Premium
Globalism, Hegemonism and British Power: J. A. Hobson and Alfred Zimmern Reconsidered
Author(s) -
PEATLING G. K.
Publication year - 2004
Publication title -
history
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.12
H-Index - 15
eISSN - 1468-229X
pISSN - 0018-2648
DOI - 10.1111/j.1468-229x.2004.00305.x
Subject(s) - empire , hegemony , power (physics) , argument (complex analysis) , scholarship , globalism , unilateralism , context (archaeology) , history , sociology , foreign policy , imperial unit system , law , political economy , political science , globalization , archaeology , politics , biochemistry , chemistry , physics , quantum mechanics
Interpretations of British imperial history which highlight the role played in the decline of the British empire by misguided gestures of appeasement, and particularly by supercilious internal anti‐imperial critics, have recent been influentially restated within and outside of historical scholarship. Such analysis however is characterized by inadequate assessment of the nature of debate within Britain about the empire during key phases of history. This article considers the ideas of the leading intellectuals Alfred Eckhard Zimmern and John Atkinson Hobson as exemplars of opposed positions taken in that debate in the context of imperial Britain's global strength in the years before and at the start of the First World War. Within this debate, however, Zimmern and Hobson agreed on many fundamentals, not least on the significant potential for good possessed by British imperial power. This case study demonstrates that it is usually desirable for students of history to avoid analogical modes of argument in foreign policy by demonstrating the complexity of decision‐making therein. It also suggests, however, that internal dissent and weakness is likely to be less of a source of difficulty in the world's predominant power – even in one that frequently underpins international order – than is commonly assumed.