Let's take an example. One country invents a tractor, and makes improvements on it for 100 years. Then, another country that does agriculture by hoe and shovel, buys a modern tractor.
Which one is going to experience faster year over year growth in the next year?
If you bring a cellphone to an isolated Amazon tribe, have you just implemented the most rapid advancement of technology known to man? It’s a ridiculous, meaningless question.
Where is their industrial capacity? Where is their university system? Or their self defense capability? A space program on the way tomorrow perhaps?
Why is it that China’s development outpaces India so much? Why does China have 28,000 miles of high speed rail, doubling in the next decade, when the US has 50? Why did China roll out 5G before the west, when there wasn’t anything to steal yet?
Does the US need to steal some high speed rail technology from somewhere so that it can grow?
These aren’t matters of technology at this point. They are growing fast because they’re committed to it. The growth capacity has been there for so long in the west, but we prioritize the wealth of elites instead. At this point they have a better space station and a better moon landing / colonization plan. Their green tech is better, their batteries are better, their robots are better, their EVs are way better.
This idea that they should slow down because there’s no more technology to steal is inconsistent with the fact that they have in so many areas surpassed us rather than asymptotically approaching the status quo.
Comparatively, the trajectory of material conditions leaves the US in the dust, if it hasn’t already for most of the US populous.
It makes me sad because I’m an American, but it gives me hope because the US may finally start competing in areas like infrastructure, housing, and education rather than letting the private sector take the wheel.
That's the literal opposite of the truth and basically just neoliberal propaganda. It's also quite an amusing take more broadly, considering that the market reforms were implemented by the original Communist revolutionaries, people who were deeply committed to Marxism and vehemently opposed to that idea.
China's system is defined by not letting the private sector take the wheel. Capitalists (major owners of capital, the 0.1%) have very little political power vs. in the West, where policies are almost wholly driven by the private sector.
Marx actually believed that Capitalism was a necessary step to Socialism, which would then turn into communism. Lenin added that a vanguard party would be required to oversee that transition. The CCP fulfills that purpose in China. When the Chinese leaders decided to allow some capitalism, they did so with heavy restrictions, referring to it as a "bird in a cage" policy. They quite explicitly did not allow the private sector to take the wheel, and that continues to this day.
The real history of China in the last 100 years is extremely fascinating once you get past all the western propaganda. If you want to see what happens when the private sector takes the wheel, look up "shock therapy in Russia".
Which one is going to experience faster year over year growth in the next year?