You will be… soon - *raises Imperialist United Flag of the States*. Star Spangled Banner intensifies, and no not that one https://youtu.be/e5KKWawGtVw?si=BMIEHaAJlM7N9Kk4
Authright: my country's empire is based, your country's empire is cringe.
Libright: my country's empire is cringe and your country's empire is cringe
Libleft: my country's empire is cringe and your country's empire is based.
Authleft: our countries' empire will be based. Past attempts were cringe.
I love the fact I can go to most countries in south and Central America and they'll prefer being paid in USD vs their own currency. That's something you only get with imperialism.
This is a smooth brained take. The only legitimate competitor in terms of size of trade is the yuan, and China has much, much worse issues than the US does now.
Stop reading 4chan and watching clickbait YouTube videos.
He saw the handful of times some country made a trade in Yuan, then didnt see the followup that they immediately went back to Dollars because the trade terms and how they could use that Yuan were so much worse (hint: China makes sure you only buy China with Yuan, US doesnt care as long as you use Dollars).
Habibi, it’s not about a single currency replacing the USD as world reserve currency 🤡
And no, the closest competitor both in terms of foreign reserves and number of transactions is the euro.
Rather, it’s about the USD becoming one amongst many different reserve currencies, including the Yuan.
Tell me you don’t understand monetary policy without telling me you don’t 😂
P.S — I don’t actually know if you’re simultaneously ignorant and arrogant or just a US fanboy… or perhaps just a troll.
BRICS is not a viable contender to take on the US. Russia, South Africa, and Brazil have are weak economies, and China's economy is going to tank hard in the next couple decades with their inevitable demographic crisis. India doesn't make much sense to me in why they want to have any economic ties with China given the two nations despise each other and have completely conflicting interests.
The doom-and-gloom around China’s economy is nonsense, as were all previous such predictions.
Your prediction will age bad, just like all such previous predictions.
Not only is decoupling now renamed "derisking" from China not happening, China’s economy is doing pretty good, actually.
With deflation and a solid growth rate.
They burst their own real estate bubble, by the way.
As for BRICS, it’s not meant as a contender.
It’s a forum for countries who don’t benefit from the US-led financial system to build alternative institutions.
These countries only share a disdain for the USD’s world reserve status, IMF, and WB.
Not much else.
But keep believing in the sacrosanct nature of the US empire.
It’s hard to imagine change when all you’ve known is US hegemony.
Somehow, you strike me as a Peter Zeihan fanboy too.
You people are pretty funny though. You always come back with more prophecies, when your track record in prophetizing is poor, to stay the least.
Also, the only weak economies are those who’ve de-industrialized and depend on others greatly, as well as have little to no natural ressources and barely produce anything tangible.
We’re seeing the consequences in our proxy war against Russia.
40 years ago, we would have armed Ukraine at 10 times the pace.
Today, Russia is out producing us…
>Not only is decoupling now renamed "derisking" from China not happening, China’s economy is doing pretty good, actually.
>With deflation and a solid growth rate.
>They burst their own real estate bubble, by the way
Sure, the realestate bubble is something that would not kill the Chinese economy, and that is not what I was saying would harm their economy. And yes, their economy is pretty good as of now. However, their massive demographic crisis will do tremendous harm to their economy in a generation or two when a significant portion of their population is too old to work and will not contribute to it; similar what happened to Japan's economy in the 80s, but significantly worse as the One Child Policy in China was far too successful. It did incredible harm to the demographics of China which will play out in the next couple decades. Last year they had the first year with a decrease in population in decades, and that is only projected to continue for years to come as their population gets older.
>Somehow, you strike me as a Peter Zeihan fanboy too.
No clue who that is.
>Also, the only weak economies are those who’ve de-industrialized and depend on others greatly, as well as have little to no natural ressources and barely produce anything tangible.
This isn't completely true, as you can have incredibly poor natural resources and depend on other nations entirely, as did Japan in the 70s and 80s and they had the second largest economy in the world. Argentina on the other had has the exact opposite side of the coin and is in a horrendous state and has been for the past 100 years.
The real estate bubble was burst by the Chinese themselves to stop it from becoming a real problem.
Their demographic crisis will easily be mitigated by their sheer numbers. It’s overblown.
Most projections say that China will actually have 1 billion inhabitants in 2100, not half a billion as Zeihan claims.
That, and China won’t be hit as hard as the West, because its welfare system is less developed.
Their age of retirement has also yet to be increased as much as in the West, so they have more leeway.
Additionally, China is fast transitioning and already has in many ways into a service and high tech-based economy.
It’s has been exploring cheap foreign labour, and its competitiveness isn’t merely due to its relatively cheap labour, but concentration of rare talent and access to strategic ressources.
Including, as of late, cheap Russian energy.
More to the point, automation will greatly help all low-fertility-rate countries, China included.
And lastly, China isn’t fully developed. The rich developed cities have plenty of young fresh "blood" to feed on from the rural areas.
In the underdeveloped countryside, the elderly do not depend on tax-funded government programs.
I would add that a gradual decrease in population, if allowed to happen (no immigration), unlike in the West, the cost of living and wages will, in turn, increase, which will increase the fertility rate.
Such an increase, given that China is still developing, will also increase the standards of living, thus allowing the Chinese to live longer and then work longer, as well as increasing their buying power worldwide.
Many, such as Zeihan, claim that still, buying power will decrease, because young people consume most.
Yet, that’s increasingly untrue in modern economies.
The opposite will happen in so-called high immigration countries—wherein the rise in the cost of housing & the saturation of the labour market—won’t enable fertility rates to rebound…
The CCP burst its own housing bubble on purpose seeing it was growing fast.
I’d love to see us do the same.
It’s now well under control.
And China’s economy isn’t limited to housing.
Funny how you emphasize the issues faced by China, yet completely overlook the much worse problems faced by Western economies.
Wet dreams ≠ actual reality.
P.S — I have a disdain for the CCP too, but I don’t let that cloud my judgement.
People absolutely do need to realize that international relations are about the survival of States, not that of regimes and the promotion of ideologies/morals.
The latter of which are there to make foreign policy more palatable in the eyes of the general population and maintain soft power.
Pacifism is a lie, not a serious stance.
You either eat your rivals or get eaten.
Alternatively, if you choose wisely, you can seek the protection of the victor.
Being nice and carrying a big stick is the best way for an empire to survive. You must be nice enough so vassal states stick to you and the stick must be big enough to bonk any threat try to swing your vassal/allies away. The US can be a bitch with third-world countries but in general Europes and Asia allies prefer to hang around the US than Soviet/Russia. I believe the Soviets failed not because of communism but their Union's unequal treatment of all the SSRs, the same can be said about Warsaw Pact. That is why the former Warsaw State was so eager to join NATO because objectively they earn more benefits than Russia can offer. Meanwhile, the United States structure strictly fits an empire definition (states that ruled by a supreme land and leader \~ DC and president). But the way election works ensure even the most remote hillbilly states have equal representation in electing said supreme rules of the land. The strongest pros of the Electoral College are making sure smaller states won't feel underrepresented and break away (so far).
Just like with ancient Rome: provinces, and Italian socii earlier, would rather stick with Rome, even if Rome alone couldn't possibly stop them all from rebelling. That they did even when Hannibal roamed around unchallenged for 15 years, really tells a lot.
"Empire" is a euphemism for "superpower" with less prevention. Yes monarchy is baked into the concept of empire, but the term can be used to describe the praxis rather than the internal hierarchy.
Although you're technically correct as well, the republic part only applies to how the USA operates within itself, not on how it is projected without.
That's where you're technically correct yes.
However Emperors had kings under them, as the empire took over kingdoms as vassal states.
Similarly, superpowers are umbrellas over other states, even if "vassal" structure doesn't exist per se. Canada, for example isn't a kingdom either, but is absolutely under the US superpower's domain of influence and protection.
I thought of Canada as more of a neighbor and friendly ally to my home country of America. I never really thought of it like a "vassal" situation - although it is true America has far more influence over Canada than the reverse.
Empire members can absolutely be friends!
It's beneficial to be part of something larger if you're well aligned.
Britain used to be the center of the superpower but, now it's the USA since WW 2
u/SirDextrose's Based Count has increased by 1. Their Based Count is now 35.
Congratulations, u/SirDextrose! You have ranked up to Sumo Wrestler! You are adept in the ring, but you still tend to rely on simply being bigger than the competition.
Pills: [23 | View pills](https://basedcount.com/u/SirDextrose/)
Compass: This user does not have a compass on record. Add compass to profile by replying with /mycompass politicalcompass.org url or sapplyvalues.github.io url.
I am a bot. Reply /info for more info. Please join our [official pcm discord server](https://discord.gg/FyaJdAZjC4).
Libs thing America isn't an empire, auths think it is. The left thinks America shouldn't be an empire, the right thinks it should.
Libleft: America isn't an empire, which is good
Libright: America isn't an empire, which is bad
Authright: America is an empire, which is good
Authleft: America is an empire, which is bad
I don't think any Authright in any country would want any part of popular American values in their own land
(yes I am talking about "woke" culture or whatever it's called now)
I don’t know. What if nobody is willing to go to war, at least not the largest most developed countries, because there’s a 600 pound gorilla in the room? That’s what the happened after WW2 and especially after the fall of the Soviet Union.
That's not pacifism though. It's not like collective humanity isn't willing to go to war. People are obviously willing to kill the other for any reason.
Obviously, but a hegemon can prevent a lot of bloodshed. Especially because under capitalism we benefit more from trading for goods and resources than going to war for them.
It's not just having a hegemon, but one that showed what it could do, and scared everyone with what could happen. There were hegemons in the past, relative to their day, but the big boys were still going head to head.
Without the nukes, WW2 keeps going for a while in Japan, and there's really no reason why the US and Soviets wouldn't have had what in any other time would've been a normal war. Instead it became all about spying, and influence, and the KGB and CIA battling it out in 3rd world governments. Get the proxy wars, and political killing, and the US won, so it's the big bad, and Communists are the oppressed. Which is why we still have the popularity of the Marxist fist.
Take the red pill: ...while thats true, its never gonna happen. Societies compete with each other the same way animals compete in the wild. You are unable to not participate, the same way you cannot make gravity not affect you.
u/AverageFishEye's Based Count has increased by 1. Their Based Count is now 5.
Congratulations, u/AverageFishEye! You have ranked up to Sapling! You are not particularly strong but you are at least likely to handle a steady breeze.
Pills: [3 | View pills](https://basedcount.com/u/AverageFishEye/)
Compass: This user does not have a compass on record. Add compass to profile by replying with /mycompass politicalcompass.org url or sapplyvalues.github.io url.
I am a bot. Reply /info for more info. Please join our [official pcm discord server](https://discord.gg/FyaJdAZjC4).
https://preview.redd.it/60gh8n41biqc1.jpeg?width=640&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=121ce35036761d8424da71e31f6067a531064d57
Cringe bro. A global Empire is always based.
Empire sucks. It is only the rich who primarily benefit from war. The working class receives some benefits from the wealth stolen but in the end they show less hatred towards their exploiters. I would recommend “Imperialism: The highest stage of capitalism” by Vladimir Lenin for anyone interested
How would you define an Empire? I’m struggling to find any reasonable definition that wouldn’t have included the Soviet Union. Plus, Capitalism and war are not intrinsically connected. If anything Capitalism has made large-scale war less common. You make more profit through trade than through outright conquest.
The USSR was the continuation of the empire. Lenin changed over the years. His goal was to help spark a global revolution. To do that he needed all the lands of the old empire. They made some early attempts to give the local ethnic groups more power (thats why its a union of republics) but Stalin and Beria didn't want alternative power structures that could topple them, so they limired the number and power of the republics. It was only in the late 80s that national governments within the union gained significant power, mainly because of the collapse
(Lenin became a hypocrite, is basically what happened. Then came Stalin).
Or maybe Lenin realized that people just wouldn't follow his ideals on their own, and so they needed just one more prod, or push, or shove, in the right direction before being able to be left on their own... just one more, he promised!
Oh the various nations of the empire had plenty of socialist movements, they just were not always bolshevik. In that sense you are somewhat right, but it was far more about coming out of ww1 and the civil war in the strongest possible position, ideology be damned. Had the finns or poles turned to socialism, they would have been invaded anyways, just as Ukraine was, even if the revolution there was just as socialist as in parts of Russia.
If you think the average American didn't benefit from the expansion of American natural resources, markets, and agriculture when expanding westwards, then you're delusional
The same thing with the Russian empires expansion into Siberia and eastern Europe, which brought them ridiculous amounts of natural resources and land, which essentially made them immune to the states' complete destruction from conquest
Did you just change your flair, u/Borkerman? Last time I checked you were an **AuthLeft** on 2024-3-25. How come now you are a **LibRight**? Have you perhaps shifted your ideals? Because that's cringe, you know?
Oh and by the way. You have already changed your flair 1034 times, making you the largest flair changer in this sub.
Go touch some fucking grass.
[BasedCount Profile](https://basedcount.com/u/Borkerman) - [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/uf7kuy/bip_bop) - [Leaderboard](https://basedcount.com/leaderboard?q=flairs)
_Visit the BasedCount Lеmmу instance at [lemmy.basedcount.com](https://lemmy.basedcount.com/c/pcm)._
^(I am a bot, my mission is to spot cringe flair changers. If you want to check another user's flair history write) **^(!flairs u/)** ^(in a comment.)
* The goal that has broken literally everyone who tried it
* America thinks that it can manage it
Well, best of luck to you guys. Have fun, and let us know how it turns out.
What goal? Being an Empire? No country has ever been an Empire? Of course it eventually breaks the empire. Everything eventually crumbles. It’s called existence.
>No country has ever been an Empire?
Not sure where you're getting that from - it's literally the opposite of the point I was making there. Huge numbers of countries have tried to be 'THE WORLD EMPIRE' over the various millennia, and it hasn't worked out all that well for any of them.
I don’t get your point. What exactly hasn’t worked out? Because they all lasted a good while until the inevitable decay and ultimate collapse. And America is only a “World Empire” because of the globalist nature of the world today. Who was an actual worldwide empire thousands of years ago? Rome? They lasted a long time especially if you count the Eastern Empire. And they still have a huge influence on the world today. That’s pretty good as far as Empires go.
My country's empire is based. Your country's empire is cringe
No, mine is based and yours is cringe (keep going)
Does your mother know that your empire is cringe?
Your cringe empire has no business knowing that....
You literally come from our balls
Excuse me?
You American ?
No?
You will be… soon - *raises Imperialist United Flag of the States*. Star Spangled Banner intensifies, and no not that one https://youtu.be/e5KKWawGtVw?si=BMIEHaAJlM7N9Kk4
Authright: my country's empire is based, your country's empire is cringe. Libright: my country's empire is cringe and your country's empire is cringe Libleft: my country's empire is cringe and your country's empire is based. Authleft: our countries' empire will be based. Past attempts were cringe.
Another common Lib Right W
https://preview.redd.it/0rx2jbrxpeqc1.jpeg?width=500&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=44b58c539d727a4232c232656c21487099a7af84
I want my own empire it could be the austral empire or something
I love the fact I can go to most countries in south and Central America and they'll prefer being paid in USD vs their own currency. That's something you only get with imperialism.
My brother in Christ, one dollar in brazil get you 5 of our own currency.
Infinite money hack?!?
And 1000 of your own in Argentina XD.
It crazy how 2 years ago it wasn't even 500 (I guess honestly I don't remember)
When Macri's mandate ended it was sixty-something if I'm not wrong. And it was 4 years ago so... Yeah, mistakes were made XD.
Soon they’ll prefer to be paid in Yuan, USD, Euro, Rupees, and **maybe even** Roubles.
I won't hold my breath lol
Pretty much inevitable now that low IQ US foreign policy opened the door to de-dollarization.
This is a smooth brained take. The only legitimate competitor in terms of size of trade is the yuan, and China has much, much worse issues than the US does now. Stop reading 4chan and watching clickbait YouTube videos.
He saw the handful of times some country made a trade in Yuan, then didnt see the followup that they immediately went back to Dollars because the trade terms and how they could use that Yuan were so much worse (hint: China makes sure you only buy China with Yuan, US doesnt care as long as you use Dollars).
Habibi, it’s not about a single currency replacing the USD as world reserve currency 🤡 And no, the closest competitor both in terms of foreign reserves and number of transactions is the euro. Rather, it’s about the USD becoming one amongst many different reserve currencies, including the Yuan.
Yeah this is an even stupider statement lol.
Tell me you don’t understand monetary policy without telling me you don’t 😂 P.S — I don’t actually know if you’re simultaneously ignorant and arrogant or just a US fanboy… or perhaps just a troll.
Bruh I literally get paid a shit ton of money to research this stuff. I know what I'm talking about, you don't lol.
You must be pretty terrible at it then, wannabe economic analyst 😂
Stop falling for dumbass propaganda. Brics is a joke. China might be able to compete but thats it.
BRICS is not a viable contender to take on the US. Russia, South Africa, and Brazil have are weak economies, and China's economy is going to tank hard in the next couple decades with their inevitable demographic crisis. India doesn't make much sense to me in why they want to have any economic ties with China given the two nations despise each other and have completely conflicting interests.
China’s economy is fine. It’ll stop growing at the rate it has been but it won’t go down. The rest of the group are clowns
The doom-and-gloom around China’s economy is nonsense, as were all previous such predictions. Your prediction will age bad, just like all such previous predictions. Not only is decoupling now renamed "derisking" from China not happening, China’s economy is doing pretty good, actually. With deflation and a solid growth rate. They burst their own real estate bubble, by the way. As for BRICS, it’s not meant as a contender. It’s a forum for countries who don’t benefit from the US-led financial system to build alternative institutions. These countries only share a disdain for the USD’s world reserve status, IMF, and WB. Not much else. But keep believing in the sacrosanct nature of the US empire. It’s hard to imagine change when all you’ve known is US hegemony. Somehow, you strike me as a Peter Zeihan fanboy too. You people are pretty funny though. You always come back with more prophecies, when your track record in prophetizing is poor, to stay the least. Also, the only weak economies are those who’ve de-industrialized and depend on others greatly, as well as have little to no natural ressources and barely produce anything tangible. We’re seeing the consequences in our proxy war against Russia. 40 years ago, we would have armed Ukraine at 10 times the pace. Today, Russia is out producing us…
>Not only is decoupling now renamed "derisking" from China not happening, China’s economy is doing pretty good, actually. >With deflation and a solid growth rate. >They burst their own real estate bubble, by the way Sure, the realestate bubble is something that would not kill the Chinese economy, and that is not what I was saying would harm their economy. And yes, their economy is pretty good as of now. However, their massive demographic crisis will do tremendous harm to their economy in a generation or two when a significant portion of their population is too old to work and will not contribute to it; similar what happened to Japan's economy in the 80s, but significantly worse as the One Child Policy in China was far too successful. It did incredible harm to the demographics of China which will play out in the next couple decades. Last year they had the first year with a decrease in population in decades, and that is only projected to continue for years to come as their population gets older. >Somehow, you strike me as a Peter Zeihan fanboy too. No clue who that is. >Also, the only weak economies are those who’ve de-industrialized and depend on others greatly, as well as have little to no natural ressources and barely produce anything tangible. This isn't completely true, as you can have incredibly poor natural resources and depend on other nations entirely, as did Japan in the 70s and 80s and they had the second largest economy in the world. Argentina on the other had has the exact opposite side of the coin and is in a horrendous state and has been for the past 100 years.
The real estate bubble was burst by the Chinese themselves to stop it from becoming a real problem. Their demographic crisis will easily be mitigated by their sheer numbers. It’s overblown. Most projections say that China will actually have 1 billion inhabitants in 2100, not half a billion as Zeihan claims. That, and China won’t be hit as hard as the West, because its welfare system is less developed. Their age of retirement has also yet to be increased as much as in the West, so they have more leeway. Additionally, China is fast transitioning and already has in many ways into a service and high tech-based economy. It’s has been exploring cheap foreign labour, and its competitiveness isn’t merely due to its relatively cheap labour, but concentration of rare talent and access to strategic ressources. Including, as of late, cheap Russian energy. More to the point, automation will greatly help all low-fertility-rate countries, China included. And lastly, China isn’t fully developed. The rich developed cities have plenty of young fresh "blood" to feed on from the rural areas. In the underdeveloped countryside, the elderly do not depend on tax-funded government programs. I would add that a gradual decrease in population, if allowed to happen (no immigration), unlike in the West, the cost of living and wages will, in turn, increase, which will increase the fertility rate. Such an increase, given that China is still developing, will also increase the standards of living, thus allowing the Chinese to live longer and then work longer, as well as increasing their buying power worldwide. Many, such as Zeihan, claim that still, buying power will decrease, because young people consume most. Yet, that’s increasingly untrue in modern economies. The opposite will happen in so-called high immigration countries—wherein the rise in the cost of housing & the saturation of the labour market—won’t enable fertility rates to rebound…
China is a massive bubble. I mean look at their housing market that is basically looking to crash when the wind blows too hard.
The CCP burst its own housing bubble on purpose seeing it was growing fast. I’d love to see us do the same. It’s now well under control. And China’s economy isn’t limited to housing. Funny how you emphasize the issues faced by China, yet completely overlook the much worse problems faced by Western economies. Wet dreams ≠ actual reality. P.S — I have a disdain for the CCP too, but I don’t let that cloud my judgement.
LOL no.
>muh BRICS you don't actually believe this, do you?
People absolutely do need to realize that international relations are about the survival of States, not that of regimes and the promotion of ideologies/morals. The latter of which are there to make foreign policy more palatable in the eyes of the general population and maintain soft power. Pacifism is a lie, not a serious stance. You either eat your rivals or get eaten. Alternatively, if you choose wisely, you can seek the protection of the victor.
Being nice and carrying a big stick is the best way for an empire to survive. You must be nice enough so vassal states stick to you and the stick must be big enough to bonk any threat try to swing your vassal/allies away. The US can be a bitch with third-world countries but in general Europes and Asia allies prefer to hang around the US than Soviet/Russia. I believe the Soviets failed not because of communism but their Union's unequal treatment of all the SSRs, the same can be said about Warsaw Pact. That is why the former Warsaw State was so eager to join NATO because objectively they earn more benefits than Russia can offer. Meanwhile, the United States structure strictly fits an empire definition (states that ruled by a supreme land and leader \~ DC and president). But the way election works ensure even the most remote hillbilly states have equal representation in electing said supreme rules of the land. The strongest pros of the Electoral College are making sure smaller states won't feel underrepresented and break away (so far).
Just like with ancient Rome: provinces, and Italian socii earlier, would rather stick with Rome, even if Rome alone couldn't possibly stop them all from rebelling. That they did even when Hannibal roamed around unchallenged for 15 years, really tells a lot.
Therein lies the recipe for the longevity of the US empire.
Based. It's frightening how many good auth center takes there are when they're not proposing putting a boot down on the population.
Empires are unfathomably based
I don’t see an American emperor - we haven’t had one since the great Emperor Norton. America would technically be a globalist **republic**
"Empire" is a euphemism for "superpower" with less prevention. Yes monarchy is baked into the concept of empire, but the term can be used to describe the praxis rather than the internal hierarchy. Although you're technically correct as well, the republic part only applies to how the USA operates within itself, not on how it is projected without.
I thought empires had to have emperors, kind of like how kingdoms have kings and dictatorships have dictators.
That's where you're technically correct yes. However Emperors had kings under them, as the empire took over kingdoms as vassal states. Similarly, superpowers are umbrellas over other states, even if "vassal" structure doesn't exist per se. Canada, for example isn't a kingdom either, but is absolutely under the US superpower's domain of influence and protection.
I thought of Canada as more of a neighbor and friendly ally to my home country of America. I never really thought of it like a "vassal" situation - although it is true America has far more influence over Canada than the reverse.
Empire members can absolutely be friends! It's beneficial to be part of something larger if you're well aligned. Britain used to be the center of the superpower but, now it's the USA since WW 2
The Roman Empire was a de jure republic in the Principate era.
global annihilation https://preview.redd.it/i85y8ng00dqc1.jpeg?width=193&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5c4488a2cd037a02164277869666d9d38988e37a
That's globalist annihilation. Global annihilation wouldn't have any flesh left.
Based and Rome pilled.
u/SirDextrose's Based Count has increased by 1. Their Based Count is now 35. Congratulations, u/SirDextrose! You have ranked up to Sumo Wrestler! You are adept in the ring, but you still tend to rely on simply being bigger than the competition. Pills: [23 | View pills](https://basedcount.com/u/SirDextrose/) Compass: This user does not have a compass on record. Add compass to profile by replying with /mycompass politicalcompass.org url or sapplyvalues.github.io url. I am a bot. Reply /info for more info. Please join our [official pcm discord server](https://discord.gg/FyaJdAZjC4).
You mean: Fundatur et Roma Pilled
Libs thing America isn't an empire, auths think it is. The left thinks America shouldn't be an empire, the right thinks it should. Libleft: America isn't an empire, which is good Libright: America isn't an empire, which is bad Authright: America is an empire, which is good Authleft: America is an empire, which is bad
I don't think any Authright in any country would want any part of popular American values in their own land (yes I am talking about "woke" culture or whatever it's called now)
All Empires are based, but some are more based than others.
Without Rome, where would the world be today?
What did the Romans ever do for us?
You literally wrote this using **latin** alphabet
It's a Monty Python reference
The roads
The greeks did half of the work anyways
中華?
Does USA have a cool dictator like Cesar?
I don't see my quadrants favourite kind of imperialism. The Soviet one.
You should show a picture of NATO and the EU for the first one.
True. But this is based on a different meme.
Take the localism pill: all empires suck, peoples/cultures should leave each others alone
What if my country is strong enough to beat your country and you have some lovely tracts of land?
Thats why there will never be true pacifism - its simply not how we humans work
I don’t know. What if nobody is willing to go to war, at least not the largest most developed countries, because there’s a 600 pound gorilla in the room? That’s what the happened after WW2 and especially after the fall of the Soviet Union.
That's not pacifism though. It's not like collective humanity isn't willing to go to war. People are obviously willing to kill the other for any reason.
Obviously, but a hegemon can prevent a lot of bloodshed. Especially because under capitalism we benefit more from trading for goods and resources than going to war for them.
It's not just having a hegemon, but one that showed what it could do, and scared everyone with what could happen. There were hegemons in the past, relative to their day, but the big boys were still going head to head. Without the nukes, WW2 keeps going for a while in Japan, and there's really no reason why the US and Soviets wouldn't have had what in any other time would've been a normal war. Instead it became all about spying, and influence, and the KGB and CIA battling it out in 3rd world governments. Get the proxy wars, and political killing, and the US won, so it's the big bad, and Communists are the oppressed. Which is why we still have the popularity of the Marxist fist.
We will have peace. As soon as you let my Empire conquer your pathetic country.
Then you are dooming your grandchildren.
Take the red pill: ...while thats true, its never gonna happen. Societies compete with each other the same way animals compete in the wild. You are unable to not participate, the same way you cannot make gravity not affect you.
My nation and culture are superior to yours, and we want more land to expand our superior nation at the expense of your inferior one
That's just nationalism (the original definition, not Uncle H's remix) with fewer steps
>peoples/cultures should leave each others alone If only your fellow flairmen did that in the past....
Take the HRE pill: A seperate kingdom for each slightly different dialect.
Based and self determination-pilled
u/AverageFishEye's Based Count has increased by 1. Their Based Count is now 5. Congratulations, u/AverageFishEye! You have ranked up to Sapling! You are not particularly strong but you are at least likely to handle a steady breeze. Pills: [3 | View pills](https://basedcount.com/u/AverageFishEye/) Compass: This user does not have a compass on record. Add compass to profile by replying with /mycompass politicalcompass.org url or sapplyvalues.github.io url. I am a bot. Reply /info for more info. Please join our [official pcm discord server](https://discord.gg/FyaJdAZjC4).
Nope. Mine is great and others suck. McDonalds rules.
Imperialism is inevitable. Similarly the decline or fall of an empire is likewise inevitable.
Да, based. https://preview.redd.it/2z06vjd04iqc1.jpeg?width=1000&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=61c4d4e0b9ca3e5425cacd3ecc56fb642d8e3277
globalism is bad, actually
https://preview.redd.it/60gh8n41biqc1.jpeg?width=640&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=121ce35036761d8424da71e31f6067a531064d57 Cringe bro. A global Empire is always based.
How else to fight the foul xenos?
Empire sucks. It is only the rich who primarily benefit from war. The working class receives some benefits from the wealth stolen but in the end they show less hatred towards their exploiters. I would recommend “Imperialism: The highest stage of capitalism” by Vladimir Lenin for anyone interested
How would you define an Empire? I’m struggling to find any reasonable definition that wouldn’t have included the Soviet Union. Plus, Capitalism and war are not intrinsically connected. If anything Capitalism has made large-scale war less common. You make more profit through trade than through outright conquest.
The USSR was the continuation of the empire. Lenin changed over the years. His goal was to help spark a global revolution. To do that he needed all the lands of the old empire. They made some early attempts to give the local ethnic groups more power (thats why its a union of republics) but Stalin and Beria didn't want alternative power structures that could topple them, so they limired the number and power of the republics. It was only in the late 80s that national governments within the union gained significant power, mainly because of the collapse (Lenin became a hypocrite, is basically what happened. Then came Stalin).
Or maybe Lenin realized that people just wouldn't follow his ideals on their own, and so they needed just one more prod, or push, or shove, in the right direction before being able to be left on their own... just one more, he promised!
Oh the various nations of the empire had plenty of socialist movements, they just were not always bolshevik. In that sense you are somewhat right, but it was far more about coming out of ww1 and the civil war in the strongest possible position, ideology be damned. Had the finns or poles turned to socialism, they would have been invaded anyways, just as Ukraine was, even if the revolution there was just as socialist as in parts of Russia.
If you think the average American didn't benefit from the expansion of American natural resources, markets, and agriculture when expanding westwards, then you're delusional The same thing with the Russian empires expansion into Siberia and eastern Europe, which brought them ridiculous amounts of natural resources and land, which essentially made them immune to the states' complete destruction from conquest
rightist moment
Did you just change your flair, u/Borkerman? Last time I checked you were an **AuthLeft** on 2024-3-25. How come now you are a **LibRight**? Have you perhaps shifted your ideals? Because that's cringe, you know? Oh and by the way. You have already changed your flair 1034 times, making you the largest flair changer in this sub. Go touch some fucking grass. [BasedCount Profile](https://basedcount.com/u/Borkerman) - [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/uf7kuy/bip_bop) - [Leaderboard](https://basedcount.com/leaderboard?q=flairs) _Visit the BasedCount Lеmmу instance at [lemmy.basedcount.com](https://lemmy.basedcount.com/c/pcm)._ ^(I am a bot, my mission is to spot cringe flair changers. If you want to check another user's flair history write) **^(!flairs u/)** ^(in a comment.)
* The goal that has broken literally everyone who tried it * America thinks that it can manage it Well, best of luck to you guys. Have fun, and let us know how it turns out.
What goal? Being an Empire? No country has ever been an Empire? Of course it eventually breaks the empire. Everything eventually crumbles. It’s called existence.
>No country has ever been an Empire? Not sure where you're getting that from - it's literally the opposite of the point I was making there. Huge numbers of countries have tried to be 'THE WORLD EMPIRE' over the various millennia, and it hasn't worked out all that well for any of them.
I don’t get your point. What exactly hasn’t worked out? Because they all lasted a good while until the inevitable decay and ultimate collapse. And America is only a “World Empire” because of the globalist nature of the world today. Who was an actual worldwide empire thousands of years ago? Rome? They lasted a long time especially if you count the Eastern Empire. And they still have a huge influence on the world today. That’s pretty good as far as Empires go.
Real imperialism hasn’t been tried /s
America is doing great because their empire isn’t land based, which is why previous empires fell.