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.

"Empires don't collapse when they become cruel—they collapse when cruelty stops being deniable. The danger today is not that power is violent, but that it has learned how to look lawful." Music: Bad Moon Rising (Remastered 1985) - YouTube A history lesson for Americans. You're still British. – Patriots for Truth

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

Intro

This 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 Accidental

By 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 Interface

The 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 Systems

Britain'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.

Closing

This 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 Violence

Caroline 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 Control

Noam 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 & Frameworks

Structural 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