Good points all, I'm with you up until having one global hegemon, and that one being the US. The hegemony of the US, propagandistically touted domestically and abroad as promoting freedom and democracy, has entailed the exact opposite. In furthering its economic (capitalistic), political, and ideological interests worldwide (800 military…
Good points all, I'm with you up until having one global hegemon, and that one being the US. The hegemony of the US, propagandistically touted domestically and abroad as promoting freedom and democracy, has entailed the exact opposite. In furthering its economic (capitalistic), political, and ideological interests worldwide (800 military bases over the globe!), this country has suppressed freedom and democracy through exploitation, subversion, coercion, murder, assassination, overthrow of governments, control of international organizations, bribery, overt warfare, covert warfare, and on, and on, and on... I mean even the worshiped USAID was a front for the CIA and a sleight of hand to profit American companies rather than assist in substantive international development, see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5mFSRb5dUOM.
Yeah, America as the "exceptional, indispensable" nation throughout the world has cost the lives of millions, has diminished the life prospects of untold millions more, including among its own people (“The U.S. ranks as the worst performer among 10 developed nations in critical areas of health care, including preventing deaths…”, https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/us-health-care-ranking-report-last-rcna171652). America’s global leadership is also in its withdrawal from international climate accords and denial of global warming as official Trumpian/MAGA belief and government policy, That outlook hastens the environmental collapse bearing on all of civilization.
The words of JFK spoken in June of 1963 still pertain today: “What kind of a peace do I mean? What kind of a peace do we seek? Not a Pax Americana enforced on the world by American weapons of war. Not the peace of the grave or the security of the slave. I am talking about genuine peace, the kind of peace that makes life on earth worth living, the kind that enables men and nations to grow and to hope and build a better life for their children — not merely peace for Americans but peace for all men and women — not merely peace in our time but peace for all time” [https://singjupost.com/full-transcript-president-kennedys-peace-speech-at-american-university-june-10-1963/?singlepage=1].
So I don’t subscribe to there being a global hegemon, certainly not an American one, nor a Chinese, nor a Russian, nor… I’d like to see a multipolar world order (maybe along the lines of a BRICS one?) reflecting the values of - ready for this? – diversity, equity, and inclusion (gawd, I’m a DEI-ist!) in economic, political, social, and cultural arrangements. In other words, I don’t think Francis Fukumaya got it right in “The End of History and the Last Man.”
I always appreciate a well-structured and meaningful post, so no worries—thanks for taking the time to write it out.
I fully understand where you're coming from. The U.S. has absolutely used its power to extend and secure more power, and the network of 800+ military bases is a clear manifestation of that. There's no shortage of morally bankrupt operations either—whether it's their behavior abroad or at home. From spraying entire neighborhoods (often Black communities) with chemical agents, to poisoning people during Prohibition, to supporting regime changes for economic interests—they’ve done some deeply messed-up things.
And believe me, I never thought I would be the one defending the U.S. But I'm from the Czech Republic—former Eastern Bloc, Warsaw Pact, occupied by the Soviet Union for 40 years. I was born in 1990, just after the fall of the USSR. I grew up during the transition—when the country was privatizing state assets, rebuilding institutions, and aligning itself with the West. The Soviet system had just collapsed, but its effects were still everywhere: the economy, the infrastructure, the generational mindset of people around me.
I remember when my parents went to vote on joining NATO and the EU. I asked them how they voted, and they said, "For your future." And honestly? That choice paid off. I was able to study at a university in Denmark. Our economy became stable under the NATO umbrella. Infrastructure, commerce, even our global mobility improved massively. It wasn’t perfect—but for a huge number of people, life genuinely got better. That happened because of U.S. hegemony—whether directly or as a byproduct of the Western system it underwrites.
Sure, nothing is all good. But speaking from my own generational experience—growing up in the aftermath of Soviet collapse and now living under U.S. influence (mostly soft power)—I’d still pick U.S. influence every single time. If you need a comparison, just take Holodomor—millions starved to death under Stalin’s policies in Ukraine. Whatever missteps the U.S. has made, they’re not even in the same league of horror.
Now, I get that people in the Middle East or Southeast Asia may disagree—and rightly so. U.S. foreign policy in those regions has been brutal and cynical. But from the perspective of post-communist Europe, the West is the reason we have functioning economies, personal freedoms, and stable institutions.
As for the idea of a multipolar world: I get the appeal in theory—diversity, equity, decentralization—but history doesn’t support it. In practice, multipolarity tends to produce rival alliances competing for dominance. We’ve been there before. Europe had multiple powerful states—Prussia/Germany, France, Austria, Britain, Spain—and what did we get? Endless shifting alliances, constant tension, and two world wars born from that chaos.
Look, a better alternative has to be grounded in facts. The hegemon will always be the one with the biggest gun—it’s never been about morality, and it never will be. It’s just a global dick-measuring contest powered by missiles and money. The most peaceful version of that we've seen was probably the U.S.–EU relationship pre-Orange Man, and even that was built on mutual interest, mostly because we had a common enemy. That won’t change. Humans always need enemies.
So the only way I can see this pattern breaking is if the enemy becomes truly universal—something that threatens everyone equally. I don’t want to say Aliens… but Aliens. 😄 Or fine, let’s say an asteroid. A big one. Something that forces all of humanity to look in the same direction for once. But even then, I’d bet that as soon as the “NEVER GONNA CLOSE MY EYES!!!” montage ends and the space rock explodes, we’ll go right back to massacring each other over flags and markets.
I saw your reply just as I was about to zone out last night (up much too late!) and after I had edited and posted my previous response with the addendum citing the link to a Jeffrey Sachs piece on a new international order. Our respective missives must have crossed somewhere in cyberspace. If you missed it, I ask that you give it a read. Similarly I reiterate JFK’s question-answer, “What kind of a peace do I mean? What kind of a peace do we seek? Not a Pax Americana enforced on the world by American weapons of war. Not the peace of the grave or the security of the slave…”
You have given me much to think about. I hope the following reflects something cogent.
I can scarcely comprehend what life was like in the Czech Republic even under the waning effects of Soviet domination (although I think we’re now getting more than a hint of it in the U.S. under Trump and the MAGAs). I can’t disagree that for a huge number of people in Eastern Europe (and the former Soviet republics?) life genuinely got better after the collapse of the Soviet Union.
But whether “That happened because of U.S. hegemony—whether directly or as a byproduct of the Western system it underwrites,” especially such a militarily reliant one as exemplified by its creation of NATO, I have to say “no”.
I arrive at my conclusion by referencing George Kennan and his 1946 “containment policy” (his “Long Telegram”) toward the Soviets https://retrospectjournal.com/2025/03/16/the-long-telegram-george-kennan-and-the-birth-of-containment/. A few points: first, Kennan meant that the strategy was to be a political and economic one, not a military one. Second, the policy was directed at the communism in the Soviet Union that was unique to Eastern Europe, not elsewhere. Third, he accurately foretold the internal collapse of the Soviet economy and system as a whole.
A bit more… as a result, Kennan was put in charge of the Office of Policy Planning at the State Dept. in May 1947. Dean Acheson as Secretary of State signed the treaty creating NATO in April 1949. He forced Kennan out of his position in May 1950, replacing him with kindred spirit Paul Nitze, who manipulated Kennan’s message so as to confront communism anywhere and everywhere in the world with overwhelming military force. Nitze’s NSC-68 was a counterpart to Kennan’s “Long Telegram”, opening the way to the Cold War, its historically unprecedented military spending (to the tune of over one-half the federal discretionary budget, and climbing), and involvement in open and clandestine wars in and Southeast Asia and elsewhere throughout the world.
[So this statement is correct: “Now, I get that people in the Middle East or Southeast Asia may disagree—and rightly so. U.S. foreign policy in those regions has been brutal and cynical. But from the perspective of post-communist Europe, the West is the reason we have functioning economies, personal freedoms, and stable institutions.” The West’s circumscribed success in that part of the world must be stacked up against its horrific ruinations wreaked elsewhere across the globe. The West’s legacy now more recently includes its complicity in the Gaza genocide extending back to the Nakba of 1948 and beforehand.]
A bit more more… with the collapse of the Soviet Union, what was the need for NATO? This question was even being asked, and answered to some degree, by officials in the Bush I administration, such as U.S. Secretary of State James Baker and his famous “not one inch eastward” assurance about NATO expansion in his meeting with Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev on February 9, 1990 in return for the reunification of Germany. The discussions went beyond that, including the integration of the Soviet Union (still extant at the time) into European economic and security structures and protecting Soviet security interests. Subsequent discussions included the possibility of the Soviet Union becoming a partner in NATO. On May 31, 1990, Bush went out of his way to assure Gorbachev, “And of course, we have no intention, even in our thoughts, to harm the Soviet Union in any fashion” https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/russia-programs/2017-12-12/nato-expansion-what-gorbachev-heard-western-leaders-early.
Needlessly generating another war and possibly the last one ever, this is the Pax America JFK warned against.
Now, as to “Whatever missteps the U.S. has made, they’re not even in the same league of horror [as the Holodomor—millions starved to death under Stalin’s policies in Ukraine]”, I have to mention the plight of the Native American peoples and the Blacks, both of whom could be said to be victims of genocide of policies toward them, involving outright slaughter in the case of the Natives to slavery of the Blacks and to more subtle measures such as discriminatory laws and practices affecting both groups. The Natives population was estimated to be 15 million at the time of Columbus’ arrival in the New World; by the late 19th century that number had been reduced to 238,000 https://eji.org/news/history-racial-injustice-mass-killings-of-native-americans/ and https://oxfordre.com/americanhistory/display/10.1093/acrefore/9780199329175.001.0001/acrefore-9780199329175-e-3.
The effects of historical social marginalization, discriminatory policies, and insufficient resources over the centuries has led to decreased health status for both groups to the present day, Native Americans ranking near the bottom in health and education measures https://www.gao.gov/tribal-and-native-american-issues and Black life expectancy is nearly five years shorter compared to White people, as well as suffering in other measures.
Are we condemned to having no better an international order than that of hegemony, the most seemingly benign of them being the U.S.? If we are, we should be prepared for the collapse of the American Empire as laid out by Chris Hedges here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=csI8JLJ15Ak. Will a futile spasm of trying to retain dominance be World War Last with China?
Jeffrey Sachs piece on “Birthing a New International Order” is worth rereading and contemplating. A path forward, rather than running into roadblocks or running in circles, looks promising with Security Council reform at the UN to allow India as a member, giving greater more proportional representation to that part of the world while reducing the West’s grip and telling the U.S. to keep its dick in its pants, no matter how much it boasts of it (got a kick outta the “dick-measuring contest” metaphor).
Finally, that need for a “universal enemy”...? We got two, global warming and nuclear war. We’ve taken ourselves out of contention for any leadership role there, indeed any role, as we’ve torn up arms control agreements, are spending $1.5 trillion on nuclear weapons “upgrades”, and pretty much set back if not abandoned government involvement in global warming mitigation efforts. Pretty impressive record for the defender of the free world.
Good points all, I'm with you up until having one global hegemon, and that one being the US. The hegemony of the US, propagandistically touted domestically and abroad as promoting freedom and democracy, has entailed the exact opposite. In furthering its economic (capitalistic), political, and ideological interests worldwide (800 military bases over the globe!), this country has suppressed freedom and democracy through exploitation, subversion, coercion, murder, assassination, overthrow of governments, control of international organizations, bribery, overt warfare, covert warfare, and on, and on, and on... I mean even the worshiped USAID was a front for the CIA and a sleight of hand to profit American companies rather than assist in substantive international development, see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5mFSRb5dUOM.
Yeah, America as the "exceptional, indispensable" nation throughout the world has cost the lives of millions, has diminished the life prospects of untold millions more, including among its own people (“The U.S. ranks as the worst performer among 10 developed nations in critical areas of health care, including preventing deaths…”, https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/us-health-care-ranking-report-last-rcna171652). America’s global leadership is also in its withdrawal from international climate accords and denial of global warming as official Trumpian/MAGA belief and government policy, That outlook hastens the environmental collapse bearing on all of civilization.
The words of JFK spoken in June of 1963 still pertain today: “What kind of a peace do I mean? What kind of a peace do we seek? Not a Pax Americana enforced on the world by American weapons of war. Not the peace of the grave or the security of the slave. I am talking about genuine peace, the kind of peace that makes life on earth worth living, the kind that enables men and nations to grow and to hope and build a better life for their children — not merely peace for Americans but peace for all men and women — not merely peace in our time but peace for all time” [https://singjupost.com/full-transcript-president-kennedys-peace-speech-at-american-university-june-10-1963/?singlepage=1].
So I don’t subscribe to there being a global hegemon, certainly not an American one, nor a Chinese, nor a Russian, nor… I’d like to see a multipolar world order (maybe along the lines of a BRICS one?) reflecting the values of - ready for this? – diversity, equity, and inclusion (gawd, I’m a DEI-ist!) in economic, political, social, and cultural arrangements. In other words, I don’t think Francis Fukumaya got it right in “The End of History and the Last Man.”
[Thanks for taking the time to read this.]
ADDENDUM: I came across this from Jeffrey Sachs after writing the above. I think it's very germane https://consortiumnews.com/2025/04/14/jeffrey-sachs-birthing-a-new-international-order/.
I always appreciate a well-structured and meaningful post, so no worries—thanks for taking the time to write it out.
I fully understand where you're coming from. The U.S. has absolutely used its power to extend and secure more power, and the network of 800+ military bases is a clear manifestation of that. There's no shortage of morally bankrupt operations either—whether it's their behavior abroad or at home. From spraying entire neighborhoods (often Black communities) with chemical agents, to poisoning people during Prohibition, to supporting regime changes for economic interests—they’ve done some deeply messed-up things.
And believe me, I never thought I would be the one defending the U.S. But I'm from the Czech Republic—former Eastern Bloc, Warsaw Pact, occupied by the Soviet Union for 40 years. I was born in 1990, just after the fall of the USSR. I grew up during the transition—when the country was privatizing state assets, rebuilding institutions, and aligning itself with the West. The Soviet system had just collapsed, but its effects were still everywhere: the economy, the infrastructure, the generational mindset of people around me.
I remember when my parents went to vote on joining NATO and the EU. I asked them how they voted, and they said, "For your future." And honestly? That choice paid off. I was able to study at a university in Denmark. Our economy became stable under the NATO umbrella. Infrastructure, commerce, even our global mobility improved massively. It wasn’t perfect—but for a huge number of people, life genuinely got better. That happened because of U.S. hegemony—whether directly or as a byproduct of the Western system it underwrites.
Sure, nothing is all good. But speaking from my own generational experience—growing up in the aftermath of Soviet collapse and now living under U.S. influence (mostly soft power)—I’d still pick U.S. influence every single time. If you need a comparison, just take Holodomor—millions starved to death under Stalin’s policies in Ukraine. Whatever missteps the U.S. has made, they’re not even in the same league of horror.
Now, I get that people in the Middle East or Southeast Asia may disagree—and rightly so. U.S. foreign policy in those regions has been brutal and cynical. But from the perspective of post-communist Europe, the West is the reason we have functioning economies, personal freedoms, and stable institutions.
As for the idea of a multipolar world: I get the appeal in theory—diversity, equity, decentralization—but history doesn’t support it. In practice, multipolarity tends to produce rival alliances competing for dominance. We’ve been there before. Europe had multiple powerful states—Prussia/Germany, France, Austria, Britain, Spain—and what did we get? Endless shifting alliances, constant tension, and two world wars born from that chaos.
Look, a better alternative has to be grounded in facts. The hegemon will always be the one with the biggest gun—it’s never been about morality, and it never will be. It’s just a global dick-measuring contest powered by missiles and money. The most peaceful version of that we've seen was probably the U.S.–EU relationship pre-Orange Man, and even that was built on mutual interest, mostly because we had a common enemy. That won’t change. Humans always need enemies.
So the only way I can see this pattern breaking is if the enemy becomes truly universal—something that threatens everyone equally. I don’t want to say Aliens… but Aliens. 😄 Or fine, let’s say an asteroid. A big one. Something that forces all of humanity to look in the same direction for once. But even then, I’d bet that as soon as the “NEVER GONNA CLOSE MY EYES!!!” montage ends and the space rock explodes, we’ll go right back to massacring each other over flags and markets.
Because that’s just what we do.
Martin-
I saw your reply just as I was about to zone out last night (up much too late!) and after I had edited and posted my previous response with the addendum citing the link to a Jeffrey Sachs piece on a new international order. Our respective missives must have crossed somewhere in cyberspace. If you missed it, I ask that you give it a read. Similarly I reiterate JFK’s question-answer, “What kind of a peace do I mean? What kind of a peace do we seek? Not a Pax Americana enforced on the world by American weapons of war. Not the peace of the grave or the security of the slave…”
You have given me much to think about. I hope the following reflects something cogent.
I can scarcely comprehend what life was like in the Czech Republic even under the waning effects of Soviet domination (although I think we’re now getting more than a hint of it in the U.S. under Trump and the MAGAs). I can’t disagree that for a huge number of people in Eastern Europe (and the former Soviet republics?) life genuinely got better after the collapse of the Soviet Union.
But whether “That happened because of U.S. hegemony—whether directly or as a byproduct of the Western system it underwrites,” especially such a militarily reliant one as exemplified by its creation of NATO, I have to say “no”.
I arrive at my conclusion by referencing George Kennan and his 1946 “containment policy” (his “Long Telegram”) toward the Soviets https://retrospectjournal.com/2025/03/16/the-long-telegram-george-kennan-and-the-birth-of-containment/. A few points: first, Kennan meant that the strategy was to be a political and economic one, not a military one. Second, the policy was directed at the communism in the Soviet Union that was unique to Eastern Europe, not elsewhere. Third, he accurately foretold the internal collapse of the Soviet economy and system as a whole.
A bit more… as a result, Kennan was put in charge of the Office of Policy Planning at the State Dept. in May 1947. Dean Acheson as Secretary of State signed the treaty creating NATO in April 1949. He forced Kennan out of his position in May 1950, replacing him with kindred spirit Paul Nitze, who manipulated Kennan’s message so as to confront communism anywhere and everywhere in the world with overwhelming military force. Nitze’s NSC-68 was a counterpart to Kennan’s “Long Telegram”, opening the way to the Cold War, its historically unprecedented military spending (to the tune of over one-half the federal discretionary budget, and climbing), and involvement in open and clandestine wars in and Southeast Asia and elsewhere throughout the world.
[So this statement is correct: “Now, I get that people in the Middle East or Southeast Asia may disagree—and rightly so. U.S. foreign policy in those regions has been brutal and cynical. But from the perspective of post-communist Europe, the West is the reason we have functioning economies, personal freedoms, and stable institutions.” The West’s circumscribed success in that part of the world must be stacked up against its horrific ruinations wreaked elsewhere across the globe. The West’s legacy now more recently includes its complicity in the Gaza genocide extending back to the Nakba of 1948 and beforehand.]
A bit more more… with the collapse of the Soviet Union, what was the need for NATO? This question was even being asked, and answered to some degree, by officials in the Bush I administration, such as U.S. Secretary of State James Baker and his famous “not one inch eastward” assurance about NATO expansion in his meeting with Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev on February 9, 1990 in return for the reunification of Germany. The discussions went beyond that, including the integration of the Soviet Union (still extant at the time) into European economic and security structures and protecting Soviet security interests. Subsequent discussions included the possibility of the Soviet Union becoming a partner in NATO. On May 31, 1990, Bush went out of his way to assure Gorbachev, “And of course, we have no intention, even in our thoughts, to harm the Soviet Union in any fashion” https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/russia-programs/2017-12-12/nato-expansion-what-gorbachev-heard-western-leaders-early.
In 1994 Clinton reneged on the assurances given to Gorbachev by beginning the expansion eastward that resulted in the Ukraine-Russia war (still threatening WWIII) and even continued after its onset https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/nato-75-russia-programs/2021-11-24/nato-expansion-budapest-blow-1994.
Needlessly generating another war and possibly the last one ever, this is the Pax America JFK warned against.
Now, as to “Whatever missteps the U.S. has made, they’re not even in the same league of horror [as the Holodomor—millions starved to death under Stalin’s policies in Ukraine]”, I have to mention the plight of the Native American peoples and the Blacks, both of whom could be said to be victims of genocide of policies toward them, involving outright slaughter in the case of the Natives to slavery of the Blacks and to more subtle measures such as discriminatory laws and practices affecting both groups. The Natives population was estimated to be 15 million at the time of Columbus’ arrival in the New World; by the late 19th century that number had been reduced to 238,000 https://eji.org/news/history-racial-injustice-mass-killings-of-native-americans/ and https://oxfordre.com/americanhistory/display/10.1093/acrefore/9780199329175.001.0001/acrefore-9780199329175-e-3.
The effects of historical social marginalization, discriminatory policies, and insufficient resources over the centuries has led to decreased health status for both groups to the present day, Native Americans ranking near the bottom in health and education measures https://www.gao.gov/tribal-and-native-american-issues and Black life expectancy is nearly five years shorter compared to White people, as well as suffering in other measures.
Are we condemned to having no better an international order than that of hegemony, the most seemingly benign of them being the U.S.? If we are, we should be prepared for the collapse of the American Empire as laid out by Chris Hedges here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=csI8JLJ15Ak. Will a futile spasm of trying to retain dominance be World War Last with China?
Jeffrey Sachs piece on “Birthing a New International Order” is worth rereading and contemplating. A path forward, rather than running into roadblocks or running in circles, looks promising with Security Council reform at the UN to allow India as a member, giving greater more proportional representation to that part of the world while reducing the West’s grip and telling the U.S. to keep its dick in its pants, no matter how much it boasts of it (got a kick outta the “dick-measuring contest” metaphor).
Finally, that need for a “universal enemy”...? We got two, global warming and nuclear war. We’ve taken ourselves out of contention for any leadership role there, indeed any role, as we’ve torn up arms control agreements, are spending $1.5 trillion on nuclear weapons “upgrades”, and pretty much set back if not abandoned government involvement in global warming mitigation efforts. Pretty impressive record for the defender of the free world.
It’s late, again. Good night, ‘til the next time.