If my post is 'utter nonsense' then prove it with better arguments
These comments remind me of the time when I refused to believe that Mao was behind a famine or the Cultural Revolution after years of living in the West; it got to the point where I was arguing with a professor in class...
If my argument is so weak, do you have any stats and facts to destroy it?
While I have great hope for innovation in various Asian countries moving forward, I'm not sure that there will be many purely homegrown major innovations from these places for the next decade or three.
FWIW, I think that the catalyst for Asian innovation will be the exploration of areas that many religious westerners find inappropriate -- stem cell research, genetics research, etc. The question is whether then will be truly independent, or whether there will be a brain drain from the west that helps lay the foundation (much like Europeans did for the US in the twentieth century).
Regardless, we are in exciting times.
Although I hold strong dissent against Chinese government in many aspects (in particular censorship, e.g. GFW), although I agree the traditional norm of Chinese culture and society does not commend rebellions, your argument is a slippery slope at its best. Essentially, you are exaggerating from both ends: a. going from political suppression and a humble (or even submissive, if you wish) culture to suppression on technical innovation; b. reading too much from the so-called SV culture and success stories, so much so to draw a strong equivalence between innovation and (social) disruption.
For (a), as many peer comments have already stated, there are many counterexamples. Japan has a much more submissive culture and Russia has similarly, if not more, suppressive political atmosphere. Innovations still happen in both places. And I also suggest you to read more history to see how many innovations were achieved in unwelcoming environment. Yes, these are obstacles and might affect the scale and success of innovations, but obstacles exist everywhere (if there were no opposition, rebellions even wouldn't be called "rebellions" in SV), and small (in the sense of domain, e.g. purely technical) innovations are still innovations, which leads to the second point--
For (b), "disruption" is really a buzz word loved by VC, and there is a trend of extending such buzz word to contexts we would not use this word originally, for example an invention in a particular domain is now a "disruption" in that domain, which makes a ripple sound like a tide. Fundamental, social disruptions can be significantly harder in China, but that does not prevent other innovations, or if you prefer, "disruptions", from happening.
In a nutshell, you are stretching these two ends to force them to meet: the negative effect of political/cultural suppression --> impossible to innovate <-- the "disruptions" of innovations
And finally, pardon my language, your examples and references are utter nonsense. I know where you are trying to go from them, but they do not prove your point by any means.