who agrees that America ought to force a hegemony of the world?

Question

i know it is harder said than done, but mostly i think it isnt done because people shy away from the death toll that would ensue.

what these people are afraid of is that the deaths would be "pre-determined", unlike the violence today that is not as planned.

these people are wrong because while yes, there would be blood, it would be short term - after, when the nations of the world that are currently squabbling and taking innocent lives are stripped of major leaders, the coup will be complete. long term, this will effectively mean the end of all wars, world hunger and depravity, and we will come closer to a state of utopian society, an eternal golden age, to say.

because i cannot say everything due to text constraints, skipping to long term goals - oligarchical hegemony of western values (freedom of religion, that stuff, not too liberal though), comprised of influential, intelligent leaders in their cultures and religions (9 people or so, i am out of room now. cp dth tll <5k

Answer 1

i agree

Answer 2

If the US had total power, we would have an extreme state of poverty and and very small percentage of the worlds population as extremely rich. If you study the flow of wealth in the US from history until today's date and then create a projection based on the figures, you will end up with a very unutopian like society. Hegemonic masculinity is very violent and agressive. It is based on positionality above others. We could project a police state, a poverty stricken slave nation of global proportions.

I would like to offer you the benefit of reading a really amazing book. It was researched and written after 9/11 as a response to many US citizens asking "why do people hate America?" Appropriately, the book carries the same name as its title. It is very inexpensive, usually less than 10$ USD--definately under 15$. The chapters have very dry introductions, but the meet of the book was one of the most influencial readings of my life.

Answer 3

Sorry, but America (even if you were to add in Europe) does not have the money or military power (even if a draft were imposed) to do what you're suggesting. Look how hard one little country with a determined resistance like Iraq is to hold! That's one of the reasons we have to get along with the rest of the world and having the world think better of us: we can get them to do things (maybe even empart some western values).

Answer 4

permit me preface my answer by making use of asserting that i'm no longer a non secular person, yet nor am I an atheist. That mentioned, there is easily no longer something incorrect with prayer. whether or no longer it reaches the ears of a god or gods, and whether or no longer there is an answer, i think of that putting forth sturdy will for our fellow people is a gracious act in itself. in case you sense susceptible to wish for others, then that concern will probable (and would) ensue itself on your on a regular basis movements besides. the only time that i think of that prayer is fully meaningless is while that's accomplished for egocentric motives - including praying that your activities group wins a contest or which you will win the lottery. In a international the place sturdy will regularly comes with a value or expectancies of reciprocation, giving it in any form can purely be a sturdy ingredient.

Answer 5

nope.I do not agree. Your delusions of empire and your assertion is illogical and unworkable as well as immoral and unethical.