“Great Power Competition, Selective Morality, and the Sustainable Development Goals”

13 min readAug 6, 2020

“Great Power Competition, Selective Morality, and the Sustainable Development Goals”

Mark Godges 高勉正

August 5th, 2020

It has become clear that the most dire issue we are facing as a planet is not any of the clear political opposition to the Sustainable Development Goals, but rather those who seek to pick and choose which Sustainable Development Goals they wish to follow, otherwise known as “selective morality” among political leadership. Selective morality will be a key issue in the post pandemic era as hypermasculine leaders of highly intelligent and militarized countries seek to utilize global issues for economic gain. They will omit their human responsibility to reflect and create revolutionary policy for a more just and inclusive Post-Pandemic World, unless we, the people, stand up. Within the issue of selective morality and the Sustainable Development Goals there are at least 5 sub-categories which can be discussed; Capitalist Co-optation, Rural Exclusion in Sustainable Development, Acceptance of Latin American Autocrats out of Geopolitical Convenience, Hypocritical Incentivization in Global Leadership, and the dismissing of the Pax Americana as a legitimate idea.

The first major issue is the capitalist co-opting of global issues such as Climate Change. In the Sustainable Development Goals, particularly with Climate Change we often see policy makers and advocates using privatized economic incentives to get people to care about serious issues. However, people should not need to make money to care about serious issues. They should simply care about them because they affect their fellow human beings and other living beings they share the earth with. This issue is important to me because the people of Bolivia, for example, are resilient people who believe in Democracy, and Elon Musk selfishly coup’d their country in order to create lithium batteries for his cars through mining.

This is a perfect example of someone using the climate crisis to make themselves look like they are doing a good thing, but really in order to make eco-friendly cars, he is committing just as much pollution as he is preventing, such is the nature of capitalism. This is just one reason it is clear to me that the only clear solution to the climate crisis is to look at Climate Change as a human rights issue, both in the rights of the human species to live freely but also the rights of Pachamama. Through concrete policies modeling the ideas of Berta Cáceres and Wangari Maathai, we must engage in political and corporate decentralization in order to prevent mass industry emissions and exploitation of monocrops and necessary components of the earth’s ecosystems, in addition to engaging in backwards facing responsibility for the negative human aspects of that ecological exploitation. Through exclusively focusing on maximizing profit in solving issues regarding sustainable human development while ignoring the human rights lens, naturally large segments of the population will be excluded from policy.

A major example of this comes with the second issue of rural exclusion in Sustainable Development. At the root of this problem is development that does not take into account the experiences of those who live in more isolated environments outside of large cities or population hubs, and what setbacks could be created in their lens and voice not being given a seat at the table. In each of the policy prescriptions for the Sustainable Development Goals we can see this issue persisting as it is at its heart an issue of an unwillingness for governments to invest in economic and social infrastructure where it is not economically convenient to do so. However, I would argue that it is not only a good investment, but a necessary one.

This is most pertinent in the sphere of education, where in order to be successful, not only do students need tools like textbooks or reliable internet access which may be harder to obtain in rural areas, but also means by which to transport themselves to areas of schooling which without transportation would be inaccessible to children and young people outside of large metro areas.

This is important to me specifically, because as someone who just turned 23, I have a deep knowledge that it is my generation of those currently aged 12–23/24 who will need to lead the shift into a new globalized society within the frame of the current radical revolution of values we are experiencing. The only way we can do this efficiently, effectively, and sustainably is through gaining the education and institutional knowledge within our respective fields to move our society and our species forward. If children and young people and rural areas are excluded from this process, not only will they suffer, but our society will not be able to repair our divisions and the politics of resentment.

The way to solve this problem is not only through a higher investment in rural internet infrastructure and access to electronic learning, but also through localizing and decentralizing our education system much like we need to do with our agricultural systems, without disconnecting ourselves from the broader national and international society.

The third major issue is the acceptance of dictators when convenient for economic development, even if it comes to great detriment to human development simply because it is diplomatically convenient. Nowhere is this more convenient than with the relationships of China and the United States to Brazilian authoritarian Jair Bolsonaro, as he lets agricultural corporations ravage sacred rainforests, as he continues to treat the coronavirus pandemic as a joke. Who are the United States and China as global leaders if we sincerely treat administrations like the administration of Bolsonaro as a functioning government.

This is important because if we do not isolate Bolsonaro from the world immediately after Joe Biden winning the 2020 election in order to pressure Bolsonaro to resign, we may not be able to salvage the Amazon Rainforest in a way that it will recover. This is a perfect example of leaders using the progress of some Sustainable Development Goals as a clear excuse to sidestep others and commit mass human rights abuses of indigenous people in Brazil. Very much in the same way, Chile’s administration, despite having protests with millions of people in the streets, has decided that it is acceptable to increase costs of living while wages remain stagnant. This is called class warfare, and the people will always rise up.

My solution to these problems is not complicated, the United States and China should stop giving a platform to abusive policy makers in Chile, Brazil, and Venezuela and invest in democratic governance both at home and abroad. When we give permission for irresponsible leaders to go rogue under the guise of not meddling in their “internal affairs”, we allow the Bolsonaro’s of the world to hurt the global climate by destroying the rainforest, and that affects all of our lives. Because the US and China both seek to socio-politically shift culture in Latin America for economic benefit rather than moralistic reasons, neither are listening to the demands of the majority of Latin American people.

The fourth major issue, is that although policy makers in all corners of our world claim to want to forward the Sustainable Development Goals as political and corporate leaders, it is apparent that our government and corporate leadership structure does not incentivize the prioritization of Goals #5 (Gender Equality), #10 (Reducing Racial, Class, Sexuality and other inequalities) , #14 (Life on Land), #15 (Life Below Water), or #16 (Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions). We incentivize our leaders based on GDP and maximizing profit, even if it comes at the cost of human dignity. We see this in Saudi Arabia relentlessly acting as an aggressor on Yemen, doing what they view as protecting national sovereignty, which really means protecting their oil trading routes.

If we allow our political leaders in nations of all continents to pick and choose which Sustainable Development Goals that they want to follow with the excuse of protecting “culture” and “national sovereignty” as many conservatives would say, we have already failed. This is why when one looks at the most recent Sustainable Development Report, we have not reached any of our benchmarks because countries want to pick and choose. For example, many countries want to achieve peace, but peace is not a question of want, peace is a question of dismantling oppression that causes conflict to begin with. To give the most glaring example, this is why Saudi Arabia will never know peace until they atone for their crimes against humanity in blockading food and bombing thousands and thousands of innocent people in Yemen while attempting to destroy their society. Some may argue for peace, but ultimately peace is a question of justice, and only justice will bring peace. So, when a few nations across the earth act like Saudi Arabia does, it ruins the entire dynamic and makes the Sustainable Development Goals impossible to achieve.

Despite the majority of citizens of nations of the world on board with all 17 of the Sustainable Development Goals, it is obvious that because of conservative lobbying, the political and economic leadership of the world only cares about a maximum of 12 of the Sustainable Development Goals, thereby making none of them achievable as they rely on each other. My solution is that the young people rise up and continue to run for office and take the seats of those who do not believe in basic fundamental dignity, as we have seen in Canada, the United States, and Argentina. We just can’t lose momentum.

The fifth major issue is where many in the intelligentsia have viewed the shaping of the new 21st Century World Order through the lens of two major actors: President Xi Jinping and President Donald Trump, completely ignoring the major idea that has dominated the global world order since 1945, which is the idea of the “Liberal World Order”. It is dangerous to view Trump and Xi as the leaders of the world when it is clear they represent hegemonic ideals, where as it should be substantially discussed that the “Pax Americana” is an idea of the Post WWII American Leadership of a global order, and the person that is carrying that vision forward today is German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who is largely absent from conversations about great power competition. This idea, that Chinese people view the world the way Xi Jinping views the world and that Americans view the world the way Donald Trump views the world and that there cannot be any sort of ideology that respects the institutions that build the foundations for the EU, in my view, is ridiculous.

Ignoring the fact in 90 days Americans will decide whether we will sustain the Pax Americana through the election of Joe Biden and the re-acceptance of our global alliances, has also become a dangerous theme in global discussion. Ultimately this issue is not a material issue, but an issue of hopelessness and despair, and the decision to choose either, or the belief that we can choose either. This issue is important to me because as an American, I want the world to know that Donald Trump lost the popular vote, and was only elected through the Electoral College, so the majority of Americans did not vote for him — and I want the world to know we will win the Electoral College in November because the American people care about preserving the Liberal Democratic World Order, and will defend it with our lives. The solution I propose to this current gap in our discussions of great power competition is to introduce a new element of “The great comeback of Liberal Democracy”, as well as how the majority of young people in every corner of the world, because of the emerging world they grew up in, believe in it.

Therefore, at the heart of the fight against selective morality among policy makers in the realm of the Sustainable Development Goals, is the problem of the battle for sociopolitical Global Supremacy between the United States and China. This is a major problem because despite American and Chinese societies holding many similarities, the cultural and political differences among decision makers will lead to hostility and unrest. Many elite policymakers in the United States and China are willing to use the Sustainable Development Goals, as with anything, to get ahead of the other country, however neither are just as interested in the Sustainable Development Goals because it will uplift the most marginalized populations within their respective countries, but rather because both of the global hegemonies of the 21st century are looking to capture the global narrative. Ultimately the war that the United States and China are fighting is not political, social, psychological, economic, or military, but it is a war of stories and ideas.

Hence, the second major problem is the impact of the 2020 American election on the “American Idea” and the “Chinese Idea” in a Globalized world. Whether Democrats or Republicans win, they will both seek to challenge what they view as an adversarial “Chinese idea”, however they would seek to do it in different ways. For this reason, the two major issues that were not discussed go together; how the US-China battle of sociopolitical global supremacy impacts the global political arena, and how the 2020 Presidential Election will affect which “American Idea” will be at the forefront of that battle.

This is important to me because a sustainable existence for humanity is on the line, and in a planet defined by nations, in order for a future to exist at all, the 2 most influential nations must be on board in creating a sustainable future that protects the environment, rectifies historical injustices, reforms corrupt political systems, and more. This will not happen if they view each other as adversaries to the point where they can both forsake the Sustainable Development Goals in their quest for sociopolitical supremacy. In order to solve this tension, we must recognize that there are specific flashpoints of the US-China relationship that will permanently damage it if we do not address them clearly. These include: Human Rights (as defined by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights), International Trade Regulations (as defined by the World Trade Organization), and International Law (as defined by the International Court of Justice).

My proposed solution to this issue is to empower more women in politics in both the United States and China. The United States in the entirety of its history has never had a female head of state, and after over 270 years of governance, we are finally beginning to have more women being elected to Congress. China, despite having the world’s 2nd largest GDP, is ranked 85th in the Gender Development index, according to the United Nations Development Program. Therefore, I believe that young progressive women in the rising generation of leaders replacing older conservative men of the waning generation in policy making positions will be how our two nations find peace, as for so long the curse of gender imparity in government has plagued our systems of checks and balances to be dominated by questions of global empire and maintaining racial capitalism rather than implementing overdue system changes that incorporate political, agricultural, environmental, economic, and educational reform.

I believe the best way to stop China and the United States from increasing tension is to empower women of all backgrounds to step into professions they have traditionally been excluded from, and this includes politics. By changing not only the faces of power, but the lenses and perspective of policy makers in the most powerful countries on the planet, we can define power through compassion rather than subjugation. In addition to this I believe we can solve this problem by engaging in “backwards facing responsibility” about the ongoing histories of the United States and China regarding issues of race and class, and how new policies can begin to mend the wounds caused by generations of leadership which has defined success based on economic growth while neglecting human rights and human development due to the pervasive issue of money in politics in all major countries, but particularly in the Permanent 5 Nations of the United Nations Security Council.

The final thing that policy makers in particular can do to reduce tensions between the United States and China is for both to adopt respective Green New Deals which allow our nations to right the human wrongs of our history through making sure the renewable energy revolution is inclusive and holistic. Ultimately saving the United States-China relationship could be our chance to save the world not only from more climate catastrophes, but from each other as well, by forcing each of our nations to be more inclusive, compassionate, and just and thereby reducing the threats that the continuation of the cold war has posed to a stable world since 1991. Ultimately the success in bridging our two nations will depend on the United States Presidential Election in November as we will decide what the “American Idea” is, and therefore what the current administration in China will solidify or develop as their “Chinese Idea” in accordance to their greatest competition. In many ways the United States is already doing this as well with China being a front and center issue in the American Presidential Election.

Ultimately the world’s future will hinge upon the American idea and the Chinese idea being able to help each other grow and work together to create a more just world as we move into a post pandemic era and a new world order. Although the theme of US-China competition in a social context rather than solely an economic context was not discussed in any of our modules, it has become clear that the issue touches on all the issues we have spoken on regardless, when utilizing the politics of responsibility to understand the both the United States’ role and China’s role in destabilizing global sustainability and our responsibility to recover what we have broken.

America is going through a moment right now where its foundations in the constitution are being put under assault, and it is our choice as Americans to rise up to the challenge of protecting our constitution. In the same way, the post WWII values that were set up as a foundation to the new world are currently under assault, and it is our choice as a world to rise up to strengthen and protect the Liberal Democratic World Order. The young people at the top of Generation Z must work towards earning the necessary skills, relationships, and credentials to assist and lead our generation in protecting these values and ideas between and within our nations to build bridges before we build walls, but never sacrifice our universal values in the process.

Works Cited:

Written by Mark Godges 高勉正