Imperialism is bad for either the imperialist or the conquered.

While imperialism may at first glance be a good thing analytically, one can clearly see, when shown in depth, that it is in fact quite the opposite, and not only has negative effects on the colonies, but on the imperialistic society itself. You mention that one of the main reasons that India became an extremely wealthy country was because of America helping them, and fulfilling the "white man's burden" aided them on becoming a successful capitalism. However, the main reason why India became more successful was because of micro financing, most notably micro loans, where small, low-interest loans are provided to those in poverty, who can use the money to jump start a small business and help the nation as a whole. This system is extremely successful, and has a 99% return rate, meaning that it is, in essence, a no-cost solution that has worked time and again in many developing countries. The second point that you bring up that I disagree with is about how America's control militarily is a good thing. When America establishes bases around the world, they start to become the world's police, which may at first seem like a good thing, as we are "the home of the free, and the land of the brave". Much to my dismay, however, this has not been the case with our foreign policies. I quote Amnesty International on their US military aid report when they say that "Throughout the world, on any given day, a man, woman or child is likely to be displaced, tortured, killed or disappeared, at the hands of governments or armed political groups. More often than not, the United States shares the blame." One key example of this was the disastrous CONTRA affair, where Reagan sent troops into Nicaragua to overthrow a fairly elected president because it suited their interest. This happens surprisingly often around the world, and though sometimes it will benefit the world as a whole, more often than not, it doesn't. Another point that hasn't been brought up yet, but I believe is important when debating this is the complete loss of the conquered nation's identity and culture. When European nations colonized Sub-Saharan Africa, they destroyed a great deal of the natives' cultures, and it is now lost to history. While this may be a slightly ethical argument, I feel for a nation to be truly successful and provide new views to the world, it is necessary for them to have a distinct history and culture. One last contention that you made that I would like to negate is the fact that deindustrialization is a good thing for the imperialist nation. With the growing increase in vital goods and foodstuffs being imported from other nations, America is slowly becoming more and more dependent on other nations. This is clearly shown with America's constant desire for oil from other, possibly volatile, nations. This is affecting our foreign policies, and is causing America to make poor decisions based on their dependence. With our dependence on foreign nations and their dependence on us for money, this is causing a intertwining web, which while may good for some nations, will be bad when a catastrophe occurs. Imperialism may appear to be basically a good idea, but in reality, it is nothing but a curse which has harmed both the colony and the colonizer.