Debate why the United States will/won't continue to be the sole hegemon for the rest of the century

UmQasaan

UmQasaan

”How did he acquire Semper Fidelis? Through jihad”
kiwifarms.net
Joined
Jan 13, 2022
Do we still have the bombs? There's your answer. :woo:

 
Honestly I'm not sure the AmeriKKKan Empyre will survive the 21st century. It suffers from a lot of the same problems the Weimar Republic or maybe the late Roman Empire did. Both had runaway inflation, for one.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: AMHOLIO, Toolbox, Red Hood and 1 other person
We're already slipping down the ladder.

我想我应该学普通话
(guess I should learn Mandarin)
 
  • Feels
Reactions: AMHOLIO
The US gov started it by removing money from any material standard, but giving manufacturing to random developing countries, mostly China, sold out the rest of the economic power. All that's left is tech and it's experiencing some pretty high brain drain. Well, tech combined with medical, which is admittedly still fairly ahead of even other western countries.
 
Duke Nukem said:
Honestly I'm not sure the AmeriKKKan Empyre will survive the 21st century. It suffers from a lot of the same problems the Weimar Republic or maybe the late Roman Empire did. Both had runaway inflation, for one.
Click to expand...
I think the late roman republic fits more. The roman empire took a real bad beating for centuries before it collapsed. And Weimar Germany was never built too stand. Late Rome makes more sense because it dealt with the same problems we deal with now. Our institution cannot catch up too the changing social and economic landscape. And many people have different interpretations on how it should and does look like.

Also regardless of where American lands in the next 100, 200 or 300 years, I doubt any successive government will identify itself as completely different to what came before. At least in name. The roman republic still considered itself a republic even when the last say came down too one person. We will likely shift our government overton window in how it operates too the point that its wholly different to what it was originally intended to do.
 
  • Feels
  • Agree
  • Winner
Reactions: Raoul_Duke, Beak Thing and AMHOLIO
FatmanFatfist said:
I think the late roman republic fits more. The roman empire took a real bad beating for centuries before it collapsed. And Weimar Germany was never built too stand. Late Rome makes more sense because it dealt with the same problems we deal with now. Our institution cannot catch up too the changing social and economic landscape. And many people have different interpretations on how it should and does look like.

Also regardless of where American lands in the next 100, 200 or 300 years, I doubt any successive government will identify itself as completely different to what came before. At least in name. The roman republic still considered itself a republic even when the last say came down too one person. We will likely shift our government overton window in how it operates too the point that its wholly different to what it was originally intended to do.
Click to expand...
True, people mostly think of the empire rather than the republic when it comes to the Romans though, but you're probably correct on that front. A lot of people don't understand how relatively democratic or republican forms of government (Athenian Greece, Roman Republic, etc.) end up becoming ruled by autocrats of whatever flavor they might be. That's because they've lived their entire lives in countries with relatively liberal regimes compared to what most of human history has endured, and know little else.

A lot of people also don't realize that "democracy" of any particular flavor isn't necessarily a good thing. Majority rule can mean anything from a community that tolerates other races and religions to one where they vote to legalize the homicide of homosexuals, tobacco smokers, or just people who are somehow better off than average.

Also, when certain people like to scream about "our democracy," their mean THEIR "democracy," where dissent is not tolerated.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: Windex and Toolbox
I'm just waiting to see which country has the resources & power to catch up. I hope it's India if we go by population, the country and people can be retarded like all countries but there's effort being put in and I'm not learning mandarin.
 
Hot take here, but I don't think any country will be "taking over" from the USA. Once Pax Americana fails, just like the fall of Pax Romana, everyone underneath it is going to suffer.
China's going to collapse due to their insane population imbalance, as well as the simple truth that China's "strength" comes from being the world's sweatshop.
India might as well be 5 or 6 different countries forced to exist as one unit, with literal illiterate, spear-chucking savages all the way to civilized folks sharing that space. They're unstable as hell and won't last through the economic shock that the end of Pax Americana will bring to the world.
And that's just on the economic side of things. You're going to see a fuckton of armed conflicts erupt once the possibility of American intervention is gone, especially in places where there's already a shit ton of resentment, like Korea or Africa.

If any place in the world could come out the least screwed up, it'd be Eastern Europe and Russia. Russia might benefit from our downfall, since most of their best and brightest fleeing to the West won't be a thing once the West collapses.
 
The Foxtrot said:
If any place in the world could come out the least screwed up, it'd be Eastern Europe and Russia. Russia might benefit from our downfall, since most of their best and brightest fleeing to the West won't be a thing once the West collapses.
Click to expand...
How would Russia survive if China collapses and they go apeshit? They almost went to nuclear war with each other in the late 1960s and China has legitimate claims on Russian territory due to the unequal treaties.
 
Realistic Elephant mk2 said:
How would Russia survive if China collapses and they go apeshit? They almost went to nuclear war with each other in the late 1960s and China has legitimate claims on Russian territory due to the unequal treaties.
Click to expand...
Because China wouldn't "collapse" and still be intact. It'd be another Warlord Period like before/during WW2, except worse due to their shitty infrastructure and complete LACK of a truly self-sufficient economy.
If Russian wanted to neuter China as a threat, they could just blow up the Three Gorges Dam and wipe out a significant portion of China.

And before you say "B-but MUH CHINESE NUKES!!!" again, the Chinese, just like with the USA, don't have the amount of nukes to even try and play a game of Mutually Assured Destruction, nor the range on their launch systems. Don't forget the Russians still have dedicated ABM systems, which were designed to try and combat our Nuclear Triad.

It's as stark a difference as "On a good day we could hit some of your cities in the Far East" versus "We could wipe out the entirety of your country and make sure it glows in the dark for a few thousand years". ALSO don't forget that the Russians aren't the USA, they respond badly to threats at extermination.
 
The Foxtrot said:
Because China wouldn't "collapse" and still be intact. It'd be another Warlord Period like before/during WW2, except worse due to their shitty infrastructure and complete LACK of a truly self-sufficient economy.
If Russian wanted to neuter China as a threat, they could just blow up the Three Gorges Dam and wipe out a significant portion of China.

And before you say "B-but MUH CHINESE NUKES!!!" again, the Chinese, just like with the USA, don't have the amount of nukes to even try and play a game of Mutually Assured Destruction, nor the range on their launch systems. Don't forget the Russians still have dedicated ABM systems, which were designed to try and combat our Nuclear Triad.

It's as stark a difference as "On a good day we could hit some of your cities in the Far East" versus "We could wipe out the entirety of your country and make sure it glows in the dark for a few thousand years". ALSO don't forget that the Russians aren't the USA, they respond badly to threats at extermination.
Click to expand...
Yeah, but China has 10x the population of Russia. If things get bad those young men are going to be armed and marching north, east and west for new loot and territory like the Mongols.
 
Realistic Elephant mk2 said:
Yeah, but China has 10x the population of Russia. If things get bad those young men are going to be armed and marching north, east and west for new loot and territory like the Mongols.
Click to expand...
And most of them are nothing like the Mongols. They are "little emperors", in Chinese slang. AKA, they're China's version of soyboys. Not to mention they'll be too busy dying of starvation or disease to even attempt to fuck with Rosguard.
Why are you people under the stupid belief that China is anything but a giant fucking bughive filled with useless eaters that have had every ounce of aggression and strength beaten/bred/conditioned out of them? And what makes you think the Russians will do anything but shell the fuck out of them, or just straight up gas them? If anything, the Russians will be the ones pushing south!
 
The Foxtrot said:
And most of them are nothing like the Mongols. They are "little emperors", in Chinese slang. AKA, they're China's version of soyboys. Not to mention they'll be too busy dying of starvation or disease to even attempt to fuck with Rosguard.
Why are you people under the stupid belief that China is anything but a giant fucking bughive filled with useless eaters that have had every ounce of aggression and strength beaten/bred/conditioned out of them? And what makes you think the Russians will do anything but shell the fuck out of them, or just straight up gas them? If anything, the Russians will be the ones pushing south!
Click to expand...
Yeah, but there are 1.4 billion of them with an economic infrastructure far more developed than anything Russia has ever accomplished, ever under the USSR. Eve if all of that goes to shit, it takes time...Russia is a weak. aging and dying shithole that can't even defeat the poorest country in Europe. It has taken more L's over the past year than Gunt.

India will just watch and wait.
 
  • Dumb
Reactions: The Foxtrot
Realistic Elephant mk2 said:
Yeah, but there are 1.4 billion of them with an economic infrastructure far more developed than anything Russia has ever accomplished, ever under the USSR. Eve if all of that goes to shit, it takes time...Russia is a weak. aging and dying shithole that can't even defeat the poorest country in Europe. It has taken more L's over the past year than Gunt.

India will just watch and wait.
Click to expand...
1.4 billion, most of whom are aging (read: China's version of Baby Boomers). The ones that are of fighting age are meek, docile bugmen.
And I'm sorry, but you're a retard not worth talking to if you think Russia is a "dying shithole" and that they're losing to Ukraine. Or that China has "more developed economic infrastructure" than Russia when most of China still lives in the fucking Stone Age, or a bastard hybrid between 2022 and the 1930s, and it's all geared towards building shit "Fast and Cheap" for the West.

And India will keep being a bunch of street shitters arguing over which is TRUE AND HONEST: Islam or Hinduism.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back