[Unthinking Majority]

USA;

1- Grooming the public for aggressive confrontation with China.
2- Trump retarded domestic and international efforts to confront climate change.
3- Willfully negligent response to Covid risks allowing the disease to mutate and nullify any vaccines we develop.

1. China forcing the rest of the world's hand by being fascist imperialist a-holes.
2. Fair enough, though Trump is out of office. China is by far the #1 emitter.
3. Fair enough, though China's willful negligence created COVID.

Therefore, my choice is China and the USA. They'll burn us all to ashes or turn us into cybernetic slaves.

[late]

The assholes in power, and the sheep who turn a blind eye.

The species has achieved the Peter Principle, we have reached the level of development at which we are utterly incompetent.

Global problems demand global solutions, and most can't handle that thought.

[Patrickov]

We are saying "threats", which means "change for the worse".

The United States (and by extension, the Five Eyes) have been dominating the world stage for hundreds of years, even for parts of the world that had been resisting them (e.g. China). In a sense, if they are threats they are "immediate" threats, not long-term threats. Saying them as such is absurd.

Russia has recently fallen so is out of the question.

China, on the other hand, seems to be the rising star, and they are surely influencing all governments to be more authoritarian one way or another. IMHO China is the natural choice.

(EDIT)
The Muslim world is number 2, especially to the Western world. Of course, they are in reactionary stage after (centuries?) of bullying by Christian powers, but their tribality means the society will make a bad turn. If not for the Uighurs, China will be with them hand-in-hand.

India is number 2 3. They are less imposing and they are keen to maintain whatever democracy they have, but when absurdity of lawmaking comes to mind they can be as bad as China.

[Patrickov]

Global problems demand global solutions, and most can't handle that thought.

It's true that most are unwilling to handle it,
because such statements often induce a sense that the speaker is superior,
which means arrogance to most.

Sometimes it might be better to go into the details or actual action plans of the said solution.
People are that stupid, you know.

[ingliz]

China

Malta and China have enjoyed a long-standing friendship since the establishment of diplomatic relations in 1972, with Malta being one of the first European countries to establish relations with China.

[Patrickov]

Malta and China have enjoyed a long-standing friendship since the establishment of diplomatic relations in 1972, with Malta being one of the first European countries to establish relations with China.

IMHO it's a mistake on their part.

But more importantly, I have explained my point and you seem fail to even address it.

[Red_Army]

Obviously the US. The idea that the US ever has it's hand "forced" is just ridiculous, but American media uses that language constantly so I'm unsurprised to see it. The US is always put in an uncomfortable position and "reluctantly" using it's military that spends more than the 10 next biggest militaries combined.

The fact that ridiculous assertions like this follow a flippant comment about sheeple is similarly predictable.

[Patrickov]

The idea that the US ever has it's hand "forced" is just ridiculous.

Indeed it's ridiculous for some people to defend the US in such a gaslighted manner.

[JohnRawls]

Indeed it's ridiculous for some people to defend the US in such a gaslighted manner.

I think that it is okay to consider US a threat. I mean realistically if US has overwhelming influence on you or your country then obviously you are going to fear that influence one way or the other simply because it exists and you do not decide what it will choose. This has nothing to do with US being a positive or negative influence. This just shows that even if some hegemon is more or less positive in most cases, it will still be feared to a degree.

[late]

It's true that most are unwilling to handle it,
because such statements often induce a sense that the speaker is superior,
which means arrogance to most.

Sometimes it might be better to go into the details or actual action plans of the said solution.
People are that stupid, you know.

In the past, I have.

The responses are invariably tedious and depressing.

[Oxymoron]

I am embarrassed to say it, but the answer is US.
The LGBTSWRD lunatics, along with the Leftist BLM and the impotent majority is a recipe for disaster.
At this point Russia might be on the right side of history at this juncture.

[Tainari88]

I voted for the USA. Their war shit ideas killed my mother off early with uranium caused cancer.

Everyone who protested the toxic shit they threw got it at the same time. No doubt they are the world's war polluters.

[Beren]

I voted the USA because the strongest socio-economic, cultural, and political impulses still come from there and it will be so until my death I guess, and I consider both Trumpism and Wokeness threats to me. I also don't consider the EU a threat, rather the opposite, while Russia is not powerful enough and China is still too far (although COVID-19 came from there).

[Patrickov]

I think that it is okay to consider US a threat. ... This has nothing to do with US being a positive or negative influence.

After weeks I finally come up with a reply.

The point is not whether the US influence is being positive or negative.

If we stick to the question itself I have already explained my point in my previous post.

As for whether US is positive or negative, my belief is that the US way allows choice -- whether it's good or bad is relatively controllable -- even we can sign White House petitions for Pete's sake.

If people think the US is a threat, I dare to say it's partially their own problem rather than that of the US.

Countries like China, on the other hand, is actually led by a single entity without any (internal) check and balance. This is where the threat is.

Some people here simply don't understand how much appreciation should be given to the freedom they currently have.

[JohnRawls]

After weeks I finally come up with a reply.

The point is not whether the US influence is being positive or negative.

If we stick to the question itself I have already explained my point in my previous post.

As for whether US is positive or negative, my belief is that the US way allows choice -- whether it's good or bad is relatively controllable -- even we can sign White House petitions for Pete's sake.

If people think the US is a threat, I dare to say it's partially their own problem rather than that of the US.

Countries like China, on the other hand, is actually led by a single entity without any (internal) check and balance. This is where the threat is.

Some people here simply don't understand how much appreciation should be given to the freedom they currently have.

I understand the notion Patrickov and I agree actually.

This doesn't mean that the US is not a threat. This is a question that has many elements to it and it is not a simple question of who is bad and who is good. Some answer won't even be logical. For example, if you go really deep in to it, Taiwan is a threat to current China and some people would consider Taiwan a threat to current mainland China.

[skinster]

The U.S. got more votes than all the other options combined. I guess it's not just me then.

The idea that the US ever has it's hand "forced" is just ridiculous, but American media uses that language constantly so I'm unsurprised to see it. The US is always put in an uncomfortable position and "reluctantly" using it's military that spends more than the 10 next biggest militaries combined.

"The stumbling empire"

Yeah, no.

[MistyTiger]

Growing up in the US has been a huge struggle. As an Asian American, I used to feel so insignificant and inferior. I felt like I did not matter because I was not like everyone else, no matter how I tried. In college one philosophy professor mentioned "You cannot fit a square peg into a round hole" and I realized that I was the square peg who would never fit into that round hole. My very nature is different. I have always been stubborn and I do not like to just follow the crowd for no valid reason at all. I was never the blind follower type.

The US is aggressive and forceful in its diplomacy and marketing techniques. Having grown up with immigrant parents, I disagreed with the common ways. I think a lot of immigrants have lots of criticism about how Americans act but most are too afraid to voice their opposition. The US likes this "one size fits all" mentality. They like to generalize. They like categories. Generalizing is the lazy way. The US has a two-party system...they cannot be bothered to have more parties like Canada or Australia. Or the US largely supports just speaking American English. Who wants to bother with being bilingual or trilingual? Lazy. Americans are upset by signs in different languages. The rest of the world does that. In Tainan, most of the signs were in Chinese. Highway/transportation signs had some English. Just don't expect an old local on the street to be fluent in English.

I have seen a lot of inflexibility to change in the US. I tolerate it because this is the only country I have lived in. I was born here. I cannot change it. The US is not as progressive or adaptable as they want to be. Much of the country is still very conservative and backwards.

[Patrickov]

The U.S. got more votes than all the other options combined. I guess it's not just me then.

Well, I think most of you are wrong at least because you have been focusing on what's already happened, while the question states "long term".

Your quote seems to prove (?) that the US will cease to matter in the long term, which I think goes against the claim from most of you.

Well done for slapping your own group in the face.

[skinster]

Yes, a lot of us go by what is and what happened rather than what we imagine, well spotted.

[Patrickov]

Yes, a lot of us go by what is and what happened rather than what we imagine, well spotted.

Projecting any country other than the United States as the biggest long term threat is based on what's happening now, not imagination. The bolded part has never been in the equation.