The Anarchy of Empire - Imperialism and "Othering" through "Culture"

     Kaplan's introduction to The Anarchy of Empire in Making U.S. Culture is filled with a discussion on the colonization of Puerto Rico via socio-jurisprudence discourse regarding the concepts of the "foreign," the "domestic," the use of imperialism to build empire, and the role of borders within all of the above.  With regards to taxation, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that "in terms of the rights and privileges conferred by the Constitution, the court excluded Puerto Rico from that same sphere and thus deemed it foreign in a 'domestic sense.' To be domestic in the domestic sense would have made it a part of the nation, on parity with the states, and to be foreign in the foreign sense would have made Puerto Rico an autonomous nation" (Kaplan 3).  This, for me, was a great example and means of introducing the concept of "othering" through "culture."' However, in order to fully understand the problematic nature of "culture," one must think about society from an intersectional perspective in that, regardless of whether one is discussing socioeconomic status, class, gender, sexuality, or in this case, nationality and citizenship, in order for something to be deemed part of a "culture," everything that is not is automatically an outcast, an "other." "Culture," and I use it in said quotes for obvious reasons, has been used to delineate realms of "us versus them" existence throughout history, both from a U.S.-perspective as well as in various other transnational contexts, particularly in regards to imperialistic and colonialism endeavors.  The use of "culture" with regards to nationalistic pride and self-preservation, as was the case with the SCOTUS ruling regarding Puerto Rico, results in the creation of borders meant to keep out anyone not deemed to be part of that hegemonic "culture" previously in place, especially if assimilation by said individuals could result in anything even remotely detrimental to said hegemonic "culture."
     In the case of Kipling's "The White Man's Burden," he wrote this urging the U.S. to take up the "burden" of empire, encouraging the U.S. to take on the imperialist ego-trip that the British had already endeavored on by dominating numerous territories and indigenous populations by taxation, militaristic force, and other means of exploitation, thus again, resulting in a climate of hegemonic "culture" and the "other" or "others," as the case may be. As noted by our handout on "The White Man's Burden," this racialized title because a euphemism for imperialism because it had and would continue to be dominated by white men of privilege and prominence, looking to maintain that hegemonic edge on the rest of the existing world, regardless of whether they deemed them "civilized," "savage," or otherwise.  Reverting back to Kaplan's discussion on Puerto Rico and tying in Kipling's "White Man's Burden," one could easily connect the non-white citizens of the island with the "othered" threat to the hegemonic white "culture" of the U.S. nation-state, which ironically enough, had been on its own tirade to usurp territory and otherwise remove other nation-based "threats" in the form of the Native Americans who resided in said territories initially.
     In a more modern sense, one can connect both of these practices, that of "othering" through the use of "culture" when discussing the mythic idea of the "culture of poverty" in that there is a long-standing trend to blame those who differ from oneself for their differences, without holding any regard for the social institutions and societal regulatory systems that may be to blame for those differences.  Instead, we victim-blame on the basis of social constructions such as race in order to justify the perpetuation of the social cycle of "othering" as a means of attempting to maintain some archaic sense of a "pure" and hegemonic "culture," when in fact, the concept of "othering" is itself a creation of society, which holds itself to be the guardian of "culture," which is yet another social construction. We, collectively as a nation, figuratively, have a history of casting judgment and ostracism on the bases of illusions, delusions, and borderline superstitions that have been created through social constructions and this unfortunate practice of "othering" which inadvertently perpetuates the cycle.  It's time to look beyond the individuals, beyond groups, and beyond people, really, and instead, one should focus one's attention on the social institutions and regulatory entities that have become corrupted by the ideologies of hegemony and oppression. The system is broken.