Regarding the policy issue, I wonder if our "standard techniques" for dealing with a controversy are perfectly adequate to deal with the issue. Ironically, the effort to clarify the issue for the mailing list may point the way to resolving the question on the page.
How about this:
China has been traditionally considered a communist state, although the Chinese Constitution states that China is a socialist state. Western scholars are moving away from the label "communist" and calling China "socialist", "[[late socialist]]", or "[[post socialist]]".
I'm not saying that this is a really *good* formulation; I'm sure it could be refined quite easily. But it eliminates a controversy by stating the controversy. All parties can agree to it.
--Jimbo
p.s. Regarding the content issue, it is my understanding that China is nowadays a confused and somewhat internally contradictory place. Shanghai in particular is often cited as being relatively capitalist, even! I don't really know anything about that other than what I read in the newspapers and magazines, though.