During the second half of the twentieth century, the
United States emerged as the preeminent power in the
world, dominant in its economic and technological
achievements as well as in terms of military hardware. Although
the Soviet Union was a serious competitor in the
arms race engendered by the Cold War, its economic
achievements paled in comparison with those of the U.S.
behemoth. Beginning in the 1970s, Japan began to rival
the United States in the realm of industrial production,
but the challenge faded in the 1990s, when structural
weaknesses began to tarnish the Japanese miracle.
The worldwide dominance of the United States was a
product of a combination of political, economic, and cultural
factors and showed no signs of abating as the new
century began. But there were some warning signs that
bore watching: a growing gap in the distribution of
wealth that could ultimately threaten the steady growth
in consumer spending; an educational system that all too
often fails to produce graduates with the skills needed to
master the challenges of a technology-driven economy;
and a racial divide that threatens to undermine America’s
historical role as a melting pot of peoples.
As the new century dawned, America’s global hegemony
was also threatened from abroad in the form of a
militant terrorist movement originating in the Middle
East. So far, the U.S. response, led by the administration
of President George W. Bush, has been primarily military,
but whether the politics and social forces driving the
movement can be defeated by such means alone has been
a matter of vigorous debate. As Americans become increasingly
concerned about the threat to national security,
the future remains in serious doubt.
For most of the nations elsewhere in the Americas,
U.S. dominance has mixed consequences. As a vast consumer
market and a source of capital, the dynamism of
the U.S. economy helped stimulate growth throughout
the region. But recent studies suggest that for many countries
in Latin America, the benefits of globalization have
been slower to appear than originally predicted and have
often flowed primarily to large transnational corporations
at the expense of smaller domestic firms. At the same
time, the U.S. penchant for interfering in the affairs of its
neighbors has aroused anger and frequently undermined
efforts by local governments to deal with problems within
their own borders. At the end of the twentieth century,
the United States was still finding it difficult to be a good
neighbor.