[nine_k]

Dictatorships are not very efficient economically, it seems.

China has become an industrial powerhouse when some modicum of economic liberty was admitted by Deng Xiaoping. Dictatorship stifles internal economic competition, and makes the economy less and less efficient.

If Mao times look too drastic a comparison, you can compare to the USSR, which was also, well, nuanced, and had leaders stat stayed at power for decades. How well did it fare against the US?

[tchaffee]

China isn't the USSR. China is increasingly capitalist, has had years of excellent economic growth, and has a quickly growing middle class. So my question remains: who gets unelected first when the middle class suffers? I don't think it's the dictator.

[nine_k]

With more heavy-handed government involvement, I'd suppose that China is decreasingly liberal-capitalist and increasingly state/crony-capitalist. Government-controlled huge semi-monopolies are known for comparatively lower efficiency.

[tchaffee]

Then what's confusing is why China's economy grew at something like 10% for many years. When was the last time the US saw that kind of growth? Why aren't corporations democracies? I'm not convinced you have a strong persuasive case, but data is always welcome.