people will find the multipolar world of the furure much more benevolent, peaceful and altruistic.

I don't think anyone can ever expect the world to be more benevolent, peaceful, and altruistic. I'm not even convinced that was ever a genuine goal. In fact, the very goals and objectives of US foreign policies can themselves be called into question, since very often they come across as incoherent and inconsistent - which can give off the appearance of hypocrisy and indecisiveness. That's where something "bad" can even be worse.

 

[Debater Slayer]

They have certainly done bad things.

Tu say they are “bad” assumes the alternatives would have likely been better.

I’m very sceptical about that.

I doubt people will find the multipolar world of the furure much more benevolent, peaceful and altruistic.

I don't think saying that American foreign policy has generally been atrocious (at least after World War II) and that US-led global hegemony is bad necessarily means the alternatives would have likely been better, since the alternative to a bad thing can be just as bad or even worse.

Still, I believe a multipolar world is probably better at this time just because it provides more balance of power than a unipolar one. Some of the US' most conspicuous acts of geopolitical thuggery and bloodshed happened between 1991 and the early 2000s, when it had no real rival power on the global stage. It would be much harder for the US to get away with another Vietnam, Afghanistan, or Iraq today, when it has to be much more careful both about its global image and its relations with countries that it wouldn't want to lose to China's arms. Likewise, I think it's good that China has to keep the US in mind when it thinks about engaging in military aggression (e.g., against Taiwan) or trying to pursue its own hegemonic interests.

Of course, there's also the relativity of what constitutes "good" or "bad" in many geopolitical contexts. Has the US-led global order been a net good for Western Europe or Israel? Most likely, yes. Has it been a net good for Iran or Iraq? Most likely not.

I think that at some point, any question of whether the global order led by any given power was or is a "net good" or "net bad" involves some subjective value judgments, relative and region-specific interests, and specific rather than universal answers.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

I read the OP as merely a satire or parody of the Team America schtick.

It might be interesting to know if @lukethethird did...

 

[Debater Slayer]

Read the list and add up your score.

I scored a big fat zero out of 30 so I guess I'm not an empire simp.

1. You get triggered whenever anyone highlights the well-documented western provocations that paved the way to the war in Ukraine.

2. You think Putin invaded Ukraine solely because he is evil and hates freedom and the US is pouring weapons into the nation because it loves Ukrainians and wants to protect their freedom and democracy.

3. You’re more interested in Trump’s mugshot than the western-backed atrocities in Yemen or starvation sanctions in Syria.

4. You can listen to Tony Blinken talk without wanting to throw trash at his head.

5. You understand that the last time there was a credible foreign military threat near the US border the US responded so aggressively that it almost ended the world, yet you demand that Russia and China accept US military threats on their borders.

6. You think the US is filling Australia with war machinery because it loves Australians and wants to protect them from China.

7. You believe the world’s most destructive military force is encircling its #1 geopolitical rival with war machinery as a defensive measure.

8. You live in the most propagandized population on earth and make jokes about North Korean propaganda.

9. You live in the most propagandized population on earth and spend your time fretting about Russian propaganda.

10. You think the title of most murderous and tyrannical regime on earth belongs to any government besides Washington.

11. You live under the most murderous and tyrannical power structure on earth and yet spend your time shrieking about tyranny in Asian countries.

12. You want to see Vladimir Putin tried for war crimes before George W Bush.

13. You believe western interventionism has ever had anything to do with spreading freedom and democracy or protecting humanitarian interests.

14. You find protests in places like Iran, Venezuela or Cuba much more interesting than protests in places like France, Haiti or Chile.

15. You unironically call NATO a “defensive alliance”.

16. You rend your garments about China preparing to seize control of Taiwan by military force without ever acknowledging that the US empire is preparing to do the exact same thing.

17. You’ve ever believed for even one second that the US government gives a **** about Muslims in China.

18. You oppose guns except when they’re being used to kill foreigners overseas.

19. You claim you oppose the misdeeds of all governments equally but find yourself spending most of your time yelling at people who criticize US foreign policy online.

20. You’ve ever accused anyone who criticizes US foreign policy of secretly working for Russia or China.

21. You’ve ever accused someone who criticizes Israel of being an anti-semite.

22. You think being anti-war means putting a Ukraine flag in your Twitter bio.

23. You think “the troops” have ever fought for your freedom at any time since you’ve been alive.

24. You think the invasion of Iraq had anything to do with liberating the Iraqi people.

25. You think the destruction of Libya had anything to do with protecting Libyans.

26. You think the west arming Al Qaeda in Syria had anything to do with advancing the interests of Syrians.

27. You think US escalations against Russia and China have anything to do with “national security”.

28. You think the Department of Defense has anything to do with defense.

29. You think it’s okay for the US to keep waging wars, destroying nations, starving civilian populations with economic sanctions, instigating proxy wars, arming neo-Nazis and violent jihadists, staging coups and persecuting journalists, because if it doesn’t do those things the world might be taken over by evil tyrants.

30. You were bothered by any item on this list.





30 Signs You Might Be An Empire Simp

I find a considerable amount of truth to many items on the list (keeping in mind that the list is probably satirical), especially the ones touching on what I see as a simplistic notion that NATO is "purely defensive" and the notion that the US supports Ukraine and Taiwan out of the goodness of its heart rather than the coincidence that a sound humanitarian cause happens to align with the geopolitical interests of the US in both cases.

Still, I tend not to be a fan of such lists because I think they're oversimplified, diluted, and unnuanced. For example, I think it is possible for some criticism of Israel to be motivated by antisemitism, although antisemitism certainly isn't a requirement to point out any of the many instances of valid criticism of Israel's policies. I can also see why Russia's immediate neighbors—such as Estonia, Latvia, and Poland—may legitimately see NATO as defensive in their own situations, which would be correct but not a complete picture of the alliance as a whole.

All of the items on the list seem to me connected to complex, multifaceted issues that require extensive discussion to address sufficiently, and a list of one-liners will never be able to provide that necessary level of clarity and detail.

 

[Left Coast]

Who's gonna tell him Russia is an empire?

 

[Augustus]

Still, I believe a multipolar world is probably better at this time just because it provides more balance of power than a unipolar one

There are arguments for and against, and no one really knows what will turn out for the best.

Imo, the idea a multipolar world provides balance is akin to the idea that reading opposing sources of propaganda provides balance when in fact it just makes people misinformed in different ways.

Technology means small scale actors can cause increasingly significant disruptions, and multipolarity means there will be more people encouraging it.

Around the 18th C+/-, technological advances meant pirates and privateers were able to have massive impacts on global trade with safe havens and state support. The Royal Navy was what largely made sea lanes safe simply due to the global dominance of the British Empire (not to minimise the harms or empire or to suggest this was an altruistic venture).

Whether the 'balance' of competing empires was a good thing or not, a lack of balance does offer some benefits that are not easy to achieve otherwise.

Some of the US' most conspicuous acts of geopolitical thuggery and bloodshed happened between 1991 and the early 2000s, when it had no real rival power on the global stage. It would be much harder for the US to get away with another Vietnam, Afghanistan, or Iraq today, when it has to be much more careful both about its global image and its relations with countries that it wouldn't want to lose to China's arms.

Vietnam was a direct consequence of bipolarity, and Afghanistan, and perhaps even Iraq also have legacy roots in the Cold War era.

Historically, multipolarity trends more chaotic.

Still, I tend not to be a fan of such lists because I think they're oversimplified, diluted, and unnuanced

The list is just another manifestation of the Christian salvation myth and it's secular Enlightenment offspring. It's just the negative of the one America traditionally has told itself.

If bad things are caused by bad people then we can solve them by believing in Jesus/reason/human exceptionalism/a different kind of order etc.

Trying to understand the world without understanding ideology and that which underpins it leads to such misunderstanding.

Ideology is primarily about how we explain the world to ourselves, and most people don't see themselves as the bad guys.

We come easily to the belief that what benefits us benefits others, and this isn’t simply the result of propaganda and makes self-interest.

24. You think the invasion of Iraq had anything to do with liberating the Iraqi people.

This is a perfect case in point.

Of course the invasion had many reasons, but it's perfectly obvious that liberating the Iraqi people was indeed one of them. We can certainly argue about how important a reason, but the idea it had nothing to do with this is as naive as the idea it had everything to do with this.

Western universalism whether Christian or secular progressive assumes it is the beneficial spreading of 'Enlightenment' into the dark corners of the world. Whether it was 16th C Catholic or 19th C protestant missionaries, or 21st C liberal interventionists, the idea none of them actually believed in what they preached is as ridiculous as thinking empire was always for the benefit of those colonised. Empire has always been driven by conflicting values.

The "West" was able, for a while, to offer an aspirational model built around the Enlightenment secular progressive myth, although without the deep cultural roots that it has in Europe and America, this was largely transactional and contingent on it delivering what it claimed.

Sooner or later, people get mugged by reality (and hypocrisy).

Multipolarity is as much about the ideologies and narratives that underpin the order (even if these equate to purely transactional power politics) as it is about military power, and from this perspective, it is not good for the West. Especially as they have never been good at recognising the cultural contingencies of their own ideological assumptions, especially the secular progressive Enlightenment faction (which is why they are so defensive of the narrative that it emerged as a rationalist rejection of Europe's Christian past).

Half of the world is relatively new nation states and all polities have origin myths or national stories based around kernels of truth but that have a profound impact on how they view the world. Many of these are not particularly congruent with the West's self concept and how they promote their interests.

They are certainly not compatible with being talked at or down to and continued Western condescension.

I'm not even sure it is particularly salvageable, but it certainly isn’t if they continue to mistake their culturally and historically contingent worldview as being a universal, neutral and natural one.

Many outside the “west” might have good reason to look forward to this, I don’t really understand those within the West who seem to think this is likely to be a good thing for them and their values.

 

[Augustus]

Who's gonna tell him Russia is an empire?

And China…

 

[Augustus]

I don't think anyone can ever expect the world to be more benevolent, peaceful, and altruistic. I'm not even convinced that was ever a genuine goal. In fact, the very goals and objectives of US foreign policies can themselves be called into question, since very often they come across as incoherent and inconsistent - which can give off the appearance of hypocrisy and indecisiveness. That's where something "bad" can even be worse.

All nations with the ability to project power have and will continue to do so.

Hegemons are always hypocritical and inconsistent.

One hypocritical and inconsistent power still might be less bad than several hypocritical and inconsistent powers competing against each other though.

Just like how empire can be bad, but the breakup of empires can be even worse, especially if driven by positive forces like democracy.

 

[Jimmy]

All countries have problems imo. There are some sick leaders, groups and people in the world unfortunately. Things could be worse, a lot worse imo. Hopefully things will get better and better.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Read the list and add up your score.

I scored a big fat zero out of 30 so I guess I'm not an empire simp.

1. You get triggered whenever anyone highlights the well-documented western provocations that paved the way to the war in Ukraine.

2. You think Putin invaded Ukraine solely because he is evil and hates freedom and the US is pouring weapons into the nation because it loves Ukrainians and wants to protect their freedom and democracy.

3. You’re more interested in Trump’s mugshot than the western-backed atrocities in Yemen or starvation sanctions in Syria.

4. You can listen to Tony Blinken talk without wanting to throw trash at his head.

5. You understand that the last time there was a credible foreign military threat near the US border the US responded so aggressively that it almost ended the world, yet you demand that Russia and China accept US military threats on their borders.

6. You think the US is filling Australia with war machinery because it loves Australians and wants to protect them from China.

7. You believe the world’s most destructive military force is encircling its #1 geopolitical rival with war machinery as a defensive measure.

8. You live in the most propagandized population on earth and make jokes about North Korean propaganda.

9. You live in the most propagandized population on earth and spend your time fretting about Russian propaganda.

10. You think the title of most murderous and tyrannical regime on earth belongs to any government besides Washington.

11. You live under the most murderous and tyrannical power structure on earth and yet spend your time shrieking about tyranny in Asian countries.

12. You want to see Vladimir Putin tried for war crimes before George W Bush.

13. You believe western interventionism has ever had anything to do with spreading freedom and democracy or protecting humanitarian interests.

14. You find protests in places like Iran, Venezuela or Cuba much more interesting than protests in places like France, Haiti or Chile.

15. You unironically call NATO a “defensive alliance”.

16. You rend your garments about China preparing to seize control of Taiwan by military force without ever acknowledging that the US empire is preparing to do the exact same thing.

17. You’ve ever believed for even one second that the US government gives a **** about Muslims in China.

18. You oppose guns except when they’re being used to kill foreigners overseas.

19. You claim you oppose the misdeeds of all governments equally but find yourself spending most of your time yelling at people who criticize US foreign policy online.

20. You’ve ever accused anyone who criticizes US foreign policy of secretly working for Russia or China.

21. You’ve ever accused someone who criticizes Israel of being an anti-semite.

22. You think being anti-war means putting a Ukraine flag in your Twitter bio.

23. You think “the troops” have ever fought for your freedom at any time since you’ve been alive.

24. You think the invasion of Iraq had anything to do with liberating the Iraqi people.

25. You think the destruction of Libya had anything to do with protecting Libyans.

26. You think the west arming Al Qaeda in Syria had anything to do with advancing the interests of Syrians.

27. You think US escalations against Russia and China have anything to do with “national security”.

28. You think the Department of Defense has anything to do with defense.

29. You think it’s okay for the US to keep waging wars, destroying nations, starving civilian populations with economic sanctions, instigating proxy wars, arming neo-Nazis and violent jihadists, staging coups and persecuting journalists, because if it doesn’t do those things the world might be taken over by evil tyrants.

30. You were bothered by any item on this list.





30 Signs You Might Be An Empire Simp

My score is zero. Zero craps given about something so obviously biased list. Like 8. Yes, I live in America and I'll laugh all I want at how dumb NK propaganda is that weaves the Kims into divine leaders.

 

[Stevicus]

All nations with the ability to project power have and will continue to do so.

Hegemons are always hypocritical and inconsistent.

One hypocritical and inconsistent power still might be less bad than several hypocritical and inconsistent powers competing against each other though.

Just like how empire can be bad, but the breakup of empires can be even worse, especially if driven by positive forces like democracy.

Perhaps, though if we really want to be an empire, then we should act like it. If we'd rather be some positive force for good, decency, and enlightenment in the world, then we should act like that instead.

The fact that we can't seem to make up our minds about this - that's why things go awry.