In shadow of this thread, I wanted to pursue this topic more. Contrary to Advocat's thread, the American hegemony on the world stage has been declining since the 1970's, argues, not I, but Immanuel Wallerstein, a senior research scholar at Yale in <a href="http://www.foreignpolicy.com/">Foreign Policy Magazine</a>: "the economic, political, and military factors that contributed to U.S. domination are the same factors that will inexorably produce the coming U.S. decline." According to mr. Wallerstein this gradual process is best captured in and illustrated by four symbols: 1) the war in Vietnam, which showed the world that its most powerful military could be beaten by a third world country. This war also at a time in which the western European and Japanese economies were booming. That ended U.S. preeminence in the global economy. 2) the revolutions of 1968. Its direct political consequences were minimal, but the geopolitical and intellectual repercussions were enormous and irrevocable. Centrist liberalism tumbled from the throne. Conservatives would again become conservatives, and radicals, radicals. 3) The fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989. The collapse of communism in effect signified the collapse of liberalism, removing the only ideological justification behind U.S. hegemony, a justification tacitly supported by liberalisms ostensible ideological opponent. 4) The terrorist attacks of September 2001. The persons responsible were members of a nonstate force, with a high degree of determination, some money, a band of dedicated followers. In short, militarily, they were nothing. Yet they succeeded in a bold attack on U.S. soil. So, is the demise of the U.S. as a superpower, or more accurate as the sole superpower at hand? The economic rise of <a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/99aug/9908china.htm">China</a> and the increasing political unification of <a href="http://www.salon.com/books/int/2002/12/02/kupchan/index.html">Europe</a> appear to be ready to claim a bigger role on the world stage.