> Hence why c 2023 no one seriously thinks Brazil, Thailand, Mexico, Malaysia are currently or even potential future US competitors
Because all those countries largely aligned with the liberal international order and didn't try to antagonize their neighbors.
A notable exception to your list is Russia, a fellow upper middle income country that in 2010-2014 was on the precipice of becoming a developed country (HDI above 0.800 AND GDP per Capita above $12,000/yr c. 2010-13)
Russia began playing a belligerent role in Georgia/Abkhazia/Ossetia (2008-Present), Ukraine (2014-present), Syria (2015-present), and the CAR (2018-president) and we burnt multiple cycles worrying about them.
When I was on the Hill, we were honestly neutral/indifferent about China until you guys hacked our companies (Google, Lockheed Martin) and our government (OPM Hack in 2015, CIA in 2012-13).
This is just the US. The leadership in post-2011 China has unnecessarily antagonized Japan, South Korea, Vietnam, Phillipines, India, Australia, and Vietnam despite all those countries preferring to the neutral in any US-PRC confrontation.
All the hawkish comments on here hoping for the collapse of the PRC are disgusting and do not reflect what those of us in a decisionmaking capacity or adjacent to those think.
Yet unbridled nationalism and hubris by commentators on both sides is impacting the ability to get shit done.
> Like there simply isn't any time period in the past where one country had population or institutions to do so, nor are any countries likely to match including US who would to increase immigration to politically unfeasible levels, or (IMO) India even with 1.6B pop unless they manage to not only stop crippling brain drain but also coordinate talent domestically on par with PRC capabilities
India in 2023 is a country with developmental indicators, institutions, and infrastructure largely on par with the PRC in the 2000-2003 period.
A lot of the same problems you mentioned about India are the exact same problems China faced and overcame, and the same playbook is being applied there.
In fact, the same kind of commentary you are bristling too is the exact same commentary people used to give China during the exact same time period, and it's kind of funny seeing Chinese commentators reusing the same comments we Americans made about China in the 2000-2015 period on India.
> A country can simulatenously improve/lead at top while bottom languish/decline
This is a still an open question. No country has ever transitioned from a developing country to an advanced economy with as crippling a Human Capital Handicap as the PRC today. The last large upper middle income countries that had a similar handicap were Mexico, Brazil, Türkiye, and Malaysia.
None of these countries are shitholes, but when they reached a similar pivot as China did today in the late 90s/early 2000s, they had the need to resort to extensive social and economic reforms. While Malaysia has succeeded at that, this hasn't been as successful in Brazil, Türkiye, and Mexico.
If I was a gambling man, I'd lean towards assuming this transition will be a protracted affair. Not "institutions collapse" bad but 7-10 years of malaise, because building human capital takes time and effort.