While China is a lot less authoritarian than the US when it comes to matters especially like policing and aspects of daily life, you are always going to fall into a trap when you let them make the conversation about this, because in some respects, China is more authoritarian than the US, especially when it comes to things like censorship, the Great Firewall, lockdowns, and the housing market.

In discussions with liberals, make it clear to them that authoritarian measures (because “authoritarianism” is a nonsensical term) are not an intrinsic quality of any particular mode of production or individual countries, cultures, and governments, but are simply means at the disposal of whatever form of governance of whatever body to reach certain aims which it has set itself faster, more reliably, and with greater accuracy. Explain to them what is the purpose of such authoritarian measures in China, and how they are necessary to provide for public health, prevent terrorism and fake news, and eliminate poverty. If they say they do not care what China’s aims are, or for the results which it has achieved, but for the life of “the individual”, explain that it does not matter what they think because in China, having healthy grandparents, a full fridge, a good university education, rights on the job, your own home, no loans to pay off, and a safe, clean, and lively neighbourhood beats the ability to behave inconsiderately for dubious personal gain at least 95% of the time.

Only once you have explained all of this should you go back to the original matter and ask them: What is the reason for the cases in which the US actually does behave more authoritarian than China? What exactly does the average US citizen gain from broken window policing, civil asset forfeiture, prohibition of drinking in public, loitering laws, and the suppression of shadow libraries? Or is there someone, something entirely un-average at whose behest these laws are made?