Instigator / Pro
0
1500
rating
1
debates
50.0%
won
Topic
#5397
American hegemony was better for the world, than "multipolar" world
Status
Finished
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
Winner & statistics
After not so many votes...
It's a tie!
Parameters
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 5
- Time for argument
- One day
- Max argument characters
- 10,000
- Voting period
- Two weeks
- Point system
- Winner selection
- Voting system
- Open
Contender / Con
0
1455
rating
13
debates
34.62%
won
Description
No information
Round 1
The period after dissolution of USSR until early 2010s is called the "golden age" by many economists and historians. This brief period of time was accompanied by the political, economical and military dominance of one country, which more or less dictated - how countries should progress towards better future and what principles they have to use in order to achieve it. United States of America was, and still is to some extent, the hegemon of world politics.
These ~20 years of American dominance on the world stage were one of the most peaceful times in modern history, with some exceptions, which will later be used by geopolitical opponents of US to berate them on their foreign policies. Namely war in Iraq, intervention into Afghanistan, bombing of Belgrade. During those 20 years, China and Russia tried to portray themselves as only partners of Western countries, rarely challenging them up on any issues (mainly because of their economic reliance on the West and US in particular). Radical Islamism and world terrorism were the major problems of 2000s. After China became an industrial superpower and other countries saw an opportunity to align themselves with anyone, except the only hegemon - they took this opportunity, especially considering that China never had any informal principles, that are a requirement for building up a friendly relationship with them (Democratic system of political rulling, freedom of speech, freedom of expression).
What we call today a "multipolar" world is just a non-official division of the geopolitics to Pro-West and Anti-West. There are a small pool of countries, that do business without straight alignment with neither of two (South Korea, Israel, United Arab Emirates, India), but majority of the world are divided into these two categories of geopolitical predicaments.
To finally address - how exactly the times of total US hegemony were better for the world, than so-called "multipolarity" of the world, let me bring up the numbers.
- The constant world economic growth up until 2008 (data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.KD.ZG).
- The number and severity of wars during US hegemony was considerably lower, than after the rise of China and Chinese-aligned countries. (ourworldindata.org/grapher/deaths-in-armed-conflicts-by-type?time=2003..latest; ourworldindata.org/grapher/deaths-in-armed-conflicts-by-type?time=1990..2002)
- The ideology and principles United States have promoted during their dominance, even though were informal (US have a history of supporting non-democratic dictators for their benefit), is still better for overall mankind, than the ideologies promoted by China, Russia or any other non-Western, anti-US country. I hope it is self-explanatory.
- US still maintains its position as leading economic superpower, after a decade of talks which tried to convince the public that "tomorrow China will overtake US".
- Military-wise - the strongest military alliance in the world is heavily reliant on United States and recently expanded, all the while Chinese struggle to find any military allies, even with the strongest of their economically-dependant partners.
- The Chinese economic decline (largely constituted by the governmental economic interventionism and population decline) will inevitably affect their geopolitical position, hence affecting all of their partners as well. It can be either further escalation of global conflicts (i.e full-scale invasion of Taiwan) or comeback to foreign policies of 2000s, in which US was portrayed largely as a partner, rather than an enemy.
Once upon a time, in particular after the World War Second American hegemony was better for the world. Great American hegemonic power based on the military,
economic, technological and diplomatic power played an important and decisive role in exerting an enormous influence in promoting peace, security and democracy
in many allied countries of the U.S. They heavily depended on the American power . What is power ? Joseph S. Nye argues that ``power, like love, is easier to
experience than to define or measure. Power is the ability to achieve one`s purposes or goals. ``1) and `` the ability to control others is often associated with the
possession of certain resources, political leaders commonly define power as the possession of resources. ``2)
They showed and accepted cooperative diplomatic policy in economic , military, trade and diplomatic areas with the U.S. to promote their economic prosperity,
development and national security. So they accepted U.S. military bases in their countries. For example, Japan, many European countries benefited too much by
establishing friendly relationship with the U.S.
By possessing the great power in world politics ,the U.S. involved in wars fought in a number of foreign countries like Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria and Vietnam.
The main purpose was to prevent the regional wars which were being waged in those countries from spreading into more dreadful and destructive regional wars
for many years and from developing into World War 3. As a global policeman, the U.S. had a sense of responsibility strongly for keeping peace and security in many
countries and regions of the world by offering the military and diplomatic power of the U.S.
And the economic , military and world political situation changed greatly with the collapse of Soviet Union in 1990s. Globalization and the Information age triggered
by the penetration of Internet in many parts of the world have emerged. This dynamic transformation brought about a Multi-polar world which we are living now.
In this newly emerging world the U.S. was compelled to retreat the position as a global hegemonic super-power. In the 21 century China, India, Brazil and Russia
have emerged as new global powers which are influencing in world politics replacing the U.S.
We human beings are facing serious problems threatening our survival these days. They are climate change and regional wars. We also experienced the threat of
pandemic like Covid-19. Cooperation and dialog among many countries and people are urgently required to mitigate those serious problems.
The age which was led by the U.S. in world politics has ended. And muti-polar world politics and relationship has begun.
It is true that American hegemony was better for the world in the past than multi-polar world. However, in the global world which we are living now, American
hegemony is not better for the world than multi-polar world. The important thing is that in the globalized world exerting the hegemonic power by the U.S. faces
unsupportive sentiment not only in the U.S. but in many countries of the world.
Sources: 1),2) Joseph S. Nye. Power in the global information age, Routledge. 2004. P. 53.
Round 2
The text formatting of my opponent is quite weird. I would appreciate if he would be more careful with how he quotes, deleting unnecesary apostrophes.
What is power ? Joseph S. Nye argues that ``power, like love, is easier toexperience than to define or measure. Power is the ability to achieve one`s purposes or goals. ``1) and `` the ability to control others is often associated with thepossession of certain resources, political leaders commonly define power as the possession of resources. ``2)
Joseph Nye, according to the argument of my opponent, is contradicting himself. First he says that "power" is somewhat esoterical, that it is easier to "feel" rather than scale. But in the next argument, he says that power is the ability to control resources, which are indeed, quite scalable.
By possessing the great power in world politics ,the U.S. involved in wars fought in a number of foreign countries like Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria and Vietnam.The main purpose was to prevent the regional wars which were being waged in those countries from spreading into more dreadful and destructive regional wars
Wrong, 2/4 of the aforementioned wars were ideological ones (if the opponent means US supporting Afghanistan in the 80s, in their war with USSR). If he means war that started in 2001 - it is direct consequance of the 9/11 attacks.
In this newly emerging world the U.S. was compelled to retreat the position as a global hegemonic super-power. In the 21 century China, India, Brazil and Russiahave emerged as new global powers which are influencing in world politics replacing the U.S
This is nonsence. Non of those countries can replace US as a global superpower, especially considering that majority of them are authoritarian, free of democratic elections, hence, vulnerable to internal, economic and broader geopolitical struggles overall. The only thing that those countries are able to do is to challenge US in the long-term status of the future hegemon, which could happen only in case of United State's drastic economic and political decline.
We also experienced the threat of pandemic like Covid-19. Cooperation and dialog among many countries and people are urgently required to mitigate those serious problems. The age which was led by the U.S. in world politics has ended. And muti-polar world politics and relationship has begun.It is true that American hegemony was better for the world in the past than multi-polar world. However, in the global world which we are living now, Americanhegemony is not better for the world than multi-polar world. The important thing is that in the globalized world exerting the hegemonic power by the U.S. facesunsupportive sentiment not only in the U.S. but in many countries of the world.
We experienced the COVID-19 outbreak because of one particular country with very small amount of internal basic liberties, ton of propaganda and hiding the information on the potential danger of the virus. If Chinese government were more open on their data regarding COVID-19 in the beginning, this disease wouldn't spread as much as it did. Here are a couple of arguments, that supports this argument - arrests, detentions, and reprimands didn't help, experts, who alerted the authorities were ignored and overall - the way that China dealed with COVID is atrocious. www.euronews.com/2023/06/14/could-the-covid-19-pandemic-have-been-avoided-if-china-were-a-democracy
Why the American hegemony was better before and not good now? Why multipolarity of geopolitics is good? What is the point of the last sentence, if US always had quite big group of isolationists, who were against US hegemony, even in the 90s and 00s? I don't see the answer to any of those questions.
In the previous Round, Pro presented three questions. I try to answer two questions in this Round.
First is ``Why the American hegemony was better before and not good now ? ``
The most important thing is that during the age of Cold War American hegemony based on the absolute military power played an important role to prevent
the nuclear war with the Soviet Union. Furthermore, world monetary system what we call International Monetary System which guaranteed the convertibility of U.S.
dollar to the gold showed how the U.S. exerted a hegemonic super power in the world economic activities till the collapse of Breton Woods System in 1971.
That system played an important role in promoting the growth and stability in world economy. So, from above argument I believe that American hegemony was
better for the rest of the world.
Second question is ``Why multipolarity of geopolitics is good ? `` One striking benefit of multi-polar world is the existence of dialog and cooperation between
the leader of major democratic countries and the leader of major of authoritarian countries. This new wave in world politics and international relations contributes
mainly to expanding and strengthening technological research and development which brings about the economic growth, social development and better human life
among many people of the world beyond the difference in political ideas and ideology.
`` Multi-polar world consists of several major players - America, the European Union, China, Russia and India. Since power is multi-dimensional, no single country
will continue to be dominant in all fields. ``1) And the most important thing is ``a flexible combination of the main actors emerging to thwart the excessive ambitions of one of them. In other words, an international set-up where great powers will be able to thwart the unbridled aim of an aspiring superpower.
Back to the age-old balance of power at work.``2) Of course, it is expected that a competition exists in many fields among above mentioned countries.
However, cooperation among them is highly appreciated in muti-polar world.
And when we look at the 21 century, hegemonic power of the U.S. faces a decline. Joseph Nye. argues that ``now with less preponderance and a more complex
world, American exceptionalism in terms of its economic and military power should focus on sharing the provision of global public goods, particularly those that
require`power with`others. Wilson`s century old insights about international institutions and a rules-based order will remain crucial but America`s place in
that world may be threatened more by the rise of populist politics at home than the rise of other powers abroad.``3)
References: 1),2) `After Empire- the Birth of a multipolar world ` ( https://archive-yaleglove.yale.edu.)
3) International Affairs, January 2019. https://www.hks.harvard.edu.
Round 3
The most important thing is that during the age of Cold War American hegemony based on the absolute military power played an important role to preventthe nuclear war with the Soviet Union. Furthermore, world monetary system what we call International Monetary System which guaranteed the convertibility of U.S.dollar to the gold showed how the U.S. exerted a hegemonic super power in the world economic activities till the collapse of Breton Woods System in 1971.That system played an important role in promoting the growth and stability in world economy. So, from above argument I believe that American hegemony wasbetter for the rest of the world.
The only thing that deterred soviets from starting a nuclear war would be the absolute certainty of total mutual destruction. Military-wise - US and USSR were more or less on the same scale of power. Historically, soviets never gave much fuss about the economy, which led to the dissolution of USSR. And now my opponent tries to support the argument for the same authoritarian type of ruling, which led to creation of the worst totalitarian entity, right after Nazi Germany. He advocates for the modern Russia, China and their authoritarian rulers. The same rulers who suppressed and forced their neighboring countries to do their bidding by force, not by diplomacy. www.wilsoncenter.org/blog-post/the-august-1968-red-square-protest-and-its-legacy
Second question is ``Why multipolarity of geopolitics is good ? `` One striking benefit of multi-polar world is the existence of dialog and cooperation betweenthe leader of major democratic countries and the leader of major of authoritarian countries. This new wave in world politics and international relations contributesmainly to expanding and strengthening technological research and development which brings about the economic growth, social development and better human lifeamong many people of the world beyond the difference in political ideas and ideology.
This argument is so ludicrously delusional, that I am not gonna even attempt to counter it. Instead, I will just point out that it implies impossibility of expanding technological research, economic growth, social development, better human life without “having a dialog and cooperation” with Winnie the Pooh, the midget-KGB historian and their countless allies (like 3-4 dependent countries) in the world of geopolitics.
I guess several decades of growth and cooperation between western democracies did not impress my opponent and their level of “having a dialog and cooperation” wasn’t sufficient enough.
Finally, I am not reading any of the Joseph Nye quotes, until opponent clears up the formatting of the text and will make it look like coherent, structured piece of reading, without excessive use of ` symbol, instead of a mess that he wrote in his two previous rounds.
We must keep in mind that political, diplomatic environment surrounding world politics and international relations are changing month by month and day by day.
In the multipolar world it is expected and targeted to keep and promote peace , security, basic human right and stable economic activities in many countries of the
world. United Nations recommends five actions for peace as follows.
1. Prevention at the global level: reducing strategic risks and geopolitical divisions
2. Preventing conflict and violence and sustaining peace
3. Strengthening peace operations and addressing peace enforcement
4. Novel approaches to peace and potential domains of conflict
5. Strengthening international governance (https://www.un.org.)
Realizing those objectives, people-centered approaches must take into consideration seriously.
``Governments must restore trust with their constituents by engaging with, protecting and helping realize the aspirations of the people that they represent.``
(A new agenda for peace . July 2023. The United Nations)
So, the power of the people is very important in multipolar world. Each government is urgently required to listen to what people have to say about
its diplomatic policy and its relations with the rest of the world.
These days in many parts of the world people are demanding cease-fire of the war between Israel and Palestine. Even in the U.S. many American people
are opposing to the military involvement in and support for Israel by the U.S.
However, unfortunately ``the U.S. authorized sending billions of dollars worth of bombs and fighters jets to Israel, despite political pressure to cut military aid``
(Reuters, March30, 2024)
We must pay attention to the fact that the U.S. is involving in wars being fought in foreign countries aggressively.
This policy might develop into more dangerous, harmful and dreadful Middle East war involving the partnership countries of Palestine like Iran, Syria and Lebanon.
Multipolar world which emerged after the end of Cold War does not necessarily a safer and peaceful world.
``A multipolar world might be more chaotic - and even have more wars- but without the existential dread of superpower competition that characterized the U.S.-
Soviet rivalry.``( Foreign Policy, October 5, 2023. https://foreignpolicy.com.)
Round 4
We must keep in mind that political, diplomatic environment surrounding world politics and international relations are changing month by month and day by day.In the multipolar world it is expected and targeted to keep and promote peace , security, basic human right and stable economic activities in many countries of theworld. United Nations recommends five actions for peace as follows.1. Prevention at the global level: reducing strategic risks and geopolitical divisions2. Preventing conflict and violence and sustaining peace3. Strengthening peace operations and addressing peace enforcement4. Novel approaches to peace and potential domains of conflict5. Strengthening international governance (https://www.un.org.)
UN is the "successor" (if anything containing the word "success" can be applicable in this case) of League of Nations - an infamously useless organization, which aimed to prevent global conflicts. United Nations is almost as useless, as LN was, except WW3 hasn't happened yet and we can't say that the usefulness of this organization is exactly on par.
I feel like I am debating with an AI chatbot, since my opponent haven't challenged anything that I said, just presenting concepts and ideas that he thinks belong to the topic of this conversation. Especially considering that he brings up China and Russia as countries, challenging US hegemony and then says this:
So, the power of the people is very important in multipolar world. Each government is urgently required to listen to what people have to say aboutits diplomatic policy and its relations with the rest of the world.
As we know - power of people is very prevalent in aforementioned countries, since they are natural democracies (sarcasm).
Let me begin this round by expressing my ideas concerning the argument presented by Pro in Round 3.
It is often said that United Nations is almost useless organization. However, I believe that United Nation plays an important role in multipolar world.
Representatives of the member countries get together and discuss various problems facing us today freely. It can offer a great and precious opportunity
to pave the way for better future and world. Therefore, the value of the existence of United Nation is great.
In this Round, I mainly present the benefits of a multipolar world. First is governance. Power is not concentrated in one hegemonic superpower.
So, dialog and cooperation are highly valued among nations in world politics. ``The world is better ruled by more powers, where old and new powers have
balanced influence on world leadership affecting its decisions and planning. They can speak for and support other states inside/ outside their alliances,
previously marginalized or manipulated by a single/few superpowers.``1)
And if a unipolar country might emerge, it must be ``watched and corrected by proper well-enforced laws. Lawless power is dangerous, and powerless law
is useless.`` 2) Here, United Nation is strongly urged to prevent the hegemonic and self-interest oriented superpower from emerging in world political stage
and multipolar world.
Second is creativity. `` The diversity of a multipolar world speeds up the rate of entire human civilization, where aspects of scientific progress(reserch, inventions,
discoveries) dramatically improve, flourishing and emerging from all world regions.``3) It is expected that new epoch-making scientific knowledge including
the field of space exploration which improves our civilization and our life emerges from many parts of the world.
Third is economy. `` Cooperation between equal world powers better defines the economic role each can play, to create a more diverse world market, without
the excess of useless products and shortage of useful others.`` 4) This contributes to maintaining the stable supply and demand in world market.
Fourth is world stability. ``A multipolar world security is more enduring, because it is based on mutual interest not on the false harmony claimed by unipolarists.``5)
In a multipolar world self-interest oriented diplomacy and foreign policy are not accepted. Each country must make every effort to make a world without an economic
inequality, regional military conflict and global war. Prosperity, peace and better life among all the people of the world must be placed on the highest priority.
References: 1), 2), 3), 4),5) https://ra-ha.net.
Round 5
Forfeited
Unfortunately, Pro forfeited Round 5. Before beginning my last argument, let me rebuttal for the argument presented by Pro in Round 2.
Pro pointed out that American political power might decline in the future. I believe that political power is closely linked to the military power.
The fact is that only one hegemonic military power which the U.S. enjoyed in the past is already declining these days.
For example, the U.S. is demanding for increasing military expenditure to the allied countries like Japan, Germany and Australia.
Burden sharing has become the main policy of U.S. military strategy from the long -term perspectives.
Following is my last argument. In the multipolar world the emergence of only one hegemonic country must be prevented to keep cooperation and stabilized
relationship among many countries of the world as long as possible. However, unfortunately recently the authoritarian countries like China and Russia are trying
to strengthening their economic and military power together as a countervailing power against the U.S.
This might threaten the multipolar world which is urgently required in the 21st century. Therefore, other countries like the U.S. ,European Union, other leading countries and United Nation must prevent the foundation of the multipolar world from being cracked by the influence and power of China and Russia.
The allied countries of China and Russia like Iran and other Arab counties are showing strong interest in building a closer friendly relationship with China and
Russia.
Coping with this emergency situation, the role of United Nation is urgently expected. However, unfortunately United Nation can not solve all problems effectively and
efficiency. Therefore, ``a center of command has to exist somewhere in world order for better management and effective world decisions.
The Center could be a country, many countries, or a network body representing all countries.``1)
In the multipolar world ``respect and tolerance are a prerequisite. Accepting other`s values and ways of thinking without necessarily agreeing with them is a sign
of strength rather than weakness. We need that strength to build a whole better than its parts. We need that strength to be able to hold conflicting ideas without
succumbing to the comfort of an easy answer. We need that strength to acknowledge that we can not be completely right all the time.
We are not advocating for moral relativism but what we call multipolar morality, the ability to understand and even emphasize with how others see, think and feel,
even when we disagree with them. Respect, tolerance and acceptance of differences are just the first steps, they do not automatically lead to agreement.
To negotiate workable solution together, we need to learn to contain our many differences in a neutral, non-judgement space, without a single predominant view
dictating right and wrong.`` 2)
And ``by overcoming our fears and creating a brave space for dialogue, we can relate and lead better in the new multipolar world.`` 3)
The most important thing is that not only all political and business leaders of the world but people of the world must try to have a strong sentiment and behavior
as members of a world community without having hatred feelings and prejudice toward people of different cultures, religions and way of life in the multipolar
world. From above arguments so far, I believe that looking at the future the multipolar world is better than the world which was led and controlled by the hegemonic
power of the U.S. We must keep in mind that a history is a dialog between past and present. We must learn many lessons from history between the U.S. and the rest
of the world.
References: 1) https://ra-ha.net.
2), 3) Horacio Falcao, Marc Le Menestrel, ` What it means to lead in a multipolar world`, May 2022, http://knowledge.insead.edu.
this is true and so was british hegemony, and you can see it when the countries they were in were doing so well and then they left and became literal shitholes. This has got to be a non white thing, because if Blacks do a better job with my country and give me a better life than whites, the last thing I would do is start crying about my independence and kick them out to be lead by a bunch of incompetent whites.
Me fucking everyone's gf is better than everyone fucking their own gf.
Long live American imperialism!