That was my thought while reading the post you responded to.

A US Citizen thinks the US is the best superpower? color me shocked (I'm also a US Citizen).

I am not American and I consider America to be preferable to just about any other contender. I'll take the EU, but if China were to ever take the role of the U.S., we are all in big trouble.

Yeah, also not American, but given that the options are the US, the Russians or the Chinese, then the Americans are the least worst option (from my perspective, at least).

I can understand America and China being the only two realistic options for a superpower at the moment.

What I don't understand is the idea that the EU as a superpower is less plausible than Russia?

I can't speak for the earlier commenter, but I think there is a large gap between what the EU does today and what it would need to do to be a "superpower". It is left to our imaginations to guess at such a future, and so disagreements may just stem from different imagined scenarios.

I don't think the US would be a superpower if the treaties, tariffs, and military control were parceled out to the individual states and each state governor and state assembly decided when to work as a block and when to act independently.

It can’t even keep its most important members in. European pride will be its downfall.

When asked, Americans are Americans first, then whatever state they come from second.

Europeans are whatever state they come from first, European second.

Most European countries haven’t seen per capita GDP growth since the beginning of the millennium.

They’d rather preserve their “culture” than compete and survive, and it’s starting to show up in the data.

I understand that the EU is a poor candidate to be a superpower. But how can it be a worse candidate than Russia, which can't even control Ukraine?

To be fair, I've been making that comment since well before the Ukraine invasion, I may have to update it...

It's just not where the EU is right now. I was at an EU young people summit almost twenty years ago now, and I pointed out that the EU would need an army to stop future genocides like the Balkans. I was shouted down by basically everyone in the room.

I'm not convinced that much has changed since, and you definitely can't be a super power without an army.

I’m also not American but am glad they are the world’s police. I’ll take them any day over Russia, China or any other large power.

Also not American, and I will add to the chorus. There is no potential superpower half as palatable as the US and I don't expect one to rise.

Other recent contenders: Japan, Germany, USSR, and China?

A US citizen thinks any of those even has a chance of being preferable to the US? Color me shocked!

I have an undefined identifier: Color::shocked. Which one would you like me to #define for you? I'd go for pink :)

color="shocked" is kind of a turquoise blue.

You'd have preferred Soviet Russia?

I don’t remember saying that.

The issue is that the Soviet Union was the other viable contender for superpower during the CIA-in-South-America days.

Apart from the superpowers, there were also significant political forces that were supporting democracy and social justice. On the other hand, both USA and USSR actively (and succesfully) fought them. I don't see any sense in calling either of the superpowers preferable in this context.

Yes things could’ve been different and maybe better if you subtract huge amounts of reality (like the existence of rival empires)

The point of the word "preferable", is that it means something different to the word "good".

Do you really think the CIA stopped being in South America?

Does it exist? Did US stop?