US-China competition is not about ideology

Dear Editor,
Peeping Tom’s claim that the rift between China and the US is ideological is shallow and without merit. Tom’s principal claim is that the US-China conflict has gone beyond competition, and that at base, it is an ideological conflict. I must confess that I do not know what school of ideology Peeping Tom has in mind.
For Tom, the ideological battle lines are between liberal democracy and authoritarianism. Tom has a basic problem here, because all ideologies are built on claims of ethical and moral superiority. I challenge Peeping Tom to tell us otherwise.
The United States can easily and credibly make the case that liberal democracy is superior to other forms of political ideologies because it guarantees free speech, free movement, the freedom to own property, and the right to freely elect representatives to political office, or to remove them through free and fair elections. These freedoms are consonant to natural rights.
Based on the above, those who support liberal democracy can rightfully claim legitimacy.
I ask Tom what would China say, or what does it say, in defense of authoritarianism. Does the Communist Party of China actually admit to running an authoritarian state? Have the Chinese ever advocated authoritarianism as an IDEOLOGY? Did Beijing defend Tiananmen Square on the basis that “authoritarianism” is a good moral or even political basis to kill protesting citizens?
Jagdeo is correct that the US-China global situation is best characterized as geopolitical competition. A word of advice to Peeping Tom is in order: you need to study ideology before writing about it.

Dr Randy Persaud