The Chinese Revolution And The Significance Of China Today
October 1, 1997 marked the 48th anniversary of the day the leader of the Communist Party of China, Mao Zedong, proclaimed the liberation of China with the words "China has stood up." In the last nine months, China has been in the world headlines. Deng Xiaoping died in February; July 1st saw Hong Kong reunited with China; and just recently the Fifteenth Congress of the Communist Party of China (CPC) was held. These events need to be considered against the backdrop of what took place in 1949, the year China won its liberation. After continuous struggles and through heroic wars, since Japanese occupation in the 1930s, the system of foreign domination and dismemberment which had been imposed by European and other powers since the mid-nineteenth century was overthrown and national independence achieved. At the same moment, the Chinese people opened the path to social progress through the abolition of centuries-old feudal backwardness supplemented by brutal foreign capitalist exploitation and put the construction of socialism on the agenda. The significance of the emergence of China as the most populous country and one of the largest in the world impressed itself on international opinion immediately at the time. This defeat inflicted on world imperialism reverberates even down to this day. In the wake of the collapse of the bipolar system, when the conditions today show that no force in the world can act in the old way, China and the direction which it decides to take is a factor which has to be reckoned with by all forces in the world. The role of China and the words and deeds of the Communist Party of China must be studied by the Marxist-Leninists and progressive forces with the seriousness they deserve, without being prejudiced by preconceived notions. The liberation of China was of special significance to those nations and peoples in the rest of Asia, Africa and Latin America who were still trapped under the occupation of European colonialism. During the 1950s and 1960s, one country after the other achieved their national independence, in no small part through the inspration of China's example, finally eliminating colonialism as a system from the world, with some exceptions. The American imperialists for a long time refused to reconcile themselves to their defeat in China. As the backers of Chiang Kai Chek, the U.S. used its veto to prevent China taking her rightful seat at the United Nations. But eventually, under the renewed blows inflicted by the Vietnamese and other Indochinese people, themselves inspired by Chinese liberation, even the biggest world superpower, U.S. imperialism, had to come to terms with the modern reality of an independent China. China acceded to the U.N. in the early 1970s and since then her insistence on the reunification of her remaining territories as a resolute stand for the rights of national sovereignty has continued to exert a progressive influence on international affairs. Just recently, Hong Kong was finally handed back from British occupation, while Macao is soon to return to China. The demand for the return of Taiwan to China remains on the agenda as an important consideration in geo-politics and as a further example in the upholding of the important democratic principle of the rights of nations and sovereignty in the world. With the collapse of the USSR and other pseudo-socialist countries in eastern Europe, the U.S. imperialists tried to arrogate to themselves the position of sole arbiter in a unipolar world. Apart from the rivalry of other imperialist powers, the position of China as a country to determine its own social system has helped as a block to imperialist ambitions of hegemony. Worldwide, China has friends who would like to see it march on to socialism and communism through revolution. Commentators have been speculating since the end of the 1970s and the accession of Deng Xiaoping to power in China, that the course of reforms to the Chinese economy favouring foreign investment were leading inevitably to the restoration of capitalism and China coming back under the imperialist system. However, the direction which China will take has not as yet been settled. The recent convening of the IMF in Hong Kong is evidence of the concern of the world bourgeoisie, on one hand their having to respect the sheer size of China as an economy today as well as their desire to bring her closer under their wing. It also revealed the important role China plays to stand up for national sovereignty. Today's situation is one where there is one Workers and Communist Movement in the world. Revolutionary forces are gathering strength for the coming revolutionary storms which are bound to follow the current period of retreat of revolution. So it is a time when it is mandatory that the word and deed of each political party is studied with an open mind, including that of the Communist Party of China. What is crucial is to analyze the position each
David Harvey on the Communist Manifesto
David Harvey spoke on the Communist Manifesto last night at NYC's Brecht Forum as part of a year-long celebration of its 150th anniversary. Harvey has some of the most interesting insights into the Marxist classics today, especially involving questions of their "spatial" dimension. Since he a geography professor, this is not surprising. Harvey spent much of his talks discussing shortcomings or omissions in the Communist Manifesto. For example, the question of how the state comes into existence is only dealt with in a sketchy manner. Also, there is little discussion of how the world is "territorialized." Marx and Engels accepted the division of the world as it stood in 1848 pretty much on its own terms. There is also very little consideration of the power of financial institutions, which Harvey found puzzling given the major role that the Rothschild and Baring banks were playing in Europe in those days. This oversight has been corrected by Doug Henwood, needless to say. One of the presuppositions of the Communist Manifesto is that local struggles meld into national struggles, which culminate in proletarian revolution. Harvey wondered if this was a simplistic view in light of the tendencies to retain a stubbornly local character with their own dynamic. He also questioned whether the socialist movement has failed to develop a geographical strategy that is anywhere as comprehensive as the bourgeoisie's. The bosses have learned to divide up workers in such a manner that trade union and political struggles are weakened. They, for example, have calculated that 50 workers per plant in distances of 200 miles from each other has a powerful dampening effect on the ability to form unions. Workers need a geographical strategy of their own. Another problem is the tendency of the Communist Manifesto to depict the working-class in much more homogenous terms than it has developed historically. This means that the problem of conceptualizing socialism is much more difficult than originally anticipated. Perhaps the key is to conceive of a form of socialism that embraces heterogeneity rather than struggling against it. In almost a sidebar, Harvey developed some very interesting insights on the importance Marx and Engels attached to the question of colonialism. One of the goals of the Communist Manifesto was to develop a strategy for internationalism. The bourgeoisie had spread its tentacles world-wide and it was incumbent on the workers to forge ties across national boundaries. Harvey pointed out that colonialism was embraced by Hegel in "The Philosophy of Right" in 1821. This work was of enormous significance to Marx and he felt the need to confront and overcome Hegel's imperialist world-view, as reflected in the following passage from Hegel's work: "The principle of family life is dependence on the soil, on land, *terra firma*. Similarly, the natural element for industry, animating its outward movement, is the sea. Since the passion for gain involves risk, industry though bent on gain yet lifts itself above it; instead of remaining rooted to the soil and the limited circle of civil life with its pleasures and desires, it embraces the element of flux, danger and destruction. Furthermore, the sea is the greatest means of communication, and trade by sea creates commercial connections between distant countries and so relations involving contractual rights. At the same time, commerce of this kind is the most potent instrument of culture, and through it trade acquires its significance in the history of the world... "To realize what an instrument of culture lies in the link with the sea, consider countries where industry flourishes and contrast their relation to the sea with that of countries which have eschewed sea-faring and which, like Egypt and India, have become stagnant and sunk in the most frightful and scandalous superstition. Notice also how all great progressive peoples press onward to the sea." Marx was attempting to put these questions on the terrain of capital accumulation rather than philosophy when he wrote chapter 33 of volume one of Capital, titled "The Modern Theory of Colonization." He says: "In Western Europe, the homeland of political economy, the process of primitive accumulation has more or less been accomplished... "It is otherwise in the colonies There the capitalist regime constantly comes up against the obstacle presented by the producer, who, as owner of his own conditions of labour, employs that labour to enrich himself instead of the capitalist." As such, Marx tends to see the spread of pure capitalist property relations as beneficial in colonized nations, which, more often than not, are socially and economically inferior to the European colonizer nations. This combination of theoretical imprecision and plain ignorance about the real history of India and African societies leads Marx to make the sort of unfortunate statement found in the Communist Manifesto: "The bourgeoisie has subjected
Re: The Chinese Revolution And The Significance Of China Today
On Sat, 25 Oct 1997, Shawgi A. Tell reprinted from the TML Weekly: Today's situation is one where there is one Workers and Communist Movement in the world. Revolutionary forces are gathering strength for the coming revolutionary storms which are bound to follow the current period of retreat of revolution. Wow. This is like Gus Hall on acid. Well, after Eastern Europe's latest stupendous ideological success -- namely, market Stalinism -- I guess it was inevitable that market Maoism would arrive in Jiang Zemin-land at last. -- Dennis
