Say what you want about China's monoparty system, but it enables planning that spans decades.

Our 4 years terms is short slighted by design.

> Say what you want about China's monoparty system, but it enables planning that spans decades.

That's not a trait of a monoparty system, or even any totalitarian autocratic system. There are democratic multiparty systems which have plans that spans decades, and autocratic totalitarian regimes that barely put together a coherent multi-year project.

I don't think this case has much to do with the mono party system but with the state taking interest to support a local industry at a loss but for future security.

Like for example the French government massively supported its aerospace and nuclear industry, and German government gave massive support to its legacy auto industry and they're not a mono party totalitarian system.

So it can be done even in democracies, but you need visionary leaders to spend money wisely on future industry bets and not just on buying votes from pensioners.

The big issue EU now has compared to the past when it kickstarted its nuclear and aerospace industry, is the massive burden of the welfare state that leaves little money for investments into other ventures, and boomers who are the largest beneficiaries of that welfare state, also account for the majority of the voter base, so the major EU economies France and Germany are stuck in a quagmire where the party who wins the elections is the one who goes more into debt for the welfare state.

EU has 7 years planning interval. Is not bad and tends to overlap the usual 4 years legislature in member countries.