What I think the larger question is, is how will inter-personal relations between countries change when we can’t just GO TO WAR like we used to and even the most insane actors are pretty rational by today’s standard. How will diplomacy change and how will the world look when larger alliances are made and warmachines get bigger and bigger? When virtually EVERYONE has a nuke, will we decide that we just can’t go to war anymore?
Also, it seems that in UN talks and stuff, the US is always a leader of discussion and of action. Will we get to a point where countries’ economic viability, or combined viability, can rival the US and tell them what to do?
Two things-when the UK was the sole super power, things were not so bad-the Royal Navy patrolled the seas, suppressed slavery, and generally policed the world. The USA did the same-but now, it is bankrupt. The funny thing is, China (the rising power) has no desire or inclination to take on the role of world cop-they prefer to make money instead. Maybe that is not such a bad idea-Africa wasn’t very nice during the reign of the superpowers-maybe business and profit making are the way to go. What would China do, faced with a civil war in a place like Somalia? Most likely, nothing.
I agree. It seems to me that back when you had “major powers”, “minor powers” and everyone else, there was a lot more contention, strange alliances and very bloody wars, in comparison to the nearly 70 years of relative peace we’ve enjoyed since the rise of the superpower(s) post WWII.
The UK was never a “superpower”. It was a “great power”. France, Germany, Russia, Austria, the Ottoman Empire and so on were equal, or near equal, or superior in terms of economic, cultural, and military strength. There never was a time when the UK was stronger than its next two or three rivals combined.
Yes, the Royal Navy was the largest and most capable navy in the world, but naval power is only one metric of military strength, and the UK army was much smaller and less capable than France or Russia or Germany/Prussia. Obviously this is because the UK was an island nation and the naval focus made sense. But the UK always had to rely on continental allies when fighting continental wars. They brought the navy and their allies brought the armies.
In the period we’re talking about France was the closest thing to a superpower in Europe, especially in the Napoleonic Era. The UK was never even close to the economic and military and cultural power of France.
Didn’t the UK directly control a quarter of the world’s population at the height of its empire? I’m pretty sure France never got near that. The US *certainly *never did.
I think it depends on how quickly the US loses its current hegemony. If it’s quick, the way the Brits fell apart, I’m afraid for the world. I can see some populist leader in the US actually ginning up a serious war in the panic that would accompany that kind of discontinuity especially because (as with Britain) it would have serious short term economic effects too.
If we can somehow manage to take our foot off the gas and slowly return to being “just” a Great Power, alongside the obvious contenders of India, China, Brazil, and maybe the EU if they ever get their act together, then I think we will handle it with grace and even a smidgeon of our old values intact. This is particularly true since at the same time the US will become far more diverse ethnically and culturally, so the forces of reaction won’t be able to play religious or racial gambits.
This is of course assuming nation states even matter in the future. We may be moving towards a different model of social organization and competition, and the “US” may wind up a sort of nostalgic atavism like the HRE was.
I don’t think the US is still a super power, they owe too much money to china and traitorous company’s continue to send their jobs to China. I think it is time to notice China is the newest super power. Thankfully the US and China need each other, China needs the US to buy the American companies goods, and the US needs the goods from those American companies in China.
Because in modern times wars of conquest and outright empires aren’t typically profitable. And there’s been plenty of war, the US and USSR manipulated and funded immense amounts of fighting across the world; we just count that as “peace” because most of the people dying were and are poor and brown. If a few million people die in Africa or Asia or South America, that’s not real people dying like it would be if they were white people in Europe during WWII.
America re-elected Bush and has gone along with the Obama coverup of the Bush torture programs; we’ve made it clear that as a nation we’re just fine with the torture and murder at Abu Ghraib and in the rest of the “extraordinary rendition” torture network. Were just embarrassed to having gotten caught.
In what universe is $2 trillion and growing not significant? The EU’s GDP is 13% larger than the US’s by my calculations with half of Eastern Europe still in dire poverty.
What makes a country a superpower? As I said before, China’s economy is about half the size of the US, and it’s population is 4 times greater. That means your average Chinese person gets by on 1/8th the income of an average American. When the average Chinese person has an income to match the average Mexican, then let’s come back to talk about how China is the newest superpower.
I think I’ve already conceded that there are many hypocritical elements in US history and culture. I’m just saying that I don’t see us as any more villainous than, say, Great Britain, Europe, France, or Russia, and certainly less oppressive to our own citizens than North Korea or Saudi Arabia.
I seem to recall a number of people from Abu G going to jail, and I personally know people who were blamed even though they could not have had knowledge or control over it. That tells me that ‘we’ (whoever ‘we’ is) are far from unanimous in our support for torture.
In the 19th century, the Great Powers were those who had to be consulted in all European affairs, even if they had nothing to do with the situation at a first glance - eg, when there was a conflict between Austria and Russia, then Prussia, France and the UK also had a say in its solution, could demand a compensation for any gains the others made and exchanged the highest class of diplomats, the true ambassadors.
If we convert that the current Global Powers (thereby sidestepping the Superpowers question), that would be those who claim officially or inofficially the right to intervene, interfere and generally meddle globally, ie outside of its neighborhood. The US fits that bill, but also the EU and its more powerful members. Russia today is active in the CIS, the Shanghai Org. and Syria, so I think they count as well. China is rather active in Africa, but only economical, not political or military. India is actibve in South Asia, but was not even able to effectively project power to Sri Lanka, so they probably don’t count at all. Brazil does not seem to be active anywhere beyond Southa America, AFAICT.
OTOH, the modern equivalent of the “Concert of Europe” would be either the Veto Powers of the UNSC or perhaps the G8.
What the citizens of the country make is not what makes the super power. The money and weaponry the country has along with the population that could over run another large country does. Could the US over come China in a war? Or visa-versa? Both have nukes to spare, both could deliver those nukes, can both afford to make more nukes or more war?
If China ever does catch up to the US in per capita GDP it will have an economy 5 times as large as the US economy. In that case the US will no longer be a superpower - it will be what Britain is today.
The other aspect of this is that China only needs to have a per capita GDP equal to 20% of the US per capita GDP to have an economy as big as the US. Some economists are predicting that China will economically overtake the US in as little as 3 years.
I’m kind of curious if we’ll see some sort of latter-day NATO with the goal being for multiple countries to strategically stand against China. I assume India would be the major player therein, if it wasn’t the U.S.
