The article goes over my head by building too many arguments to sustain its case.

For me it's much simpler to articulate:

Human relationships are build on trust and mutual respect. Once that is gone, the relationship goes out the window as well and it's not coming back.

Counter intuitively, relationships between countries seem to function mostly the same way, instead of being based strictly on interest and practicality as one might expect.

Once trust is strained until it breaks, it's not going to be the same from then on.

“The British Empire’s descent from unchallenged global hegemon in 1939[…]” lol what? British empire was a meager shadow of itself after WW1. Indians’ take on British empire is always wild.

I found John Glubb’s analysis of the problem much better than the author’s: https://people.uncw.edu/kozloffm/glubb.pdf

Much more impressive he wrote this 50 years ago, but he might as well have been alive today. History certainly rhymes.

The US will be able to keep issuing as much debt as they like as long as the Dollar is the global reserve currency. Its when that stops being the case they'll be in trouble with hyperinflation being the most likely outcome.

The American economy today is far larger and more diverse than Rome or the British Empire ever were which makes such comparisons difficult at best. One of the good things about fiat currencies is that you can manipulate or replace them as needed.

Eh, no, the debt is not a problem, as long as the world is willing to pay the tax for the police and ordering institutions. The ruling empire is a defacto service provider- and the world taking and hoarding the dollar is basically allowing for the printing of endless debt, as long as the empire does its job. If it ceases to perform its job, the tax paid by buying and keeping currency reserves becomes worthless - and the debt realizes.

Thus can be concluded, the moment a empire acts only in self interest, abandoning all its services to the global public, the debt it holds becomes real.

[dead]