Click on Links masthead to clear previous query from search box
Recent comments
- The Olympics: Unveiling Police State 2.0
11 hours 11 min ago - Thank you for this amazing documentary
11 hours 26 min ago - Musharaf resignation a victory for democratic forces of Pakistan
11 hours 42 min ago - A US-backed dictator tossed overboard
14 hours 6 min ago - DSP message of congratulations to comrades in Pakistan
21 hours 3 min ago - Looking over a shoulder
1 day 9 hours ago - Behind the war on South Ossetia
1 day 16 hours ago - Boris Kagarlitsky on the Russia-Georgia conflict & video
1 day 18 hours ago - Immanuel Wallerstein on the mini-war in the Caucasus
1 day 20 hours ago - US stokes war fears in Europe
1 day 21 hours ago
China: Socialist revolution and capitalist restoration
By Chris Slee
The Chinese revolution was one of the most important events of the twentieth century. The victory of the revolution in 1949 was a major defeat for imperialism. The new Communist Party government carried out democratic measures such as land reform, and improved the conditions of workers and peasants through the spread of health care and literacy. It began expropriating industry, and within a few years had nationalised all capitalist enterprises. It proclaimed that the revolution had entered the socialist stage.
A Lego recreation of Jeff Widener's 1989 photograph of "The unknown rebel".
But the new state was bureaucratically distorted from
its inception. The bureaucrats enjoyed substantial privileges. They repressed
dissent amongst workers, peasants, students and intellectuals. And they engaged
in violent power struggles amongst themselves, undermining the gains of the
revolution.
Eventually the bureaucracy set out on the road of
restoring capitalism. By 1992, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) leadership had
adopted a policy of restoring capitalist economic relations as the predominant
relations of production. The state had become a capitalist state.
The struggle for power
In 1921, when the CCP was founded,
In 1911, the Chinese emperor was overthrown by
nationalist army officers. However, this did not resolve the situation. Foreign
intervention continued, with various imperialist powers grabbing pieces of
Chinese territory. China was divided amongst competing regional tyrants known
as ``warlords’’, and the central government virtually ceased to exist. Peasants
were ruthlessly exploited by the big landowners. Some modern industry was
established, mainly in the coastal cities, but the workers (who were only a
very small proportion of China's population) were ruthlessly exploited by
foreign and Chinese capitalists, enduring very long hours and unsafe and
unhealthy conditions.
The main bourgeois nationalist party, the Guomindang,
aimed to unite China by defeating the warlords. During the 1920s the Communist
Party formed an alliance with the Guomindang. But once the main warlord armies
were defeated, the Guomindang, headed by Chiang Kai-shek, turned on its ally
and massacred thousands of communists.
The Guomindang lost whatever progressive direction it
originally had, and became an unambiguously reactionary party of landlords and
capitalists. It did deals with some of the warlords it had formerly opposed.
The Communist Party was virtually wiped out in the
cities, but it survived in remote rural areas. With peasant support the CCP
began to grow again. Liberated areas were established, with their own
revolutionary governments. In these areas the CCP carried out progressive
measures such as land reform. Land was taken from big landlords and distributed
among the peasants.
National united front
During the 1930s the Japanese imperialists seized
large areas of Chinese territory. There developed a strong popular sentiment
that all Chinese should unite against the Japanese invaders. A truce was
eventually arranged between the Guomindang and the communists, but only after
Chiang Kai-shek had been taken prisoner by some of his own generals and forced
to agree.
During the period of the national united front against
Japanese imperialism -- from 1937 to the end of the second world war -- the CCP
moderated its land reform policy. Instead of redistributing land from the
landlords to the peasants, it merely reduced land rents and interest rates. In
theory, that was also the policy of the Guomindang, but the latter never
actually carried it out.
It was during the anti-Japanese war that the CCP
became a really powerful force. Because it had the support of the peasantry,
the CCP could wage an effective guerrilla war. The Guomindang, on the other
hand, became increasingly discredited due to its corruption and incompetence.
After the defeat of
The Guomindang received a lot of
In 1949 Chiang Kai-shek fled to the island of Taiwan.
The Chinese mainland was united under the rule of the Communist Party. CCP leader
Mao Zedong proclaimed the establishment of the People’s Republic of
The People’s Republic
The new political system was called ``new democracy’’.
It was said to be based on an alliance between four classes -- the working
class, the peasantry, the petty bourgeoisie and the national bourgeoisie.
The revolution was intended to be democratic, not
socialist. It was directed against imperialism, feudalism and what was termed
``bureaucrat-capitalism’’ – that is, against those capitalists who had gained
their wealth through corrupt links with the Chiang Kai-shek regime. The
national bourgeoisie was regarded as an ally.
In the rural areas, land reform was extended to the
newly liberated areas. The CCP began to encourage the formation of mutual aid
teams and cooperatives. Participation in cooperatives was supposed to be
voluntary.
In the urban areas the government expropriated the
property of Chiang Kai-shek's collaborators, but initially allowed other
capitalists to continue running their enterprises. The Communist Party did
however launch a drive to recruit workers to its ranks[1], and it reorganised
the union movement on an industrial basis. The CCP also made a major effort to
recruit students and intellectuals.
After the defeats of the 1920s, the CCP's base in the
cities had been greatly weakened. The urban population did not play a major
role in the victory over Chiang Kai-shek. The victory was won by a peasant army
(known as the People’s Liberation Army, or PLA). The fact that the revolution
came to the cities from outside, without the active participation of the urban
masses, was a factor contributing to the bureaucratic nature of the regime.
In the immediate aftermath of the victory, the PLA
played a major role in administering the cities. Many administrative personnel
from the Chiang regime also remained in their positions. In local governments
and other institutions there was often a ``triple alliance’’, comprising
representatives of the CCP and the PLA, representatives of mass organisations
such as trade unions, and personnel from the old regime.
The outbreak of the Korean War in 1950 led to a change
in policy. The arrival of large numbers of US troops in
Furthermore, some capitalists were bribing government
and party officials to get favourable treatment from the government. These
problems and dangers led to a radicalisation of the CCP’s policy.
A series of mass movements were launched by the CCP
leadership. The ``3 anti’’ movement was directed against bribe-taking, waste
and bureaucratism amongst government and party officials. The ``5 anti’’
movement was directed against bribery, tax evasion, theft of state property,
cheating on state contracts and theft of state economic information by
capitalists. Unions were told to mobilise their members to investigate their
employers. Bosses were brought before mass meetings and confronted with
accusations by their workers.
Those who confessed and said they were sorry were
usually able to keep their positions as owners and managers of the means of
production -- at least in the short term. However this experience intimidated
the capitalist class and weakened its ability to resist subsequent
nationalisation measures.
In October 1953 the CCP stated that its policy was one
of ``transition to socialism’’ (see Brugger, p.112 and p.119). By 1956 nearly
all capitalist property had been nationalised.[2]
Social gains
The early years of the revolution brought big gains
for the Chinese masses. Health and education were greatly improved. The new
regime organised mass campaigns to eliminate disease, illiteracy, prostitution,
forced marriage of women and young girls, and many other abuses of the old
society.
Prior to the revolution, a large proportion of the
people lived on the brink of starvation. This so lowered their resistance to
disease that epidemics killed thousands every year. While there were no
reliable statistics, one estimate of the average life expectancy in China in
1935 was 28 years! (Horn, p. 125; cited by Evans, p. 49) Another estimate of
life expectancy before liberation was 35 years (Ruth and Victor Sidel, p.94).
By 1981 life expectancy had risen to 69.6 years for
women and 67.0 for men, according to Chinese figures (Sidel & Sidel,
p.94).[3]
Massive campaigns of vaccination and public health
education, stepped up medical training and widely distributed health services
virtually wiped out many diseases that were rampant in the past.
Medical services were brought to rural areas which had
not previously seen a doctor. The number of doctors was rapidly expanded, and
doctors from urban areas were encouraged to spend some time in rural areas. In
addition, tens of thousands of rural people were trained as paramedics (known
as ``barefoot doctors’’) and were able to provide a basic level of health care
to their neighbours.
Urban workers also benefited from the revolution. In
addition to the health and literacy programs, they gained job security and
other benefits, such as housing supplied by their enterprise.
What sort of revolution?
How should we analyse what happened in China in the
first few years after 1949? What sort of revolution was it?
I would sum it up by saying that the CCP first carried
out a democratic revolution (land reform, achievement of national
independence). It then began some initial steps in the transition to socialism.
It mobilised the working class to weaken the power of the capitalists. It
nationalised capitalist industry and began building a planned economy, which
began to bring social gains for the workers and peasants.
However, the transition to socialism was hindered both
by objective conditions (the backwardness of China, the pressures of
imperialism) and by the bureaucratic nature of the Communist Party.
The CCP mobilised the workers and peasants to attack
the capitalists and landlords, but did not allow them to organise in a
democratic manner. The workers and peasants made big social gains, but politically
they were ruled over by a bureaucratic regime.
In the Democratic Socialist Perspective of Australia,
we usually refer to this kind of state as a ``bureaucratically deformed
worker’s state’’, or a ``bureaucratically ruled socialist state’’.
Bureaucracy
The Communist Party bureaucracy had begun to develop
in the liberated zones during the decades of civil war and war against Japanese
imperialism. Communist Party officials, PLA officers etc became a privileged
layer in the liberated zones. Bureaucratic tendencies were exacerbated when the
CCP came to power in the cities.
In 1956, the Chinese government adopted a system of
ranks for state employees that included 30 grades, with the top grade receiving
28 times the pay of the bottom grade. (Evans, p. 86) In addition to their
salaries, higher party and state officials had expense accounts that provided
special housing, cars, drivers, personal servants, meals, travel and more.
The CCP used repression against people who supported
the revolution but disagreed with some of the government's policies. One early
example was the arrest of several hundred Trotskyists in 1952-53.
In 1956, following Khrushchev's speech denouncing
Stalin's reign of terror in the Soviet Union, there was a brief period of
liberalisation in China. People were encouraged to voice their criticisms. The CCP
advanced the slogan: ``Let a hundred flowers bloom, let a hundred schools of
thought contend.’’
However the amount of criticism that came forward
shocked the party leadership, and in June 1957 there was a crackdown. Many of
those who had spoken out were arrested. This repression intimidated people from
criticising mistaken policies of the Communist Party and the government. This
meant that mistakes were not corrected until they had become disasters of such
a magnitude that the leadership was forced to change course.
The bureaucratic nature of the CCP was also reflected
in its foreign policy. In 1954 China and the Soviet Union combined to put
pressure on the Vietnamese Communist Party to agree to the division of Vietnam
at the Geneva peace conference. But instead of showing gratitude to the Chinese
leadership, US imperialism continued its embargo on trade or any other form of
contact with China.
Divisions in the leadership
Over the years there have been a series of internal
struggles within the CCP leadership, which have resulted in drastic changes in
policy, affecting the economy and all aspects of social life.
In the early and middle fifties, a system of
centralised planning was established. Heavy industry was given priority over
the production of consumer goods. The Soviet Union provided aid and technical
advisers. The first five year plan (1953-1957) was successful in bringing about
a rapid growth in production. Employment and workers' wages also grew.
During the same period agricultural cooperatives
spread, and ``higher level cooperatives’’, which were in effect collective
farms, began to be formed.
In 1958, carried away by these apparent successes, the
CCP leadership went on a voluntarist binge. (Voluntarism is the idea that, if
we try hard enough, we can do whatever we like, regardless of objective
conditions.)
Mao, who had become increasingly out of touch with
reality, initiated a set of policies that led to severe setbacks for the
revolution. The Chinese media, presumably reflecting Mao's views, talked of
advancing rapidly to communism, ignoring the fact that the material basis for
this did not exist in China at that time (see Maitan, p. 47). Mao put forward
unrealistic targets for rapid economic growth, but adopted policies that led to
a period of economic decline.
The collective farms were amalgamated into communes
comprising tens of thousands of people. These were too large for the peasants
to identify with. Calls went out for enormous increases in industrial and
agricultural production -- for what was termed a ``great leap forward’’.
Workers and peasants were pushed to work at an excessive pace. Transport and
supply systems collapsed. Thousands of small scale ``backyard’’ blast furnaces
were established. They turned out poor quality iron, much of which was totally
useless.
Peasants were set to work on big projects such as dam
construction. While some of these projects were useful, others were ill
conceived, an a lot of labour was waste through poor planning. This would
undoubtedly have led to a growth of cynicism about the benefits of collective
labour amongst many peasants.
The net result of the Great Leap Forward was a severe
decline in agriculture -- causing the reappearance of famine -- and chaos in
industry, aggravated by the sudden cutting off of Soviet aid in 1960.
The Communist Party leadership was forced to retreat.
The July 1959 central committee meeting began a gradual process of reversing
some of the voluntarist policies. The communes lost much of their importance.
Smaller units -- production brigades (i.e. villages) and production teams --
became the basic units. The peasants were allowed small private plots.
In the early 1960s China began to recover from the
effects of the Great Leap Forward. However, a new wave of turmoil was about to
hit the country. The failure of Mao's grandiose schemes had discredited him
somewhat and reduced his influence within the party leadership. There had
already been differences within the leadership over the speed of the transition
from individual farming to collective agriculture. The debacle of the Great
Leap Forward exacerbated this conflict and sowed the seeds of an open and
extremely bitter split in the leadership.
However there was no open admission of mistakes, nor
open criticism of Mao, who was the driving force behind the Great Leap Forward
and the communes. The cult of Mao was maintained. Even at the July 1959 central
committee meeting, which began the retreat from the policies of the Great Leap
Forward, most leaders seem to have been reluctant to openly criticise Mao.
Defence minister Peng Dehuai wrote a letter to Mao criticising some of the
voluntarist policies, but does not seem to have openly attacked Mao. However
this did not prevent him from being dismissed from his position as a result of
the letter (see *Memoirs of a Chinese Marshal*, Foreign Languages Press:
Beijing 1984)
Two factions
The retreat from the Great Leap Forward began in 1959
and continued in the early sixties. By this time, if not before, two hostile
factions had emerged among the CCP leadership.
One faction, headed by Liu Shaochi and Deng Xiaoping,
were often referred to as ``pragmatists’’ or ``moderates’’. They wanted no more
voluntarist adventures like the Great Leap Forward. They emphasised increasing
production through material incentives; they also wanted managers and technical
experts to be able to run industry with minimal interference from political
cadres.
The other faction, headed by Mao Zedong, and including
defence minister Lin Biao (who had replaced Peng Dehuai) and Mao's wife Jiang
Qing, was still prone to voluntarism. They were also anti-intellectual and
xenophobic, and tended to glorify the peasantry and denigrate city life. They
sometimes used egalitarian rhetoric, but this was hypocritical given the
privileged lifestyle of the bureaucracy, of which they were part.
Cultural Revolution
The Maoist faction, in decline after the debacle of
the Great Leap Forward, launched the Cultural Revolution as a means of making a
comeback .[4] They made use of Mao's prestige to mobilise youth to attack the
wing of the bureaucracy that supported Liu and Deng, who were accused of
``following the capitalist road’’. The cult of Mao, built up over several
decades and never seriously challenged by other members of the CCP leadership
(except to a limited extent during the brief period of relative openness in
1956-7), was used as a weapon against Mao's opponents.
Mao and his supporters used some radical-sounding
slogans to mobilise students against Mao’s opponents (e.g. ``It is right to
rebel’’). High school and university students formed groups of ``rebels’’ or
``red guards’’. They criticised, publicly humiliated and often physically
attacked teachers, professors and academic authorities. They also attacked
party and government officials.
Mao’s faction tried to keep control of the movement,
directing it against those perceived as Mao’s opponents. But some groups got
out of control and began attacking Mao’s supporters as well. Some groups seized
arms, and different groups of ``rebels’’ began fighting each other .
In some areas workers began demanding and going on
strike for wage rises, shorter hours, better working conditions and better
social security. Some began to throw out their factory managers and replace
them with elected committees (Maitan, pp. 124-6).
The army was brought in to restore order. As a means
of co-opting some of the ``rebel’’ leaders, ``revolutionary committees’’ were
set up in schools and factories, and to replace local and provincial
governments. These committees included representatives of the army, the old
party cadres, and the young ``rebels’’.
As a further measure to contain the upsurge, millions
of students were sent to the countryside, supposedly to learn from the
peasants, but actually to get them out of the way and keep them quiet.
Although the Maoist faction appeared to have come out
on top in the inner-party struggle, their grip on power was actually very
shaky. They had to restore to positions of authority many of the old cadres who
had been purged, in order to get society functioning normally again. The
Maoists depended heavily on the army, but its loyalty was also very shaky.
Thus the Cultural Revolution ended in an uneasy
compromise.
Right turn in foreign policy
At this stage, US imperialism started putting out
feelers to the Chinese bureaucrats. It was looking for a deal with China at the
expense of Vietnam and third world national liberation struggles generally. The
first talks were held in 1969. US secretary of state Henry Kissinger visited
China in 1971, preparing the ground for Nixon's visit the following year.
China's foreign policy turned sharply to the right in
1971, with the Chinese government openly supporting the reactionary side in
struggles in Ceylon, Bangladesh and Sudan. It appears that most of the leaders
of both the Maoist and anti-Maoist factions agreed on the right turn. Defence
minister Lin Biao may have been an exception. Previously Mao's leading
supporter, he is believed to have died in a plane crash in September 1971 while
fleeing towards the Soviet Union after an alleged coup attempt. However it is difficult
to be sure of the reasons for his split with Mao.
Deng's return
The uneasy compromise between the Maoists and the
``moderates’’ continued. In 1973 Deng Xiaoping was restored as vice-premier. In
1976 Premier Zhou Enlai died. He was generally regarded as a moderate, although
unlike Deng Xiaoping or Liu Shaochi he had not been purged in the Cultural
Revolution. After Zhou’s death, Deng was purged yet again. However, a mass
demonstration occurred in Beijing under cover of ``mourning’’ for Zhou Enlai.
It was violently repressed.
Later that year Mao died. The Maoists -- led by the
so-called Gang of Four, including Mao's widow Jiang Qing -- were defeated in
the ensuing power struggle.
At first Hua Guofeng became the leader. He was a sort
of compromise figure. But by 1978 Deng Xiaoping had become the real leader of
China, though Hua remained a figurehead until 1980. In that year Deng's
supporters Hu Yaobang and Zhao Ziyang took over as party secretary and prime
minister respectively.
The death of Mao and the rise to power of Deng
Xiaoping led to a degree of liberalisation. Art, literature and music had been
severely repressed by Jiang Qing, who was in charge of culture. Only
stereotyped ``proletarian’’ art was allowed. Deng allowed more freedom for
different varieties of art, and also initially allowed a degree of freedom for
critical comment about society. But he soon became worried at the extent of the
criticism coming forward and arrested some of the most outspoken dissidents.
The Communist Party talked about a non-dogmatic
approach to Marxism. Books by or about Bolshevik opponents of Stalin, such as
Trotsky and Bukharin, were published, as were some of Ernest Mandel's writings.
However the pro-imperialist foreign policy continued
and even got worse. In 1979, shortly after Deng came to power, Chinese troops
invaded Vietnam. The invasion occurred shortly after Deng had visited the US,
and it is reasonable to assume it was planned in collusion with the US.
The Chinese troops met strong resistance and were soon
forced to withdraw, but only after causing substantial damage and loss of life.
Chinese harassment of Vietnam continued for a number of years. China continued
to support the forces of the former Pol Pot regime -- a genocidal regime which
ruled Cambodia between 1975 and 1979 and had been ousted by Vietnamese troops.
Pol Pot’s forces, which were carrying out attacks on Cambodia from Thailand,
received Chinese as well as Western aid.
Economic changes reintroduce capitalism
Deng’s main changes were in the economic area. These
changes are often referred to as ``market reforms’’. In the early stages, the
reforms could be seen as similar to those carried out by the Bolsheviks during
the period of the New Economic Policy in the 1920s -- i.e. the use of market
mechanisms to develop the economy, but with the state sector remaining
predominant in large-scale industry. But by 1992 the Deng regime had adopted
the perspective of restoring capitalism as the dominant mode of production.
The first step in the market reforms was to encourage
peasants to sell produce from their private plots on the free market. The next
step was the introduction of what was called the ``responsibility system’’.
Each peasant household was allocated a certain amount of collectively owned
land to farm. Each family had to produce a certain amount of wheat, rice or
other crop for the collective. Whatever they produced above this amount they
could keep for themselves, sell to the state, or sell on the free market.
In the cities the responsibility system meant that
individual factories became responsible for their own profits and losses. If a
factory could not make a profit it could be forced to close.
Foreign-owned companies were allowed to establish
joint ventures with Chinese state and collective enterprises. As the reform
process went further, some wholly foreign-owned enterprises were established.
Restrictions on the ability of Chinese citizens to establish privately owned
enterprises were progressively eased.
``Special economic zones’’ were established, where
foreign capitalists were offered cheap labour and land, low taxes and easy
remission of profits. But soon foreign capital was no longer confined to these
zones, and began spreading throughout China.
Corruption spread as bureaucrats increasingly strove
to accumulate wealth for themselves and their relatives and cronies in the
context of an increase in private ownership of the means of production. The
bureaucrats began to start to turn themselves into owners of capital.
The 1989 democracy movement and the Beijing massacre
But opposition to corruption -- and to the
bureaucratic regime -- began to grow. In 1988-89 there was an upsurge of
demands for freedom and democracy, and against corruption. In April 1989
students protested in Beijing's Tien An Men square. They remained for more than
a month and were joined by many non-students. The army was ordered to remove
the protesters, but the protesters talked to the soldiers and won many of them
over. Workers joined the protest and raised their own demands, focusing on job
security, wages, opposition to the burgeoning private enterprises, and control
over their workplaces.
Eventually the regime brought in new army units that
used extreme violence to crush the movement. A wave of repression followed.
In early 1992, Deng Xiaoping gave the go-ahead for a
policy of all-out privatisation. He cited the example of Guangdong province,
where privatisation was most advanced, as an example for the whole of China to
follow. The 14th Communist Party congress later that year confirmed this
perspective, adopting a policy of creating what was termed a ``socialist market
economy’’. In reality, it was a policy of creating a capitalist economy.
At the 15th congress of the Communist Party in 1997
the policy was reaffirmed and deepened. Jiang Zemin (the president of
When did the state become capitalist?
While it is clear that the Chinese state is now
capitalist, there was some debate in the DSP a few years ago about when the decisive change occurred.
In his report to the January 1999 DSP congress on
``The Class Nature of the Chinese State’’ (reprinted in the pamphlet The Class Nature of the People's Republic of
China, Resistance Books, 2004) Doug Lorimer argued that 1992 was the point
of qualitative change towards a ``new course -- towards the full-scale
restoration of capitalism’’. This was when the CCP leadership adopted a policy
of all-out privatisation. He argued that this was the point at which the
People’s Republic of China became a capitalist state.
In this report, Lorimer polemicised against a view I
had expressed during the pre-congress discussion that the decisive change
occurred in December 1978, when Deng Xiaoping came to power. I held this view
because Deng’s rise to power was the starting point for the ``market reforms’’
which eventually culminated in the predominance of the capitalist mode of
production.
Lorimer pointed out that there is no evidence that
Deng was already committed to the restoration of capitalism in December 1978,
and that the market reforms implemented in the years immediately after Deng's
rise to power were not in themselves evidence that the state was capitalist.
Rather they could be interpreted as an attempt to carry out a reform along the
lines of those carried out in Yugoslavia and elsewhere, where the role of the
market had increased but state property remained predominant.
I now agree that it was premature to talk of the state
becoming capitalist in 1978. In principle, a different outcome was possible.
The relaxation of repression during the 1980s, however limited and
contradictory, created the potential for moving in the direction of socialist
democracy rather than capitalist restoration.
Unfortunately this potential was crushed. The 1989 Beijing
massacre, by crushing the movement for socialist democracy, helped prepare the
way for the turn to capitalist restoration a few years later.
China today
Today millions of Chinese workers are ruthlessly
exploited by local and foreign capital. Extremely long hours, physical
punishment, fines and non-payment of wages are among the abuses suffered by
many Chinese workers. (This is documented in the book China's Workers Under Assault: the Exploitation of Labor in a
Globalizing Economy, by Anita Chan)
By 2005 China had become the world’s third-biggest
recipient of foreign investment. In that year, the flow of foreign direct
investment into China was US$72 billion, which was exceeded only by Britain and
the United States, according to OECD figures.
The transnational corporations (and the South Korean,
Taiwanese and Hong Kong contractors who do much of their dirty work) are
attracted by the huge reserve army of labour created by the displacement of
peasants from the land, and of workers from state-owned factories that have cut
their workforce or closed down altogether. They are also attracted by the total
absence of unions in many enterprises, and the tameness of the All-China
Federation of Trade Unions where it exists.[5]
It is clear that China is now a capitalist country.
Yet the imperialists are not totally satisfied. State-owned enterprises remain
dominant in certain strategic industrial sectors and in the banking sector. The
imperialists want more rapid and complete privatisation, and unfettered access
to all areas of the economy. This contributes to the tension which exists
between China and the United States. It helps to explain the rhetoric from
Western politicians and media about the need for ``democracy’’ in China.
It appears that the Chinese regime wishes to maintain
a certain degree of independence from imperialism. Although in the past it has
collaborated with imperialism to attack Third World revolutions, today it has
good relations with Cuba and Venezuela.
Nevertheless, the state remains capitalist. It
represses the resistance of the workers to capitalist exploitation.
However, workers are fighting back against the attacks
on their job security, living standards and working conditions. There have been
thousands of strikes and protests by Chinese workers, as well as numerous
protests by peasants against land seizures by local governments and property
developers, and protests by environmentalists against pollution and other forms
of environmental destruction.
These struggles indicate the potential for a new
socialist revolution.
[Chris Slee is a member of the Democratic Socialist
Perspective, a Marxist tendency within the Socialist Alliance of Australia.]
Notes
1. ``Many factories reported increases in Party
membership from some three per cent to between 10 and 30 per cent, of whom
large numbers were skilled workers and technicians... By mid-1950, therefore,
the composition of the Party ... was very different from two years previously.
In the following year when 11.4 per cent of the total industrial workforce in
north-east China was enrolled, it was announced that within five years the
Party planned to recruit one-third of all the industrial workers’’ (Brugger, p.
61).
2. ``In theory, the state was supposed to own
enterprises jointly with the former owners, who were to draw 5 per cent of the
value of their business for twenty years. Since there was officially no
inflation, this was supposed to represent full payment of the total value. The
former owners were to stay on as managers and be paid a relatively high wage,
but there would be a Party boss over them" (Jung Chang, p. 270-1; see also
Brugger, p. 120).
3. The World
Bank gives a slightly lower estimate of 64 years in 1979, but this is still
markedly better than India’s figure of 52 for the same year (Sidel and Sidel,
p. 93). It is likely that the 1981 Chinese figures are more accurate than the
1979 World Bank estimates, since Chinese statistics began to improve after the
death of Mao.
4. Doug Lorimer (The
Class Nature of the People’s Republic of China, Resistance Books 2004,
p.15) argues that there were two qualitatively different stages in the Cultural
Revolution -- the first initiated by Mao’s opponents and involving high school
students, the second initiated by Mao and involving university students. I am
not convinced by this argument. I view the two stages as part of a single
process initiated by Mao.
The cult of Mao meant that Mao’s opponents in the
bureaucracy did not usually oppose him openly. Rather they pretended to agree,
but tried to hinder the implementation of Mao's policies in practice, or
selectively implemented those aspects least harmful to themselves. This
happened in the early stages of the Cultural Revolution, but that does not
alter the fact that Mao was the driving force behind the Cultural Revolution as
a whole.
5. In 2006, the ACFTU launched a drive to unionise
foreign companies, and succeeded with many, including companies such as
Wal-Mart. (See Wall Street Journal,
October 13, 2006: China to press more
firms to unionize, by Mei Fong.) Critics charge that the ACFTU is more
concerned with controlling workers than organising them to fight for their
rights. It sometimes challenges blatant violations of China's labour laws by
employers through legal channels, but does not encourage strikes.
References
Bill Brugger, China:
Liberation and Transformation 1942-1962, Croom Helm: London, 1981.
Anita Chan, China's Workers Under Assault: the Exploitation of Labor in a Globalizing
Economy, East Gate: New York, 2001.
Jung Chang, Wild
Swans, Flamingo: London, 1992.
Les Evans, China
After Mao, Monad Press: New York, 1978.
Joshua Horn, Away
with all pests, Monthly Review Press: New York, 1969.
Livio Maitan, Party
Army and Masses in China, NLB: London, 1976.
Ruth and Victor Sidel, ``The Health of China, Zed:
London, 1982.


Comments
Post new comment