In recent years, the term “state capitalism” has become a frequent label used by Western politicians, analysts, and major media outlets to describe China’s economic system. On the surface, it appears to be a neutral analytical category. In practice, however, it often functions as a political framing device, one that compresses a complex economic model into a simplified and politically charged narrative. China’s state-owned enterprises, industrial policies, and macroeconomic coordination are frequently cited as evidence of excessive “state control over the economy.” Yet this interpretation is rarely applied consistently across countries. Instead, similar practices in Western economies are typically described using more neutral or even positive terms such as “industrial policy,” “strategic investment,” or “public-private partnership.” This asymmetry is at the heart of what critics describe as a Western discourse trap. It is not merely about terminology. It is about how language s...