# the end of the pax americana? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 21, 2018, 4:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-end-of-the-pax-americana/816516 "2018-06-21T16:07:13Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2018, 4:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-end-of-the-pax-americana/816516/21 "2018-06-22T16:24:42Z")
> [@I\_can\_t\_think\_of\_a\_name](#): > > Also, other countries have been on the rise and there has been a general turning away from relying on the protection of a superpower country. For example, many African countries are now doing a **lot** more in the way of varying degrees of alliance with each other in addition to the individual countries being a lot better off. Which might be a healthy trend. South Korea and Japan would be better off assuming the US defense umbrella is shaky than firm. ---
**Author:** ![Delicious](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/dbc845/32.png) [@Delicious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Delicious)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2018, 7:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-end-of-the-pax-americana/816516/22 "2018-06-22T19:09:57Z")
> [@puddleglum](#): > > The article conflates trade and US influence. The US is losing influence around the world and will continue to do so. It has nothing to do with who the president is or how much foreigners like him. Foreigners loved Obama yet the diminishment of US influence continued apace during his term. What is causing the US to lose influence is the realization that the US no longer wants to be the world’s policeman. Iraq and Afghanistan have showed that the US no longer has the stomach for a fight. Demographics mean that the US is going to follow the example of Europe and start spending so much money on old people’s care that it does not have the money for a huge military. Syria is the first post pax Americana conflict. The US acted like just another nation. Some limited help to rebels and some assistance with bombing but mostly just ineffectual tut tutting while hundreds of thousands of people are killed. > The replacement will be regional hegemonies. Germany will be the hegemon of Western Europe, Russia of Eastern Europe, China of North Asia, India of South Asia. Saudi Arabia and Iran are fighting proxy wars in Yemen and Syria to determine who will be hegemon in the Middle East with Turkey trying to get involved too. > The rise of economic populism and trade fights is a totally separate phenomenon. The sharp increase of immigration in the US and Europe have led to a rise in populist parties. Populism is always against free trade. Hillary though TPP was the gold standard of trade agreements and as soon as she saw the polling disavowed it. Of course as soon as she did that Krugman jumped on board and more or less disavowed free trade. Now that Trump is doing the one grandstanding of trade he has gone back to being for free trade. Trade is why we have these Pax’s. Britain and America didn’t build sea ruling fleets just for the fun of it, they were to protect trade…I imagine the Roman roads were for the same reason. I expect China will be next with their Belt & Road idea, at some point they’ll decide they need military force to protect the trade route and we’ll have Pax China ---
**Author:** ![I\_can\_t\_think\_of\_a\_name](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/ed8c4c/32.png) [@I\_can\_t\_think\_of\_a\_name](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/I_can_t_think_of_a_name)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2018, 11:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-end-of-the-pax-americana/816516/23 "2018-06-22T23:33:58Z")
> [@Delicious](#): > > [ol] > [li]We don’t elect the Prime Minister, they’re chosen from the elected MPs (occasionally Lords)[/li][li]The PM’s agenda is generally that of the majority party, if it isn’t, they’ll get a leadership challenge.[/li][li]Have you noticed a lot of Brexit related issues sailing through parliament recently? The PM’s power is severely limited if they aren’t fully backed by a majority of MPs.[/li][li]Do they not teach this stuff in school anymore?[/li][/ol] I never said we elect the Prime Minister directly. Where did you get that from? The PM can (and frequently does) coerce their MPs to vote in a particular way and even order them to do so. That’s what the whips are for. The system is geared towards concentrating power in the hands of the PM and is becoming even more so. The only severe limit on their power occurs when their party doesn’t have an outright majority, but we have very close to a two party state so it’s common for one party to have an outright majority. Yes, it’s true that another member of the party can mount a leadership challenge. How often has a PM been replaced in that way? How does it significantly reduce the power of the office of PM? Perhaps your school level politics is a little over-simplified. ---
**Author:** ![I\_can\_t\_think\_of\_a\_name](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/ed8c4c/32.png) [@I\_can\_t\_think\_of\_a\_name](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/I_can_t_think_of_a_name)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2018, 11:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-end-of-the-pax-americana/816516/24 "2018-06-22T23:56:03Z")
> [@Delicious](#): > > Trade is why we have these Pax’s. Britain and America didn’t build sea ruling fleets just for the fun of it, they were to protect trade…I imagine the Roman roads were for the same reason. I expect China will be next with their Belt & Road idea, at some point they’ll decide they need military force to protect the trade route and we’ll have Pax China The stated main reason for the Roman roads was troop deployment and the stated reason for troop deployment (and to a large extent the entire existence of the military) was to protect Rome from attackers. There was a very strong tendency to portray Roman military actions as defensive, even when they weren’t. Perhaps a result of how often Rome was attacked or at least threatened with attack. Trade was part of that, too. Rome’s military expenditure was far higher than normal and that required a strong economy, which required trade. But protecting trade wasn’t the stated reason for the roads. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2018, 3:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-end-of-the-pax-americana/816516/25 "2018-06-23T03:16:36Z")
When I see the various nations of Europe doubling their defense budgets and creating alliances without any US involvement, or when I see the same thing in the Pacific theater, when I see the Chinese get really serious about it’s military wrt training, when I see Russia…well, not be a dystopian authoritarian hell hole and get it’s economy geared up to be able to spend serious amounts on all the fancy toys they have built a few of, when I see countries be able to ignore the US wrt trade or military matters or basically anything, well, I’ll start to take seriously the idea that the US has lost it’s power. When I start to see countries engaged in large scale military adventures and not proxy conflicts then I’ll take seriously the idea that the ‘pax americana’ has really ended. Currently none of the above is a serious rival to the US, none of them can simply ignore the US wrt trade or military matters. Even with the Buffoon in Chief, even with someone as clueless about using and wielding soft power or an inkling of understanding of trade, the military, international relations or basically anything besides how to bloviate and tweet nonsense…even with that, the US is still incredibly powerful, and exactly zero countries are in a position to simply ignore us and do their own thing without regard to the US. The day may come when the US goes the way of the British Empire or the other empires listed by several in this thread. It might even happen in our lifetimes. But that day isn’t here yet, and frankly I’m not seeing indications that any contender is without feet of clay and issues even worse than ours. ---
**Author:** ![bump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7c8e57/32.png) [@bump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bump)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2018, 3:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-end-of-the-pax-americana/816516/26 "2018-06-23T03:27:05Z")
I think it’s a bit hyperbolic; the rest of the world knows that in no less than four, and no more than eight years, they’ll have a new US Presidential administration, assuming no assassinations or untimely deaths. So while Trump may be fucking things up right and left, I have to figure that most nations won’t paint his successor with the same brush in 2020 or 2024 (God forbid!) In other words, I think a lot of the lack of diplomatic goodwill is more or less temporary; look at how fast we rebounded under Obama versus the Bush II years, for a good example of what I’m talking about. ---
**Author:** ![Lamoral](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lamoral/32/16078_2.png) [@Lamoral](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamoral)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2018, 5:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-end-of-the-pax-americana/816516/27 "2018-06-23T05:39:26Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > The difference is that our allies across both oceans knew that they could depend on America to be there if Russia or China threatened. Now America has a President who seems to be more on the side of Russia and China (and even North Korea!) than of our traditional allies. “Be there?” What’s “be there”? Launch nuclear bombs? Threaten to launch nuclear bombs? Move nuclear bombs conspicuously from one location to another? I’d rather we not have any part of that kind of shit. Vast countries like Russia and China will have skirmishes with neighbors and attempt to consolidate historically-contested territories. It’s been ever thus. The idea that America or anyone else needs to stick their wang into that hornet’s nest and risk nuclear conflict over anything short of World War II-style invasion and genocide, is insane. My take on Trump’s attitude, in any case, is that Trump looked at the world (as much as he is capable of doing so) and saw Europe beset by terrorism and a refugee crisis; he saw the horrific pictures from the Bataclan (pictures which I’ll never forget because those long smears of blood on the floor were so fucking disgusting), he saw many other terrorist attacks all over Europe and he saw how horrified Americans were by this. He witnessed the rise of nationalism in Europe; he witnessed Brexit; he witnessed growing anti-EU sentiment, and he witnessed a sort of Russophilia or general admiration for the cultures of Eastern Europe over Western Europe among conservatives. What did he take away from all this? “Europe dropped the ball, they’ve allowed their countries to get all fucked up, they’re not important to me.” Furthermore, from the position of the global political stage (which includes military power, something that Trump clearly respects), Trump is thinking: “Russia, China, the Koreas, these are the power players right now. The Europeans are has-beens.” None of this is remotely surprising to me. ---
**Author:** ![Wesley\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wesley_clark/32/20581_2.png) [@Wesley\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wesley_Clark)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2018, 3:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-end-of-the-pax-americana/816516/28 "2018-06-23T15:46:37Z")
I think on some level, Trump’s rise is just a symptom of America’s decline relative to China. China currently has a GDP of 12 trillion or so. But if that double again in 10 years (which it should if they maintain 7% growth rates) they will be at 24 trillion. Their PPP GDP may be 40 trillion. Plus China is an innovative nation which is building a scientific infrastructure. So they will become a world leader in politics, economics, science, technology, poverty, climate change, etc. even more than they are today. But anyway, yeah America is an empire in decline. The rise of white nationalism is in part a symptom of this. I just hope the Chinese manage to build a better world. My concern is that the Chinese do not value human rights in nations they form alliances with. Hopefully Western Europe and other OECD nations (Canada and Australia) can form a strong enough bulwark to make sure human rights are still on the international agenda even if China doesn’t value them. ---
**Author:** ![Lamoral](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lamoral/32/16078_2.png) [@Lamoral](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamoral)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2018, 4:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-end-of-the-pax-americana/816516/29 "2018-06-23T16:04:17Z")
> [@Wesley\_Clark](#): > > But anyway, yeah America is an empire in decline. The rise of white nationalism is in part a symptom of this. I don’t think that America should have been an empire in the first place. ---
**Author:** ![bump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7c8e57/32.png) [@bump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bump)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2018, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-end-of-the-pax-americana/816516/30 "2018-06-23T17:15:44Z")
> [@Jacquernagy](#): > > I don’t think that America should have been an empire in the first place. Explain how we were an empire in the first place; the most we ever had in terms of imperial possessions were some of the post-Spanish American War places such as the Phillipines, Guam and Puerto Rico, of which only the latter two are still part of the US, and a few late 19th century places in the Pacific such as American Samoa and Hawaii, although the latter has been integrated as the 50th state. It’s true that we’ve engaged in building an American hegemony, but that’s not quite the same thing as an empire, and that’s an important distinction. We don’t send our people to go be governors of anywhere but our rather paltry (in historical terms) imperial possessions, and AFAIK, they’re popularly elected anyway. In other words, we’re not looking for direct control and integration of territories like an empire would; we are more interested in being a hegemon. ---
**Author:** ![asahi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asahi/32/8693_2.png) [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2018, 10:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-end-of-the-pax-americana/816516/31 "2018-06-23T22:29:14Z")
> [@bump](#): > > In other words, I think a lot of the lack of diplomatic goodwill is more or less temporary; look at how fast we rebounded under Obama versus the Bush II years, for a good example of what I’m talking about. Tearing up existing trade agreements, threatening an all-out trade war, and throwing people out of work isn’t something countries are going to just forgive and forget. And we can’t just pretend that Trump is some natural disaster that happened; American voters, by the millions, put him there. If I were living in Europe or Japan, I would be pissed as hell that a so-called “ally.” I wouldn’t have much confidence that a new president means the dawn of a new day. It would probably seem more like a brief respite until our political system devolves even further. ---
**Author:** ![asahi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asahi/32/8693_2.png) [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2018, 12:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-end-of-the-pax-americana/816516/32 "2018-06-24T00:04:29Z")
> [@Northern\_Piper](#): > > The United States has been a major world leader because of its ideals, not just its armed forces. The more it abandons its ideals and simply relies on force for leadership, the less leadership it will have, internationally. The US has been a major world leader because it was blessed by geography that placed us thousands of miles from predatory neighbors. We also took in some of the world’s best and brightest and created an environment in which we could all benefit from their talents. And after WWII, we rebuilt Europe and Japan and turned them into capitalist markets and vital global partners. These partnerships allowed us to grow into an economic juggernaut and these alliances meant we could use their land, ports of call, and airspace to project our military power. These alliances were a critical bulwark against capitalism. But more than that, we created a world in which we valued cooperation over competition. We’re now backsliding into the world that existed before 1945, a world in which countries view each other as competitors rather than partners. American nationalism is going to inevitably fuel nationalism as a reaction to being abandoned by their largest and most valuable partner. And we’re getting closer and closer to the moment when such changes will be irreversible for a generation. Nationalist, authoritarian movements are gaining across much of Europe, and when those dominoes begin to fall, it won’t matter whom we elect. In fact, if Europe sets itself on fire with a nationalist wave that sweeps the country and pulls the EU down with it, we will probably be LESS likely to vote for another Obama. ---
**Author:** ![Lamoral](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lamoral/32/16078_2.png) [@Lamoral](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamoral)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2018, 1:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-end-of-the-pax-americana/816516/33 "2018-06-24T01:08:14Z")
> [@asahi](#): > > The US has been a major world leader because it was blessed by geography that placed us thousands of miles from predatory neighbors. We also took in some of the world’s best and brightest and created an environment in which we could all benefit from their talents. And after WWII, we rebuilt Europe and Japan and turned them into capitalist markets and vital global partners. These partnerships allowed us to grow into an economic juggernaut and these alliances meant we could use their land, ports of call, and airspace to project our military power. These alliances were a critical bulwark against capitalism. I assume you meant communism, not capitalism. But, #1, communism is no longer a threat to us, and #2, projecting military power is different now than it was 50 years ago. There isn’t really any reason for America to be projecting military power short of ICBMs, and if it comes to that, everyone is fucked anyway. I don’t see a diminished capacity for “projecting military power” out of Europe as necessarily being a bad thing. Just who is it that will be the recipient of that projection, anyway? Whoever it is, chances are we’d be better off not doing it in the first place. ---
**Author:** ![asahi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asahi/32/8693_2.png) [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2018, 2:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-end-of-the-pax-americana/816516/34 "2018-06-24T02:04:19Z")
> [@Jacquernagy](#): > > I assume you meant communism, not capitalism. But, #1, communism is no longer a threat to us, and #2, projecting military power is different now than it was 50 years ago. There isn’t really any reason for America to be projecting military power short of ICBMs, and if it comes to that, everyone is fucked anyway. I don’t see a diminished capacity for “projecting military power” out of Europe as necessarily being a bad thing. Just who is it that will be the recipient of that projection, anyway? Whoever it is, chances are we’d be better off not doing it in the first place. I’m hammered. I’ll respond later…like much. ---
**Author:** ![Wesley\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wesley_clark/32/20581_2.png) [@Wesley\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wesley_Clark)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2018, 2:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-end-of-the-pax-americana/816516/35 "2018-06-24T02:53:27Z")
> [@Jacquernagy](#): > > I don’t think that America should have been an empire in the first place. We did do some evil things. But we did try to have some ideals and morals about western values. However once those ideals or morals got in the way of our geopolitical or economic agenda, they went out the window. ---
**Author:** ![WillFarnaby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/willfarnaby/32/514_2.png) [@WillFarnaby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WillFarnaby)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2018, 3:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-end-of-the-pax-americana/816516/36 "2018-06-24T03:21:38Z")
> [@Wesley\_Clark](#): > > We did do some evil things. But we did try to have some ideals and morals about western values. > > However once those ideals or morals got in the way of our geopolitical or economic agenda, they went out the window. Lol. When did this turn occur before or after the Native American genocide? ---
**Author:** ![Wesley\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wesley_clark/32/20581_2.png) [@Wesley\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wesley_Clark)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2018, 5:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-end-of-the-pax-americana/816516/37 "2018-06-24T05:25:36Z")
> [@WillFarnaby](#): > > Lol. When did this turn occur before or after the Native American genocide? Most of those deaths were due to disease. Blame whatever deity you believe in. The US did help liberate areas from the nazis and the Japanese. South Korea is much better off than North Korea. Western Germany was much better than Eastern Germany. I believe the US helped latin America transition to democracy in the 80s and 90s. But obviously we weren’t perfect, our economic and geopolitical strategies always came first. I once heard a speech by someone living in Myanmar (over a decade ago). I asked her what we could do as US citizens to put pressure on our government to do more. She said the US already did quite a bit for justice there. I would rather have a nation like Canada be the world leader in promoting democracy. They are likely more consistently moral than the US. Hopefully western Europe, Canada & Australia will ally to promote western values as a bulkwark against China, and while the US is mired in white nationalist dysfunction. ---
**Author:** ![Flyer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/flyer/32/7298_2.png) [@Flyer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Flyer)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2018, 5:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-end-of-the-pax-americana/816516/38 "2018-06-24T05:27:06Z")
I think that at least half of the people in this thread would greatly benefit from reading _Empires of Trust_ by Thomas Madden. > **[Empires of Trust: How Rome Built--and America Is Building--a New World: Madden,...](https://www.amazon.com/Empires-Trust-Built-America-Building/dp/0452295459)** > > Empires of Trust: How Rome Built--and America Is Building--a New World \[Madden, Thomas F.\] on Amazon.com. \*FREE\* shipping on qualifying offers. Empires of Trust: How Rome Built--and America Is Building--a New World ---
**Author:** ![asahi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asahi/32/8693_2.png) [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2018, 2:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-end-of-the-pax-americana/816516/39 "2018-06-24T14:03:39Z")
> [@Jacquernagy](#): > > I assume you meant communism, not capitalism. But, #1, communism is no longer a threat to us, and #2, projecting military power is different now than it was 50 years ago. There isn’t really any reason for America to be projecting military power short of ICBMs, and if it comes to that, everyone is fucked anyway. I don’t see a diminished capacity for “projecting military power” out of Europe as necessarily being a bad thing. Just who is it that will be the recipient of that projection, anyway? Whoever it is, chances are we’d be better off not doing it in the first place. Whether diminished power is a good or bad thing is open to debate. I guess what I’m trying to say is that the decline of American power will have consequences. It will leave a vacuum, and that vacuum won’t stay empty for long. What should concern everyone is whether or not there is an alliance in place that is capable of being an effective counter-weight to countries that might have territorial ambitions. If I’m understanding you correctly, I’m in agreement (and have argued before) that we might be better off taking a step back in Europe and elsewhere. As long as we have the alliances with the European Union and partners like Japan, South Korea, and others, we’re fine. But what I see right now with Trump is the end of those alliances. Our allies today could well be our competitors tomorrow. The seeds are being sown for nationalist governments to sprout up all over the globe. It’s going to be a different world that Americans live in when that time comes, and we will have a lot less to say about the outcome if they don’t operate in our economic and political interests. ---
**Author:** ![Hector\_St\_Clare](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/b5ac83/32.png) [@Hector\_St\_Clare](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hector_St_Clare)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2018, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-end-of-the-pax-americana/816516/40 "2018-06-24T17:55:01Z")
> [@Jacquernagy](#): > > I don’t think that America should have been an empire in the first place. +1000 to this. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-end-of-the-pax-americana/816516.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-end-of-the-pax-americana/816516.md?page=3)