I think the general concept of the Trump administration is that the economic dangers against China are simply mitigated by containing their expansionist tendencies. Others argue that an aggressive China does not translate into an economic threat. Integrating China into the international system helped China shape their perception in the world and their role in the global economy. The polarity between socialism and capitalism has narrowed because of the cooperative nature of both ideologies becoming similar in their role of consumption.
The United States’ and China’s military might gives legitimacy to the state corporations that are suitable for their own economic interests. Remarkably, both nations enjoy crony capitalism. In the US, 1% controls 99% of the country’s wealth. However, it is constantly being contested by new entrepreneurs and disruptive technology. The institutional structure of capitalism does not change because the corporate arrangement within the government rests on the global banks that now dominate not only the stock market, but the bond markets that institutionalize wealth among the few.
In China, economic reform reshaped and transformed China’s business climate. However, the liberalization of their economic environment has streamlined their state-owned entities as a policy that links their consumption patterns towards brand-named products. The industrial revolution of Britain and the US began at the turn-of-the-century. However, scientific socialism swept across Asia and Russia because of Karl Marx. The fundamental difference between Russia and China was that China was able to maneuver their industrial demand through consumer demand which was based on brand-name products that elevated the expectations of the middle class to belong with the masses.
The polarization between socialism and capitalism has rapidly narrowed. The real perpetual significance towards innovation has been characterized by China’s state authorities and regulators that have pushed innovation to propel their masses towards a middle-class state. No other country in the world has elevated hundreds of millions of people from poverty to an economic force as consumers of the world’s largest brands. Mind you the new corporate elites in China can enrich themselves, but the one-party state rulers will integrate and manage the social cohesion once deemed unthinkable.
China relies on order and cohesion not only in Africa, but their own geographical world that they live in and continue to push the boundaries upon. Order and cohesion are something that country can’t live without. China’s prosperity relies on the win-win mentality that all countries should abide their own culture and norms as long as growth is instigated in the world itself. China producers more cars, more iPhones, more semiconductors, and are able to transmit more transportation infrastructure towards impoverished nations to not only lift their partners towards a path of sustainable growth, but to beholden upon their own glory of the billionaires that they produce to forge this new destiny governing the One Belt One Road initiative.
The crossroads between socialism and capitalism had its birth in America. Even though technological advancements were perpetuated by the United States in the growth of their country, their failure was providing a win-win solution towards all countries rather than a select few. Europe's pragmatic approach towards China is not because they fear them, but because they understand the security of China's law and order and the country's growth prospects that inadvertently positions them to finance their infrastructure. What gives China and the United States legitimacy towards dominance and a rising power? It's military superiority that not only protects their interests, but allows for the expansion of China's virtues towards Africa, the Asia Pacific region, and their holistic belief that all can win with respect to growth, entrepreneurship, and innovation.
Many of my scholarly colleagues would disagree that the only virtue is drawn upon the Nobel Prizes won by Americans rather than the ones who believe otherwise. I believe that consumption is the only virtue in economics. It draws from mathematics, social science, and subtly with Darwin's survival of the fittest. The Americans who won all their Nobel Prizes failed to understand one critical thing; that we as humans are still creatures and our animal-like nature propels us not only to gather, but to dominate. The Russian-style of socialism unfortunately was not the type of capitalism that all could benefit from. It was all based on kleptocracy and means only individuals like Putin and his favored associates can benefit from the system.
Julius Caesar was a threat to the Roman Empire because he had so much wealth that he wanted to give back to the Roman people. Today, the biggest advocates in terms of paying their fair share of taxes include individuals like Warren Buffett and Bill Gates. That is why they started their own charitable organizations aimed at giving back some of their wealth to the masses.
Is China a threat? Only the corporate elites are the ones who should be asked this. These corporate elites want to make money through the domestic markets of India and China that enabled millions of people rise beyond the ranks as an established middle class through consumerism and brand products. Nothing has changed folks. If a country is able to offer the masses good health care and entrepreneurial opportunities that perpetuate capitalism then socialism and capitalism have essentially become the same in fulfilling the desires of their self-fulfilling prophecy in aiding children to get more than what their parents have. Capitalism and socialism derive on one aspect towards human nature; and that is consumption and order. The reason why is the universe has established order. The universal law has always been mathematics. Let the Nobel-prize economists assume otherwise..