Poll: Which superpower is the least bad at the moment?

[noname223]

Today, I read a new piece of Slavoj Zizek.
Here is the last passage.

At this point, some leftists are tempted to claim that today's China comes closest to such a mechanism of collective decision-making which regulates and constrains the market, taking care of the long-term interests of our survival. I am ready to accept that China is at this moment the least bad of the three superpowers (China, the US, Russia), but I think that the non-transparency of its system contradicts the Confucian harmony advocated by China as its model of social relations. Just recall the latest mega-purges in the Chinese army (half of the entire supreme command was removed): did Xi not do this as a supreme Predator acting without any public consultation? Again, I am not claiming I oppose this purge: there are good reasons to presume that Xi targeted the generals who were pushing China toward war (an attack on Taiwan), and in general, Predators do things which are necessary. What we all need are such strong acts, but not accomplished in a predatory way — if this is the only way left to us, we are truly lost.

I think this is a very controverisal take. I read Zizek's substack because his takes are often censored in the mainstream press. Friends of mine also debated which superpower is currently the least horrible. Both agreed Russia is the worst. But they were not sure whether China or the US is actually worse. I think to claim China was the least bad choice isn't the most controversial thing he expresse. It seems to be more controversial to say he is not claiming to oppose the purge within the Chinese apparatus. He gives a dictator like Xi the benefit of the doubt. I think the text should be thought-provoking anyway and well it is.

I am not sure where I position myself. The US revives imperialism and gives China and Russia a good excuse to invade Taiwan and Ukraine. Though, thus far China did not act on it. China is supporting Russia in its war against Ukraine. It helps Russia to circumvent sanctions. However, I think the US foreign policies have the potential to lit the Middle East on fire. And destabilize a region with an extreme fallout risk for generations to come.

Considering domestic politics I think the US is still better than China. There is an opposition. There are free media outlets. I don't deny the media system is under severe pressure. But imagine the Daily Show, New York Times, Substack authors within China's system. That's unimaginable.

I am not fully sure. And I had no time to consider all the arguments. But the impact on the global order the US seems to be more aggressive and worse. Imagine what our media outlets would report if China threatened Greenland, Cuba, Denmark let alone invade/abduct foreign leaders. Considering domestic politics there still seems to be more freedom in the US compared to China.

What do you think?

 

[UserFromNowhere]

I think both have their pros and cons. For example, while you do trade off privacy and liberty in China, you also have access to a lot more social welfare and equality of outcome than America. In America, you have more privacy and liberty (although that's questionable) than China, but you don't have access to social welfare or equality of outcome. Both states have an impact on the grand scheme of the world, whereas the dominance of the liberal system or hypothetical dominance of the "communist" system influences the domestic politics of other nation states due to the bandwagon effect.

US neoliberal influence across the world undermined the more collectivist and harmonious nature of other countries, which even caused China to fall under the ideas of a more capitalistic system (even if there is still state regulation. I personally value privacy and liberty, but I do think China's social programs and regulations make a compelling argument against the global dominance of the neoliberal order, and given these two are the major superpowers (excluding Russia due to it's lack of economic might) rather than societies that more combine the two systems (Sweden, Switzerland, Germany, or Japan among other states come to mind) which would be preferable but is unlikely, it results in a conflict.

I don't think either of the two are less bad in terms of what their executive does without supervision, Trump's recent bureaucratic purges are quite similar to China's purge of military command, it's just that the USA has more power to act without restriction on the global stage at this point.

 

[Pessimist]

The US, but I'm not a big fan of Trump.

 

[EternalShore]

Sure, the US is in its 2nd Gilded Age rn, but the current Chinese government is straight-up evil (altho, I know some users will disagree, they don't appear to be in this thread anyways~)~ Even discounting the genocide, persecution, and purges; consider that they're the main reason North Korea exists rn~
Meanwhile, Russia is a dictatorship~ ngl, the current methods with which Russia and the US are waging the wars they choose to wage are very odd to me tho... The US more than likely isn't going to liberate Iran by bombing it into smithereens, altho I sure wish they could~ I just hope they can install a better government because all those deaths would've been for nothing then~ :(
Meanwhile, Russia is murdering its entire youth population in order to gain more land and people before its population collapses while they simultaneously betray all their allies~

Misc.: One of the worst things tho is that China's surveillance system, which we were told was so awful about them in MS, has been adopted in a different form by the US and probably in another form by Russia too~ >_<
China is still very "harmonious" as they're presently in internal peace~ ngl, I was shocked and dismayed when I saw someone from China discussing Liu Bei and Cao Cao in YT comments~ They said that as a kid, they cheered for Liu Bei, but now, about how it doesn't matter who the "good guy" is (and presumably how much evil they did either) as long as they bring peace~ :/ that's just propaganda ig~ >_<

 

[untothedepths]

i dont believe there should be world powers.

 

[Leonard_Bangley39]

I hoenstly dont get how anyone can try to argue that its anything other than the US. Or that China is the least evil. It doesnt matter if you like or hate trump, if youre a republican or a democrat, liberal or conservative. You can bring up as many points about the US government that you dont like but at the end of the day, the fact you can even bring those up just proves that the US is the least evil.

If you even try saying even half the stuff people say about the US government about the chinese or russian governments while living there, they will just arrest or kill you. they are DICTATORSHIPS. not the "dictatorship" that the media tries to claim america is becoming. im talking the real deal. the "break down your door and drag your ass to a prison where you'll do forced labor until the day you die because you said aomething bad about the leader" kind of dictatorship.

 

[Hvergelmir]

I hoenstly dont get how anyone can try to argue that its anything other than the US.

I did hesitantly go with China in this poll. I'm from Europe, and I don't hate Trump, though I'm a bit worried about the implications of his swift and often surprising actions.

I very much like free speech, but it's not the only relevant factor in a good society. I'm also growing more and more critical of democracy, as currently implemented. I'm no longer convinced that democracy will continue to be viable, given the current technological and cultural trajectory.

Let's do a quick comparison of anecdotes. It's not meant to be a proof, but an arbitrary list things nudging me in favor of China - a partial answer to "how anyone can try to argue".

The free democratic West declares the climate a top priority, presenting themselves as superior to China an others.
Ten years later, China invests the most money in renewables, and leads the transition to EVs.
Meanwhile, the West are afraid of nuclear power, and China builds the first Thorium reactor.

The west declares an AI cold war, while worrying about consolidation of power into a few companies. China releases the most powerful open source models, democratizing AI.

The west declares that wars of aggression is wrong, but that a strong military is important.
The West then get involved in frequent wars, while China builds an impressive army, but stays out of conflict.

And the list goes on... To me it appears as if, despite its autocratic governance, and sometimes violently oppressive methods, China seem to be doing the right things - not just the things declared 'right' by the dictator, but according to Western values.
Meanwhile, The West, despite its democracy and free speech, does not seem to follow its own ideals.

I'm personally uncertain. We're talking huge complex entities, and cultures I've never experienced. But I think there are convincing arguments to be made, and I think it's worth taking note, rather than dogmatically supporting the West.
I agree with your assessment that the U.S. is a relatively free country, and that I wouldn't want to be a political dissident in China.

 

[stopMotionSickness]

In all authoritarian states, the biggest threat is hardly ever the leader themself, but their succession. A competent authoritarian leader will outperform a competent liberal leader, 9 times out of 10; the controls and pluralization of power are genuinely a barrier to good policy, as well as bad. But when the authoritarian leader dies, 9 times out of 10, everything they built will be immediately engulfed in a power struggle, since no accepted system exists for deciding who should be in their place (since those very mechanisms likely had to be destroyed to consolidate that power in the first place).
And so, in the US we have a wildly incompetent and actively destructive, but arguably still liberally bound leader. Versus a clearly competent but authoritarian leader. In my mind the question hinges on just how much America is willing to stick to its actual liberal principles (liberal here meaning a government with limited and separated powers, generally leashed by popular support).

In case anyone didn't know, January 6th and all of Trump's slogans about "reforming voting" and "fake news" were and are about defying the electoral process. After the 2020 election, he was told by all his staff that he lost and there was no fraud evidence to be found, and he went on and said everything was fraud. Filed dozens of cases in several states, lost every single one, overwhelmingly because of a lack of standing (meaning the judge didn't see the claims or evidence as even worth litigating). FOX News and Rudy Giuliani got sued for billions for their lies, and lost their cases; interestingly only offering the defense that outright lying was their 1st amendment right, and NOT that they had good reason to believe what they were saying. The grand scheme of J6 was where Trump's team got together 7 slates to outright forge electoral votes for the states they lost; that when they showed up to congress and disputed the actual electors, the "confusion" would be sorted by the Vice president, as laid out in the Constitution, which Trump planned to have just decide it in his favor. The day that was all meant to go down was January 6th, while congress was certifying the electoral votes, and Trump made a riot because Mike Pence was refusing to go along with the scheme, hence their fallout to this day. All of this constitutes a completely unbridled attempt at a coup, and if it was happening in any other country with any other people, everyone in the US would immediately recognize this to be true, if they knew.

All that to say that there's legitimate concern to believe the US just doesn't have the succession process it once did. It seems fairly obvious that Trump to this day does not give a single damn about elections, and has no issue undermining any he lost. He also doesn't give a crap about separation or limits on power, as seen by him ignoring congress on everything he does. It strikes me as fully plausible that in 2028 there will be no serious discussion of election, instead only a conflict only over who should succeed Trump's cult of personality. He already pardoned all of the people trying to torch congress on J6 for holding an election, so his base knows that if they succeed, that all means are permissible. If that's the case, then there exists no meaningful distinction from the US government and authoritarianism. That would put it to a tossup of competence, which is soundly in China's favor.