of course, but the US is not mostly composed of chinese people.
It is common belief in china that the state governance by the CCP is doing good for the country, and the proof is economic progress, material wealth and geopolitical strength.
I don't know, but how to define if a country is going towards a better path, if all the changes listed does not count?
If the people there belives, is it unresonable that the people not there argue about that?
I'm not saying it is not arguable, it really falls down to the North-Korea situation that almost everyone inside or outside see that place as hell, but I'm not sure if China feels alike here - a country does have significant economic progress, material wealth and 'geopolitical strength', which I don't think NK has all these.
One very notable take is that some assert China is "exporting" parts of their population to ensure their people and culture can grow elsewhere, presumably to eventually have more influence over those places in the future.
Who doesn't have political yard signs? I'd be surprised if China doesn't have them; they just might not be so varied.
[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_without_a_...
But what we’ve seen over the past decades is other countries reexamine what parts are actually good for them.
For example Japan has a stock market, and it was a lot like the US in the 80s. But now it looks and operates with nationalist priorities which are very different,
> Who doesn't have political yard signs?
Anybody really excited about democracy in the US also has to reconcile with marketing. People will literally vote because of a tv commercial.
This is not a normal system you will find anywhere else. And it’s pretty obvious to outsiders that US media plays a weird state function in it as well.