Which would be?
You should move a step away from your selective illiteracy.
Your "points" are all over the place, addressed each time in my point-to-point rebuttals nonetheless, always wrong, and therefore form no coherent argument. Let's see what some of them were:
China needs to form a Chinese way for the world to follow. Rebuttle: That would be copying America's interventionist model while China affords countries the freedom to develop themselves.
China's reputation was damaged from its handling of HK and ROC. Rebuttle: 70+ nations support China's new law in HK and 20+ are opposed. American police brutality is far worse so that shows China being too liberal compared to a "democracy". There is no handling of the ROC yet.
China should have followed ROC and HK as they progressed faster initially. Rebuttle: China can only be a superpower if it rises of its own accord. It is also too big to be lifted as the smaller territories can be. Furthermore, to follow the Western model can result in Indian style failure and even in instances of success, one can always expect sabotage like the US did to Japan.
America has higher approval than China. Rebuttal: 1 chart shows the younger generation over the world taking greater liking to China. Another study shows China exceeded the US in global approval rating in a poll of 134 countries.
Chinese who protest in the West are hypocrites. Rebuttal: Nope, just following the laws of the land. The US accusing China of human rights violations while America is the biggest police brutality state is hypocritical.
Those are just off the top of my head. Any more? Stopped counting...
That's a good way to slink out of your failures to rebut any of my points. I'm sure nobody sees through that
Sraight drinking the kool aid. I'm impressed.