Hyper-Unipolar World

[DominusNovus]

I'd like to keep this as broad as possible, so I won't be focusing on any one particular candidate for the hyperpower in this scenario. Whichever you think is most likely (larger US, united Europe that avoided WW1/2 and maintains their colonies, etc). The only restriction is that this must be a power that is content with its current position, and isn't trying to conquer the rest of the world (so if this hyperpower came about via conquest, it better be chilling out for awhile).

But let us assume that at some point, there is a state/superstate (a highly integrated supranational union, such as federalized EU, would qualify) that maintains a dominant share of global GDP, population, and/or military for several decades (lets say somewhere in the ballpark of 50 years). For reference, for most of the 20th/21st centuries, the US has had 20-30% of global GDP, and a bit above 30% of global military expenditures. What I am proposing is a world in which one power has closer to 50% of these metrics consistently.

What do geopolitics, economics, etc. look like in this world?

 

[Anarch King of Dipsodes]

50% of world GDP? That would be impossible except maybe for a unitary British Empire.
Or... The US stays out of WW II, the USSR and Germany both develop the Bomb, and destroy each other, plus Japan and Britain.

US is the Last Man Standing, with 50% of what's left of the world's GDP

(In Robert A. Heinlein's Future History, something like this happens. At the time of Methuselah's Children, the Old World is radioactive ruins, inhabited only by primitives. (RAH gave no details of what happened there.)

 

[suul'ken]

A4 from Calbears Anglo American- Nazi war:

The Anglo/American - Nazi War

Here is the start of a T/L inspired by some recent reading I've been doing on Hitler's plan's for Europe AFTER he won the war. The conceit here is that this is supposed to be part of a 2010 book on the war between the Western democracies and Nazi Germany in the early-mid 1950's (haven't quite...

www.alternatehistory.com

The Anglo/American Nazi War

An Alternate History in which World War II grinds to a stalemate following the defeat of the Soviet Union. By the time that full-scale fighting resumes in the early 1950s, the Third Reich has had the opportunity to implement much of its manifesto …

tvtropes.org

Nazis manage to conquer Europe and US and Britain+ India led the free world against Nazi regime.
After the War the Allied nation dominance is near total with only India and China being significant independent countries ( as in outside direct allied influence) left.

 

[DominusNovus]

50% of world GDP? That would be impossible except maybe for a unitary British Empire.
Or... The US stays out of WW II, the USSR and Germany both develop the Bomb, and destroy each other, plus Japan and Britain.

US is the Last Man Standing, with 50% of what's left of the world's GDP

(In Robert A. Heinlein's Future History, something like this happens. At the time of Methuselah's Children, the Old World is radioactive ruins, inhabited only by primitives. (RAH gave no details of what happened there.)

I don’t see anything impossible about that or other scenarios.

 

[RamscoopRaider]

50% of world GDP? That would be impossible except maybe for a unitary British Empire.

The US did hit 50% for a brief period in the immediate aftermath of WWII in OTL

Making the Second World War longer and nastier could on its own put the US up to 55-65% in the immediate aftermath, and 50% for almost decade or so, that's fairly plausible

You can probably finagle a Quebec Secession in the 50's with a WWI PoD and give the US a chance to peacefully eat the rest of Canada piecemeal over a few decades, that probably is a 1-2% or so boost. I rate the Quebec part as plausible, it getting screwed up enough the US can grab part of the remainder is only slightly less plausible, but absorbing the whole thing less so

You might be able to bite off another chunk of Mexico with a WWI PoD but that won't be worth that much. Likewise the US might be able to grab a few New World colonies peacefully rather than them going independent, but again not worth that much

With the right policies discouraging growth across the world the US can probably stretch out its post WWII GDP dominance longer by keeping everyone else down

Combine these and the US can probably have over 50% up until 1960-5, and above 45% for another decade and over 40% for the rest of the century, possibly these dates can be stretched longer if you have enough implausible economic self sabotage elsewhere

 

[DominusNovus]

The US did hit 50% for a brief period in the immediate aftermath of WWII in OTL

Making the Second World War longer and nastier could on its own put the US up to 55-65% in the immediate aftermath, and 50% for almost decade or so, that's fairly plausible

You can probably finagle a Quebec Secession in the 50's with a WWI PoD and give the US a chance to peacefully eat the rest of Canada piecemeal over a few decades, that probably is a 1-2% or so boost. I rate the Quebec part as plausible, it getting screwed up enough the US can grab part of the remainder is only slightly less plausible, but absorbing the whole thing less so

You might be able to bite off another chunk of Mexico with a WWI PoD but that won't be worth that much. Likewise the US might be able to grab a few New World colonies peacefully rather than them going independent, but again not worth that much

With the right policies discouraging growth across the world the US can probably stretch out its post WWII GDP dominance longer by keeping everyone else down

Combine these and the US can probably have over 50% up until 1960-5, and above 45% for another decade and over 40% for the rest of the century, possibly these dates can be stretched longer if you have enough implausible economic self sabotage elsewhere

I’ve looked into this, and all I’ve seen is 50% of industrial capacity. It topped out around 30% of GDP.

 

[RamscoopRaider]

I’ve looked into this, and all I’ve seen is 50% of industrial capacity. It topped out around 30% of GDP.

Having done research, we are both wrong but you are closer to right, it topped out at 35%. Punching it to 50% may be possible with a longer knock down drag out WWII, but sustaining that even temporarily is almost impossible. Maybe if you knock out the Gold Standard early and play the right currency games you can have the US hit and stay at 50% of nominal GDP as measured in USD, with a huge disconnect between that and PPP

Looks like its nuclear war as the solution after all if you want that sustained with a post 1900 PoD

 

[DominusNovus]

Having done research, we are both wrong but you are closer to right, it topped out at 35%. Punching it to 50% may be possible with a longer knock down drag out WWII, but sustaining that even temporarily is almost impossible. Maybe if you knock out the Gold Standard early and play the right currency games you can have the US hit and stay at 50% of nominal GDP as measured in USD, with a huge disconnect between that and PPP

Looks like its nuclear war as the solution after all if you want that sustained with a post 1900 PoD

I’m less interested in the specifics of how to get there, just what international affairs are like in such a world.

 

[N7Buck]

I'd like to keep this as broad as possible, so I won't be focusing on any one particular candidate for the hyperpower in this scenario. Whichever you think is most likely (larger US, united Europe that avoided WW1/2 and maintains their colonies, etc).

Britain keeps the American colonies, and develops into a settler colonial based empire.

The only restriction is that this must be a power that is content with its current position, and isn't trying to conquer the rest of the world (so if this hyperpower came about via conquest, it better be chilling out for awhile).

This British empire would be directed by the interests of the settlers rather than the metropole. So the expansion would've absorbed lands where settlers can become the majority, and would ignore largely populated lands. (Similar to the Continental US, as majority American-settler Territories became States, and how America was reluctant to take more Mexican lands).

The colonial, distant and expansive nature of this state would lead it to be isolationist. With each developed colony focusing on it's own interests, and not seeing themselves as regions of a greater state/country.

But let us assume that at some point, there is a state/superstate (a highly integrated supranational union, such as federalized EU, would qualify) that maintains a dominant share of global GDP, population, and/or military for several decades (lets say somewhere in the ballpark of 50 years). For reference, for most of the 20th/21st centuries, the US has had 20-30% of global GDP, and a bit above 30% of global military expenditures. What I am proposing is a world in which one power has closer to 50% of these metrics consistently.

I think a unified America, Canada, Britain, Australia and New Zealand would meet some requirements:
- 30% global military expenditures.
- Largest Navy.
- Between 30%-40% global GDP
- Largest economy.
- At least 30%+ industrial capacity.

What do geopolitics, economics, etc. look like in this world?

Less British influence in India, so balkanized Indian Subcontinent. London far away from Latin America, so either stronger independent states, or European influence.
China might still come under economic imperialism of the great powers. Europe is probably in a constant state of war, or dominated by one power.
If Africa isn't colonised by European powers, it could be very isolated from the outside world. If it is possible for the other European countries to control that much land, then it would less stable and poorer (than otl) due to being a more multipolar region, under the control of less wealthy European states.

I would say Europe would be in a constant state of war, without British persistent intervention to knock down the strongest power, but there wouldn't be any wars the size of the World Wars.

----
Other than a British settler colonial empire, I would say Russia and China have the ability to lead a hyper-unipolar world. This is because these countries are very large, and have a populous core. If a country is ruling over too many disparate groups, it will inevitably become unstable. A centralised strong EU would require a large German population or French population, which would form the core. However, such a supranational arrangement would gradually disintegrate due to smaller countries/nations feeling underrepresented.

 

[M79]

1983 goes nuclear, Australia combines into a new Commonwealth with New Zealand, South Africa, India, Malaysia, various surviving (former) colonies, and a few survivor states in North America. Their common language makes recovery easier and for two decades, peaking at 61% in 1998, they control over half the worlds GDP.