Superpowers. Do They Still Exist?

Err, we're not talking about superman or something. We're talking about countries being powerful, one of the most powerful; a superpower! Clearly, there are extremely powerful countries.

 

we are all doomed.

 

The term "superpower" will always exist until the end of civilization.
The United States will always be a powerhouse but China is sitting in the "superpower" throne.

 

I will respond to this with part of an earlier post i put up:

"Finally, China is not a superpower and the U.S. is not because they are completely dependent on each other. China buys U.S. bonds to keep the U.S. dollar up in value and the U.S. buys China's goods. Without China, the U.S. debt count would skyrocket even more than it is now and without the U.S. China would start losing money at a dramatic rate."

Greater self-sufficiency than dependency on other nations is a main part of a superpower. As much as people like to think it, China would not survive on its own without foreign trade, especially the U.S. China buys U.S. bonds to keep the dollar up (thus maintaining America) and America buys Chinese goods (giving China growth). A superpower would not need a foreign nation to this degree as they are a force on their own that, if separated from the world whether by war or shear hatred, they could survive for a reasonable amount of time to see their country rise up again.

With this comes the counter argument that "but a superpower would have to rely on foreign countries, how else could it get money to buy things?" Well, a superpower indeed does do foreign trade i do not deny that. But the sheer magnitude of its economy and the stability of said economy is partially what defines said superpower. Strong military, stable economy, and a prospering society all fit into some of the qualifications for a superpower.

This being said, to say that China today is a superpower would be to say that without foreign trade to the U.S. and Europe, China would be able to survive on their own. Without this massive foreign trade, China would go into negative profit, producing less and less goods and selling ever fewer of said goods.

So, to sum it up, China should not be considered a superpower for their reliance on other nations for their economic stability.

 

Alright what country, nation, faction, province, etc has been a superpower without reliance on another country.

 

Valid, but I was referring to the part where the previous poster said Japan has a huge population and could invaded another country for more land. I just meant they hardly have a military worth mentioning and doubt they could capture a sushi restaurant with it.

 

Alright, I'll rephrase what i am trying to state. Reliance on a country grants no influence in world politics. Our reliance on China gives us no position to declare that the world should be named the United Land Masses of the Milky Way. China's reliance on everyone else puts them in no position to do the same. Now, this is very much so a hyperbole, but holds the basic concept true.

Absolute Astronomy, quoting Alice Lyman Miller, defines superpower as "a country that has the capacity to project dominating power and influence anywhere in the world, and sometimes, in more than one region of the globe at a time, and so may plausibly attain the status of global hegemon."

Hegemon is a country that shows hegemony or the dominance of one nation over others.

Domination of a country would require semi-self-sufficiency. I said that i did not mean complete self-sufficiency, but the U.S. and Soviet Union during WWII and post-WWII era are good examples of superpowers. They influenced the world with merely their everyday actions and had no regard for the world's opinions. It was all about Democracy v. Communism. Actions taken by countries today are very centered around preserving their failing, or in China's case), prospering, economies.

So, self-sufficiency shows that a country can make demands without regard for the opinions of other nations. The U.S. and Soviet Union in the post-WWII areas are good examples as they survived predominately on their own production and had mostly independent economies. They only traded for the raw materials that they could obtain on their own, they just wanted more. As opposed to now where the US buys everything from toys straight down to the plastic to make the toys. The superpowers were "vertically integrated," controlling all aspects of industry from production to distribution. Now, they are mainly buying from other nations the finished products and rely on them for their goods.

 

Superpowers? No.

Special Abilitys? Yes.

 

way to not even read the thread..

 

I've seen that with a lot of posts.

 

I did read the thread. Get disputed on. Kthx.

 

Russia is a superpower, but has not been involved in foreign affairs lately, yet they are strong economically and militarily. China is growing stronger, potentially becoming the dominant economy. It could probably be called the strongest militarily only because of the size of its army, however technologically, they are still behind. The U.S. is only dominant in technology.

 

If you read the thread and still posted that, you're retarded.