Empire strikes back; every empire has its rise and fall, but it looks like American imperialism is on the upswing.

THIS SUMMER THE THIRD AND DARKEST CHAPTER of the Star Wars saga--Revenge of the Sith--will recount Anakin Skywalker's fall from grace and the Republic's descent into tyranny. Where once stood a righteous Jedi knight is now the villainous Darth Vader, and from the ashes of a federation of democratic states rises the phoenix of the all-consuming Empire.

For six films and three decades the Empire has been the archvillain of George Lucas' sci-fi epic. A cancerous juggernaut with an insatiable appetite for wealth, power, and dominion, this intergalactic superpower has (like Star Trek's Borg) crushed and colonized life-forms across the universe, extinguishing every spark of liberty and resistance with a monstrous brutality. For Lucas the Empire is always evil.

Anti-imperialism is not new to Hollywood. American movies have long portrayed empires as the sworn enemy of freedom, democracy, and the rule of law. In the 1950s and '60s big-budget blockbusters like Ben Hur, The Robe, and Quo Vadis exposed the sins and failings of Rome's empire, and the success of Ridley Scott's Gladiator a few years back suggests that American hostility to emperors is still alive and kicking.

Britain's empire, too, has been blasted in revolutionary epics like The Last of the Mohicans, The Patriot, and Gandhi, while China's empire has been reviled in The Last Emperor and Seven Years in Tibet.

Still, empires are suddenly getting a friendlier reception in Hollywood. Oliver Stone, who used to be more suspicious of power-hungry mortals, presents Alexander as a misunderstood hero who merely wanted to unite warring nations in a peaceful kingdom. And in Wolfgang Petersen's Troy Achilles may be the sword with which Agamemnon conquers neighboring kingdoms, but he is a gentler warrior than Homer ever knew. So, too, the Pontius Pilate who resists executing Jesus in Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ hardly seems like the imperial officer who ordered the massacre and execution of thousands. You would think this was his first crucifixion.

Hollywood has been particularly friendly to the British Empire in a number of recent films. Shekar Kaphur's remake of The Four Feathers celebrates the heroism of imperialist soldiers crushing an indigenous rebellion in the Sudan, and Peter Weir's Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World revels in Captain Jack Aubrey's quest for conquest, glory, and the spoils of war. One wonders how empire got such a bad name.

This new love of empire is also showing up outside of Hollywood. Our nation's overwhelming military might and our government's willingness to use this force in unilateral and preemptive actions has led many to speak--often in glowing terms--of an American empire.

Niall Ferguson believes empires can be good, and that the world's only remaining superpower should accept its role as a liberal empire, called to bring peace, progress, and prosperity to a chaotic world. In Empire: The Rise and Demise of the British World Order (Basic Books) the British-born Harvard historian recounts the virtues of British imperialism (which he credits with providing the international community with a century of order, security, and prosperity). And in the more recent Colossus: The Price of America's Empire (Penguin) Ferguson encourages the U.S. to take up the imperial mantle with the courage and (ruthless) conviction required to govern and pacify the world.

Robert D. Kaplan makes a similar argument in an Atlantic Monthly (July 2003) essay, "Supremacy by Stealth: Ten Rules for Managing the World." According to the journalist, America has the power and duty to provide security and order to a fragmenting and dangerous world and needs to embrace the sort of "pagan" principles and values that enabled Rome's empire to be so successful. Kaplan seems unconcerned that some of these principles involve deception, disregard for international law, and the occasional use of brutal force.

BUT NOT EVERYONE IS CRAZY ABOUT AN AMERICAN EMPIRE. New York University historian Greg Grandin's essay in Harper's, "The Right Quagmire: Searching History for an Imperial Alibi" (December 2004), takes issue with Ferguson's rosy portrayal of imperialism. The British empire, he argues, wasn't such a success in Mesopotamia, Egypt, or India. Empires often show little regard for democratic structures, the protection of human rights, or the rule of law. And the record of American neo-colonialism or imperialism in Latin America and the Philippines is bad enough to give any thoughtful person pause.

G. John Ikenberry's essay in Foreign Affairs, "Illusions of Empire: Defining a New American Order" (March 2004), expresses similar concerns about calls for an American empire. The Georgetown professor of geopolitics and global justice disagrees with Ferguson's notion that the world needs an American empire, arguing that "the challenges of peace and economic development are best pursued by advanced democracies working together ... [and] such a cooperative order would require that Washington transcend the atavistic habits of empire." According to Ikenberry, the pursuit of empire through unilateral and preemptive use of force against other nations violates our democratic values and undermines our moral authority and legitimacy as a world leader.

Richard A. Horsley offers a scathing theological critique of the rise of American imperialism in Jesus and Empire: The Kingdom of God and the New World Disorder (Fortress). According to the author of The Message of the Kingdom and Jesus and the Spiral of Violence (Fortress), the God we find in the scriptures is no friend of empires but a liberator of subjugated and oppressed peoples.

When a nation of Hebrew slaves was being crushed under the weight of Egypt's empire, God sent Moses to set his people free. When Israel's ruling class forgot their covenant with God and began to practice the politics and economics of empires, God's prophets chastised and reprimanded them. And when Jesus proclaimed the reign of God, he called for a "kingdom" that would be the opposite of every empire, a society where widows and orphans and aliens would be seated before lords and masters.

As Horsley sees it, the good news of the gospels is political and demands that Christians resist and dismantle empires, standing in solidarity with those oppressed and marginalized by every sort of imperialism. America, which remembers itself as a "New Israel"--a nation of pilgrims and refugees who came to these shores seeking liberty, safety, and peace--must not become a "New Rome," oppressing and colonizing other peoples with our new found might.

ANY CATHOLIC WITH A SENSE OF history should be troubled by the praise of empires. When Constantine brought the Roman empire into the church, Christians no longer had to worry about being persecuted by a pagan state and many church leaders began to call the empire "holy." It wasn't long before believers like Augustine were using the empire's might to persecute and torture other Christians. And when Christian missionaries accompanied European imperialists to the New World, the church gained millions of converts but also collaborated in the enslavement and slaughter of hundreds of millions of indigenous peoples. Baptizing an empire doesn't make it a good thing.

And though Catholicism came late to the defense of democracy, modern Catholic social thought is no friend of empires. Instead, for the last half century Catholic teaching has strongly defended an international order where democratic states cooperate with one another and where international and multilateral organizations like the United Nations provide for the peace and security of the human community. As Pope John XXIII wrote in Pacem in Terris, we live in an era when the universal common good demands that states freely cooperate with one another in international organizations that follow the rule of law. This is no time for empires.

In an age when America's overwhelming military power tempts us to spurn the hard work of collaboration with other weaker and often chaotic states, it is important to remember the dangers and evils of imperialism.

If, like Anakin Skywalker, we choose the path of empire, we may end up violating the very democratic freedoms and values we hold so dear, betraying our best instincts and surrendering to the dark side of the Force.

PATRICK MCCORMICK, professor of Christian ethics at Gonzaga University in Spokane, Washington.