Within a climate of sensible discussion, this wouldn’t even need to be said:
The CCP’s liabilities are well known. … The party’s advantages are less often discussed, but these bear reviewing if one is to evaluate the viability of CCP rule. One of the most overlooked, but important, assets is a lack of any credible alternative. The party’s repressive politics prevent the formation of potential candidates, so the alternative to CCP rule for now is anarchy. For a country still traumatized by its historic experience with national breakdown, this grants the party no small advantage. To truly imperil its authority, the CCP would need to behave in so damaging a manner as to make the certainty of political chaos and economic collapse preferable to the continuation of CCP rule. A party that attempted to return to extreme Mao-era policies such as the catastrophic Great Leap Forward could perhaps meet that threshold. But despite the numerous superficial comparisons in Western media, little about the current administration policy agenda resembles classic Maoism. […] … Beijing will continue to face massive political, economic, ecological, and other challenges. The party could well fail to carry out needed reforms and ultimately collapse at some point. But with China on the cusp of achieving a centuries-long ambition of national revitalization, observers would be well served to exercise caution in once again assuming the nation’s leadership and people would so readily scuttle such an historic opportunity in favor of a return to the humiliations and agonies of national dissolution that the country has struggled for so long to escape.