The word I would choose is Fascist. That said, there are pockets of economic freedom in Fascist societies that exceed the freedom available in Western Socialist Mobocracies. My company's life saving technology would have died on the vine if we waited for approval in the States. You literally have to buy a Senator to bring certain technologies to market in this country. Actually your remark : Look at Wm. McNeill's "Pursuit of Power," on how the Chinese ran a mercantilist system---for the good of the government---and reacted strongly against capitalism when it came in. is an apt description of modern Socialist America. Rather than nationalizing the means of production like the USSR did America has nationalized the results of production. Its the same basic idea, its just a more workable implementation of Marxism. Competence is harnessed in America to subsidize incompetence, incompetence results in crisis. Crisis is used to justify more power for the mobocracy and more restrictions upon freedom.Rinse wash repeat.
As for Social Security, no, it does matter how Americans "view" things: If they see it as a contract, which they do, they will insist that it be honored.
Sure, our view matters. Unfortunately, our "view" is divorced from reality. How do you propose to conjure these nonexistent savings out of the thin air? If these savings exist, I should be allowed to opt out without harming the system, right? But obviously, that is financially impossible. The younger generation will be the tax slaves of the Baby Boomers. SS is not in any way, shape or form, savings, it is tax. I pay more in SS than I do in rent (amusingly I pay rent to a boomer who also already receives 15% of salary in Social Security taxes).