Is the East Still 'Red?' - Notes on
China
From the racist Charlie Chan caricatures of the "inscrutable
Chinese" to the influence of Mao Zedong thought, China has always
been a source of fascination in the west. But what sort of influence
does it have? For one thing, many people seem unsure as to what sort
of society China actually is? Ask a group is China communist, and
you'll hear, "yes", "no", "maybe" and "it used to be" as the
answers.
Ironically, as China more and more resembles western market
capitalism, interest in Mao Zedong thought is rising. Like a scene
out of "I was a teenage Maoist," in Montreal, the Revolutionary
Communist Party (Organizing Committee) is apparently recruiting
radicalizing youth, and has begun to operate in Toronto too. But the
pull of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism thought isn't just confined to
official Maoism organizations. An Anarchist Black Cross group
recently republished the Maoist tract, "Organization Means
Commitment." Full of ludicrous sentence structure and 'Serve the
People' rhetoric, this statist ideology has struck a chord among the
anti-statists. It's not so hard to believe that if the
anti-globalization mobilizations of recent years were taking place in
the 70s, many of those participating would be carrying the Great
Helmsman's Little Red Book. It's necessary to examine then what is
China?
The Communist Party of China (CPC) was founded in 1921 in
Shanghai. Six years later, it was decimated as a result of the
Comintern's disastrous policy of allying with the
bourgeois-nationalist Guomindang. From that point saw the rise of Mao
Zedong. The Communist Party was ultimately victorious on October 1st
1949, and while its image may have been sexier than that of the
somewhat stodgy Soviet Union, its mission was little different. The
regime saw itself as the conscious modernizer of China, and whether
or not on some level the party cadres believed in Marxism, their
beliefs were utilized as an ideology for modernization and compulsory
labour. The CPC would fulfill the tasks of the bourgeois revolution.
The victory of the Communist Party was the triumph of a
state-capitalist ideology.
The Cultural Revolution of 1966 was accepted by many starry-eyed
youth in the West as an anti-bureaucratic and youth-driven struggle
against the bureaucratic elements in the Communist Party. Leaving
aside the fact that Mao, aged 73 in 1966, began this 'struggle' as a
way to regain ground lost as a result of his disastrous policies in
the so-called Great Leap Forward. When sections of the Red Guards
took the rhetoric seriously, Mao used the People's Liberation Army to
suppress them. Mao's death in 1976 and the arrest of the Gang of Four
led China in a new direction.
As China's cautiously abandoned the scorched earth rhetoric that
would become the hallmark of the Khmer Rouge regime, Deng Xiao Ping
and his supporters, went even beyond Bukharin's cries to "peasants
enrich yourselves" to note "to get rich is glorious." For many of the
Chinese regime's boosters like the Communist Party of Canada
(Marxist-Leninist), this was the end of the revolution. (Actually,
the CPC-ML backdated their critique and concluded that Mao had never
been any good, switching their allegiance to Albania's Enver Hoxha)
For others, it produced a similar crisis and many significant
movements suffered damaging splits (the RCP in the U.S.) or
disappeared altogether (the Workers Communist Party and En Lutte! in
Canada).
While the Maoists saw this as capitalist restoration (just as they
saw Khrushchev ushering in capitalism in the Soviet Union), the
Trotskyists by and large maintain that China is still a workers'
state, although coming ever closer to the brink. Approximately once a
year, the U.S. Spartacist League publishes an article on how China is
coming closer to the edge, but inevitably concludes that it is still
a workers state.
As for the regime, unlike the Moscow Stalinists who tried to
introduce market reforms (perestroika) and a measure of democracy
(glasnost) and lost control of everything, the Beijing Stalinists
have done an admirable jobs of market reforms while keeping control;
the events of Tiananmen Square notwithstanding. Until now.
The state-led development structure has more or less worked
successfully by transforming aspects of the Chinese economy from
feudal production levels to a manufacturing-based economy (although
obviously, there is still a long way to go), but as China integrates
itself into the world economy, this strategy is running into
difficulties as the old state-owned industries are privatized and the
economy opened up to the world market and foreign companies.
The economic 'reforms' have benefited some. Of China's billion
plus population, approximately 50 million now lead middle class
lifestyles. However, the social costs are mounting and are
threatening to run out of control. In the course of their
privatization, many of the former state industries have been looted
by their former managers. Old and inefficient industries have been
closed down, transforming the "Iron Rice Bowl" of Maoist legend into
a rust bowl with estimates of 100 million people in a permanent
migration from city to city in search of work.
It doesn't take a very close look to see that despite earlier
successes, the Chinese government is now struggling to keep things in
check. On April 13 of this year, crowds as large as 1,000 rioted in
Huaxi, in Zhejiang Province in an effort to stop pollution from
nearby factories. On April 25, 10,000 workers in Shenzhen at
Japanese-owned Uniden Electronic Products struck over issues of union
recognition and working conditions. Interestingly, despite the
anti-Japanese rhetoric currently promoted in China, the company sided
with the Japanese owners of the plant in forcing the workers back to
work. And these are not isolated cases. An article from the New York
Times in December 2004 suggested that almost 60,000 of these moments
of social tension had occurred that year. The seeds of these disputes
were sown in 1997, when at the party congress 100 million layoffs
over the next decade were announced. Despite their relative
successes, the future looks very risky for the Chinese
Stalinists.
While the economy continues to grow, these problems may be offset.
In 2004, the Chinese economy grew by 9.4%., However, some many China
watchers are predicting a meltdown in the economy in the next three
to five years Andy Xie of Morgan Stanley noted "China is an export
and investment-driven model, and the connection between exports and
investment is basically the state banking system that takes the money
earned by exports and puts that into investment, regardless of
returns.," This cannot continue indefinitely.
It seems likely that the further integration of China into the
world economy will cause massive disruption, and given the U.S.'s
strategy for growth relies partly on China, the world economy too
seems destined for trouble. As the Chinese used to say, may you live
in interesting times.
Some Useful Further Reading
Cajo Brendel. Theses on
the Chinese Revolution. London: Solidarity, 1974.
Loren
Goldner. China in the Contemporary World Dynamic of Accumulation and
Class Struggle: A Challenge for the Radical Left
Bill Russell. "Chinese Roads to State Capitalism: Stalinism
and Bukharinism in China's Industrial Revolution." Root & Branch,
#8, circa 1979. Available from
Red & Black Notes
Home Page / Index
/ Articles / Reviews
/ History / Links /
Publications Martin
Glaberman Archive /
Against Capital / What's
New