6 ms·

To the many here that have blithely asserted that a multi-polar world is a good thing, well, while a unipolar hegemony had significant downsides, this is what y

To the many here that have blithely asserted that a multi-polar world is a good thing, well, while a unipolar hegemony had significant downsides, this is what you get when you have a multi-polar world: the poles gearing up to promote their own interests and defend those interests from each other, whether politically, economically or militarily. "Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it" and what seems likely is a repeat of the 1800s and its rivalry between the great powers, only this time with modern arms. May we all survive the coming era of international strife and war.

oblak 4y ago
Only ThrowawayR2's people can bring salvation to the human race. Let there be one ruler, one king.
- ThrowawayR2 4y ago
  The old hegemony is already on its way out or this re-armament and re-militarization wouldn't be happening. You're literally getting your wish. Now everyone is going to have to survive the aftereffects of the resulting power vacuum.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
FpUser 4y ago
Well, if the hegemon had done something productive rather than waving their dick with invasions / bombings / sanctions / political interferences / etc. etc. they might have had more sympathetic view from the outside.
- ThrowawayR2 4y ago
  I knew somebody would pop up to reflexively say this. Let's be clear, I didn't say the hegemon was good, or nice, or just. What I said is that the situation could get much, much worse than it was under the past hegemony.
  - FpUser 4y ago
    >"situation could get much, much worse " Yes it could. And one of the reasons is that over long time nobody will tolerate hegemon telling them how live their lives. Hegemon must be smart enough not to be one but that is not what we have.
  - annadiru 4y ago
    It's not reflexive to critisize US foreign meddling. It IS reflective because it requires considerable consideration to puncture the fabric of US internal propaganda and reach these conclusions. The problem is that it's built on a web of lies and treachery. That's not a very smart attitude to take between whole nations of people. Maybe it is if the end goal is further ethnic domination, subjugation, and/or exterminaton-- which the US has done and still does, systematically. There are bearings a country can take, foreign relations wise, that over the long term that lead to better outcomes and just quality-of-life improvements in general. Benevolence and smart relationship management com ined with military dominamce has immense soft power, of which the U.S. has left unexplored. I just found this reading up on S.Pacific politics: Weiner, Tim (9 October 1994). "C.I.A. Spent Millions to Support Japanese Right in 50's and 60's". The New York Times. Retrieved 29 December 2007. Add japan to the laundry list where these organized, professionalized, politically motivated paramilitary "groups" involve themselves in the democratic process of other nations, with absolutely no control or oversight from the very society they comes from.
    - oldcigarette 4y ago
      Don't confuse the US before the collapse of the soviet union and now. There is a reason it is in the position it is - it actually did stuff countries liked such as rebuilding the world after WWII. When the soviet union collapsed the US needed to pivot - instead a bunch of inept politicians have been doing expedient nothings for 30 years.
- seventytwo 4y ago
  Pretending that “the hegemony” has done nothing but terrible things is intellectually dishonest.
  - FpUser 4y ago
    I am not pretending. I just mentioned bad things sine those are the reason we are getting deeper in shit. Good things were done by many sides but it is irrelevant in the context. I am not dishonest at all. Maybe you are.
    - seventytwo 4y ago
      And the fact that you attribute good things to “many sides”, but bad things solely to “the hegemony” shows no bias whatsoever!
      - FpUser 4y ago
        Whether I have a bias or not is irrelevant. It does not negate who the hegemon is.
data-abuse 4y ago
To be fair, a multi-polar world with the level of technology that we have today is unprecedented. I don't think nations would resort to fighting in the past. It would be more similar to the cold war. Tensions, posturing in hot zones, and occasional proxy wars. Its not like US hegemony has brought about peace. In fact, the US has intentionally provoked wars in nations that needed a regime change. Iraq War brought ISIS. ISIS brought terrorist attacks to EU and US. Political instability in Africa has caused genocides. Often with a connection to US decisions. South American regime change doesn't happen as often as it did in 70s to 90s, but that was the source of a lot pain for people.
- localplume 4y ago
  [dead]
zjp 4y ago
America can't even win a culture war with itself... I don't think college-aged leftists have ever fully comprehended what Pax Sinica means for them: work. Just watch "American Factory", the documentary Obama made on Netflix a few years back. American MBAs think you are lazy compared to Chinese who will work 12 hours a day, six days a week, and would love nothing more than for you to accept that schedule for even lower wages.
RobotToaster 4y ago
Absolutely, how dare those uppity colonials subvert the unipolarity of His Majesty King George.
- akiselev 4y ago
  Yeah cause it worked out soooo great for those colonials in a multipolar world with the Spanish, Portugese, French, and British empires fighting over the new world or that time Britain, France, Germany, Portugal, Spain, and Italy tore it up in Africa. Come to think of it, it worked out great for everyone a century ago. Three-peat here we go!
barrysteve 4y ago
1800s is too recent. Now is more like a repeat of the 1300s and a build up to an exploratory treasure voyages from China in the 1400s. Modern wars between super powers can't be fought. They are an existential threat for the human species. Plenty of proxy wars to waste lives on though.
- neovialogistics 4y ago
  Jules Verne was saying the same things in his time.
Animatronio 4y ago
Cool, then let China be hegemon for a half a century and we'll debate their merits after that.
- MomoXenosaga 4y ago
  If America bails on Ukraine, as some politicians want, it will be a signal for everyone on this planet: you're on your own good luck. At that point you have two options: conciliate with the baddies or arm yourself. Including nuclear weapons- even Japan is rethinking it's stance on nuclear proliferation. This is nothing new really Europe was a war torn continent for a thousand years.
  - Animatronio 4y ago
    Or maybe new alliances will appear from this? What's to say the EU won't unite further and have a decent military? Or maybe another bloc of countries will coalesce. At some point, even if it takes 1000 years, America will stop being numero uno. Then what, we're all doomed?
    - DuckFeathers 4y ago
      > At some point, even if it takes 1000 years, America will stop being numero uno. Then what, we're all doomed? In 1000 years, if the US gets taken over, the new power that takes over will have the same reasons to keep the peasants doing what they are doing to keep the state useful as a whole at the time of the takeover. If a completely different nation state takes power openly, sure, a few idiots who have been too brainwashed to serve their old exploiters will struggle... but they'll eventually be forced to get in line or suffer. This will not affect the population at large. They'll keep doing whatever they are doing, like they have been, for many many generations all over the world. New history will make old history boring and uninteresting to the politically minded, but it will be just the same for everyone else. The outcomes will be vastly different if it happens in the next couple of hundred years though. There is no way there will be enough decentralised resources for people to survive by themselves... so the elites losing the power will try to do everything to hold on to it. They will control food supply to starve the people and force them into war... and won't stop until a lot of damage is done on the population.
yongjik 4y ago
During the brief time the US enjoyed being an uncontested global superpower, it managed to invade Iraq, creating a power vacuum, leading to the rise of ISIS. Let's not pretend history ever stopped repeating. It was always repeating. If you think the world enjoyed a brief reprieval under a single superpower, that's because you and I happened to live in privileged places.
tim333 4y ago
I'm rather hoping that rather than unipolar or multipolar world we move towards a nonpolar one with all countries chipping in to protect each other a bit like the UN was planned. That might seem idealistic but there are a bunch of countries chipping in over Ukraine, not just the US.

oblak 4y ago

Only ThrowawayR2's people can bring salvation to the human race. Let there be one ruler, one king.

ThrowawayR2 4y ago
The old hegemony is already on its way out or this re-armament and re-militarization wouldn't be happening. You're literally getting your wish. Now everyone is going to have to survive the aftereffects of the resulting power vacuum.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

FpUser 4y ago

Well, if the hegemon had done something productive rather than waving their dick with invasions / bombings / sanctions / political interferences / etc. etc. they might have had more sympathetic view from the outside.

ThrowawayR2 4y ago
I knew somebody would pop up to reflexively say this. Let's be clear, I didn't say the hegemon was good, or nice, or just. What I said is that the situation could get much, much worse than it was under the past hegemony.
- FpUser 4y ago
  >"situation could get much, much worse " Yes it could. And one of the reasons is that over long time nobody will tolerate hegemon telling them how live their lives. Hegemon must be smart enough not to be one but that is not what we have.
- annadiru 4y ago
  It's not reflexive to critisize US foreign meddling. It IS reflective because it requires considerable consideration to puncture the fabric of US internal propaganda and reach these conclusions. The problem is that it's built on a web of lies and treachery. That's not a very smart attitude to take between whole nations of people. Maybe it is if the end goal is further ethnic domination, subjugation, and/or exterminaton-- which the US has done and still does, systematically. There are bearings a country can take, foreign relations wise, that over the long term that lead to better outcomes and just quality-of-life improvements in general. Benevolence and smart relationship management com ined with military dominamce has immense soft power, of which the U.S. has left unexplored. I just found this reading up on S.Pacific politics: Weiner, Tim (9 October 1994). "C.I.A. Spent Millions to Support Japanese Right in 50's and 60's". The New York Times. Retrieved 29 December 2007. Add japan to the laundry list where these organized, professionalized, politically motivated paramilitary "groups" involve themselves in the democratic process of other nations, with absolutely no control or oversight from the very society they comes from.
  - oldcigarette 4y ago
    Don't confuse the US before the collapse of the soviet union and now. There is a reason it is in the position it is - it actually did stuff countries liked such as rebuilding the world after WWII. When the soviet union collapsed the US needed to pivot - instead a bunch of inept politicians have been doing expedient nothings for 30 years.
seventytwo 4y ago
Pretending that “the hegemony” has done nothing but terrible things is intellectually dishonest.
- FpUser 4y ago
  I am not pretending. I just mentioned bad things sine those are the reason we are getting deeper in shit. Good things were done by many sides but it is irrelevant in the context. I am not dishonest at all. Maybe you are.
  - seventytwo 4y ago
    And the fact that you attribute good things to “many sides”, but bad things solely to “the hegemony” shows no bias whatsoever!
    - FpUser 4y ago
      Whether I have a bias or not is irrelevant. It does not negate who the hegemon is.

data-abuse 4y ago

To be fair, a multi-polar world with the level of technology that we have today is unprecedented. I don't think nations would resort to fighting in the past. It would be more similar to the cold war. Tensions, posturing in hot zones, and occasional proxy wars. Its not like US hegemony has brought about peace. In fact, the US has intentionally provoked wars in nations that needed a regime change. Iraq War brought ISIS. ISIS brought terrorist attacks to EU and US. Political instability in Africa has caused genocides. Often with a connection to US decisions. South American regime change doesn't happen as often as it did in 70s to 90s, but that was the source of a lot pain for people.

localplume 4y ago
[dead]

zjp 4y ago

America can't even win a culture war with itself... I don't think college-aged leftists have ever fully comprehended what Pax Sinica means for them: work. Just watch "American Factory", the documentary Obama made on Netflix a few years back. American MBAs think you are lazy compared to Chinese who will work 12 hours a day, six days a week, and would love nothing more than for you to accept that schedule for even lower wages.

RobotToaster 4y ago

Absolutely, how dare those uppity colonials subvert the unipolarity of His Majesty King George.

akiselev 4y ago
Yeah cause it worked out soooo great for those colonials in a multipolar world with the Spanish, Portugese, French, and British empires fighting over the new world or that time Britain, France, Germany, Portugal, Spain, and Italy tore it up in Africa. Come to think of it, it worked out great for everyone a century ago. Three-peat here we go!

barrysteve 4y ago

1800s is too recent. Now is more like a repeat of the 1300s and a build up to an exploratory treasure voyages from China in the 1400s. Modern wars between super powers can't be fought. They are an existential threat for the human species. Plenty of proxy wars to waste lives on though.

neovialogistics 4y ago
Jules Verne was saying the same things in his time.

Animatronio 4y ago

Cool, then let China be hegemon for a half a century and we'll debate their merits after that.

MomoXenosaga 4y ago
If America bails on Ukraine, as some politicians want, it will be a signal for everyone on this planet: you're on your own good luck. At that point you have two options: conciliate with the baddies or arm yourself. Including nuclear weapons- even Japan is rethinking it's stance on nuclear proliferation. This is nothing new really Europe was a war torn continent for a thousand years.
- Animatronio 4y ago
  Or maybe new alliances will appear from this? What's to say the EU won't unite further and have a decent military? Or maybe another bloc of countries will coalesce. At some point, even if it takes 1000 years, America will stop being numero uno. Then what, we're all doomed?
  - DuckFeathers 4y ago
    > At some point, even if it takes 1000 years, America will stop being numero uno. Then what, we're all doomed? In 1000 years, if the US gets taken over, the new power that takes over will have the same reasons to keep the peasants doing what they are doing to keep the state useful as a whole at the time of the takeover. If a completely different nation state takes power openly, sure, a few idiots who have been too brainwashed to serve their old exploiters will struggle... but they'll eventually be forced to get in line or suffer. This will not affect the population at large. They'll keep doing whatever they are doing, like they have been, for many many generations all over the world. New history will make old history boring and uninteresting to the politically minded, but it will be just the same for everyone else. The outcomes will be vastly different if it happens in the next couple of hundred years though. There is no way there will be enough decentralised resources for people to survive by themselves... so the elites losing the power will try to do everything to hold on to it. They will control food supply to starve the people and force them into war... and won't stop until a lot of damage is done on the population.

yongjik 4y ago

During the brief time the US enjoyed being an uncontested global superpower, it managed to invade Iraq, creating a power vacuum, leading to the rise of ISIS. Let's not pretend history ever stopped repeating. It was always repeating. If you think the world enjoyed a brief reprieval under a single superpower, that's because you and I happened to live in privileged places.

tim333 4y ago

I'm rather hoping that rather than unipolar or multipolar world we move towards a nonpolar one with all countries chipping in to protect each other a bit like the UN was planned. That might seem idealistic but there are a bunch of countries chipping in over Ukraine, not just the US.