The United States is currently the most powerful country in the world. It is the second largest country by landmass (Penn State, 2016), and it is the third most populous country, with 324,909,129 people (Worldometers, n.d.). It has the largest economy and the biggest military budget (US News, 2016). So, is there any reason for the United States to be concerned with growing countries, namely China and India?
China and India are the two most populous countries in the world with 1.36 and 1.23 billion people respectively (Penn State, 2016), and represent approximately 37 percent of the world’s population (Rodriguez, n.d.) an estimated 7.4 billion people as of March 2016. They are the world’s fastest-growing economies; China is currently the largest, and India is currently the third-largest, economy in the world by purchasing power (Twining, 2015). Table 1.0 shows a comparison of each of Hofstede’s six dimensions of culture between the United States, China, and India.
| Country | Power Distance | Uncertainty Avoidance | Individualism | Masculinity | Long-Term Orientation | Indulgence vs Restraint |
| United States | 40 | 46 | 91 | 62 | 26 | 68 |
| China | 80 | 30 | 20 | 66 | 87 | 24 |
| India | 77 | 40 | 48 | 56 | 51 | 26 |
| World | 59.31 | 67.64 | 45.17 | 49.53 | 24.23 | 22.29 |
Table 1.0 (Penn State, 2016) (Hofstede, n.d.)
As you can see, China and India score very closely in power distance, meaning neither mind that there are inequalities between powers within their respectable culture, and display a lot more restraint, when compared to the United States. With regards to uncertainty avoidance and masculinity, all three countries score relatively close. Uncertainty avoidance is the “tolerance for things being unsettled and ambiguous” (Penn State, 2016). With that being said, all three countries are accepting of the unknown, and all three countries differentiate between male and female roles just a tad bit more than other countries around the world. While India scores 48 in individualism, which is just a tad over the world average, China’s score indicates more of a collectivism tendency, while the United States’ score indicates more of an individualism tendency. The last comparison, which is probably the most beneficial, is long-term orientation. China scores extremely high in this dimension, meaning they have a very extended view of time (Penn State, 2016).
It sure is a good thing India and the United States are unofficial allies because if China and India were to form an alliance, they would dominate mainland Eurasia and the sea lanes of the Indian Ocean and Western Pacific because together they make up one-third of humanity (Twining, 2015). Especially since both countries have a desire to lead the way into a new Asian century. The United States, India, and other democratic counties all believe they can rise together in both coordination and competition. Fortunately for the United States, China and India continue to have great tension (Wicker, 2016).
Geert Hofstede. (n.d.). Retrieved from: https://geert-hofstede.com/united-states.html on 30, October 2016.
Penn State University World Campus. (2016). Lesson 10: Focus on China and India. Retrieved from: https://psu.instructure.com/courses/1802572/modules/items/21179122.
Rodriguez, Peter. (n.d.). “China, India, and the United States: The Future of Economic Supremacy,” The Great Courses. Retrieved from: http://www.thegreatcourses.com/courses/china-india-and-the-united-states-the-future-of-economic-supremacy.html.
Twining, Daniel. (2015). “The U.S.-India-China Triangle in the 21st Century,” Jewish Policy Center. Retrieved from: https://www.jewishpolicycenter.org/2015/05/31/us-india-china-triangle/.
US News. (2016). Best Countries. Retrieved from: http://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/power-rankings.
Wicker, McDaniel. (2016). “Only America Can Keep a China-India War from Erupting,” The National Interest. Retrieved from: http://nationalinterest.org/feature/only-america-can-stop-china-india-war-17036.
Worldometers. (n.d.). Retrieved from: http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/us-population/ on 30, October 2016.
Hi Diana, I enjoyed reading your post I enjoyed reading your post. I’m not quite sure that America would be lagging too far behind either China or India. At least in India their government has bit more relaxed viewpoint and individualistic thoughts and beliefs are welcome by their society.
Although thinking outside the box and or having an independent thought or more efficient brand to do something are not welcome in China unless you are a very high-ranking official. If you’re common working man or woman you are expected to follow orders and not do anything to disrupt the flow of harmony.
For a worker bee to possess that structured ability to follow orders and not disrupt the harmony is all well and good, although where America gets their strengths is from the encouraged, personal viewpoints and individualistic mindsets.
it is in the US citizens individualistic tendencies , and a mindset that welcomes the thought that “Our company might be able to manufacture it better , and faster using my idea ” type thinking.
This style of management , and leadership that welcomes new ideas , combined with the high levels of diversity that our nation has we are assured to have a plentiful bounty of new thoughts and viewpoints that will poise our nation to be quite successful, despite the fact that our nation is smaller in size and population than India and China.
According to the information in our readings “collectivistic cultures, such as China, tend to put group needs ahead of individual ones so that the group processes in place already will be very group focused. Adding individualistic types of rewards (such as personal recognition) may be seen as inappropriate and may be resisted “(PSU,2016).
.
The above statement reflects the Chinese stance on their Authoritarian viewpoints as well as their in relation to control over its, citizens who are regarded as subservient, subordinates applied to society essentially to be “workers “ enlisted to the government for use towards the common good of the nation.
I agree that China and India will have a bit of a difficult time working together, although I just think that if the Chinese lead, even with their individualistic tendencies, the nation of India be quite happy to follow, and both will share incredible successes.
At the same time, I firmly believe that the US will do well to allow their encouraged individualistic mindsets and massive diversity to step well outside of the box and think of new methods of doing things , while making ample use of new technology to increase the success of our nation as well.
References:
PSU, Olead course, lesson 10, Asia focus on China, India , 2016.
Retrieved from: https://psu.instructure.com/courses/1802572/modules/items/21179122
Hi KFB5108 , I enjoyed your post I enjoyed reading your post specially when you mentioned that if the Indian China would form an alliance they could easily dominate Eurasia especially due to the size of their population .
I agree with that statement although I wouldn’t be too concerned about them getting together and forming a bond because their cultures are far too different. To the nation of India has a bit more relaxed style of governance and their citizens tend to have more individualistic viewpoints. A businessman or woman in the India would have more of a tendency to think outside of their box, and implement new ideas.
While the entire Chinese culture, has been brought up to go along with the flow and display a tendency to stick with the original plan, since it would be disruptive to formulate your own ideas. This type of behavior is not welcomed by the masses, rather they enjoy being told what to do by an authoritarian leader.
The quote from our modules reinforces the above statement.
According to the information in our readings “collectivistic cultures, such as China, tend to put group needs ahead of individual ones so that the group processes in place already will be very group focused. Adding individualistic types of rewards (such as personal recognition) may be seen as inappropriate and may be resisted “(PSU,2016).
.
The above statement reflects the Chinese stance on their Authoritarian viewpoints as well as their in relation to control over its, citizens who are regarded as subservient, subordinates applied to society essentially to be “workers “ enlisted to the government for use towards the common good of the nation.
I agree that China and India will have a bit of a difficult time working together, although I just think that if the Chinese lead, even with their individualistic tendencies, the nation of India be quite happy to follow, and both will share incredible successes.
References:
PSU, Olead course, lesson 10, Asia focus on China, India , 2016.
Retrieved from: https://psu.instructure.com/courses/1802572/modules/items/21179122
I am always interested in the “China taking over the world” conversation. I think you raise some very valuable points and insights on that topic with your blog. In the beginning you talk about America being the strongest, and then compare America to China and India because they have the higher population. However, some have projected that America will surpass China in population because China is already close to their peak.“America’s population is set to rise by 30% in the next 40 years,” China will hit its population peak in 2026, decreasing sharply after that.(Boginreif, 2013). How do you think things will change is China’s population does sharply decrees while America’s population increases? Will this more solidify America as the strongest nation in the world?
Bogenreif, M. (2013, January 21). 5 Reasons China Won’t Take Over The World. Retrieved from http://www.businessinsider.com/5-reasons-china-wont-take-over-the-world-2013-1
Seeing that the U.S. is considered an indulgent society with a score of 68 and also has a very low score of 26 for long term orientation ( Hofstede, n.d.); do you think that that is an indication of China eventually taking our title as the most powerful nation in the world? China with a high score of 87 for long term orientation may have a higher focus on their long-term success that may lead to increased power for their growing stability and economic prosperity?
References
Hofstede, G. n.d. Dimensions. Retrieved from https://geert-hofstede.com/united-states.html