Socialism with Chinese characteristics

Socialism with Chinese characteristics
Socialism with Chinese characteristics
Simplified Chinese	Trung QuốcĐặc sắcXã hội chủ nghĩa
Traditional Chinese	Trung QuốcĐặc sắcXã hội chủ nghĩa
Hanyu Pinyin	Zhōngguó tè sắc shèhuìzhǔyì
Hanyu Pinyin
Transcriptions
Standard Mandarin
Hanyu Pinyin	Zhōngguó tè sắc shèhuìzhǔyì
Bopomofo	ㄓㄨㄥㄍㄨㄛˊ ㄊㄜˋ ㄙㄜˋ ㄕㄜˋ ㄏㄨㄟˋ ㄓㄨˇ ㄧˋ
Wade–Giles	Chung1-kuo2t'e4-se4she4-hui4-chu3-i4
Tongyong Pinyin	Jhongguó tè- sắc shè-huèi-jhǔ-yì
IPA	[ʈʂʊ́ŋ.kwǒ tʰɤ̂.sɤ̂ ʂɤ̂.xwêɪ.ʈʂù.î]

Socialism with Chinese characteristics(Chinese:Trung Quốc đặc sắc xã hội chủ nghĩa;pinyin:Zhōngguó tè sắc shèhuìzhǔyì;Mandarin pronunciation:[ʈʂʊ́ŋ.kwǒ tʰɤ̂.sɤ̂ ʂɤ̂.xwêɪ.ʈʂù.î]^ⓘ) is a set of political theories and policies of theChinese Communist Party(CCP) that are seen by their proponents as representingMarxism–Leninismadapted to Chinese circumstances and specific time periods, consisting ofDeng Xiaoping Theory,Three Represents(Jiang Zemin),Scientific Outlook on Development(Hu Jintao), andXi Jinping Thought.According to CCP doctrine, Xi Jinping Thought is considered to represent Marxist–Leninist policies suited for China's present condition while Deng Xiaoping Theory was considered relevant for the period when it was formulated.^[1]

The term entered common usage during the era ofDeng Xiaopingand was largely associated with Deng's overall program of adopting elements ofmarket economicsas a means to foster growth usingforeign direct investmentand to increase productivity (especially in the countryside where 80% of China's population lived) while the CCP retained both its formal commitment to achievecommunismand its monopoly on political power.^[2]In the party's official narrative, socialism with Chinese characteristics is Marxism adapted to Chinese conditions and a product ofscientific socialism.The theory stipulated that China was in theprimary stage of socialismdue to its relatively low level ofmaterial wealthand needed to engage ineconomic growthbefore it pursued a moreegalitarianform ofsocialism,which in turn would lead to acommunist societydescribed inMarxist orthodoxy.^[3]

Primary stage of socialism

During the Mao era

The concept of a primary stage of socialism was conceived before China introducedeconomic reforms.^[4]In the early 1950s, economistsYu Guangyuan,Xue MuqiaoandSun Yefangraised the question of socialist transformation in which China's economy of lowproductive forcewas in a transitional period, a position whichMao Zedong,theChairman of the Chinese Communist Party,endorsed briefly until 1957. When discussing the necessity of commodity relations at the 1stZhengzhouConference (2–10 November 1958), for example, Mao said that China was in the "initial stage of socialism".^[4]However, Mao never elaborated on the idea and his successors were left to do this.^[4]

After Mao Zedong's death

Some have called our road "Social Capitalism",others"State Capitalism",and yet others" Technocratic Capitalism ". These are all completely wrong. We respond that socialism with Chinese characteristics issocialism,by which we mean that despite reform we adhere to the socialist road – our road, our theory, our system, and the goals we set out at the18th National Party Congress.... Socialism with Chinese characteristics is the dialectical unity of the theoretical logic of scientific socialism and the historical logic of China's social development. It'sscientific socialismrooted in Chinese realities, reflecting the will of Chinese people, and adapted to the requirements of China and its circumstances.

—Xi Jinping,speech to theCentral Committee of the Chinese Communist Party,5 January 2013^[5]

On 5 May 1978, the article "Putting into Effect the Socialist Principle of Distribution According to Work" (Quán triệt chấp hành phân phối theo lao động xã hội chủ nghĩa nguyên tắc) elaborated on the idea that China was still at the first stage of reaching acommunist society^[6]and that it had not become a truly socialist society.^[6]The article was written by members in theState Council's Political Research Office led by economist Yu Guangyuan on the orders ofDeng Xiaopingso as to "criticize and repudiate" the beliefs of the communist left.^[7]After reading it, Deng himself authored a brief memo saying that it was "well-written, and shows that the nature of distribution by labor is not capitalist, but socialist [...] [and] to implement this principle, many things are to be done, and many institutions to be revived. In all, this is to give incentives for us to do better".^[8]The term reappeared at the 6th plenum of the11th Central Committeeon 27 June 1981 in the document "Resolution on Certain Questions in the History of our Party since the Founding of the PRC".^[9]Hu Yaobang,theCCP General Secretary,used the term in his report to the12th National Congresson 1 September 1982.^[9]It was not until the "Resolution Concerning the Guiding Principle in Building Socialist Spiritual Civilization" at the 6th plenum of the12th Central Committeethat the term was used in the defense of the economic reforms which were being introduced.^[9]

At the13th National Congress,acting General SecretaryZhao Ziyangon behalf of the 12th Central Committee delivered the report "Advance Along the Road of Socialism with Chinese characteristics".^[10]He wrote that China was a socialist society, but that socialism in China was in its primary stage,^[10]a Chinese peculiarity which was due to the undeveloped state of the country's productive forces.^[10]During this phase of development, Zhao recommended introducing a planned commodity economy on the basis ofpublic ownership.^[10]The main failure of the communist right according to Zhao was that they failed to acknowledge that China could reach socialism by bypassing capitalism. The main failure of the communist left was that they held the "utopian position"that China could bypass the primary stage of socialism in which the productive forces are to be modernized.^[11]

On 5 October 1987, Yu Guangyuan, a major author of the concept, published an article entitled "Economy in the Initial Stage of Socialism" and speculated that this historical stage will last for two decades and perhaps much longer.^[12]This represents, says Ian Wilson, "a severe blight on the expectations raised during the early 70s, when the old eight-grade wage scale was being compressed to only three levels and a more even distributive system was assumed to be an important national goal". On 25 October, Zhao further expounded on the concept of theprimary stage of socialismand said that the party line was to follow "One Center, Two Basic Points" —the central focus of the Chinese state was economic development, but that this should occur simultaneously through centralized political control (i.e. theFour Cardinal Principles) and upholding the policy of reform and opening up.^[9]

General SecretaryJiang Zeminfurther elaborated on the concept ten years later, first during a speech to the CCPCentral Party Schoolon 29 May 1997 and again in his report to the15th National Congresson 12 September.^[9]According to Jiang, the 3rd plenum of the 11th Central Committee correctly analyzed and formulated a scientifically correct program for the problems facing China and socialism.^[9]In Jiang's words, the primary stage of socialism was an "undeveloped stage".^[9]The fundamental task of socialism is to develop the productive forces, therefore the main aim during the primary stage should be the further development of the national productive forces.^[9]The primary contradiction in Chinese society during the primary stage of socialism is "the growing material and cultural needs of the people and the backwardness of production".^[9]This contradiction will remain until China has completed the process of primary stage of socialism—and because of it—economic development should remain the party's main focus during this stage.^[9]

Jiang elaborated on three points to develop the primary stage of socialism.^[13]The first—to develop a socialist economy with Chinese characteristics—meant developing the economy by emancipating and modernizing the forces of production while developing amarket economy.^[13]The second—building socialist politics with Chinese characteristics—meant "managing state affairs according to the law", developing socialist democracy under the party and making the "people the masters of the country".^[13]The third point—building socialist culture with Chinese characteristics—meant turning Marxism into the guide to train the people so as to give them "high ideals, moral integrity, a good education, and a strong sense of discipline, and developing a national scientific, and popular socialist culture geared to the needs of modernization, of the world, and of the future".^[13]

When asked how long the primary stage of socialism would last, Zhao replied "[i]t will be at least 100 years [...] [before] socialist modernization will have been in the main accomplished".^[14]Thestate constitutionstates that "China will be in the primary stage of socialism for a long time to come".^[15]As with Zhao, Jiang believed that it would take at least 100 years to reach a more advanced stage.^[9]

Socialist market economy

What is socialism and what is Marxism? We were not quite clear about this in the past. Marxism attaches utmost importance to developing the productive forces. We have said that socialism is the primary stage of communism and that at the advanced stage the principle offrom each according to his ability and to each according to his needswill be applied. This calls for highly developed productive forces and an overwhelming abundance of material wealth. Therefore, the fundamental task for the socialist stage is to develop the productive forces. The superiority of the socialist system is demonstrated, in the final analysis, by faster and greater development of those forces than under the capitalist system. As they develop, the people's material and cultural life will constantly improve. One of our shortcomings after the founding of thePeople's Republicwas that we didn't pay enough attention to developing the productive forces. Socialism means eliminating poverty. Pauperism is not socialism, still less communism.

—Deng Xiaoping,speech discussing Marxist theory at a Central Committee plenum, 30 June 1984^[16]

Deng Xiaoping, the architect of theChinese economic reforms,did not believe that the market economy was synonymous withcapitalismor thatplanningwas synonymous with socialism.^[17]During his southern tour, he said that "planning and market forces are not the essential difference between socialism and capitalism. A planned economy is not the definition of socialism, because there is planning under capitalism; the market economy happens under socialism, too. Planning and market forces are both ways of controlling economic activity".^[17]

Ideological justification

In the 1980s, it became evident to Chinese economists that the Marxist theory of thelaw of value—understood as the expression of thelabor theory of value—could not serve as the basis of China's pricing system.^[18]They concluded that Marx never intended his theory of law of value to work "as an expression of 'concretized labor time'".^[18]Marx's notion of "prices of production" was meaningless to theSoviet-styled planned economiessince price formations were according to Marx established by markets.^[19]Soviet planners had used the law of value as a basis to rationalize prices in the planned economy.^[20]According to Soviet sources, prices were "planned with an eye to the [...] basic requirements of the law of value".^[20]However, the primary fault with the Soviet interpretation was that they tried to calibrate prices without acompetitive marketsince according to Marx competitive markets allowed for anequilibriumofprofit rateswhich led to an increase in theprices of production.^[21]The rejection of the Soviet interpretation of the law of value led to the acceptance of the idea that China was still in the primary stage of socialism.^[20]The basic argument was that conditions envisaged by Marx for reaching thesocialist stage of developmentdid not yet exist in China.^[20]

Mao said that the imposition of "progressiverelations of production"would revolutionize production.^[22]His successor's rejection of this view according toA. James Gregorhas thwarted the ideological continuity ofMaoism—officially Mao Zedong Thought.^[22]Classical Marxismhad argued that asocialist revolutionwould only take place in advancedcapitalist societiesand its success would signal the transition from a capitalistcommodity-based economy to a "product economy" in which goods would be distributed for people's need and not for profit.^[22]If because of a lack of a coherent explanation in the chance of failure this revolution did not occur, the revolutionaries would be forced to take over the responsibilities of thebourgeoisie.^[22]Chinese communists are thus looking for a new Marxist theory of development.^[22]CCP theorist Luo Rongqu recognized that the founders ofMarxismhad never "formulated any systematic theory on the development of the non-Western world" and said that the CCP should "establish their own synthesized theoretical framework to study the problem of modern development".^[23]According to A. James Gregor, the implication of this stance is that "Chinese Marxismis currently in a state of profound theoretical discontinuity ".^[24]

According to academics Xinru Ma and David C. Kang, socialism with Chinese characteristics is restricted to China itself and focuses on China's own ideology and practices.^[25]^: 181Ma and Kang write that in its foreign relations with otherGlobal Southcountries, China does not attempt to export the ideology of Socialism with Chinese characteristics.^[25]^: 181

Private ownership

The Chinese government's understanding ofprivate ownershipis claimed to be rooted in classical Marxism.^[26]According to party theorists, since China adopted state ownership when it was asemi-feudalandsemi-colonialcountry, it is claimed to be in the primary stage of socialism.^[26]Because of this, certain policies and system characteristics—such as commodity production for the market, the existence of aprivate sectorand the reliance of theprofit motivein enterprise management—were changed.^[26]These changes were allowed as long as they improved productivity and modernized themeans of production,thus furthering the development of socialism.^[26]

The CCP still considers private ownership to be non-socialist.^[27]However, according to party theorists, the existence and growth of private ownership does not necessarily undermine socialism or promote capitalism in China.^[27]They argue thatKarl MarxandFriedrich Engelsnever proposed the immediate abolishment of private ownership.^[27]According to Engels' bookPrinciples of Communism,theproletariatcan only abolish private ownership when the necessary conditions have been met.^[27]In the phase before the abolishment of private ownership, Engels proposed progressive taxation, high inheritance taxes and compulsory bond purchases to restrict private property, while using the competitive powers of state-owned enterprises to expand thepublic sector.^[27]Marx and Engels proposed similar measures inThe Communist Manifestowith regard to advanced countries, but since China was economically undeveloped, party theorists called for flexibility regarding the party's handling of private property.^[27]According to party theorist Liu Shuiyuan, theNew Economic Policyprogram initiated by Soviet authorities in the aftermath of thewar communismprogram is a good example of flexibility by socialist authorities.^[27]

Party theorist Li Xuai said that private ownership inevitably involvedcapitalist exploitation.^[27]However, Li regards private property and exploitation as necessary in the primary stage of socialism, stating that capitalism in its primary stage uses remnants of the old society to build itself.^[27]Sun Liancheng and Lin Huiyong said that Marx and Engels—in their interpretation ofThe Communist Manifesto—criticized private ownership when it was owned solely by the bourgeoisie, but not individual ownership in which everyone owns the means of production, hence this cannot be exploited by others.^[28]Individual ownership is considered consistent with socialism, since Marx wrote that apost-capitalist societywould entail the rebuilding of "associated social individual ownership".^[29]

References

Citations

^"Ful ltext of the letter by China's Minister of Commerce".Xinhua News Agency.2 July 2018.Archivedfrom the original on 2 July 2018.Retrieved3 July2018.
^Xiaoping, Deng(1 October 1984)."Building Socialism with a Specifically Chinese Character".People's Daily.Archivedfrom the original on 3 July 2018.Retrieved3 July2018.
^"Deng Xiaoping: Let part of people get rich first".Shanghai Fengqi.Archived fromthe originalon 29 July 2021.Retrieved17 July2020.
^^a ^b ^cLi 1995,p. 400.
^Jinping, Xi (11 April 2022)."Regarding the Construction of Socialism with Chinese Characteristics (2013)".Redsails.org.Archived fromthe originalon 11 April 2022.
^^a ^bHe 2001,p. 385.
^He 2001,pp. 385–386.
^"Kiên trì phân phối theo lao động nguyên tắc"[March 28, 1978: Adhere to the principle of distribution according to work].China Central Television.16 September 2003.Archivedfrom the original on 5 December 2004.Retrieved4 March2018.
^^a ^b ^c ^d ^e ^f ^g ^h ⁱ ^j ^kHe 2001,p. 386.
^^a ^b ^c ^dLi 1995,p. 399.
^Schram 1989,p. 204.
^Yu, Guangyuan (5 October 1987). "Economy in the Initial Stage of Socialism".Zhongguo Shehui Kexue(3).
^^a ^b ^c ^dHe 2001,p. 387.
^Vogel 2011,p. 589.
^2nd session of the9th National People's Congress(14 March 2004)."Constitution of the People's Republic of China".Government of the People's Republic of China.Archived fromthe originalon 26 July 2013.Retrieved14 January2013.{{cite web}}:CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
^Deng, Xiaoping (30 June 1984)."Building a Socialism with a specifically Chinese character".People's Daily.Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party.Archivedfrom the original on 16 January 2013.Retrieved13 January2013.
^^a ^b"Market fundamentalism' is unpractical".People's Daily.Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party.3 February 2012.Archivedfrom the original on 22 September 2012.Retrieved13 January2013.
^^a ^bGregor 1999,p. 114.
^Gregor 1999,pp. 114–116.
^^a ^b ^c ^dGregor 1999,p. 116.
^Gregor 1999,pp. 115–116.
^^a ^b ^c ^d ^eGregor 1999,p. 117.
^Gregor 1999,pp. 117–118.
^Gregor 1999,p. 118.
^^a ^bMa, Xinru; Kang, David C. (2024).Beyond Power Transitions: The Lessons of East Asian History and the Future of U.S.-China Relations.Columbia Studies in International Order and Politics. New York:Columbia University Press.ISBN 978-0-231-55597-5.
^^a ^b ^c ^dHsu 1991,p. 11.
^^a ^b ^c ^d ^e ^f ^g ^h ⁱHsu 1991,p. 65.
^Hsu 1991,pp. 65–66.
^Hsu 1991,p. 66.

Sources

Gregor, A. James (1999).Marxism, China & Development: Reflections on Theory and Reality.Transaction Publishers.ISBN 978-0-7658-0634-5.
He, Henry Yuhuai (2001).Dictionary of the Political Thought of the People's Republic of China.M.E. Sharpe.ISBN 978-0-7656-0569-6.
Hsu, Robert (1991).Economic Theories in China, 1979–1988.Cambridge University Press.ISBN 978-0-521-36567-3.
Li, Gucheng (1995).A Glossary of Political Terms of the People's Republic of China.Chinese University Press.ISBN 978-962-201-615-6.
Schram, Stuart (1989).The Thought of Mao Tse-Tung.Cambridge University Press.ISBN 978-0-521-31062-8.
Vogel, Ezra (2011).Deng Xiaoping and the Transformation of China.Harvard University Press.ISBN 978-0-674-05544-5.