Hmm... will there be a backlash? I'm not entirely certain, but if there is I suspect that much of it will be due to the complete lack of an opposition in the US. Even in the UK, there's at least a semblance of debate. In the US, dissent is akin to treason in the eyes of many. I think that by stifling debate, tensions build to an unacceptable point as people realize that rational compromise is no longer a consideration. I've heard people say some pretty scary things that I never would have dreamed them capable of saying even a few years ago. Even in myself, as our country pushes farther to the right, I am moving farther to the left partly as a reaction against the dismantling of what I view as worthwhile in our country.

I tend to suspect that what we are seeing in our country is the inevitable result in any nation where dissemination of information is tightly coupled with the profit motive. Add to this a non-representative political process that is beholden to corporate donations and we can see a major conflict of interest, but the media has struck back by planting in the minds of people that the media is captive to a "liberal elite". This lie is repeated so many times that regardless of how blatantly biased the news is, people utter their knee-jerk "liberal bias" mantra without bothering to pay attention to the truth.

(I say "non-representative political process" because a third party can potentially garner 49% of the vote and still receive 0% of the representation. "Winner take all" is not a fair system. Plus, the Democrats and the Republicans are now virtually the same party.)

These problems all lend themselves beautifully to fostering the climate which you have described. I'm not sure how we can avoid this, though. The obvious first start is to pull the money out of politics. When politicians are no longer dependant on big business for the bulk of their campaign finances, perhaps then they will be more able to represent their constituents. Unfortunately, the Supremes have already struck down campaign-finance reform laws as limitations of free speech, so this will be difficult (though frankly, I never quite saw how the ability to buy a vote constitutes free speech).

As for your speculation about who will be the next superpower, my money is on China, but the EU is a possibility. China has more potential, though. They have a fairly homogenous society, a single foreign policy and tremendous national pride. The EU, on the other hand, is a hodgepodge of nation states that squabble over the tiniest of legal changes, have an ineffective foreign policy and cannot seem to get over their current economic doldrums (and this is not simply because the US is having problems which pull Europe down). If, however, the UK were to suddenly decide to ally itself much closer with the European mainland than with the US, we might see a dramatic turnaround in their ability to respond to the challenge that the US represents to them. However, as the UK remains captive to the US "special relationship", the EU will continue to have a difficult time forming an economic and foreign policy which might give it a level playing field. The US, I might add, is well aware of this and has encouraged EU admission of many other nations that view us favorably in order to prolong this problem.

If China continues to rise as an economic force and more lesser-developed nations start using the EU as the backing for their currency instead of the dollar, we could see US power fall even farther. As our economic might falls, there would be less incentive for other nations to fear our bullying them with economic sanctions, tariffs, and boycotts. It's when the even the citizens of the US start to see us losing our special place that I see a backlash forming. We have become such a jingoistic nation that it will take threats to our superiority to truly motivate most Americans.