Ultra-Left in China

[Leo]

I've been trying to find resources about Ultra-Left in China. I wasn't able to find much, but so far I did come up to interesting stuff:


Originally posted by Wikipedia Article+--> (Wikipedia Article) "Ultra-Left" refers to those GPCR rebel positions that diverged from the central Maoist line by identifying an antagonistic contradiction between the CPC-PRC party-state itself and the masses of workers and "peasants" conceived as a single proletarian class divorced from any meaningful control over production or distribution... The Ultra-Left argued that the objective interests of bureaucrats were structurally determined by the centralist state-form in direct opposition to the objective interests of the masses, regardless of however "red" a given bureaucrat's "thought" might be. The Ultra-Left argued that "cultural revolution" had to give way to "political revolution" - "in which one class overthrows another class". The masses could achieve democratic control over production and distribution only through "a new political power of the Paris Commune type." This meant that mass delegates subject to immediate recall and a universal salary would take over all the tasks necessary for organizing production and distribution, and all other bureaucratic posts would be abolished, including the military and police, which would give way to an armed citizenry. This revolution would necessarily involve general strikes, mutinies, weapons seizures, and, ultimately, the merging of the Chinese revolution with a global communist revolution. [/b]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-communism_in_china

I also found a quite interesting text written by an organization called Sheng-wu-lien (shortened form of Hunan Provincial Proletarian Revolutionary Great Alliance Committee) called "Whither China?". Apparently this organization was formed by a coalition of 20 Red Guard and rebel-worker groups, and it had 2 to 3 million followers. Apparently K’ang Sheng, Minister of Public Security, in a speech attacked this organization:


K’ang Sheng
They describe the State and the Party led by Chairman Mao as a privileged class similar to Khrushchev party ... It may be seen from an article by Yang Hsi-kuang that they have probably collected some counter-revolutionary works of Trotsky ... They say that the great cultural revolution has just begun, that the great cultural revolution in the past was merely reformism, and that it has really begun only since the emergence of “Sheng-wu-lien” ... They say that the provincial revolutionary committees and preparatory groups for these committees set up in the great cultural revolution are all reformists. Now we all know that the problems in various provinces were settled by Chairman Mao himself ... In a roundabout way and by all conceivable means they are trying to hoodwink the masses, describing the great cultural revolution, the solution of provincial problems, and the setting up of preparatory groups for revolutionary committees as reformism, and identifying them with the thought of Mao Tse-tung. In this way, isn’t Chairman Mao’s thought reformism too? In this way they slander our great leader Chairman Mao.

In "Whiter China?" they say:


The development of new productive forces in China today has brought in conflict the class that represents the new productive forces and the decaying class that represents the production relations which impede the progress of history. It will inevitably lead to a great social revolution, and a new society will inevitably be born amid the fierce flames... Facts as revealed by the masses and their wrath told people initially that this class of “Red” capitalists had completely become a decaying class that hindered the progress of history, and that the relations between them and the people in general had changed from relations between the leaders and the led to those between the rulers and the ruled, the exploiters and the exploited, from the relations of revolutionaries of equal standing to those between the oppressors and the oppressed. The special privileges and high salaries of the class of “Red” capitalists was built on the basis of the oppression and exploitation of the broad masses of the people. In order to realize the “People’s Commune of China”, it was necessary to overthrow this class...

http://www.marxists.de/china/sheng/

Thoughts?

[bcbm]

Sounds interesting. Let us know if you find more information.

[Comrade-Z]

Other interesting news:

Dang it! The link has expired. Anyways, an emerging Chinese punk-rock scene, with tinges of anarchism, is challenging Chinese government, culture, and wealth disparity. Yeehaw! Really, sometimes China astonishes me with its rapidity of progress. It sounds to me like parts of China are entering the U.S.'s equivalent of the late 1970s), which is about when the punk-rock phenomenon emerged in the U.S. and Britain--all the while rural parts of China are still stuck in the 18th century. An explosive mix! Especially when you throw in the 120 men to 100 women gender ratio among the latest generation of Chinese. And then there's the whole fact that the Chinese government is trying to govern an increasingly sophisticated population with the nakedly oppressive tactics of a one-party state, which must inevitably give way to multi-party "democracy," a far more subtle means of control and coercion, a la Russia after the dissolution of the USSR. In short, I can't see how China can avoid mass upheaval for much longer.

[Leo]

Other interesting news:

Dang it! The link has expired. Anyways, an emerging Chinese punk-rock scene, with tinges of anarchism, is challenging Chinese government, culture, and wealth disparity. Yeehaw! Really, sometimes China astonishes me with its rapidity of progress. It sounds to me like parts of China are entering the U.S.'s equivalent of the late 1970s), which is about when the punk-rock phenomenon emerged in the U.S. and Britain--all the while rural parts of China are still stuck in the 18th century. An explosive mix! Especially when you throw in the 120 men to 100 women gender ratio among the latest generation of Chinese. And then there's the whole fact that the Chinese government is trying to govern an increasingly sophisticated population with the nakedly oppressive tactics of a one-party state, which must inevitably give way to multi-party "democracy," a far more subtle means of control and coercion, a la Russia after the dissolution of the USSR. In short, I can't see how China can avoid mass upheaval for much longer.

The situation might get hopeful in China. After all, the Chinese working class has a good tradition of class struggle, full of strikes and they managed to establish communes in many occasions. Just to think that an "ultra-left" organization existed numbering between 2 to 3 million is quite interesting. (And makes me want to say "Take that!" to Zinoviev :lol: ) And today, it seems as if some people are chasing back this tradition and combining it with international positions of the communist left. I might write to people from that site about Left Communism in China for more information actually.

[Janus]

Anyways, an emerging Chinese punk-rock scene, with tinges of anarchism, is challenging Chinese government, culture, and wealth disparity
Yes, it's a vey recent phenomenon and an isolated one as well. It's nothing compared to the mass strikes that have been launched by farmers and workers.

[Janus]

Thoughts?
The Cultural Revolution was quite complicated and spawned many more groups and ideas than most people would imagine. Hunan was definitely one of the areas in which the Cultural Revolution was carried out with the utmost drive as it was the homr province of Mao (and me :P ). However, these groups were either attacked by other Red Guard groups or were later repressed by the Chinese government itself which is quite a shame.

[Janus]

I also found a quite interesting text written by an organization called Sheng-wu-lien (shortened form of Hunan Provincial Proletarian Revolutionary Great Alliance Committee) called "Whither China?".
OK, so after some digging I have discovered that the writer of this text was 杨小凯 or Yang Xiaokai formerly known as 杨曦光 or Yang Xiguang. He wrote this essay when he was only a 20 year old high school student. I'm not sure if he was in Sheng Wu Lian and I couldn't even find anything on that since I have no idea what Sheng Wu Lian would be in Chinese characters.

More on this guy, he was imprisoned for 10 years after writing this essay and later became a well known economist specializing in the mathematical aspect of it. He died in Australia in 2004.

[Leo]

OK, so after some digging I have discovered that the writer of this text was 杨小凯 or Yang Xiaokai formerly known as 杨曦光 or Yang Xiguang. He wrote this essay when he was only a 20 year old high school student. I'm not sure if he was in Sheng Wu Lian and I couldn't even find anything on that since I have no idea what Sheng Wu Lian would be in Chinese characters.

I think I encountered that name as well. I think on the article called "New Trends of Thought on Cultural Revolution" published in Journal of Contemporary China in July 1999, it is said that Xiguang was indeed in Sheng Wu Lian. In the link I gave for the text, which was published in one of Tony Cliff's party's magazines and Cliff wrote an introduction for it. I would say our best bet to find more about Sheng Wu Lian in Chinese characters would be that speech by K’ang Sheng.

[Janus]

Ok, so it's safe to assume that Yang Xiaokai was in Sheng Wu Lian as he is criticizing the three in one programs initiated by Mao as a counter against a Chinese Commune.


I would say our best bet to find more about Sheng Wu Lian in Chinese characters would be that speech by K’ang Sheng.
Still no luck with that; I can't find it in Chinese.


and it had 2 to 3 million followers
Sheng Wu Lian only existed for a few months before it was repressed, I don't see how they could've recruited that many people in such a short time.

[Alejandro C]

The Ultra-Left in China? In China there are no politics. The only people who talk about politics are the old people and all they do is ***** about other countries. Chinese people , when I say Chinese people I mean the very vast majority of them, don't think about politics, don't know about politics, and don't care about politics. In my opinion any uprising is so incredibly unlikely that its not even on the radar of the government officials. There have been an increase in outraged uprisings over mistreatment, corruption, and general problems; but these never really have any focus. They just want short term compensation or a solution. Usually they are compensated; with force, imprisonment, torture, or someother 'solution'. These are things that would set off national outrage in other countries, but in China no one hears of them or really pays attention to them. Because of the results of these, we can predict that political organizations or uprisings (which taking planning, coordination, and advertising of some sort or another) would have no change of being fruitful.
The only threat to the government is the government itself. If there were forces inside the government or the army that had ambition, that might be a threat. But we would never here about it until after it happened. For China to gain an interest in politics to the point that they could build up any support to stand up to the government would take decades.
I can't point to any articles that would support this, but it's my feeling, and those of you who know China I think would agree.

[Alf]

Leo was talking about the period of the 'Cultural Revolution' in the 60s. In relation to that, it would cetainly be interesting to find out more about the group Sheng Wu Lian (or however it's written). I remember hearing about it from a Swedish group which broke with Maoism and briefly discussed with us in the 70s before disappearing into modernism and lifestylism. I also recall mentioning it in an old article in World Revolution -I will try to dig it up. The Cultural Revolution was essentilaly a conflict between different factions of the Chinese ruling class, but there were genuine working class reactions during this period (in some cases, strikes by workers against the Red Guards coming into the fatcories and trying to intimidate them) and Sheng Wu Lian seems to have been the expression of some kind of break with Maoism by elements who no longer wanted to be manipulated by the bureaucracy.

Not long ago in the International Review we did an article on left communists in China during the second world war, so there is an internationalist tradition there. I will check out the reference and see whether it can be put online.

In response to Alejandro, there may well be disillusionment with what officially passes for politics in China today, but the brutal development of exploitation there over the past few years has provoked a whole series of workers' strikes and peasant rebellions. I don't have the figures to hand but I will try to find some.

[Leo]

Originally posted by Janus
Sheng Wu Lian only existed for a few months before it was repressed, I don't see how they could've recruited that many people in such a short time.

I think it was an alliance between about 20 different groups that existed before their unity. I got that number from a pretty decent academic source, I'll post the link soon.


Still no luck with that; I can't find it in Chinese.

Hmm, I'll email the owners of that site then, I hope they know more about it.


Leo was talking about the period of the 'Cultural Revolution' in the 60s. In relation to that, it would cetainly be interesting to find out more about the group Sheng Wu Lian (or however it's written). I remember hearing about it from a Swedish group which broke with Maoism and briefly discussed with us in the 70s before disappearing into modernism and lifestylism. I also recall mentioning it in an old article in World Revolution -I will try to dig it up. The Cultural Revolution was essentilaly a conflict between different factions of the Chinese ruling class, but there were genuine working class reactions during this period (in some cases, strikes by workers against the Red Guards coming into the fatcories and trying to intimidate them) and Sheng Wu Lian seems to have been the expression of some kind of break with Maoism by elements who no longer wanted to be manipulated by the bureaucracy.

Not long ago in the International Review we did an article on left communists in China during the second world war, so there is an internationalist tradition there. I will check out the reference and see whether it can be put online.

Alf, I was actually hoping that you would come post on this thread :) I would be very interested to read the ICC articles about the situation in China. Did you check the website about Left Communism in China? Do you know anything about the people who made it? Does the ICC has contacts in China?

[Leo]

In China there are no politics. The only people who talk about politics are the old people and all they do is ***** about other countries. Chinese people , when I say Chinese people I mean the very vast majority of them, don't think about politics, don't know about politics, and don't care about politics.

Just an interesting statistic: apparently, there were 65,000 clashes between the police and the civilians protesters last year. That makes about 200 clashes per day.

[Janus]

Chinese people , when I say Chinese people I mean the very vast majority of them, don't think about politics, don't know about politics, and don't care about politics.
:blink: Even if you are Chinese, how can you profess to speak for the majority of the population?


In my opinion any uprising is so incredibly unlikely that its not even on the radar of the government officials.
:lol: Which is why they spend so much time and money on repressing unrest.


The only threat to the government is the government itself
The government views its own people as a threat. In fact, there were an estimated 85,000 strikes last year (this estimate was put together by the government so it may be deflated).


I can't point to any articles that would support this, but it's my feeling
I don't know where you got the notion that most Chinese are politically apathetic from but you really need to do more research rather than rely on your "feelings" in the future.

[Janus]

Just an interesting statistic: apparently, there were 65,000 clashes between the police and the civilians protesters last year. That makes about 200 clashes per day.
There were an estimated 74,000 protests in 2004 and around 87,000 in 2005. And even these figures may be deflated as they do come from the government.

[Alejandro C]

And for you statistic junkies, "The number of violent protests declined by 22 percent in the first nine months of 2006, to 17,900, one measure the police use indicates." -from today's NYTimes.
What if this is inflated? Chinese are infamous about inflating figures that make them look like victims i.e. the 300,000 figure from NanJing. I consider it possible that these numbers are not deflated, but inflated. But from a scientific perspective, the government's control of the numbers makes them completely unreliable, as would most research into the subject.
To reply to Janus: I've been doing my own research, and that's what I've found. It is my opinion and I challenge you to argue against that with any credible evidence. There is no new data on Chinese political apathy, not newer than 4 years anyway. And my own research and analysis of that (newest data) points strongly to my opinion, that especially young people are apolitical, and hold a traditional value set that strongly discourages them from having political ideals.
And in my mind uprising and sporadic specific violent protests are two very different things. To me uprising means organized with a large goal such as reform, not just justice for one specific situation like most of these are. That is what is really not on the governments radar. I agree that they are very concerned about the sporadic specif violent protests. The culture in china supports individual gains or family gains. In my opinion the cultural values plus the governments power makes it very unlikely that any leftist movement could ever gain a foothold, let alone momentum.
However, I do see a breakdown of the traditional values of community and village identity because of the massive migrations taking place. (which may be why these protests are declining). I think this will only further the chinese idea that they have to do what's right for their family and make it less likely for them to participate in any 'collective good' type of organization.
Anyway sorry for hijacking this and turning into a now type of discussion. I know you all were trying to discuss something specific about the past., those are good discussions. I should have started a new thread, I apologize.

[Leo]

And for you statistic junkies, "The number of violent protests declined by 22 percent in the first nine months of 2006, to 17,900, one measure the police use indicates." -from today's NYTimes

What are you using this defend? You don't "trust" our statistics but you pull our other statistics to prove that you are right?


Chinese are infamous about

I think that&#39;s a bit racist lad <_<

[Alf]

Thanks Leo and Janus for providing the statistics. I read just today that there was a riot at a hospital where local residents felt that a child had died because the hospital authorities had demanded money to complete his treatment. These things are extremely common. Not all of them have a potential in terms of developing the autonomy of the working class, by any means, but there seems little doubt that the ferocious explitation suffered by the workers and other strata in China is producing an extremely explosive mix.

I looked back over what we had written about Chinese internationalists. There is a short piece in International Review 94, which talks about the left opposition in China. The &#39;Trotskyists&#39; in the 20s, like Trotsky himself, did represent a proletarian opposition to the Stalinist line of subordinating the class struggle to the Kuomintang and the national struggle, which resulted in the betrayal of the 1927 Shanghai uprising. By the 1930s however, the Trotskyist movement had itself become increasingly opportunist, and tended to capitulate to the nationalist line of support for the Chinese bourgeoisie against the Japanese invader. The Italian left around Bilan and the Mexican left communists ferociously attacked Trotsky himself for putting forward this line. However, within the Chinese movement itself, there were still class reactions.

In 1931 a number of Trotskyist groups united to form the Communist League of China.

"But when China was attacked by the Japanese, most of the CLC agreed to support the resistance, and in consequence went over to the enemy, bourgeois camp.

Only Zheng Chaolin, Wang Fanxi and a handful of militants remained faithful to revolutionary internationanlist principles and stood by &#39;revolutonary defeatism&#39;. They published The Internationalist, and held that the conflict was part of an imminent Second World War.

Zheng Caholin continued to publish The Internationalist and boycotted the CLC&#39;s 2nd Congress in August 1941. His position was a coherent one, unlike that of Wang Fanxi who agreed to take part in the Congress. Wang Fanxi made certain distinctions: he supported a &#39;defensive&#39; war by a country under attack, but refused to take part in an imperialist war should the Anglo-Saxon powers enter the war against Japan. His minority fraction was defeated and excluded from the Congress by the Trotskyist Peng Shu-tse.

We salute this handful of internationalists, who like the Italian left in Europe held high the communist internationalist flag through the darkest period of the workers&#39; movement. In their underground paper The Struggle. the Chinese Trotskyists described their support for the anti-Japanese resistance as &#39;revolutionary victoryism&#39;. What a pathetic, shameful rallying to the national bourgeoisie&#33;"

[Janus]

Chinese are infamous about inflating figures that make them look like victims i.e. the 300,000 figure from NanJing.
Yes, the Chinese government also inflated the death toll during the Hundred Flower&#39;s program, Great Leap Forward, the Cultural Revolution, and the Tian An Men massacre.
They also made up the Japanese invasion and Unit 731 in order to gain pity from the international populace. :angry:

You&#39;re not providing any evidence here; just false stereotypes.
Get over yourself. The Chinese don&#39;t need to inflate anything because they were the victims of Japanese imperialism.

The only people who question and deny those figures are Japanese historians. I&#39;ll say that you&#39;re walking a thin line here.


And my own research and analysis of that (newest data) points strongly to my opinion, that especially young people are apolitical
Yes, there is a current of political apathy just as there are in every country yet you are wrong to say that the Chinese have some traditional affinity for it or that the majority are apathetic.

And compared with a few years ago, I say that action is growing.


However, I do see a breakdown of the traditional values of community and village identity because of the massive migrations taking place. (which may be why these protests are declining).
You&#39;ve got this all mixed up. This is why the protests are growing.


In my opinion the cultural values plus the governments power makes it very unlikely that any leftist movement could ever gain a foothold, let alone momentum.
Cultural values are eroding in the face of today&#39;s modernization. China has progressed since the dynastic times.

Like I said, the situation in China has not reached the levels of a true uprising but protests and strikes are a growing trend.

[Janus]

What if this is inflated?
Take a step back and examine your logic here. Why would the CCP inflate these figures?


I think this will only further the chinese idea that they have to do what&#39;s right for their family and make it less likely for them to participate in any &#39;collective good&#39; type of organization.
Collective actions are what the Chinese have been participating for much of their history. It is only recently that this has been corroded due to capitalism.

I don&#39;t understand why you seem to think that family conflicts with collective thinking as Confucius supported both in his works. Family used to be emphasized more but this value has also been broken down to the modernization of China as well.

[rebelworker]

I think a mojor factor to take into account is the huge levels of people who are physically displaced, like the three gorges damn project, and the tens of millions of urban unemployed.

This group of people will be a breedingground for anti govt sentiment.

Im currious if any of you have any information of the existance of anarchist politics outside of youth subculture.

I know at the turn of the century it was the largest progressive political current and anarchist organisations were respinsible for the first modern trade unions in china, Im just currious if any of that has survived, at least in accesable history there?

[Janus]

and the tens of millions of urban unemployed.
Unemployment is around 10 million.


This group of people will be a breedingground for anti govt sentiment.
As the figures above indicate, they already are.


I know at the turn of the century it was the largest progressive political current and anarchist organisations were respinsible for the first modern trade unions in china
Anarchists definitely weren&#39;t the largest progressive political movement though they may have been one of the largest radical leftist movements in the early 20th century. And as for the first unions, I&#39;m pretty sure that anarchists helped to organize them though I don&#39;t know if they were responsible for setting them up originally.


at least in accesable history there?
Probably not but I&#39;ll look once I figure out the translations. :P

[Leo]

Only Zheng Chaolin, Wang Fanxi and a handful of militants remained faithful to revolutionary internationanlist principles and stood by &#39;revolutonary defeatism&#39;.

The position those lads took against the war seems to have been quite interesting, and in my opinion, the position against inter-imperialist wars is one of the most important aspects of internationalism. Anyway, I found some stuff on those two, to all who is interested:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wang_Fanxi

http://wss.hkcampus.net/~wss-6489/en/03/030129.htm

http://www.marxists.org/history/etol/docum...ina/china05.htm (http://www.marxists.org/history/etol/document/china/china05.htm)

http://www.greenleft.org.au/1998/334/20327

http://www.marxists.org/history/etol/docum...china/zheng.htm (http://www.marxists.org/history/etol/document/china/zheng.htm)

[OneBrickOneVoice]

weren&#39;t the ultra left cultural revolution extremists?

[Janus]

weren&#39;t the ultra left cultural revolution extremists?
Depends on what you mean by extremist. They were extremists in that they wanted decentralization and a corresponding advancement into communism. Pretty radical, huh?

[OneBrickOneVoice]

No I mean that they thought that 95% of the party should be purged. At least that&#39;s what I&#39;ve heard.

[Janus]

The Ultra-leftists wanted to totally do away with the party structure as well as the bureaucratic state structure so as to give power back to the masses.

[OneBrickOneVoice]

Basically they were anarchist opportunists trying to bring chaos?

[Janus]

Basically they were anarchist opportunists trying to bring chaos?
:blink: No, they were simply the more radical of the groups that participated in the Cultural Revolution and as a result were strongly opposed by the government. They were not trying to bring chaos(there was already chaos all around them) but rather wanted to change the structure of the Chinese state.

[OneBrickOneVoice]

oh. I see. Now I get it; they were Left Communists.

[Leo]

Originally posted by LeftyHenry

The Ultra-leftists wanted to totally do away with the party structure as well as the bureaucratic state structure so as to give power back to the masses.

Basically they were anarchist opportunists trying to bring chaos?

:lol: (Henry, This is where I get to laugh at your dogmatic idiocy)