"Not beholden", like say, unilaterally waging war on another country without congressional approval?

Unfortunately congress did vote. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorization_for_Use_of_Milit...

They didn't declare war, which is unfortunate but congress did approve.

This came after the fact, which is not supposed to be how it works.

Free Trade for Free Countries is a decent slogan! I’ve long been disappointed that this isn’t the mainstream position. Anything else feels very hypocritical (for the US).

Eh, economic engagement with unfree countries got us south korea, Taiwan, probably more in eastern Europe: Albania comes to mind. Afaict disengagement only worked with south Africa.

There’s roughly three levels free vs unfree:

1. Democratic countries that mostly abide by international law and the rules-based order.

2. Non-democratic countries that also mostly abide by international law and the rules-based order, because they benefit from it more than not doing so.

3. Non-democratic countries that reject international law and the rules-based order.

The US trades with #1 and #2, and was hoping to make China into #2. But unfortunately it doesn’t look like that’s going to happen, China is in the grey area between #2 and #3 and probably trending toward #3.

Beautifully said.

2 works for small countries, if countries are large enough they can afford themselves to be a 3, which otherwise is reserved for failed states and outright dictatorships.

My goal wouldn’t be to get them to change. We just shouldn’t get involved.

Democracies are beholden to the stupidity of the masses (see trump). They are also beholden to dead lock as multiple interests wage war on some policy and nothing gets done.

Democracy is also much more beholden to corporate interests as much of the US government has already been infiltrated by big business.

I think the US has grown up. We are well past the time of worshiping the idealism of democracy and we are now actually seeing the raw truth. That democracy is simply one side of a coin. It is just one side of debate between monolith and micro services.

Obviously you haven't lived in a dictatorship. Spend a few years in Russia or China or Turkey or Iran and then come back with your hypothesis about the raw truth.

I lived in both the US as a citizen and china as well.

Some people are naturally born slaves and do prefer living in a society where their lives are completely controlled by a strong arm dictator...

Hello, Hitler, how is the weather in Hell?

No, some people know what they are talking about. You, unfortunately, don't because you haven't lived in China.

Have you? Honestly, pompous "democracies" aren't fundamentally different to the rest of the world, when you start actually experiencing the day to day living.

There are lots of "dictatorships" where living is better then in lots of other "democracies", but this is not something you'll figure out from your internet feed, you really have to actually travel.

Exactly. The answer is not so clear cut black and white. Centralized governments tend to be more efficient but lack the checks and balances of a democracy. Singapore, for example, is a good showcase for centralized government.

Get over your Trump Derangement Syndrome, please.

There are other, more recent and more fitting examples you could choose if you want to use a specific politician.

You could also have used research that shows that people in general support or reject policies based on what party they think came up with them and not based on the (sometimes quite obvious ahead of time) consequences of those policies.

Except this isn't true. Trump was voted into power by the lower middle class simply for having rhetoric that was different from the status quo. He was "real" and his style largely resonated with an america who was tired of politicians acting fake and tired of digging through all the complexity of the economy and politics to figure out what was wrong with the country that caused them to work two jobs just to support themselves.

Trump instead lowered taxes for the rich. He was one of the rich, and he served himself. It was his rhetoric and dramatic conversational style that essentially caused people to unknowingly vote against their self interest.

I apologize for using the word "stupid" here. People and voters aren't stupid. Trump, however, was indeed an example of people not using the best strategy in the name of their self interest.

The USA also got rid of Trump peacefully. The Belarussians tried to get rid of Lukashenko and failed. And now their territory is being used to commit war crimes against Ukrainian civilians.

In democracies voters can fix their mistakes without risking their life and freedom.

Yes agreed. That's a huge benefit. But it also comes with a downside. The fix for the mistake can immediately by unfixed in a subsequent election.

What good is free trade is China's navy gets to countrol shipping routes? That's one card they are playing. The other one is controlling Russia in exchange for Taiwan.

They understood that building cheap and in great numbers is the key to success. They did this with the J-7 and now the J-10.