The preceding entry is about a NYT article that is complicated.  I have more to say about it.

I quote again:  Some [Chinese] officials are promoting a Chinese style of economic management that they suggest serves developing contries better than the American model, in much the same way they argue that they are in no hurry to copy American-style multiparty democracy.  From:

China faults U.S. policy on economy

This idea that their model of economic management and government is more appropriate for a developing nation is tricky.  It is worth consideration, especially the economic piece which has resulted in remarkable growth for China over the last thirty years.  Of course, almost anything they would have done to open up would have resulted in growth.    

On the other hand, I believe that lack of hurry to embrace multiparty democracy is self-serving. 

Nonetheless, I agree that a sudden change from totalitarianism to democracy is likely to fail.  People who have lived under totalitarianism, or a dictatorship as we more often call it, are unaccustomed to democracy and all its freedoms and responsibilities. 

Democracy cannot exist without free speech and there is no free speech without dissent. 

In countries with long histories of totalitarianism, there is a fear of dissent.  In the past, it has been punished, and once it is allowed it may continue to be viewed with suspicion or even as criminal.  Please listen to the video embedded in the Jim Lehrer News Hour entry. 

Thus, a sudden change from governance by a tyrannical dictator to a democracy will discover a citizenry unprepared for the responsibilty of choosing leaders and policies. 

Redirection of a country's governance and policies takes time.