The United States Should Set a More Constructive Example for Future Superpowers

You say that we as the U.S. took whole pages from Greece and Rome and England. Yes we did. But we aren't talking about how countries are formed. And how a government is set up. What we are talking about is superpowers. The difference between the American superpower and every other superpower is how we became a superpower. America is a superpower because of WWII, and it's economy. Yes, I realize our economy is a touchy issue, but we are rich compared to essentially every other nation on earth. What nation before us has done that? Other superpowers have been information superpowers like ancient Greece, with their influence over the modern thought at the time. Others were military superpowers like Rome and their conquest of the mediterranean area. We are unlike anything before us. Yes, we have military might, but we don't own half of the world. We have our borders, and we don't go around taking other nations by force and claiming them as our own. Our military might is different from every before. Our wealth is envied more than anything else we have. While in eastern europe, I was asked to buy something from every vendor on the street. Why? Because I was an american, and I was rich. Our power is not from the size of our nation, but rather from our economy and ability to defeat others. Not that we have to defeat other nations, but we can if we needed to. Now lets talk about setting the precedent. By setting the precedent, we would be giving the other nations something to base themselves off of. You say that I shouldn't use the word copy, but that is exactly what setting the precedent is. If there is a precedent, then people who use that precedent, are taking something they see, and using it. That is copying something. You say that the world community is close knit. You are correct. It is. There is great scrutiny of the world's actions. I agree. But this doesn't mean that the other countries are going to use the mandate set by us. There are many countries who hate the United States. Take for example a lot of Muslim nations. Take for another example many eastern asian countries. While they do business with us, they don't particularly like us. Why then would they accept our mandate? The fact is they wouldn't. You haven't proven how they would take and act upon our mandate. It hasn't been empirically proven in the past, and to assume it will start now doesn't mean anything. It can't be proven. We must look to the past to find what happens. Not only that, but you don't argue my point of why they would want to when we fell. Why would a country want to do the same thing as a country who did it and then lost their superpower status. They wouldn't want to copy a failing model. They would want their own chance to perfect it. Just like we wouldn't keep inventing the same thing if it didn't work. We would continuously be trying to improve upon that. The same goes for superpowers. You say that there have never been superpowers. That is true. Which means that we have perfected it more than anyone else so far. But the resolution implies we are going to fall, so i'm debating like we are going to fall. So, when we do fall, they will have no reason to follow our precedent. You give the example of European nations taking cues from each other as to what is acceptable and not accptable. Once again. We are talking about superpowers. Each superpower has been different. Because they don't want to fail as the others have failed. There is no sense in doing something that has failed. Doing the same thing hoping for a different result is crazy. That's why we don't have to worry about the precedent we set. It won't matter.