America will Conquer the World

[kobayashi]

Hello,

This is my first post in the OT forum. I have been reading the Taliban Al queda end is near thread and it got me thinking about American Power and why Muslims hate the West.

My answer, the world is broken into two types of countries.

1 those where the government tries to give the people what they want irrespective of whether they need it or not. This would basically be a democracy cum free market (I will just call it DFM) set up and is the ultimate progeny of centuries of natural selection among competing government types. In many ways it is the best form of government in a peaceful world and beneficial to the continuing evolution of mankind. It is also the reason why the US is all powerful. DFM is self evolving.

2. those where the government tries to give the people what they need irrespective of whether they want or actually need it. What do people need ? You decide yourself (communism) or look it up in a book (fundamentalism). These government types are static.

(Doesn’t this sound like Civ2)

In a way, there is a continuing global conflict where the DFMs are making the archaic government types (I will just call these AGT) extinct and they are desperately fighting back. DFM will of course prevail eventually and somewhere in the future, there will be a single global DFM on earth, the United States of the World – especially when other planets begin to get colonised.

(Doesn’t this sound like Civ2)

Does this mean that the US will eventually conquer the world? I am afraid so. It is happening even as I write this. One side effect of progress that has become apparent in the past 10 years is the need for economies of scale to undertake more complex or wide-spanning initiatives. This leads to mergers and takeovers with the largest entity in control. Beachheads that America has made in all countries now include, Mac Donalds, Coke, Microsoft, Buffy the Vampire slayer, Star Wars, Allie McBeal, 747 and Civ2.

How can other countries stop this? They may be able to delay the inevitable for a century or two. Why not just sit back and enjoy the liberation. The DFM does not eradicate your culture or religion, it just adsorbs you. However, if a AGT takes over your country, your culture will be eradicated.

One exception to this outcome- surprisingly it, it is the EU which alone stands in the way of US domination (China or Russia don’t even come close) and perhaps we will have a Global Union instead of a United States of the World. In any case, the two will not be much different.

 

[andycapp]

This looks and smells like a troll - anyway, welcome to OT Kobayashi.

Btw, McDonald's franchises in Australia are reporting downward profit trends - a minor victory for good taste!

 

[Knight-Dragon]

I don't really mind anyway, if it means I can get any future versions of Civ much much earlier when they come out into the mkt. Beats most of the local national govts around these parts anyway.
Yeah and McD in Spore actually retrenched a couple of execs (30-40?). Not doing that well.

 

[willemvanoranje]

Yeah! All we need is beer, women and Civilization!

Ok, now seriously. I agree with you kobayashi, the US is dominating the world and probably will take over in the end. While reading your post I was thinking about my reply, and decided to tell you about the EU, 'till I read the last part where you talk about the EU. The EU was founded to compete on economical level with the US and Japan (and other Asian countries like Korea) in the first place. I think the European governments are still too sissy, they listen too much to the US. We are like the Rumanians in the Axis! We listen to the US, do what they say and help them, thinking we're doing a great job, while the US doesn't need us at all. For the US government we're just a bunch of stupid countries which are satisfied with a bit technology and a nice talk with the prime minister once in a while. We are kept happy easily. What I'm trying to say is, Europe is too dependant!
What the EU needs, is total independence of the US. No more sissies that only say 'yes, sir' and 'no, sir' and have no own opinion. To reach this, a European superstate, probably the EU, needs to be formed. The EU should be mightier, more powerful in the European countries. Get one social system, one tax system, one political system. There is no balance of power in this world, though some countries (like the US) may say it does excist. The US rules the world, and all opponents go down or 'Americanize', just as Europe did. Europe needs to form a country or federation, which will bring balance in the world power, a counter-part. The whole idea of democracy is to prevent one man from having all power, it gives different power to different people: the trias-politica. There's balance of power in a democratic country, something that doesn't excist on a global view. There has to be balance, to prevent that one man (US) to use its power in a way it was never meant to be used.
In the end, when such a European Union excists, and there is a balance of power in the world, then a Global Union can excist. If not, I fear the world will, as kobayashi says, become the United States of Earth.

 

[H Tower]

I think that it will be the EU that eventually "conquers" the world. my reasoning is: Eventually all the european nations, including eastern europe will join and they will surpass the united states in economic and scientific production. After that, i see russia joining the EU and making a huge super state. Can Someone rationally try to tell me how the US will be able to outperform a democratic nation stretching from the bay of biscay to the pacific ocean? I figure even the US will join the union and they'll have to rename it the Northern Hemisphere Union(NHU). After that... world domination by economic development is a foregone conclusion, other countries will be faling over themselves to join in on the prosperity.

 

[amadeus]

The concept of a Euro superstate is ridiculous. As long as there are human beings, fighting will continue to advance their portion of the "pie" (the "pie" being Europe).

Finland, for example, will not have increased influence in a Euro superstate, it would only be another League of Nations concept.

 

[CornMaster]

Originally posted by rmsharpe
The concept of a Euro superstate is ridiculous. As long as there are human beings, fighting will continue to advance their portion of the "pie" (the "pie" being Europe).

Question for you rmsharpe.

Now.....I've noticed your voice is against several mergers of countries, regions, etc.... Is this because you don't want it to happen? Or you want it to happen but realistically, you know you will never see it happening?

Just curious...

 

[Alcibiaties of Athenae]

Kob is no troll, but an old buddy of mine.

He states what is obvious, Communism and Religious Fundementalism look backward, attempt to subvert the rights of man in favour of the state (either spirtiually or psyically).

Such a concept has been shown not to work, time and again.

Nations run on Religion are ALWAYS oprressive (to destroy non-believers, disenters, and the like), and Communism has shown itself to be no better (lenin began the Soviet nation on the concept of state sponcered terror, as a means of controlling the population).

I doubt the Europe will ever be comfortible with one government, and believe a United States of Earth more likely.

 

[willemvanoranje]

Sure, most people would like to stay independent, but a powerful federal government wouldn't do any harm. Besides, I for one am not feeling strictly Dutch, I'm feeling European as well. Especially if I'm outside of Europe (which doesn't happen that often). Maybe that's got something to do with me being a multi-national (sounds cool, huh?. Like I'm a company or something. ), but I know more people who think this way. I know Holland will never play a big role in a European Superstate, but still I believe it's good for Europe and the world.

 

[CornMaster]

Originally posted by Alcibiaties of Athenae
He states what is obvious, Communism and Religious Fundementalism look backward, attempt to subvert the rights of man in favour of the state (either spirtiually or psyically).

I'd give you half credit.

While religious fundementalism is a backward step, Communism is a huge leap forward. It aims to erase social classes, race, sex, age barriers, and equality for all. While taking care of ALL the people.

How you see this as a step backward....I'll never know. Unless your talking Soviet, Chinese, and other dictator run communism-ish. In which case, it's not really the communism at fault, but the absolute power of the leader. And the obvouisly corruptness of them.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, a democratically run Communism is the only thing that will save mankind from itself.

 

[Alcibiaties of Athenae]

Originally posted by CornMaster

I've said it before and I'll say it again, a democratically run Communism is the only thing that will save mankind from itself.

If you can provide a Single example of this benevolent, utopian Communism in action, I will change my views.

In other worlds, No Freakin' way!

 

[CornMaster]

Originally posted by Alcibiaties of Athenae
If you can provide a Single example of this benevolent, utopian Communism in action, I will change my views.

But that's the problem. No one is willing to try! How can you discount a Democratically run Communism when there isn't any now and has never been one?!?!

It's people like you AoA that should be in on this. People who value freedom, you should be pushing for stuff like this. Then you can keep the gov't on the straight and narrow. (I just don't mean you, but anyone who feels they would lose their freedom.) Delivering rights, freedom, choices, to the people, I can see you in that position!

 

[joespaniel]

Very interesting thread.

Fayadi will be here any minute to tell you China will be the one to take over, not the US.

Seriously, has ever a nation existed with so much military power that did not use it to conquer and enrichen itself? I speak of modern times, not the expansionist 19th century.

If the US takes over the world economicaly, it will do so without holding a gun to someones head, figuratively.

Ive read that the next world war would be fought with currency, not guns. Trade is now the measure of a nations greatness, not factories, tanks and bombers.

On a side note, Corn, theres not much hope of a communist government suceeding anywhere anymore. It will become a dusty relic of the 20th century.

 

[PinkyGen]

It's hard to form a democracy in a dictatorship of the proletariot (msp).

As for the US conquering the world, only possible in the economic sense. The manifest destiny concept of territorial expansion ended in the 19th (some early 20th) century, when we basically stopped territorial expansion.

The US won't exist forever. Empires rise and fall, and we will be no different. It is more of a question of how long we have, and when are best days will be.

 

[sonorakitch]

"Communism is a huge leap forward. "

Cornmaster,

I don't understand how you can feel this way realistically. Ideologically, communism makes some sense, but logically would never work. You will always have people in charge of the system, and without checks and balances, would simply lead to corruption. You are living in a pipe dream to think communism would provide the social benefits you suggest, without leading to bigger problems.

And please don't continually suggest China, Russia, Mongolia, North Korea, Cuba, Albania, and Angola aren't (or weren't) communism. It is a tiring and victory-less argument.

~Chris

 

[Whiskey Priest]

As far as I can see the best form of governement that has ever been dreamed up was Plato's Republic, which fit neither of Kobayashi's classicifications.

By the way if Plato was around today he would laugh at the idea of the United States being a democracy. He would call it what it is, an Oligarchy.

 

[Sixchan]

"Communism is a huge leap forward. "

Cornmaster,

I don't understand how you can feel this way realistically. Ideologically, communism makes some sense, but logically would never work. You will always have people in charge of the system, and without checks and balances, would simply lead to corruption. You are living in a pipe dream to think communism would provide the social benefits you suggest, without leading to bigger problems.

And please don't continually suggest China, Russia, Mongolia, North Korea, Cuba, Albania, and Angola aren't (or weren't) communism. It is a tiring and victory-less argument.

~Chris

What do you suggest then Chris? Capitalism? Doesn't that bring bigger problems too? There is no such thing as a perfect government. In every government, no matter how benevolent it is, there is always someone who wants power for his own benifit.

We have to decide, if all men are created equal, do they stay equal? Should they all be entitled to the same standard of living? Should they all have the same rights? Is man really created equal? What chance does a Brain-damaged person have to make a living in a capitalist society?

 

[CornMaster]

Originally posted by sonorakitch
"Communism is a huge leap forward. "

Cornmaster,

I don't understand how you can feel this way realistically. Ideologically, communism makes some sense, but logically would never work. You will always have people in charge of the system, and without checks and balances, would simply lead to corruption. You are living in a pipe dream to think communism would provide the social benefits you suggest, without leading to bigger problems.

And please don't continually suggest China, Russia, Mongolia, North Korea, Cuba, Albania, and Angola aren't (or weren't) communism. It is a tiring and victory-less argument.

~Chris

Did you read my post????

By you saying what I said wouldn't work...your saying Democracy doesn't work. And that my friend...will get you boo'ed.

I said that a Democratic Communism is the only way it will work. By default a Democracy is supposed to have checks and balances, which would keep Communism in line. There is no "leader", just the government that runs things.

The countries you stated are not/were not Democratic Communism. So my point still stands.

 

[Sixchan]

And if it hadn't been for Stalin, Gorbachev's democratic policies in the USSR may have led to the first working democratic communism. Something has to work. It may be this.

 

[Whiskey Priest]

Yugoslavia was a moderate democracy/communist nation after Tito died. Too bad that there was so much hatred in the that area. By the way did you know that Croatia was the only Axis occupied country that was not "DeNazified" after the war.