The Libertarian Review July 1978 - Libertarianism.org

I Liberty's HeritageThe conquest ofthe United Stntes by Spainby William Graham SumnerBorn in 1840, William GrahamSumner was probably the most famousexponent of classical liberal ideas in theUnited States in the last quarter of the19th century, when he was professor ofpolitical and social science at Yale. Hispioneering sociological works-particularlyFolkways and The Science ofSociety-gained him a worldwide reputation.Ever the doggedly determinedadvocate of his deeply cherished politicalideas, Sumner risked dismissalfromYale by insisting on the use of HerbertSpencer's Principles of Sociology as atext, over the opposition of the presidentof the university; and he incurredthe bitter hostility of many influentialRepublican alumni by his life-long attackon protective tariffs (which heviewed as a form of "socialism ''). Hismany popular works, however, includingWhat Social Classes Owe EachOther and especially the essay, "TheForgotten Man," gained him widefollowing.Sumner was an uncompromising supporterof laissezjaire against not onlyprotectionism and socialism, but alsoagainst antitrust legislation, regulationof railroad rates, and the variousschemes current in his time for monetaryinflation. Behind much governmentinterference in the economySumner glimpsed the hands of what hecalled "the plutocrats"- businessmenwho used government privilege, ratherthan the market, to gain wealth.Like his great contemporary, fellowsociologistHerbert Spencer, Sumnerwas an outspoken opponent ofimperialismand war. The war which he had toconfront-and which provoked his polemicalanger-was the Spanish-A mericanWar of 1898, the result, as Sumnerindicated, of a plot by a group of highgovernmental imperialists, includingTheodore Roosevelt. (Spencer was similarlyoutraged by the Boer War, whichhis country began fighting the followingyear.) In a famous speech given in1899, Sumner startled his audience bytaking as his theme, "The Conquest ofthe United States by Spain. " The followingcondensation of that speech (fromThe Conquest of the United States bySpain and Other Essays, edited by MurrayPolner, Gateway Books) sets forththe dangers that Sumner believed werein store for the United States once itbegan to aspire to the role of worldpower.- Ralph Raico.During the last year the public hasbeen familiarized with descriptions ofSpain and of Spanish methods of doingthings until the name of Spain has becomea symbol for a certain welldefinedset of notions and policies. Onthe other hand, the name of the UnitedStates has always been, for all of us, asymbol fora state of things, a set ofideas and traditions, a group of viewsabout social and political affairs.Spain was the first, for a long time thegreatest, of the modern imperialisticstates. The United States, by its historicalorigin, its traditions, and itsprinciples, is the chief representative ofthe revolt and reaction against that kindof state. I intend to show that, by theline of action now proposed to uswhichwe call expansion and imperialism-we are throwing away some of themost important elements of the Americansymbol and are adopting some ofthe most important elements of theSpanish symbol. We have beaten Spainin a military conflict, but we are submittingto be conquered by her on thefield of ideas and policies. Expansionismand imperialism are nothingbut the old philosophies of nationalprosperity which have brought Spain towhere she now is. Those philosophiesappeal to national vanity and nationalcupidity. They are delusions, and theywill lead us to ruin unless we are hardheadedenough to resist them. In anycase, the year 1898 is a great landmarkyear in the history of the United States.The original and prime cause of thewar was that it was a move of partisantactics in the strife of parties at Washington.As soon as it seemed resolvedupon, a number of interests began to seetheir advantage in it and hastened tofurther it. It was necessary to make appealsto the public which would bringquite other motives to the support of theenterprise and win the consent of classeswho would never consent to eitherfinancial or political jobbery. Such appealswere found in sensational assertionswhich we had no means to verify,in phrases of alleged patriotism, instatements about Cuba and the Cubanswhich we now know to have been entirelyuntrue.Where was the statesmanship of allthis? It was unstatesmanlike to publish asolemn declaration that we would notseize any territqry, and especially tocharacterize such action in advance as"criminal aggression," for it was morallycertain that we should come out of anywar with Spain with conquered territoryon our hands, and the people whowanted the war, or who consented to it,hoped that we should do so.[The war] was a gross violation ofself-government. We boast that we are aself-governing people, and in this respect,particularly, we compare ourselveswith pride with older nations.What is the difference after all? TheRussians, whom we always think of asstanding at the opposite pole of politicalinstitutions, have self-government-ifyou mean by it acquiescence in what alittle group of people at the governmentagree to do. The war with Spain wasprecipitated upon us headlong, withoutreflection or deliberation, and withoutany due formulation of public opinion.Whenever a voice was raised in behalf ofdeliberation and the recognized maximsof statesmanship, it was howled down ina storm of vituperation and cant.12Libertarian Review