What will a Multipolar World look like in the future?

I have been hearing the term "Multipolar World" tossed around a lot recently in the news and in the last video I mentioned it, which made some of you question my ideas on the topic. So, I wanted to explain myself and talk about how I see a multipolar world and if China or any nation can be "on top" in this new world.

Since, many of you didn't agree with me in the last video, does this video help explain my position better? Do you still disagree with me? Leave a comment and let me know.

Also, a VPN because it might help:
_________________________

FOLLOW US ON OUR TRAVELS:
_________________________

[colonylaser]

Totally agreed. May be we can pull back a few oversea bases and use the money to start helping our own needy, low income citizens, and failing infrastructure. It'll be good for us too.

[dodid]

Magnificent analysis as always. Was reading a FT article today "How the Ukraine war has divided the world" and was thinking that that Beijing guy might have a video on this interesting topic. Lo and behold, he did!

[truthmatters]

You're right. The world needs to be multipolar, and the old world order needs to be updated to the new reality. One country should never dictate their dominance over other countries and the old rules written by and only benefit certain countries need to be revised to reflect the new situation in the world. China will play the role as a powerful spokesperson for the weak.

[itsmebe]

In a multi-polar world, nobody is on top, but there will be multiple centers and peers. It means there needs to be improved diplomacy, adherence to international law, and everyone abides by the rules they signed on. To me, this is like the United Federation of Planets like in Star Trek.

[michaelhui]

Your analysis is correct not just this time but most of the time.
You will build a large followers in times with your objective assessments of most issues you have picked and presented.
However one word stand out to me is (dominance).
Perhaps like you said more balanced and co-existence practice to keep the world in peace.

[ibvocean]

古人云：天下之大，合久必分，分久必合。
一超多强，此为合；多强鼎立，此为分。

[夢裏不知身是客]

I like your tent analogy. Each pole may also be a different aspect of power or influence. Since the end of WWII the U.S. has dominated in almost all aspects of the overall power, such as industrial production, economy, finance, military, media, etc. In a multipolar world, we may have several *independent* powers (meaning not in a pact) with comparable overall power or, at least, with lesser powers having enough counterweight to check and balance the greatest power. Or, we may have a different greatest power in each aspect. I believe the point of a multipolar world is that no one power can misbehave without swift and just consequences in the international realm, thereby preventing misbehavior, in other words, making international politics less of a jungle as it is right now.

[saruman]

In order for a multipolar world to succeed, the US needs to learn how to share, but how can it be achieved if the US cannot share even with their own American population? Have you seen the wealth inequality there?

[sjm]

I love your info Trip. It all helps us to "Hold the line" whilst we scramble under the current of the US Hegemony and degrading of all the people including Americans.❤❤

[laverdadescatolica]

So each CONTINENT will have 2-3 poles.

[gavintamwow]

What Muli-polar world means to me is that everyone would respect each other even when they have different point of view, political system, values, ways to do thing. There is no one size fits for all. US or Western believe their values and system is universal truth, and others should follow. Obviously, this is not true when we look at China, middle east. This is more on change of mindset rather than who will lead the world.

[RayMak]

I’m already living in the Multi Verse ;)

[iamcanadianedmonton]

When I look the history of ww1 and ww2. The multipolar powers didn't bring peace. All those powers had history of aggressions. However, this time it could be different because the rising countries had suffered from Colonialism and imperialism and they should understand the pains it brought. Hopefully, this rising new order of multipolar world could bring peace and prosperity to the new world. My concern now is USA might provoke china into a war ( the benefits of a war could retain USA hegemony and China might be devastated economically). So, China must be patient and react only when China is fully ready to counter measure against USA. Love from Canada

[marcelpenuelatraub]

It doesn't have to be viewed as a tent- it can also be viewed as a temple, supported by many pillars

[ellashy]

the problem is the vassal states like Japan S Korea Germany and Italy which are beholden to the US defence and Military policy are at the mercy of the US who also happen to station military "protection" at their country, the biggest obstacle will be the US and unless US is sufficiently declined in the world stage I foresee wars happening because US won't let go

[JorgePetraglia]

Your analogy of the big tent supported by a central pole is missing something.
Comparing the other poles with the former empires is not that accurate, in fact the empires were fighting with each to become the central pole; in one word: hegemony.
Hegemony is what we have today and it hasn't been working for a very long time.

There is not point in supporting a central power where everyone else works to provide support to it without any real benefits for themselves.

An international organization, very much like UN, is the only way forward.
The big deal with UN is that, despite the different concerns and suggestions, it is ignored by the few ones who have more decision power than the rest of them.

A new international organization must be more democratic than the one we have, where decisions can be taken to benefit everyone and not just a little group.
Creating more centers of power will take us back to whenever we had them and suffer the consequences we can see today.

Competing with each other over the riches of our planet only divides us ; solidarity will make all of us stronger and better, but then again: we will have to finds ways to neutralize the artificial differences among us, by putting aside the pernicious influences of religions and the sense of superiority that convince us that we are better and more deserving than anybody else.

Greetings from Toronto.

[xushenxin]

It is bi-polar world that is forming, US and China, because the GDP of US and China is closing, and GDP difference of the rest of countries is increasing. In 2009, Obama come to China talking to Hu Jintao, president of China at that time, proposing a G2, US and China governing the world. Hu Jintao categorically rejected the proposal in an official statement. Because Obama gives China the role just like the black slave manager of white slave owner in the Django Unchained movie by Quin Tarantino. US manages China, China manages the rest of world. It is not China leader have in mind. Maybe Japan likes it, but not China.

[devondevon]

According to Emma Ashford and Evan Cooper in a Foreign Policy article, 'Yes, the World is Multipolar, ' multipolarity doesn't mean that power is shared equally among several states, but it can involve two or three big powers among several middle powers jockeying for position." For them, multipolarity is here since both non-allies of the US and China have significant powers that each needs. They wrote that in 1950, the US, the Soviet Union, and their blocs accounted for 88% of the military and economic might, but today, the US and China account for just 30%. Hence, the world is multipolar. When we think of unipolarity, we imagine just one great power and two great powers with somewhat equal influence for bipolarity, but for them, multipolarity can Involve just two great powers and several middle powers since a 'multipolar system is often unbalanced. '
PS
So, for them, if a planet of 32 nations had two big powers, each accounting for 20% of GDP while each of the remaining 30 middle powers accounts for 2%, then it would actually be a multipolar system if those middle powers were non-allies of the big powers
as this would make it difficult for the big powers to contain each other. So, a multipolar word matters as they think it makes
it more difficult for the US to contain Russia and China.

[Billck]

At least each region should have representative.

[JonMonov]

In our days when it's monopolar because of us' hegemony politic the cultural, traditional aspect of other nations are unimportant, that's why this kind of world can be only exists by total military control of us. We need multipolar world where everyone can respect each other and generally improve. I believe people are ready for this kind of world now