• weeeeum@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    10 months ago

    Unfortunately it may be impossible because of game theory. In a perfect world everyone would get along and no one would have to dump billions into the military. That’s impossible because there’s always a “rat” that uses this opportunity to invade and conquer defenseless territories. A rat kind of like Russia or soon potentially China.

    Because of them now everybody has to invest in their military and we are all worse off because of it, this can also apply to nukes. One power will exploit their nuclear advantage over one who doesn’t, which is why the USSR and CCP, DPRK, and Pakistan developed nukes, their rivals had one too.

    I encourage you to watch veritasium’s video on the concept of game theory and how it affects most things in our lives.

  • Omega_Haxors@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    10 months ago

    Superpower wars are expensive and extremely unrewarding. Neither wants them. Sometimes they may talk the talk but when it comes to dedicating the next 10 or 20 years to a constant resource drain with no chance of recovering any of that, they’ll find any excuse to get out of it.

  • CanadaPlus@futurology.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    They know the answer already, and are probably both trying it.

    In US terminology, since that’s the language I know, they try for “competition” rather than “conflict”. The difference being whether they respect each other’s sovereignty for the most part while trying to bury the other, and don’t take straight-up military actions.

    To achieve this, you provide a long series of “offramps” - opportunities to pause and de-escalate - on the path between peace and MAD, and ensure there is no benefit to either party to do any specific escalation. Mistakes will happen, both deliberate and accidental, but they’re very unlikely to all happen at the same time, so even if things get tense there’s offramps left, and game-theoretically they will take one because nobody wants a full-scale nuclear conflict.

  • davel [he/him]@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    I suspect this question assumes that all “superpowers” are the same, namely that they’re all capitalist imperialist states.

  • HikingVet@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    Who is the second super power?

    EDIT: Got a lot of tankie cope going on in this thread.

    The US is a superpower if china is.