I understand the argument you’re making, but isn’t the sentiment that “Chinese capitalism” is not my problem” just a complete abandonment of proletarian internationalism?
Like if you’re drawing your thought from Marx and Engels at the baseline, they are pretty damn clear that “The working men have no country.”
This isn’t an idealist position in either sense of the word—capital doesn’t respect national boundaries and literally treats the working class as an international pool of labor power:
Hundreds of thousands of workers thus wander hundreds and thousands of versts. Advanced capitalism drags them forcibly into its orbit, tears them out of the backwoods in which they live, makes them participants in the world-historical movement and brings them face to face with the powerful, united, international class of factory owners.
- Lenin “Capitalism and Workers’ Immigration”
Just as the development of capitalism leads to an international capitalist class, the working class, too, is an international class, with international class interests. “An injury to one is an injury to all” is not limited to workers of “your” nation: the victories of the working class in China (or Bangladesh or Burkina Faso or Chile or wherever) are the victories of your class, and their defeats are your defeats.
What you lose when you take the position that “Chinese capitalism is not my problem,” is the internationalist perspective that is an essential part of what it means to be a communist—it’s all part of the same struggle, and the solution is an international working class solution.
“The Communists are distinguished from the other working-class parties by this only: 1. In the national struggles of the proletarians of the different countries, they point out and bring to the front the common interests of the entire proletariat, independently of all nationality.”
- Communist Manifesto, Chapter 2