At a conference in the Fall about the US's place in the world I was talking to this this Yale professor woman about how I thought the rise of China and India in the world economy was just fine and that it was particularly dandy that formerly poor people were becoming more affluent. She wasn't having any of it. She wanted the US to remain dominant, and she sounded somewhat hurt about it.
The sight of Zheng Jie having beat Ana Ivanovic at Wimbledon, some nine months later, evoked a curious response from me. With oil and other commodities going through the roof and sovereign wealth funds snapping up US assets wholesale, the dissolution of US hegemony is no longer a topic for parlor discussion, it's a hard cold fact.
So all of a sudden Zheng Jie pops up and forces me to think, what happens when China and India start to really dominate world athletics, what then? Will all America rally round the women's softball team and a few other medal contenders and beam with pride? Or will be turn nasty and try to lash out with our military? (Oh yeah, as I said last week, we already did that)
We've taken for granted the fact that we dominate, and will soon be learning a lesson or three from other former empires such as the UK and Russia. We would do well emulate the former (in all matters save culinary).
Saturday, June 28, 2008
Secret lust for world domination
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I just enjoyed a biography of James Polk. In the debate between the Democrats and Whigs in the 1840s, the Democrats were expansionists, but opposed to internal improvements, while the whigs were opposed to expansion but in favor of internal improvements. The Whig Presidents were two and both died in office. What a different country we would have been.
Americans are better endowed (and have access to special creams to keep it that way) so we win.
Post a Comment