>>>Nobody there wants another USSR. What they want is another China - where the economy is capitalist but the political control is centralized and minimally influenced by the rabble. <<<
In other words, what we used to call fascism.
Well, let's see what the dictionary says:
dictatorial movement: any movement, ideology, or attitude that favors dictatorial government, centralized control of private enterprise, repression of all opposition, and extreme nationalism
Well, what do you know - you are right! :-)
But they still can do it and sell to their populations - just by using different words. In fact, you don't have to sell fascism to China, they are living it since days of Deng Xiaoping. India may remain democratic for a while (until another flurry of terrorist acts, perhaps.) Russia was living in fascist dictatorship since ... forever, probably; there is no record of slavs on Russian land not living under one ruler or another. That would be an easy sell.
The Fascism 2.0 will not have to be aggressive. Neither was the previous release; but Hitler just decided to get it all in one move - that's where he failed. If only he stayed within German borders (or perhaps with Sudetenland) and wasn't so fixated on Jews he'd die in his bed and be known as a great politician. Alternative history is interesting to me, I read a lot of it.
Anyway, Fascism 2.0 can be built (see China) and it can be successful enough, for a certain definition of success. Slavery was also "successful enough" - even for some slaves, especially in ancient times, not in the early USA. Back then, in Greece or Rome, slavery was just one of several fates that you could draw; and it wasn't the worst one.