America has problems, but your order-of-magnitude calibration is way off if you think a concentration-camp operating (i.e. the real kind with over a million people who committed no crime and are held just for their beliefs and culture) expansionist (Hong Kong, Tibet, Taiwan) totalitarian (speech is monitored and punished in a "go to prison, right away" manner rather than "twitter deleted my racist shit and nothing else happened to me" way) government. So yes, occasionally ineffective democracies that value human rights and freedoms (i.e. the west) is better than the CCP government, and will continue to be better now and into the foreseeable future.
The US invaded Iraq for oil colonization.
Can't answer specifically without knowing who "ours" and "theirs" are, but I can answer generically. Governments that hold elections where more than one genuinely competing party can win if enough voters want to vote for them are better than governments that declare themselves the rulers.
Governments that defend the rights of people to express genuinely competing opinions, regardless of who agrees or disagrees, are better than governments that use or enable coercion to silence opinions they don't want people to hear.
Governments that use pervasive surveillance to monitor and punish people for thought crimes, where having or expressing forbidden opinions is treated as an actual "crime", are worse than governments that don't.
There is clearly a spectrum, and though my Chinese relatives keep pointing out how many US institutions are coming to resemble the Marxist institutions and people resemble the Red Guards they remember, the actual government of China is still far worse. "Since we, the CCP, are the People's Gov't, there is no further need for elections, and anyone who disagrees is an Enemy of The People, needs to be discovered, and deserves to be punished for that crime."