So I don't think that statement is "silly" at all. I bet on Cuba once Castro is done so is his regime. While the Chinese regime enriches and arms itself.
I guess silly is a strong word, I just don't agree.
We used containment with the Soviets and it seems to have worked pretty darn well.
"I bet on Cuba once Castro is done so is his regime."
Yes, I completely agree that Castro is a very important single man in Cuba...if he goes, communism may well collapse in Cuba. Whereas, in China, communism is more systemic. So what about North Korea? Do you think North Korea will be a democracy with a free press before China? (China has much freer trade than North Korea.)
"While the Chinese regime enriches and arms itself."
It can't possibly arm itself sufficiently to fight against an overwhelming majority of its people (even if those people aren't armed). It will only take one, or perhaps two, more Tiananmen Squares to collapse the government in China. The military will (soon) refuse to fire on its own people.
"I guess silly is a strong word, I just don't agree."
Good. (On dropping the "silly," which I thought was inappropriate.)
What will convince you that more trade collapses authoritarian regimes faster than less trade? If China's communist government collapses before North Korea's or Cuba's?
"We used containment with the Soviets and it seems to have worked pretty darn well."
The Soviet Union existed for more than 70 years. They forcibly occupied all of Eastern Europe for approximately 45 years. That's not very fast!
In contrast, August Pinochet's authoritarian government in Chile (which allowed free trade) collapsed in 17 years.
Taiwan and mainland China were both authoritarian in 1949, but Taiwan allowed free trade. Taiwan's authoritarian regime ended about a decade ago.
North and South Korea were both authoritarian when they split. South Korea is now a democracy.
G@d only knows when North Korea will be one. (Poor devils.)