Graham guardian., 1899-06-09
DEMOCRACY AND IMPERIALISM.
From the Springfield Republican.

expanslonist and at the same tim
oppose imperialism, The thing
that are incompatible, however
both in principal and in practic
are democracy and imperialism
The essence of the oemocrati
principal is self.government o,
freedom and equality ofopportuni
| ty, whereas the essence of imperI
alism is government from without
special privilege and exploitation
| No nation or ruler would want l.
govern a people against their will
except for purposes of spoliation o.
to put them to servile and selfisi
uses. There is nothing in thu
principles or spirit of true demo
cracy that would prevent 1t from
reaching ont to other nations and
people and taking them into its
folds. But it would never coerce
them TO come in, and if they elect
ed to come in they would be ac'
cepted and welcomed only on
terms of equality and freedom,
Imperialism, even when it does
not coerce, never admits on terms
of equality, and its ideal of good
government is, as Professor Geddes
of Edinburgh says, to keep them
quiet and in order while they are
being feeced. There is vast diff.
ference between a colonial posses
sion and a Democratic territory.
The inhabitants of the latter look
foi ward to being admitted into
the sisterhood Of states on terms
of equal opportunity and the pri.
vilege of selfgovernment, while
the people of the former expect to
remain the subjects of a govern
ment imposed from without and
the victims of special privileges
exercised by their masters or
granted to a favored few.
There are many people in this
country who are opposing the
administration because they be.
lieve that 1t intends to make Of the
Philippines colony to be govern
ed and exploited by citizens Of
this nation. On the other hand,
there are many who indorse the
administration because they believe
that it means to give the Filipinos
freedom and equal opportunity.
Why can it not be made known
which of these opposing aims is
the one really held by the govern
ment? 1t is pity that our people
cannot be given an opportunity
through the referendum to express
their convictions and wishes in
this matter. 1t is calamity, iii
not shame, that our government
did not say to the Filipinos, and
to the people of this country,
what they proposed to do with the
Philippines after they had gotten
possession of them. 1t is hardly
sufficient to tell us now that the
administration did not know what
its intentions were, for that would
be confessing that they had bar
gained for something for which
they were willing to pay dearly,
both in money and in the lives of
our people, yet did not know why
they wanted it or what they could
or would do with it. That is a
confession of incompetency that
is sufficient reason for dishonor-
able discharge. If they wanted
the Philippines enough to pay
100000 and then fight for
them they must have had de-
finite purpose in view.
There are good reasons for be-
lieving that the more intelligent
inhabitants of the islands would
glady have joined us or made
terms with US if they had been
promised that in the near future
they would be self governing and
protected in the enjoyment of
equality of opportunity in their
own territory. In return for their
liberation from SPAN and pro-
missed protection, this country
would have oheeriuIly granted all
the trade advantages it could rea-
sonably and justly have asked,
and coaling station and, indeed
everything that the nation (not
individually can or will get In any
event. This Democracy of ours
could have expanded all over the