Why is it a bad thing that wealthy people are kept in check and have to follow laws? Or conversely, why is it a good thing that wealthy people can control the state, like in the US? I think the US being a plutocracy with only a veneer of being a democracy is nothing to be proud of.
You're jumping to some pretty extreme conclusions, I'm not in favor of plutocracies or autocracies and I think everyone should follow the law.
I come from an ex-communist country myself and I can tell you that what the political class was doing back then was definitely not "for the people". If you were part of the political elite (or a boot-licker) you had access to fancy things like cheese and chocolate, got to travel outside of the country, could occupy a good job, and other benefits.
I've seen corporations & billionaires run out of control like in the US where political bribery is legal and the government ends up catering to the 0.1% and not the majority of their constituents, and I'm not a fan of this, though I don't think the problem is democracy.
Okay but China is in no way comparable to ex-Soviet countries. You can't lazily lump them together just because of a label. There's a reason why PRC as a state still exists today, and it's not just because the government holds power.
The Chinese government enjoys massive support, mostly from poorer rural populations. Western views don't quite believe it, and think it's all an excuse to hold power, but they take the notion of not letting rich people take over the state, quite seriously, especially nowadays.
