The US is partially disassociating the Western-controlled scientific-industrial complex from China, resulting in two separate systems, a Western one and a Chinese one. Whichever system produces better results in the long run will prevail. A tech blockade is not doomed to fail, the US tech blockade against the Soviet Union was quite effective. If the West pulls further and further ahead of China in the coming decades, then eventually China's ability to resist will be undermined, just as the Soviet Union's was. China can only defend itself successfully if its scientific-industrial complex produces better results in the long run than the Western one.
In order for that to happen there are two ingredients: scale and institutions. Scale is why a small country like Singapore cannot go up against the US alone, despite having great institutions. You need a massive talent pool, labor force, and tax/consumer base to support such a structure. This is part of why China must keep its birth rate high. But that is not sufficient by itself, the second is institutions. Institutions are the rules/laws and culture that allow scientific innovation to succeed and scientists to thrive, and the right collaborations between universities, labs, government, and private companies. Otherwise scale will go to waste. That is what happened in Mao's China or during the Permit Raj.
Even if China's scale and institutions matches the West, it will only improve at the same rate as the West. In that case, the West's massive trove of legacy knowledge capital from decades of tinkering and know-how will keep it perpetually ahead. China must actually have better scale and institutions than the West to win this fight.
this is a gross oversimplification. 'institutions' is an interesting word. what's an institution? anything from taxes to academia to industrial policy to existing GDP per capita to religion can be called an institution. it's utterly meaningless and free from any predictive value.
China has 3 things going for it: 1. proven amazing social cohesion 2. proven ability to manage emergencies, 3. proven policy flexibility.
Meanwhile some other country: 1. proven poor social cohesion, 2. proven poor ability to manage emergencies, 3. proven policy inflexibility.
If an inflexible and fragile country is doing well, it might keep doing well. But every stumble is not self correcting, it is self amplifying. See how exceptionalist propaganda resulted in failure to manage initial outbreak of COVID, which resulted in poor financial decision to print $3T USD, almost none of which went to the consumer economy and instead went to prop up zombie companies/real estate/stock, which results in housing prices skyrocketing while the bottom falls out of the consumer economy resulting in people being late on rent and mortgage in danger of eviction, which then forces an eviction moratorium, which then results in landlords and banks becoming more dependent on the government for relief rather than their investments... We still haven't seen the end result of COVID yet, pandemic isn't over.