If that were true China would be the most diverse nation on the planet, and the hardest to manage.
The problem in the US is the opposite - national policy is almost exclusively influenced by interest groups with very limited intellectual and cultural diversity.
There could easily have been a crash space-race type of program of renewables development at any time from the mid-70s onwards.
If that had happened, it's likely there would have been astounding developments in collection efficiency and energy storage.
But the Jurassic energy cos were never going the loss of face, I mean loss of profits, that would have led to.
You start out implying that China _isn't_ diverse, an dthen seem to argue that the US's problem is that we're more diverse. But you got it right the first time: China, especially in terms of leadership, doesn't listen to a bunch of diverse groups. They centrally control it without much concern for the whining of the luggage industry, or the furniture industry, or the cotton farmers. In the US, we listen to special interests because 1. we listen to those who talk and 2. special interests are very interested in a small thing that the general public doesn't care about.
A very small luggage industry can demand absurd luggage protectionism because people in that industry care a lot, and people outside of it are barely even aware that it's a thing. I won't change my vote based on whether you put massive tariffs on foreign-made suitcases, but people whose jobs depend on it will.
China avoids this by not caring about what people say.
