I can’t think of anyone who does this
better than Mearsheimer

Mearsheimer’s reasoning is a little (or actually a lot) skewed. Not to mention so paranoid as to ironically bring about precisely the outcome he seeks to avoid.

He has, if I recall correctly (and apologies if I am wrong), actually acknowledged that China, for one, has no animosity towards the West, and does not seek to overthrow or bring an end to our, or any, socio-economic system or way of life. They just don’t care about that.

IMHO, the main “existential danger” when it comes to both China and Russia is that they are powerful enough to simply ignore the West’s (to include Japan) “commands” and “decrees” and keep on following their own paths, in the case of China, thus far, without recourse to violence.

That’s VERY bad for the United States (the chief Western empire) on many levels.

1) It sets a bad example for the rest of enslaved, oppressed and coerced humanity. Even the comprador, complicit elites of the non-West, Third World are beginning to resent the G-7. Ominous.

2) It drives home the point that the West’s power has real limits, shattering the myth of invincibility. The emperor may still be clothed, but his coat has holes and is in tatters.

And 3), the independence of China/Russia, inadvertently, coincidentally (not deliberately), presents an alternative, and to many countries, attractive model, all with no real intention of “displacing”, the United States.

The BRICS just want to move forward, regardless of what the West wants. They’re not against us, they mean to simply bypass us. IMO, such is their right as sovereign nations.

In essence, Mearsheimer says China and Russia MUST be defeated and broken not because they have bad intentions, but for the sin of being powerful in their own right independent of the United States.

Put another way: Mearsheimer’s logical framework: “We must make an enemy of China, simply because China is powerful enough to maybe/possibly be an enemy (but hasn’t taken any hostile actions)”.

HUH?!? “Yeah, I should shoot this other guy. Why? Because he’s capable enough that he’s able to . . . . shoot right back”. Sheer grand strategic paranoia, and suicidal.

You see how stupid and insane that sounds? Now apply that reasoning to the present day, real world. “You can exist, as long as we overshadow you. If we don’t overshadow you, YOU ARE A THREAT.”

That’s my main beef with Mearsheimer.

Plus, he speaks with arrogance, and attempts to not-so-subtly intimidate, giving Americans a worse name than we already have. He publicly threatened an Australian audience, in their own country, that they would be made to suffer if they did not get on board the anti-China crusade. Unbelievable.

He calls himself a “realist”, to make his skewed views more palatable and to give them more seeming weight. But he starts with a premise, American Supremacy, then seeks to make that premise look rational.

Not buying it.