The author assumes that a multipolar global system is superior to a benevolent quasi-hegemon. I'm not sure this is the case (despite my firm belief that a concentration of power is inherently dangerous, in direct proportion to the size and scope of that power)
What we want is to have a society or groups of societies where 1. There is a free flow of information 2. Where the people themselves choose the best route for their country or rid their country of ineffective leadership preferrably peacefully.
That #1 and #2 puts communist dictatorships, or another dictatorship...communist or not in one hell of a predicament. Its their @ss on the line hence they don't like the US maessin' with their own iron rice bowl.
They will talk about hegemonism to culture until they a blue in the face to protect themselves...
You can speak your mind. We all can... We are a cesspool of ideas coming from more "poles" than we can count from all over the globe.
China has defined political multipolarism to a way that is unique to China to protect its dictatorship.
That is their goal.