HR, here you are again telling China what is China. Chinese political pholosphers say, our form of government is MERITOCRACY. It has always been this way since the dawn of Chinese civilization. You use Jack Ma as your political expert. He's not. Listen to Zhang Weiwei.
I'll cede that Mao founded PRC under Marxist/Leninism. The China of Mao and the China of today are not the same. Mao was idealistic and he wouldn't allow free market or capitalism to come into China. This resulted in China's isolation regionally and China's dependence on Russia. Around 1978, Deng Xiaoping came into political influence and power. Deng opened up China. The result of his work is SIGNIFICANT and DRAMATIC. I wrote about this already. I'll restate it here for those who cannot remember or refuses to learn.
Prior to 1978, China's extreme poverty rate was around 88%! That means 9 out of 10 Chinese were starving, malnutrition or living under $1 a day. Deng realizing they had no economic means to bootstrap themselves, Deng sought to make a trade with the west. Deng would open China to economic prosperity through what we call Special Economic Zone. In these SEZ, the economy will run like the west, capitalistic and free-market. Outside, they will remain the same. This was the compromise made. Fast forward to today, the SEZs have generated so much wealth and prosperity that now less than 10% of Chinese are living in extreme poverty. Those who are living in extreme poverty sadly are outside the reach of the economic zone. This is why annually, people in the hills and outskirts come to the Special Economic Zone to work and then return home. Capitalism, Free Market, and the West are directly responsible for investing in China and raising China's living standard. No historian, economic, etc... dispute this. This is universally accepted that it is CAPITALISM that RAISED China to where it is....NOT SOCIALISM...NO T COMMUNISM.
How do we know this? It's quite simple. Before capitalism/free market China had 88% extreme poverty. 30 years after capitalism/free market working in China, less than 10% extreme poverty. Effectively, the only significant change to China is THE ECONOMIC.
Today, the great debate in China is whether China operates under SOCIALISM, COMMUNISM, OR MERITOCRACY. Currently, the political philosophers like Zhang Weiwei who lived and studied in the west are claiming, China has always operated under its own system since the dawn of their civilization, MERITOCRACY. Their social programs may reflect socialism, democracy, communism, etc... but the core underpinning philosophy is let the best operate, and they will take care of everyone else. It is not so much a system of state own operation or not given in China you see both a democracy and communism system. For example, in Hong Kong, they are democratic. In the Special Economic Zone, they are both. Outside HK and SEZ, they are more communist. When you look at IMPACT, you see that systems with the least communism performs SUPERIOR on a measure of wealth generation, but performs INFERIOR to the generation of social equity. China political philosopher is wise and insightful and he says, it's not ONE SYSTEM vs. ONE SYSTEM. It's a HARMONY, BALANCE, like the YIN-YANG.
Deeply rooted, China philosophy is not western, it's very eastern. China system of government is not western, it is deeply rooted in eastern. A label is merely a label. China meritocracy seeks to build harmony, cohesion, balance, just as it has always been so through concepts like balancing the YIN-YANG.
I hope this helps you understand China and open your eye to not group thinking...Chi na does not group think because it is a meritocracy and they allow the best ideas to win. Best here meaning having the most significant social utility to the majority.
Sometimes I think you cannot understand what I am writing because you are stuck in your ways...Be open to other systems of thinking. I've examined socialism and communism, and we know from the fall of USSR that communism and socialism are easily corruptable which makes them not durable. It's the durability of an idea and of an institution that matters more than the ideal state of an idea or an institution. Utopian societies and ideals do not last long because human being have not evolved away from their reptilian brains and wolf brains. We still fight/flight with the reptilian brain and we still fight through the dominance hierarchy of the wolf brain. The only way for Utopian society to flourish and be possible is if we see each other as part of each other... Jesus of Nazareth said that we are all part of the body of Christ. Each one of us being part of the whole with the God Head leading. What is the God head? It's the Word and the Way. In Taoist belief, and even in Hmong belief we often talk about THE WAY...The WAY is the WORD...and the WORD is the GODHEAD. Within this paradigm, each one of us with a purpose, each one of us loved and cherished and etc...
However, humanity refuses to accept this notion of unity because we value individualism over the whole..more so greed like those of the vices, and deadly sins as written in the Old Testament. So here we are...Until humanity has evolved to see humanity as a single organism, I see no point in touting socialism or communism because it's not durable for the larger groups like government. I do see socialism and communism working within a smaller group like family, clan, organization, churches, etc..., in fact that is how they operate. On a much larger scale, anybody who operates to lead, cannot lead if they do not take into consideration the state of being of those they are leading. The "being lead" have their own agenda so that's why it is political. The leader can try to educate them to raise their awareness and consciousness but until the group reaches a critical mass in understanding, it won't work. This is the truth about transformation al and change theory. Obama couldn't change DC...and DC changed him. So I applaud your ideas and fight for socialism and communism. They are great ideals, but they are not effective today because people are inherently too selfish today. It doesn't mean such a form won't be effective tomorrow. Maybe in 5-10-20 generations later and humanity will have evolved properly through many martyrs where we truly understand our place in the stars. Right now we are just a wrecking ball...and so right now, pick one that is least bad and allows us to move forward.
There is a movie that sort of talks about a failing Utopian society called Divergent. Honestly, the great Englighten Ones debated this they could not find a solution to the utopian society problem...and so they resolved around individuality. This is why the classical liberals say only you know what is best for you AND the government does not. Social liberals error on believing that the government knows best for the individual. As a classical liberal, social liberals have dangerous ideas in my opinion and this is reflected in the movie Divergent.