The Thailand expat forum for Travel, Lifestyle and Fun.

DrB0b

A dead white male? have you learned nothing from the 1980's

__________________

Accidental Ajarn

The US is currently on the downside of an economic cycle, but it is way too early to start to see a decline from an economic standpoint.

Second, all this talk of “the world” against the USA is an exaggeration. There has been an extreme upsurge in anti-Americanism in Europe, but Europe ain’t the world. Most reports show people in China and most of Asia have pretty positive views of the USA.

Again, this feeling in Europe is more likely part of a natural cycle, and may not be a long-term trend. European anti-Americanism can be better explained by looking at what has been happening in Europe rather than America’s policies.

The US has its share of problems and its share of strengths. The US is still the world’s leader in science, economic and military power. However, its relative position to the rest of the world has been shrinking for a long-time. At the end of World War II, the US produced almost 50% of the world’s GDP, today that number is closer to 20%. But because the rest of the world is growing economically does it make the US weaker?

America bashers have been on the lookout for signs of America’s decline for over 200 years. I suspect they will keep seeing the signs of decline for hundreds of years in the future.

America’s future strength relies primarily on whether the American voters vote to continues the principles that have made it so strong (much immigration and free market economics) or if we follow the path of protectionism and welfare state-ism we can expect to lose ground.

2 or 3 years of economic slowdown is hardly the sign of the end of America as a superpower, but it does indicate that our current path (Huge government deficits and a growing public sector) is not the path we should continue.

sabang

I thought it was a very good post too Tex- I do not agree with the above comment however. I think the recent rise in Euro anti-Americanism can be squarely put at the foot of the Bush administration, specifically it's foreign policy.

Thats my opinion, but what other factors internal to Europe could you attribute it to?

__________________
To err is human. To blame someone else is politics.

Butterfly

Accidental Ajarn, quite agree also except that part below, a bit too much of the "victimization" syndrome

Texpat

^^ Bush. Interesting you bring him up ... again.

Here's my take on Bush. When he's gone, little will change. Attitudes will not swing back to neutral. European hatred of many things American will not disappear. The influence of the US in Europe reached its the threshhold of many citizens -- and they're pushing back. Fair enough. But when McCain or Obama take over, all the factors that contribute to this infringement will still exist. And America isn't going away. Attitudes will change little.

I get the impression from reading TD posts and talking to Europeans that they want the problem to be with Bush. Or maybe it's a nicer way of saying they're fed up with America -- but it's easier to blame one individual. The reality, however, doesn't disappear on January 20.

America doesn't subscribe to many policies or ideas that Europeans hold as gospel. Why should it? It sees the world through very different lenses than Europe does. Aside from its influential European lineage, that's being weakened every generation, why would the US have anything more in common with Germany or Spain than with, say, Japan or Korea?

When I was studying at uni in Japan in the 80s, all the talk was of how the US will begin looking toward the West instead of toward Europe in the coming decades. The idea of a European neighborhood might sound cozy to some, but the US values its independence as much as its alliances. It simply doesn't have to seek assurances and approval and buy-ins with the frequency and necessity as most other nations -- many resent that and wish it wasn't so.

But for the forseeable future, there's not another nation on the planet that can match the US as a superpower. The reality is that countries around the planet are getting smaller and weaker, not larger and more powerful. My opinion is that China will make great strides in the near future but will not likely eclipse the US as a major power in my lifetime.

Panda

Being armed to the teeth with cutting edge high tech weaponry doesn't make a country a superpower.
The US dominance on the world scene over the past 50 years has been mainly economic but backed up with military power.

The US now faces huge internal economic problems related to its level of debt owed to mainly China and Japan. Militarily, the war in Iraq, and other involvement in the far away Middle East (which poses no military threat to USA), is for purely economic reasons.

On a broader world scale, the slow decline in the US hegemony as the worlds established trading currency will further undermine USAs position of world financial dominance. So long as traded goods are priced in $USs and USA can simply print more $USs and sell them as loans to other countries the US will continue to be able to live above its means.

However, should the rest of the world reject the $US as the international trading currency (particularly for oil), it would seriously diminish the world demand for $USs. Which, of course, would mean a much lower exchange rate for the $US and a lower standard of living for US citizens as all their imported consumer goods became more expensive. And, of course, the US government of the day would have to print many more $USs to back up further international loans.

This very scenario above is in progress at the moment. there is a slow but steady move away from the $US as the worlds major trading currency and the $US is on a slide. But its not all bad news for the country as eventually it will settle down to a point where domestically produced goods will become competitive with the imported stuff. It will just cost a lot more, that's all. But will be great for improving the unemployment figures.

Iraq has been USAs last ditch military effort to prop up their economy now based on debt and dependent on world paying for oil in $USs, (which of course the USA would like to have control over). Saddam Hussein's downfall was when he demanded payment for his countries oil in $Euros. Iran has been pushing OPEC to change to $Euros as has Venezuela. However, Saudi Arabia as the senior OPEC producer at the moment has over ruled them and is sticking with the $US.
Ironically, both Iran and Venezuela are democracies, while Saudi Arabia is ruled by one of the most extreme Muslim dictatorships denounced by human rights organizations around the world. yet, Saudi Arabia, or rather the Royal dictators of Saudi Arabia are one of USAs closest allies in the Middle East. While Iran is painted as a hostile military enemy. Actually, Iran is no threat what so ever to USA militarily, but could certainly be an economic threat when Saudi Arabia runs out of cheap to produce oil in the next couple of decades.

The point to be made here is that the worlds military superpower is not so much concerned about democracy, justice, or the moral high ground, anywhere, least of all in the Middle East, but more concerned about world economic dominance and the repercussions on the domestic situation.