Comradeship // Freechat

I'd argue there are two reasons- the first is, that this is a product of all the contradictions of capitalism, which, particularly after Reaganomics and then the triumphalist "end of history" as the Soviet Union fell, reached a point wherein the beast began truly devouring itself- and all the foundations which it had built itself upon- at a pace greater than it could plunder back or reproduce in turn, and with ideological justifications and systemic corruption (ie. neoliberalism and the environment that enforces it- finance capitalism, the rentier-monopolist classes, etc) that have made recovery difficult if not nigh impossible without revolutionary change.

The second reason is that, simply put, barring genocide of the majority of the masses of the non-western world, this was the natural path of things- the global south, the colonized, far outnumber the west, and with the decadence, and also arrogance of the imperial cores, this decline was nigh inevitable as the rest of the world caught up and outpaced the west, and as deterrence and through it the ray of hope for independent powers and blocs emerged. The contradictions of capitalism and the empire prevented the actions needed for its final victory (if it were even possible); frankly if you ask me, the only way this victory could have been assured would have been if a thoroughly inhumane (and utterly monstrous, in a way that not even the worst genocidaires in history such as Hitler were) western leader, taking the logic of empire, would have undertaken Churchill's proposed "Operation Unthinkable" before the Soviets had developed their own nukes- and they would have not only nuked the Soviets, but used nukes, biological and chemical weapons, etc, etc. upon the entire rest of humanity to destroy even the seeds of hope and resistance- and even then it would likely not be enough, as the contradictions of capital and the empire are such that the bulk of their labor and extracted resources are from the periphery, and even of those truly and purely from the imperial cores, such a horror would inspire resistance, whether out of moral principles, the awareness that those within the core would increasingly be next, or the pragmatism of not wanting to rule over ashes.

China alone is already more populous than the entire west combined. Without a constant (and by necessity- explicitly genocidal) suppression, this development- where China would retake the place it has held for the vast majority of human history- was inevitable; even just the Chinese people alone can produce more than the west, innovate more than the west, and frankly for that matter they have a superior (indigenous) civilization (well, frankly I'd argue that every non-western civilization is inherently far superior in this aspect, so it's not just China) which is not founded upon the imperialist divide-and-conquer contradictions that exist even within the imperial cores- the settler-states most obviously, but also even England proper, France, Germany, the Netherlands, etc... the empire, and capitalism, is founded on a kind of chaos and conflict- the eternal suppression and beating down of the lower classes, the eternal search for the "other" to vilify and scapegoat for the flaws in the system, and the eternal race to the bottom, with whatever underhanded or destructive means necessary to gain a quick buck. Without the global south to plunder, and to vent its frustrations and contradictions upon, the west would have collapsed long ago, in the same sense that Nazi Germany (as an embodiment of the true nature of the west), in a triumphal world where they had eradicated all the "untermensch" and established a "pure 'Aryan' society" across the globe- would have eaten itself alive. If you ask me, the western system is such that not even a "virgin earth" all to themselves, could be enough to satiate even a capitalist nation as small as the Netherlands (nevermind the fact that being cut off of the bulk of the world's labor which it depends upon would be disastrous for it).

Competent imperialist could- and did- try to sustain the empire, further still. They co-opted and cannibalized new contenders- like Japan and Germany- successfully carved apart and mangled all the true (non-western) civilizations of the world- the Russian/Soviet, Chinese, Islamic, South Asian, West African, etc. civilizations. But the nature of the contradictions inevitably led to their arrogance, and seeking to extract more, more, and more from the global south and the working class, to the point where they exported even the foundations their empires were built upon (industrial production) to the colonized with the expectations the colonized, the "lesser slaves" could never build up against them- and better than they ever had- in turn; and to the point those nations that could have been co-opted, post-Soviet Russia in specific, but also countless other nations- the gulf Arabs, the south Asian states, nations across Latin America, Africa, Asia- was spurned rather than added into the fold without any consideration as to the basic dignity and volition it, and all of humanity, had to not simply go quietly into the dark, to not accept being carved apart, piece by piece, and eternally plundered.

@SadArtemis@lemmygrad.ml has lain the second reason pretty well, but if you want more there’s TriContinental / Vijay Prashad:

• Video: Hyperimperialism: US-NATO’s Dangerous and Decadent New Stage, w/ Vijay Prashad
• Hyper-Imperialism: A Dangerous Decadent New Stage
• The Churning of the Global Order