Discussion about this post

User's avatar
steve's avatar

The single biggest compliment I can give is that each and every one of your articles provokes serious thought about what you are writing about.

A rare gift to possess as a writer or analyst.

Thank you

Expand full comment
Andres's avatar

Excellent article, as usual.

I want to add some info that can complement and help to reassess some points, You have to take into account that I add a Latin American perspective (coming from a US colony with many cultural similarities).

1) "The big question is how a population of 300 million people is able to control the rest of the world, comprising 8 billion people. How can the US empire control the rest of the world? Through fear."

I think that the fear component may work as the overwhelming one in many regions, but in Latin America (Mexico aside) the force of the US is mostly economic, financial and CULTURAL. Many left-wing populist governments that went semi-autonomous during the 00's (Lula, the Kirchner, Correa, Evo Morales) were defeated by US soft power "prongs": Financial (sanctions, market manipulations) and cultural ones (mass media, social media).

The US counts on the strong image imposed around the world that the standard of living of the postwar USA is the desired way of life: Living in a bungalow with lawn in the suburbs, with 2+ cars in the driveway, having plenty of consumption opportunities around and enjoying a 30-year employment in the same company after which the individuals retire and enjoy traveling and other leisure activities wearing a Hawaiian shirt and a Reflex camera.

Nothing of that is actually true, but many, MANY people (due to movies, fake news and other communication channels) still believe that the average American lives that way, or closely, and they believe that it's feasible to do so for the majority of the population.

Briefly, many upper-middle and upper classes in the US colonies have the idea that the US enjoys the best standard of living and that image helps to block socioeconomic transformations in their countries since they don't feel attracted by other cultural models elsewhere.

2) "And I hope the US will manage the transition away from the empire and become prosperous again."

I doubt that this will happen. The US has a "social contract" in which the illusion of an ever increasing prosperity allows to tolerate the extremely unfair pro-business and pro-1%ers policies that the official and civil institutions protect. The US social cohesion works as long as "the sky is the limit" (or "The American Dream") is still believable.

The US won't have enough indigenous resources to recreate a "New Deal". The country is already developed and the needed transformations don't necessarily imply the traditional path of economic grow in a mass consumption society (investment in internal market's economy -> more consumption -> even more investment and taxes -> repeat).

However, what may positively happen (as I saw in many places in the US) is a massive slow shift in consciousness to a "survival" economy: To live on local products and resources, more frugally but more sustainably. This is evident in "marginal progressive" places such as Burlington, VT. I doubt that NYC or Boston can enter into that equation.

(continues)

Expand full comment
79 more comments...

No posts