"In the late 20th century, the “US” (which primarily means the US corporate elite controlling much of policy) wanted to make *itself* rich, not “China” (or Chinese elites) as Mearsheimer maintains.

While ideally, in a perfect world, the US elite prefers to spread (subservient) electoral plutocracy (what Mearsheimer calls “liberal democracy”), economic subordination was always the main goal. The US preference for electoral plutocracies stems from their superior capacity to institutionalize subservience. These systems: 1. Invisibly align elite interests through financialized capitalism rather than overt coercion. 2. Reproduce US hegemony via interdependent networks (WTO rules, dollar dominance). 3. Preempt anti-imperial backlashes by disguising exploitation as “partnerships.” When non-electoral systems prove equally subservient (e.g., Saudi Arabia), the US readily supports them. Conversely, electoral systems resisting US demands (e.g., Allende’s Chile, Morales’ Bolivia) face regime-change efforts. Thus, the form of government matters only insofar as it facilitates reliable control—a calculus where managed electoral plutocracies often prevail. However, in the 20th century, this subordination model often meant the creation and support of neo fascist regimes under the guise of fighting communism, as amply documented by Chomsky and Herman in “the Washington connection and third world fascism.” Institutionally speaking, capitalist interests are not only represented, but also tempered/stabilized by the more inclusive & partially independent long term (strategic) regulatory focus of the state. The bureacratic state is an organization that not only serves mainly as representative of (& arbitrator of competing interests within) the capitalist class, but that has its own elite interests— while having a somewhat broader and more inclusive social focus than immediate capitalist interests. While capitalist and state elites compete to varying degrees, they primarily constitute a nexus. This capitalist-state nexus creates an elite interplay that competes for power and wealth against: A - Their own populations (primarily) B - Other capitalist - state nexus actors (secondarily) Nationalism in the state-capitalist interplay serves the role of 1) *Somewhat concessional* elite economic buffer/diversion against more egalitarian class conscious collective ideologies like syndicalism, anarchism or communism, 2) Society-wide psychological buffer against death anxiety, as shown by Terror Management Theory studies: patriotic identity & legacy provide long lasting personal significance to counter the personal insignificance represented by death (also for state and capitalist elites) 3) Legitimizing ideology for the state and (to a somewhat lesser extent) capitalism. 4) Legitimizing ideology for imperialism 5) Rationale for a collusion-competition dynamic with other state-capitalist nexus elites that serves as a diversionary mechanism against their own general populations (class warfare/competition)".

JS