The American Empire Part 24

Hayti remained "under United States control" until the revelations of the summer of 1920 (see _The Nation_, July 10 and August 28, 1920), when it was shown that the natives were being compelled, by the American forces of occupation, to perform enforced labor on the roads and to accept a rule so tyrannous that thousands had refused to obey the orders of the military authorities, and had been shot for their pains. On October 14, 1920, the _New York Times_ printed a statement from Brigadier General George Barnett, formerly Commandant General of the Marine Corps, covering the conditions in Hayti between the time the marines landed (July, 1915) and June, 1920. General Barnett alleges in his report that there was evidence of "indiscriminate" killing of the natives by the American Marines; that "shocking conditions" had been revealed in the trial of two members of the army of occupation, and that the enforced labor system should be abolished forthwith. The report shows that, during the five years of the occupation, 3,250 Haytians had been killed by the Americans. During the same period, the losses to the army of occupation were 1 officer and 12 men killed and 2 officers and 26 men wounded.

The att.i.tude of the United States authorities toward the Haytians is well ill.u.s.trated by the following telegram which the United States Acting Secretary of the Navy sent on October 2, 1915, to Admiral Caperton, in charge of the forces in Hayti: "Whenever the Haytians wish, you may permit the election of a president to take place. The election of Dartiguenave is preferred by the United States."

The Cuban Treaty established the precedent; the Great War provided the occasion, and while Great Britain was clinching her hold in Persia, and j.a.pan was strengthening her grip on Korea, the United States was engaged in establishing protectorates over the smaller and weaker Latin-American peoples, who have been subjected, one after another, to the omnipotence of their "Sister Republic" of the North.

5. _The Appropriation of Territory_

Protectorates have been established by the United States, where such action seemed necessary, over some of the weaker Latin-American states.

Their customs have been seized, their governments supplanted by military law and the "preservation of law and order" has been delegated to the Army and Navy of the United States. The United States has gone farther, and in Porto Rico and Panama has appropriated particular pieces of territory.

The Porto Ricans, during the Spanish-American War, welcomed the Americans as deliverers. The Americans, once in possession, held the Island of Porto Rico as securely as Great Britain holds India or j.a.pan holds Korea. The Porto Ricans were not consulted. They had no opportunity for "self-determination." They were spoils of war and are held to-day as a part of the United States.

The Panama episode furnishes an even more striking instance of the policy that the United States has adopted toward Latin-American properties that seemed particularly necessary to her welfare.

Efforts to build a Panama Ca.n.a.l had covered centuries. When President Roosevelt took the matter in hand he found that the Government of Colombia was not inclined to grant the United States sovereignty over any portion of its territory. The treaty signed in 1846 and ratified in 1848 placed the good faith of the United States behind the guarantee that Colombia should enjoy her sovereign rights over the Isthmus. During November 1902 the United States ejected the representatives of Colombia from what is now the Panama Ca.n.a.l Zone and recognized a revolutionary government which immediately made the concessions necessary to enable the United States to begin its work of constructing the ca.n.a.l.

The issue is made clear by a statement of Mr. Roosevelt frequently reiterated by him (see _The Outlook_, October 7, 1911) and appearing in the _Washington Post_ of March 24, 1911, as follows:--"I am interested in the Panama Ca.n.a.l because I started it. If I had followed the traditional conservative methods I would have submitted a dignified state paper of probably two hundred pages to the Congress and the debate would have been going on yet. But I took the Ca.n.a.l Zone and let the Congress debate, and while the debate goes on, the Ca.n.a.l does also."

Article 35 of the Treaty of 1846 between the United States and Colombia (then New Grenada) reads as follows,--"The United States guarantees, positively and efficaciously to New Grenada, by the present stipulation, the perfect neutrality of the before mentioned Isthmus ... and the rights of sovereignty which New Grenada has and possesses over said territory."

In 1869 another treaty was negotiated between the United States and Colombia which provided for the building of a ship ca.n.a.l across the Isthmus. This treaty was signed by the presidents of both republics and ratified by the Colombian Congress. The United States Senate refused its a.s.sent to the treaty. Another treaty negotiated early in 1902 was ratified by the United States Senate but rejected by the Colombian Congress. The Congress of the United States had pa.s.sed an act (June 28, 1902) "To provide for the construction of a ca.n.a.l connecting the waters of the Atlantic and the Pacific Oceans." Under this act the President was authorized to negotiate for the building of the ca.n.a.l across the Isthmus of Panama. If that proved impossible within a reasonable time, the President was to turn to the Nicaragua route. The treaty prepared in accordance with this act provided that the United States would pay Colombia ten millions of dollars in exchange for the sovereignty over the Ca.n.a.l Zone. The Colombian Congress after a lengthy debate rejected the treaty and adjourned on the last day of October, 1902.

Rumor had been general that if the treaty was not ratified by the Colombian Government, the State of Panama would secede from Colombia, sign the treaty, and thus secure the ten millions. In consequence of these rumors, which threatened transportation across the Isthmus, American war vessels were dispatched to Panama and to Colon.

On November 3, 1902, the Republic of Panama was established. On November 13 it was recognized by the United States. Immediately thereafter a treaty was prepared and ratified by both governments and the ten millions were paid to the Government of Panama.

Early in the day of November 3, the Department of State was informed that an uprising had occurred. Mr. Loomis wired, "Uprising on Isthmus reported. Keep Department promptly and fully informed." In reply to this the American consul replied, "The uprising has not occurred yet; it is announced that it will take place this evening. The situation is critical." Later the same official advised the Department that (in the words of the Presidential message, 1904) "the uprising had occurred and had been successful with no bloodshed."

The Colombian Government had sent troops to put down the insurrection but the Commander of the United States forces, acting under instructions sent from Washington on November 2, prevented the transportation of the troops. His instructions were as follows,--"Maintain free and uninterrupted transit if interruption is threatened by armed force with hostile intent, either governmental or insurgent, at any point within fifty miles of Panama. Government forces reported approaching the Isthmus in vessels. Prevent their landing, if, in your judgment, the landing would precipitate a conflict."

Thus a revolution was consummated under the watchful eye of the United States forces; the home government at Bogota was prevented from taking any steps to secure the return of the seceding state of Panama to her lawful sovereignty, and within ten days of the revolution, the new Republic was recognized by the United States Government.[57] (Ten days was the length of time necessary to transmit a letter from Panama to Washington. Greater speed would have been impossible unless the new state had been recognized by telegraph.)

6. _The Logical Exploiters_

The people of the United States are the logical exploiters of the Western Hemisphere--the children of destiny for one half the world. They are pressed by economic necessity. They need the oil of Mexico, the coffee of Brazil, the beef of Argentine, the iron of Chile, the sugar of Cuba, the tobacco of Porto Rico, the hemp of Yucatan, the wheat and timber of Canada. In exchange for these commodities the United States is prepared to ship manufactured products. Furthermore, the masters of the United States have an immense and growing surplus that must be invested in some paying field, such as that provided by the mines, agricultural projects, timber, oil deposits, railroad and other industrial activities of Latin-America.

The rulers of the United States are the victims of an economic necessity that compels them to seek and to find raw materials, markets and investment opportunities. They are also the possessors of sufficient economic, financial, military and naval power to make these needs good at their discretion.

The rapidly increasing funds of United States capital invested in Latin-America and Canada, will demand more and more protection. There is but one way for the United States to afford that protection--that is to see that these countries preserve law and order, respect property, and follow the wishes of United States diplomacy. Wherever a government fails in this respect, it will be necessary for the State Department in cooperation with the Navy, to see that a government is established that will "make good."

Under the Monroe Doctrine, as it has long been interpreted, no Latin-American Government will be permitted to enter into entangling alliances with Europe or Asia. Under the Monroe Doctrine, as it is now being interpreted, no Latin-American people will be permitted to organize a revolutionary government that abolishes the right of private interests to own the oil, coal, timber and other resources. The mere threat of such action by the Carranza Government was enough to show what the policy of the United States must be in such an emergency.

The United States need not dominate politically her weaker sister republics. It is not necessary for her to interfere with their "independence." So long as their resources may be exploited by American capitalists; so long as the investments are reasonably safe; so long as markets are open, and so long as the other necessities of United States capitalism are fulfilled, the smaller states of the Western Hemisphere will be left free to pursue their various ways in prosperity and peace.

FOOTNOTE:

[57] For further details see "The Panama Ca.n.a.l" Papers presented to the Senate by Mr. Lodge, Senate Doc.u.ment 471, 63rd Congress, 2nd Session.

XVI. THE AMERICAN CAPITALISTS AND WORLD EMPIRE

1. _The Plutocrats Must Carry On_

The American plutocrats--those who by force of their wealth share in the direction of public policy--must carry on. They have no choice. If they are to continue as plutocrats, they must continue to rule. If they continue to rule, they must shoulder the duties of rulership. They may not relish the responsibility which their economic position has thrust upon them any more than the sojourners in Newfoundland relish the savage winters. Nevertheless, those who own the wealth of a capitalist nation must accept the results of that ownership just as those who remain in Newfoundland must accept the winter storms.

The owners of American timber, mines, factories, railroads, banks and newspapers may dislike the connotations of imperialism; may believe firmly in the principles of compet.i.tion and individualism; may yearn for the nineteenth century isolation which was so intimate a feature of American economic life. But their longings are in vain. The old world has pa.s.sed forever; the sun has risen on a new day--a day of world contacts for the United States.

Henry Cabot Lodge of Ma.s.sachusetts stated the matter with rare accuracy in a speech which he made during the discussion over the conquest of the Philippines. After explaining that wars come, "never ostensibly, but actually from economic causes," Senator Lodge said (_Congressional Record_, 56th Congress, 2nd Session, p. 637. January 7, 1901):

"We occupy a great position economically. We are marching on to a still greater one. You may impede it, you may check it, but you cannot stop the work of economic forces. You cannot stop the advance of the United States.... The American people and the economic forces which underlie all are carrying us forward to the economic supremacy of the world."

Senator Lodge spoke the economic truth in 1901. William C. Redfield reenforced it in an address before the American Manufacturers Export a.s.sociation (_Weekly Bulletin_, April 26, 1920, p. 7): "We cannot be foreign merchants very much longer in this country excepting on a diminishing and diminishing scale--we have got to become foreign constructors; we have got to build with American money--foreign enterprises, railroads, utilities, factories, mills, I know not what, in order that by large ownership in them we may command the trade that normally flows from their operation." That is sound capitalist doctrine.

Equally sound is the exhortation that follows: "In so doing we shall be doing nothing new--only new for us. That is the way in which Germany and Great Britain have built up their foreign trade."

New it is for America--but it is the course of empire, familiar to every statesman. The lesson which Bismarck, Palmerston and Gray learned in the last century is now being taught by economic pressure to the ruling cla.s.s of the United States.

The elder generation of American business men was not trained for world domination. To them the lesson comes hard. The business men of the younger generation are picking it up, however, with a quickness born of paramount necessity.

2. _Training Imperialists_

Every great imperial structure has had simple beginnings. Each imperial ruling cla.s.s has doubtless felt misgivings, during the early years of its authority. Hesitating, uncertain, they have cast glances over their shoulders towards that which was, but even while they were looking backward the forces that had made them rulers were thrusting them still farther forward along the path of imperial power. Then as generation succeeded generation, the rulers learned their lesson, building a tradition of rulership and authority that was handed down from father to son; acquiring a vision of world organization and world power that gave them confidence to go forward to their own undoing. The masters of public life in Rome were such people; the present masters of British economic and political affairs are such people.

American imperialists still are in the making. Until 1900 their eyes were set almost exclusively upon empire within the United States. Those who, before 1860, dreamed of a slave power surrounding the Gulf of Mexico, were thrust down and their places taken by builders of railroads and organizers of trusts. To-day the sons and grandsons of that generation of exploiters who confined their attention to continental territory, are compelled, by virtue of the organization which their sires and grandsires established, to seek Empire outside the boundaries of North America.

During the years when the leaders of American business life were spending the major part of their time in "getting rich," the sweep of social and economic forces was driving the United States toward its present imperial position. Now the position has been attained, those in authority have no choice but to accept the responsibilities which accompany it.

Economically the United States is a world power. The war and the subsequent developments have forced the country suddenly into a position of leadership among the capitalist nations. The law of capitalism is: Struggle to dispose of your surplus, otherwise you cannot survive. This law has laid its heavy hand upon Great Britain, upon France, upon Germany, and now it has struck with full force into the isolated, provincial life of the United States. It is the law--immutable as the system of gravitation. While the present system of economic life exists, this law will continue to operate. Therefore the masters of American life have no alternative. If they would survive, they must dispose of their surplus.

Politically the United States is recognized as one of the leaders of the world. Despite its tradition of isolation, despite the unwillingness of its statesmen to enter new paths, despite the indifference of its people to international affairs, the resources and raw materials required by the industrial nations of Europe, the rapidly growing surplus and the newly acquired foreign markets and investments make the United States an integral part of the life of the world.

The ruling cla.s.s in the United States has no more choice than the rulers of a growing city whose boundaries are extending with each increment of population. If it is to continue as a ruling cla.s.s, it must accept conditions as they are. The first of these conditions is that the United States is a world power neither because of its virtue nor because of its intelligence in the delicacies of the world politics, but because of the sheer might of its economic organization.

Economic necessity has forced the United States into the front rank among the nations of the world. Economic necessity is forcing the ruling cla.s.s of the United States to occupy the position of world leadership, to strengthen it, to consolidate it, and to extend it at every opportunity. The forces that played beside the yellow Tiber and the sluggish Nile are very much the same as those which led Napoleon across the wheat fields of Europe and that are to-day operating in Paris, London, and in New York. The forces that pushed the Roman Empire into its position of authority and led to the organization of Imperial Britain are to-day operating with accelerated pace in the United States.

The sooner the American people, and particularly those who are directing public policy, wake up to this simple but essential fact, the sooner will doubt and misunderstanding be removed, the sooner will the issues be drawn and the nation's course be charted.

3. _The Logical Goal_

The logical goal of the American plutocracy is the economic and incidentally the political control of the world. The rulers of Macedon and a.s.syria, Rome and Carthage, of Britain and France labored for similar reasons to reach this same goal. It is economic fate. Kings and generals were its playthings, obeying and following the call of its destiny.

The rulers of antiquity were limited by a lack of transportation facilities; their "world" was small, including the basin of the Mediterranean and the land surrounding the Persian Gulf and the Indian Ocean, nevertheless, they set out, one after another, to conquer it.

To-day the rapid acc.u.mulation of surplus and the speed and ease of communication, the spread of world knowledge and the larger means of organization make it even more necessary than it was of old for the rulers of an empire to find a larger and ever larger place in the sun.

The forces are more pressing than ever before. The times call more loudly for a genius with imagination, foresight and courage who will use the power at his disposal to write into political history the gains that have already been made a part of economic life. Let such a one arise in the United States, in the present chaos of public thought, and he could not only himself dictate American public policy for the remainder of his life, but in addition, he could, within a decade, have the whole territory from the Canadian border to the Panama Ca.n.a.l under the American Flag, either as conquered or subject territory; he could establish a Chinese wall around South American trade and opportunities by a very slight extension of the Monroe Doctrine; he could have in hand the problem of an economic if not a political union with Canada, and could be prepared to measure swords with the nearest economic rival, either on the high seas or in any portion of the world where it might prove necessary to join battle.