My point is that you're excusing the horrors of US hegemony by comparing it to an imaginary continuation of European hegemony - though you could argue that, apart from the geographical centre being in Washington rather than London, Paris or Berlin, that the US hegemony was simply a continuation of the European one - it's been pretty much the same people in charge, after all.
The thing that I'm disagreeing with is the idea that if any other nation where in the position that the US is now that they would behave any differently.
Which means that the best way to deal with this isn't to make the specific case against the US, but the general case against the behavior in question.
You shut down the conversation with a lot of the people who can have an impact on that behavior by making this about American hegemony instead of American hegemony. It's counterproductive.
It's cliche but true. Hate the sin, not the sinner. And I'll give my consent to any government that does not deny a man a living wage-Billy Bragg
