In the narrowest sense, a superpower has the military might to force the world to acquiesce to hegemonic resolve (for example, the Soviet Union). Then there are economic superpowers that influence capital flows and global growth rates. When they struggle, the world does too. Finally, there are soft superpowers, nations that "own" universal values.
American strengths and weaknesses. In response to the brouhaha over the American debt ceiling, a correspondent for the German newspaper Die Welt wrote in July, 2011: "Out of the American twenty-first-century crisis could come the downfall of the dominant power of the twentieth century." His sentiments, perhaps overheated, are a reminder that nothing lasts forever. It is to be hoped that America's disorientation, triggered by the rise of China, political polarization, and a hangover of material self-indulgence, is not permanent. Even if GDP growth slows due to protracted deleveraging, the combination of a growing population and high per capita income ensures continued economic sway. America's military budget, currently eight times that of China, will continue to underpin geopolitical clout, even as the country's status of as an 800-pound gorilla diminishes in a multi-polar world.
American values -- as opposed to its political system -- will have global appeal for generations. Individualism -- the encouragement of society to define oneself independent of society -- does not travel well, but respect for the dignity of the common man touches all hearts. Iconic American brands such as Nike and Coke, vessels of hope, will never go out of style. American pop culture will not be challenged. Superstars -- from Lady Gaga to Michael Jackson to Angelina Jolie to Johnny Depp -- epitomize self-actualization, an aspiration that transcends culture.
China's soft power gap. China will undoubtedly evolve into an economic superpower. Its economy, within decades, will become the world's largest. Per capita disposable income will be constrained but aggregate spending power will be massive. China's industrial tentacles will be felt everywhere; traditional Chinese medicine will become more popular; and university students will learn Mandarin.
But China will not easily capture hearts and minds. The Chinese are ethnocentric. In large ways and small, an instinct to narrowly defend interests can be off putting:
First, the country maintains a chip on its shoulder regarding indignities suffered at the hands of foreigners between the Opium War and the establishment of Communist China in 1949. Strident outrage erupts whenever any country "hurts the feelings of the Chinese people."
Second, in a pinch, the government lapses into bullyboy petulance, throwing economic and military weight around the region. Diplomatic relationships with Japan and India are tetchy, largely because China remains brittle and insecure. Decades-long territorial disputes are unresolved.
Third, although Chinese society is more civil than a few years ago, daily life is still dog-eat-dog. Charity organizations are underdeveloped due to the party's reluctance to grant authority to any entity not under its direct control. Families, unprotected by rule of law, fend for themselves at the expense of individuals outside the clan. Anyone who fails to conform to convention -- for example, the handicapped or mentally ill, homosexuals, and AIDS patients -- is socially ostracized. Spitting and burping in public is commonplace. In crowded elevators and airplanes, mobile phone users lack volume control.
Fourth, Chinese, a language in which written and spoken forms are completely unrelated, remains a temple of linguistic exclusivity, a walled garden, frustratingly off limits to everyone but the most disciplined and determined foreigners. Every character requires memorization; every sentence must conform to structural imperatives.
When in Rome? Despite fascination with the world, the Chinese do not assimilate easily. China tries hard to be open -- road signs are bilingual, English is a passion, trade links are robust, macroeconomic policies during financial crises were constructive -- but, emotionally, the nation stands apart. Information is controlled. Defensive instincts militate against free and easy exchange of ideas. Until trust is established, foreigners are treated with polite suspicion. Manufacturers that acquire Western companies have difficulty integrating domestic and international management teams. The global footprint of China's state-controlled English-language news outlets is growing, but broadcasts are so dull international viewers tune out. The opening ceremony of the 2008 Beijing Olympics, impressive in scale and moving in ambition, lapsed into mawkish cliché when gears shifted from celebrating China's glory to preaching "One World, One Dream."
China's ability to leverage the assets of other cultures is peerless. Its superhighways are modeled after America's and major web portals are copycats of Western sites, tweaked for local users. The Party has also integrated itself into the fabric of the global trading system as a check against domestic weaknesses (for example, poor corporate governance, pliable standards of financial transparency). But, unless deemed "safe," foreigners are still confronted with awkward silences and robotic smiles. Bonding at the national level is a long ways off.
China will be an economic superpower only. There will be more than one tiger on the mountain.
Note: This article is adapted from my upcoming book, What Chinese Want: Culture, Communism and China's Modern Consumer, to be published by Palgrave Macmillan in May, 2012.
1. Modernize the traditional exam system (exams are still administered but they are for entry into universities)
2. Elimination of sinecures - positions that provide little or no work but give a salary. (China's modern governmental administration is a meritocracy).
3. Creation of a modern education system - studying maths and science instead of focusing mainly on Confucian texts, etc. (China has a modern higher education system that trains more scientists and engineers than we do)
4. Change the government from absolute monarchy to constitutional monarchy with democracy. (China has a one party parliamentary system with internal checks and balances)
5. Apply principles of capitalism to strengthen the economy.(market socialism)
6. Completely change the military buildup to strengthen the military. (China has a modern military with nuclear weapons)
7. Rapidly industrialize all of China through manufacturing, commerce, and capitalism. (just what China has done over the last 30 years.)
The Communists have basically fully implemented the dreams of China's late 19th century reformers.
--Deng Xiaopeng
I guess this is just a subject that provokes emotion and defensiveness, because it appears the quality of discussion here is largely reflective of simple emotion and go-to ideas with little breadth or subtlety.
After the Cold War ended the US had hegemony and will keep it for another decade or so, as the sole remaining superpower. Given that the US has 1/20th of the world's population that was an unnatural situation, and the future US will have to make do with "merely" being the first among equals, with other nations having an increasing say. However this has little to do with China directly. The Chinese Dream, so to speak, is "Get Rich Quick". As they succeed in this there will be a lot of poor countries that will look to China, what are they doing right that we have been doing wrong. During crises, as there surely will be, they might be looking elsewhere.
I don't think you will find many in China that consider the US to be their adversary, in fact China has looked to the USA (among other inspirations). Of course it tickles nationalistic pride to be able to say "we are number 1". More cars for instance is sold in China than in the US, making China the number 1 car market, but that ignores that there are four times as many people in China, and that there were hardly any cars in the country twenty years ago so there is a lot of catching up to do.
If you take away the currency devaluations China's economy is around the same size as the US economy.
The most common aspect of the stereotypes that we harbor towards people who are different from us is the assumption that they will always be in this "fixed" state and never change. Americans like to talk about how much their culture embraces change but from what I have seen, especially from the half of the nation that votes republican, that is one big fat lie. America is increasingly entrenched in ideologies and fearful of change. On the other hand, I have seen Asia, including China, more and more willing to embrace originality and change. So, honestly, I don't see anything inherent superior about American culture.
They are 2 very different systems. Each has freedom and constriction in different areas. What works here would NOT work there and vice-versa. I'm not sure if either one is 'better'.
The only conclusion I can come up with is to question the notion of this very elusive and slippery word: "Freedom".
I am sitting on a chair made in Denmark, at a desk from Indonesia, I'm drinking wine from Chile. Typing this on a laptop manufactured in China and distributed via the US. My house is warmed by 'green' energy from France, and my clothes are from all over the globe.
I own a small business and have staff living in the UK, Sweden, Switzerland, Italy, India and Bahrein. My clients are located all over the globe. I have friends living on all continents. My best friend lives 5000 miles away, and I talk to her more than my next best friend who lives around the corner.
There is not one US. There are many. There is not one China either. There are countless societies though, and they are not bound by country borders. Welcome into the 21st century.
America is the world's superpower still and will be for a long time to come. Many things made in China and India are made by American companies with American financing. Every economic and business trail in the world leads back to the US, and the fundamental reason is because Americans have worked harder, and smarter, than the rest of the world, and have also been friendlier to the rest of the world, for many hundreds of years. And that is why your American friends are welcome to live in many different countries, and why the immigrants of the world largely perfer America as a new home over any other country.
A great many wealthy Chinese wish to leave their own country, but Americans largely prefer to live in their own. Americans have long promoted freedom, human rights and have been kind to the world. I am not an American (I'm Canadian), but in my own travels I've consistantly found Americans to be the friendliest people anywhere.
I'm quite confident that the 21st Century will be a good one to be American, and that is at essence because of "core American values" - hard work, diplomacy, freedom, respect, human rights, etc. Don't expect America to lose it's stature in the world any time soon..
Yes, if by Americans we include the labor of slaves, and the resources stake from native Americans.
Let's not sugar-coat our history. These were an enormous capital down-stroke which allowed the country to grow exponentially. Having the only industrialized economy standing after WWII helped a bit, too.
I am an American born, raised and worked there in various parts of the country for 40 years, but no longer live there and probably never will again. As you might imagine, I have a very different point of view.
So long as 1.3 BILLION people wake up every morning demanding an every more protein-rich breakfast, China will be first and foremost a nation that struggles to feed itself.
Add to the mix their oversupply of young men and the restive provinces outside the urban-industrial centers, and China is more likely to implode than they are to explode.
Keep your eyes on MEXICO.
Nothing.
What would happen to the US if China refused to buy American products?
Nothing.
Now flip those questions around and ask what would happen to China?
China has $3 trillion in the bank at the Fed enough to buy all of the US farmland.
Doesn't pass the sniff test.
http://www.intel.com/jobs/china/sites/dalian.htm
Sort of not, since they are engineering their own things.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loongson
It's only halfway in jest that I'd point out that Intel's products are a rip-off of the abacus.
So the young people in Asia look to the west for social trends and styles. Western culture moves quickly and better represents the poorer classes because it comes from the bottom, (the poorer classes). Music, art, literature, in east Asia is for the most part, stiff and pro-establishment because the powers that be in these countries are stingy about letting its people make decisions effecting the culture. It's difficult for me to imagine a day when the people in power in this region allow this process to change. It's far too risky. It could upset the power structure and make their leaders obsolete. This is why I don't feel that China well ever find themselves on top culturally, which is what they really want. Power without love is empty.
I find it hypocritical to talk of how inherently "top-down" some non-white societies are when colonialism (where white people have authority over non-white people) is the epitome of a top-down social structure.
And, no, I'm not suggesting you "live somewhere else" ... I, too, have dual citizenship (EU) and am extremely critical of certain aspects of the US, but I have chosen to stay here (for now) as, to me, on balance, there is more good than bad -- though we definitely need to make big changes for the better (i.e. stop focussing on feeding the MIC/military and start rebuilding our infrastructure, educational system and providing goodwill towards other countries).
One can almost feel sympathy for some of the 1 percenters who struggle to keep up with the .01 percenters.