Is the US a declining empire?
956271
The U.S. is absolutely a declining empire.  It's a hard fact for most of us Americans to admit.  Most can't admit it at all.  But do a detailed comparison between decline of the Roman empire and the U.S. today (bread and circus, anyone?).  Or even the British empire and the U.S. today.\n\nAll countries and/or empires decline and fall.  It is a fact (and just a matter of time), although we may never live to see the end.
43107
The U.S. actually doesn't have protectorates anymore. They are all called "Insular Areas" and are regulated by the Office of Insular Affairs.
414320
America is currently facing many problems, however a drastic decline in it's power is doubtful.  According to most rankings that take into account all aspects of a nation, The usa is by far the most powerful, and is more powerful than the second and third most powerful countries combined.  However, if our country continues on its current trend yes there will be problems.  Our currency is depreciating, and the gap between rich and poor is growing under the current administration, and there is also talk of starting our third war in this regime.  The only reason why i think that America won't decline though is because the Republicans will have nobody else to blame after this term, and once they are voted out these problems will be addressed.  The republicans control everything now and have lost their scapegoat.  The only people they have to blame our themselves.
1082212
I think the issue is more then a depression. The United States is losing confidence throughout the world. Foreign and American investors are turning to Europe as the solidified economy. A depression indicates a periodic significant drop in the economy. I think its going to be much worse. It will be permanent. New jobs consist of unskilled and underpaid positions. When 10,000 Americans are applying for jobs that pay 8 dollars an hour, just so they can work, and basic fuel products, gasoline, natural gas, heating oil etc are skyrocketing, how are people going to afford this at 8 dollars an hour? We are watching the decline of the American dream and hence its empire. This is sadly written by someone who loves America.
966678
No will\nNo clout\nNo backbone\nNo respect\nNobody cares what europeans say or do.\n\nHey cd, America has been "the" empire for some years now. Did you just land on this planet ???
371211
Trying to come to terms with the fact that China etc. have overtaken her economically, leaving the US as a second-tier nation.\n\nDesperately trying to hold together the scraps of an "empire" they worked so hard to create at the turn of the century.\n\nRealising that natural resources are running low, and trying to stem the tide of rampant overexploitation \n\nWishing that they'd done something about it 20 years ago!
302365
More likely the subservience of people's interests to corporate interests signals the decline of America.
219675
First of all, what info are u getting making u believe the U.S. is faling behind on everything?  Sure we're falling in some categories but at the same time we're leading is many others.  This quesiton is too general.  Be more specific.
375122
Bush's support is currently in the mid 30s. It has consistently gone down his whole time in office though, so it will probably drop further.
398066
It isn't.  But you knew that.  A better question would be:  Why is U.S. foreign policy imperialistic?
399383
The US and UK have enjoyed a "special relationship" since the beginning. I don't think the "colony" thing is permanent; Tony Blair wanted to be Bush's lapdog, but I think he (and the British public) has learned his lesson.
145798
First, Imperialism is a policy of extending control or authority over foreign entities as a means of acquisition and/or maintenance of empires, either through direct territorial conquest or through indirect methods of exerting control on the politics and/or economy of other countries. The US has never been a acquisition nation.\n\nNow, there has been a trend to criticize imperialism not at an economic or political level, but at a simply cultural level, particularly the widespread global influence of American culture. We have a great deal of influence on all cultures and our culture is slowly changing the world. \n\nIt comes down to how you view it.
575633
The decline of the Roman Empire, also called the fall of the Roman Empire, is an historical term of periodization which describes the collapse of the Western Roman Empire. The term was first used in the 18th century by Edward Gibbon in his famous study The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, but he was neither the first nor the last to speculate on why and when the Empire collapsed. It remains one of the greatest historical questions, and has a tradition rich in scholarly interest. In 1984, German professor Alexander Demandt published a collection of 210 theories on why Rome fell[1].\n\nThe traditional date of the fall of the Roman Empire is September 4, 476 when Romulus Augustus, the Emperor of the Western Roman Empire was deposed. However, many historians question this date, and use other benchmarks to describe the "Fall". Why the Empire fell seems to be relevant to every new generation, and a seemingly endless supply of theories are discussed on why it happened, or indeed if it happened at all.\n\nMainstream theories\nMainstream theories about Rome's fall can be split into several general categories:\n\n"Declining empire" theories\nGenerally, these theories argue that the Roman Empire might have survived, but due to some combination of circumstances didn't. Some historians in this camp believe that Rome "brought it on themselves," i.e., ensured their own collapse by either misguided policies or degradation of character.\n\nVegetius\nThe historian Vegetius theorized and has recently been supported by the historian Arthur Ferrill that the Roman Empire declined and fell due to a combination of increasing contact with barbarians and the subsequent "barbarization", as well as a surge in decadence and the following lethargy. This resulted in complacency and ill-discipline among the legions, making it primarily a military issue.\n\nGibbon\nEdward Gibbon famously placed the blame on a loss of civic virtue among the Roman citizens. They gradually outsourced their duties to defend the Empire to barbarian mercenaries who eventually turned on them. Gibbon considered that Christianity had contributed to this, making the populace less interested in the worldly here-and-now and more willing to wait for the rewards of heaven.\n\nVon Mises\nLudwig von Mises argued that the inflation and the price controls promoted by the later emperors destroyed the economic system of the ancient world, this leading into hyperinflation, deterioration of the imperial economical basis and transfer to barter economy instead of a more advanced monetary economy. The theory assumes the hyperinflation combined with price controls undermined the economic system of the empire, and it simply went into bankruptcy, unable to pay its legions. The theory further argues that the Eastern Roman Empire (Byzantine empire) survived for over a millennium after the fall of the Western empire because of its smaller economic decline.\n\nRichta\nOn the other hand, some historians have argued that the collapse of Rome was outside the Romans' control. Radovan Richta holds that technology drives history. Thus, the invention of the horseshoe in Germania in the 200s would alter the military equation of pax romana, or a borrowing of the compass from its inventors in China in the 300s would also alter that equation.\n\n"Doomed from the start" theories\nIn contrast with the "declining empire" theories, historians such as Arnold J. Toynbee and James Burke argue that the Roman Empire itself was a rotten system from its inception, and that the entire Imperial era was one of steady decay of its institutions. In their view, the Empire could never have lasted. The Romans had no budgetary system. The Empire relied on booty from conquered territories (this source of revenue ending, of course, with the end of Roman territorial expansion) or on a pattern of tax collection that drove small-scale farmers into destitution (and on
415311
over a hundred year period, America will cease to be the global force that it is today, the chances of Australia taking its place are slim. \n\nThe contenders at the moment seem to be a United Europe, China and India.
272421
It is important to maintain the illusion that the U.S. isn't 'colonizing' anyone. Denial of Empire helps do that, regardless of what the money trail says about who controls which countries, the arms trades, and the development of nations. This is another reason why it is so important to pay attention to who is actually running the US, the integrity of the voting systems, and the money used to lobby Washington, D.C.
996042
Decline in some areas, maybe (manufacturing comes to mind)...but in terms of research, development, and especially services...these are what will buoy the US over the next fifty years.\n\nThis is what happens during the development of a one-world economy. The idea of the nation is, in some ways, obsolete.
108937
The short answer is 'No'. I think it is hard to define what you put as "Anglo-American" powers.  Do you mean the West, or specifically England and the United States?  In any event, we must realize that neither the West nor the Islamic world is a monolithic entity.  There are widely varrying strains and currents throughout both.  From a strategic perspective, the US is unrivaled.  From an ideological perspective, there are ongoing shifts toward conservativism and fundementalism in both the West and the Arab world.  These shifts are largely reactionary to the rise of globalism.  Ultimately the historical trend toward openness and integration, driven by a global economy, will overcome zenophobic impulses in both the West and the entire Islamic world.