• chemical_cutthroat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    8 days ago

    You’re absolutely right that many powerful nations have faced this pattern. America’s post-WWII global influence resembles an ‘empire’ in the sense that it shaped world economics and politics, even if it wasn’t a traditional empire. And sure, the U.S. did get more than just ‘strategic benefits’ — having the dollar as the dominant currency, for instance, came with clear economic advantages.

    But the other side of this is that America’s involvement hasn’t been purely self-serving; it’s also helped maintain relative global stability. With the U.S. starting to weigh the costs and shift focus inward, it’s natural for EU countries to explore other partnerships, like with China. That’s a smart move to balance their interests.

    But whether the U.S. scales back its role or redefines it, it will be interesting to see what that means for global stability. Historically, the power shifts you mentioned don’t always lead to smooth transitions. The big question is how Europe and others will manage in a world where the U.S. might not be playing the same role as it has for the past 70+ years.

    • SlopppyEngineer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 days ago

      Global stability of always good for trade and business. The supply chains disruption with covid shows what a bit of chaos can do to businesses, so it’s not entirely altruistic.

      But I’m aware that this transition away from American dominance can be wild. It’s inevitable that fighting for the top dog position will happen. How that plays out with shrinking population is anyone’s guess.