Why Seizing Venezuela's Oil Now Appears Legal, Inevitable. How Britain's Visible Brutality Gave Way to America's Invisible Empire—From Colonies to Systems, and Laws.
Psychopath In Your Life with Dianne Emerson · Dianne Emerson
Audio is streamed directly from the publisher (traffic.libsyn.com) as published in their RSS feed. Play Podcasts does not host this file. Rights-holders can request removal through the copyright & takedown page.
Show Notes
Do you have a psychopath in your life? The best way to find out is read my book. BOOK *FREE* Download – Psychopath In Your Life4
Support is Appreciated: Support the Show – Psychopath In Your Life
Tune in: Podcast Links – Psychopath In Your Life
UPDATED: TOP PODS – Psychopath In Your Life
NEW: My old discussion forum with last 10 years of victim stories, is back online. Psychopath Victim Support Community | Forums powered by UBB.threads™
Google Maps My HOME Address: 309 E. Klug Avenue, Norfolk, NE 68701 SMART Meters & Timelines – Psychopath In Your Life
IntroThis short piece explains what my work is fundamentally about.
Psychopaths and Control. How it works
Not whether one empire was "good" and another was "bad," but how power actually operates—and how it adapts when its older forms become politically impossible to sustain.
The British Empire is often remembered as uniquely brutal. The United States is often described as an imperfect but fundamentally moral successor.
That comparison misses the point.
What follows is not a moral argument. It is a structural one.
Britain's "Violence Problem" Was Structural, Not AccidentalBy the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the British Empire had reached a contradiction it could not resolve:
It governed vast populations with minimal consent
It relied on racial hierarchy, extraction, and coercion
It increasingly required overt violence to maintain control
Examples include:
- Famines in India exacerbated by export policies
- Brutal counterinsurgency campaigns (Ireland, Kenya, Malaya)
- Collective punishment, concentration camps (Boer War), and martial law
This level of coercion became politically unsustainable in an era of mass media, nationalism, and global war fatigue.
Britain did not lose its empire because it was insufficiently ruthless—it lost it because its form of ruthlessness became too visible and too expensive to maintain.
The United States Inherited the Empire—but Changed the InterfaceThe United States absorbed British imperial dominance after World War II, but with key operational differences:
What Stayed the Same
Control over trade routes, finance, and resources
Strategic military bases across the globe
Willingness to use extreme violence when deemed necessary
What Changed
Indirect rule replaced direct colonial governance
Corporations, NGOs, and international institutions replaced governors
Violence became:
Outsourced (proxy wars)
Legalized (treaties, "security assistance")
Sanitized (technocratic language, economic models)
Where Britain ruled openly, the U.S. ruled through systems.
Why U.S. "Evil" Is Harder to See Than British "Evil"British imperial violence was:
- Visible
- Explicit
- Often unapologetic
- American imperial violence is:
- Bureaucratic
- Fragmented
- Plausibly deniable
Instead of saying:
"We control you because we can,"
the U.S. model says:
"Markets demand this," "Security requires this," "Development failed," "Institutions malfunctioned."
The harm is real, but the agency is obscured.
This is why the U.S. can plausibly claim moral superiority while producing comparable—or greater—destructive outcomes.
The Key Distinction: Britain Ruled People; the U.S. Rules SystemsBritain's empire was personal and territorial.
America's empire is:
- Financial (currency dominance, debt)
- Legal (trade law, arbitration, sanctions)
- Infrastructural (energy, data, logistics)
- Psychological (narrative control, normalization)
This makes the U.S. empire:
- More resilient
- Less accountable
- Harder to revolt against directly
You cannot "declare independence" from an algorithm, a credit system, or a global supply chain.
Why Britain Lost Its Empire—and the U.S. Has Not (Yet)Britain faced:
- Rising domestic opposition
- Bankruptcy after two world wars
- Inability to hide violence
The U.S. has so far avoided this fate by:
- Shifting costs offshore
- Financializing conflict
- Keeping domestic populations insulated
- Turning force into abstraction
But the underlying contradiction remains: An empire that depends on coercion eventually faces moral, economic, or structural collapse.
Britain's empire collapsed because its violence was too visible. The American empire persists because its violence is systemic, outsourced, and deniable.
That distinction—not a difference in moral character—is what separates the two.
ClosingThis is why modern harm so often appears accidental, technical, or unavoidable.
The violence did not disappear. It changed form.
Power learned that visibility was a liability, that accountability could be diluted, and that systems could do what armies once did—quietly.
Understanding that shift is essential. Why outcomes remain destructive even when no single hand appears to be pulling the trigger. On British Empire & Structural ViolenceCaroline Elkins — Legacy of Violence: A History of the British Empire A Pulitzer-winning historian who shows how violence was systemic, embedded in institutions and law, and not sporadic in British colonial rule. Harvard Business School Library
Philip Dwyer & Amanda Nettelbeck (eds.) — Violence, Colonialism and Empire in the Modern World Collected essays exploring how coercion and structural violence were central, not incidental, to empire. Springer
Priyamvada Gopal — Insurgent Empire: Anticolonial Resistance and British Dissent Analyzes how anti-colonial thought and resistance within the empire challenged the supposed legitimacy of the British imperial project. Wikipedia
Peter Fitzpatrick — (chapter on Colonialism and the Rule of Law) Argues legal systems were integral to colonial rule and helped shape the international order of inequality. OUP Academic
On U.S. Empire, Law & Systemic ControlNoam Chomsky — Hegemony or Survival: America's Quest for Global Dominance Classic critical work on U.S. foreign policy, elites, and the pursuit of global power through military, legal, and economic means. Wikipedia
American Empire Project (series): Includes work by Chomsky, Andrew Bacevich, and others critiquing U.S. imperial power, exceptionalism, and institutional dominance. Wikipedia
Megan A. Black — The Global Interior: Mineral Frontiers and American Power Explores how the U.S. Department of the Interior and resource governance helped extend American influence far beyond its borders. Wikipedia
Rosa Ehrenreich Brooks — "The New Imperialism: Violence, Norms, and the Rule of Law" Law professor and scholar examining how legal norms and the rule of law can coexist with and justify imperial power. Grupo de Pesquisa em Direito Econômico
Energy and U.S. Foreign Policy: The Quest for Resource Security Examines the ties between U.S. policy, oil, and strategic legal/economic frameworks—useful contextual background on how energy shapes global rule systems. Dokumen
Andrew S. Cooper — The Oil Kings: How the U.S., Iran, and Saudi Arabia Changed the Balance of Power Historical account connecting U.S. power to oil politics and global influence structures. Wikipedia
Justin Podur & Joe Emersberger — Extraordinary Threat: Six Coup Attempts Against Venezuela Investigative exploration of U.S. policy toward Venezuela, sanctions, and foreign intervention as part of broader strategic rule-making. Monthly Review
Scholarly Concepts & FrameworksStructural Violence (Johan Galtung & related research) Foundational academic concept: inequality and institutional harm embedded in systems rather than overt acts of violence. ResearchGate
Complex Systems & Power Dynamics (Yaneer Bar-Yam) Though not directly about empire, work on power as systemic and embedded in structures offers a theoretical lens. arXiv