[itmayno]

USSR followed the same path when their citizens grumbled about liberalization. State owned enterprises are now seizing power from private companies and foreign entities. Pretty soon you are going to see replays of USSR SoE dominance such as lack of innovation, bread lines, inefficient operation, and corruption. It seems xi jing ping did not fully study the downfall of USSR after all.

[SubiculumCode]

This analogy works on a few levels, but not in others. One key differences between the USSR and China is that the USSR did not have a close economic relationship with the U.S., nor an economy near parity to the U.S.'s. There might be a decline of Chinese power, but it will not take a similar path, imo.

[itmayno]

Agreed that it’s not exactly the same scenarios. However US is actively disengaging from China. And as far as economy parity I think that may never be as China is on a downward trajectory while US is going up. And lots of china’s numbers are fabricated.

[vkou]

I've been hearing from pundits that the collapse of China is around the corner for the past 25 years, and I have yet to see why I won't be hearing about it for the next 25.

[VictorPath]

They've been saying it since 1949. Now China is the world's second (first on some measures) largest economy, and they sent a rover to Mars and are building a space station.

I had occasion to read some New York Times newspapers from 1917 and 1918, and they were filled with stories about how Mr. Lenine's (sic) government was about to fall if not already in flight. Off the mark by 70 years or so, and Russia is still run by former CP nomenklatura.

[moltar]

USSR didn’t have private enterprises and thus no markets. There was no competition.

[lycopodiopsida]

Actually, it did: it was called "NEP"[1] and was used to reboot the economics after the revolution and civil war. Afterwards the control of all economic matters was ceased again by the goverment.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Economic_Policy

[thombee]

Do you really think that the Chinese government have not studied the causes and effects of the ussr collapse enough? The other large communist nation who was also their neighbour? Or is this just some weird rhetoric you're using

[ecshafer]

The causes of the downfall of the USSR seems to always line up with whatever political angle the writer has. Leftwing can point to a lack of (political) liberalization or poor planning, rightwing can point to not going further on (economic) liberalization. It's a topic that is really valuable to think tanks based on their politics and their donor's politics.

[flavius29663]

And very few people look at what topped it off: the cold war. The insane pressure from the US caused USSR to overspend on military when then barely fed their population. I think people should say "US won the cold war" rather than "the cold war ended" or "the USSR collapsed". It didn't collapse on it's own...as bad as communism was for the population, they could have potentially carry it on forever, like North Korea, if it wasn't for the US pressure.

[VictorPath]

The USSR economy did pretty well under Stalin, especially during the Depression that affected the west. Khrushchev deprioritized capital expenditures and that was the beginning of the end. Similar story in the DDR around the time of Stalin's death.

[nickff]

Most people in the West (both left and right-wing) thought the USSR was much more economically productive than it actually was, and that the populace was more supportive of the regime than was the case. The Chinese learned very valuable lessons from the USSR, namely that liberalization is very dangerous for a regime; North Korea has done much worse (economically) than the USSR, but is very politically stable.

I am not sure how earlier political liberalization could have saved the USSR, which was essentially a (communist) imperialist dictatorship.