{"title":"全球内陆:矿产边界与美国实力","authors":"Tyler Priest","doi":"10.1080/14682745.2021.2016469","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Megan Black’s The Global Interior reconsiders the United States’ rise to global dominance in the mid-twentieth century by emphasising how US officials ‘brought together Cold War strategy and economic globalization’ (p. 119) to promote US resource interests. Her study analyses the United States’ hunt for oil and strategic minerals – those vital to US civilian and defence industries but in short supply domestically – as a central feature of US economic expansion and geopolitical influence. This perspective is not new, but Black makes the original argument that the US Department of the Interior (DOI), the ‘innermost arm of the American state’ (p. 17), was the agent that ‘spearheaded’ the development of overseas extraction and the commitment of the United States to ‘resources globalism’ (p. 127). The Global Interior posits that US overseas expansion in the mid-twentieth century was less a product of the East Bloc-West Bloc conflict than a continuation of earlier continental expansion and settler colonialism, which, as historians have long established, was also shaped by Interior. The overarching thesis is that Interior used cooperation rather than coercion – mainly through apolitical forms of technical assistance and resource surveys – to incorporate the oil and mineral frontiers of the world into a US hinterland. Interior’s foreign activities thus ‘wrested domestic meaning from foreign space’ (p. 5) and perpetuated the myth that the United States was not an imperial nation. As the winner of several book awards, The Global Interior is likely to influence a generation of historians who study US Cold War strategy and US multinational trade and investment. The research and analysis that inform its claims about the DOI’s global ambitions thus warrant close examination. Black writes,","PeriodicalId":46099,"journal":{"name":"Cold War History","volume":"22 1","pages":"533 - 538"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The global interior: mineral frontiers and American power\",\"authors\":\"Tyler Priest\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14682745.2021.2016469\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Megan Black’s The Global Interior reconsiders the United States’ rise to global dominance in the mid-twentieth century by emphasising how US officials ‘brought together Cold War strategy and economic globalization’ (p. 119) to promote US resource interests. Her study analyses the United States’ hunt for oil and strategic minerals – those vital to US civilian and defence industries but in short supply domestically – as a central feature of US economic expansion and geopolitical influence. This perspective is not new, but Black makes the original argument that the US Department of the Interior (DOI), the ‘innermost arm of the American state’ (p. 17), was the agent that ‘spearheaded’ the development of overseas extraction and the commitment of the United States to ‘resources globalism’ (p. 127). The Global Interior posits that US overseas expansion in the mid-twentieth century was less a product of the East Bloc-West Bloc conflict than a continuation of earlier continental expansion and settler colonialism, which, as historians have long established, was also shaped by Interior. The overarching thesis is that Interior used cooperation rather than coercion – mainly through apolitical forms of technical assistance and resource surveys – to incorporate the oil and mineral frontiers of the world into a US hinterland. Interior’s foreign activities thus ‘wrested domestic meaning from foreign space’ (p. 5) and perpetuated the myth that the United States was not an imperial nation. As the winner of several book awards, The Global Interior is likely to influence a generation of historians who study US Cold War strategy and US multinational trade and investment. The research and analysis that inform its claims about the DOI’s global ambitions thus warrant close examination. Black writes,\",\"PeriodicalId\":46099,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cold War History\",\"volume\":\"22 1\",\"pages\":\"533 - 538\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cold War History\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14682745.2021.2016469\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"历史学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cold War History","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14682745.2021.2016469","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
梅根·布莱克(Megan Black)的《全球内政》(The Global Interior)通过强调美国官员如何“将冷战战略和经济全球化结合起来”(第119页)来促进美国的资源利益,重新思考了美国在20世纪中期崛起为全球主导地位的过程。她的研究分析了美国对石油和战略矿产的追求,这些矿产对美国民用和国防工业至关重要,但在国内供应短缺,是美国经济扩张和地缘政治影响力的核心特征。这种观点并不新鲜,但布莱克提出了最初的论点,即美国内政部(DOI)是“美国国家最内部的部门”(第17页),是“带头”发展海外开采和美国致力于“资源全球主义”的代理人(第127页)。《全球内政》认为,美国在20世纪中期的海外扩张与其说是东西集团冲突的产物,不如说是早期大陆扩张和定居者殖民主义的延续,正如历史学家长期以来所确定的那样,这也是由内政部塑造的。总体论点是,内政部利用合作而非胁迫——主要通过非政治形式的技术援助和资源调查——将世界石油和矿产边界纳入美国腹地。因此,内政部的对外活动“从外国空间中夺取了国内意义”(第5页),并使美国不是一个帝国国家的神话永久化。作为多个图书奖的得主,《全球内政》可能会影响一代研究美国冷战战略和美国跨国贸易与投资的历史学家。因此,为其关于内政部全球雄心的声明提供信息的研究和分析值得仔细审查。布莱克写道,
The global interior: mineral frontiers and American power
Megan Black’s The Global Interior reconsiders the United States’ rise to global dominance in the mid-twentieth century by emphasising how US officials ‘brought together Cold War strategy and economic globalization’ (p. 119) to promote US resource interests. Her study analyses the United States’ hunt for oil and strategic minerals – those vital to US civilian and defence industries but in short supply domestically – as a central feature of US economic expansion and geopolitical influence. This perspective is not new, but Black makes the original argument that the US Department of the Interior (DOI), the ‘innermost arm of the American state’ (p. 17), was the agent that ‘spearheaded’ the development of overseas extraction and the commitment of the United States to ‘resources globalism’ (p. 127). The Global Interior posits that US overseas expansion in the mid-twentieth century was less a product of the East Bloc-West Bloc conflict than a continuation of earlier continental expansion and settler colonialism, which, as historians have long established, was also shaped by Interior. The overarching thesis is that Interior used cooperation rather than coercion – mainly through apolitical forms of technical assistance and resource surveys – to incorporate the oil and mineral frontiers of the world into a US hinterland. Interior’s foreign activities thus ‘wrested domestic meaning from foreign space’ (p. 5) and perpetuated the myth that the United States was not an imperial nation. As the winner of several book awards, The Global Interior is likely to influence a generation of historians who study US Cold War strategy and US multinational trade and investment. The research and analysis that inform its claims about the DOI’s global ambitions thus warrant close examination. Black writes,