The issue with your analysis is that if you spend more than 10 days in China you quickly realize that it is a chaotic self driven society full of people who start small businesses and enterprises with the state barely keeping control over this mass. In addition, the way the system actually works in China(or how it used to) was “pay x% of revenue and do what you want”. Also the government structure was historically incredibly decentralized with mayors and local party officials having the vast majority of power and a lot of autonomy, wayyy more than most elected officials have in the US. The US is choked by its many and massive unelected and unaccountable federal agencies which have passed millions of regulations that essentially strip away all form of local autonomy and democracy. The US also spends a lot on welfare while china spends almost nothing, which allows it to build a lot more infrastructure.
"For all its material successes, the CCP cannot offer its people a satisfying answer to the question: What is the point of all this efficiency?"
This question does not currently appear to bother the public in China very much. National greatness and a stable, prosperous society seem to be good enough answers for most Chinese (at least for the time being; attitudes may change). While there is arguably a "spiritual emptiness" at the heart of modern China, most of is people don't see changing the political system as the answer, even if they sense the problem.
The question is to what extent people in the rest of the world would be willing to accept a model like this.
“we need to remember what we are competing for: the right to define what human dignity looks like in the modern world”. This reflects the unfortunate tendency to conflate our right to conduct our society as we choose with what the rest of the world should do. Different circumstances lead to different choices. China’s choice is informed by recent history in which the absence of a strong central order led directly to chaos, detestation, starvation and death. We’ve been more fortunate.
The failure of the United States is almost inevitable. Just look at the remarks made by you, a so-called "American elite":
"China's system can bring prosperity, but it cannot convey meaning. It can create wealth, but it cannot establish a mechanism for people to find their own life goals. It can build cities, but it cannot construct a civic culture that makes these cities livable."
1. Regarding the meaning of life – "Cultivate one's moral character, manage the family well, govern the state effectively, and bring peace to the world" (a core concept of traditional Chinese values emphasizing the connection between personal growth and the greater good of society and the nation);
Unlike almost all other countries on Earth, China is the only one with a clear, detailed, reliable, and unbroken historical heritage spanning 5,000 years. Ask any Chinese junior high school student who has not yet entered society about their expectations for themselves, their expectations for the government, and their expectations for the country's future – and you will get your answer. Of course, as they grow up, many people may change their ideals or lose their ambition. However, there are 1.4 billion people in this country, and the strong development potential of this nation, as well as everything it has achieved today, are created by those Chinese people who have not lost their ideals.
2. Regarding social wealth – "When one achieves success and prosperity, they should help others and contribute to the well-being of society" (a traditional Chinese value advocating the sharing of wealth and care for the broader community);
What happens to your country or community when capitalism is left unchecked and the "market" is allowed to dominate everything? My friend, go to Portland, Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Philadelphia – walk around and take a good look.
Is there any homeless person who was not once a beloved child cherished by their parents? Is there any drug addict or person with disabilities who was not once a promising young person in society? Could it be that they are really so willing to degenerate, destined by nature to lose their property, jobs, families, careers, and dignity?
The capitalists don't care. The U.S. government doesn't care. The so-called "social responsibility" in the United States amounts to no more than handing out just enough food to barely sustain life. But ask yourself: Is food really all they need?
You keep saying that China's social wealth cannot support its citizens' life ideals and personal goals. This is utterly absurd. China's social wealth not only benefits every citizen but also places greater emphasis on enabling them to "support themselves through their own efforts" and live with dignity.
Use your Google search to look up "Jilin Train No. 4245", "Anhui Train No. K8525", and "Hunan Train No. 7272" – I won't list them all one by one. China has retained 81 such green-skinned trains (affordable, slow-speed trains serving remote areas) for farmers in distant rural and mountainous regions. You can easily find photos of farmers herding chickens, ducks, and sheep onto these trains to take their agricultural products to cities for sale.
What does it mean to truly "care for" a citizen? The most basic step is to give them the opportunity to support themselves with their own hands. Look at the streets of your country – what has your government done?
Every official of the Communist Party of China, whom you despise so much, has two fundamental performance assessments: safeguarding people's livelihoods and addressing public opinion. If one morning, a Chinese city were filled with desperate homeless people, by noon that day, you would see that each homeless person's educational background and professional skills would be assessed, and small and medium-sized enterprises, led by the government, would provide career plans that enable them to support themselves.
3. Regarding the livability of cities
I don't want to say much more – you already have the answer.
A core challenge to (re)articulating the American Idea is that we--as a nation--are still reëvaluating what that Idea even is.
For my part, I'm taken by the American Idea as a promise: "I don't care who you are; if you Do The Work, you will reach prosperity." But a lot on the right flatly reject that the United States is an idea--instead they see the country as a culture based on a land and a Western heritage (and maybe a discrete ethnicity). And a lot of people on the center-left are still pondering Howard Zinn's charge that all this patriotism is a cover for three-plus centuries of increasingly wide-ranging plunder--hence the land acknowledgements and hesitancy around the American flag.
That's all part of the competition--we don't have consensus on the point of this nation, but we have agreed that "Compete with China" is part of that goal without asking if we agree on _why_ we're competing with China.
The issue with your analysis is that if you spend more than 10 days in China you quickly realize that it is a chaotic self driven society full of people who start small businesses and enterprises with the state barely keeping control over this mass. In addition, the way the system actually works in China(or how it used to) was “pay x% of revenue and do what you want”. Also the government structure was historically incredibly decentralized with mayors and local party officials having the vast majority of power and a lot of autonomy, wayyy more than most elected officials have in the US. The US is choked by its many and massive unelected and unaccountable federal agencies which have passed millions of regulations that essentially strip away all form of local autonomy and democracy. The US also spends a lot on welfare while china spends almost nothing, which allows it to build a lot more infrastructure.
"For all its material successes, the CCP cannot offer its people a satisfying answer to the question: What is the point of all this efficiency?"
This question does not currently appear to bother the public in China very much. National greatness and a stable, prosperous society seem to be good enough answers for most Chinese (at least for the time being; attitudes may change). While there is arguably a "spiritual emptiness" at the heart of modern China, most of is people don't see changing the political system as the answer, even if they sense the problem.
The question is to what extent people in the rest of the world would be willing to accept a model like this.
“we need to remember what we are competing for: the right to define what human dignity looks like in the modern world”. This reflects the unfortunate tendency to conflate our right to conduct our society as we choose with what the rest of the world should do. Different circumstances lead to different choices. China’s choice is informed by recent history in which the absence of a strong central order led directly to chaos, detestation, starvation and death. We’ve been more fortunate.
The failure of the United States is almost inevitable. Just look at the remarks made by you, a so-called "American elite":
"China's system can bring prosperity, but it cannot convey meaning. It can create wealth, but it cannot establish a mechanism for people to find their own life goals. It can build cities, but it cannot construct a civic culture that makes these cities livable."
1. Regarding the meaning of life – "Cultivate one's moral character, manage the family well, govern the state effectively, and bring peace to the world" (a core concept of traditional Chinese values emphasizing the connection between personal growth and the greater good of society and the nation);
Unlike almost all other countries on Earth, China is the only one with a clear, detailed, reliable, and unbroken historical heritage spanning 5,000 years. Ask any Chinese junior high school student who has not yet entered society about their expectations for themselves, their expectations for the government, and their expectations for the country's future – and you will get your answer. Of course, as they grow up, many people may change their ideals or lose their ambition. However, there are 1.4 billion people in this country, and the strong development potential of this nation, as well as everything it has achieved today, are created by those Chinese people who have not lost their ideals.
2. Regarding social wealth – "When one achieves success and prosperity, they should help others and contribute to the well-being of society" (a traditional Chinese value advocating the sharing of wealth and care for the broader community);
What happens to your country or community when capitalism is left unchecked and the "market" is allowed to dominate everything? My friend, go to Portland, Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Philadelphia – walk around and take a good look.
Is there any homeless person who was not once a beloved child cherished by their parents? Is there any drug addict or person with disabilities who was not once a promising young person in society? Could it be that they are really so willing to degenerate, destined by nature to lose their property, jobs, families, careers, and dignity?
The capitalists don't care. The U.S. government doesn't care. The so-called "social responsibility" in the United States amounts to no more than handing out just enough food to barely sustain life. But ask yourself: Is food really all they need?
You keep saying that China's social wealth cannot support its citizens' life ideals and personal goals. This is utterly absurd. China's social wealth not only benefits every citizen but also places greater emphasis on enabling them to "support themselves through their own efforts" and live with dignity.
Use your Google search to look up "Jilin Train No. 4245", "Anhui Train No. K8525", and "Hunan Train No. 7272" – I won't list them all one by one. China has retained 81 such green-skinned trains (affordable, slow-speed trains serving remote areas) for farmers in distant rural and mountainous regions. You can easily find photos of farmers herding chickens, ducks, and sheep onto these trains to take their agricultural products to cities for sale.
What does it mean to truly "care for" a citizen? The most basic step is to give them the opportunity to support themselves with their own hands. Look at the streets of your country – what has your government done?
Every official of the Communist Party of China, whom you despise so much, has two fundamental performance assessments: safeguarding people's livelihoods and addressing public opinion. If one morning, a Chinese city were filled with desperate homeless people, by noon that day, you would see that each homeless person's educational background and professional skills would be assessed, and small and medium-sized enterprises, led by the government, would provide career plans that enable them to support themselves.
3. Regarding the livability of cities
I don't want to say much more – you already have the answer.
https://www.choosingvictory.com?utm_source=navbar&utm_medium=web
A core challenge to (re)articulating the American Idea is that we--as a nation--are still reëvaluating what that Idea even is.
For my part, I'm taken by the American Idea as a promise: "I don't care who you are; if you Do The Work, you will reach prosperity." But a lot on the right flatly reject that the United States is an idea--instead they see the country as a culture based on a land and a Western heritage (and maybe a discrete ethnicity). And a lot of people on the center-left are still pondering Howard Zinn's charge that all this patriotism is a cover for three-plus centuries of increasingly wide-ranging plunder--hence the land acknowledgements and hesitancy around the American flag.
That's all part of the competition--we don't have consensus on the point of this nation, but we have agreed that "Compete with China" is part of that goal without asking if we agree on _why_ we're competing with China.