You’re confusing hegemon and classical empire, with global homogeny. We can debate whether or not global hegemony is unique to a unipolar world, but I don’t think it’s very debatable that it’s only been achieved through the use of neo-imperialism.
That is to say, no classical empire has ever achieved truely global hegemonic status, but there’s no shortage of historical hegemonic powers and classical empires, including that European ones you listed.
I will say that while I generally view the British empire as a classical empire, it’s competition with other European powers in the 19th and 20th centuries is what really gave rise to the concept of neo-imperialism.
But the Monroe doctrine put real checks on their imperial power and influence, that they could not, or would not, overcome. Which is why I have a hard time considering them a global hedgemon in the same context as America, but I realize for their time, they could be considered the first global hegemon.
You’re confusing hegemon and classical empire, with global homogeny. We can debate whether or not global hegemony is unique to a unipolar world, but I don’t think it’s very debatable that it’s only been achieved through the use of neo-imperialism.
That is to say, no classical empire has ever achieved truely global hegemonic status, but there’s no shortage of historical hegemonic powers and classical empires, including that European ones you listed.
I will say that while I generally view the British empire as a classical empire, it’s competition with other European powers in the 19th and 20th centuries is what really gave rise to the concept of neo-imperialism.
But the Monroe doctrine put real checks on their imperial power and influence, that they could not, or would not, overcome. Which is why I have a hard time considering them a global hedgemon in the same context as America, but I realize for their time, they could be considered the first global hegemon.