Do you have any idea that China has slaughtered thousands of Muslims and Tibetans?Bet they don’t think China has had a ‘good’ outcome.

China did well after adopting a capitalist economic model. Not so well after adopting a communist economic model. Over 50 million dying just from starvation is basically the worst you can possibly be. Insane top down command like killing all the sparrows or collectivizing farms, or pulling nails out of furniture so that little villages can make steel describes the insanity of that approach. It had a shelf life of about 40 years.

They still maintain the party dictatorship.

Really what matters for dominance is a disciplined party apparatus that seizes power in some kind of coup or revolution and then rules the country with an iron fist.

The party may use a justification of envy -- appealing to people's anger that others have more than they do -- or it may use religion, or moral arguments, or national pride arguments. But those are all instrumental to the underlying aim of power.

Once you are in power, you can impose capitalism or communism or some mix. If communism doesn't work, you can discard it and look for something better.

It's interesting that many on the left just dropped working class issues like a used shirt and refocused on race with extreme ease. For me personally, that's how I distinguish between a group that wants power as opposed to a group that is advocating for some policy profile. If they can switch out the policy profile and replace it with something different, then they were never that interested in policy to begin with.

Tbh, I have no idea who 'on the left' you could be talking about (except Sinema I guess)? The labor side of the Democratic party has been enemic for the last 50 years.

> China did well after adopting a capitalist economic model. Not so well after adopting a communist economic model.

Let's be clear here -- regardless what you think of the Chinese government, they are far from a "capitalist economic model". Many major industries are nationalized, the state plays an enormous role in the economy. 60% of their economy by market cap is state-owned. It isn't Soviet-style or Mao-era socialism, but it is still a very different system than western capitalism. It's similar to the NEP era in the USSR (1921-1928)

It’s arguable whether China actually benefited from an authoritarian, centralized economic model or from other factors. They did open up their society to market economic forces, both domestic and international, although they do seem to be ready to pull the rug out from people at a moment’s notice - for example with banning some foreign company or with blocking IPOs or disappearing business leaders. Another factor is the literal theft of intellectual property through corporate espionage or hacking, as well as the theft of IP through business relationships (for instance with European high speed rail manufacturers). I do think China’s leadership, particularly Xi Jinping, still have an eye on implementing an idealistic socialist/communist system as an end goal, but it does seem like all the steps to get there involve anything but that.

Only after near total free market reforms.

It’s too soon to tell.

Are you referring to Mao?