Why?
When China becomes uber powerful, will the state then stop controlling everyone's thoughts?
Will they have basic rights then?
Or will corruption go away?
Will people still be looking to flee China when it's #1?
> Will they have basic rights then?
> Or will corruption go away?
> Will people still be looking to flee China when it's #1?
If you assume that the future will be basically like the past (untrue, but better than most assumptions), then the answers are:
1. It doesn't now, it can't now, and it won't be able to then. But it definitely won't stop trying.
2. Yes, in much the same way they have basic rights now. Which is to say, they will enjoy what their culture thinks of as basic rights, but probably not what you think of as basic rights.
3. No.
4. Yes, just as people have sought to flee every country in the past or present.
Some people like the story and rally around it.
As our world gets more and more hyperconnected whatever delusions groups of people have of their favorite story being accepted as global narrative get tested very fast.
And break down faster if there is no universal appeal. There are enough examples playing out around the world.
All these nationalistic stories will keep breaking down.
There are 5 billion more people in the world than the Americans and Chinese put together. They aren't going to blindly bend over to either an American or Chinese narrative.
We like to live in this dream state that the most powerful countries matter. They dont. Ask the Taliban.
The Indians and Russians and Europeans and South Americans and Africans don't give one shit about Make America great again or Make China great again.
What will play out is a collapse of these narratives in spectacular fashion.
You mean ask a bunch of people living in the stone age, who are getting killed en masse what they think of their power relative to others?
I think you picked maybe the worst possible example: just because a group can live on rice in inhostile territory doesn't mean that the power ratio is negated.
If the Americans wanted to actually destroy the Taliban it wouldn't be that hard, it would just come at a cost nobody wants to pay.
Besides, anybody can ask the same. If the US keeps its power or gains even more, will the cops stop killing black citizens? Will the big corps stop have politicians in their pockets? Will Wall Street lackeys get out of power? Will mass surveillance stop? Will wars for oil and "national interests" stop? Will the middle and working class stop declining? Will healthcare be affordable?
I call rubbish.
Corruption is corruption and nobody ever accepts it as 'part of our historical culture'.
Having a corrupt government official take your home because they want to build a mall is pretty much Universally bad.
Being thrown in a concentration camp because of your religion not something anyone wants.
Having to bribe officials to get where you want is not something anyone wants.
Being told how many children you can and cannot have is not something anyone would rather live with.
I accept that people will accept differing levels of surveillance etc. - but in the end there are universal issues here.
You'd be surprised. Some cultures don't like rigid "law and order" on everyday life, and prefer bendable laws in some cases (even if are OK with stricter laws in others). It has a lot to do with historical development and custom law, rather than some sterile "law trumps everything" being everybody's utopia.
>Having a corrupt government official take your home because they want to build a mall is pretty much Universally bad.
Sure, but having a strong government and not blow up a 1.6 billion country into competing factions and civil war chaos is pretty much universally badder.
Most of the "bleeding hearts" (for the countries of others), assume once you break down the "corrupt government" a functional democracy will follow.
The never bother wondering whether a functional democracy is even possible at that scale, nor to ponder the other places they've turned into hell-holes with their interventions.
Nor do they care much about sovereignty, the idea that people should fix those things for themselves, and not have some third parties (with their own ideas, culture, and interests) impose a solution.
>Being told how many children you can and cannot have is not something anyone would rather live with.
At the individual level maybe. But having too much population grown in your country is not something "anyone would rather live with" either.
What if you're not American nor Chinese?
And America and China really do want to both be the lone superpower. (I'm just not convinced of this premise by the way, but let's assume it's true)...
Then the rational thing for you to do is look back on the past, what? 70 or so years and ask yourself has it been good for you or bad for you? That should give you a pretty good idea of which nation you'd be best off with as the super-power.
Then kick back, grab some popcorn, and hope that your guy wins.
I mean, if you're not American or Chinese...
it's easy.
Again, why would this be an issue? I mean, for us here in the USA? Why would we not want to be rid of the "privilege" of being the "super" power in what is clearly a multi-polar world?
First, the vast majority of our debt is owed to ourselves, not to foreigners.
Second, what makes our dollars so valuable, is not our status as a super-power, but our willingness to pay it back. Think of it this way, the big ticket items in the US government budget are the military, Medicare/SS, and debt service. Now we hear all the time talk about cuts to the military or medicare/ss. But no one even CONSIDERS talk about cutting debt service. THAT is what makes dollars so valuable. (It's also why the vast majority of them are eaten up by us and not foreigners.)
So I'm not convinced at all that our dollars are valuable because we are a super-power. Russia was a super-power, and no one was stockpiling rubles. Likewise, Switzerland is not a super-power, but everyone should have some swiss francs.
That doesn’t give them leverage to print money inflation-free.
What allows the US to do it is the USD’s status as the leading global reserve and trade currency. That status is based on habit and influence.
I'm not saying that America is innocent (by any means), just that I would rather them hand the torch to a country that's more honest to their own people and operates more openly.
So, China then? At least with party rule, what you get is what you see.
China is definitely no friend of the US, nor an enemy (at this point), but definitely a genuine competitor. If the US does not recognize this and act accordingly, China will indeed replace it as the world superpower. If you're Chinese, this would be great news, if you're American it would be concerning. It's always going to be bad news for one of the parties due to the conflicting ideologies.