When is a hegemon a hegemon?
Chinese distinguishes between wang dao（王道）and ba dao（霸道）。The latter is close to hegemony because it does not respect the sovereignty of other nations. As a matter of fact, hegemonic might makes right often directly reduces sovereign of victim nations.

"Imperialism and the Developing World: How Britain and the United States Shaped the Global Periphery" is about how the British and American have negatively impact the developing world. It also clarifies what makes a hegemon a hegmon.

"How did Western imperialism shape the developing world? In Imperialism and the Developing World, Atul Kohli tackles this question by analyzing British and American influence on Asia, Africa, the Middle East, and Latin America from the age of the British East India Company to the most recent U.S. war in Iraq. He argues that both Britain and the U.S. expanded to enhance their national economic prosperity, and shows how Anglo-American expansionism hurt economic development in poor parts of the world.

To clarify the causes and consequences of modern imperialism, Kohli first explains that there are two kinds of empires and analyzes the dynamics of both. Imperialism can refer to a formal, colonial empire such as Britain in the 19th century or an informal empire, wielding significant influence but not territorial control, such as the U.S. in the 20th century. Kohli contends that both have repeatedly undermined the prospects of steady economic progress in the global periphery, though to different degrees.

Time and again, the pursuit of their own national economic prosperity led Britain and the U.S. to expand into peripheral areas of the world. Limiting the sovereignty of other states-and poor and weak states on the periphery in particular-was the main method of imperialism. For the British and American empires, this tactic ensured that peripheral economies would stay open and accessible to Anglo-American economic interests. Loss of sovereignty, however, greatly hurt the life chances of people living in Asia, the Middle East, Africa, and Latin America. As Kohli lays bare, sovereignty is an economic asset; it is a precondition for the emergence of states that can foster prosperous and inclusive industrial societies."

On Friday, September 17, 2021 at 2:15:07 AM UTC-10, ltlee1 wrote:
> When is a hegemon a hegemon?
> Chinese distinguishes between wang dao（王道）and ba dao（霸道）。The latter is close to hegemony because it does not respect the sovereignty of other nations.. As a matter of fact, hegemonic might makes right often directly reduces sovereign of victim nations.
>
> "Imperialism and the Developing World: How Britain and the United States Shaped the Global Periphery" is about how the British and American have negatively impact the developing world. It also clarifies what makes a hegemon a hegmon.
>
> "How did Western imperialism shape the developing world? In Imperialism and the Developing World, Atul Kohli tackles this question by analyzing British and American influence on Asia, Africa, the Middle East, and Latin America from the age of the British East India Company to the most recent U.S. war in Iraq. He argues that both Britain and the U.S. expanded to enhance their national economic prosperity, and shows how Anglo-American expansionism hurt economic development in poor parts of the world.
>
> To clarify the causes and consequences of modern imperialism, Kohli first explains that there are two kinds of empires and analyzes the dynamics of both. Imperialism can refer to a formal, colonial empire such as Britain in the 19th century or an informal empire, wielding significant influence but not territorial control, such as the U.S. in the 20th century. Kohli contends that both have repeatedly undermined the prospects of steady economic progress in the global periphery, though to different degrees.
>
> Time and again, the pursuit of their own national economic prosperity led Britain and the U.S. to expand into peripheral areas of the world. Limiting the sovereignty of other states-and poor and weak states on the periphery in particular-was the main method of imperialism. For the British and American empires, this tactic ensured that peripheral economies would stay open and accessible to Anglo-American economic interests. Loss of sovereignty, however, greatly hurt the life chances of people living in Asia, the Middle East, Africa, and Latin America. As Kohli lays bare, sovereignty is an economic asset; it is a precondition for the emergence of states that can foster prosperous and inclusive industrial societies."

That system which maintains individual freedom is superior to the collective slavery of materialistic and atheistic communist dictatorship. That is a no brainer.

On Friday, September 17, 2021 at 6:32:18 AM UTC-7, Jedi Master wrote:
> On Friday, September 17, 2021 at 2:15:07 AM UTC-10, ltlee1 wrote:
> > When is a hegemon a hegemon?
> > Chinese distinguishes between wang dao（王道）and ba dao（霸道）。The latter is close to hegemony because it does not respect the sovereignty of other nations.. As a matter of fact, hegemonic might makes right often directly reduces sovereign of victim nations.
> >
> > "Imperialism and the Developing World: How Britain and the United States Shaped the Global Periphery" is about how the British and American have negatively impact the developing world. It also clarifies what makes a hegemon a hegmon.
> >
> > "How did Western imperialism shape the developing world? In Imperialism and the Developing World, Atul Kohli tackles this question by analyzing British and American influence on Asia, Africa, the Middle East, and Latin America from the age of the British East India Company to the most recent U.S.. war in Iraq. He argues that both Britain and the U.S. expanded to enhance their national economic prosperity, and shows how Anglo-American expansionism hurt economic development in poor parts of the world.
> >
> > To clarify the causes and consequences of modern imperialism, Kohli first explains that there are two kinds of empires and analyzes the dynamics of both. Imperialism can refer to a formal, colonial empire such as Britain in the 19th century or an informal empire, wielding significant influence but not territorial control, such as the U.S. in the 20th century. Kohli contends that both have repeatedly undermined the prospects of steady economic progress in the global periphery, though to different degrees.
> >
> > Time and again, the pursuit of their own national economic prosperity led Britain and the U.S. to expand into peripheral areas of the world. Limiting the sovereignty of other states-and poor and weak states on the periphery in particular-was the main method of imperialism. For the British and American empires, this tactic ensured that peripheral economies would stay open and accessible to Anglo-American economic interests. Loss of sovereignty, however, greatly hurt the life chances of people living in Asia, the Middle East, Africa, and Latin America. As Kohli lays bare, sovereignty is an economic asset; it is a precondition for the emergence of states that can foster prosperous and inclusive industrial societies."
> That system which maintains individual freedom is superior to the collective slavery of materialistic and atheistic communist dictatorship. That is a no brainer.

Oh!!! yes!!! Slavery, stole everything from Africa, the Middle East, Asia, the Americas,...
Street killing within cities,...
Kill, rape and destroy all over the world...
The power of the gun controls everything.

On Friday, September 17, 2021 at 9:32:18 AM UTC-4, Jedi Master wrote:
> On Friday, September 17, 2021 at 2:15:07 AM UTC-10, ltlee1 wrote:
> > When is a hegemon a hegemon?
> > Chinese distinguishes between wang dao（王道）and ba dao（霸道）。The latter is close to hegemony because it does not respect the sovereignty of other nations.. As a matter of fact, hegemonic might makes right often directly reduces sovereign of victim nations.
> >
> > "Imperialism and the Developing World: How Britain and the United States Shaped the Global Periphery" is about how the British and American have negatively impact the developing world. It also clarifies what makes a hegemon a hegmon.
> >
> > "How did Western imperialism shape the developing world? In Imperialism and the Developing World, Atul Kohli tackles this question by analyzing British and American influence on Asia, Africa, the Middle East, and Latin America from the age of the British East India Company to the most recent U.S.. war in Iraq. He argues that both Britain and the U.S. expanded to enhance their national economic prosperity, and shows how Anglo-American expansionism hurt economic development in poor parts of the world.
> >
> > To clarify the causes and consequences of modern imperialism, Kohli first explains that there are two kinds of empires and analyzes the dynamics of both. Imperialism can refer to a formal, colonial empire such as Britain in the 19th century or an informal empire, wielding significant influence but not territorial control, such as the U.S. in the 20th century. Kohli contends that both have repeatedly undermined the prospects of steady economic progress in the global periphery, though to different degrees.
> >
> > Time and again, the pursuit of their own national economic prosperity led Britain and the U.S. to expand into peripheral areas of the world. Limiting the sovereignty of other states-and poor and weak states on the periphery in particular-was the main method of imperialism. For the British and American empires, this tactic ensured that peripheral economies would stay open and accessible to Anglo-American economic interests. Loss of sovereignty, however, greatly hurt the life chances of people living in Asia, the Middle East, Africa, and Latin America. As Kohli lays bare, sovereignty is an economic asset; it is a precondition for the emergence of states that can foster prosperous and inclusive industrial societies."

> That system which maintains individual freedom is superior to the collective slavery of materialistic and atheistic communist dictatorship. That is a no brainer.

American has a death problem before the Covid epidemic has caused the death of hundreds of thousands of Americans.
"Why Is America So Bad at Keeping People Alive?" is the title of a recent article explaining how freedom in America has led to inequality and inequality has led to more death, black and white, rich and poor. Everyone wants freedom, the more the merrier, the issue is affordability.

Anyway, the thesis of the book is that UK and American imperialism have caused the lost sovereignty of many nations which in turn greatly hurts the life chances of people in Asia, the Middle East, Africa, and Latin America.

On Saturday, September 18, 2021 at 3:50:53 AM UTC-7, ltlee1 wrote:
> On Friday, September 17, 2021 at 9:32:18 AM UTC-4, Jedi Master wrote:
> > On Friday, September 17, 2021 at 2:15:07 AM UTC-10, ltlee1 wrote:
> > > When is a hegemon a hegemon?
> > > Chinese distinguishes between wang dao（王道）and ba dao（霸道）。The latter is close to hegemony because it does not respect the sovereignty of other nations. As a matter of fact, hegemonic might makes right often directly reduces sovereign of victim nations.
> > >
> > > "Imperialism and the Developing World: How Britain and the United States Shaped the Global Periphery" is about how the British and American have negatively impact the developing world. It also clarifies what makes a hegemon a hegmon.
> > >
> > > "How did Western imperialism shape the developing world? In Imperialism and the Developing World, Atul Kohli tackles this question by analyzing British and American influence on Asia, Africa, the Middle East, and Latin America from the age of the British East India Company to the most recent U..S. war in Iraq. He argues that both Britain and the U.S. expanded to enhance their national economic prosperity, and shows how Anglo-American expansionism hurt economic development in poor parts of the world.
> > >
> > > To clarify the causes and consequences of modern imperialism, Kohli first explains that there are two kinds of empires and analyzes the dynamics of both. Imperialism can refer to a formal, colonial empire such as Britain in the 19th century or an informal empire, wielding significant influence but not territorial control, such as the U.S. in the 20th century. Kohli contends that both have repeatedly undermined the prospects of steady economic progress in the global periphery, though to different degrees.
> > >
> > > Time and again, the pursuit of their own national economic prosperity led Britain and the U.S. to expand into peripheral areas of the world. Limiting the sovereignty of other states-and poor and weak states on the periphery in particular-was the main method of imperialism. For the British and American empires, this tactic ensured that peripheral economies would stay open and accessible to Anglo-American economic interests. Loss of sovereignty, however, greatly hurt the life chances of people living in Asia, the Middle East, Africa, and Latin America. As Kohli lays bare, sovereignty is an economic asset; it is a precondition for the emergence of states that can foster prosperous and inclusive industrial societies."
>
> > That system which maintains individual freedom is superior to the collective slavery of materialistic and atheistic communist dictatorship. That is a no brainer.
> American has a death problem before the Covid epidemic has caused the death of hundreds of thousands of Americans.
> "Why Is America So Bad at Keeping People Alive?" is the title of a recent article explaining how freedom in America has led to inequality and inequality has led to more death, black and white, rich and poor. Everyone wants freedom, the more the merrier, the issue is affordability.
>
> Anyway, the thesis of the book is that UK and American imperialism have caused the lost sovereignty of many nations which in turn greatly hurts the life chances of people in Asia, the Middle East, Africa, and Latin America.

One word!! Greed!!!
Take everything they have. Kill, if you must, to take it. The English empire was made by greed!!!

On Saturday, September 18, 2021 at 6:50:53 AM UTC-4, ltlee1 wrote:
> On Friday, September 17, 2021 at 9:32:18 AM UTC-4, Jedi Master wrote:
> > On Friday, September 17, 2021 at 2:15:07 AM UTC-10, ltlee1 wrote:
> > > When is a hegemon a hegemon?
> > > Chinese distinguishes between wang dao（王道）and ba dao（霸道）。The latter is close to hegemony because it does not respect the sovereignty of other nations. As a matter of fact, hegemonic might makes right often directly reduces sovereign of victim nations.
> > >
> > > "Imperialism and the Developing World: How Britain and the United States Shaped the Global Periphery" is about how the British and American have negatively impact the developing world. It also clarifies what makes a hegemon a hegmon.
> > >
> > > "How did Western imperialism shape the developing world? In Imperialism and the Developing World, Atul Kohli tackles this question by analyzing British and American influence on Asia, Africa, the Middle East, and Latin America from the age of the British East India Company to the most recent U..S. war in Iraq. He argues that both Britain and the U.S. expanded to enhance their national economic prosperity, and shows how Anglo-American expansionism hurt economic development in poor parts of the world.
> > >
> > > To clarify the causes and consequences of modern imperialism, Kohli first explains that there are two kinds of empires and analyzes the dynamics of both. Imperialism can refer to a formal, colonial empire such as Britain in the 19th century or an informal empire, wielding significant influence but not territorial control, such as the U.S. in the 20th century. Kohli contends that both have repeatedly undermined the prospects of steady economic progress in the global periphery, though to different degrees.
> > >
> > > Time and again, the pursuit of their own national economic prosperity led Britain and the U.S. to expand into peripheral areas of the world. Limiting the sovereignty of other states-and poor and weak states on the periphery in particular-was the main method of imperialism. For the British and American empires, this tactic ensured that peripheral economies would stay open and accessible to Anglo-American economic interests. Loss of sovereignty, however, greatly hurt the life chances of people living in Asia, the Middle East, Africa, and Latin America. As Kohli lays bare, sovereignty is an economic asset; it is a precondition for the emergence of states that can foster prosperous and inclusive industrial societies."
>
> > That system which maintains individual freedom is superior to the collective slavery of materialistic and atheistic communist dictatorship. That is a no brainer.
> American has a death problem before the Covid epidemic has caused the death of hundreds of thousands of Americans.
> "Why Is America So Bad at Keeping People Alive?" is the title of a recent article explaining how freedom in America has led to inequality and inequality has led to more death, black and white, rich and poor. Everyone wants freedom, the more the merrier, the issue is affordability.
>
> Anyway, the thesis of the book is that UK and American imperialism have caused the lost sovereignty of many nations which in turn greatly hurts the life chances of people in Asia, the Middle East, Africa, and Latin America.

The question of the 21st century.
Would the US continues to hurt the sovereignty of nations, currently under the flag of democracy (Western version) and human rights?

Yes, they will still continue to hurt the sovereignty of nations, changing
them to adopt, adapt, and suit like their own western values and system.

If not, they will have no diplomatic work to do. Externally, the US
diplomacy will end as "no eye to see", "no ear to hear", and "no propaganda
to make".

That means their diplomacy around will have no one to complain, and will end
up with no work, no job, and no pay.

Their troops in US lying around in their barracks have no place to fly to.
They will be sitting and idle around sending sex texts on their cell phone.

They will get bored, and will look for date rape to relieve their ego and
esteem. Hence they have no joys sitting around waiting for orders to go
abroad to do their kill.

With no one abroad to kill and destroy, and no devastation to be flattened,
they have to be retrenched for no work. They will save tax payer money and
PDST costs.

The military assets will be in surplus and will soon be rusted. The parts in
the assets will be seized up and became inoperable from not working and
operating it.

Their troops and contractors stationed in allied countries will have no war
to fight, and will end up with no jobs. They will be retrenched and send
home.

Henceforth, the US will have no choice but to continue to hunt for hurt, in
order to inflict hurt on the sovereignty of nations. If not, they will have
no diplomat work to do.

"ltlee1" wrote in message
news:18af602a-f30f-4fa9-b45c-4b061a5228edn@googlegroups.com...

On Saturday, September 18, 2021 at 6:50:53 AM UTC-4, ltlee1 wrote:
> On Friday, September 17, 2021 at 9:32:18 AM UTC-4, Jedi Master wrote:
> > On Friday, September 17, 2021 at 2:15:07 AM UTC-10, ltlee1 wrote:
> > > When is a hegemon a hegemon?
> > > Chinese distinguishes between wang dao（王道）and ba dao（霸道）。The latter is
> > > close to hegemony because it does not respect the sovereignty of other
> > > nations. As a matter of fact, hegemonic might makes right often
> > > directly reduces sovereign of victim nations.
> > >
> > > "Imperialism and the Developing World: How Britain and the United
> > > States Shaped the Global Periphery" is about how the British and
> > > American have negatively impact the developing world. It also
> > > clarifies what makes a hegemon a hegmon.
> > >
> > > "How did Western imperialism shape the developing world? In
> > > Imperialism and the Developing World, Atul Kohli tackles this question
> > > by analyzing British and American influence on Asia, Africa, the
> > > Middle East, and Latin America from the age of the British East India
> > > Company to the most recent U.S. war in Iraq. He argues that both
> > > Britain and the U.S. expanded to enhance their national economic
> > > prosperity, and shows how Anglo-American expansionism hurt economic
> > > development in poor parts of the world.
> > >
> > > To clarify the causes and consequences of modern imperialism, Kohli
> > > first explains that there are two kinds of empires and analyzes the
> > > dynamics of both. Imperialism can refer to a formal, colonial empire
> > > such as Britain in the 19th century or an informal empire, wielding
> > > significant influence but not territorial control, such as the U.S. in
> > > the 20th century. Kohli contends that both have repeatedly undermined
> > > the prospects of steady economic progress in the global periphery,
> > > though to different degrees.
> > >
> > > Time and again, the pursuit of their own national economic prosperity
> > > led Britain and the U.S. to expand into peripheral areas of the world.
> > > Limiting the sovereignty of other states-and poor and weak states on
> > > the periphery in particular-was the main method of imperialism. For
> > > the British and American empires, this tactic ensured that peripheral
> > > economies would stay open and accessible to Anglo-American economic
> > > interests. Loss of sovereignty, however, greatly hurt the life chances
> > > of people living in Asia, the Middle East, Africa, and Latin America.
> > > As Kohli lays bare, sovereignty is an economic asset; it is a
> > > precondition for the emergence of states that can foster prosperous
> > > and inclusive industrial societies."
>
> > That system which maintains individual freedom is superior to the
> > collective slavery of materialistic and atheistic communist
> > dictatorship. That is a no brainer.
> American has a death problem before the Covid epidemic has caused the
> death of hundreds of thousands of Americans.
> "Why Is America So Bad at Keeping People Alive?" is the title of a recent
> article explaining how freedom in America has led to inequality and
> inequality has led to more death, black and white, rich and poor. Everyone
> wants freedom, the more the merrier, the issue is affordability.
>
> Anyway, the thesis of the book is that UK and American imperialism have
> caused the lost sovereignty of many nations which in turn greatly hurts
> the life chances of people in Asia, the Middle East, Africa, and Latin
> America.

The question of the 21st century.
Would the US continues to hurt the sovereignty of nations, currently under
the flag of democracy (Western version) and human rights?

On 17/9/2021 8:15 pm, ltlee1 wrote:
> When is a hegemon a hegemon?
> Chinese distinguishes between wang dao（王道）and ba dao（霸道）。The latter is close to hegemony because it does not respect the sovereignty of other nations. As a matter of fact, hegemonic might makes right often directly reduces sovereign of victim nations.
>
> "Imperialism and the Developing World: How Britain and the United States Shaped the Global Periphery" is about how the British and American have negatively impact the developing world. It also clarifies what makes a hegemon a hegmon.
>
> "How did Western imperialism shape the developing world? In Imperialism and the Developing World, Atul Kohli tackles this question by analyzing British and American influence on Asia, Africa, the Middle East, and Latin America from the age of the British East India Company to the most recent U.S. war in Iraq. He argues that both Britain and the U.S. expanded to enhance their national economic prosperity, and shows how Anglo-American expansionism hurt economic development in poor parts of the world.
>
> To clarify the causes and consequences of modern imperialism, Kohli first explains that there are two kinds of empires and analyzes the dynamics of both. Imperialism can refer to a formal, colonial empire such as Britain in the 19th century or an informal empire, wielding significant influence but not territorial control, such as the U.S. in the 20th century. Kohli contends that both have repeatedly undermined the prospects of steady economic progress in the global periphery, though to different degrees.
>
> Time and again, the pursuit of their own national economic prosperity led Britain and the U.S. to expand into peripheral areas of the world. Limiting the sovereignty of other states-and poor and weak states on the periphery in particular-was the main method of imperialism. For the British and American empires, this tactic ensured that peripheral economies would stay open and accessible to Anglo-American economic interests. Loss of sovereignty, however, greatly hurt the life chances of people living in Asia, the Middle East, Africa, and Latin America. As Kohli lays bare, sovereignty is an economic asset; it is a precondition for the emergence of states that can foster prosperous and inclusive industrial societies."
>

Britain and US shaped a global strategy on countries far from them.

How can they do that when they are far away from it is determine by
their white power syndrome to rule and dictate made to them.

That means they want to control to even far away countries from them,
such as the 24 nations.

These 24 nations covered from the South West of India to the West of
Indonesia.

By having 24 nations under their wing, they called and named it, as
Indo-Pacific region.

By creating a Indo-Pacific, it will include the Asia-Pacific, too. This
means they have enlarged their sphere of influence and influence them to
comply to them.

When they widened their spread of power on these countries, they will
also be setting of rules and laws for them for their own interests
instead.