This is a total non sequitur. It's implying that you can't criticize ANY corrupt government without first criticizing all of them.

you think it's a total non sequitur but im just asking what i think is a simple question: whether that logic is applied fairly and accurately within the context of being a world superpower. otherwise you just end up potentially looking like a hardline racist parrot to some readers.

Do I also need to include disclaimers about Russia, North Korea, Iran, etc, being bad anytime I criticize China as well? Or are they exempt for some reason? Are you following your own advice, to criticize fairly and accurately across the board?

I don't apply the same logic to any country's history. It wouldn't make sense to hold modern China accountable for the Qing, or the civil war, or the Cultural Revolution. Like the original commenter, my biggest concern by far with the Chinese government is their repeated public statements that they plan to violently conquer a neighboring country and integrate it into their own. The US has undertaken a lot of military adventures I don't agree with in the past few decades, but annexation is a red line that almost every country in the world agrees to and respects.

The CCP can certainly be held accountable for the Cultural Revolution and the Great Leap Forward. They're truly Mao's heirs, and whereas some previous leaders left Mao's path, Xi is firmly back on track.

I agree that China should be regarded as a particularly problematic country, but I would like the US to have a more comprehensive and introspective attitude. The US can stop the mutual bullying and take the high ground. That doesn't change the facts about China, but shifts in foreign policy and/or PR can at least give the US a better grounds as the primary opposing actor to China, if not incentivize China to change too.