Is America in the final stages of dementia?

https://www.quora.com/Although-hard-to-consider-given-how-tense-things-are-between-the-U-S-and-Chinese-along-with-Russia-how-effective-do-you-think-they-would-be-as-allies-and-who-would-the-U-S-work-better-with-for-example-like-counter/answer/Vince-Dhimos
 
Although hard to consider given how tense things are between the U.S and Chinese along with Russia, how effective do you think they would be as allies and who would the U.S work better with? (for example like counter-terror operations)
 
Vince Dhimos, Editor-in-Chief at New Silk Strategies (2016-present)
 
At this point in time, the US cabal is stuck in a negative economic strategy that obviously will never work out in the long run. Their attitude toward Russia and China is juvenile and not worthy of adults. They appear to think — God knows why — that if they can bring down these two countries, they will somehow benefit, perhaps even prosper. And yet there is no rational reason to expect that, quite to the contrary. The fact is, if they could just stop this childishness, the US could make money by joining China’s Belt and Road Initiative.
 
A few years ago when China opened its Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), 14 European states joined and so did most US allies in Asia such as India, Malaysia and Indonesia, the South Pacific, such as Australia and N. Zealand and many more for a total of 97 member states at this point. It was symbolic that Saudi Arabia – on which the US had once pinned its hopes of propping up the dollar – was one of the first to join. Everyone saw the growth opportunities. Everyone except the self-proclaimed Exceptional Nation. Obama warned that the AIIB lacked "safeguards." What he apparently meant was that unlike the IMF, this Chinese bank was liable to lend even to countries that did not have cross dressers in uniform. It was just weirdness and stubbornness, very much like a debilitating mental disease. At this point, the US does not seem capable of admitting that it could benefit from any kind of business relationship with Russia and China as long as the founders of the business venture are either of these two countries. The US response to Russia’s incursion into Arctic oil exploration, for example, was to plan the construction of military bases there. For what purpose? Would making Russia poorer make the US richer? Wouldn’t it have been more rational to offer cooperation with US oil companies?
 
The US insists on being the big cheese and getting all the attention but it won’t listen to anyone that is not a worshipper. Frankly, it is never of any benefit to pass up a business opportunity, especially something like China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), which is the biggest infrastructure enterprise even undertaken and is intended to involve all continents. There is nothing any bigger or potentially more lucrative that the US could invest in. But the US would rather lose than not be in the driver’s seat. If this attitude doesn’t cease at some point, the US will find itself eating the dust of Russia and China as the dollar drops in value and loses its hegemonic reserve status. It’s really a crying shame, all that wasted potential. I have never seen any other country with so much potential throw it all away just for the sake of false pride. I mean, if the cabal in Washington and Wall Street wants to commit suicide, that is their prerogative, but they are dragging down the whole country and there are people in the US who don’t deserve this.
 
I sensed the wind direction years ago when the Saudis joined the AIIB, and sure enough, just a few weeks ago, Saudi was baring its fangs and claws at the US, signalling the end of the honeymoon, as I reported here:
 
http://www.newsilkstrategies.com/news--analysis/news-from-wsj-on-saudi-arabia-americas-ex-ally-yes-ex
 
and here:
 
http://www.newsilkstrategies.com/international-relations/uh-on-saudis-side-with-putin-against-us-sanctions
 
I suspect this kind of scenario may be the end stage of all democratic experiments in  environments where a premium is placed on freedom. After all, democracy must by its nature focus on politics, not technically sound solutions, and eventually, the politics and the technically sound solutions must diverge fatally. I'd have to say we are there.
 
Maybe this whole process is like the life cycle of the sequoia, whose propagation is said to depend in part on a forest fire that helps open up the tough seed coat so it can sprout. At any rate, it looks more and more likely that destruction will come before redemption.