Funnily the US still manufacture their own planes an weapons ... and a few cars, like Teslas :)
Military manufacturing generally occurs in your own country, unless you are very good friends with your arms suppliers, or the arms in question apply technologies that you don't have. And yes, the NSA has its own chip foundries, as well, for sensitive components, so that a foreign government supplying your chips can't just tell your military to "turn off", should it come to a conflict.
I have no concrete idea what is going wrong in your country, but perhaps instead of looking at China, look at other successful nations and start copying.
We have granted MFN - most favored nation - status to China; this means we can not tariff them more than we tariff anyone else.
This means we can not tariff products manufactured in China contingent on them following the U.S. Fair Labor Relations Act standards; this makes Chinese labor cost inherently less than equivalent U.S. labor, per work unit per hour.
It also means we cannot tariff them based on not complying with U.S. environmental standards; U.S. environmental standards are among the most stringent in the world, and as a result, operating costs for U.S. factories are higher, due to things like hazardous waste disposal; this makes Chinese production costs apart from labor costs inherently less than equivalent U.S. production costs.
The combination of these things means that we have shipped most of our manufacturing to China. Not ironically, our compact fluorescent light bulbs are manufactured in China because of the mercury component required prevents U.S. manufacture, yet dead bulbs go to U.S. landfills, where the mercury accumulates. Further, we are not permitted to use standard incandescent bulbs, which do not have this environmental pollutant, due to environmental regulations regarding energy usage (this is actually an energy production problem, not an energy consumption problem).
In addition, we have what is called "the NAFTA hole". This is where countries which would ordinarily be tariffed on these things which we cannot tariff China on, ship their nearly completed products to Mexico, where they go to a factory barely on the Mexican side of the U.S./Mexico border for final assembly, manufacturing, or processing. This can be as little as shrink-wrapping or other packaging for distribution of bulk-packed items. Then they are exported from Mexico to the U.S. with no tariff. These factories are colloquially called "Maquiladoras".
And *THAT*, my friend, is what is going wrong in my country.
Regarding social changes: my impression is, the US move like a glacier and everybody is super conservative, health care is an example. Why change a bad running system if there is a chance that it is even worse afterwards, seems to be the attitude.
You have a simplistic view of Democrat (liberal) vs. Republican (conservative) politics and embedded interests. This is to be expected, if you are not from the U.S., since it's fairly nuanced as to who "owns" which platform issues.
This is predominantly because the structure of our electorate is actually as a Representative Republic, rather than a Populist Democracy, as it's usually portrayed; we are much more the Roman model, than the Greek model.
Take your health care example:
Nixon, a Republican president, proposed in 1974 a national health care system much better than the one the ACA has imposed upon us; it was single-payer, rather than forcing us to be customers of insurance companies. It was a much better plan. On his deathbed, Teddy Kennedy, a powerful Democratic senator from the state of Massachusetts, stated that his one regret in his political career was not agreeing to help Nixon implement this plan.
The current ACA, which just raised my premiums another 25% to deal with the sunset clause on federal subsidies for the state health exchange for those who can not afford insurance, is jokingly called "TARP III" (TARP I and TARP II were the bail-outs for the financial institutions and Wall Street, who were considered "too big to fail"). This is because it transferred nearly a trillion dollars to AIG (Allied Insurance Group) and other insurance agencies and groups, as part of the implementation of the ACA.
So we are not moving forward on health care even now, and it was a Democrat who instituted the ACA, because the Democratic platform aligned with insurance industry interests.
Politics is not simple, when you are talking about 240 year old systems.
Consider that the German system as it exists today had its reset button pushed in 1945; Germany, as it exists today, is a fairly new governmental system, despite the age of the name of the region which it occupies, being less than 75 years old.
Likewise, the Commonwealth government in the Britain and the U.K. date from about the 1920's, making them less than 100 years old as a governmental system.
The French revolution occurred not long after the U.S. revolutionary war -- yet it, too, had the rest button pushed on its government at the end of WW II, meaning it is less than 75 years old, as well.
The Japanese government had it's reset button pushed around the end of WW II as well.
The dissolution of the Soviet Union occurred in 1991 -- it's the youngest of all discussed so far: technically speaking, all of the governments in the Soviet Union are less than 25 years old.
One commonality in all of this, is the the U.S., as part of the Marshall Plan, and with the exception of the Russian Republics, had a hand in rebuilding all of these nations and governments, and they benefitted from the U.S. being aware of the mistakes that they had made in their own government, and what mistakes to avoid, going forward.
It's not so easy to correct your own system from inside. So yeah: it's been kind of slow.