Originally posted by
[email protected] 26 2006, 08:30 PM
Now as for whether or not China is a worker’s state, I have to say that this notion is simply ridiculous. Even during Mao’s time, China was not a truly worker’s state as it was the Party that had the final say.
That's not the point.
Of course the political regime in China is not, and never has been, representative of the workers. Almost everyone knows that.
The real question is: what economic system does China have? What economic foundations does the state machinery rest on - and so necessarily, to a degree, defend?
It's on that economic basis that I and some others (in reality, dunno about this board) would argue China remains a workers state.
So do Russia, and other countries, whose political regimes no longer claim to be communist - a false claim anyway - but where stable capitalist property relations are a long way from being reestablished. In some ways the Chinese Communist Party and its highly repressive regime has been able to go further towards capitalism than they have.
The capitalists have noticed the problems they've run into in the former Soviet bloc, even if few leftists internationally have.
****
Since you've mentioned the countryside, it's interesting to note that despite the abolition of the collectives, the land is still state property. The peasants have the use of the land, but it cannot be transferred, sold, foreclosed on by banks.
The usual capitalist pattern - of peasants being driven off the land, and ownership being concentrated in fewer hands - is not happening in the Chinese countryside. In some ways this has buffered the social chaos and discontent that normally accompanies industrial expansion - and the moves towards capitalism in the cities.
Any reforms the Chinese government introduces occur in that context, so comparisons to rural reforms in the U.S. (which ones, anyway?) don't seem particularly useful.
That's why taxation, land seizures to clear land for industry, etc., are the major issues. Because unlike farmers in the U.S., Chinese farmers don't have to worry about losing their land to the bank.
****
As for industry: Privatization is a long way from complete. So are measures to try to make the state-owned companies operate like capitalist concerns, with profitability their highest concern.
They are underway, and fiercely resisted by workers and peasants - with thousands of strikes, demonstrations, and massive street fights with cops and soldiers.
People who say China is simply capitalist, are acting as if this battle was already lost. But it's still underway.
It should also be kept in mind that imperialist pressure on China - from the U.S., European powers, Japan - aims at encouraging and demanding further moves towards capitalism. Along with Chinese bureaucrats and capitalists, they're trying to push social reality one way - Chinese workers and peasants are pushing it the other.
Communist worldwide oughta side with Chinese workers and peasants and oppose imperialist pressure on China, obviously - but not many "leftists" do. Some take the opposite side.
Fidelbrand's comment that Chinese "state capitalism" is progressive compared to "pure market-liberal-economics." is interesting, and might point towards a conclusion I'd agree with, terminology aside.
***
As for Tragic Clown's stuff on China - on this one question, she does have a point, which some people could stand to think about. That looking at the economy, China is not simply capitalist.
'Course, she attributes this to the regime having some progressive content, and even sides with it against peasant protesters. That's where she's dead wrong.
The regime is trying as hard as it dares to push towards capitalism - and it's the worker and peasant protesters who are opposing the moves towards capitalism. They - not the regime - represent what's progressive about China's social setup - the remaining gains of the 1949 Revolution.