[kawaiikouhai]

Exactly. I had this exact thought experiment of "What if America were no longer Hegemon".

So, I looked at other historic examples. The British, Dutch, and Spanish. (You can add German/Austrian and the French, close contenders).

They're all still very well-off!

[lxgr]

I actually grew up in one of these, and I fully agree.

Yes, my country was significantly larger and more influential a century ago. It even was an empire, with an emperor and all! But no, I don't feel like the average person born back then had a better life than me.

[sebastianz]

> I don't feel like the average person born back then had a better life than me.

This is true for (almost) anywhere in the world. Everybody has a better life _on average_ than 100 years ago.

> It even was an empire, with an emperor and all!

But the fact that your country was the capital of an empire a century ago is a large reason for why it is richer now, and generational wealth was indeed passed on.

This perhaps is visible if you look at countries that used to be subservient to yours, in empire times. Are they not - relatively - still poorer than the former empire capital?

[lxgr]

Oh, definitely! Many former empires still benefit from their history.

But all I'm saying is that there's a path to preserving wealth beyond outright remaining an empire. (Whether it's still possible after making hypothetical full reparations is a difficult question I don't know the answer to.)

[unclebucknasty]

What you're missing is the role the U.S. has historically played in preserving and protecting democracy in the world and, particularly, Europe.

If America was suddenly no longer a hegemon, it would be qualitatively different. There are other hegemons in the world that would step into the void left by the U.S., and it would be their influence that would be felt most the world over, including by the countries you named.

[matwood]

Exactly. People act like if the US steps back there will suddenly be peace and everyone will get along. What will happen is someone else will step into the US position or multiple someone’s will fight for that position. Neither are probably good for the US or the world.

Another problem (which Trump is idiotically pushing) is for everyone else to grow their military. Do we really think the world is safer with more countries having larger militaries that are an election or coup away from no longer being allies?

[jajko]

At this point, and from this point onward, some other hegemons sound darn good compared to US. russia aint one, they simply lack competence for anything grander than petty squables at their borders. Everybody hates them, inclusing all former soviet bloc countries and only deal with them when they have to.

Ie China is not doing sudden backstabbing of its allies, strongarming weak at their weakest point. In contrary ie it helped develop parts of Africa that were severely neglected by western powers, not for free but that was never the case. They did some not so nice stuff, but so did US in the past, in much higher numbers. Tens of millions of civilians are dead because of failed US policies and invasions which ended in withdrawals and defeats in past 80 years.

With all negative stuff on China (uighur treatment, other cases of human rights violations) its still shines compared to US now. Now for any outsider (>95% of mankind), why should they still ally with US now?

[baq]

Why do you present China as an alternative? I’d you’re a western country, the CCP is not a body you want anything to do with unless you’re desperate. They do not share western values. If you don’t ally with the US, you really, really want to be a separate center of power, because everyone who isn’t US wants to exploit you dry and admits it openly.

[surgical_fire]

Why not?

China seems a lot more reliable than the US, and has seem more reliable for quite a while.

You speak as if the US does not exploit others dry. The US is a lot more malignant than you make it sound.

[Hikikomori]

Most of the "protection" and for democracy stuff the US has been up to has been to protect their own corporate interests to extract resources from those countries, see all of South America and some of the middle east.

[baq]

I don’t blame them for how the world works. I’m saying if I need to be under some ‘protection’, I’d rather it is US than China and especially Russia.

[mullingitover]

If Britain were a US state it would be between Mississippi and Alabama in GDP per capita.

Not sure I’d call the place well off. Granted, a lot of the reason they’re in this situation is because they put everything into stopping the Nazis and thus saving the world. The US kinda lucked into inheriting the UK’s wealth.

[jazzyjackson]

GDP is not a measure of wealth let alone well being, it just means Mississippi is more expensive than Cornwall.

Japan is even lower on the list, but personally I’d rather live in Osaka than Mobile.

[dredmorbius]

Though with (for the moment) a rather better social safety net / services provision than the US as a whole, and MS/AL specifically.

I do agree with your larger point, it is however counterbalanced in part. Gross per capita income doesn't reveal the full picture.

[suraci]

The British, Dutch, and Spanish

All whites, all allies of the Hegemon, and most importantly, all colonizers, what a coincidence

if this is a satire, I have to say it's a brilliant one