[herbst]

> but at least if you discount US' human rights violations in the Middle East

Can we not just discount the issues with china then as well?

I think the one big difference here is that nobody expects china to invade their country, violate human rights within their own country or put pressure on their local politics for various reasons (other than random trade agreements maybe).

All things nearly everyone pretty much expects from the U.S. at this point.

[cageface]

China has figured out that economic invasion is a lot cheaper and more effective than bombing. Sadly the US still seems to be a long way from learning this lesson.

But if you think China doesn't exert pressure in other countries' politics you haven't spent much time in Asia, particularly SE Asia.

[mtanski]

The favorite method of centrist leadership in the recent past has been exporting neoliberalization economic policies and the neoliberalizm of trade deals (think NAFTA).

That's one of the component that's given the US a lot of influence and power dealing with the world. This was aided by how inward the competing powers were.

There's been a backlash against those ideas as foreign policy both inside and outside the US. As evidenced by the current president.

It's my hunch that in the long run the US will miss the privilege and benefits that have come from that asymmetric relationship. 4 or 8 years can be a long time and a lot can happen when were standing still.

Just look at England, they've never fully come to grips that the sun has set on the English empire.

[herbst]

Probably not long enough, but long enough to know that the chinese are most buying and building things other than invading (even less killing) for new wealth in other countries. At least in the last ~10 years or so.