I certainly hope so! I don’t like the USA as the only superpower-being the worlds policeman has bankrupted us and made us unpopular. furthermore, our military forces are unsustainable-as the wars we have so foolishly gotten in to have proven.
So what’s ahead for the world-are we going back to a pre-WWII collection of nation-states? or, will the futility of trying to unify the world result in power blocs?
Is nationalism dead?
This was a fairly recent development and certainly wasn’t part of the ‘Post WWII World Order’.
The US has been variably unpopular/popular pretty much since we decided to put our hat in on the world stage…just like most of the OTHER nations who are world powers. I think it comes with the territory of being a superpower…when we aren’t a superpower anymore then we be more like France or Britain I suppose and China (or whoever) can take all the heat. And welcome to it. I wouldn’t hold my breath though…
What evidence do you have that our military forces are unsustainable? The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have certainly strained our CURRENT force levels somewhat (hell, a lot)…but we COULD always expand our military force levels if such situations become common place. I’m not seeing our current force structure as being unsustainable however and would need to see some evidence and a bit more expansion on your part to see what you are talking about.
Eventually we will probably have a multi-polar world again, to be sure. Or maybe one or two major powers will arise again like in the bi-polar world when it was the US and the Soviets. It’s hard to project how things might work out…because we are probably talking about a few decades or maybe a century or so from now. The US is far from being ready to drop off the face of the world and become a 2nd rate power…and the other potential rivals are FAR from having all the things they would need to be a WORLD superpower.
In the mean time we will probably see a few nations challenge the US as ECONOMIC powers (the EU and China), and no real challenge to the US on the military front for the foreseeable future. When you start seeing people hepped up to learn Chinese, when you start seeing cultural trends, movies, etc coming out of India or the EU and dominating the world…well, then you will know that the US’s day has passed and we have faded off the world stage. Like I said before I wouldn’t hold my breath if I were you.
Hardly…
-XT
The Post-WWII order was the Cold War. That ended, along with the 20th Century, in 1991.* It was replaced by the modern world, which is not yet named but could be called the Unipolar World or the Asymmetric World. This has made a lot of people unhappy and was widely regarded as a bad idea.
*1991 saw:
[ul]
[li]the collapse of the USSR, which ended the Cold War[/li][li]the First Gulf War, which provided a foretaste of how war would be conducted in the Asymmetric World (and, not incidentally, marked the beginning of the current period of strong American involvement in the Middle East)[/li][li]the Rodney King beating, which demonstrated the new media of non-journalists with video cameras capturing news the mainstream media never could have[/li][li]and, last but certainly not least, the opening of the Internet to commercial parties as opposed to it being owned entirely by nonprofit entities[/li][/ul]Frankly, taking 1991 as the end makes a lot more sense than either 2000 or 2001. Likewise, taking 1914 as the beginning makes a lot more sense than either 1900 or 1901.
If you compare the percentage of government expenditures on the military with other nations, you can see a strong correlation between weak economies and high military spending. The USA spends a significantly larger percentage of their economy on the military than most (all?) other modernized industrial countries, and we’re seeing the toll it’s taking on us.
We can’t afford universal health care, like other countries with a higher quality of life and a lower military budget can. We can’t subsidize university tuition costs, like other countries with a higher quality of life and a lower military budget can. Many of our industries are failing to competitors in other industrialized countries, especially technology and automobile manufacturing.
In short, we (as individual people) are worse off and have a worse quality of life than other industrialized modern countries. I see a strong correlation between our intense military spending and a declining quality of life, which has until now been camoflauged by a powerful dollar.
Mosier: Ah, but all those countries rely on America to do the fighting for them. They are able to have small militaries because American forces do the fighting whenever the UN needs muscle. That, too, is a holdover from the Cold War, when only America and the USSR had the weapons that really mattered (ICBMs and SLBMs).
According to these folks the top military spenders per capita are Isreal, Singapore, USA, Brunei, Kuwait, Qatar, Oman, France, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Norway, UAE, Greece, Australia, and the UK. Save Oman (arguably), those are all pretty nice places to live. If you click the per GDP tab, you will see the United States is on par with France and Australia.
I’m not so sure, palces with universal healthcare often have higher taxes. No free lunch and all that. Also, the United States certainly subsidizes Universities. We do have state schools after all.
What evidence do you have for a declining quality of life? Also, “seeing” correlations is poor science. There is usually some econometrics involved in these kind of things.
Our forces are quite capable, and are easily supported in their current amounts. The problems in the ME theater have arisen because our forces are being used in a way they were never designed to be used.
When/if we withdraw from Iraq and Afghanistan, you’ll see a period of refit and restore, and then I imagine a gradual shifting in the force structure as the powers that be determine that the awesome ability to engage and defeat the enemy is now only a part of the overall military role of the future.
IMHO the world can never revert to the situations of yesterday,Globalism in business is a fact of life whether we like it or not,we have instantaneous world communication whether by phone or internet,we can watch on TV events on the otherside of the world as they happen and so on.
I think that the world will increasingly become divided up into superstates amongst the developed nations just as the E.C. is becoming larger and larger and is actually turning away countries who wish to join.
I think N.America will increasingly become integrated(As in Canada/U.S.//Mexico)maybe in time Central American states becoming amalgamated.
I think that is quite a strong possibility of a new cold war if Russia keeps sliding to the right.
I think that the West should stop trying to act as World Policeman as for every perceived wrong that we try to right we create several more and the knowledge that its likely that we’ll jump in to help actually encourages people in the third world to instigate conflicts that they would not otherwise contemplate.
I think that in the West illegal recreational drugs should be reviewed as like it or loathe it their use,particulary in the U.K. is at epidemic proportions,I have no cite for this I am extrapolating from my personal experience of people I work with and come into contact with.
Illegal drugs can not be categorised as being the province of the “criminal classes” as leading figures in business,sport and entertainment are amongst some of the most prolific users(I am of course referring to Cocaine use here.)
I suspect that the streets will become emptier as more people socialise and are entertained via the net and video games.
I also think that genuine terrorism will become more prevalent and recreational terrorism will become more commonplace.
Recreational terrorism ? its where people carry out terrorist acts for the thrill of it as opposed to any genuine ideological beliefs ,we already have them in the U.K. under the name of the Animal Liberation Front amongst others.
Global overpopulation will become even worse with all the associated problems of strife,famine,pollution,depletion of resources and loss of habitat .
Finally when all my predictions are proved 100% correct in the coming years I expect enthusiasts to decode my shopping lists and memos to colleagues, to PROVE that I predicted the coming of the the E.Ts from the Andromeda galaxy in the year 2091 and actually knew the aliens names !(They wont of course decypher this from my writings until long after the event has actually happened )and various other events.
I dont ask for adulation from future generations,just a hundred foot statue of me with a plaque saying"Fuck you Nostrodamus you AMATEUR".
Sorry if i’m serious for too long I get bored.
(1) Nationalism is not dead: look at Kosovo as an example of that.
(2) The USA is “the only superpower” only in military terms. The European Union is its equal is an economic force, and is growing in importance; China will soon catch up, and India isn’t that far behind. As WW2, and as the end of the Soviet bloc teach us, in the longer term economic power is more important than military power.
(3) Why do you want to “unify the world”? What’s important is to maintain peaceful relations if possible, and to reduce barriers to international trade; but you can do that without having a single world government.
Actually at that time the U.K had the ability to destroy most of the Soviet Unions urban civilisation west of the Urals with SLBMS but being thrifty we also had quite a few air delivered Nukes in the QMs stores as well.
I say “at that time” because our capability is now very much increased.
Also U.K. special forces were tasked with taking out Warsaw pact Nuclear strike forces.
Britain NEVER relied on America fighting for us because we knew that the American electorate might not be prepared to fight the third world war on our behalf,we love you guys but you turned up late for both world wars and we suspected that WW3 might not last the several years it might take for you to make up your mind to join in .
Apart from that we fought alongside you in Korea,fought and WON our own Vietnam(Malaya)using only conscript troops,successfully defended Malaya from Indonesia’s territorial ambitions again using only conscript troops,beat the Argentinians,fought in Gulf 1 and 2 and are now daily receiving body bags from Afghan and Iraq where we are backing you up our best mate and our best ally.
Out of curiosity, why do you suppose ‘in state tuition’ is often as low as 25% of ‘out of state tuition’?
:rolleyes: Sorry we couldn’t get there sooner, old bean.
Yeah, but…what have you done for us lately? 
I was assuming that state schools were subsidized by state governments, not the national government. Even if I’m wrong, the point that it’s a lot harder for most American kids to afford university schooling than it is for some of our more progressive neighbors.
This is just plain wrong.
Going to a community college for two years and then a state school for two years after that costs roughly 20% of what a similar private school would cost. Commuting from off campus also makes things much cheaper.
Loans would easily cover any shortfall and still leave this student with miniscule school debt compared to their private school peers.
I know, I thought a private school was “better” and now I’m paying the balance in school debt.
Its all very well being sorry AFTER the event but we felt such idiots sitting in the bar for three years while evreyone sniggered behind our backs and said that we either were "Billy No Mates "or that we had been stood up for a date!
They are, but it’s universal AFAIK. Are states not part of the nation?
See Justin Bailey’s post. My wife financed herself through college and we’re paying for my education as I go. I’ve never in my life met or even heard of an American who sincerely wanted an education and couldn’t afford it.
The U.S. spends more on defense than the rest of the world’s countries combined. It is 65 percent of U.S. discretionary spending. Link
We wouldn’t have had to show up at all if you Europeans hadn’t started both of them. 
Nice post.
The odd thing about the Unipolar world is that the US has been experiencing relative decline for, oh, 40+ years: the remainder of the world has grown faster than the US.
This could be called the Pre-China age. We’re a lot like Britain in 1890: it’s understood that we’re the top dog. It’s understood by calm observers that this will not last forever.
It is in the US national security interest to pass the torch to a democratic and non-resentful China, presumably near the middle of this century. As the economic historian Bradford DeLong recently argued: