Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiWelcome to 2025
American Preeminence Is Disappearing Fifteen Years Early
Memo to the CIA: You may not be prepared for time-travel, but welcome to 2025 anyway! Your rooms may be a little small, your ability to demand better accommodations may have gone out the window, and the amenities may not be to your taste, but get used to it. It's going to be your reality from now on.
Okay, now for the serious version of the above: In November 2008, the National Intelligence Council (NIC), an affiliate of the Central Intelligence Agency, issued the latest in a series of futuristic publications intended to guide the incoming Obama administration. Peering into its analytic crystal ball in a report entitled Global Trends 2025, it predicted that America's global preeminence would gradually disappear over the next 15 years -- in conjunction with the rise of new global powerhouses, especially China and India. The report examined many facets of the future strategic environment, but its most startling, and news-making, finding concerned the projected long-term erosion of American dominance and the emergence of new global competitors. "Although the United States is likely to remain the single most powerful actor [in 2025]," it stated definitively, the country's "relative strength -- even in the military realm -- will decline and U.S. leverage will become more constrained."
That, of course, was then; this -- some 11 months into the future -- is now and how things have changed. Futuristic predictions will just have to catch up to the fast-shifting realities of the present moment. Although published after the onset of the global economic meltdown was underway, the report was written before the crisis reached its full proportions and so emphasized that the decline of American power would be gradual, extending over the assessment's 15-year time horizon. But the economic crisis and attendant events have radically upset that timetable. As a result of the mammoth economic losses suffered by the United States over the past year and China's stunning economic recovery, the global power shift the report predicted has accelerated. For all practical purposes, 2025 is here already.
Many of the broad, down-the-road predictions made in Global Trends 2025 have, in fact, already come to pass. Brazil, Russia, India, and China -- collectively known as the BRIC countries -- are already playing far more assertive roles in global economic affairs, as the report predicted would happen in perhaps a decade or so. At the same time, the dominant global role once monopolized by the United States with a helping hand from the major Western industrial powers -- collectively known as the Group of 7 (G-7) -- has already faded away at a remarkable pace. Countries that once looked to the United States for guidance on major international issues are ignoring Washington's counsel and instead creating their own autonomous policy networks. The United States is becoming less inclined to deploy its military forces abroad as rival powers increase their own capabilities and non-state actors rely on "asymmetrical" means of attack to overcome the U.S. advantage in conventional firepower.
No one seems to be saying this out loud -- yet -- but let's put it bluntly: less than a year into the 15-year span of Global Trends 2025, the days of America's unquestioned global dominance have come to an end. It may take a decade or two (or three) before historians will be able to look back and say with assurance, "That was the moment when the United States ceased to be the planet's preeminent power and was forced to behave like another major player in a world of many competing great powers." The indications of this great transition, however, are there for those who care to look.
Six Way Stations on the Road to Ordinary Nationhood
Here is my list of six recent developments that indicate we are entering "2025" today. All six were in the news in the last few weeks, even if never collected in a single place. They (and other events like them) represent a pattern: the shape, in fact, of a new age in formation.
1. At the global economic summit in Pittsburgh on September 24th and 25th, the leaders of the major industrial powers, the G-7 (G-8 if you include Russia) agreed to turn over responsibility for oversight of the world economy to a larger, more inclusive Group of 20 (G-20), adding in China, India, Brazil, Turkey, and other developing nations. Although doubts have been raised about the ability of this larger group to exercise effective global leadership, there is no doubt that the move itself signaled a shift in the locus of world economic power from the West to the global East and South -- and with this shift, a seismic decline in America's economic preeminence has been registered.
"The G-20's true significance is not in the passing of a baton from the G-7/G-8 but from the G-1, the U.S.," Jeffrey Sachs of Columbia University wrote in the Financial Times. "Even during the 33 years of the G-7 economic forum, the U.S. called the important economic shots." Declining American leadership over these last decades was obscured by the collapse of the Soviet Union and an early American lead in information technology, Sachs also noted, but there is now no mistaking the shifting of economic power from the United States to China and other rising economic dynamos.
2. According to news reports, America's economic rivals are conducting secret (and not-so-secret) meetings to explore a diminished role for the U.S. dollar -- fast losing its value -- in international trade. Until now, the use of the dollar as the international medium of exchange has given the United States a significant economic advantage: it can simply print dollars to meet its international obligations while other nations must convert their own currencies into dollars, often incurring significant added costs. Now, however, many major trading countries -- among them China, Russia, Japan, Brazil, and the Persian Gulf oil countries -- are considering the use of the Euro, or a "basket" of currencies, as a new medium of exchange. If adopted, such a plan would accelerate the dollar's precipitous fall in value and further erode American clout in international economic affairs.
One such discussion reportedly took place this summer at a summit meeting of the BRIC countries. Just a concept a year ago, when the very idea of BRIC was concocted by the chief economist at Goldman Sachs, the BRIC consortium became a flesh-and-blood reality this June when the leaders of the four countries held an inaugural meeting in Yekaterinburg, Russia.
The very fact that Brazil, Russia, India, and China chose to meet as a group was considered significant, as they jointly possess about 43% of the world's population and are expected to account for 33% of the world's gross domestic product by 2030 -- about as much as the United States and Western Europe will claim at that time. Although the BRIC leaders decided not to form a permanent body like the G-7 at this stage, they did agree to coordinate efforts to develop alternatives to the dollar and to reform the International Monetary Fund in such a way as to give non-Western countries a greater voice.
3. On the diplomatic front, Washington has been rebuffed by both Russia and China in its drive to line up support for increased international pressure on Iran to cease its nuclear enrichment program. One month after President Obama cancelled plans to deploy an anti-ballistic missile system in Eastern Europe in an apparent bid to secure Russian backing for a tougher stance toward Tehran, top Russian leaders are clearly indicating that they have no intention of endorsing strong new sanctions on Iran. "Threats, sanctions, and threats of pressure in the current situation, we are convinced, would be counterproductive," declared the Russian foreign minister, Sergey V. Lavrov, following a meeting with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in Moscow on October 13th. The following day, Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin said that the threat of sanctions was "premature." Given the political risks Obama took in canceling the missile program -- a step widely condemned by Republicans in Washington -- Moscow's quick dismissal of U.S. pleas for cooperation on the Iranian enrichment matter can only be interpreted as a further sign of waning American influence.
4. Exactly the same inference can be drawn from a high-level meeting in Beijing on October 15th between Chinese Prime Minister Wen Jiabao and Iran's first vice president, Mohammed Reza Rahimi. "The Sino-Iran relationship has witnessed rapid development as the two countries' leaders have had frequent exchanges, and cooperation in trade and energy has widened and deepened," Wen said at the Great Hall of the People. Coming at a time when the United States is engaged in a vigorous diplomatic drive to persuade China and Russia, among others, to reduce their trade ties with Iran as a prelude to toughened sanctions, the Chinese statement can only be considered a pointed rebuff of Washington.
5. From Washington's point of view, efforts to secure international support for the allied war effort in Afghanistan have also met with a strikingly disappointing response. In what can only be considered a trivial and begrudging vote of support for the U.S.-led war effort, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown announced on October 14th that Britain would add more troops to the British contingent in that country -- but only 500 more, and only if other European nations increase their own military involvement, something he undoubtedly knows is highly unlikely. So far, this tiny, provisional contingent represents the sum total of additional troops the Obama administration has been able to pry out of America's European allies, despite a sustained diplomatic drive to bolster the combined NATO force in Afghanistan. In other words, even America's most loyal and obsequious ally in Europe no longer appears willing to carry the burden for what is widely seen as yet another costly and debilitating American military adventure in the Greater Middle East.
6. Finally, in a move of striking symbolic significance, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) passed over Chicago (as well as Madrid and Tokyo) to pick Rio de Janeiro to be the host of the 2016 summer Olympics, the first time a South American nation was selected for the honor. Until the Olympic vote took place, Chicago was considered a strong contender, especially since former Chicago resident Barack Obama personally appeared in Copenhagen to lobby the IOC. Nonetheless, in a development that shocked the world, Chicago not only lost out, but was the city eliminated in the very first round of voting.
"Brazil went from a second-class country to a first-class country, and today we began to receive the respect we deserve," said Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva at a victory celebration in Copenhagen after the vote. "I could die now and it already would have been worth it." Few said so, but in the course of the Olympic decision-making process the U.S. was summarily and pointedly demoted from sole superpower to instant also-ran, a symbolic moment on a planet entering a new age.
On Being an Ordinary Country
These are only a few examples of recent developments which indicate, to this author, that the day of America's global preeminence has already come to an end, years before the American intelligence community expected. It's increasingly clear that other powers -- even our closest allies -- are increasingly pursuing independent foreign policies, no matter what pressure Washington tries to bring to bear.
Of course, none of this means that, for some time to come, the U.S. won't retain the world's largest economy and, in terms of sheer destructiveness, its most potent military force. Nevertheless, there is no doubt that the strategic environment in which American leaders must make critical decisions, when it comes to the nation's vital national interests, has changed dramatically since the onset of the global economic crisis.
Even more important, President Obama and his senior advisers are, it seems, reluctantly beginning to reshape U.S. foreign policy with the new global reality in mind. This appears evident, for example, in the administration's decision to revisit U.S. strategy on Afghanistan.
It was only in March, after all, that the president embraced a new counterinsurgency-oriented strategy in that country, involving a buildup of U.S. boots on the ground and a commitment to protracted efforts to win hearts and minds in Afghan villages where the Taliban was resurgent. It was on this basis that he fired the incumbent Afghan War commander, General David D. McKiernan, replacing him with General Stanley A. McChrystal, considered a more vigorous proponent of counterinsurgency. When, however, McChrystal presented Obama with the price tag for the implementation of this strategy -- 40,000 to 80,000 additional troops (over and above the 20,000-odd extra troops only recently committed to the fight) -- many in the president's inner circle evidently blanched.
Not only will such a large deployment cost the U.S. treasury hundreds of billions of dollars it can ill afford, but the strains it is likely to place on the Army and Marine Corps are likely to be little short of unbearable after years of multiple tours and stress in Iraq. This price would be more tolerable, of course, if America's allies would take up more of the burden, but they are ever less willing to do so.
Undoubtedly, the leaders of Russia and China are not entirely unhappy to see the United States exhaust its financial and military resources in Afghanistan. Under these circumstances, it is hardly surprising that Vice President Joe Biden, among others, is calling for a new turn in U.S. policy, foregoing a counterinsurgency approach and opting instead for a less costly "counter-terrorism" strategy aimed, in part, at crushing Al Qaeda in Pakistan -- using drone aircraft and Special Forces, rather than large numbers of U.S. troops (while leaving troop levels in Afghanistan relatively unchanged).
It is too early to predict how the president's review of U.S. strategy in Afghanistan will play out, but the fact that he did not immediately embrace the McChrystal plan and has allowed Biden such free rein to argue his case suggests that he may be coming to recognize the folly of expanding America's military commitments abroad at a time when its global preeminence is waning.
One senses Obama's caution in other recent moves. Although he continues to insist that the acquisition of nuclear weapons by Iran is impermissible and that the use of force to prevent this remains an option, he has clearly moved to minimize the likelihood that this option -- which would also be plagued by recalcitrant "allies" -- will ever be employed.
On the other side of the coin, he has given fresh life to American diplomacy, seeking improved ties with Moscow and approving renewed diplomatic contact with such previously pariah states as Burma, Sudan, and Syria. This, too, reflects a reality of our changing world: that the holier-than-thou, bullying stance adopted by the Bush administration toward these and other countries for almost eight years rarely achieved anything. Think of it as an implicit acknowledgement that the U.S. is now descending from its status as the globe's "sole superpower" to that of an ordinary country. This, after all, is what ordinary countries do; they engage other countries in diplomatic discourse, whether they like their current governments or not.
So, welcome to the world of 2025. It doesn't look like the world of our recent past, when the United States stood head and shoulders above all other nations in stature, and it doesn't comport well with Washington's fantasies of global power since the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991. But it is reality.
For many Americans, the loss of that preeminence may be a source of discomfort, or even despair. On the other hand, don't forget the advantages to being an ordinary country like any other country: Nobody expects Canada, or France, or Italy to send another 40,000 troops to Afghanistan, on top of the 68,000 already there and the 120,000 still in Iraq. Nor does anyone expect those countries to spend $925 billion in taxpayer money to do so -- the current estimated cost of both wars, according to the National Priorities Project.
The question remains: How much longer will Washington feel that Americans can afford to subsidize a global role that includes garrisoning much of the planet and fighting distant wars in the name of global security, when the American economy is losing so much ground to its competitors? This is the dilemma President Obama and his advisers must confront in the altered world of 2025.
42 Comments so far
Show AllMichael,
I found Alan MacDonald's comments to be worth consideration. I would really like to hear a response from you about the issues he raises, if you are so inclined.
Can an empire be created or sustained without a geographic location to serve as its home base? This raises the question of what resources an empire needs, and whether or not they could be obtained using new technologies/distribution systems. Also, can an empire exist without a home population providing justifications and cultural encouragement for the activities of the empire?
Can the definition of "empire" be expaneded to include stateless groups that control certain resources but do not control any territory?
These are interesting questions to consider in light of the changing global economy.
Thank you all for the comments on my column - I found them most valuable.
On the question of empire, I did not use that word in my article at all - other people placed that word in the title, but it wasn't me. My article discusses the relative decline in US power vis-a-vis competing powers, and I stick to the validity of my assessment.
But I do not claim that national power is ALL power - certainly multinational corporations have substantial power of their own.
However, when you look at energy, the area I know best, states still dominate. Exxon is the wealthiest and most powerful shareholder-owned MNC, but its power is dwarfed by state-controlled corporations like Saudi Aramco and Gazprom. The fact is, privately-owned energy firms are losing ground to national oil companies, which now control about 80% of the world's oil reserves, and probably a larger share of natural gas reserves.
In other fields, state-controlled firms in China, India, Russia, Malaysia, and so forth are gaining wealth and power in comparison to privately-owned firms. So I do not accept the view that the state is being replaced by an independent nexus of MNCs.
In any case, I welcome the discussion!
Best to all, Michael Klare
Considering the what really should be called the 'sovereign' or even "monopoly" power of states in areas - such as "monopoly on violence" - or the sovereign power to issue currency..
it behooves those who would think that "only privatization" or "private enterprise" is able to generate "change" or "innovation" ....or even EFFICIENCY..since THROUGH STATE mandate - when properly applied - to encourage better systems ...something such as the article below reports not only "gets off the ground" but even spreads on a national scale to make a country previously thought as "backward" NOW
RIGHT NOW - is the world's premiere producer of SOLAR POWER. CHINA.
the point? here is another example of where the USA is FAR, FAR behind.
consider this article, and pay particular attention to the paragraph:
" On January 1, 2006, China passed a revolutionary renewable energy law to spur local governments to support the development of renewable energy projects across provinces. "
================
Business
Oct 29, 2009
China leads solar home revolution
By Ryan Rutkowski
Gazing across the Chinese urban cityscape, one quickly notices many strange tubular devices dotting the rooftops of many residential buildings. These are solar water heaters.
Solar water heaters rank among the world's fastest-growing applications of solar thermal technology. According to the WorldWatch institute, the solar thermal heating sector expanded worldwide in 2007 at its highest rate since 1995, up 19 gigawatts of thermal equivalent (GWth) to 147 GWth total capacity. Solar thermal energy harnessed for domestic water heating is the primary application of this technology, accounting for 86% of all installations in 2009.
China is the world's largest market for solar water heating (SWH). Since the 1990s, China has blossomed with an increase in annual
production to 114.1 million square meters in 2007 from 0.5 million square meters in 1991, accounting for two thirds of global output. According to "The China Greentech Report 2009", the country has the world's largest installed base of solar water heaters, at over 125 million square meters, with one in 10 families such devices.
In 2007, SWH firms in China generated sales of 32 billion yuan (US$470 million). The country's annual production of solar water heater systems is twice that of Europe and four times that of the United States.
Moreover, China has become a global leader in the manufacturing of components for solar water heater systems. According to "The China Greentech Report 2009", over 95% of core solar water heating technology patents are held by Chinese firms. In 2005, China produced over 90% of the world's evacuated tubes, 70% of the world's borosilicate glass, and more than 90% of the world's "getter" - reactive materials used for removing traces of gas from vacuum systems.
In recent years, China has begun exporting its SWH technology. In 2007, the sector's exports grew 28%, with a total value of US$65 million, the equipment going to 50 countries and territories in Europe, the United States, Africa and Southeast Asia. China's leading export companies are Jiangsu Sunrain New Energy Group, Shandong Linuo Solar Energy Group and Beijing Tsinghua Solar.
Solar water heater systems can be seen across China, from the largest urban metropolitan areas to the smallest rural hamlets. The systems are most common on residential buildings in urban areas, while 90% of the systems are used in single households and 10% in schools, hotels and restaurants.
Altogether, over 30 million households in China use the systems. Southwestern Yunnan province, an area known for abundant sunshine and consistent year-round temperatures, has adopted widespread use of solar water heater systems, with almost all residential buildings in cities and rural areas equipped with them.
A combination of low production costs and significant government support has contributed to the rise of the systems. A standard household system can be set up for just over 2,000 yuan (US$294), compared with 1,800 yuan for gas and as low as 500 yuan for comparable electric water heaters. However, every cubic meter of natural gas costs about 1.7 yuan and every kilowatt hour of mains electricity costs about 0.44 yuan, compared with no cost for a SWH system - a significant savings over time, especially in areas with no access to natural gas and with abundant solar energy.
According to a study by Shanghai Jiao Tong University, SWHs were the most economical domestic hot water system compared with diesel oil boilers, gas boilers, or electric water heaters. The annual operating costs of SWHs in Shanghai were 70% less than electric water heaters.
On January 1, 2006, China passed a revolutionary renewable energy law to spur local governments to support the development of renewable energy projects across provinces. In 2007, the National Development and Reform Council's Medium and Long-term Development Plan for Renewable Energy in China called for an increase in the total installed area for SWH systems to 150 million square meters by 2010 and 300 million square meters by 2020 - of this 100 million square meters will be in rural areas.
(article continued)
=============
At present, the Shenzhen Special Economic Zone next to Hong Kong, eastern Nanjing, Zhengzhou and Xiamen, and Shijiazhuang near Beijing, are among cities that make SWH systems compulsory on newly built and rebuilt residential buildings at 12 stories or below. In Shanghai, the local government is also pushing for an increase in the solar collecting area.
Three types of solar SWH systems are in use in China: vacuum tube collectors, flat-plate collectors, and combined storage collectors. The vacuum tube collectors are the most prevalent, making up 88% of the market in 2004, compared with 11% for flat-plate collectors, and less than 1% for combined storage collectors. New models often have electrical heaters inside the water tank to ensure efficiency in all weather conditions. According to a study by Shanghai Jiao Tong University, under weather conditions in Shanghai, the annual solar collecting efficiency of flat panel SWH systems is about 36-40%.
The SWH manufacturing market is highly fragmented, with more than 5,000 producers throughout the country. A lack of comprehensive standards for components and manufacturing and local protectionism has kept down the costs of entry for firms.
In April this year, the Ministry of Commerce announced a "Home Electronics to Countryside" program to encourage the growth of SWH systems in rural areas with a 13% subsidy on the cost of buying a system for rural residents. Many experts view this plan as a tool to encourage consolidation in the industry through adoption of more rigid standards. Only 92 of the 133 companies that placed a bid for the program were selected.
Shandong is the world production center for SWHs, based on measured area of concentrated heat vacuum tubes, with over 100 million square meters a year and 387 manufacturers. Of China's 30 leading makers of the products with over 10 million yuan in production value, 10 are based in the province, including some of the largest SWH producers, such as Himin Solar Energy Group, Shandong Sangle Solar Energy and Linuo Paradigma Solar Energy.
Dezhou city, home to Himin Solar, boasts that 90% of households there use SWHs and that the streets are lit with solar-powered lights.
Recently, Jiangsu province joined the drive into SWH manufacturing. Of the 92 companies selected for the home electronics to the countryside program, 15 were from the province, including Jiangsu Huayang Solar Energy Heater, Jiangsu Sunrain Solar Energy and Jiangsu Sunshore Solar Energy Industry.
Jiangsu Huayang has filed for 150 independent patents and exports products to the US, Germany, Italy, Singapore, South Korea and Taiwan.
The industry's growth is attracting overseas interest. On September 17, Milwaukee-based, AO Smith Corp acquired a controlling stake in Tianlong Holding, one of China's leading water purification companies. AO Smith is a world leader in residential and commercial water heating equipment and is already the second-biggest maker of water heaters in China, posting sales revenue of US$2.3 billion in 2008.
China's rapid adoption of SWH technology will help counter the country's dependence on fossil fuels. In 2004, SWH units already provided 12% of China's renewable energy, second only to hydropower. According to the government's mid-to-long term plan, China could save 20 million tonnes of coal by installing a total of 150 million square meters of SWHs by 2010.
According to "The China Greentech Report 2009", the market size for green technology in China could reach up to 15% of gross domestic product by 2013. Clearly, this is not only an opportunity for foreign firms to jump on the bandwagon of a Chinese market with astronomical growth potential, it is also a golden opportunity for Chinese firms to gain a foothold in the rapidly developing renewable energy markets in Europe and North America. China's solar revolution is well underway, and will not be limited by national borders.
Ryan Rutkowski is a master's student studying international economics at Johns Hopkins University - Nanjing University Center for Chinese-American Studies.
(Copyright 2009 Asia Times Online (Holdings) Ltd. All rights reserved. Please contact us about sales, syndication and republishing.
)
think of it:
at present - roughly 1 in 10 homes in mainland china ALREADY are solarpower fitted...a lot of it spread quite equitably between RURAL and urban areas...meaning: even less -well off people are coming around to it.
1 in 10 chinese homes, roughly...
even a rough translation of that percentage of how many chinese citizens are now relying at least partly on solar power - can be the equivalent of AT least the ENTIRE population of the United States of America.
in contrast - how many AMERICAN HOMES are fitted for this?
oh - wait -- americans are worrying about their mortgages, the banks , etc....
what solar power? we got problems with paying the CAR insurance ...
Michael Klare has it wrong --- just as Paul Kennedy did over 20 years ago in his "Rise and Fall of the Great Powers"
Both Klare and Kennedy were caught in a Nation-state-centric view of Empire.
Kennedy's great work on the "Great Powers" (ie. EMPIRES) was sub-titled, "Economic Change and Military Conflict from 1500 to 2000", and Kennedy understood that the world and Empires that ruled the world before 1500 had been preceded by an era of Church-Centric and pre-Nation-State-Centric EMPIRE control.
However, neither Kennedy nor Klare fully appreciated that the era of EMPIRE succeeding that of Nation-State Empires (ie. succeeding 2000) would evolve to a world of Corporate EMPIRE (singular) that would exist beyond the concept of nation-states.
Today, what has irreversibly begun, below the radar of most people, is that epical change from the last nation-state-centric Empire (American Empire) to the 21st century Global Corporate/Financial Empire --- merely posing behind the death-mask of American Empire.
For most people this change from America as a "Great Power" (Kennedy's term) or EMPIRE (Klare's term) is very unsettling for two reasons; that most Americans never thought of their/'our' supposedly democratic Republic as an Empire, and for the few Americans (like Klare, Chalmers Johnson, Chomsky, Kolko, etc.) who recognized that America was acting as an Empire, most of them mistook it as an 'American Empire' (ie. a nation-state-centric Empire that was 'American' in nature).
However, the 21st century ruling-elite global corporate/financial EMPIRE that now exists (and is the proximate cause of all the world's sorrows) is really not the 'American Empire', but is really controlling the carcass of the former nation-state called America, and which many still think of as 'our country'.
But as David Suskind perfectly captured in his “One Percent Doctrine” when he recounted that, “The (Bush) aide said that guys like me were "in what we call the reality-based community," which he defined as people who "believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality." I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. "That's not the way the world really works anymore," he continued. "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality -- judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."
So we have not reached “The End of History” as Francis Fukuyama claimed in 1992 with ‘free-market democracy’ (and which G.W. Bush perverted into “the world’s greatest capitalist democracy” --- whatever that perverted moron meant by that oxymoron), but rather history has played a bad joke on us and continued to metastasize into this cancerous tumor of Corporate Empire as our gift for the 21st century.
Although a postmortem on America the country, and America the body-snatched carcass of this new Global Corporate Empire may seem both ghoulish and irrelevant now that the train has left the station, for those interested in how this slight of hand was performed by the evolving Corporate Empire, here is the very sophisticated propaganda deception that the new EMPIRE employed:
http://www.opednews.com/populum/diarypage.php?did=14698
Alan MacDonald
Sanford, Maine
Alan, myself and others:
Yes, most of us somewhere in the back-burners of our brain remember that revelatory speech delivered by the head corporate CEO to Mr. Beal in the prophetic film "Network."
"Mr. Beal, there is no U.S.A., no Soviet Union, no China, India, or Brazil (not necessarily exact countries or words). There is only Exxon, Monsanto, AT&T.... (fill in the blanks). Just one giant holding company (yes, to big to fail) in which we all have a small stake in."
Nations, religions, flags, holy books, etc. are all just symbols to effect us into believing we still have autonomy, independence and democracy, rather then the reality of our bondage to international systems that are beyond our control...... probably even beyond the control of those who "think" they are running them. We/they have created an earth destroying juggernaut that crushes everything in it's path.... including those pulling it.
"Nations, religions, flags, holy books, etc. are all just symbols to effect us into believing we still have autonomy, independence and democracy, rather then the reality of our bondage to international systems that are beyond our control...... probably even beyond the control of those who "think" they are running them. We/they have created an earth destroying juggernaut that crushes everything in it's path.... including those pulling it."
Let's think again...
"reality of our bondage"
No.
Let's just create OUR own reality.
Here is my reality:
I AM FREE. No matter what! I am not in bondage to anything or anyone. I have free will.
I always, always have choices.
US corporations in blind pursuit of short term profit offshored the US's productive capacity, which was the real source of its power.
by the time Rachel Carson wrote Silent Spring, the productive capacity of the US was running smack into a relatively new phenomenon: rampant environmental destruction in the form of toxicity, illness and death...
this is still the single issue waiting to be dealt with by humanity...
whether within the current boundaries of the country currently called the United States, or elsewhere on the small, living world, production by any name results in the destruction of the one and only environment we have, and the illness and death of the proximate living things...and the damage done encircles the globe...
NC-Tom - instead of thinking U.S. military industrial complex, try substituting "Global" MIC. The U.S. MIC is evolving and has nothing to fear.
Well, if the American empire is toast, the best thing to do would be to recall what Gen. Eisenhower said during the darkest phase of the Battle of the Bulge in December 1944 -- "The present situation should be seen as one of opportunity and not of disaster."
Those who adapt to change will not only survive, as I see it, but thrive; the ones who try in vain to fight off the combined forces of history, political reality and economic reality (mainly, the elites in Mordor-on-the-Potomac and Isengard-on-the-Hudson) will end up as extinct as the dinosaurs.
And recall how Frodo wished he had not lived in his time (the re-emergence of Sauron), and how Gandalf counselled him: "[A]ll we have to do is decide what to do with the time that is given us."
is this a bad thing? "Your rooms may be a little small, your ability to demand better accommodations may have gone out the window, and the amenities may not be to your taste, but get used to it. It's going to be your reality from now on." Aren't we all suppose to move to the city, live in tiny apartments on top of eachother and ride the bus? Seems this is good news!
Well, it looks pretty bleak. No one will question that. Don't count America out yet. We can rebuild the dream, a dream that all free men and women want. The idea of America is still a great notion, even if it has produced such horrible ends. The idea of free people in a democracy is not an illusion. It is something we will have to find maybe for the first time. Maybe this time humility, wisdom, and compassion will have to head the list of those things we never fail to do. Our greatness is in our people, in our desire to learn and resolve those problems that have been with every nation since the beginning of time. Lets remake ourselves in a way that truly uplifts and respects humanity. Just maybe these times are a wake up call and a new direction? We as a people can set the course if we can learn from our terrible history that no one is expendable, we all bear the responsiblity of freedom and goodwill.
If the year 2025 has arrived, can the year 2525 be far away?
In The Year 2525
Zager Evans
In The Year 2525
If woman can survive
They may find
In the year 3535
Ain't gonna need to tell the truth, tell no lies
Everything you think, do, and say
Is in the pill you took today
In the year 4545
Ain't gonna need your teeth, won't need your eyes
You won't find a thing chew
Nobody's gonna look at you
In the year 5555
Your arms are hanging limp at your sides
Your legs got not nothing to do
Some machine is doing that for you
In the year 6565
Ain't gonna need no husband, won't need no wife
You'll pick your son, pick your daughter too
From the bottom of a long glass tube
In the year 7510
If God's a-comin' he ought to make it by then
Maybe he'll look around himself and say
Guess it's time for the Judgement day
In the year 8510
God is gonna shake his mighty head
He'll either say I'm pleased where man has been
Or tear it down and start again
In the year 9595
I'm kinda wondering if man is gonna be alive
He's taken everything this old earth can give
And he ain't put back nothing
Now it's been 10,000 years
Man has cried a billion tears
For what he never knew
Now man's reign is through
But through the eternal night
The twinkling of starlight
So very far away
Maybe it's only yesterday
Poet
"That was the moment when the United States ceased to be the planet's preeminent power and was forced to behave like another major player in a world of many competing great powers."
It has not only happened, it has gone far further. As we write, it is glaringly obvious that America is no longer a great power. Power indicates respect in recognition of rational intentions. America, however, is and for some probably short time will remain a great force. Force indicates recognition of the danger in irrational might as in the body of a great fighter who is a mental retard. Some fighters throughout history have been like this.
While it is saddening to say this, this American century has been the shortest century in the history of mankind.
The cause of this debacle lies in America, buried in the understanding that Americans have of themselves. Its people have become its greatest enemy.
BENJAMIN FRANKLIN was himself highly skeptical of the 'american experiment'....history seemingly recording that he cautioned the mostly "younger" "founding fathers" that what they had was really just "the best we could do" but left much to be desired.
he had said:
"........democracy eventually arrives at Tyranny"...
"...should this Nation fall -- it will not be because of foreign threats or enemies, real or imagined. it shall fall because the PEOPLE are CORRUPT".
I have stated before that in the late 80's a new type of economic vulture showed up called the "corporate raider" who looked for sound undervalued companies, took over through forced takeover, and then proceeded to cannibalize a sound company by selling of it's assets, all for quick profits.
Well I feel this is what is happening today only on a national level. Corporate vultures have taken over almost all phases of our social, political and economic structures from government, to food and health, all the way down to private prisons and mercenaries. They are taking a country that had a strong but complacent middle-class element and are sucking all the wealth out of it creating a society of a small number of "haves" and a large struggling dumbed down base of "have-not's."
Their myopic tunnel vision that only sees the $$$$$ on the keyboard tapestry of life is unsustainable. When so many industries are gone, jobs outsoursed and social equity provisions eliminated.... Then the the beleaguered masses will not even be able to shop at War Mart. Maybe their vision is to then attack the newer economic winner like India and China and have the reserve process begin with factories being set up in the desperately poor countries like the U.S. and Europe.
Naturally these shenanigans will not work as there is and end game in the finite resources of this earth (our natural bank account with cornucopian wealth being exhausted) and even the programed gullibility of the masses.
What the elite's must realize is that mother earth is like the Titanic. A glorious rich ;and fascinating place on cruse control with no one competent at the helm is doomed when it crashes into the glacier of selfish greed and arrogance.
Is it not true that people will expecting the US to fall in stature in the 1970's never to return? Don't underestimate the power of the US. Remember, those with power use their power to maintain it. This economic collapse will heal with time, and the rest of the world can not be sure they won't be doing well.
Welcome To The Homeland
Welcome to Germany
Welcome to the Hyper-White Techno-Evangelical Inquisition
800 billion additional dollars to the War for Lockheed-Halliburton
now up to a quarter of a trillion for the war for the Brown&Root- for the Dyncorp
in addition to the regular 500 million or so a minute for the
Narcotics Trafficking- CIA- Military- Industrial- World's Greatest Polluter- Criminal Think Tank Complex
Small scale tactical nuclear weapons cocktails
served up to brown skinned children
with distended bellies
by well-manicured barbarians in Citadels and Mansions
by their servants in boardrooms
with distended bellies
With 725 military bases
With 350 outposts
In 132 countries
In Every jungle
In Every tree
All baby-faced tamarinds run for cover, hiding in their mother's breasts
America- A fundamentally sick society
America- A culture of conquest
Get out of Iraq Get out of Viet Nam
America get out of Colombia
America get off the Rez
America get out of Afghanistan
America get out of etcetera
America, a fundamentally sick society.
Welcome to Plastic Racist Nation
Welcome to McAmeriWal-Martika
Germany- The Fatherland
America- The Homeland
Welcome to Soft Fascism
General Reinhard Gehlen head of German military intelligence on the Eastern front and his network of spies and terrorists were brought over to the USA after World War 2 in the now well known Operation Paperclip. From these advisers and functionaries Allen Dulles, copying many of the methods utilized by the likes of Herr Gehlen, shaped what we now know to be the CIA.
Instruments of Statecraft
Counterinsurgency Literature
Strangle Them- Starve Them
Hold an election
Call it Democracy
I pledge allegiance to the United Sports Utility Vehicle
of Der Father- der Home Land of the Fee
Home Land of Wage Slavery
Land of the Tidy White Bestiality
This Land of Pre-Ordained Brutality
This Land of Hyper-Tense Entreprenurial Mentality
Overthrow Castro
Overthrow Arbenz
Overthrow Mossadegh
Overthrow Chavez
Overthrow National Sovereignty
Overthrow Dignity
It is time to stop living
The Lie that is America- I Secede
And the baleful truth of the matter is the reality of America is even worse than the above elicitation can hope to describe.
"Over the town, in the dark tempestuous night, backwards revolved the luminous wheel."–(Malcolm Lowry, "Under The Volcano.")
America is an abstraction of delirium that reconciles itself only to itself.
It can only be what it is. Transfixed.
Fixed stars cycle repetitively. The ferris wheel can only revolve backwards.
Maximal death projected outward and inward simultaneously. The droning. The Drones.
Silently they descend, noiselessly without remorse. Embossed with 'Smiley face' decals. The innocence unto death. Missives of the American 'joie de vivre.'
The event horizon of a dead people, a dead culture and a dead country. Enter evening and dread.
Choking on an indigestible history as it cannibalizes itself.
A necropolis of endings. Who said "Welcome to the Terror dome?"
Was it Lindsay Lohan?
There will be no tomorrow, tomorrow is over.
"Wer immer strebend sich bemüht, den können wir erlösen."
(Whosoever unceasingly strives upward...him can we save. )
–(Goethe, Faust).
–(Jill Bains)
tanks mcoyote for the swelling crescendo
there has been soo much good to read today
from hedges, klare responses are excellent
The British, Russians, Germans, French, Dutch all once powerful colonial powers in the 19th and 20th century were pulled down by the same Imperial over reach and endless wars. We have now met the enemy and it's us! The war mongers and greed heads among us have won but we've all lost and so has our country. Obama is presiding over the twilight of American power. It's simple we cannot afford to go on spending on the military with $$ were borrowing and a failing shrinking economy. How our leaders thought we could just send all of our manufacturing and now large chunks of our service sector offshore and stay prosperous was beyonf many of us but they did. Wall sts. total focus on shor t term gain and phony paper games has also helped to pull us down , but these pirates could care less . many of them will simply move offshore with their loot and blame the rest of us for the countries demise as a power.
US corporations in blind pursuit of short term profit offshored the US's productive capacity, which was the real source of its power.
"How much longer will Washington feel that Americans can afford to subsidize a global role that includes garrisoning much of the planet and fighting distant wars in the name of global security, when the American economy is losing so much ground to its competitors?"
This kind of misses the point. Most of the world doesn't feel that America is fighting distant wars in the name of global security, but rather in the name of expanding and maintaining markets for American based multinationals.
No one asked the US to go to Vietnam, Grenada, Panama, etc. But when America was asked to go to Rwanda, she turned the world thumbs down, because there was no American interest.
America wastes vast amounts of public resources on the military and the health insurance industry, resources which could be better used elsewhere.
"How much longer will Washington feel that Americans can afford to subsidize a global role that includes garrisoning much of the planet and fighting distant wars..." (wanderingraven)
–How much longer? Until the last bomb is dropped and the very stars are ripped from the skies!
"Ain't no life nowhere!" -(Jimi Hendrix, "Manic Depression.")
–(Jill Bains)
Hail to Bush!!!
Along with Tzar Nicolas II the Bloody with mental capacity at the same level as the Last American Emperor; along with demented France Joseph Hapsburg and Gorbachev, Bush have sped demise of the Empire of Lies.
Thank you, idiots.
Thanks Professor Klare for the excellent and TIMELY
analysis.
On a tangential note. I have a serious proposal for JAY LENO.
1)90% of what glenn beck says is true. His schtick
is to MISASSIGN 'AGENCY'...that is to misdirect citizens
assignation of BLAME from the perpetrators of the raygun revolution to an entirely different culprit. This use of a scapegoat is the prime modus operandi of the faux news environment.
The bankrupting of the socially democratic state has been their goal. That and enabling permanent ownership
of the political processes to those whose to whom fraud and
deceit and , yes, sedition is acceptable. At the citizens expense,
those that subverted the political process through the use of payola and quid pro quo of political patronage (appointing of politicians family members to cushy
board memberships with 200k/year to show up at a meeting, stock options, etc...) have achieved their political power,
financial power and permanent use of the military as their own private militia (even that has been subverted by the
parasitism of the private security contractors). You could say that the total
collapse of our media infrastructure has been predicated on 'the false premise'.
Millions of $$$ has been spent to effect this change in our society over thirty or so years...through the use of "thinktanks" whose sole mandate is the construction of faulty reasoning with which to blanket the airwaves. They've been so successful
that, as Prof Klare says, the end of the world is upon us. Can it be saved by the people and for the people...??? only by changing the media paradigm from the
false premise to the noble and true premise, that government of, by and for the people shall not perish from this earth...in northamerica anyway.
Regarding jay
2) I can supply a guest list that would triple his
viewership overnight. It would though require a change
of attitude on the part of its corporate parent, from
rampant profitability back to steady and reliable growth.
3) I can also show fairpoint how to immediately
resume or initiate growth by serving specific product selectivity in a cable environment and dedicated server
initiation in the high speed internet environment.
call me... those of us who understand the big
picture are in a position to redirect under-utilized resources for the good of the constitution, the citizenry and yes even the financial restabilization of the Empire;
in return for a reapplication of first principles...
c'mon you guys....be heroes to the american people,
stop the hypocrisy and we can satisfy all but the
political extremes with an acceptable modicum of success.
Since the collapse of the Soviet Union I have always tried to counter the assertion that: "The U.S. won the Cold War" with, in my estimation, both countries lost the CW. It is just taking a bit longer for all the catastrophic implications to hit the U.S. Primarily because the U.S. had a better credit rating then the Soviet Union.
We are like the old rich aristocratic family in a moderate sized town that can exist for years on it's good historic name, but eventually even the bar owners learn to rein in our tabs and we have to start paying cash just like the other working stiffs.
The U.S. has become a world class dead beat nation and we need to start attending a national credit card 12 step program with the MIC carte blanche card being the first to be cut up and recycled into a good pair of strong work boots to do some organic farming.
Excellent.
If he hasn't already done so, President Obama should read some Chalmers Johnson. Then, perhaps in a thoughtful fireside chat, Barack should recast the basic decision as a "guns versus butter" issue: should the United States continue to sacrifice its domestic, middle class consumer economy in order to maintain and keep expanding a far flung military and aggressive intelligence presence all over the globe? Does perpetuating the Bush era priorities of full spectrum dominance and preemptive war actually make the nation safer, or does it simply insure we will harvest yet more blowback? The context, of course, is the choice on Afghanistan.
In the immediate aftermath of World War II, Americans overwhelmingly favored an emphasis upon butter rather than yet more guns, a transition from a war economy to a peace economy, Ike in a business suit rather than MacArthur as proconsul of Manchuria. The Brits too (militarily victorious in WWII but economically devastated) similarly opted for a national health system and other domestic rebuilding rather than shoveling still more wealth into doggedly shoring up what was left of their colonial empire.
If Obama recasts the public debate this way, the GOP will shriek hysterically. But so what? Americans do love their guns and the latest hi tech Pentagon shock and awe gadgetry. But push come to shove, a majority of Main Street Americans still love their butter more - particularly when the guns generate obscene profits only for a very few, while the scene around the kitchen table keeps looking more and more grim.
Bill from Saginaw
"If Obama recasts the public debate this way, the GOP will shriek hysterically. But so what? " –(Bill from Saginaw)
–Obama will not be recasting "the public debate" anytime soon, if ever. First, is because there is no "public debate" in the first place. Secondly, there is no 'public' in America to begin with.
But this is a trenchant point being made here about the GOP: True governance in America must proceed as if the GOP does not exist. "So what?" indeed. Total war against the GOP is not an option, but then neither is total war against the Democrats not an option. To wit:
"The dictatorship is necessary because it is a case, not of partial changes, but of the very EXISTENCE of the bourgeoisie. No agreement is possible on this ground. Only force can be the deciding factor" –(Leon Trotsky)
For there to be a true 'public' debate, it cannot include the Republicans or the Democrats because they will not exist.
–(Jill Bains)
Sounds like the debate is between you and yourselfs.... (Amfortus wound and Jill Bains)
and you already have your wonderful dictatorship.
So don't forget to invite us to your victory parade.
You're not one of those "radicals", are you?
"Until now, the use of the dollar as the international medium of exchange has given the United States a significant economic advantage: it can simply print dollars to meet its international obligations..." But of course the "economic advantage" could not last forever. We merely piled up debt. Now the dollar must sink in value in order to repay that debt. We must eventually have a lower dollar to disincentivise us from buying foreign products and to make our products cheaper and more likely to be purchased abroad. Hopefully China will begin selling some dollars to help us out. Of course if they sell too much, they lose value in their remaining dollar holdings.
The "bottom line" is ordinary USans have to get a clue. The global preeminence created by USan elites through enslavement of ordinary USans was actually an opportunity squandered by USans to convert the product of their enslavement into a lever to advance world peace, prosperity, equity and justice.
But unless USans get a clue, the USA's fall to mediocrity, due to spectacular elite hubris, will result in much more than that squandered opportunity. They will have to get off the luxury/convenience consumption binge and go back to work, not in offices, but in factories and fields, for a pittance.
Now every cloud has a silver lining. And given a clue amid a chronic collapse of their currency and credit, USans would turn that into an opportunity to rebuild their local industry that elites shipped offshore. USans would recapture their local markets, rebuild their communities around local self-reliance, and the local exchange loops would become strong again and resistant to elite pathogen destruction.
But lacking a clue, USans will instead go to work for Chinese corporations in Chinese-owned/operated plants around the USA, making warez for the Chinese binging on their own luxury/convenience. The exploitation table will be turned.
Neither nation or any nation will be fulfilled until it disengages from the global marketplace, and focuses on local production for local consumption, i.e. localism.
The only thing Klare's analysis leaves out is the impact of global climate change and environmental degradation. Some countries are going to be hurt more than others--India will have the world's largest population soon, China's population of young workers will level off, thus diminishing its role as a cheap-labor nation and, at the same time, environmental damage will take a terrible toll on the health of the people. Food, in an age of petroleum scarcity, will become increasingly expensive and India will find it difficult to feed its population (if, indeed, it cares). One thing about the future: unpredicted influences crop up like mushrooms after a rain. Just as the CIA miscalculated in its assessment of the future, so Klare might have exaggerated the imminent demise of the United States. He is, of course, right about the end of American exceptionalism. That doctrine is gone forever. Good riddance.
It is going to be very interesting to see how the U.S. Military Industrial complex deals with this new reality. I really can't picture it peacefully riding off into the sunset.
That's exactly the first thought I had, too.
Darn, when Klare wrote of a confined future for the CIA, I had hoped he meant prison, rather than simply a diminished role in future meddling.
Klare writes: "don't forget the advantages to being an ordinary country like any other country..."
On that score, Let’s get on with it. The collapse and failure of American empire, I mean. Lest this sound seditious, consider two studies:
"Selfish Capitalism and Mental Illness"
http://www.thepsychologist.org.uk/archive/archive_home.cfm/volumeID_20-editionID_149-ArticleID_1212-ge...
has stats on economic systems and societal health showing a high correlation of selfish capitalism with mental illness. Among 16 nations, the US, an exemplar of SC, has the highest rates of mental illness, while the Netherlands and all other social democracies have a rate less than half of ours.
Another, "An Overview of Child Well-being in Rich Countries", by UNICEF
http://www.unicef-irc.org/publications/pdf/rc7_eng.pdf
finds that of 21 countries, the US ranks second to last in child well-being. The Netherlands is number one, sharing top billing with most Scandinavian countries. So, the Dutch remind us then that there is at least some hope after all for quality of life in the aftermath of imperial failure. Thus, let us all now bow our heads and pray that we too may soon fail so successfully.