Other countries like Soviet Union or Maoist China have tried other paths with not exactly stellar results.
(At least, compared to the failure before, with just central planning.)
If you have anything contradicting that, it would be interesting?
(Edit: Ah, I commented on a karma 23 secondary account? :-) )
When Sweden had a high growth, the taxes were low and it was much more of a strict capitalist economy.
When the taxes were raised to be internationally high in the early 70s, the growth crashed and Sweden fell quite a few places in GNP/Capita.
(I am Swedish.)
I think countries should be free to choose their own paths and for those countries to find their own unique implementations of economic policy and whatnot is fascinating, and we can always learn from them and implement the good things while eschewing the bad. As long as they don't interfere with what my country wants to do, they can do whatever they want.
It's also incredibly Euro-centric to be thinking that other countries ought to be following the path Europe and the US took to capitalism, and then to say that these countries should be implementing it in such a way that there's the same worker exploitation everywhere.
Worker exploitation isn't some thing in the past. It doesn't just happen in China, it's happening all the time and everywhere. But the case of it is so readily apparent in China it ought to be a case against worker exploitation as a whole. Yet some people still say "nevermind these countries, they're just on their way to being like us". We do not stop to question whether being like Europe is actually beneficial?