End of Empires: who and what was responsible? (post WW2)

[Dayuhan]

Er,...he was also instrumental in demanding Briaitn dismantle the system of Imeprial preference (the Imperial tarif bloc)- in other words an Open Door policy- before the US would back Britian. Ny cutting the remaing ties that bound the Colonies and Sel-Governing Dominions to the motherland the US was able to redirect those links by controlling the finaincal reins of a global capitalist order that it put in place.

Given that the archaic closed-loop colonial trading systems effectively closed new rising powers out of trade and were largely responsible for triggering WW2 in the Pacific, this seems a not unreasonable demand. It probably seemed unreasonable to the old colonists, who were accustomed to imposing ridiculously one-sided trade terms on their "possessions", but then fair play always seems a drag to those accustomed to the benefits of unfair play.

He also dmeanded that Chruchill sign the Atalantic Charter (ever heard of that) that stated that all states had the right to soviereignty or, in plainer words, that the US had a right to other states formerly under Imperial tutelage). Idealism pish tosh, naked self interest (and you can forget humanitarian liberal universalism...IIRC segregation was still law in many states of the Union)

And exactly how many former colonies did the US establish sovereignty over?

"Imperial tutelage" my arse. Have a look at, say, the opium trade, the single most profitable commercial enterprise in British imperial history. An interesting form of "tutelage", that. The White Man's Burden was never more than romantic fiction, it was about making money.

In the wake of WW2 the old empires were dead. The subjects were no longer interested in subjection and the masters no longer had the power to impose it. That was clear to some, if not to all, as early as 1945. It was clear to all soon enough.