China is just undergoing its own Industrial Revolution which the western world already participated in. They Chinese Industrial Revolution was sparked
in the rural village of Xiaogang. The local farmers were fed up with the communist control, lack of freedom, enforced collectivism, stringent quotas and all. A group of 18 farmers (illegaly) divided their communal farm and went into competition. They outperformed the allocated quota by a large margin. Even the communist government could not ignore the results of this capitalistic experiment. Then they slowly allowed this freedom across the country. Engineers were running the country back then in the communist era too. Soon China opened up to foreign investments in their special economic zones, that enabled technology transfer.
You see, this is the natural result of private property and freedom. People will trade/exchange/compete resulting in better outcomes for all. This is the same thing that happened in Taiwan, Hong Kong, Japan, South Korea, Europe/America and pretty much all developed countries.
CCP has largely adopted capitalism in the economic sector. It still controls other freedoms, mainly speech, press etc.
America is drowning in unnecessary regulations/taxes/red tape. America and Europe did move fast when it was young, just like China is doing in its young phase of this industrial revolution.
I am no American or Chinese. Just an independent observer from a third world country.
cedws · 52m ago
I can’t remember where I heard this from but I once heard that the ideal political system isn’t democracy, it’s a benevolent autocracy. While the CCP may have some corruption, I do get the impression that it is mostly benevolent and serves China’s best interests. Relative to autocracy, democracy is slow and pulls in different directions due to party politics and elections.
I went to a museum in Hong Kong recently. It had a very obvious Chinese bias, but it clarified some things for me about how China sees itself. The CCP sees social cohesion as critical to the security of the state. If we look at Western countries like the US and UK, social cohesion is weakening, we’re extremely divided and addicted to bickering amongst ourselves.
Take the Charlie Kirk murder as a recent example which has sparked heated infighting between the left and right in the US. You’re all part of the same country but you pull in completely different directions and hate each other. Driving wedges like this is a tool adversaries can use to dismantle democracy.
pjc50 · 48m ago
The question is always how much violence is required to suppress dissent. Especially given the recent history of Hong Kong.
Some influencer called Matt Forney was calling for a ban on the Democrat party in the wake of the Charlie Kirk murder. I can see how a one-party state might be achieved with popular support in the US.
meekaaku · 45m ago
Most people think democracy is necessary for economic development. Taiwan/Singapore/South Korea, were pretty much authoritarian yet developed economically immensely. Democratization came much later.
Well the idea was, adoption of capitalism and economic freedom will eventually lead to political freedom. It did happen that way in many countries, but China is still yet to happen.
epolanski · 1h ago
> America is drowning in unnecessary regulations/taxes/red tape
Which regulations are unnecessary?
Those that make it more difficult to hire foreigners?
Those that put requirements on energy providers to invest in excess capacity so you don't end up in blackouts every time the grids are stressed?
Those that prevent companies from collecting minor data online?
Those that force major websites and devices to serve people with disabilities?
Or the national standards for healthcare data privacy?
I could go on and on, but every time people complain about regulations, they seem to be coming from a place where they don't realize that regulations have a purpose in general, they ain't there for the lulz.
Sure, there's always things to look at and review, that's the nature of progress, but to say that companies are drowning in regulations, what are those regulations?
Are you sure we can't find plenty of examples that would require more?
pjc50 · 55m ago
I'm very sympathetic to this point - regulations are usually there for a reason, and it's important to know what it is - but there's always a grey area between genuine public need and regulatory capture by special interests, which the incredibly dysfunctional nature of US politics hides.
The big ones are probably zoning and protectionist car regulations.
(Note that having a one party state makes a lot of the problems of partisanship go away. However, the problems of "working towards the leader" and the tendency to hide unfavorable news leading to poor decisions are still there. The tradeoff that China has is that, so long as high levels of growth can be delivered, political unrest can be contained, or dealt with by blaming "corrupt local officials" who can then be "dealt with".)
meekaaku · 49m ago
Some are necessary and some are not, or can be streamlined.
In the context of the article, where it discuses China can develop things fast while America cannot, lets take California highspeed rail.
- The Buy America law hinders supply choice
- Crash test standards are much higher than Europe
- Lot of consultation/assessment and pretty much any lobby group could block the construction
- Sue friendly environment, so makes things costly.
belter · 1h ago
> America is drowning in unnecessary regulations/taxes/red tape.
You must be joking...
- Unlike most OECD countries, the U.S. lets employers fire workers without “just cause” or severance.
- The U.S. is the only OECD country with no national paid parental leave mandate.
- There is no federal privacy law or something like GDPR
- No nationwide rules or regulations on Payday lending caps with interest often >450% APR
- Fines for U.S. workplace safety penalties are flat and modest
- TSCA lets many chemical substances stay on the market, while for example in the EU, the REACH program requires precautionary testing and registration.
Why do people bother with new theories in this space? Just to throw shade at other countries' political systems? It is perfectly clear what caused China's rise and why it is a historic and geopolitical exception that will not translate to any other country today. And it's certainly not their authoritarian political system that deserves praise, even though right-wingers in the west love foreign autocrats these days and want to bring that shit here.
anovikov · 2h ago
So what is your theory of it?
Also, how is this an exception? Didn't many the other Southeast Asian countries do the same, with the result being less remarkable just because of their smaller size?
sigmoid10 · 28m ago
This is not "my theory." This is pretty standard historian stuff. It's a combination of cold war shenanigans from the US, globalisation and favourable demographics. You can easily find this by looking at any source that is not pushing a certain political agenda. Here's a pretty good summary that is not particularly tainted: https://moderndiplomacy.eu/2025/06/27/chinas-rise-is-an-exce...
hshdhdhj4444 · 45m ago
Yeah it’s not clear what China achieved was qualitatively significantly superior than Japan or Korea’s achievements.
I think China’s biggest source of fortune was that their rise coincided with the unraveling of American democracy, which arguably began with the 2020 election, but was well and truly set in motion when American leaders exploited 9/11 and lied to the public to start a war in Iraq.
China is just undergoing its own Industrial Revolution which the western world already participated in. They Chinese Industrial Revolution was sparked in the rural village of Xiaogang. The local farmers were fed up with the communist control, lack of freedom, enforced collectivism, stringent quotas and all. A group of 18 farmers (illegaly) divided their communal farm and went into competition. They outperformed the allocated quota by a large margin. Even the communist government could not ignore the results of this capitalistic experiment. Then they slowly allowed this freedom across the country. Engineers were running the country back then in the communist era too. Soon China opened up to foreign investments in their special economic zones, that enabled technology transfer.
You see, this is the natural result of private property and freedom. People will trade/exchange/compete resulting in better outcomes for all. This is the same thing that happened in Taiwan, Hong Kong, Japan, South Korea, Europe/America and pretty much all developed countries.
CCP has largely adopted capitalism in the economic sector. It still controls other freedoms, mainly speech, press etc.
America is drowning in unnecessary regulations/taxes/red tape. America and Europe did move fast when it was young, just like China is doing in its young phase of this industrial revolution.
I am no American or Chinese. Just an independent observer from a third world country.
Take the Charlie Kirk murder as a recent example which has sparked heated infighting between the left and right in the US. You’re all part of the same country but you pull in completely different directions and hate each other. Driving wedges like this is a tool adversaries can use to dismantle democracy.
Some influencer called Matt Forney was calling for a ban on the Democrat party in the wake of the Charlie Kirk murder. I can see how a one-party state might be achieved with popular support in the US.
Well the idea was, adoption of capitalism and economic freedom will eventually lead to political freedom. It did happen that way in many countries, but China is still yet to happen.
Which regulations are unnecessary?
Those that make it more difficult to hire foreigners?
Those that put requirements on energy providers to invest in excess capacity so you don't end up in blackouts every time the grids are stressed?
Those that prevent companies from collecting minor data online?
Those that force major websites and devices to serve people with disabilities?
Or the national standards for healthcare data privacy?
I could go on and on, but every time people complain about regulations, they seem to be coming from a place where they don't realize that regulations have a purpose in general, they ain't there for the lulz.
Sure, there's always things to look at and review, that's the nature of progress, but to say that companies are drowning in regulations, what are those regulations?
Are you sure we can't find plenty of examples that would require more?
The big ones are probably zoning and protectionist car regulations.
(Note that having a one party state makes a lot of the problems of partisanship go away. However, the problems of "working towards the leader" and the tendency to hide unfavorable news leading to poor decisions are still there. The tradeoff that China has is that, so long as high levels of growth can be delivered, political unrest can be contained, or dealt with by blaming "corrupt local officials" who can then be "dealt with".)
You must be joking...
- Unlike most OECD countries, the U.S. lets employers fire workers without “just cause” or severance.
- The U.S. is the only OECD country with no national paid parental leave mandate.
- There is no federal privacy law or something like GDPR
- No nationwide rules or regulations on Payday lending caps with interest often >450% APR
- Fines for U.S. workplace safety penalties are flat and modest
- TSCA lets many chemical substances stay on the market, while for example in the EU, the REACH program requires precautionary testing and registration.
- U.S. oil & gas flaring rules are a joke
Also, how is this an exception? Didn't many the other Southeast Asian countries do the same, with the result being less remarkable just because of their smaller size?
I think China’s biggest source of fortune was that their rise coincided with the unraveling of American democracy, which arguably began with the 2020 election, but was well and truly set in motion when American leaders exploited 9/11 and lied to the public to start a war in Iraq.