The dollar’s dominance is *not* the result of American military strength. Other countries don’t use the dollar because we bully them into it. They do it because it in their own interest. Period.
The US provides an open capital account of enormous size and liquidity, stable legal system, and a vast export market. None of those things are dependent on empire. In fact, insofar as “retaining a market for our exports” was traditionally the reason for empire, we are actually providing an anti-empire.
I find all your arguments here unconvincing but if there is one stupid idea I wish I could extirpate forever from the right wing commentariat it’s the economically illiterate “hurr durr King Dollar because air craft carriers!!” nonsense.
Military dominance is absolutely not the only factor (you pointed out several that are arguably more important), but it absolutely is *a* factor. To say otherwise, you’d have to completely ignore the historical context in which it formally became the global reserve currency.
Plus, this analysis ignores that the *dollar itself* is the export for which the empire retains markets. Trump has been making this more explicit with investment deals with regional allies, but it’s been the case for decades.
You could definitely argue it’s a bad way to run our economy (Dutch Disease, etc), and I’d be inclined to agree to a large extent, but that doesn’t change that exporting dollars (and US bonds, equities, etc) is the primary engine of American wealth at present with energy and MIC exports as ancillary drivers.
military dominance (US Navy) is why trade/commerce flows smoothly. the dollar being the export is how foreign countries maintains US as the consumer of foreign over production and foreign wage suppression
Yes, the system as it exists absolutely has detrimental impacts on Americans as workers (at least when it comes to traditional manufacturing), but it does give Americans cheaper imports and more valuable assets, so it benefits Americans as consumers and as asset-owners.
There are good arguments that’s a bad exchange for us as a nation (though I think that becomes less the case as our core native population ages and shrinks), but it’s important to makes the upsides as well as the downsides explicit when arguing the pros and cons of our present system.
"cheaper imports and more valuable assets" yes many consumed goods are cheaper but you mentioned more valuable assets which means inflated assets and HOUSING PRICES THROUGH THE ROOF.
There's a reason we feel the economy is hollowed out and its because we are forced to consume. For foreigners its because their wages and consumption are suppressed. Not to mention mass migration to the US (other countries give special carve outs to attract foreigners
Yes, but this is where it’s a trade off. American Boomers (the whitest living generation besides the rapidly dwindling Silents) benefit hugely from inflated housing prices and equity prices (via their 401ks).
Much of that is at the expense of younger generations, but it’s not only, or even primarily, foreigners benefiting from this arrangement. It’s the same basic problem we have with Social Security and Medicare.
There are some other benefits too beyond just wealth for the Boomers. Their inflated stock prices give American companies the resources to throw tons of capital at R&D which plays a major role in our technological dominance.
capex and R&D are down compared to share buybacks/dividends.
my mine issue with the importation of excess capital isn't even about muh manufacturing (aside from national security issues) but rather its created an economy of cheaper products/luxuries but needs such as housing because more and more expensive. not to mention debt. I agree its about tradeoffs and I'm willing to make that tradeoff
No, this has no economic economic validity at all. The engine of American wealth is the productivity of its economy.
If it were actually true that a country could export its currency to increase its own wealth, places like Venezuela or Argentina would be by far the richest countries on Earth. But currency is merely a claim on the production of a national economy - and to the extent our currency is artificially strong due to our economic policies, the “wealth” it produces is a temporary mirage with significantly deleterious long term consequences.
What is the "productivity of our economy" as it actually exists today? It's first of all the consumer economy and the capital markets (i.e. the things that are turbocharged by dollar dominance) and secondarily it's energy (thanks to the fracking revolution, which to a large extent is actually another product of our capital markets!) and MIC exports (symbiotic with military dominance).
And the examples of Venezuela and Argentina are obviously silly, because the value of something isn't determined by how much of it you produce. The value or price of a product is primarily determined by the demand for it, how much people are willing to pay for it, and that's what US currency, treasuries, equities, etc, have that third world currencies and markets don't have.
You're absolutely right that there are deleterious effects of this system, but just like the argument that we should crash the housing market, so young people aren't priced out of housing, it's very important to think about second-order consequences of extreme changes to an existing system, even when it has significant downsides.
True. Britain got China addicted to British opium to balance their trade balance with them, that should be the purpose of an empire. Not the case in the current US-China relationship.
the current relationship or at least until chinese exports to the US plunged as of late, is one where China suppresses its own wages/consumption, overproduces then pours that capital into the US so that the US can consume what China overproduces
I feel like you are ignoring the fact that whenever China tried to expel opium sellers they would get decimated by the militaries of Europe. Militaries that would not have the necessary projection to enforce their countries will without an empire.
1) If you look at recent history, empires are breaking up, and attempts to "turn back the clock" are unsuccessful, e.g. as in Russia's case -- it's having extreme trouble reasserting control over its large prior possessions such as Ukraine;
2) The immigrant/non-white situation is actually getting out of control in this _current_ US empire. It's not like having the current empire is leading to a more homogenous white country, it's the opposite. An argument can be made that empires are associated with diversity.
I think, as per Scott's point, that's because Russia already let it go. Recent history also seems to indicate that America is capable of doing more than some led us to believe, just like wild eyed fantasists 20 years ago tried to convince us we could basically do anything. The unrealistic pessimism is an over reaction to the unrealistic optimism of the previous epoch.
This doesn't mean that the US needs to run the empire as it presently does at extortionate expense.
Yes, the petrodollars argument is valid, though it has been shaken this past week. But outside of pricing minerals in Dollars there is no need for 700 bases across the globe.
These costs make the US economy weaker, as do badly conceived military expeditions.
You’re gonna wonder why the NH-White pop slips below 50% and wonder why “uhh wow countries wouldn’t take back their pops when we empired harder!” and with a Dem win in midterms and possible 2028 win it’ll go faster. Provisional data for 2024–2025 indicates a historic demographic shift where births to non-Hispanic white women fell below 50% of all U.S. births for the first time, landing at approximately 49%. Regardless of what you say there’s really no answer to the problems domestically here long-term.
Maybe Hanania is correct that we can influence a country in a liberal direction without needing troops on the ground. The more liberal and/or wealthy a country becomes, the less likely its citizens will want to migrate to the West.
Whether or not anyone likes the empire is irrelevant. It’s here to stay and has been getting its way for going on a century now. You can cite whatever misadventure across the globe you want, but in the end the empire gets what it wants. And it plays both sides so it never loses.
It’s here to stay, but it really is an obsolete model of governance. Satellites, air travel, instant communication have made the planet a lot “smaller” over the past century. You know, if you didn’t notice the Somalis driving the wrong way down a one way in your city.
Anyways, the empire will eventually transform into something approximating “realms”. Roughly corresponding to the continents. I think America will stay as the default cultural hegemon, but the power politics stuff is coming to an end.
I want to clarify what I mean when I say the American right needs to ditch Trump.
I do not mean vote Democrat or for any third party.
I do not mean protest Trump.
I do not mean take up arms against the administration.
All I am asking is that you stop supporting him proactively. This can include, but is not limited to:
Make a tweet denouncing him and saying you regret your vote.
Reconcile with Trump critics on the right.
Do not support his planned third term.
Do not vote for anyone he endorses.
Do not let him dictate the 2028 primary election.
Do not vote for any of his named successors, at least without them apologizing for what went wrong under Trump.
Just let the left have Trump and his family to pacify and distract them. If they send him to jail, who cares? It would be no different than Bill Clinton or George Bush going to jail, which you all said you wanted.
I care about my people and their future in the countries they built. I do not care about Mar-a-Lago, a stupid dance done at rallies, or that time he posted a Pepe the Frog edit in 2017
Why does it matter if Trump goes to jail ? He is old and has no terms left he is of little use to us. It would be strategically better to sacrifice him to the corn to limit leftist retaliation.
idk maybe the guy who changed the discourse for the better deserves better than that...? even if you want him out of politics. but congrats on a crash out short enough for me to read for once
Do you have nothing better to do with your time than crash out in the comments? TRS and its podcasts have plenty of the "Anti-Trump, but from the right!" perspective you keep malding out because that's not on offer here.
130 years is about how long the Jews have been completely in charge of jewmerika jUSA. They assassinated hard money man William mckinley to put their more nyc banker friendly Teddy Roosevelt into the presidency... Then they used Woodrow Wilson as an abject pawn- Jewish political sex blackmail even oi veh!!! We will never have a good america with the Jews in power here. Wexner gave epschtein a $BILLION. it's a Permanent Jew War Economy and a Perpetual Jew War Machine. Since the 1960's psychedelic peace and love revelations, we could be doing a lot better. How much more obvious does it have to get? Jews did 911 AND 10/7... https://will263248.substack.com/p/les-gave-jeff-a-billion?utm_source=direct&r=b0n52&utm_campaign=post-expanded-share&utm_medium=post%20viewer
Interesting article, not sure I agree though. Maybe it is just a terminology thing. I don't know that having an empire (we stand alone on top of the world in force projection ability) and using an empire (war after war after war) are the same thing. Throwing your immense weight around economically and geopolitically to get what you want to benefit your own country I'm ok with (Trump does seem to wheel and deal pretty well and get what he wants internationally, minus Greenland for now), as long as it doesn't involve stupid pointless overseas wars.
As much as I'm disappointed to see some of the right go full anti-America over Iran, I'm almost just as shocked to see some turn into John McCain, Lindsey Graham, and Mark Levin clones overnight.
I would like to see someone bring a case to SCOTUS over Iran. Trump has been shown to be able to do whatever he wants when it comes to foreign policy but stymied by the courts domestically. Let some leftist or Massie sue over War Powers and force an emergency decision. If SCOTUS rules against Trump, what then? Does anyone really think we'd pack it in and turn the fleet and Air Force around? Will it be the crisis that finally solidifies an executive empire and ends the farce that we are anything like a republic? If it gets him to ignore the courts domestically, I almost would like to see it. The weight of it and fears of finding some workable middle ground decision might actually kill Roberts.
You're forgetting something, Scott. In America there are two empires: a RW one, and a LW one. The RW one gives us macho quips from Pete Hegseth and the LW one gives us BLM flags in Seoul. Both give us stupid wars thousands of miles away.
Furthermore, our LW and RW empires will accept migrants as much or more than "weak France" does. We just went through 25 years of a RW and then LW empire and we were not better off; quite the contrary. In little France's case, she is under no obligation to say "oui" to anyone, powerful or not. If the French people don't want foreigners, they will get none. Or else it really is war.
At this point in time, the French are simply too libtarded or worn out to say "non". Power is irrelevant. Will is what matters. Ask the Ancient Greeks or the Ottoman Greeks. Would you die for a cause, even if you were the weaker party? Of course you would. It could even be glorious. The Iranians are facing that now.
Our “RW empire” accepts virtually zero refugees outside of a few thousand White South Africans. Immigration overall is net-negative. European empires of old had zero immigration from the third world. The levers of our empire (tariffs and military pressure) Trump has used in countries like Columbia and Venezuela for remigration is enormously helpful, and something modern European nations will not have once they start mass deportations.
The dollar’s dominance is *not* the result of American military strength. Other countries don’t use the dollar because we bully them into it. They do it because it in their own interest. Period.
The US provides an open capital account of enormous size and liquidity, stable legal system, and a vast export market. None of those things are dependent on empire. In fact, insofar as “retaining a market for our exports” was traditionally the reason for empire, we are actually providing an anti-empire.
I find all your arguments here unconvincing but if there is one stupid idea I wish I could extirpate forever from the right wing commentariat it’s the economically illiterate “hurr durr King Dollar because air craft carriers!!” nonsense.
Military dominance is absolutely not the only factor (you pointed out several that are arguably more important), but it absolutely is *a* factor. To say otherwise, you’d have to completely ignore the historical context in which it formally became the global reserve currency.
Plus, this analysis ignores that the *dollar itself* is the export for which the empire retains markets. Trump has been making this more explicit with investment deals with regional allies, but it’s been the case for decades.
You could definitely argue it’s a bad way to run our economy (Dutch Disease, etc), and I’d be inclined to agree to a large extent, but that doesn’t change that exporting dollars (and US bonds, equities, etc) is the primary engine of American wealth at present with energy and MIC exports as ancillary drivers.
military dominance (US Navy) is why trade/commerce flows smoothly. the dollar being the export is how foreign countries maintains US as the consumer of foreign over production and foreign wage suppression
Yes, the system as it exists absolutely has detrimental impacts on Americans as workers (at least when it comes to traditional manufacturing), but it does give Americans cheaper imports and more valuable assets, so it benefits Americans as consumers and as asset-owners.
There are good arguments that’s a bad exchange for us as a nation (though I think that becomes less the case as our core native population ages and shrinks), but it’s important to makes the upsides as well as the downsides explicit when arguing the pros and cons of our present system.
"cheaper imports and more valuable assets" yes many consumed goods are cheaper but you mentioned more valuable assets which means inflated assets and HOUSING PRICES THROUGH THE ROOF.
There's a reason we feel the economy is hollowed out and its because we are forced to consume. For foreigners its because their wages and consumption are suppressed. Not to mention mass migration to the US (other countries give special carve outs to attract foreigners
and that my friend is what we call neoliberalism
Yes, but this is where it’s a trade off. American Boomers (the whitest living generation besides the rapidly dwindling Silents) benefit hugely from inflated housing prices and equity prices (via their 401ks).
Much of that is at the expense of younger generations, but it’s not only, or even primarily, foreigners benefiting from this arrangement. It’s the same basic problem we have with Social Security and Medicare.
There are some other benefits too beyond just wealth for the Boomers. Their inflated stock prices give American companies the resources to throw tons of capital at R&D which plays a major role in our technological dominance.
capex and R&D are down compared to share buybacks/dividends.
my mine issue with the importation of excess capital isn't even about muh manufacturing (aside from national security issues) but rather its created an economy of cheaper products/luxuries but needs such as housing because more and more expensive. not to mention debt. I agree its about tradeoffs and I'm willing to make that tradeoff
No, this has no economic economic validity at all. The engine of American wealth is the productivity of its economy.
If it were actually true that a country could export its currency to increase its own wealth, places like Venezuela or Argentina would be by far the richest countries on Earth. But currency is merely a claim on the production of a national economy - and to the extent our currency is artificially strong due to our economic policies, the “wealth” it produces is a temporary mirage with significantly deleterious long term consequences.
What is the "productivity of our economy" as it actually exists today? It's first of all the consumer economy and the capital markets (i.e. the things that are turbocharged by dollar dominance) and secondarily it's energy (thanks to the fracking revolution, which to a large extent is actually another product of our capital markets!) and MIC exports (symbiotic with military dominance).
And the examples of Venezuela and Argentina are obviously silly, because the value of something isn't determined by how much of it you produce. The value or price of a product is primarily determined by the demand for it, how much people are willing to pay for it, and that's what US currency, treasuries, equities, etc, have that third world currencies and markets don't have.
You're absolutely right that there are deleterious effects of this system, but just like the argument that we should crash the housing market, so young people aren't priced out of housing, it's very important to think about second-order consequences of extreme changes to an existing system, even when it has significant downsides.
True. Britain got China addicted to British opium to balance their trade balance with them, that should be the purpose of an empire. Not the case in the current US-China relationship.
the current relationship or at least until chinese exports to the US plunged as of late, is one where China suppresses its own wages/consumption, overproduces then pours that capital into the US so that the US can consume what China overproduces
I feel like you are ignoring the fact that whenever China tried to expel opium sellers they would get decimated by the militaries of Europe. Militaries that would not have the necessary projection to enforce their countries will without an empire.
I meant the British got the chinese to buy the opium because they had the military to enforce it, yes. That is the empire.
In 2026 30 pieces of silver converts to $7,000 per article.
1) If you look at recent history, empires are breaking up, and attempts to "turn back the clock" are unsuccessful, e.g. as in Russia's case -- it's having extreme trouble reasserting control over its large prior possessions such as Ukraine;
2) The immigrant/non-white situation is actually getting out of control in this _current_ US empire. It's not like having the current empire is leading to a more homogenous white country, it's the opposite. An argument can be made that empires are associated with diversity.
I think, as per Scott's point, that's because Russia already let it go. Recent history also seems to indicate that America is capable of doing more than some led us to believe, just like wild eyed fantasists 20 years ago tried to convince us we could basically do anything. The unrealistic pessimism is an over reaction to the unrealistic optimism of the previous epoch.
This doesn't mean that the US needs to run the empire as it presently does at extortionate expense.
Yes, the petrodollars argument is valid, though it has been shaken this past week. But outside of pricing minerals in Dollars there is no need for 700 bases across the globe.
These costs make the US economy weaker, as do badly conceived military expeditions.
You’re gonna wonder why the NH-White pop slips below 50% and wonder why “uhh wow countries wouldn’t take back their pops when we empired harder!” and with a Dem win in midterms and possible 2028 win it’ll go faster. Provisional data for 2024–2025 indicates a historic demographic shift where births to non-Hispanic white women fell below 50% of all U.S. births for the first time, landing at approximately 49%. Regardless of what you say there’s really no answer to the problems domestically here long-term.
Maybe Hanania is correct that we can influence a country in a liberal direction without needing troops on the ground. The more liberal and/or wealthy a country becomes, the less likely its citizens will want to migrate to the West.
Whether or not anyone likes the empire is irrelevant. It’s here to stay and has been getting its way for going on a century now. You can cite whatever misadventure across the globe you want, but in the end the empire gets what it wants. And it plays both sides so it never loses.
It’s here to stay, but it really is an obsolete model of governance. Satellites, air travel, instant communication have made the planet a lot “smaller” over the past century. You know, if you didn’t notice the Somalis driving the wrong way down a one way in your city.
Anyways, the empire will eventually transform into something approximating “realms”. Roughly corresponding to the continents. I think America will stay as the default cultural hegemon, but the power politics stuff is coming to an end.
I want to clarify what I mean when I say the American right needs to ditch Trump.
I do not mean vote Democrat or for any third party.
I do not mean protest Trump.
I do not mean take up arms against the administration.
All I am asking is that you stop supporting him proactively. This can include, but is not limited to:
Make a tweet denouncing him and saying you regret your vote.
Reconcile with Trump critics on the right.
Do not support his planned third term.
Do not vote for anyone he endorses.
Do not let him dictate the 2028 primary election.
Do not vote for any of his named successors, at least without them apologizing for what went wrong under Trump.
Just let the left have Trump and his family to pacify and distract them. If they send him to jail, who cares? It would be no different than Bill Clinton or George Bush going to jail, which you all said you wanted.
I care about my people and their future in the countries they built. I do not care about Mar-a-Lago, a stupid dance done at rallies, or that time he posted a Pepe the Frog edit in 2017
Why do you keep insisting on crashing out in every article about this issue? Your "persuasion tactics" are that of a jilted ex, not a rational person.
"If they send him to jail, who cares"
With an attitude like this you have no people
Why does it matter if Trump goes to jail ? He is old and has no terms left he is of little use to us. It would be strategically better to sacrifice him to the corn to limit leftist retaliation.
idk maybe the guy who changed the discourse for the better deserves better than that...? even if you want him out of politics. but congrats on a crash out short enough for me to read for once
He just stole what others had said 20 years prior. Again he has outlived any use he has to us. He isn't loyal to us why should we be loyal to him ?
Do you have nothing better to do with your time than crash out in the comments? TRS and its podcasts have plenty of the "Anti-Trump, but from the right!" perspective you keep malding out because that's not on offer here.
130 years is about how long the Jews have been completely in charge of jewmerika jUSA. They assassinated hard money man William mckinley to put their more nyc banker friendly Teddy Roosevelt into the presidency... Then they used Woodrow Wilson as an abject pawn- Jewish political sex blackmail even oi veh!!! We will never have a good america with the Jews in power here. Wexner gave epschtein a $BILLION. it's a Permanent Jew War Economy and a Perpetual Jew War Machine. Since the 1960's psychedelic peace and love revelations, we could be doing a lot better. How much more obvious does it have to get? Jews did 911 AND 10/7... https://will263248.substack.com/p/les-gave-jeff-a-billion?utm_source=direct&r=b0n52&utm_campaign=post-expanded-share&utm_medium=post%20viewer
Interesting article, not sure I agree though. Maybe it is just a terminology thing. I don't know that having an empire (we stand alone on top of the world in force projection ability) and using an empire (war after war after war) are the same thing. Throwing your immense weight around economically and geopolitically to get what you want to benefit your own country I'm ok with (Trump does seem to wheel and deal pretty well and get what he wants internationally, minus Greenland for now), as long as it doesn't involve stupid pointless overseas wars.
As much as I'm disappointed to see some of the right go full anti-America over Iran, I'm almost just as shocked to see some turn into John McCain, Lindsey Graham, and Mark Levin clones overnight.
I would like to see someone bring a case to SCOTUS over Iran. Trump has been shown to be able to do whatever he wants when it comes to foreign policy but stymied by the courts domestically. Let some leftist or Massie sue over War Powers and force an emergency decision. If SCOTUS rules against Trump, what then? Does anyone really think we'd pack it in and turn the fleet and Air Force around? Will it be the crisis that finally solidifies an executive empire and ends the farce that we are anything like a republic? If it gets him to ignore the courts domestically, I almost would like to see it. The weight of it and fears of finding some workable middle ground decision might actually kill Roberts.
Empire respecter checking in.
You're forgetting something, Scott. In America there are two empires: a RW one, and a LW one. The RW one gives us macho quips from Pete Hegseth and the LW one gives us BLM flags in Seoul. Both give us stupid wars thousands of miles away.
Furthermore, our LW and RW empires will accept migrants as much or more than "weak France" does. We just went through 25 years of a RW and then LW empire and we were not better off; quite the contrary. In little France's case, she is under no obligation to say "oui" to anyone, powerful or not. If the French people don't want foreigners, they will get none. Or else it really is war.
At this point in time, the French are simply too libtarded or worn out to say "non". Power is irrelevant. Will is what matters. Ask the Ancient Greeks or the Ottoman Greeks. Would you die for a cause, even if you were the weaker party? Of course you would. It could even be glorious. The Iranians are facing that now.
Our “RW empire” accepts virtually zero refugees outside of a few thousand White South Africans. Immigration overall is net-negative. European empires of old had zero immigration from the third world. The levers of our empire (tariffs and military pressure) Trump has used in countries like Columbia and Venezuela for remigration is enormously helpful, and something modern European nations will not have once they start mass deportations.
"No Empire, No Welfare." And Welfare isn't just for the underclass, despite what PMC types think.
I still think that a debate/discussion between you and Tom Woods on this question would be outstanding!
Nice pfp