Nobody gave ‘murica any right, they just imposed themselves. The simple answer is imperialism. USA was always a power and money hungry bitch and has been putting nations, populations and markets under their boots (not always thru military force) for profit since the late 1800s. Yes, they’ve been an evil empire for that long. Latin America as a whole has suffered many hells so uncle sam could keep commodities’ prices super low.
Why does America feel the need to control the world? Do what they say? Instead of taking care of their own problems at home? When did the US become police officer of the world and enforcer?
Submitted 1 day ago by Patnou@lemmy.world to [deleted]
Comments
ICastFist@programming.dev 11 minutes ago
AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 9 minutes ago
I think you’re setting the timeline about a century and a half too late. The people that would become the first US citizens were genociding the Native Americans as early as 1750
meekah@lemmy.world 54 minutes ago
I’m German and went to the US for a year as a high school student.
My US history teacher literally told us that the US is the world police. Because of that I believe that many Americans think that way.
olafurp@lemmy.world 1 hour ago
Kinda how they were “last man standing” in WW2. Everybody else got severely fucked and they won them over by with the Marshall aid program which got us to a bi-polar world with NATO in which the US was the hegemony.
After the fall of the Soviet Union and before the rise of China there was only one superpower that could act as such militarily and then US continued their power trip.
OpenPassageways@programming.dev 2 hours ago
Because authoritarians convinced the American people that military interventions prevent terrorist attacks to distract them from the reality which is that terrorist attacks are caused by American interventions.
It’s only possible to convince Americans of that because they are shockingly ignorant of history and they believe whatever the warmongers tell them.
Steve@communick.news 1 day ago
After world war two, Europe was busy putting itself back together. It left an opening that the US stepped into. And who wouldn’t like to be the big dog in the yard.
plyth@feddit.org 40 minutes ago
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suez_Crisis
Took 10 years untill 1956
Valmond@lemmy.world 1 day ago
They (the USA) got to be the big dog, protecting us in europe, and we let them the hard & soft power. Everyone was happy (in the US and Europe) until americans started to believe their own hype that thay are in fact better than other people, and thus the breakup began.
It’s not over just yet with the usa supremacy but trump fucked things up so bad that IMO ten years from now the world will be a different place.
AES_Enjoyer@reddthat.com 1 day ago
protecting us in europe
Protecting Europe from what exactly? What military threat did the US fight against in Europe? There hasn’t been an attack to western Europe since WW2 until the US bombing of Yugoslavia.
Bytemeister@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Pretty much when the US was the only super power to survive WWII unscathed.
Also, having developed atomic hellfire, and the will to use it (twice), kinda makes you the big kid on the playground.
LilB0kChoy@midwest.social 1 day ago
This right here. The US was isolationist prior to WWII but then got attacked and drawn in to active war.
Since the mainland of US was untouched by war directly, and industry boomed post depression and during the war they came out of it better off than Europe, which had a lot of rebuilding to do.
As a result of the war and the need for defense they established bases all across the globe and for the last 80-90 years as the political system grew more corrupt the increase of American hegemony followed.
plyth@feddit.org 50 minutes ago
The US was isolationist prior to WWII
South America wants to have a word with you.
brax@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
They love to take credit for WWII while completely ignoring the part Canada played
macaw_dean_settle@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Many countries played an important role, not just Canada. And no, not all of us take credit for it.
ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 1 day ago
Canada’s role is adequately acknowledged, our Nederland brothers send flowers every year
The US taking credit at all in Europe is silly but they did help with the Japanese theatre
Etterra@discuss.online 1 day ago
Because people in power only want one thing - more power. They only fear one thing - loosing power.
blarghly@lemmy.world 2 hours ago
*Losing
NigelFrobisher@aussie.zone 1 day ago
Because it’s an empire. Everything else is clever marketing.
the_abecedarian@piefed.social 1 day ago
There are privileges to being an empire and the capitalists in the US continue to use that empire to get access to those privileges. Favorable trade, commercial, and financing terms are a big one.
Also the US war industry pushes the country to intervene. You can see how there are interventionist and isolationist movements in the US fighting right now over how much the US gets directly involved in Iran-Israel.
daggermoon@lemmy.world 1 day ago
I want Finland to rule the world.
Lemminary@lemmy.world 1 day ago
I also want that, but only for the future generations to know that “we were Finnished”
AES_Enjoyer@reddthat.com 1 day ago
The last time Finland invaded a nation, they did it together with the Nazis. I don’t think you want Finland to rule the world.
lepinkainen@lemmy.world 1 day ago
It was either surrender to Soviet Union (legendary dicks) or ally with Nazis (had no reason to stay and conquer us). We picked the lesser evil.
daggermoon@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Okay but in a hypothetical scenario where Finland ruled the world (as it exists today), I highly, highly doubt they would be siding with fascists. I don’t see your point. Thanks for leading me to some Wikipedia articles to read though.
A_norny_mousse@feddit.org 1 day ago
But they had the guts to change sides mid-war.
RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 1 day ago
The citizens, in general, don’t. We want to do the same thing every other country’s people want - live our lives and hopefully give our kids a good or better one.
I have no fucking clue what the government is doing to make these decisions.
jaggedrobotpubes@lemmy.world 17 hours ago
Anybody who thinks about that question enough always realizes they don’t want that kind of power and control. Sometimes people think about it partly, get excited by the promises of power, but only misrepresented by their own misunderstandings, and mistakenly think they do.
Nobody actually does, just not everybody realizes it fully.
TempermentalAnomaly@lemmy.world 1 day ago
I’m gonna answer from the perspective of someone who believes the world is a better place when it is led by America without reverting to a thin jingoist ideology. These aren’t my views, but a steel man of someone I would disagree with.
Why does America feel the need to control the world?
In the wake of the world wars, we realized that the world is best off with one power to lead the world. No powers and multiple powers will result in another world war. We were the best position to take that role after WW2 and resist the Soviet union’s attempt to gaining that position.
Do what they say?
Many of these countries don’t do what America says because America says it. Heck, many go against what we say. But they believe in a better world and when they remember that, they undtand that America is putting themselves in the most danger by clearing that path for the rest of the free world.
Instead of taking care of their own problems at home?
The problems we have at home are pretty limited. Most of these problems are born out of laziness. But we keep the criminals in check both at home and abroad.
When did the US become police officer of the world and enforcer?
If we didn’t step up after ww2, the world would have slipped into another world war or deem communism run rampant.
I guess my question is who gave the Americans the right?
The civilized world at the end of WW2. And under our leadership, the world is safer and healthier for it.
I say this as an American. But would not the world be a better place if we just minded our own business and quit nation building and stoking non existant fires?
From communism to extreme religious views, we are the only ones who are capable and willing to step up and protect the world against that. It’s a difficult and thankless job.
Lemminary@lemmy.world 1 day ago
I also believed the world was a better place when the US led, but when anyone other than Trump was in power. At least with the US, we had a clear ideal of justice being normalized, and you could feel the progressive momentum with every passing year. We don’t get that among the other major world powers. But I don’t think the US stands for that anymore, thanks to meddling countries like Russia, but that doesn’t mean I want China or, especially, Russia to succeed them. They lobotomized the US and they showed their real face in return.
DrivebyHaiku@lemmy.ca 1 day ago
This is a very America centric veiw and even if it is a steel man it deserves a counterpoint.
After WWII most of the nations who were old empire builders were decimated. The general feeling was even those on the winning side didn’t feel like they’d won. The rebuilding was slow and economic austerity lasted for decades.
The American prosperity of the 1950’s and 60’s wasn’t “normal”. America didn’t have international competition it otherwise would have and that power gave them bargaining rights which made them both culturally dominant as they projected a sense of prosperity and politically powerful due to the resources at their disposal. Opposition to America was potentially disastrous and America threw their weight around like crazy. They expanded their military with these resources and established bases in countries too weak to oppose them.
America came out of the war with something of a Big Damn Hero complex. Communism, for all it’s perceived threat was also a handy excuse to pursue expansion and in keeping American supremacy in place. Whether countries wantes to be “protected” or not really has a lot of across the board nuance. A lot of American political will was coercive and a lot of the things done in the fight for “democracy” were disproportionate and horrific.
Really a lot of the American supremacy at bottom was might makes right. With the world finally recovering economically and now able to speak as equals the US is using measures that demand a return to that economic supremacy and stranglehold. The larger sore points are growing. The world doesn’t need one big power in charge. They don’t need a king with a standing army. They want to make their own choices and have freedoms to not conform to whatever America wants and the attitudes Americans show to disregard that will is garnering response.
Peter_Arbeitslos@feddit.org 1 day ago
It’s not about the USA, it’s about (powerful) countries in general. Russia, China, USA, … If someone has power (or wants to have it looks on North Korea) they want to keep it.
starlinguk@lemmy.world 1 day ago
They want more power, they don’t just want to keep it. I don’t get it, isn’t it absolutely exhausting?
AES_Enjoyer@reddthat.com 1 day ago
What exactly has China done militarily over the past 45 years that leads you to compare it to the US? China is predominantly a peaceful world power which hasn’t invaded any country over the past half a century.
A_norny_mousse@feddit.org 1 day ago
Also definitely not genocidal. /s
GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 1 day ago
America was the standard for a Democratic Republic after WW2.
after the war we helped most of Europe return to normal and even improved quality of life and living standards. part of that help came with stipulations on how the US had control within those countries that had help.
Had the US not stepped in at the time to stabilize Europe, another war would have likely happened and another, and another.
My guess, most of Europe would have fallen under Russian rule, or at the very least heavily influenced by, if the US didn’t step up.
I suppose European’s don’t look at how bad the war left Europe and often just want to forget the atrocities, but that’s not an excuse for blaming the hand that helped you in your time of need.
AES_Enjoyer@reddthat.com 1 day ago
The US didn’t step in with the Marshall plan to stabilize Europe against war, the US did so in order to prevent socialist uprisings all over Western Europe, and to create ties between European capital and US capital so that Western Europe would support the US in its imperialism.
Mubelotix@jlai.lu 1 day ago
People turned to Russia specifically because they disapproved US imperialism and wanted to counter its power, while avoiding being doomed by capitalism. I’m not saying this was the ideal solution, but at least if they succeeded we wouldn’t be in the position we are today
GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 1 day ago
US imperialism didn’t happen until the 1950s, well after the war.
this was, in part, due to the private investments from large American companies at the time. in-fact, the American economy was booming for three reasons
- war was over and people were desperate to find stability and peace
- Americans at home got through the war mostly unscathed and now had an abundance of work which in-turn made an abundance of money to spend
- Europe desperately needed materials and products to rebuild their own economy, this only further boosted American GDP from a previously untouched market. private investment took place from American companies within Europe to increase profits further.
in a sense, because Europe was so weak after the war it only fed US corporate imperialism. Had Europe been able to stand on its own the United States might not have had such an industrial boon and similarities between Europe and the US might have not been so significant.
one might even draw the strong correlation between American corporate interests and total subservience of government alliances at that time. our government had, up until then, mostly stayed neutral to concerns between corporations and citizens. this changed though because of the newly created military industrial complex that was created to feed the war. afterwards you had defense contractors that saw dollar signs, and the tradition still goes to this day.
speculation on my part, the political climate of the current day is the fruit bore from that union of corporate and state all those years ago and this has been the agenda of the American elite all along and they are currently in the final seconds of the “game of thrones”.
rottingleaf@lemmy.world 1 day ago
I have an answer different from the others.
US economy depends on the US intellectual property system, a few US monopolist companies and the US dollar, and the financial system.
Especially the intellectual property system. However different laws can be in various countries, in fact everybody tries to follow US law.
It means that a lot of things produces elsewhere mean royalties to US companies, and a lot of things can’t be produced without permission, control of markets, planned development of microelectronics and tech in particular, yadda-yadda.
So - if, in some hypothetical situation, that IP system is undone, with some countries having similar laws, some more like USSR’s “public domain by default with some fixed payment to patent holders”, and all the intermediate variants, then you’ll just have a second depression. Because a huge part of the economy will shrink.
US foreign debt is a meme subject, but honestly, if USD stops being the world’s most reliable currency, you’ll also probably have a default.
US actual industrial production (what doesn’t shrink as easily) is not so impressive when looking at its size. A lot about US level of life doesn’t really match the efficiency of the economy. Say, if you look at Germany, life there is very different. In some ways better, maybe, but many things normal in the US are not achievable there.
My point is - the American IP laws were spread around by pressure. Not just that, but sometimes the monopoly roles of American companies. Part of that pressure is the military guarantor role.
If that stops being relevant, a lot of things which were a given for your economy for many years will stop existing. And for a few other economies too. It might not look as bad as the USSR’s collapse, but it will probably look as ruined and unpredictable as the 1960s world.
I_Fart_Glitter@lemmy.world 1 day ago
I’m curious what is normal in the US and not achievable in Germany.
HK65@sopuli.xyz 1 day ago
Get your bullshit startup valued in the billions by Wall Street
Scipitie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 day ago
German here: just creating and selling something is one thing that jumps to my mind.
The concept of “I have an idea and a bit of money so I’ll just found a company” is … Tiresome. Possible, yes, but the legal hurdles both good and bad are ridiculous. You need way more time than in the US just for the formal overhead and even then you are way more in it with your own private existence.
As founder “beschränkte Haftung” is not as limited as it sounds at first if you’re not firm in legalese for example.
rottingleaf@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Food delivery as something normal, I’d think. Plumber coming soon after being called. Appointment with doctor to a close enough date.
Those things affected by actually having labor rights and less dependence on colonial mechanisms.
MNByChoice@midwest.social 1 day ago
The USA was securing international trade lines. After WW2, they started doing it to counter communism and build friendships. (Cannot attack your trading partners.)
This was not entirely popular with Americans, see “Team America: World Police”.
Another country or coalition could step up. Just build a navy that rivals the USA one to secure shipping lanes.
SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.world 1 day ago
After WW2 the US became addicted to being the world police and many other countries were happy to have the US cover the cost of their defense or income from hosting US bases.
some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 1 day ago
We were unspoiled by WW2. This gave us an unnatural ability to pull ahead economically while other nations rebuilt. We taught our citizens that this was deserved and the propaganda has stood until pretty recently. This unfair advantage is slowly then quickly unwinding.
XeroxCool@lemmy.world 1 day ago
“America is the best! Nobody could match our manufacturing!”
Well no, you were just the only hevay industrial country that wasn’t bombed in the 40s. America didn’t rocket ahead through the 60s, they just helped kneecap the competition.
And for the god damn 10th time, Mexico and China didn’t take the manufacturing. They didn’t raid the US and deport Ford to them. Ford walked it all over very politely.
TempermentalAnomaly@lemmy.world 1 day ago
US manufacturing was dominant through the twenties and thirties. it really shone in the 40s under a war time economy. It was a sleeping giant and the world knew it. Pennsylvania outputted more steel than Japan and Germany combined. Audacious goals set by President Roosevelt were mocked by Hitler as audacious Hollywood goals. The US easily surpassed these goals.
It was an amazing display of competence. The only other countries to match the intensity of growth would the USSR during the five year plan and the PRC during the eighties. But both of them were starting from an agricultural economy. The USSR never reached the American manufacturing peak and China has surpassed.
The unprecendent dominance is due in no small part because the rivals needed to rebuild. But under representing America’s position with regards to labor, capital, resources and state coordinated mobilization would be a serious error.
Fingolfinz@lemmy.world 1 day ago
We’re taught to compete with each other basically at birth cos that’s what benefits capitalism
DrFistington@lemmy.world 1 day ago
The main reason is that if we stop being the biggest shark in the tank, the next two biggest sharks (China and Russia) can’t be trusted to not feast on the smaller sharks. And if they do feast, they will become too large for the American shark to deal with.
OutlierBlue@lemmy.ca 1 day ago
The US is already feeding on the smaller sharks, and has been for decades. Look at their foreign policy in Central and South America, South East Asia, the Middle East.
The only difference is that they’ve been feasting on other nations and not the West. China and Russia don’t have those restraints. All three of them are horrible, but America hasn’t been horrible to us until just recently.
AES_Enjoyer@reddthat.com 1 day ago
for decades
Centuries*.
China and Russia don’t have those restraints
I understand why you’d say that about modern Russia, but how on Earth are you comparing China to the USA? In what war has China been in the past 40 years? What countries has it been exploiting?
rottingleaf@lemmy.world 1 day ago
I’m sorry, this seems to imply the US doesn’t “feast on the smaller sharks”. It went as far as threatening Japan with sanctions because they were considering “digital sovereignty” with TRON OS as opposed to Windows at some point. Japan is almost a non-optional ally.
And also one good solution of preventing someone from doing that is arming the smaller sharks. Yet USA seems even more against more equal spread of technologies and weapons than the “next two sharks”.
FuzzChef@feddit.org 1 day ago
And also one good solution of preventing someone from doing that is arming the smaller sharks. Yet USA seems even more against more equal spread of technologies and weapons than the “next two sharks”.
Uhmm what? The US does exactly that with NATO and nuclear weapons stationed in Europe.
ape_arms@lemmy.world 1 day ago
I think it’s even simpler than this. I think any government/state/group with power wants to hold and expand it. I’m not sure there is a group of people that exist that wouldn’t work to exercise control if they could. And I’m not defending the US, I just think it may be an inherently human thing to do.
AES_Enjoyer@reddthat.com 1 day ago
I think any government/state/group with power wants to hold and expand it
I think you’d be wrong. Famously, after the Russian Revolution in 1917, the Russian Socialist Federation of Soviet Republics, under the leadership of the Bolsheviks, created the first constitution in history that granted the unilateral right of self-determination and secession to all peoples of the former Russian Empire. This is how Poland gained its independence in 1918, as well as Finland and many other countries formerly part of the Russian Empire. Interesting episode of history.
sircac@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Every empire has those aspirations.
There are many ways to achieve it through the complex relationships between countries and societies (e.g. soft power, cultural influence, militar control, etc) but an empire willing to try it at any cost with any means will always succeed for longer as an empire…
captain_aggravated@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
Meanwhile in another thread I saw some Brits bitching about America not entering WWII until the end of 1941.
You’re the bad guy for trying to stay out of international affairs, you’re the bad guy for getting into international affairs. If you find yourself forced to play a game you can’t win, Just start hurting people.
SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.world 1 day ago
This drives me nuts with the news cycle. “The US won’t get involved in X”. The media shows how awful fighting/revolt/etc are in X. “Why won’t the US do something about the horror in X!?” The US gets involved and, of course, some civilians die. This is guaranteed in war. The media then goes “The US is awful for killing civilians in X!” The US pulls out of X. The media goes “Why has the US abandoned X!?”
XeroxCool@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Whenever I’ve seen that, it’s usually in response to America taking the credit for saving the war despite “barely being there”. On the other hand, you could say adding the American force weighed the odds into the allies’ favor, so the swift end wouldn’t have happened naturally . On the other foot, America wouldn’t have built up enough arsenal to have that much effect had they not waited. And on your neighbor’s hand, America seemed to sit idly as they watched nazis be nazis because no no, the guy has some valid points
captain_aggravated@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
So you want us to instantly invade any country whose leader we don’t like. KAY!
salacious_coaster@infosec.pub 1 day ago
It mostly started with the cold war. The US was obsessed with stopping the perceived threat of communism. In the process, it discovered the benefits of power mongering and war profiteering.
AES_Enjoyer@reddthat.com 1 day ago
It most definitely did not start in the cold war. The US was happily invading and controlling the politics of as much of the continent of the Americas well before WW2, with stuff such as the United Fruit Company or the Big Stick Ideology. The 1898 invasion of Cuba and establishment of a military junta comes to mind.
peteyestee@feddit.org 1 day ago
America isn’t the brand the they created as there image.
People just distract themselves from reality… We aren’t even natural humans anymore we are products created by their marketing psychological manipulation.
undefined@lemmy.hogru.ch 1 day ago
I’ve heard a theory that when new presidents come into office they usually aren’t interested in being involved in conflicts. What happens is that something will happen in the world and the newly elected president will have an enormous amount of power at his disposal. Wanting to do good in the world the president will typically go for it.
I wish I could recall the name of the theory or provide references; maybe someone else can chime in.
ThrowawayPermanente@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
Hammer/Nail Theory?
pinball_wizard@lemmy.zip 1 day ago
I don’t know the name of the theory, but it’s sure noticeable that candidates have diverse values while sitting presidents act earily similar.
A generous assumption could be that they have consistent advisors.
A realist assumption could be that they have consistent funding sources.
A particularly dark assumption is that they face the same threats to their loved ones.
And of course, an adorable meme child says “Why not both?”
StaticFalconar@lemmy.world 1 day ago
You sure are an american since you dont know your own history.
FuzzChef@feddit.org 1 day ago
You could argue that the US was pretty much bullied into that role by Nazi Germany and later on the CCCP.
callouscomic@lemm.ee 1 day ago
Eisenhower warned us.
razen@lemmy.world 2 minutes ago
No one, powerful countries just assume that they are needed everywhere in the world so they start acting like narcissistic bitch like US.