>>25UN is a consultory organization, it's for telling everyone what's "right" from the global perspective. If globalization was a way to end all wars, then everyone, or at least the responsible, liberal countries, would listen to it. However, even the most liberal, rich, globalist country in the world completely neglected UN and acted by starting war half a dozen way. And you're saying the modern globalization is a way to end all wars and imperialism?
And what of the economic imperialism of American or trans-national corporations which explore cheap labor in poor countries? What about those poor African kids dying in cobalt mines so that Chinese plants can make smartphones for your liberal globalized ass? What about IMF and World Bank which bankrupt whole countries like Ecuador under the guise of helping them?
The US is no more globalist than the British Empire was.
English language became fully global only under the US. Hollywood had no British Empire analogue. Britain didn't have warships and aviation capable of striking any point on the face of the Earth within minutes. It may be a technology thing, but then globalization only became possible with technology. So no, US is more globalistic than the British Empire.