Golden Arches Theory was intended as a joke. Trying to "debunk" a joke, does nothing to negate the trend of increased economic cooperation leading to decreased

Golden Arches Theory was intended as a joke. Trying to "debunk" a joke, does nothing to negate the trend of increased economic cooperation leading to decreased conflict. I think the author's own response is fitting to the sentiment in your comment: I was both amazed and amused by how much the Golden Arches Theory had gotten around and how intensely certain people wanted to prove it wrong. They...insisted that politics, and the never-ending struggle between nation-states, were the immutable defining feature of international affairs, and they were professionally and psychologically threatened by the idea that globalization and economic integration might actually influence geopolitics in some very new and fundamental ways. The link you posted at the end is a great example of what I'm talking about. The NYT has an incentive to scare you into thinking China is going to take over the US and destroy your way of life and imprison you in some dystopian hellscape. And so we must oppose them at all costs to protect our way of life, and subscribe to the NYT to read more about this growing conflict! Sounds exactly like the scary bedtime stories Hollywood told us about the USSR during the Cold War. Or the stories Newsweek told us of how Japan was going to dominate and overtake American business in the 1980s. Oh no! Not saying history will necessarily repeat and China will implode in a USSR-like manor, but, could it be that maybe those fears are just a little overblown? China is an aging, shrinking population with still a long way to go towards industrializing. And a dictatorship isn't usually a great way to organize a government if your goal is stability. Are you even willing to consider the possibility that maybe this deal was a mutually beneficial fair trade, with upside for both parties?