Juxtaposing Two Interviews

I heard Stephen Ambrose describe the historical fact that while people in the pre-civil war North generally believed slavery to be profoundly immoral, those in power in the South who were generally slave owners gaining riches from slavery, really believed that slavery was in the best interest of slaves. Basically he was combining our current understanding of the social construction of beliefs with an understanding that beliefs are based on the economic basis of our society. The point is not that people fake beliefs to justify profits, but that a class of people can really convince themselves that what they are doing is moral.

Robert S. Litwak, author of Regime Change: U.S. Strategy through the Prism of 9/11 notes that the United States has engaged in regime change frequently during the last century. If one considers the number of coercive governments that have enjoyed the favor of U.S. foreign policy, Litvak's comment suggests we are more imperialistic and less altruistic than our own mythology suggests.

Clearly there are people of influence in the U.S. government who benefit from U.S. policies that seem to be imperialistic. The Dulles brothers come to mind (Secretary of State and head of the CIA, as well as from a family enriched by United Fruit). Could it be that our self image of promoting regime change to promote democracy is a convenient fiction, socially constructed to justify our actions promoting economic interests?