6 ms·

The US century is already over. It's just that a lot of US citizens don't see that. De-dollarization will happen when one is a traitor to it's allies

by touwer 9mo ago

Jtsummers 9mo ago
Many of us see it, but many others seem to be embracing it and trying to hasten it for reasons unknown. They pine for the glory days of post-WWII US hegemony but are actively undoing the institutions that were instrumental in US economic and political power at that time. They have no coherent world view, they are severely confused, but unfortunately numerous.
- Waterluvian 9mo ago
  I actually have a greater disgust for those who see it but don't act. I think this line from an incredibly relevant book is precisely this: > "Your ‘little men,’ your Nazi friends, were not against National Socialism in principle. Men like me, who were, are the greater offenders, not because we knew better (that would be too much to say) but because we sensed better. Those who act on behalf of evil are not free from guilt, of course. But the truly damned are those who sense better but look the other way. They walk in the footsteps of the millions who tacitly supported the last time this evil took hold of the world, by not acting. This entire book, but especially this exerpt, is a must read: https://press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/511928.htm https://press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/511928.htm
  - FrustratedMonky 9mo ago
    "What happened here was the gradual habituation of the people, little by little, to being governed by surprise" Wow, seems on point. Wow "kept us so busy with continuous changes and ‘crises’ and so fascinated, yes, fascinated, by the machinations of the ‘national enemies,’ without and within, that we had no time to think about these dreadful things that were growing, little by little, all around us."
  - scottyah 9mo ago
    I think it's fair to say that neither ideology is free from evil, and choosing the "lesser evil" is still choosing evil. Every good or well-meaning movement I've seen has been taken over once it reaches a certain size.
  - deleted 9mo ago
    [deleted]
  - chmod775 9mo ago
    The US wasn't exactly "friendly", but comparing US hegemony to Nazi Germany is a bit much, don't you think? /s
    - Waterluvian 9mo ago
      Y'know, yeah I think you're right. It's not like they're dressing the part and marching through the streets like some sort of secret police agency. https://ibb.co/qMynfBBW https://ibb.co/qMynfBBW
    - touwer 9mo ago
      It wasn't of course. But the current regime looks more and more like them. Including all the minions going along with it
  - hommelix 9mo ago
    Thanks for sharing this except of the book.
- qaq 9mo ago
  Well people pushing for this have a world view. They see a bipolar world with China dominating Asia, US dominating it's hemisphere and Europe fending for itself. They also have major crypto holdings so instability of both major currencies benefits them financially.
  - outside1234 9mo ago
    Except that Crypto is also falling with the stock market (and faster), so if anything, it is correlated the wrong direction
    - qaq 9mo ago
      I am not arguing it's a sane world view
- ericmcer 9mo ago
  I feel like many are going to upvote this because they think it is an indictment on the current administration but it isn't exactly.
  - Jtsummers 9mo ago
    > I feel like many are going to upvote this because they think it is an indictment on the current administration but it isn't exactly. Is it not? Quoting myself: >> are actively undoing the institutions that were instrumental in US economic and political power at that time. Who is undoing those institutions? That'd be the current administration.
    - ericmcer 9mo ago
      Ah I was seeing a parallel between: 1. Our post WW2 neocolonial activity and the current admins push to sort of blatantly get control over Venezuela and Greenland. 2. Our WW2 manufacturing and export based economy that made us wealthy. Is similar to the current admins push to reform us from importers to exporters using tariffs and rebuilding manufacturing (at least on the surface the execution of this has been terrible).
slibhb 9mo ago
The reverse is true: people who say things like "The US century is over" almost always dislike the US or wish its global influence would decline. Their commentary is wishful thinking. There is some probability that US global influence does significantly decline but I wouldn't hold my breath.
- adamc 9mo ago
  Not true. Some, like myself, love the idea of the shining city on the hill, although we often find the behavior of the actual city less than shining. I would like for the US to continue being a beacon of freedom where people can come and build great lives. But that is not the direction we are going, and one might reasonably forecast that no country can maintain indefinite dominance. Paul Kennedy wrote "The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers" almost 40 years ago. Regression to the mean and all that, but also, great powers tend to overstep.
  - slibhb 9mo ago
    > Not true. Some, like myself, love the idea of the shining city on the hill, although we often find the behavior of the actual city less than shining. Your first sentence says "not true". Your second sentence says "true". Your dislike of the current US regime/behavior causes you to forcast the decline of US influence. I'm not saying you should like current US behavior, just that there isn't good evidence for any decline. These things are hard to predict. The most likely situation is not decline: it is continuity, where the US retains its global influence for the time being.
    - peder 9mo ago
      Yep, and nobody ever goes on these types of threads and says the EU is collapsing, even though there's demonstrable evidence that things are not going great for the EU (the UK left, there is virtually zero economic dynamism or tech investment, Russia has seized 1/3 of Ukraine who was trying to join the EU, and the continent has no money, no navies and terrible demographics to compete globally in the next century). People gloss over issues about the EU because it aligns more closely with their political beliefs.
tsunamifury 9mo ago
Hopes or morality do not strictly dictate power as much as we might wish it to be true.
- athrowaway3z 9mo ago
  The number of Trump apologists lunatics who do not seem to understand what MAD was about is staggering. Industrial scale warfare isn't some secret forgotten by accident. The current American power-trip fantasy delusion is rightfully scaring the shit out of people, and the scary thing is the people who aren't scared. It's reaching the point that I think the best thing is for Germany to detonate a nuke between the US and Greenland just to wake up the idiots who think it would be unreasonably difficult. -- Edit: I see people are misunderstanding me as saying they should use the US bombs stationed there. I'm saying they should build their own - to have people remember that It's not really that hard if you have a functioning industrial sector.
  - renewiltord 9mo ago
    Germany is a non-nuclear-weapon state. Our bombs are there yes, but if you use one of our bombs without our approval there will be hell to pay. An invasion of Greenland will be all but guaranteed. Whether Germany will retain its military the next day is questionable.
    - athrowaway3z 9mo ago
      I see you don't want to understand my point. Why exactly do you think Germany is a non-nuclear weapon state?
      - renewiltord 9mo ago
        Because we muzzled the wolf.
    - watwut 9mo ago
      It is ok for Germany to detonate nukes on someone who attacked NATO. The approval of the aggressor is not necessary.
renewiltord 9mo ago
Indeed. People are actively trying to repair something which cannot be fixed. Now that the US century is over, the only way forward is for the US to use present military power as a cudgel. Given that the multipolar world is nigh, the only path forward is through. If America and her erstwhile allies are no longer aligned, then any attempt by America to repair this is doomed. Consequently, Trump’s approach is the only way forward.
- echelon 9mo ago
  > Consequently, Trump’s approach is the only way forward. It's the DoD. Prior to Trump's actions, the American-led "world order" seemed to work, even if we couldn't get China to agree to a "Bretton Woods 2.0". Biden tried diplomacy with the EU. He tried to get them to agree to a renewed US-led world order, but it wasn't working. The EU decided to play the US and China against each other to improve its own standing, which is why the US is now moving away from the EU. I think the US could seriously pull out of NATO and leave the EU to fend off Russia by itself. It'll have to start spending enormous tax dollars on defense and war. Meanwhile, if the world is truly becoming multi-polar, then the US wants to consolidate power in its own hemisphere. This is why there's all the rhetoric and action on Venezuela, Cuba, Greenland, Canada, etc. The US will keep Chinese ports, basing, and trade completely out and secure the trade routes for when the Arctic opens up. It recently changed control over the Panama Canal, and the DoD is dead serious about taking Greenland and maintaining complete hemispheric control. With whatever energy the US has left, it will dedicate to Asia. It will strengthen alliances and project power there instead of dealing with Europe. The world is going to be a much more violent place without hegemony. Free trade doesn't exist in that type of world. The US realizes this and is playing 50 years ahead. None of the nice words matter when the energy, trade, and economic lines are redrawn. People like to say the US is led by lawyers and China is led by scientists and engineers. This is wrong. The US is led by war generals and intelligence. The career DoD folks are the ones impressing upon the administration to make these moves. To be clear: I hate this. I loved the world I grew up in. I think we're headed for a violent world that could easily erupt into war. I don't like it.
  - RealityVoid 9mo ago
chrisco255 9mo ago
[flagged]
- spiderfarmer 9mo ago
  You must be a proud holder of his cryptocurrency.
- ad 9mo ago
  Saying “we gotta get Greenland” when the people in Greenland say they don’t want to join the US. Then refusing to rule out using force. If you want to say that no exact act of treachery has been committed, then substitute “treacherous words”, which also harms alliances.
- enraged_camel 9mo ago
  >> I'm sorry, what treachery was committed? The imposition of import taxes is not treachery. It is an egregious violation of the Constitution, which specifically says that only Congress can impose taxes.
- avh02 9mo ago
  This is about way more than a few tariffs. Think Venezuela, think madman jizzing over the idea of invading greenland, or just throwing tantrums on an international scale.
  - shadowtree 9mo ago
    But Iraq, Afghanistan, Grenada, Panama, Vietnam ... were not a problem? Ahistorical BS, I am sorry. As if Trump is a radical departure of NORMS. Euros were chanting HO HO HO CHI MIN in 1968 in the streets of Berlin and Paris. There is a long tradition of anti-American feelings outside the US, like with any hegemon. The global left had to build walls to keep their people IN, crush them with tanks, from Prague to Berlin to Beijing. So there is that. HN turning so left is weird to watch, I guess a reflection of PG's stances and moderation/group votes. Well, money does not give a fig.
    - 9mo ago
ferguess_k 9mo ago
Not so fast, though. A state can be a "killer", or a "giver", or both, to gain followers and sell its currency to other states. The US was both back in the 40s as well as the late 80s when Germany and USSR crumbled. So hail to Pax Americana. However, the US is more of a "killer" nowadays. The "killer" is usually more efficient than the "giver", because people value their life more than their wallet. So that's why I think she still has some time left. I don't blame it on Trump though. Being a "giver" is a lot more trouble than being a "killer", and I think the US elites gradually rolled back from the role of "giver" since many years ago. Trump is just here to remind other states that the US can and will be a very efficient killer. And this is probably the most dangerous time for other states because she cannot afford to lose.
- fnordsensei 9mo ago
  Is it more efficient though? It just looks like burning long term prospects for short term ones. Which is on brand with the current regime to be fair.
  - ferguess_k 9mo ago
    Yeah it's more short term, I agree.
- lbrito 9mo ago
  >The US was both back in the 40s as well as the late 80s when Germany and USSR crumbled. So hail to Pax Americana. This is the historical equivalent of selective memory, and only really applies to a tiny slice of the planet - western Europe. A lot happened in the world between 1945 and 1989. Outside of Europe and Japan, most people would probably not be so sympathetic of the US actions during those times. An abridged list: * Iran 1953 - US and UK overthrow democratically elected PM, install brutal dictator * Guatemala 1954 - US via CIA overthrows democratically elected president, install brutal dictator * Brazil 1964, Chile 1973, Argentina 1976 - US supports brutal dictatorships replacing democratically elected governments * Iran/Iraq 1980s - US funds both sides in the war etc. This is a very resumed list.
  - 9mo ago
netbioserror 9mo ago
There are also many Americans who have always desired de-dollarization, since the dollar has been the foundation of our imperial system and abuses of state power. Say what you will about how dated a gold standard is, but it forces immediate fiscal responsibility upon governments; fiat currencies defer responsibility, turning it into a Sword of Damocles that catastrophically falls upon future generations. You trade geopolitical dominance now for guaranteed future withering. Of course, fiscal responsibility and the rejection of imperial ambition were core principles of the Anti-Federalists, Democratic-Republicans, and Whigs. It's baked into our history and tradition to not want to be the unilateral arbiters of a global trade and alliance system.
- JumpCrisscross 9mo ago
  > Say what you will about how dated a gold standard is, but it forces immediate fiscal responsibility upon governments We were on metal standards for millenia. Governments routinely spent beyond their means, including for imperial aims. This is like four centuries of Roman history.
  - cheeseomlit 9mo ago
    Yes, but there were practical limits to currency debasement when the currency was a physical commodity with intrinsic value. People notice when their coins start getting filled with lead, and there were serious political repercussions for it. You cant just conjure a trillion gold/silver coins out of nothing like you can with fiat, and the ability to do so is 100% guaranteed to be abused.
    - JumpCrisscross 9mo ago
      > there were practical limits to currency debasement when the currency was a physical commodity "In the second century, a modius of wheat (approximately nine liters), during normal times, had sold for ½ Denarius…. the same modius of wheat sold in 335 AD for over 6000 denarii, and in 338 AD for over 10,000" [1]. Note that inflation can also occur with zero debasement if the economy around the fixed money supply collapses. This happened in Rome when Pompey and later Augustus were trashing trade routes. It may have even led to the collapse of India's ancient democracies. > there were serious political repercussions for it There weren't. The state historically borrowed from the hilt of the sword. Economic collapse constrained kings and emperors. Not politics. [1] https://etedge-insights.com/featured-insights/analysis/how-hyperinflation-destroyed-ancient-rome/#:~:text=Historians%20and,over%2010%2C000.%E2%80%9D https://etedge-insights.com/featured-insights/analysis/how-h...
JumpCrisscross 9mo ago
> US century is already over Maybe, maybe not. We're currently the Soviet Union in the 1970s. Gerontocratic. Sclerotic. Hyped up on a new mythology. And economically uncompetitive on several levels, with the future (then computers, now elecrification) sweeping past us to our applause. Unlike the Soviets, however, we can see it happening and debate it. If '26 and '28 change course, the damage will still be done. But the America Empire is still young. And Trump's stupidest policies–the tariffs, fighting the Fed, Greenland and raising a Gestapo–don't have the support of most Americans. That leaves hope for reform through electoral pressure. It will take work. But it's as incorrect to assume indefinite American hegemony as it is to preëmptively concede the game.
- mlindner 9mo ago
  I'd agree with most of what you said, but there is no "raising a Gestapo". ICE has existed for 25 years. And the laws that give it permission to act haven't changed. It has gradually grown over the decades but what it fundamentally does has not. What's new is finally the federal government pushing back against locales that refuse to allow local police to cooperate with federal law enforcement by means of massive influxes of federal officers to offset the lack of local support. Also ICE has widespread support for what they are actually doing. Only when you ask manipulative questions that presume something is happening that isn't, do you get poll results that support a widespread dislike for ICE.
  - mythical_39 9mo ago
    > ICE has widespread support for what they are actually doing Minnesota would like to have a chat with you.
    - 9x39 9mo ago
      https://www.kttc.com/2026/01/20/americas-pulse-current-ice-activity-level-according-new-polling/ https://www.kttc.com/2026/01/20/americas-pulse-current-ice-a... About 40-50% are in support, so the parent's accurate. That roughly matches the political divide across the states.
ijidak 9mo ago
Something to think about.... Mankind has never seen the collapse of a nuclear powered empire. Sadly, it may not be possible for a nuclear powered empire to fall without the death of billions... Mankind is in uncharted territory. Even Russia never fully fell after the USSR collapsed. Whoever kept the nuclear weapons continued to be a first tier power. Nothing in human history compares to the present question of how the current empires fall, and if they can even do so safely. Very sobering times ahead.
- andix 9mo ago
  > Mankind has never seen the collapse of a nuclear powered empire. Open your history book and read about what happened in 1991.
throwerxyz 9mo ago
[flagged]
- touwer 9mo ago
  Are you a troll or just uninformed and stupid?
  - throwerxyz 9mo ago
    I'm none of those things. Are you going to answer the question?

The US century is already over. It's just that a lot of US citizens don't see that. De-dollarization will happen when one is a traitor to it's allies

by touwer 9mo ago

The US century is already over. It's just that a lot of US citizens don't see that. De-dollarization will happen when one is a traitor to it's allies

Jtsummers 9mo ago

Many of us see it, but many others seem to be embracing it and trying to hasten it for reasons unknown. They pine for the glory days of post-WWII US hegemony but are actively undoing the institutions that were instrumental in US economic and political power at that time. They have no coherent world view, they are severely confused, but unfortunately numerous.

Waterluvian 9mo ago
I actually have a greater disgust for those who see it but don't act. I think this line from an incredibly relevant book is precisely this: > "Your ‘little men,’ your Nazi friends, were not against National Socialism in principle. Men like me, who were, are the greater offenders, not because we knew better (that would be too much to say) but because we sensed better. Those who act on behalf of evil are not free from guilt, of course. But the truly damned are those who sense better but look the other way. They walk in the footsteps of the millions who tacitly supported the last time this evil took hold of the world, by not acting. This entire book, but especially this exerpt, is a must read: https://press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/511928.htm https://press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/511928.htm
- FrustratedMonky 9mo ago
  "What happened here was the gradual habituation of the people, little by little, to being governed by surprise" Wow, seems on point. Wow "kept us so busy with continuous changes and ‘crises’ and so fascinated, yes, fascinated, by the machinations of the ‘national enemies,’ without and within, that we had no time to think about these dreadful things that were growing, little by little, all around us."
- scottyah 9mo ago
  I think it's fair to say that neither ideology is free from evil, and choosing the "lesser evil" is still choosing evil. Every good or well-meaning movement I've seen has been taken over once it reaches a certain size.
- deleted 9mo ago
  [deleted]
- chmod775 9mo ago
  The US wasn't exactly "friendly", but comparing US hegemony to Nazi Germany is a bit much, don't you think? /s
  - Waterluvian 9mo ago
    Y'know, yeah I think you're right. It's not like they're dressing the part and marching through the streets like some sort of secret police agency. https://ibb.co/qMynfBBW https://ibb.co/qMynfBBW
  - touwer 9mo ago
    It wasn't of course. But the current regime looks more and more like them. Including all the minions going along with it
- hommelix 9mo ago
  Thanks for sharing this except of the book.
qaq 9mo ago
Well people pushing for this have a world view. They see a bipolar world with China dominating Asia, US dominating it's hemisphere and Europe fending for itself. They also have major crypto holdings so instability of both major currencies benefits them financially.
- outside1234 9mo ago
  Except that Crypto is also falling with the stock market (and faster), so if anything, it is correlated the wrong direction
  - qaq 9mo ago
    I am not arguing it's a sane world view
ericmcer 9mo ago
I feel like many are going to upvote this because they think it is an indictment on the current administration but it isn't exactly.
- Jtsummers 9mo ago
  > I feel like many are going to upvote this because they think it is an indictment on the current administration but it isn't exactly. Is it not? Quoting myself: >> are actively undoing the institutions that were instrumental in US economic and political power at that time. Who is undoing those institutions? That'd be the current administration.
  - ericmcer 9mo ago
    Ah I was seeing a parallel between: 1. Our post WW2 neocolonial activity and the current admins push to sort of blatantly get control over Venezuela and Greenland. 2. Our WW2 manufacturing and export based economy that made us wealthy. Is similar to the current admins push to reform us from importers to exporters using tariffs and rebuilding manufacturing (at least on the surface the execution of this has been terrible).

slibhb 9mo ago

The reverse is true: people who say things like "The US century is over" almost always dislike the US or wish its global influence would decline. Their commentary is wishful thinking. There is some probability that US global influence does significantly decline but I wouldn't hold my breath.

adamc 9mo ago
Not true. Some, like myself, love the idea of the shining city on the hill, although we often find the behavior of the actual city less than shining. I would like for the US to continue being a beacon of freedom where people can come and build great lives. But that is not the direction we are going, and one might reasonably forecast that no country can maintain indefinite dominance. Paul Kennedy wrote "The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers" almost 40 years ago. Regression to the mean and all that, but also, great powers tend to overstep.
- slibhb 9mo ago
  > Not true. Some, like myself, love the idea of the shining city on the hill, although we often find the behavior of the actual city less than shining. Your first sentence says "not true". Your second sentence says "true". Your dislike of the current US regime/behavior causes you to forcast the decline of US influence. I'm not saying you should like current US behavior, just that there isn't good evidence for any decline. These things are hard to predict. The most likely situation is not decline: it is continuity, where the US retains its global influence for the time being.
  - peder 9mo ago
    Yep, and nobody ever goes on these types of threads and says the EU is collapsing, even though there's demonstrable evidence that things are not going great for the EU (the UK left, there is virtually zero economic dynamism or tech investment, Russia has seized 1/3 of Ukraine who was trying to join the EU, and the continent has no money, no navies and terrible demographics to compete globally in the next century). People gloss over issues about the EU because it aligns more closely with their political beliefs.

tsunamifury 9mo ago

Hopes or morality do not strictly dictate power as much as we might wish it to be true.

athrowaway3z 9mo ago
The number of Trump apologists lunatics who do not seem to understand what MAD was about is staggering. Industrial scale warfare isn't some secret forgotten by accident. The current American power-trip fantasy delusion is rightfully scaring the shit out of people, and the scary thing is the people who aren't scared. It's reaching the point that I think the best thing is for Germany to detonate a nuke between the US and Greenland just to wake up the idiots who think it would be unreasonably difficult. -- Edit: I see people are misunderstanding me as saying they should use the US bombs stationed there. I'm saying they should build their own - to have people remember that It's not really that hard if you have a functioning industrial sector.
- renewiltord 9mo ago
  Germany is a non-nuclear-weapon state. Our bombs are there yes, but if you use one of our bombs without our approval there will be hell to pay. An invasion of Greenland will be all but guaranteed. Whether Germany will retain its military the next day is questionable.
  - athrowaway3z 9mo ago
    I see you don't want to understand my point. Why exactly do you think Germany is a non-nuclear weapon state?
    - renewiltord 9mo ago
      Because we muzzled the wolf.
  - watwut 9mo ago
    It is ok for Germany to detonate nukes on someone who attacked NATO. The approval of the aggressor is not necessary.

renewiltord 9mo ago

Indeed. People are actively trying to repair something which cannot be fixed. Now that the US century is over, the only way forward is for the US to use present military power as a cudgel. Given that the multipolar world is nigh, the only path forward is through. If America and her erstwhile allies are no longer aligned, then any attempt by America to repair this is doomed. Consequently, Trump’s approach is the only way forward.

echelon 9mo ago
> Consequently, Trump’s approach is the only way forward. It's the DoD. Prior to Trump's actions, the American-led "world order" seemed to work, even if we couldn't get China to agree to a "Bretton Woods 2.0". Biden tried diplomacy with the EU. He tried to get them to agree to a renewed US-led world order, but it wasn't working. The EU decided to play the US and China against each other to improve its own standing, which is why the US is now moving away from the EU. I think the US could seriously pull out of NATO and leave the EU to fend off Russia by itself. It'll have to start spending enormous tax dollars on defense and war. Meanwhile, if the world is truly becoming multi-polar, then the US wants to consolidate power in its own hemisphere. This is why there's all the rhetoric and action on Venezuela, Cuba, Greenland, Canada, etc. The US will keep Chinese ports, basing, and trade completely out and secure the trade routes for when the Arctic opens up. It recently changed control over the Panama Canal, and the DoD is dead serious about taking Greenland and maintaining complete hemispheric control. With whatever energy the US has left, it will dedicate to Asia. It will strengthen alliances and project power there instead of dealing with Europe. The world is going to be a much more violent place without hegemony. Free trade doesn't exist in that type of world. The US realizes this and is playing 50 years ahead. None of the nice words matter when the energy, trade, and economic lines are redrawn. People like to say the US is led by lawyers and China is led by scientists and engineers. This is wrong. The US is led by war generals and intelligence. The career DoD folks are the ones impressing upon the administration to make these moves. To be clear: I hate this. I loved the world I grew up in. I think we're headed for a violent world that could easily erupt into war. I don't like it.
- RealityVoid 9mo ago

chrisco255 9mo ago

[flagged]

spiderfarmer 9mo ago
You must be a proud holder of his cryptocurrency.
ad 9mo ago
Saying “we gotta get Greenland” when the people in Greenland say they don’t want to join the US. Then refusing to rule out using force. If you want to say that no exact act of treachery has been committed, then substitute “treacherous words”, which also harms alliances.
enraged_camel 9mo ago
>> I'm sorry, what treachery was committed? The imposition of import taxes is not treachery. It is an egregious violation of the Constitution, which specifically says that only Congress can impose taxes.
avh02 9mo ago
This is about way more than a few tariffs. Think Venezuela, think madman jizzing over the idea of invading greenland, or just throwing tantrums on an international scale.
- shadowtree 9mo ago
  But Iraq, Afghanistan, Grenada, Panama, Vietnam ... were not a problem? Ahistorical BS, I am sorry. As if Trump is a radical departure of NORMS. Euros were chanting HO HO HO CHI MIN in 1968 in the streets of Berlin and Paris. There is a long tradition of anti-American feelings outside the US, like with any hegemon. The global left had to build walls to keep their people IN, crush them with tanks, from Prague to Berlin to Beijing. So there is that. HN turning so left is weird to watch, I guess a reflection of PG's stances and moderation/group votes. Well, money does not give a fig.
  - 9mo ago

ferguess_k 9mo ago

Not so fast, though. A state can be a "killer", or a "giver", or both, to gain followers and sell its currency to other states. The US was both back in the 40s as well as the late 80s when Germany and USSR crumbled. So hail to Pax Americana. However, the US is more of a "killer" nowadays. The "killer" is usually more efficient than the "giver", because people value their life more than their wallet. So that's why I think she still has some time left. I don't blame it on Trump though. Being a "giver" is a lot more trouble than being a "killer", and I think the US elites gradually rolled back from the role of "giver" since many years ago. Trump is just here to remind other states that the US can and will be a very efficient killer. And this is probably the most dangerous time for other states because she cannot afford to lose.

fnordsensei 9mo ago
Is it more efficient though? It just looks like burning long term prospects for short term ones. Which is on brand with the current regime to be fair.
- ferguess_k 9mo ago
  Yeah it's more short term, I agree.
lbrito 9mo ago
>The US was both back in the 40s as well as the late 80s when Germany and USSR crumbled. So hail to Pax Americana. This is the historical equivalent of selective memory, and only really applies to a tiny slice of the planet - western Europe. A lot happened in the world between 1945 and 1989. Outside of Europe and Japan, most people would probably not be so sympathetic of the US actions during those times. An abridged list: * Iran 1953 - US and UK overthrow democratically elected PM, install brutal dictator * Guatemala 1954 - US via CIA overthrows democratically elected president, install brutal dictator * Brazil 1964, Chile 1973, Argentina 1976 - US supports brutal dictatorships replacing democratically elected governments * Iran/Iraq 1980s - US funds both sides in the war etc. This is a very resumed list.
- 9mo ago

netbioserror 9mo ago

There are also many Americans who have always desired de-dollarization, since the dollar has been the foundation of our imperial system and abuses of state power. Say what you will about how dated a gold standard is, but it forces immediate fiscal responsibility upon governments; fiat currencies defer responsibility, turning it into a Sword of Damocles that catastrophically falls upon future generations. You trade geopolitical dominance now for guaranteed future withering. Of course, fiscal responsibility and the rejection of imperial ambition were core principles of the Anti-Federalists, Democratic-Republicans, and Whigs. It's baked into our history and tradition to not want to be the unilateral arbiters of a global trade and alliance system.

JumpCrisscross 9mo ago
> Say what you will about how dated a gold standard is, but it forces immediate fiscal responsibility upon governments We were on metal standards for millenia. Governments routinely spent beyond their means, including for imperial aims. This is like four centuries of Roman history.
- cheeseomlit 9mo ago
  Yes, but there were practical limits to currency debasement when the currency was a physical commodity with intrinsic value. People notice when their coins start getting filled with lead, and there were serious political repercussions for it. You cant just conjure a trillion gold/silver coins out of nothing like you can with fiat, and the ability to do so is 100% guaranteed to be abused.
  - JumpCrisscross 9mo ago
    > there were practical limits to currency debasement when the currency was a physical commodity "In the second century, a modius of wheat (approximately nine liters), during normal times, had sold for ½ Denarius…. the same modius of wheat sold in 335 AD for over 6000 denarii, and in 338 AD for over 10,000" [1]. Note that inflation can also occur with zero debasement if the economy around the fixed money supply collapses. This happened in Rome when Pompey and later Augustus were trashing trade routes. It may have even led to the collapse of India's ancient democracies. > there were serious political repercussions for it There weren't. The state historically borrowed from the hilt of the sword. Economic collapse constrained kings and emperors. Not politics. [1] https://etedge-insights.com/featured-insights/analysis/how-hyperinflation-destroyed-ancient-rome/#:~:text=Historians%20and,over%2010%2C000.%E2%80%9D https://etedge-insights.com/featured-insights/analysis/how-h...

JumpCrisscross 9mo ago

> US century is already over Maybe, maybe not. We're currently the Soviet Union in the 1970s. Gerontocratic. Sclerotic. Hyped up on a new mythology. And economically uncompetitive on several levels, with the future (then computers, now elecrification) sweeping past us to our applause. Unlike the Soviets, however, we can see it happening and debate it. If '26 and '28 change course, the damage will still be done. But the America Empire is still young. And Trump's stupidest policies–the tariffs, fighting the Fed, Greenland and raising a Gestapo–don't have the support of most Americans. That leaves hope for reform through electoral pressure. It will take work. But it's as incorrect to assume indefinite American hegemony as it is to preëmptively concede the game.

mlindner 9mo ago
I'd agree with most of what you said, but there is no "raising a Gestapo". ICE has existed for 25 years. And the laws that give it permission to act haven't changed. It has gradually grown over the decades but what it fundamentally does has not. What's new is finally the federal government pushing back against locales that refuse to allow local police to cooperate with federal law enforcement by means of massive influxes of federal officers to offset the lack of local support. Also ICE has widespread support for what they are actually doing. Only when you ask manipulative questions that presume something is happening that isn't, do you get poll results that support a widespread dislike for ICE.
- mythical_39 9mo ago
  > ICE has widespread support for what they are actually doing Minnesota would like to have a chat with you.
  - 9x39 9mo ago
    https://www.kttc.com/2026/01/20/americas-pulse-current-ice-activity-level-according-new-polling/ https://www.kttc.com/2026/01/20/americas-pulse-current-ice-a... About 40-50% are in support, so the parent's accurate. That roughly matches the political divide across the states.

ijidak 9mo ago

Something to think about.... Mankind has never seen the collapse of a nuclear powered empire. Sadly, it may not be possible for a nuclear powered empire to fall without the death of billions... Mankind is in uncharted territory. Even Russia never fully fell after the USSR collapsed. Whoever kept the nuclear weapons continued to be a first tier power. Nothing in human history compares to the present question of how the current empires fall, and if they can even do so safely. Very sobering times ahead.

andix 9mo ago
> Mankind has never seen the collapse of a nuclear powered empire. Open your history book and read about what happened in 1991.

throwerxyz 9mo ago

[flagged]

touwer 9mo ago
Are you a troll or just uninformed and stupid?
- throwerxyz 9mo ago
  I'm none of those things. Are you going to answer the question?