The Collapse Of The American Empire, Parts One, Two and Three by Eric Striker - The Unz Review
https://www.unz.com/author/eric-striker/ 

The Collapse Of The American Empire, Part I: Demographics, by Eric Striker - The Unz Review

Feb. 18th, 2024

As much as neo-conservative/Zionist ideologues like Robert Kagan write about the exceptional inevitability of the American world order, there is a general sinking feeling among the people of the United States that this country does not have a future.

Is this impression justified? Students of imperial decline can examine historical observations and parallels to decide.

Admittedly, utilizing historicism to try and predict geopolitical developments in the short and medium term is an imperfect science, often taking the form of prejudiced soothsaying or intuitive assertions.

Part of the problem is an overreliance on ancient history, particularly Rome, as a reference point for understanding the rise and fall of empire. The lack of specific data regarding the developments that culminated in Rome’s downfall has led to subsequent commentators to fill in the blanks through the ideological prisms of their time. For example, 18th-century British historian Edward Gibbon singled out the Roman elite’s behavioral decadence as the catalyst for its downfall. Individual moral purity was a strong fixation for Protestant Englishmen like Gibbons during his time, but this theory can be challenged by information revealing widescale moral excesses among Roman rulers during the lead up and fruition of the empire’s 2nd Century AD territorial peak, e.g., the infamously obscene Caligula or Nero. Today, narratives blaming climate change for Rome’s decline, a 21st century obsession, have gained a foothold.

A more direct comparison with the downfall of the Soviet Union, where detailed information is available, is more useful in seeking to investigate the malaise and long-term viability of the America empire. The United States of 2024 shares several demographic trends with the Soviet Union of the 1970s — “the era of stagnation” — that ultimately led to the vast Eurasian superpower’s implosion in 1991.

When examining the short to medium term (10 to 30 years) prognosis of the American empire, we will also contrast it with its major adversaries: primarily Russia and China, and, supplementally (more so in later articles), Iran.

This author stresses that it is under no impression that either Russia, China, or Iran can defeat the American empire on their own. All three countries have different advantages over the United States in their world-historical struggle against neo-liberal unipolarity, but also disadvantages as individual contenders, suggesting that a future without Pax Americana could be a pre-WWII one limited to natural spheres of influence rather than a recreation of Washington’s ambitious efforts for world domination. If the three powers coordinate and unite — as China and Russia’s “no limits” partnership or the two powers’ multi-year pacts with Iran suggest they have — the Washington-led, post-war liberal world order may go down sooner than we expect.

Russia and China remain behind America on a wide array of metrics, but what is impossible to deny is that they are starting to catch up while the United States is broadly at an inflection point. In 2021, Xi Jinping made this point in his address, affirming that “time and momentum” were on China’s side.

One logical point to make is that, generally speaking, life for ordinary Russian and Chinese people is objectively getting better, while things are getting demonstrably worse in American. This alone can create divergences in national morale during a great power competition.

The economic, military, soft power, political, and other factors pointing to the coming failure and geopolitical neutralization of the US and its ideology on the world stage will be explored in future articles.

Part I: Demographics

One of the first symptoms of a nation’s decline is a breakdown in social and human health. Often small changes in data related to population well-being speaks to an underwater iceberg of more significant and systematic problems within a people.

At the hump of the USSR’s “Brezhnev stagnation” in the mid to late 1970s, demographers began speculating about the health of the once seemingly omnipotent empire after discovering that the nation’s rates of infant mortality were beginning to rise. Though this increase was minor — only a few percentage points — it broke a cycle of decades of rapid gains in the survivability of Soviet infants since the end of World War II.

This was perplexing to mainstream observers at the time, as the Soviet Union was, financially, enjoying relative prosperity due to a global oil export boom triggered by the Arab League’s 1973 oil embargo. The USSR under Leonid Brezhnev (who ruled from 1964-1982) planned its economy to become a military peer of the United States (especially in the realm of nuclear weapons), was industrially powerful, and matched or led its rivals in the world in various cutting-edge fields, such as aerospace.

Yet despite the superficial success of the system, the USSR’s most important asset, its people, began showing signs of decay and misery.

Today in the United States, we are seeing similar patterns.

In the Soviet context, Central Asian Minorities within the multi-ethnic Soviet space, who benefited from special economic, social and legal privileges (before America, the Bolsheviks of the Soviet Union created the first nation to practice official racial discriminate against its own ethnic majority citizens, as detailed in Terry Martin’s 2001 book The Affirmative Action Empire), grew at much faster rates than the less fertile Slavic population during the 1960s and 70s. By 1979, ethnic Russians declined to barely 52% of the Soviet population.

As Robert D. Putnam’s 2000 book Bowling Alone has shown, multiculturalism/ multiracialism is strongly correlated with alienation and distrust. As in the USSR in its period of downturn, America’s racial makeup has radically changed in the last 50 years, with white people now making up less than 58% of the population.

Besides the national problems created by racial and cultural alienation, changes in demographics lead to changes to a society overall. Nations naturally begin taking on the character of the home countries of the new people who populate them, which in the American context means falling behind peripheries of its empire, such as Western Europe, in critical sectors. This is another commonality with the 1970s USSR, where the Soviet homeland itself was racked with dysfunction and living standards were falling behind ethnically/racially homogenous Warsaw Pact protectorates such as Hungary or East Germany. It may be possible for non-white, non-Asian nations to achieve success, but this would require illiberal governance, ethno-cultural cohesion and enforced discipline that thoroughly multi-racial countries (like America or Brazil) appear to lack.

Predictably, it is no coincidence that the United States is facing falling living standards and social degradation, including among the once prosperous white majority, which place it at a grave disadvantage against geopolitical competitors.

In 2022, the Center for Disease Control reported that American infant mortality rose 3% for the first time in decades, from 5.44 infant deaths per 1,000 live births the previous year to 5.60. In 2023, no ground was made up in tackling this problem: the same figure was reported.

Comparatively, Russia’s infant mortality is now lower. In 2023, there were 4.807 deaths per 1,000 live births, a 3.8% decline from 2022. This is a remarkable feat of the Vladimir Putin government. In 2003, early in Putin’s reign, Russia suffered an alarming 16.156 deaths per 1,000 live births, while the United States had an infant morbidity rate of 6.85 at this time.

On the Chinese front, their massive population lags behind the US with 8.4 infants dying per 1,000 births. We can consult with Xi Jinping’s quote about “momentum” here. China has seen this statistic consistently falling by over 3% every year, as America suffers the inverse, suggesting that like Russia they can be forecasted to overcome this hurdle.

Much of this rise in infant mortality correlates with the increase in America’s minority population. Blacks and Amerindians in particular have high rates of infant mortality due to neglectful activities such as drug use, alcoholism, abuse, as well as overburdened or poorly administered minority-run health care services. At the same time, the infant mortality rate is going up for white mothers as well, suggesting that these symptoms of deterioration are harming the white American community as well.

This withering of fundamental life measures is part of a broader trend. From 2019 to 2023, US life expectancy fell from 79 years to now 76. This figure is more at home among developing nations than those we consider advanced. Among developed US liberal peers, Germany’s current life expectancy is 82 years, UK 82, France 83, and so on.

Following a modest increase from 2022 to 2023, Chinese life expectancy now surpasses that of Americans, at 77 years, a historic first for China. Russia, which is fighting a brutal war in Ukraine, still saw an increase in life expectancy from 2022 to 2023: 72 to 73.

Returning to 2003 numbers, the American life expectancy was 77, while China’s was 73 and Russia’s 65.

When comparing Soviet data during the era of stagnation, we again see a similarity with the US. The politburo began internally ringing alarm bells when they discovered that life expectancy suddenly fell in a form similar to the US, from 69.5 in 1971 to 67.9 in 1978, a fact publicly disclosed to much controversy during Perestroika and Glasnost.

America’s dwindling life expectancy and rising infant mortality, as in the case of the Soviet Union, is being fueled by an explosion in substance abuse, obesity, suicide, institutional failures, and other informal measures of nihilism and despair rooted in anomie.

In the year 2023, there were a whopping 112,000 drug overdose deaths, primarily among the young.

This dwarfs Russia, which itself is seen to have a drug problem. During a recent surge in drug overdoses in 2021, the nation with less than half the US population suffered 7,316 fatal ODs, driven in part by boredom or loneliness during COVID.

In China, with its population of 1.4 billion and with its historic crisis of opium addiction in the rearview mirror, the rate of drug-related deaths is approximately 49,000 per year.

In the realm of suicide, Russia has long had the reputation of being a world leader in this category, but the US has now quietly surpassed it.

In 2021, Russia suffered 10.7 self-inflicted deaths per 100,000 people. In the same year, the United States’ rate jumped to 14.04 per 100,000.

By comparison, in the year 2000, Russians committed suicide at the rate of 39 deaths per 100k, so their new figures are a massive leap forward when tackling the issue.

In America, we are suffering an astonishing step backwards. In 2000, Americans were 40% less likely to kill themselves, with the rate of 10.4 per 100,000.

For China, suicide rates have declined from 10.88 to 5.25 between 2010 and 2021.

In the world of serious mental illness, the United States is also one upping its rivals.

In 2022, approximately 5% of Americans suffered from severe mental disorders, such as psychosis or schizophrenia, while 1 out of 5 US citizens are being medically treated for milder forms like clinical depression.

In Russia, around 8.8% of citizens are diagnosed with clinical depression. Only 0.3% of Russians are schizophrenics. This is another sharp statistical decrease from the recent Russian past.

It will come to nobody’s surprise that Americans are the most obese in the world, a key co-morbidity accelerating these demographic problems. This does not require number crunching.

What may surprise some, however, is that citizens of the 1970s and 80s Soviet Union were also unusually overweight.

Soviet citizens began gaining weight during the Brezhnev era due to the wider availability of food compared to the past.

In one medical study commissioned by the Soviet state during Perestroika, it was found that 30% of citizens were overweight and 2/3s were sedentary, despite ample opportunities for engaging in exercise and sports. This clashed with the Soviet Union’s vaunted efforts to become internationally known as an athletic superpower.

This was one fact the Soviet regime could not hide in the 1970s. To tackle the obesity epidemic, the government sought technocratic solutions, which led to research discovering many special diets and treatments popularized today such as intermittent fasting.

Contrary to Cold War propaganda from both sides connecting obesity with capitalism, Soviet citizens were fatter than Americans. In 1975, only 20% of Americans were considered overweight.

Soviet data released during Glasnost and Perestroika from the 1970s and 80s also found huge increases in deaths due to alcoholism, increases in narcotics related fatalities, and ballooning suicide rates. This social crisis continued to intensify into the 1980s, hitting its zenith under the post-collapse presidency of Boris Yeltsin, where the life expectancy for a Russian male was reduced to a grim 57 years.

The prerequisite for any attempt to manage a world empire is naturally the well-being and happiness of its people. Americans more obese, high, alienated, mentally ill and dying of preventable causes at higher rates than the citizens of countries seeking to depose the US world order. It is a matter of time until this differential is made irrefutably apparent in the global balance of power.

Economists may point to America’s GDP growth, a matter we will explore in a future article, as evidence of imperial stability. But liberal economists lack an analysis of power in their outlook, and in the realm of military, technological, soft power, or other forms of international competition, this derives from a people’s general health, ability, and faith that their leaders are making their lives better. This has long been lost in the America of 2024, and the gravity of the situation is no longer possible to ignore.

Just as Russians became disenchanted with the Soviet system, the American people (especially the white people) have given up on America.

The Collapse Of The American Empire, Part II: Economics, by Eric Striker - The Unz Review

Mar. 3rd, 2024

If we were to pinpoint the key to America’s success through the two World Wars and the standoff with the Soviet Union, it would be its vibrant economy and impressive manufacturing capabilities.

This self-evident economic prowess has been reduced to that of an enigma. A substantial portion of the American empire’s value today is imaginary.

If we relied solely on the academic discipline of economics for interpretation, it would be difficult to reason how a heavily financialized nation can convince other countries to continue producing real, physical products for a heavily indebted nation’s citizens to sell to one another and consume at rates not balanced out by net exports.

It is a struggle to rationalize — though economists, through repetition and assertion, try — how the New York Stock Exchange can be worth $32.7 trillion dollars when there are only $2.3 trillion dollars in circulation if it isn’t a glorified Ponzi scheme riddled with securities and accounting fraud.

There are maybe plausible, albeit farfetched, explications for how WeWork’s stock value rose from $4.4 billion to $47 billion in a three-month time span, but we are left at a loss for words when investigating how 50% of this company’s reported wealth vanished from the national economy in one day.

All roads lead back to the US dollar, the world’s reserve currency, and another enigma to unravel. From 2008 to 2011, it was discovered that the Federal Reserve wired $16 trillion dollars of cheap credit they imagined into existence to prop up several banks and corporations around the world — a story the private, runaway cash-printing entity fought to keep secret from the public.

For years, the dollar flourished under a regime of 0% percent interest rates, massive trade deficits, and record levels of federal borrowing and spending. The US dollar remains a juggernaut, and inflation — while being felt more so today — is not causing the apocalyptic balance of payments crises seen in recent years in Argentina or Greece.

The reasons for this go beyond conventional economics, which generally lack an examination of power and politics. The real force behind the omnipotent dollar derives from imperial conquest and the establishment of economic rules and institutions that the victors created after World War II. Some call this system post-industrialism, globalism, or neo-liberalism, but it all describes the same program: the world must trade in US dollars, denominate their debts in US dollars, liberalize its markets and continue borrowing under often usurious conditions from US bankers.

This new order was established at the 1944 Bretton Woods conference. At that meeting of 44 nations, two Jews — Harry Dexter White and Henry Morgenthau — established the International Monetary Fund (IMF), which would act as a predatory, Dollar-centered loan structure for all of humanity.

Not everyone was keen on this radical transfer of power, including members of the Grand Alliance. At Bretton Woods, White and Morgenthau encountered resistance from British economist John Maynard Keynes, who suggested the establishment of a global central bank that would issue a neutral currency, the Bancor, to avoid the predictable abuse of the power of currency monopoly that Washington and New York would go on to enjoy under the IMF system. Though Keynes was far better known, more internationally respected and more persuasive in the debate against White and Morgenthau, his idea was discarded due to the fact that, through the Lend-Lease Act, America became the British empire’s creditor. The Soviet Union adamantly refused to sign this agreement, but its economy was devastated by the war so it also lacked leverage. With the German Mark and French Franc destroyed or in the gutter, the exhausted and broken European superpowers had no choice but to agree to dollar dictatorship.

It was here that White and Morgenthau, strongly motivated by their Jewish ethnic identity, forged a skeleton key that would enable the Jewish-dominated world of high finance to crowned king of the world.

Keynes’ worst fears came true as soon as the war ended. The United States suddenly cut off all of Britain’s credit lines after VJ Day and demanded re-negotiations in exchange for continuing to aid the militarily sapped and bankrupt supposed ally. The extortionary terms of the new loan included muscling the British empire’s vast protected markets open for US corporations to take over, neutralizing the Pound Sterling through attacks on its convertibility, and various reforms aimed at dismantling the UK’s empire and the living standards of British workers. The Anglo-American loan, as it came to be known, now required interest to be paid as well as an agreement that would allow US military bases to be housed on British territories. The House of Lords protested this takeover by US-based money and military power, but the ailing and demoralized Keynes was forced by the fragile Labour government of Clement Atlee to eventually capitulate. It took 50 years for the UK to pay off these debts.

Washington found itself in possession of infinite opportunities after the military subjugation of industrial powerhouses Germany and Japan, the safe and sound American manufacturing base, and the transformation of Britain into a vassal state. The “rules-based liberal order” — where Washington makes the rules and breaks them whenever it sees fit — was born.

Under the initial Bretton Woods agreement, Washington promised that the new economic order would peg the dollar’s value to gold to prevent its exploitative use. This would not last.

The gold-backed dollar was a source of consternation for New York and Washington throughout its run, but things came to a head by the 1960s.

In the lead up to his overthrow during the infamous Jewish-led color revolution of 1968, General Charles De Gaulle sought to re-assert French sovereignty against the “exorbitant privilege” of the US dollar by dumping his nation’s dollar supply for its value in gold. Though De Gaulle was brought down in 1969, his rebellion against the dollar successfully depleted the US Treasury’s gold reserves. This culminated in a run on the US dollar — the “Nixon Shock” — which forced the desperate White House to arbitrarily end the Bretton Woods gold standard in 1971 to avoid economic collapse.

Since then, the dollar has counter-intuitively grown in prominence. America’s post-industrial, finance-driven economy has led to grave economic suffering for the working and middle class at home, but it simultaneously provides a tempting “get rich quick” incentive for the oligarchs of the world. Foreigners now possess 40% of equity in the US, which makes acquiescing to Washington and New York’s political and imperial whims a price many are willing to pay.

For risk-averse foreign governments and elites, it is also profitable and safe to purchase American debt. When a debtor owns the machine that can print the money he owes, it’s a sound bet to assume creditors will be paid back, at interest. In China’s case, keeping the US dollar strong while devaluing the Yuan by purchasing Washington’s debt has traditionally served as a win-win keeping American consumer demand for Chinese goods high.

As plutocratic forces in Washington grow more aggressive and misanthropic, multiple nations are beginning to reexamine their entente with the American empire. The politicization and weaponization of the US dollar and American power over financial institutions, as seen in recent years with total sanctions regiments and asset freezes aimed at countries such as Iran and Russia, is leading many to question their relationship with the US economy.

It is a matter of time before America’s growing list of enemies decide to pull the rug out from underneath US economy. Such a maneuver could cause chaos in global finance and trade, but the gravest consequences will be reserved for America’s ruling class at home as living standards for ordinary people free fall.

Unprecedented interest rates have given the appearance of the dollar as being stronger than ever before, but this is an illusion built through the cannibalization of Europe and Japan. On its own merits, the deindustrialized American economy is neither competitive or sustainable.

Declining Living Standards

It is well-established that one of the major sources of political instability (populism, hopelessness, revolution, etc) is wealth inequality. Today, the United States has the most lopsided wealth distribution in the developed world, with a Gini Coefficient of 41.5 (compared to the two “second world” rivals: 36 in Russia and 38.2 in China).

The true state of the US economy is hidden under piles of cooked books and over-the-top propaganda headlines like “America’s astonishing economic growth goes up another gear,” but this can barely hide the mounting anecdotes gaining 10s of millions of views, like women with popular TikTok channels declaring that the new “American dream” is to emigrate.

Part of the mass disillusionment with the US economy is rooted in how it is structured in 2024 compared to the middle-class golden age of the 1950s. The general perception is that living standards have gotten worse for the majority of people.

In the immediate aftermath of World War II, the US economy comprised 45% of the world’s GDP, largely propelled by the production of high quality physical goods. Today, this share of the world’s wealth has fallen to 25%, which is still impressive, but the distribution of this economic activity has changed.

The radical financialization of the economy spurred by the theories of Jewish economist Milton Friedman during the 1980s ushered in a new system that began centralizing economic and political power in the hands of non-productive forces in the Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate (FIRE).

According to data collected by Greta Krippner, in 1954 nearly 40% of America’s working population was employed in the manufacturing sector versus roughly 5% participating in FIRE activity. The US had already surpassed the British Empire economically following World War I, and the global need for American products made the country an exporting superpower after World War II.

During this same period, this 40% of workers in the manufacturing sector created 35% of the US GDP, while the FIRE market added up to about 13% of the economy.

This influence on the economy allowed America’s workers to hold significant leverage over capital. In 1954, 35% of US wage and salary workers were in a labor union.

Following the implementation of Friedmanism during the “Reagan Revolution,” this socio-economic synergy was flipped on its head.

In 2022, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that a mere 12.8% of American workers are employed in the goods-producing sector (construction, mining, and manufacturing). On the other hand, a whopping 70% of Americans now work in the service industry, compared to 15% in 1954.

Less than 10% of US workers (approximately 30 million) are employed in both the FIRE market and professional business services that serve it (accountants, lawyers, consultants, financial advisors, etc). Yet percentage of the GDP controlled by this sector has shot up dramatically from 13% to now 33%.

Government spending (11.6%) has now outgrown manufacturing (11%) in terms of contribution to the GDP. This is strongly correlated with the collapse in unionization rates, which have fallen to 10%, though even here, about half of organized labor is composed of public sector unions siphoning taxpayer money. Other factors, such as mass immigration and outsourcing — staples of anti-democratic and unpatriotic neo-liberal policymaking — also play a substantial role in undercutting labor power.

This inequality is only compounded by the US ruling elite’s finance-first economic plan. Last month, it was reported that 10% of Americans own 93% of all stocks. When it comes to the balance sheets, the US tax code punishes productive work (income tax) while incentivizing speculative activities (low capital gains taxes), meaning that the rich get richer while the working class gets poorer.

The stagnation in wealth-generation for salaried and wage employees in conjunction with FIRE’s Fed-backed morally hazardous activity has made basic necessities like housing and food increasingly difficult for ordinary people to afford.

On paper, American workers are among the wealthiest on the planet, with a median income between $55 and $60 thousand dollars a year. But this is a political number created by omission rather than a reflection of real-world living standards.

For example, a worker making $50,000 dollars a year only takes home about $39,129 after taxes. US employees in the middle bracket ($50 to $100,000) pay 22% in income tax, which is lower than the OECD average (34%), but in return for paying 1/3 more, citizens in other developed nations enjoy high quality public transportation, universal health care, and free education, while American workers are expected to pay for all of this out of pocket, often through high-interest loans and credit cards. The result is that the average household in the United States owes $128,824 ($17.3 trillion overall), with a rising chunk of this coming from the overreliance on credit cards to make ends meet.

In order for an American household to be plausibly “middle-class,” two incomes are a requirement, but this is no guarantee. In 2019, it was discovered that 44% of Americans work at jobs that pay $18,000 dollars a year or less. For this population — the working poor and indigent — the state provides food, Social Security Insurance, welfare payouts, and health care subsidies, further stressing the balance of payments problem.

This has led to an awkward development, where countries perceived as second world, including US rival Russia, have started catching up to America’s long admired standard of living.

When adjusted for purchasing power parity (PPP), a Russian worker making the median Moscow salary of $19,200 a year can afford the same lifestyle as an American worker making $72,000 a year in a major American city (Chicago, Los Angeles, New York, etc).

Russian workers pay a 13% flat tax on their income, which in return gets them great public transportation and universal health care. According to 2017 statistics, Russia has a unionization rate almost three times higher than the US at 27.5%. Russian workers enjoy 28 days of paid vacation time every year, compared to an average of 11 days for their American counterparts. 23% of Russian workers are employed in goods-producing fields, with an additional 5.8% participating in the agriculture sector (Russian agricultural production has doubled since the start of Western sanctions in 2022).

The lopsided distribution of wealth is still an issue in Russia, but Vladimir Putin’s reign has drastically improved the situation. Of the highly Jewish “Seven Oligarchs” who at one point in the 1990s controlled half of Russia’s wealth and pretty much all of its media, the majority of these figures have either been jailed or forced into exile by the Putin government.

Defenders of Washington’s economic dominance over the world will often cite the billion or so people lifted from poverty since 1990. Yet the bulk of this work in combating destitution has happened in China, where 800 million people have been brought out of poverty. Much of this growth in real wealth has been driven by Chinese manufacturing, which employs 28% of workers. The doubling of the Chinese middle class from 2012 to 2022 has allowed the state to begin reorienting its economy towards domestic consumption as the trade war with the US intensifies.

Size, Trade Balance and Debt

US-based media outlets have been breathlessly predicting the looming collapse of the Chinese economy, but in 2023 China enjoyed GDP growth of 5.2%, compared to the US’ 2.5%.

Among those betting on China’s economy continuing to grow at double the rate of America are the US’ highly unpatriotic industrialists. Tim Cook of Apple, Elon Musk of Tesla, and others spent 2023 visiting China to announce expansions of their economic participation in the country despite Beijing’s efforts to closely monitor and regulate foreign investments.

For Western capitalists, losing access to the Chinese market is unthinkable. When adjusting GDP for Purchasing Power Parity, the Chinese economy has long surpassed the US. In 2023, China stood at $30.3 trillion, while the US is second at $25.4 trillion.

A lesser-known fact is that last year, the World Bank reported that Russia’s sanctioned economy ($5.32 trillion) quietly passed Germany ($5.30 trillion) to become the largest economy in Europe and the fifth largest on the planet. If Russia overtakes stagnant Japan ($5.7 trillion) in the next year or two, three of the four largest economies in the world will belong to BRICS.

Upon closer examination, it should be noted that there are serious differences in the health of these respective economies. China, whose economic system is planned around exporting more than it imports, currently enjoys a $877 billion dollar trade surplus, while the resource rich Russians were $140 billion in the black thanks to pivoting their oil market towards Asia. By contrast, the United States suffered a $773 billion dollar trade deficit in 2023, though this is still a relative improvement from the nearly trillion dollar hole from the previous year.

Debt is currently at 112% of the American GDP, compared to 66.5% in China and 15.1% in Russia. America’s most important Asian protectorate, the Japanese economic juggernaut, is being propped up by an increasingly unviable debt that is 232% of its GDP.

While the “exorbitant privilege” of the US dollar may allow America to import significantly more than it exports, its hollowed-out manufacturing base places it at a serious disadvantage in an age of Great Power competition.

Between China’s vast realized manufacturing potential and Russia’s plentiful natural resources, we are arriving at a point where sanctions and trade wars launched by the G7 hurt the aggressors more than the target.

According to the Supply Chain Vulnerability Index, the United States is the world’s most susceptible to interruptions in global trade. This interdependence, where the US consumes without producing, reveals a massive disparity with the fully self-sufficient Chinese. Trump-era tariffs on $300 billion in Chinese goods continued by the Biden administration have caused far more damage to American capitalists than to Chinese enterprises.

This dynamic is also being felt in the realm of kinetic conflicts, as seen with developments in the Ukraine war. Russian industry’s ability to simultaneously weather global sanctions and rapidly produce weapons has bewildered NATO. The Atlanticist bloc is unable to continue providing the Zelensky regime with the arms necessary to retain Ukraine’s artificial military peer status it enjoyed against Russia in 2022 and part of 2023.

Dethroning King Dollar

America’s unusually powerful dollar is a source of misery for both ordinary Americans and much of the world.

The high exchange rate of dollars (and to a lesser extent Euros) compared to other world currencies is a primary driver of mass immigration from the global south to the West, as migrants’ remittances go far in the economies of their homelands. Immigrants paying large sums of cash to smugglers to bring them to the West are often prospecting for dollars and Euros — an investment that would not be worthwhile if these currencies were weakened down to a more realistic and competitive rate of exchange.

Domestically, outside of the record profits enjoyed by the top seven firms (largely overvalued tech firms and unproductive data-mining operations like Meta and Google) in the S&P 500, America’s generally unprofitable businesses have been hit hard by interest rate raise. The lack of cheap credit flow caused a 13-year high in bankruptcies in 2023, as well as the largest bank failure since the 2008 crisis.

Connected to this is the incentive to keep wages as low as possible in the West as well as to outsource, due to American capitalist’s need to keep prices on its brands (Teslas, iPhones, etc) accessible for the upper middle classes of the less developed world. While imports are cheap due to this relationship, the downside is that Americans struggle to buy basic necessities that must be sourced at home.

At the 1971 G10 meeting, US Treasury Secretary John Connally told European “allies” that the US dollar is “our currency, and your problem.” The strong dollar allows Washington to avoid the political problems wrought by runaway inflation by forcing Europe and East Asia to endure these consequences instead. Resource poor industrial nations such as Japan and Germany are forced to import raw materials — usually in dollars — which has (alongside cutting off raw materials through the sanctioning of Russia) jacked up the price of their manufacturing to the point of causing massive contractions in both economies.

In other words, the dollar hurts almost every stakeholder save for the predominately Jewish US elite. In recent years, they tore off their mask off by utilizing control over the world reserve currency and financial institutions to mount geopolitical attacks intended to starve Iran and Russia into collapse.

For much of the world’s elite, American assets (stocks, real estate, etc) are attractive due to their high rate of quick profitability. This has traditionally given the US a high degree of economic leverage over foreign lands, but the war in Ukraine has made many countries reconsider their investments. In fact, one could argue that they are looking for an escape route.

In 2022, the United States and its G7 subjects unilaterally confiscated $300 billion dollars in Russian assets held in their territories upon instruction from Washington and New York. This was paired with deplatforming Moscow from the US-controlled SWIFT. The goal of this endeavor was economic sabotage: make it impossible for Russia to meet its financial obligations and thus “turn the Ruble into rubble.” Frustrated by the lack of desired results, America’s vindictive Jewish Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen recently floated the idea of giving all the money stolen from Russia to Ukraine.

Naturally, most of the world — the majority who have refused to participate in sanctions on Russia — has been disquieted by this weaponization of US economic might. Energy and manufacturing superpowers Russia, China, and Iran have already largely de-dollarized in their bilateral trade, mostly out of necessity, but what should be more alarming for Washington policymakers is that now nations integral to the dollar’s success such as France and Saudi Arabia are starting to sign trade agreements paid for through currency swaps and Yuans.

The most acute threat to US financial dominance is coming from BRICS, which this year officially added five new members. Three of these new participants — Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates — are oil producing powers. When tallied together, BRICS members will now control over 30% of the global energy market, overshadowing the US at 21%. BRICS will also consume 31% of the world’s energy (India’s energy dependence is the primary reason it has refused to sanction Russia), which in this realm alone creates huge incentives for them to ditch the dollar.

Iraq, which produces an additional 5% of the world’s oil supply, is also eager to join BRICS, but this effort has been blocked by the US military occupation of their country. Under present day circumstances, Iraq’s oil economy is entirely managed by the New York Federal Reserve. If Iraq and Iran work together to expel the US military out of the country, it is unlikely that Baghdad will remain in Washington’s sphere of influence.

BRICS nations have expressed interest in creating new money to trade in, backed by a basket of their local currencies and their respective resource and manufacturing capacities. Today, G7 nations only contribute approximately 30% of the world’s economic activity when adjusted for PPP.

There are several barriers and irreconcilable differences among the BRICS nations, however. The United States can do what it likes in its part of the increasingly multi-polar order due to its powerful military and financial stranglehold over the European, Japanese, Taiwanese and Korean economies, while among the BRICS, no country is interested in or capable of this type of hegemony. Rumors are spreading that there are plans to unveil a dollar-killer at the BRICS conference hosted in Russia this year, but this should be taken with a grain of salt.

In general, a BRICS currency is not really necessary, and it would be foolish to take the prevalence of the US dollar for granted regardless of what transpires next. Rather than a single opposing currency, it is more feasible that the world will increase bilateral trade via national currencies until the dollar dies from a thousand cuts.

American policymakers’ procrastinated rush to reshore and nearshore industry to the United States is a hint that Washington is planning for the worst.

Bidenomics: Why Reshoring Will Fail

Most of America’s imperial woes could be fixed by pursuing a policy of autarky. With its vast population, physical safety from rivals, and large population this is within the realm of possibility, so the question is one of will.

Enter Bidenomics, a collection of legislative bills worth $100s of billions of dollars intended to depart from the neoliberal “Washington consensus” and blow the cobwebs off American industry. So far, this project has produced paltry results.

Take for example the 2022 CHIPS and Science Act. In the interest of defeating China in the global A.I. and semiconductor fields, the US government is providing massive subsidies and tax breaks to companies such as Intel, TSMC, Nvidia, etc to invest in Research & Development, bring production to the US, and leave China in the dust .

The limitations of America’s shareholder-centered capitalist economy are coming to the fore. In Nvidia’s case, the company has embarked on a massive $25 billion dollar stock buyback scheme, causing some analysts to warn about the company’s surging stock value, which is fake and delinked from its profitability. The CHIPS act bans companies from stealing tax-payer provided subsidies through this type of speculative activity, but there are no strings attached after they have invested the bare minimum. This means they are playing on the stock market in the interest of self-dealing over making a good faith effort to invest in development in hopes of long-term profits.

Nvidia has even been spending money looking for ways around US semiconductors sanctions on China (the world’s top consumer of such devices), leading to the absurdity of public subsidies potentially being used to come up with workarounds that continue aiding the America government’s enemies.

Intel is another offender in stock buybacks. From 2022 to 2023, the company increased its stock buyback regiment by 91%, or $5.5 billion. Part of this cycle of greed and stagnation is being driven by leaches aggressively seeking to short Intel stock, which has proven quite volatile. The Chinese state has neutralized the economy-retarding effects of short-selling by simply banning it, but such an assertive move by the state in America requires exercising power over finance our plutocracy does not have.

As for Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company’s game changing $40 billion dollar facility in Phoenix, the celebrations came before any results. The entire project has suffered from significant delays from top to bottom. TSMC recently announced that it will not be able to start semiconductor production until 2025 due to a lack of qualified labor.

Part of the economic challenge facing America is a relative lack of STEM graduates. According to Charles Murray’s Facing Reality, white Americans have an average IQ of 103, while Mesoamericans are at 94 and blacks at 91. Using this data, we can conclude that drastic changes in the racial makeup of the United States in the last 40 years have basically lowered the national IQ.

But IQ does not need to be destiny. Iran’s IQ lower than the US’ (98), but the Iranian state has invested heavily in identifying and educating gifted students in order to survive ceaseless attacks on its sovereignty and murders of its scientists by the Zionist world order. The result of this prudent policy is reflected in Iran’s unexpected and sudden rise as a producer of sophisticated weapons, including hypersonic missiles. Currently, 41% of Chinese students graduate in STEM, 37% in Russia, and 33% in Iran, while the US lags behind at 20%.

The contempt the heavily Jewish American elite hold for white Americans must also be factored in. One example is the bizarre provision in the CHIPS Act instructing beneficiaries to boycott suppliers and workers of European descent. In higher education, which in the US is a costly, for-profit enterprise, virtually all engineering scholarships require applicants to be minority or female.

The US Supreme Court’s decision to reverse Affirmative Action in higher learning last year appears to be tailored towards trying to bring white people back into the house to fight Russia, Iran and China. How far this will go in practice is unknown, as most American elite universities appear ideologically committed to excluding non-Jewish white people and there are few legal resources for white students to access.

We see identical problems in the manufacturing area, where state funded largesse leads to an initial expansion of industrial activity only to fizzle out soon after. It seems that no matter how much money the government spends, it simply has no mechanism for forcing capitalists to invest in increasing production or grow markets outside of burdensome fields (such as tech and finance).

This is an outgrowth of the intrinsic corruption that plagues every liberal capitalist system.

For China and Russia, the economies are centrally planned around self-reliance to different degrees. Both countries have corruption, but they aggressively pursue it, including regularly meting out the death penalty to oligarchs and compromised state officials in the Chinese case.

The United States radically diverges. In America it is legal for officials to receive payoffs from the financial sector (through “lobbying,” PACs and other practices banned in competing states), thus reducing state independence and making it difficult for political representatives to discipline capital.

It is impossible to speculate how much securities and accounting fraud is happening in the US economy as we speak, but the current record low rate of white collar criminal prosecutions should be interpreted as a wink to Wall Street.

How much longer will the world put up with this, is the question. Just one gust of wind could bring the entire economic house of cards down and launch America into completely unchartered, perilous waters. A rational managerial class would’ve accepted that the tables have turned and started mending relations with China, Iran and Russia.

Instead, the Washington-New York-California oligarchy is doubling down on denial and intensifying their threatening actions against both the people of the world and those of us who have the misfortune of being under them.

The Collapse Of The American Empire, Part III: Diplomacy and Soft Power, by Eric Striker - The Unz Review

Apr. 16th, 2024

America’s prestige has rapidly declined. The 2003 war in Iraq, the 2008 financial crisis, Edward Snowden’s exposure of the NSA’s spying program, the weaponization of the US dollar, and America’s diplomatic isolation in support of Israel’s genocidal war in Gaza have chipped away at the persuasion power of Washington’s argument that it is uniquely qualified to uphold the rule of law and that it holds a universal mandate to impose its political ideology on the world.

The concept of soft power, popularized by Joseph Nye, holds that the key to American hegemony lies in its ability to inspire obedience, rather than obtain it through coercion. The popular culture, political values, and foreign policy of the United States, according to Nye, allows America to compel nations to do its bidding through seduction, rather than the traditional means of carrot (bribes) or stick (war).

Underpinning Nye’s theory is an unfalsifiable assumption that there are silent majorities of people all over the world who prefer liberal democracy, LGBT, special minority protections, feminism, multi-culturalism, and individualist economics to the pre-war “Strong Gods” of nationalism, tradition, and collectivism. The world may love iPhones and Coca Cola, but as famous Chicago Bulls fan Kim Jong Un shows, this does not always translate to an embrace of the American system.

This line of thinking has arguably blinkered American elites to the point of walking into avoidable diplomatic defeats in several theaters. The regular occurrence of “color revolutions” throughout the 1990s and 2000s could lend credence to Nye’s view, but these types of uprisings have not succeeded in recent years as America falls out of favor as a political model and nations grow more sophisticated in combating Washington’s covert influence (such as through Non-Governmental Organizations) and espionage.

The main weakness of Nye’s theory is that it does not allow for the possibility of anti-liberal ideals being attractive. During the Cold War the United States posited itself as a defender of Christian civilization and human freedom against Soviet atheism and totalitarianism with a degree of success. But since 2012, Vladimir Putin has worked to position his country as a counter to America’s fixation on sexually deviant behavior to become the global leading voice of heteronormativity and the traditional family, a position the overwhelming majority of humanity — including in Western nations — agrees with. A law recently passed forcing US embassies abroad to hide the LGBT and Black Lives Matter flags they have previously flown suggests that this type of soft power is more effective than liberal academics are comfortable admitting.

Today, nations the United States considers to be “democracies” trapped in the web of Atlanticist treaties continue to elect leaders who campaign in defense of ethnic majorities and against immigrants, promise law and order crackdowns, and purport to uphold traditional values, as seen with Recep Erdogan in Turkey, Viktor Orban in Hungary, Narendra Modi of India, Giorgia Meloni in Italy, and even the presidential election of Donald Trump in 2016. In France, Emmanuel Macron has been forced to publicly attack America’s anti-white values just to stave off challenges from figures such as Marine Le Pen, while in Germany the government is panicking over the favorable polling numbers of Alternativ Fur Deutschland. Tucker Carlson’s recent visit to Russia, where he praised their public order and grocery stores, was a massively demoralizing moment for not just American elites, but also their partners in Russia’s anti-Putin liberal opposition, who have come to rely entirely on the image of a rich and corruption-free America for recruitment. When looking at where popular momentum is both inside of the West and beyond, one must seriously question how many nations will remain committed to structures such as NATO once its military and economic power is matched or even overshadowed by adversaries such as Russia and China.

What the United States conceives as democracy has now declined globally for the 20th consecutive year. American discourse in foreign relations has become more mercenary and vicious, increasingly relying on threats of economic sanctions, military intervention or significant tradeoffs to achieve compliance. Some have observed that “globalization” is in truth Americanization, and all would agree that globalization is in rapid retreat.

Conversations critical of American hegemony have broken out of the stilted left-wing tradition to become mainstream and pragmatic, including in nations considered safe within Washington’s orbit. Among these rising voices includes adherents to liberalism, who are beginning to express opposition to the influence of Washington, California and New York in their own lands in anti-colonialist terms. English academic Angus Hanton’s new book Vassal State argues that American financiers and multi-nationals are looting Britain’s economy and have totally eroded the nation’s sovereignty. Emmanuel Todd, a Jew firmly committed to liberal ideals, has published a best-selling book, La Défaite de l’Occident, which warns France that the American order’s downfall is imminent. Esteemed American economist Michael Hudson and Norwegian academic Glenn Diesen express similar sentiments.

In other words, United States commands neither admiration or respect, leading to an increased reliance on hard power, which has the multiplier effect of increasing global resentment. The unprecedented rise of China offers a gateway to economic prosperity and technological innovation without being forced to embrace all of America’s nihilistic and unintuitive values has undermined the power of the carrot (access to powerful US dollars). As nations such as Russia and Iran meet Washington’s military threats directly and check its global ambitions, fear of the stick is fading.

The future of the world is shaping up to be one of a series of ala carte relationships, where small and medium sized nations deal with multiple powers — the USA, European Union, China, Russia, even Iran — on their own terms and according to their own interests.

Diplomacy

A major story in the shift in world affairs is the unfolding rivalry in developmental economics between the US’ International Monetary Fund and China’s Belt and Road Initiative.

The Belt and Road Initiative seeks to challenge America’s maritime trade system by creating a new “Silk Road” linking global economic exchange over land.

IMF recipients generally receive loans, at times with high interest, on the condition that they reform their political and economic systems, largely through eliminating protectionism and a program of asset privatization. Countries are often unable to pay these loans off, leading them into debt traps that allows bankers and multinationals to take advantage of the cranked open markets to snatch up privatized resources at fire sale prices or opportunistically capitalize on debt restructuring agreements. One famous victim of this debt-driven system was Argentina, whose economy was thoroughly stripped by Jewish vulture capitalist Paul Singer via the practice of predatory sovereign lending.

The BRI is distinct in that it is infrastructure-led and impersonal. Chinese banks pay Chinese firms to (usually) employ Chinese labor to build infrastructure with Chinese raw materials for poor nations. These are generally structured as joint-ventures, where recipients who cannot pay back the loans give Chinese firms control over the specific infrastructure project (ports, highways, high speed railways, etc) until generated profits pay off the investment and it is handed over.

Around 150 nations have signed up for China’s BRI, whereas the IMF currently has 35 customers.

A key selling point for the BRI is the Chinese policy of non-interference in local cultural or political affairs. The Chinese do not have any problem doing business with nations designated as pariahs by liberal institutions, such as Belarus, whose first national car plant was built by the BRI system, or Hungary, Eritrea, Iran, the Taliban’s Afghanistan and so on.

By contrast, the IMF has emerged as an institution used to impose Jewish ambitions and engage in social engineering as loan conditions that offend local values and undermine the self-interest of sovereign states. Examples abound. Last year, the IMF stated it will not loan Tunisia money until it ends its crackdown on illegal immigration and lets in African migrants. Both the IMF and World Bank, led by the local US ambassador, have threatened to pull billions of dollars in financing to Ghana over its parliament passing a law prohibiting public displays of homosexuality. In Egypt, the IMF has been dangling billions in bailout money contingent on their acceptance of Palestinians Israel wants to ethnically cleanse.

In theory, nations could deal with both China and the United States, but American diplomacy is often zero-sum. The assumption that America will always be the better deal is being tested by China’s counter-model for global development, to the benefit of once powerless nations.

Washington initially threatened popular Salvadorian president Nayib Bukele with sanctions over his now internationally lauded crime crackdown. The US, which began referring to to Bukele as the new Hugo Chavez, was thwarted when the Salvadorian leader responded to the needling by whipping the door open to China and signaling support for Russia. This turned the tables on Washington, who wound up learning to live instead of risking being told to get out. The National Library of El Salvador, an impressive modern educational facility that is the crown jewel of the Bukele government, was constructed as a token of friendship by China.

In Hungary, Washington and Brussels’ leverage also appears to be weakening. Last month, David Pressman, America’s gay Jewish ambassador to the NATO member state, gave a speech vowing to punish and bring down the popularly elected government of Viktor Orban. In his address, Pressman stated “While the Orbán government may want to wait out the United States government, the United States will certainly not wait out the Orbán administration. While Hungary waits, we will act.”

Orban has shrugged off these threats by drastically increasing his economic ties to China and Russia. Orban has enraged the pro-US faction in his parliament by supporting the expansion of a Chinese University in Hungary and signing a contract with Russia to build a nuclear power plant in the country. Other regional “outlaws,” such as Bulgaria and Slovakia, are following suit. If the economic and military benefits of being in NATO or the European Union no longer justify the relentless meddling by foreign actors, it is a matter of time before these nations exit these alliances.

Another major setback for American diplomacy is occurring in the resource rich Sahel region of Africa. Nations such as Mali and Burkina Faso have thrown out France and the US, opting instead for military support from Russia’s Wagner Group and economic partnerships with China. Chad, the last African nation that hosts a French military presence, is drifting away towards Russia and China even as the Macron government begs them to stay.

The new military government of Niger, which houses an American base with 1,000 troops, replied to arrogant US demands that they resign from power and restore the Washington asset Mohamed Bazoum by ordering US troops to leave their country country. Niger’s leadership has concluded that America is incapable of good faith negotiations and vowed to satisfy their security and economic needs through Russia and China. One foreign policy analyst summed up the ordeal as follows: “In this new multipolar world, it seems that the United States, still arguably the richest and most powerful country in the world, needs Niger, one of the world’s poorest and weakest countries, more than Niger needs it.”

In the Philippines, a former and arguably current US colony, we have also seen glimpses of defiance. Rodrigo Duterte, who was browbeat throughout his presidency by Washington and its NGOs for his own anti-crime campaign, responded to this harassment by moving to cancel the country’s Visiting Forces Agreement with the US in 2020. The Biden administration was able to salvage this military presence — a vital component in Washington’s anti-China strategy in the Pacific — by offering steep concessions and promising to back off from internal Filipino affairs. The ascension of Ferdinand Marcos Jr in 2022 was well received by Washington, under the assumption that he was steadfastly pro-US, but Marcos Jr has himself emulated some of Duterte’s assertive posture, such as by forging deeper economic and diplomatic ties with Iran.

The State Department is even struggling to control Saudi Arabia, a nation commonly perceived as a fully dependent client state of the American empire. In one instance, the Saudis refused demands from the Biden administration to increase oil production to lessen the impact of sanctions against Russia in Europe. Adding insult to injury, the Saudis have more or less informally integrated Russia into OPEC.

Perhaps the biggest blow to America’s Jewish-concocted foreign policy aspirations was the Chinese brokered peace agreement between Saudi Arabia and Iran, effectively bringing the bloody sectarian Sunni vs Shi’ite sectarian conflict that has haunted the Middle East for decades to an end. Since then, the Saudis have ended their horrific war against the Houthis in Yemen and restored diplomatic ties with the government of Bashar al-Assad, a leader it spent a decade trying to overthrow. Last week, the Saudis publicly declared that they would not allow their airspace to be used to protect Israel from Iran.

On the Palestine-Israel conflict, China and Russia have emerged as unlikely moral leaders in their strongly worded opposition to Israel’s war in Gaza, the worst atrocity of the 21st century being broadcast in real time to billions over social media. At the United Nations, the world continues to support, in virtual consensus, a ceasefire in the war, along with the recognition of Palestinian statehood. These efforts are continuously vetoed by the United States. Commentators and even US diplomats hold that America’s unconditional support for the Jewish state’s barbarism that billions are witnessing in real time over social media is a point of no return for the USA’s legitimacy as the international human rights policeman.

Liberal academics have started coming to terms with the growing view that America is a bad actor on the global stage. Some blame the Trump administration’s brash and thuggish language (calling on NATO countries to protection money, killing the families of belligerents, stealing the oil in Syria, etc) for America’s plummeting reputation, but in truth, many people around the world found Trump to be refreshingly honest when communicating what the US’ motives have been all along.

Technology

America’s reputation as the global leader in technological innovation, both in consumer products and weapons, is a vital incentive for nations on the fence about acquiescing to its interests. Life without the smartphone, the internet, or the personal computer — revolutionary American innovations unveiled and popularized at the height of Pax Americana in the 1990s and 2000s — would be unthinkable today. Nations who, for political reasons, were not allowed to access these technologies naturally fell far behind everyone else.

This is no longer true for the industries of tomorrow. The balance of power in the realm of technology has dramatically shifted in favor a sophisticated China. Last year, the Australian Strategic Policy Institute found that the US and the liberal sphere at large were trailing China in 37 of 44 crucial technological fields, which includes robotics, advanced manufacturing, artificial intelligence, and biotechnology.

This growing gap is beginning to be seen in consumer products, such as the iPhone, which since its inception in 2007 has been seen as the international standard in cellphone technology.

Last year, Huawei released its Mate 60 model to compete with the new iPhone 15. The iPhone 15 was launched to mixed reviews, with consumers calling it an underwhelming cash-grab that did not add any new features. The Mate 60, on the other hand, bests the iPhone 15 on many fronts, especially the groundbreaking inclusion of the ability to make satellite calls. American manufacturers already produce satellite phones, which are big, clunky and difficult to carry, but nobody has ever incorporated this technology into a smartphone you can fit in your pocket.

The United States government has made banning the sale of Huawei products both a domestic and foreign policy objective. The challenge for the US government is that Apple is becoming less competitive than its Chinese rivals due to the American corporate titan’s preference to satiate its greed through unproductive stock buybacks at the expense of investing in research and development. The Department of Justice is trying to force Apple to innovate, but the nature of the American finance-driven economic system makes this difficult.

The geopolitical ramifications are starting to be felt. Despite using the US using threats to get Chinese smartphones banned from as many markets as possible, Apple has now officially fallen behind Huawei and associated brands in global smartphone sales. This is a setback for the US government’s surveillance capabilities due to the NSA’s reliance on backdoor access to Apple and other American phone products to spy on the world.

In the realm of electric vehicles, another theater in the technological cold war, China has far surpassed the US. Earlier this year, Chinese car manufacturer BYD — dubbed by the New York Times as the “Tesla killer” — overtook Tesla as the world’s bestselling EV.

BYD’s popularity in China and beyond is driven by its budget models, which cost about a quarter of the starting price of a Tesla. BYD’s are relatively inexpensive due to their diversified approach, such as producing batteries in-house. China currently has a 22% adoption rate for electric vehicles, which is playing a role in reducing emissions and smog, while in the US the rate of EV adoption is at under 6%.

That is not to say the United States is behind everywhere. America has one-upped China by creating the first interactive AIs. This achievement, however, has been sullied by the absurd scandal of the Google Gemini bot, which was programmed to refuse any normal portrayal of white people in order to fit America’s ruling ideology.

This disease is showing symptoms in ChatGPT, the first conversational AI tool, which is programmed to block “hateful” queries on race and gender, as well as “content attempting to influence the political process.” ChatGPT will not even allow users to generate scientific research critical of transgenderism. A tool that should place the US ahead of China in the AI race is now dismissed as a propaganda tool by a substantial portion of the American people at home.

This malaise is plaguing other strategic fields where the United States has always been respected. A combination of racial hiring quotas discriminating against qualified white employees and greed-fueled corporate corner cutting has led to several high-profile technical failures of Boeing’s newest airplanes, transforming the name of the global leader in aerospace products into a source of anxiety when flying. Both anti-white racism and the “greed is good” philosophy of business are integral to Americanism, meaning that remedying this problem will be difficult, if not impossible.

Access to America’s high-tech weapons have long served as a powerful foreign policy tool, but here too America has been falling way behind due to the immense corruption and inefficiency of national arm’s manufacturers. The $1.7 trillion dollar F-35 program remains one of the biggest public spending disasters in US history. Russia’s Su-57 and China’s Chengdu J-20 match most of the F-35’s capabilities, though some would argue the J-20 is superior.

In the realm of difficult to intercept hypersonic missiles, the news is grim for the US. Iran, China, and Russia are all considered to be far ahead of the United States, having effectively tested their first missiles and in Russia’s case used them in battle, while America’s attempts at testing its version of this technology have failed.

Earlier this month, the small and heavily sanctioned nation of North Korea beat the US by successfully testing its own hypersonic missile, the Hwasong-16B. This development has provoked more questions than answers. It is widely speculated that Russia covertly transferred this technology to the North Koreans, granting them a surprising strategic edge against America’s presence in the region.

The US currently holds an arm’s exporting advantage over Russia due to the war in Ukraine, but the desire to access Russia’s cheaper yet more advanced weapon’s systems, such as the S-400 defense system, remains a major barrier preventing strategic powers like India from fully supporting Washington’s ambitions of creating an “Asian NATO.”

Culture

The proliferation of American pop culture, where Jews play an important role as tastemakers, has been an important arrow in the global hegemon’s quiver. There is no question that Levi’s jeans, rock music and McDonalds captured the imaginations of millions in the Eastern bloc during the Cold War. In 2002, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was more blunt, suggesting to the US Congress that they should work to broadcast Beverly Hills 90210 into Iran to foment discord, with Netanyahu quipping, “that’s subversive stuff!”

The popularity of American culture still retains some of its power, but it has undoubtedly waned globally.

During the 1990s, the semi-nude buxom blondes on the series Baywatch made it the most watched TV show in the world. Fast forward to 2023, and the CGI remake of The Little Mermaid starring a black woman as the titular character was a box office bomb in Disney-loving China and most of the rest of the world. Chinese reviewers had no qualms stating why they boycotted the film: they believe it is inappropriate to cast a black person to star in a European folk tale and dismissed “Western” critiques of their “racism” as stupid.

Citizens in countries with massive populations like China and India are now rejecting Hollywood films and the values they promote, choosing to watch films made domestically instead.

The grip on social media, once monopolized by Instagram, Youtube, Facebook, etc, is also weakening. The global adaptation of social media throughout the 2000s and 2010s allowed Washington’s policy makers to beam American propaganda and lifestyles into the smartphones of young people all over the world, leading to episodes such as the Arab Spring.

The use of these social media apps by American, British, and Israeli state actors and NGOs to foment chaos and organize violence was cited as the reason for banning them in nations such as Turkey, Pakistan and China, leading to accusations from the West that they were undermining the free and open internet.

Now the US government is on the defensive, working to outlaw or force the sale of one of the most popular apps in America — the Chinese-owned TikTok — due to the widespread anti-Israel sentiment allowed to flow on the platform.

Russian and Chinese owned social media platforms have grown more sophisticated while their American equivalents have stagnated, leading to the widespread domestic adaptation and increasing international use of non-American products.

Russian Pavel Durov’s free speech friendly app, Telegram, has risen to the 7th most used social media platform, while Elon Musk’s attempt to compete, Twitter, is not even in the top 10. China’s WeChat is now fifth most used, TikTok is sixth, and Weibo is 10th.

China and Russia can now answer Amazon with Ali Baba and Ozon. The Google search engine has been met with Yandex and Baidu, with Yandex being less controlled and censored than even its “free speech” American competitor DuckDuckGo.

Access to American treats, such as Starbucks and McDonalds, have also been politicized by US elites, but not always to their benefit. Sanctions led to most American brands abruptly leaving Russia in 2022, but the native replacements have become more popular than their predecessors.

In a February earnings call, McDonald’s showed anemic growth. Chief Financial Advisor Ian Borden cited the boycott by the billion strong Muslim world over its support for the Israeli genocide in Gaza as the culprit. Starbucks, which is owned by the Zionist Jew Howard Schulz, is also being run out of the Middle East for supporting Israel.

In a sense, the American homogenization of the world’s cultural and consumer preferences represents a restoration of human diversity and exclusivity. US-made products are no longer “must-haves.” In soft power terms, this means Washington policymakers will need to make peace with a world that does not automatically share all of its assumptions or preferences and adapt or die.