The only major problem I worry about is the fact that China will overtake us as the most powerful nation on earth. The US isn’t perfect and we can be overly hypocritical, but China is far worse on human rights.
Predictions by Goldman Sachs say that in 2050 the economy of China will be 70 trillion. The EU, US and India will be about 35 trillion each. I’m guessing due to all the corporate theft, China’s military will probably be beyond ours by then too.
As an example the US has sanctions against Iran, Syria, Sudan, Myanmar, North Korea, etc. because of their human rights abuses. China has trade with them and is not interested in their human rights. So that is a concern, will a China superpower change how smaller countries view human rights. Since we are a country that supported a ton of dictators in latin america and asia in the last 60 years, that probably sounds naive. But I think human rights and democracy in the globe would be better with the US as a superpower. They’d be even better if Canada were a superpower, but that isn’t going to happen.
However even if the US loses its #1 status, the OECD nations combined will still have a lot of clout in international politics. Plus many middle income countries have a lot of respect for human rights and liberal democracy, and they are growing in power too.
No offense man, but you’ve got things backwards. You know why China has such a poor human rights record ?
Well, in large part because it’s a bloody police state to begin with, I’ll give you that. But also because the West, not just the US mind you but every Western nation over the last 20 or so years, has treated China like a damn piggy bank. We’ve been all too happy to make a ton of money building that country up, and even more money buying stuff from them once it was built up. All the while not really wanting to know what they were doing with the money or how they managed to get their prices so low. Sweatshops ? We liked them so much we’ve got some for ourselves now.
Far from spreading human rights, we’ve been enabling the police state. We’ve been taking advantage of poverty, and slave wages, and horrible working conditions. We’ve been working hard to maintain them too, cause they’re our profit margins and our low-price guarantees. We’ve done that all over the place.
So don’t talk to me about spreading human rights. We don’t care about that any more than the Chinese do those of North Korea. Our insatiable desire to get high alone sets half of the world ablaze, and our gas guzzling does the other half. We’re really, really in no position to be giving ethics lessons to anyone.
For a second there, I thought you were being sarcastic, but then I saw you were in South Korea, the only country where people get insulted when you are say they are second best to America in films or second best to Japan in electronics, I believed you.
Well, in the fifty years or so before America’s crown is snatched by China/India/Japan/whichever-country-takes-over-next, that country’s own culture and values might change, radically, perhaps in a direction you would consider positive. (After all, look at how radically the American view on – for example – gender issues has changed in the last fifty years!)
More importantly, though, there’s always the possibility that whichever country takes over as military/financial global leader might not necessarily be interested in aggressively spreading its culture and its values, the way the US has done (through Hollywood, etc.) for the last hundred years or so.
I can easily imagine a super-rich China in 2050, occasionally sending out troops to quell civil wars all over Africa and America and whatnot, not bothering to export its films and its music.
Either that or you let go of all the burdensome responsibilities that come with being #1, and start enjoying life. Again, look at Great Britain: Lost its Empire in the 50’s, then spent the 60’s rockin’ out to The Beatles. Not a bad way to go, eh?
I think it is a mistake to assume that China will just smoothly progress to having a per-capita GDP anything like developed countries. If it ever happens, there will be major bumps along the way. The developed countries all rate highly on things like liberty, property rights, fair treatment by the law, democracy. China is way behind on all those scores and has a lot of work to do to catch up. It’s not going to just post 15% growth a year from now until 2050. A wealthier middle class, for example, means trouble for the current ruling party. Those middle class people are going to demand more and more say in running the country.
The fall of Rome was more of a gradual transformation over a period of centuries. By the time Romulus Augustus was disposed by some cheiftan from Germania or wherever, probably almost no one cared at that point.
OTOH, the German Empire, Austro-Hungarian Empire, Ottoman Empire, and Russian Empire all sort of collapsed spectacularly as a result (or the cause) of WWI.
Whatever happens in global military or economic geopolitics, the United States will continue to be a huge, rich, strong, fully-developed country on a continental scale. And the world will continue to watch American movies and listen to American music.
Living up to a philosophical ideal of fairness and being the best of a number of imperfect alternatives are two different things. I’ll take the latter if I can’t get the former.
China faces many problems in the future that I believe will limit its progress and possibly lead to its downfall.
“The population of China will reach 1.5 billion by 2033”
“the labor force will reach 1 billion by 2016”
"The male-to-female ratio reached 119.45 in 2009. "
“4 to 6 percent of babies born each year - between 800,000 to 1 million children - were born with defects”
“elderly population peak by 2040, when there will be 400 million people aged over 60”
“the migrant population has reached 200 million”
America first in what? World health ratings we are 37th. Internet speed, 12th. Life expectancy 31st.
We are number one in jailed citizens though. I am sure we have the most millionaires and billionaires.
What’s going to be different is that the leading economies are going to be not just colonizers and exploiters of the third world as in ages past. They’re going to be the third world - exploiting the living fuck out of their own people. The leading economies will be oligarchies, and that has to have an effect on world politics.
Even assuming the US already is moving toward economic oligarchy, how much more friendly toward democratic government can the world get with oligarchs calling the tune economically? Have we reached Peak Democracy?
Conditions are vastly different from back then. They didn’t piss off entire generations of Middle Easterers willing to blow themselves up just to take out a few of them or have to deal with the possibility of rogue nukes, etc., etc. etc. The opportunities for quick revenge were far fewer in those days. I’m not trying to be a doomsayer so much as I’m saying things have the potential to be more volatile, more quickly than back then.
I wouldn’t mind taking a break. But to me the question is not where I want America to stand in the rankings. It’s what country do I want to be number one.
I’d have no problem with a world where the United Kingdom or New Zealand or the Netherlands was the world superpower. But none of them are likely to replace the United States in first place.
Because Britain was replaced by us. Suppose the Reich had been the power that replaced Britain as #1. I’m pretty sure Britain would not be enjoying a peaceful retirement.
