Comment by CapitalistCartr
1 day ago
I could make a good case for the United States fitting that description, especially the bits about trade and agression.
1 day ago
I could make a good case for the United States fitting that description, especially the bits about trade and agression.
No, you could make a weak case for the US doing that by using vague definitions and a lot of handwaving.
The Chinese government does this a lot.
The number of black Americans in prison over weed for decades is not a weak case.
The US is complex antihero type.
While it definitely attacks threats and has perpetrated plenty of unjust deeds, it also is responsible for the food security of much of the world. It has lifted more people out of poverty than any other party. It has brought poor nations to the point of industrialization.
The US has been a far greater force for good in the world than evil.
The leadership changes frequently, so it's hard to point to any single responsible party. It's democratic, so its institutions are subject to scrutiny. The free press sheds light on corruption and rule breaking.
Despite changing immigration narratives, the US has been an early and strong proponent of multiculturalism and welcoming people.
With declining US hegemony, the world is likely to become a much more dangerous place. We'll see more economic strife, more war, higher costs, greater tensions.
but at least we will have alternative energy sources in Solar, wind, batteries and probably a Nuclear renaissance which might reduce the incentives on fight for Oil & Gas even if the fights move to other resources
China is doing really well in solar. Both domestically and globally, because they are providing cheap solar panels to the rest of the world. (Well, apart from those idiots with tariffs to 'protect' them from green energy.)
> fights move to other resources
Food (eg. protein, fisheries, etc.), water (eg. dams), materials (eg. rare earths), land, strategic geography, trade, labor, security, political upheaval, power struggles, sectarian violence, terrorism, religion, historical claims, climate, etc. etc. etc.
Under a single global order, disagreements were normally put aside to participate in global trade. As we begin to move to distributed trading blocs and factions, many of these disagreements will boil over. Parties won't step up to stop them.
The inevitable whataboutism.
Firstly it's not relevant to a discussion about China's behavior.
Yes the US under Trump has become increasingly authoritarian, but besides being not as oppressive as China, the US remains a democracy and there is a chance to vote bad people out of the White House and more importantly reverse the direction of the country.