The US Unipolar World
The monopoly of world power by one country, like that of the US and its alliance, comes at the expense of the entire world's equality, diversity, stability, progress, and justice—harnessing the powers of the more legitimate but ill-founded UN, constraining its decision and action, thus failing to represent all world countries and citizens fairly or solve their problems as a "world government" should.
As for world unipolarity's effect on the US itself, it causes slow indirect damage culminating at the inevitable moment of "power re-balance" of the globe, unless the US steps back willfully and gradually to share power with others. It increases tension within and pressure on the US, by the very concentration of power it seeks:
1. Cultural Effects
• The English language the UK had spread worldwide facilitated later the cultural invasion of American values and influence over world media. It gradually grew into the world's favorite lingua franca, used by everyone, with/without colonial ties with Britain. This was a "gift" from history, having nothing to do with the English language itself. Accordingly it gave advantage to English-speaking countries, many of which became more allied in the US camp. Through such universal vessel many cultural values have traveled, enticing world's inhabitants and best "brains" to immigrate to the country they heard and read most about, in English media, academia or literature. It added "brain power" to the already rich US, while causing brain drain elsewhere in the world. The damage of unipolarity is much similar to that of urban CENTRALIZATION, where one city receives the best services, attention, and population.
Many grew passionate about America and American culture, while losing interest in learning about their own countries, or countries they have more interests and common grounds with, to understand their particular needs to satisfy and resources to use. Instead, they went with the flow (media, relatives, friends, etc.), flocking to the central/polar country everyone is gravitated towards, while deserting their own countries (their peoples, cultures, resources, projects, plans, dreams, etc.). Even those left at home, esp. in despotic regimes in alliance with the US, being purposely depoliticized by their leaders, felt useless and alienated in their own home country.
• The US uses various logical fallacies worldwide "appealing" to people's passion for modern technology, lifestyles, arts, culture, etc. at the expense of their reason, leaving many baffled, confused, unable to grasp that such country they love is statistically the one that has committed atrocities worldwide more than any other country in modern times, despite being the one who also presented to humanity more achievements in modern times than any other country . The crimes of the US ruling elite are purposely hidden behind the goodness of other Americans & American establishments, many of whom aren't involved in or even aware of their country's crimes, because the US-based world media-machine damages the brains of its people first and foremost.
• The illegal marriage between "media & state" or "capital & state" is as dangerous as that of "church & state"—all depriving government of leadership's neutrality. The rising power of telecommunication, esp. the new INTERNET technologies, when fallen into the hands of a country's intelligence becomes extremely dangerous. The enormous records of humanity's personal data and online behavior owned by GIANT corporations operating search engines, email, e-commerce and social media, when illicitly working with or monitored by the CIA augment the latter's power to unimaginable degrees, surpassing any other US establishment or any other country.
• The US keeps propagating certain American values and privileges it possesses, that it promptly lists in every "resume" for international affairs, to justify its superiority and interference in other countries. Yet there are other sides of the liberal, progressive, democratic, diverse, rich American melting pot and God-blessed land, for long receiving settlers, inspiring citizens worldwide, and disappointing others. After its 20th century glory, it slowed down in the rate of scientific progress, made less civil rights achievements, lost much control over its demographic diversity, and grew more materialistic and ruled by large national/multinational corporations than by people themselves.
Ironically, America's democracy stands in contrast with its overseas "autocracy" toward other countries, making such democracy hypocritical, incomplete, and unappealing to those the US wants to subdue or even impress. Democracy is a whole that doesn't exist in a vacuum. One cannot be democratic only toward fellow countrymen/tribesmen/family members, and undemocratic toward the rest. Also, one cannot force democracy on others without a reason: no country would want another to live happily, democratically, or even humanely for a non-existent altruistic motive.
Human rights and democracy are great values, but of secondary importance to the value of LIFE, that needs a statehood first without which people constantly fight. More importantly, to US interests, no US politician cares about the long-term benefits gained from helping a faraway country become democratic (let alone safe and literate first for citizens to choose MPs/leaders really representing them), when such US politician may not even be in office or alive to reap those benefits, assuming the helped country will eventually return the favor or ally with the US. Yet Western neo-colonialists insist on forcing democracy "immediately" on others, in the name of creative chaos, despite the obvious destructive chaos it leads to: civil wars, millions killed and displaced, armies depleted, and states divided and fallen. In this manner, many countries were ruined: Afghanistan, Somalia, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Yemen, etc.
2. Physical Effects
• The US influence on world politics has been growing ever since America's discovery and throughout its relatively "young" age. However, it emerged as the world only superpower after the end of Cold War and USSR dissolution, even amounting to a hyper-power for more than a decade afterwards, until the EU and China caught up, along with post-communism Russia.
Unfortunately, the EU chose to partake in world unipolarity by joining the US and asserting its hegemony, rather than ally with the other superpowers to create a more balanced bipolar world, or even better ally with secondary powers to create a multipolar world. Other countries followed suit too, in an almost "tribal" manner—Canada, Mexico, Australia, Japan, S. Korea, Turkey, Qatar, etc.—each paying a different tribute to the world's tribe Head (the self-elected Strongman), and playing a different role "assigned" to it according to status and skill.
There lies within the Superpower's frontiers, the world CENTER of "command, politics, military, technology, media, and even language." There reside its decision-makers, happy with the unipolar world they created then messed up, uninterested to change, share or move elsewhere to "de-centralize" and balance its power for the sake of other marginalized and less powerful countries.
Many states pusillanimously chose to follow and "not" challenge the Superpower, becoming mere satellite states turning in its orbit, rather than escape yet face its anger and media smear campaign (for leaving "us" and joining "them" evil others), and, above all, its UN-orchestrated sanctions and international isolation, joining the Defectors Club (Iran, Cuba, Venezuela, N. Korea, etc.) many of which, after long standing their ground or allying with other powers, the US sheepishly re-cajoles, contradicting its previous code of ethics, if any.
• No code except self-interest drives the US actions, that goes beyond basic existential needs to inessential greed, which had plagued many empires before, whose vanity, decadence and oppression led to their demise. By the very code, it condones the horrendous crimes of its allies while crying foul at those struggling for their fundamental right of life and statehood, before any other secondary human rights it propagates, mainly as a pretext to interfere in other countries and hide its colonial motives behind. It claims to democratize others just as old colonialists claimed to civilize and modernize native citizens and aborigines, whom they later killed tens of millions of.
Throughout its history, using its sophisticated intelligence and media machines worldwide, the US equally supported coups or dictators, dissidents or loyalists, and terrorists, whom it grew, nourished, relocated, and even hosted, till it eventually abandoned when no longer needed, or killed when they became more harm than good. Worse still, it supported, orchestrated or committed forced displacement and even "ethnic cleansing" it later distorted or erased from history books: it wiped out Native Americans, supported Zionists' crimes in Palestine, covered the genocide of Arabs and Indians in Zanzibar, etc. Sometimes all is done remotely, with no need for traditional land invasion as old colonialism required, benefiting from the more psychological and informational war tactics of our age.
What colonialists or neo-colonialists did, e.g. in the Middle East or Central Asia, is no different from what any other marauding tribes would do: Tartars, pirates, or even swarms of locusts, all having the same goal.
• The US had inherited much of Britain's colonial legacy worldwide. Hadn't it been for its strong ties with the British Empire, it would have been a strong/important country only, not a superpower. The transition from British colonialism to American neo-colonialism went quietly, unsuspected by most world peoples who were still in euphoria of liberation from old-fashioned military occupation and happily joining the US-based colonialist-charted United Nations as free sovereign states (not its predecessor, the League of Nations, that the US never joined or liked).
Many of the countries that gained their independence from Britain had American military bases installed on their land "for protection." This inevitably influenced the decision making and sovereignty of such countries, as well as their neighbors. Normally, countries would have their own armies, an alliance of armies with common interests/threats, or a neutral multinational force, but not "a" foreign country's army. Even advanced countries like Japan or Korea are not as independent or pacifist as they seem, because they are militarily protected by and allied with the US, that in turn hoards its bases around China and Russia. This feverish race and insatiable US advancement left no poorer victims than the internationally isolated people in N. Korea, dragged into other countries' conflicts as is the fate of similar crossroad states standing in the way of a superpower's ambitions: Afghanistan, Syria, Ukraine, etc.
When N. Korea refused to allow US bases on its soil as its meeker southern half did, refusing alliance with a faraway country like the US at the expense of its neighbor China with whom it shares more geographical, cultural and political interests, it relatively halted the US expansion and greed for power worldwide where it threatens and puts pressure almost on everyone, even at the doorsteps of its rivals like Russia, China, or any possible equal. No one but the US is most responsible for the tragedy of the N. Korean people, caught between world powers while living under the yoke of a panicked leadership that only makes nukes to scare away predators.
With the rise of US power, the Warsaw Pact had ended and NATO's power increased, even surpassing the more legitimate power-balanced multinational UN forces. This greatly harmed Russia, China and other world countries not in the US-EU alliance: Russia lost Eastern Europe allies and even former Soviet States; China became surrounded by US bases along the Pacific and Central Asia; and worse, many world countries were literally ruined by NATO and US intrusion.
• The rich Indian land of the US combined with its desperate/enthusiastic/gifted immigrants, distributed fairly enough across its vast space, had resulted in great utilization of US resources and sped up nation-wide development. That was easier for such a rich, newly-planned, sparsely- inhabited country, than any other.
However, this didn't satisfy the ambitions of US politicians, nor the Europeans America owes its existence to. After two world wars the US became the good son Europe could depend on. Both inched closer, increasing world bipolarity "then" vis-ŕ-vis the communist camp, before the latter's division and dominance of the unipolar world. The US-EU alliance is manifested by their shared defense (shared NATO forces, anti-missile shield & nuclear heads), bilateral trade agreements (at the expense of weaker treaty member states, small companies, and consumer's rights), and shared views, decisions and interests in critical international issues (as in the ill-founded Security Council where the UK, France & the US have a permanent veto majority).
While the fall of communism was still unfolding, the US almost celebrated it to assert its new status, by launching the Gulf War, that there were speculations it had incited it, to encircle Iran and Russia, protect Israel, and give a final blow to the Soviet Union. The US demonstration of power then was to benefit most from the status quo before the emergence of other world powers. As nascent powers were growing and the hyper-power's golden age eclipsing, it launched a more desperate war in 2003 and invaded Iraq; this time with more certainty than speculation that the US and its western allies deliberately sought to occupy and divide Iraq and weaken its military. (The "speculation" part was on whether it had orchestrated the 9/11 attacks itself, on its own soil and against its own people, intentionally or unintentionally cooperating with the perpetrators, sacrificing "a few" hundred average Americans, for a few members of its rich powerful elite.)
• Even when a country has no US military bases on its soil, it could suffer the Superpower's monopoly of military and intelligence technology, restricted from receiving any from elsewhere, unless it was diplomatically prudent enough to ally with various powers and diversify its sources. Examples of monopolized countries are most Middle-Eastern Arab countries, from mid-1970's till mid-2010's, whose alliance the US won easily, as well as the billions they pay for importing and using US weapons.
Worse still, the US uses its heavily-funded world-best intelligence, Zionist-infiltrated/controlled media, and tireless shameless political maneuvering to keep those who rebuffed its military "help" from having a strong united army, by slowly weakening and depleting it, which inevitably disintegrates the entire state, for no state exists without an army. It incites ethnic/religious/political conflicts and sponsors "anti-state" dissidents, treaties, and even constitutions (as that of the "New Iraq": divided among Kurds with US-sponsored autonomy, Sunnis with US-ally Saudi Arabia funding their violence, and Shiites left to Iran's influence, while Christians, the oldest inhabitants, were expelled), eventually dragging it into a civil war and SELF-IMPLOSION. This is the worst form of power abuse—maximum destruction with minimum effort and involvement.
This needn't be done directly or immediately, as in typical military invasion that would be internationally condemned, financially costly, and strategically complex. Even when the Superpower resorts to physical invasion, it uses deception to do so under different pretexts: 1. International "intervention," with or without the UN's or allies' acceptance, to overthrow a country's regime or stop an activity/progress against its interests (developing biological/nuclear weapons). 2. Or it does so remotely, in the name of democracy, human rights, modernization, globalization, etc. This is hypocritical and contradictory, because—the US already cooperates with other non-democratic regimes; it cooperates with countries that own such weapons; and it's silent about human rights abuses committed elsewhere in the world.
* * *
It's ironic how the US is truly a model of decentralization, democracy, and scientific research "at home," yet it's diligently working against world decentralization, a fairly elected UN or an empirically tested UN charter. It puts itself above the UN, smothering its voice and playing its role of world policeman, e.g. by sending its own military bases around the globe instead of the UN (like an inapt policeman kicking away his more qualified colleague, to receive EXTRA benefits along with what he already has, gaining undeserved rewards, possessions, and appreciation, at the expense of others' basic needs and LIVES).
None of the above credentials could give the US its over-reaching worldwide power, without its colonial legacy it has inherited from Britain, since many other countries are also new, rich, diverse, liberal, democratic, etc. but having been tied instead with weaker or farther powers. Thus, like its predecessor, the US uses other unethical means. By "power abuse, media control, UN influence, and worldwide interference, monopoly and 'bullying,'" the US rules the world. Unchecked power is a misused power, until a world government (a restructured UN) is formed and equal powers emerge, for a better, balanced, multipolar world.