While I agree with much of your sentiment at least two things stand out as not quite right:
> China at its historical peak was never more than a regional power
This is entirely a matter of foreign policy. In terms of production/population/capability, during many periods ancient china would rival/surpass the greatest contemporary empires. I don't think it's appropriate to say "they were not that great" if the main thing that differentiates them from "great" empires is that they didn't pursue a program of unconstrained conquest (and often closely related enslavement/ethnic cleansing).
> the CCP has done more to hold China's development back than western colonialism and the war with Imperial Japan
This is also not very clear. India had opportunity to work with the west/open market/democracy earlier than China yet is clearly falling behind China in development. In fact, I think one of the main reason for such compliance on the part of Chinese populace is that the standard of living really did skyrocket all within single generations. In 2000 people lived incredibly better than in 1980; now entering 2020 people live much, much better than they did in 2000. To disregard the magical transformation in standard of living (especially in urban areas) is disingenuous.
----
At the same time I don't want to detract from what I believe is the main point. The deep ethno-nationalism and the sick man of Asia narrative that the government is instilling in the youths is truly troubling. It blinds seemingly educated people to obvious abuses by the government and casts the specter of "evil US" as a boogeyman justifying terrible Chinese actions. Even many of the Chinese I met in the US still believe in "US constantly acting nefariously to subvert China" story, despite living in the US for years...
As far as China at its historical peak goes, the sentiment I was trying to express is the PRC's goal is for China to regain the world's most powerful nation and the worlds most powerful military with all nations recognizing this and being tributaries (and that this position is an exaggeration from historical truth).
On the second point, the CCP certainly deserves a lot of credit for Deng Xiaoping's reforms and the economic expansion since 1978. Though much of the early gains was to undo the Mao's collectivization of rural lands.
> Though much of the early gains was to undo the Mao's collectivization of rural lands.
This is simply not true. In 1978, start of reforms, GDP per capita was >50% higher than 1966 (start of cultural revolution) [0]. In current dollars it was $104/per capita in 1966 and $155 in 1978 (although there is something funny going on as it was ~$180 both preceding and succeeding years). More important is the miracle streak starting in 1988 where every year was positive.
I think it is important to not diminish Chinese achievement while criticizing China, because by denying their achievements you allow the unconvinced Chinese readers to say "ha, clear US bias and propaganda" and ignore the much more troubling truth about their current government (such as china running literal concentration camps, disappearing dissents, crushing demands for freedom, overtly trying to force other countries to bend the knee, etc). I have many friends dismiss valid criticisms of China with this exact excuse. If you deny to a Chinese person that they had a massive improvement in their life quality they will laugh at you, because you are denying an obvious lived experience for hundreds of millions of people (basically people in cities).
> China at its historical peak was never more than a regional power
This is entirely a matter of foreign policy. In terms of production/population/capability, during many periods ancient china would rival/surpass the greatest contemporary empires. I don't think it's appropriate to say "they were not that great" if the main thing that differentiates them from "great" empires is that they didn't pursue a program of unconstrained conquest (and often closely related enslavement/ethnic cleansing).
> the CCP has done more to hold China's development back than western colonialism and the war with Imperial Japan
This is also not very clear. India had opportunity to work with the west/open market/democracy earlier than China yet is clearly falling behind China in development. In fact, I think one of the main reason for such compliance on the part of Chinese populace is that the standard of living really did skyrocket all within single generations. In 2000 people lived incredibly better than in 1980; now entering 2020 people live much, much better than they did in 2000. To disregard the magical transformation in standard of living (especially in urban areas) is disingenuous.
----
At the same time I don't want to detract from what I believe is the main point. The deep ethno-nationalism and the sick man of Asia narrative that the government is instilling in the youths is truly troubling. It blinds seemingly educated people to obvious abuses by the government and casts the specter of "evil US" as a boogeyman justifying terrible Chinese actions. Even many of the Chinese I met in the US still believe in "US constantly acting nefariously to subvert China" story, despite living in the US for years...