of political science and international affairs at George Washington University.
They applied the "Page 99 Test" to their new book, The Price of Empire: American Entrepreneurs and the Origins of America's First Pacific Empire and reported the following:
Opening The Price of Empire to page 99 gives the reader an excellent summary of the book. We were surprised. Our central argument is that American entrepreneurs were responsible for early American imperialism in the Pacific. This page is at a turning point in the book and captures this argument well.Visit Miles M. Evers's website and Eric Grynaviski's website.
Page 99 briefly summarizes the previous chapters about how the search for guano and copra led to imperial projects. The page then compares these to American imperialism in Hawaii. It begins by discussing the conventional wisdom of U.S. annexation of Hawaii, which is often credited to American strategic and trade interests. We describe this position (which we disagree with): “Pearl Harbor, since the 1940s, has been central to the U.S. Navy’s strategies for defending the American west coast. It is also economically important as a harbor and, of course, later became a destination for American tourists. Theories that emphasize strategic or trade interests should therefore be well-placed to discuss Hawaii.”
It then turns to a summary of our argument about Hawaii: “Rising sugar prices led Americans to invest in the Hawaiian Islands. These entrepreneurs entered the economic and political life of the islands with vim and vigor, reshaping the domestic political environment of Hawaii to suit their interests. When threats arose – primarily tariffs and falling prices – they turned from entrepreneurs into lobbyists, using their positional advantages to secure favorable trade terms that initiated a pattern of imperialism in Hawaii decades before annexation.”
There are two aspects of the argument not well represented. The first is the idea of “positional advantages.” A significant part of the book explains why the U.S. government turned to entrepreneurs in crafting policies concerning overseas expansion, where we argue that their position in-between societies created special opportunities for political lobbying. The second is the long legacy of entrepreneurs with respect to indigenous rights. The introduction and conclusion highlight the long legs of imperialism and why they continue to persist today.
In sum, we give ourselves a passing grade on the Page 99 Test. Most of the argument is present, along with a summary of the historical chapters of the book, but the discussion about why it matters for contemporary readers – the nexus between economics and security, and its racist legacy – is missing.
--Marshal Zeringue