[Marxism] Maoists speak up against Chinese economic policies

Louis Proyect lnp3 at panix.com
Wed Aug 8 07:35:56 MDT 2007

Walter Lippmann wrote:
> This document by Chinese Maoists is helpful and I'm glad it was posted
> here. It would be quite remarkable in a place like the United States
> if leading current and former government officials were debating the
> class nature of the state as applied to the United States of America.

Perhaps if the US had a monumental socialist revolution after WWII and 
then reinstituted capitalist property relations in the name of a 
"feasible socialism", you'd have a similar debate taking place.

> Fortunately, that's not the case here as these opposition-minded
> former Chines leaders argue that China remains what they refer to as
> a socialist country. I wonder what they would think of Yankee radicals
> who think that the battle they are fighting has already been lost and
> capitalism has already been restored?

Who gives a shit. I think for myself, thank god.

> They also refer to China's Communist Party as having previously been
> internally democratic, and they call for a return to the democratic
> forms, structures and procedures which precedes the present period
> from which they are alienated and to which they are opposed. I would
> be curious to know if those here to consider China to be capitalist
> also think that, as these Maoists do, that China and its party were
> previously glorious and internally democratic. I ask this of those
> who think China is capitalist, but those others out there who hold
> China remains a workers state, though bureaucratically deformed are
> also welcomed to state if YOU think it used to be democratic.

Of course China was never "democratic". These Maoists are more 
interesting as a reflection of social dynamics than they are as 
political analysts. Anybody who has had a career in the Chinese CP would 
have been involved in all sorts of double-speak. These people have the 
merit of at least believing that the revolution is in danger. They of 
course are about 15 years late, but better late than never.

> Those who refer to China today, or in the past, as being a "socialist"
> society are welcome to their use of that terminology, though to me it
> seems inappropriate. I continue to prefer the old Trotskyist usage
> with which I was trained in the Socialist Workers Party, that China
> is a deformed workers state. But that's just my own personal, private
> terminological usage. In normal parlance I simply refer to the world's
> most populous country as "China" and don't get hung up on the verbiage.

Who cares what you think China is. We are interested in a *materialist* 
analysis of Chinese society, something that is obviously of either no 
interest to you or beyond your ability to articulate.

> Finally, please keep in mind that while I don't think capitalism has
> been restored, and I do think it's a workers state, it is obvious to
> me that lots of capitalist ideology and practice has entered Chinese
> life. I've never denied this, only denied that it has definitively
> triumphed and capitalism definitively been established in the PRC.
> Thanks, everyone. Let's keep the tone civil and perhaps we can shed
> some light on these most complex matters.

It is hard to keep civil when you keep "intervening" in this mailing 
list like a party of one. If you were a member of some crypto-Stalinist 
sect, you would have been shown the door long ago.

More information about the Marxism mailing list