How come US became a global superpower but UK didn't?

How come US became a global superpower but UK didn't?

Does it have to do with economics? Politics? Demographics?

The bongs are inbred cucks. That is all.

WASPs are cucks.
UK is like 80% WASP.

Hope that explains it.

Except UK WAS a global superpower.
Ffs, this is primary-school tier stuff, Sweden.

Land. Just land.

> what is the british empire
given you're around...
how do you get a job at the shill factory?
do you get paid by the post, or by hour?
do they match 401k?

literally what
we had the biggest empire ever?
WW2 crippled us.

>somalian education

>UK
>global superpower

m8

USA became superpower on the backs of black people.

UK didnt have enough black people.

The UK has a majority irreligious population you LARPing faggot. The USA was based before the influx of eurocucks whom still liked Europe over the USA.

it's like you didn't even read the post

Why didn't Russia become a world supper power then. ??

All the people with good genetics came to america, this is why europe is so shit now. What little good genes were left died with the nazis

The UK used to be a super power, but the USA was able to increase their economy via mass-producing which they got from the Brits.

>UK was never a global superpower

>The USA was based before the influx of eurocucks

So when it was solely populated by natives?

>UK
>never a global superpower

Bipolarity is an unusual circumstance, the British Empire was easily among the top of the old Great Powers.

Britain was a global superpower for more than a century.

The two world wars devastated much of Europe, including the UK. The US mainland was virtually untouched. It's that simple

because any time russia loses they fucking change their whole system instead of just fixing the problems that lead to their defeat

Hang your monarchy, and you can join us in liberty.

>somalian education

The UK has the global super power, it lead to something called the "Pax Britannica" which was 100 years of peace under British world domination.

No, mass production was of US origin. In fact, in Bongistan in the mid 19th Century, the bong aristocracy was pushing hard for the craft movement, which eschewed mass manufacturing. The Luddite movement was largely bong in origin, and we know what they were about. The bongs could have vaulted forward with the world, but they took the wrong turn every time, even at home as we see. It was over for them before it ever started, by the late 19th Century. The 20th Century was just gory details and shame, and now the "we wuzz empire kangs and sheeeit".

Henry Ford would be

>"we wuzz empire kangs and sheeeit".

That only works when it's not a truth. For the British, they were.

Dumb Amerimutt.

So the bong wars in Crimea, China, South Africa didn't happen?

The meme of pax bongannica really should be shelved.

/thread
WW2 rekt everyone's shit so hard that the U.S. was the only one left standing to profit from the recovery effort.

Oddly enough Argentina was well on its way to outpace USA before the wars. Communism, not even once.

>The Luddite movement was largely bong in origin

That's because the British were the first in the industrial revolution LOL and that was workers rebelling against that, they failed.

>he expects countries that were not having an industrial revolution to rebel against an industrial revelation

LMAO. Burger education!

Best go check on your sister, gyprom, she's been with that customer a while now.

>history is a lie
>facts are wrong

The mouth breather strikes again. You proved you are a dumb mutt by this shit:

We have 300 million people, who were historically white.

We're on a decline because our beaner population is increasing

Prior to WW2 the UK was the world superpower and the US was pretty isolationist. WW2 crippled/bankrupted the UK to the point they couldn't recover and the US took over as the super power.

>The bongs could have vaulted forward with the world, but they took the wrong turn every time

LMFAO.

After the industrial revolution Britain did vault itself and was at the height of empire.

You are brain dead. I wish Euros could post without these gun obsessed "muh guns" american morons.

recently read that nazi germany sent a lot of aid to latin america and germans regularly migrated there. i mean i know he helped these pablos develop but what is your source on argentina almost surpassing the u.s.?

Eurocuck catholics* It was based when the WASPs were in control. Some retarded catholics on here will post drawings of comfy churches in the USA, without realizing those were protestant churches.

Actually, it was the bong aristocracy that led the drive to push the people back to the dirt, gyprom.

That's why they wound up on rations in 1950. They were stupid, and for well over 2 centuries.

How's your sister doing with that turkroach?

>he thinks that never happened
Throw a dart at a map of Africa and you'd probably find a shithole that's barely industrialized because the natives fucked up everything left by colonialism.

The UK did become a global superpower, it was called the British Empire and ruled 25% of the Earth's land mass. They threw it all away in exchange for the (((NHS))) and Muslim immigration, which is now all they have.

We were a world super power and then we had 2 world wars to fight and it bassically killed us , then the US threatened to do us in with suez , our empire Died with suez .We had our day just as i feel the US will in our lifetime im sad to say

love this meme
>implying it wasn't the literal losers
although survival of the fittest bred some tough losers

There's a Paki waiting for her next, better push it along, gyppo.

A big part is played, if you want to look at it, by the hinge years of 1873-1916. These years are the moments after an economic crisis (worldwide), and the moment when the USA basically started financing the European war effort in WW1 (look it up, Adam Tooze's The Deluge is great for that).

Basically, it was around the turn of the 20th century, that US industrial output became the biggest in the world (in some industries, by 1914, they were producing as much as the UK, Germany and France combined). In fact, if you look at debates from pre-WW1 years in Europe, you already see the rise of language such as "the 19th century was the British century, we are now in the American one". The economic basis for the takeover of the mantle of world power was already there by 1914, the political will took until the 1940s for it to materialise. But financially, it was already true by 1916 (look at the impact of 1929 on Europe - where did it start, after all?)

But the simple reason for this c.1900 basis of US power over Britain, let alone the rest, is the integration of territories and thus resources into a national-spanning empire that was self-contained (unlike its nearest peers in that respect - Russia and Qing China - which were not "safe" from foreign wars).

European empires, paramount being the Brits, believed in "free trade" and "supply chains", due to the nature of their far-flung empires. That is, that the transfer of resources would be possible within these links. This could not compete with the US integration of its newfound frontier - through force, but then infrastructure - by the late 1800s. It is one of the spurs for African colonialism too - in the 1880s the ideas of "Euafrica" actually emerged (look it up, I am serious). With Africa seen as the potential territory of integration that could help places like France or Germany especially, but also Britain, rival the territorially integrated empire that was the USA.

>talks about the early 19th century Luddite movement
>correlates it with the mid 20th century

SHIT-FOR-BRAINS.

Go find your village, idiot.

>What is Pax Britannica

>1 post by this ID

Was OP bait or did he just realise how retarded his question was and gtfo?

Churchill pissed away the British Empire and America's freedom allowed for great economic growth.

>How come US became a global superpower but UK didn't?


Lad

You're a gyppo subhuman, so let me explain this to you once. In 1914, after only a brief period of national consolidation and formation, German GDP surpassed the retarded bongs. Think about that.

So much for this meme bong "empire".

Both. He's probably a somali.

they where and are

please look up
and learn some history

Reading comprehension?

The industrial revolution happened in Britain first.

Amerimutt posted claimed it was stopped by the Luddite movement and that Britain didn't vault itself forward (it did; and went on to reach the height of empire)

It was other countries who later revolted against industrialization. Not Britain, at least not successfully.

Education. Seek one. Pretty embarrassing when a Romanian like me understands Western history better than yourself.

>ad-hom
>ad-hom
>ad-hom

OMG PEOPLE ON THE BOARD CALLED AMERICANS MUTTS! WE MUST BE BEING RAIDED!! WAHH!!

Cry harder.

A meme that the bongs invented.

>He's probably a somali.
We love our somalis oh there so good oh there so sweet.

That's true. Argentina was very similar to the US in the early 19th century, they were receiving a lot of immigrants like us, they had a vast country full of rich resources, their federal system was similar to ours. I actually think they could've done very well, probably been a major world power.

All true. The real “magic moment” was Teddy Roosevelt negotiating peace between Japan and Russia. He won a NObel Peace prize for it and realizing the magnitude of the moment he immediately sent the “Great White Fleet” on a world tour.

What are you trying to say, BurgahBoy?

...

>literally started with ad-hom
>cries when people fire back with ad-hom
Projecting much?

You mad, bongbro?

your education leaves a lot to be desired

Ever hear of the British Empire?

Empires come and go, we had ours, America's having theirs, and soon China will unfortunately run the world.

>How come US became a global superpower but UK didn't?
The UK was a global superpower. They just gave up on their empire in the 20th century

Argentina was first world tier yes which is funny thinking about it , shows how different choices a nation makes hugely effect the outcome of history by miles

Britain WAS the global superpower until they shattered themselves in two stupid World Wars and then lost their nerve to rule the globe.

Goodness but you're a shrill little subhuman, aren't you?

Tell sis the drunk Russian is next..

The perfect bong imagery, a cuckolded faggot, the state of Bongistan.

99% white :^)

MAD.

Indeed. Another "magic moment" was the Wilsonian moment actually. It is a pretty subversive act to call for the right to national self-determination, when you are an empire yourself basically, but have no internal potential revolutionary populations (the Indian wars saw to that). Not the same when you basically are calling on Indians or Egyptians v the Brits, Czechs v Austrians, Arabs v Ottomans, Algerians v French, Koreans v Japanese, to defend their own rights. It has to be seen, in some way, as the political potential of USA taking up the mantle straight after WW1, rather than WW2 as it did.

Yeah, the turkroach fucking your sister says he's white too, gyppo.

>history is a meme

you're definitely 56% white

U.S. was isolationist at the time, so economy wasn't anywhere near as big as today. UK had control at the time but slipped away due to war.

In the mid to late 1800's, Argentina had very strong export economy on livestock and agriculture when U.S. just told people more or less to take it or leave it. But with boom economies come a bit of overleveraging.

The loans to grow didn't come in. Imports fell during wartime. They were dependent on British banking to hold themselves upright. They restructured their financial system (close to what we did with quantitative easing, or inflation) and went tried to grow that way, and it did work for some time, although the consequences wouldn't completely manifest until a century later.

This is probably why Nazi Germany wanted to send money to Latin and South America. It looked like a good deal. At the time, Argentina looked to be on top even after foreign banks stopped loaning money. They weathered the storm of WWI exceptionally well. Many people moved as the situation in Europe was going down the shitter.

Meanwhile, America was being cock slapped with the Great Depression and it genuinely looked like the fledgling nation would fail hard.

WWII changed all that. With Argentina out of the picture, Britain looked to the U.S. and U.S. reluctantly admitted they'd like to do business. This was more of a ruse. Of course we'd love business. We're poor as shit from depression and we need export economy to get out of this quickly.

The rest is history. U.S. mostly indirectly involved themselves in WWII, and then was the only one left with the manufacturing capability to rebuild the ruins of Europe. PROFIT!

01-01 collapsed Argentina practically overnight, the U.S. is a superpower, albeit a little too overbearing, and now the tide seems to be turning for the American empire. We are at the turning point. Empires usually don't last longer than a century. That's three generations from roots, growth, complacency, and decline.

...

meant for
not

The UK is a global superpower. They altered the way global power structures work, they can reap nearly all of the benefits of any Anglosphere nation and even have the most positive stereotypes for their ethnoquirks.

Once America invents a way to say "I don't like this chap's twink, how about you, old bean" in Spanish, the Anglosphere and Hispanosphere forge a political marriage and it's game over for Russia and China.

And That's why Putin wants you to vote for Trump.

Right, Bismark said 'The most important international fack in the 20th century is that N.America speaks English'. Implying an alliance between the US and UK. Other than that, both France and the UK were pro south during the Civil War because they already knew what was coming. As the Civil War closed down, Abe Lincoln remarked that their would never be a foreign army able to cross the Appalachians or tread in the Ohio river valley, ever.

control of the oceans, you dumb fuck

our geographic location gives us THE position for world power.

looking at the world in terms of naval power projection, it becomes easy to see the rise of power on the Italian peninsula during the Mediterranean golden age, the Iberian power strength of the trade between the Med (old seat of trade) and the Colonies in the Americas (the new seat of trade), further helped by the Midi Pyrenees as a defensive barrier, the rise to power of the British (Colonial trade control via north america and the indies), and the extent of the US power by being able to project power on both the atlantic and pacific. Soon, the population of Africa will lead to a trade struggle between the USA and China/India (whichever survives). Everything comes down to trade. The Cold War was two powers fighting for control of the Pacific and Atlantic, the USSR and the USA.

The difference is that Argentines are spics. Americans, the real ones, are largely descended from British colonists/settlers and the few northwestern European settlers who actually decided to stay here after immigrating. Most people don't know 2/3 of the people who came here just ended up going back after a short while.

The outliers to this are the non-German catholic immigrants who migrated to the northern urban centers. The distinction is largely due to their being "factory work" instead of farmers and the like. They were truly the first real "immigrants" to America as we know it. Most of the others were actual settlers like the British were when they first got here. This is why you see so many Germans and Scandinavians in the rural midwest.

>Britain was never a superpower
Umm sweetie

70% is ice

land and population, every american has no ethnic identity as well they are euromongrels so they have nothing to live for so they just cut a deal with jews for $$$

>Trips of Truth
Damn you're good.

B-but, muh heritage

Not.
Even.
White.

Indeed. People really need to pay attention to the graphs - economics can be boring, but it explains a lot more than "these guys were spics", which Sup Forums falls for all the time easily. Why did one nation outproduce other ones? USA v let's say pol favourites (for that era) Britain or Germany (of "good" stock for pol). It is economics and geography! Just look at the graphs! The Russians couldn't do it at the same time for a variety of reasons, but not least because their own vast resources were mostly locked up in Siberia - technology would make the oil there only accessible after WW2, or its diamonds (after 1957!). Thus, there, geography and technological innovation needed to tackle that geography, held back the economic development of a somewhat comparable country.

The Argentine economy was in a bubble. They were too dependent on exporting raw resources and had really high illiteracy rates and a largely unskilled workforce.

Although shitty politics definitely got in the way of their progress for a lot of the 20th century.

Also, this:

A strain of American isolationism from Europe or the world at large is a very real thing even today. Which would be natural for people that in part were running from the world. Be the US, be main force behind the League of Nations after WW1, dip out back immediately and call it useless.

More like World War I. You could see the end of British hegemony as early as 1924 when the US reorganized German reparations under the Dawes Act.

Yep. Argentine guy - politics is of course important! But by the late 19th century it was obvious to a lot of commentators that vast territory and resources without a real industrial heartland is pointless and will not create a great country. Some even explicitly compared USA v Russia, Argentina, Brazil, Mexico - precisely in those terms. Only the Russians were really starting to get an industrial heartland of any proportion at the turn of the 20th century.

Dawes Plan, rather.

We developed the resources on our land and are very difficult to invade (think about it, if any other country thought they could actually invade and get all our resources, they would've), therefore we've prospered more than any other country in the world.

With that prosperity we've developed a navy capable of being anywhere in the world within a few hours so we can play spoiler if anyone does something wrong in our eyes

Yep! And by 1916 the USA was actually supplying the credit that ran the British - and French - war efforts. It is the turning year in this US v Europe economic fight. The reparations of 1919 that were wanted from Germany are tied also precisely to the servicing of this American debt.

can you please stop this meme about UK being a superpower? they always relied on allies. Only the USA amongst the modern nations was and is a superpower. the hyperpower word was made to pretend the countries under the USA could be super powers. kek

Geography

/thread

WWI was the greatest catastrophe since Rome fell....a complete fucking waste of everything.

Britain only in the last few years re-attained its pre-WW2 population. The US was the only major power not bombed to shit.

World Wars are fucking terrible, lets not have another.

Totally agree. 1911-1923 (for Europe) was basically the decade that fucked everything up (of course, I start this with an Italian perspective, due to where I am, but it was basically one continuous series of wars in Europe and its periphery...)

google Pax Britannica you cuck