A nation's leadership class shapes its priorities. China's government, heavily populated by engineers, excels at long-term, systematic infrastructure and technology projects. The US, dominated by lawyers, often gets mired in litigation and short-term cycles, hindering large-scale execution.
The dynamic between tech and government is not a simple decline but a cycle of alignment (post-WWII), hostility (2000s-2010s), and a recent return to collaboration. This "back to the future" trend is driven by geopolitical needs and cultural shifts, suggesting the current alignment is a return to a historical norm.
AI provides a structural advantage to those in power by automating government systems. This allows leaders to bypass the traditional unwieldiness of human bureaucracy, making it trivial for an executive to change AI parameters and instantly exert their will across all levels of government, thereby concentrating power.
China offers a hyper-concentrated manufacturing ecosystem where suppliers are neighbors, supported by world-class infrastructure. This dramatically speeds up prototyping and production, turning complex international logistics into a simple "walk down the street."
China is pursuing a low-cost, open-source AI model, similar to Android's market strategy. This contrasts with the US's expensive, high-performance "iPhone" approach. This accessibility and cost-effectiveness could allow Chinese AI to dominate the global market, especially in developing nations.
The US has historically benefited from a baseline level of high competence in its government officials, regardless of party. This tradition is now eroding, being replaced by a focus on loyalty over expertise. This degradation from competence to acolytes poses a significant, underrecognized threat to national stability and global standing.
While the US prioritizes large language models, China is heavily invested in embodied AI. Experts predict a "ChatGPT moment" for humanoid robots—when they can perform complex, unprogrammed tasks in new environments—will occur in China within three years, showcasing a divergent national AI development path.
China is compensating for its deficit in cutting-edge semiconductors by pursuing an asymmetric strategy. It focuses on massive 'superclusters' of less advanced domestic chips and creating hyper-efficient, open-source AI models. This approach prioritizes widespread, low-cost adoption over chasing the absolute peak of performance like the US.
While the West may lead in AI models, China's key strategic advantage is its ability to 'embody' AI in hardware. Decades of de-industrialization in the U.S. have left a gap, while China's manufacturing dominance allows it to integrate AI into cars, drones, and robots at a scale the West cannot currently match.
While the U.S. oscillates between trade policies with each new administration, China executes consistent long-term plans, like shifting to high-quality exports. This decisiveness has enabled China to find new global markets and achieve a record trade surplus, effectively outmaneuvering U.S. tactics.
Attempting to hoard technology like a state secret is counterproductive for the US. The nation's true competitive advantage has always been its open society, which enables broad participation and bottom-up innovation. Competing effectively, especially in AI, means leaning into this openness, not trying to emulate closed, top-down systems.