Liberal democracies must formulate a coordinated, competent response to international issues.
While the US-China trade war continues to dominate political discussion worldwide, the US itself has been experiencing an equally unsettling trend for some time.
American political scientist Graham T. Allison coined the phrase “Thucydides Trap” to refer to a propensity for conflict when a rising power poses a danger to an established great power’s hegemon status in a certain area or globally.
It comes as no surprise that a Thucydides Trap is being played out in the rivalry between the two superpowers of the planet. But the degree to which the social and political fabric of the US has deteriorated has been a surprise.
Republicans and Democrats, the two main political parties, are now at odds with one another, and tensions within US society have also seemed to be at an especially harmful level.
The nation is sharply split into two almost equal factions on a wide range of subjects. These vary from typical contentious topics like the right to bear arms, abortion, and taxes to basic concerns for the future of any society (such fostering fair economic development, tackling gender inequality and climate change, and updating the nation’s physical infrastructure).
The present political atmosphere makes it difficult to find consensus on many, if not most, of these issues. Those who attempt are often seen as betraying their own camp’s purpose. Both the left and the right have adopted “cancel culture” in society at large as their go-to strategy for dealing with anybody who dared to contradict widely held beliefs on either side. Even those members of their own party who do not follow the approved political orthodoxy get reproaches. This is concerning since a successful society ultimately consists of the desire to seek out common ground.
Media organizations dedicated to fostering ever-greater mistrust by providing voice to radicals at the poles have deepened the division in the US. The two news outlets with the most politically polarized audiences are Fox News and MSNBC, which are located on opposing extremities of the political spectrum.
The anti-democratic strategies being used in the winner-takes-all political duopoly in the US are the most alarming. It is now normal practice to use gerrymandering, discourage voting, and, if all else fails, challenge election results in court. In Georgia, for instance, rules that impose penalties on persons who offer water to those standing in line for hours to vote make the lengthy lineups at the few polling places that are still open worse — especially in neighborhoods with a majority of people of color.
It has become plainly evident that even democracy’s historically most fervent champion is not immune as tyranny is on the rise in democracies all around the globe. This internal conflict is seen with significant worry outside of the US. Globally, there are increasing concerns about whether a country that is so polarized at home can be trusted to be a responsible leader on the international stage.
The globe now confronts severe structural issues. These include the changing global power structure, the rise of authoritarianism, the digital disruption of our economy and communities, and climate change. These problems need coordination in both the development of remedies and their implementation. But who will take the helm?
China is working with a steadiness and internal cohesiveness that is persuasive, while the US stumbles domestically and changes its foreign policy with each transfer of the Oval Office. As a consequence, both skill and will are contributing to the growth of its power and influence. But its approach is often antithetical to the values of liberal democracy.
Liberal countries must devise a coordinated, effective response to the global issues we confront if we don’t want a very different future. To do it, the US must get beyond the polarization that is ripping the nation apart. If not, it won’t be in a strong position to take the lead.
It is helpful to go back on the well-known adage that George F. Kennan coined in 1947. To “create among the peoples of the world generally the impression of a country which knows what it wants, which is coping successfully with the problems of its internal life and with the responsibilities of a world power, and which has a spiritual vitality capable of holding its own among the major ideological currents of the time,” he advised the US, it would be wise.
China benefits from the fact that the US internal political landscape is corroded. More nations are likely to come under Chinese control unless the US gets its act together and is able to once again uphold Kennan’s dictum. The world could regret losing the US one day, however, since the principles promoted by despotic regimes do not provide a useful alternative.
Author
