Independence, Democracy, Socialism!

Capitalism with Chinese Characteristics


One solid Marxist performance by representatives of the Revolutionary Labour Union of Serbia, at an otherwise skinny left-wing tribune at the end of last month, was enough to stir up the dormant spirits on the left in Serbia. Since then, texts have been written, resignations submitted, heated debates (link). As one of the cornerstones of these discussions, the question of the imperialist character of the modern Chinese state arose…

Many futile "communists" today are trying to prove that the People's Republic of China is a country of socialism, not state monopoly capitalism. "China and Russia will save us, like Stalin once did"—these lost souls call…

Despite all the clear indications of the capitalist mode of production, the presence of private, especially financial capital in the Chinese economy—a common "argument" used by fans of the Chinese version of modern revisionism and social imperialism to paint China with socialist colours is that belongs to the state", although this data is also deceptive and relative, and private business hires about half of the Chinese labour market…

The state sector of the economy in China is a sector of capitalist monopoly, reduced to capitalist management. It is known that in the process of "reforms" in China, the state monopoly on foreign trade was liquidated, which, in Lenin's words, is: an essential condition for the existence and development of a socialist economy.

Even in capitalist countries, the state has a decisive role in the economy. It is known that imperialist countries save or nationalise large banks and industries in times of crisis. Also, production planning is a characteristic of multinational companies, with numerous examples. In general, closer ties, merging of financial capital and the state, ie. the swallowing of the second by the first is a feature of the imperialist stage of capitalism . For state ownership of the means of production to be socialist: the state must be revolutionary, proletarian; with the obligatory condition of abolishing the exploitation and the system of hired labour; and finally by the production of the means of production which must not be based on commodity production (Economic Problems of Socialism, Stalin). The Chinese state is revisionist-bourgeois, with billionaires in the lead; with growing labour market flexibility; all production in China is exclusively—commodity production.

There is no socialist sector of production in China. State ownership in China, as well as central planning, are a form and organisation of state monopoly capitalism, which is known to all brutally exploit the Chinese working class, as well as the peoples of the world, especially Asia, Africa, Latin America, the Balkans…

The mentioned non-Marxist, folklore "communists" are trying to prove that some of today's Chinese mascots, the Cuban rulers, are also the bearers of socialism; although in Cuba, among others, as well as in China was never enforced collectivisation of agriculture, but also in the countryside, as well as in the city, saved the capitalist mode of production, which, in the words of Lenin: restores capitalism continuously, spontaneously, on a massive scale. Unfortunately, the leaders of this small revolutionary country faithfully followed the 'Kremlin Group of Bolsheviks (KGB)', the Soviet revisionists who gave up the socialist and proletarian-internationalist Lenin-Stalin path. Today, they are also threatening their country's independence and carrying out China's dictates of deepening capitalist reforms.

There are also those "Maoists" who claim that China was a socialist country during Mao Zedong. But even that is simple idealistic thinking, unfounded in historical materialism. The Chinese people's, new democratic revolution, led by the Communist Party of China, took place in the bourgeois-democratic but not in the socialist phase. Mao Zedong, one of the representatives of the important flag of proletarian internationalism, eventually completed his "thought" in the formulation of the revisionist "theory of three worlds", which became the foundation of Deng Xiaoping's bourgeois nationalist foreign and domestic policy: cooperation with American imperialism and restoration of capitalism. Chinese revisionists, as they like to point out, especially learned from the Yugoslav example; or, as Marxist-Leninists would point out: "Maoism", it is mature Titoism.

In the finale of the discussion on the character of the Chinese ruling system, let us recall these so illustrative words of Nikolai Bukharin: "If we had to summarize what my" program "would be, it would be the following: state capitalism, restriction of collective farms, foreign concessions, abandonment of monopolies on foreign trade, in other words, the renewal of capitalism in our country"—said in his last address the unheard of Bukharin, a representative of the condemned right-wing danger in the Bolshevik Party, a conspiratorial associate of Trotsky in the service of the imperialist forces. That Bukharin became popular again today among the new Chinese revisionist bourgeois intelligentsia.

The world capitalist order is also characterised by the intensification of inter-imperialist conflicts, efforts to force—such as the United States, China, Russia, Germany, Great Britain, France, etc.—to win positions in world geopolitics, to protect and expand their areas of political and economic influence. These contradictions have different manifestations, but one of the most dangerous aspects is billions in military spending.

As the general crisis of capitalism escalates and contradictions between imperialist powers grow, Chinese imperialism, the increasingly powerful conqueror of new world markets, will be seen as a fresh superpower: one of the faltering walls of a surviving decadent imperialist system that leads nations and planets to disaster.

Independence, democracy, socialism!—that is the basic, patriotic slogan of the Revolutionary Labour Union of Serbia. Workers and oppressed peoples of the world, unite!—it is supplemented by the inevitable proletarian internationalist invitation of the International Conference of Marxist-Leninist Parties and Organisations. Under these flags, guided by the invincible revolutionary science of Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin, the communists of Serbia are moving forward against the unimagined modern conditions of the general crisis of capitalism. People's Democratic Anti-Imperialist and Anti-Fascist Front Against the Capitalist Crisis : The Front of Exploited Workers, Women, youth, impoverished educated and proprietary strata, then oppressed, small, as well as fraternal Balkan peoples, in alliance with the international labour movement and the revolutionary and democratic peoples of the world—is a chance for the Serbian people in the struggle for progress and dignified life.

Some readers and commentators may found themselves offended by the concise analysis of China as a non-socialist country, just as countries like Cuba, and then Korea, etc. are not.

Revolutionary peoples such as Chinese, Cuban, Korean, and Vietnamese know how to value openness more than dubious sweet talk.

After all, if a country is not socialist, it does not mean that should consider it hostile, or that one cannot find a friend in it. Countries such as Vietnam, Cuba, Korea, Venezuela, continue to win the sympathy of Marxist-Leninists as small countries defying the great imperialist powers. Marxist-Leninist critiques of the revisionist and opportunistic mistakes of the leaders of these countries are part of the internationalist duty and are formulated with the aim of victorious resistance and the struggle of the peoples of the world against imperialism. Modern international conditions impose the issue of people's revolution and the construction of socialism as a matter not only of aspirations and debates, but also of problems that need to be solved.

"The strength of small nations lies in their fighting unity—for freedom, independence and socialism!"—Enver

In the end, it is well known that Marxist-Leninists rely on the contradictions and opposing interests of the imperialists themselves. Moreover, at specific moments in history, individual imperialist countries do not have to be considered hostile. The imperialist character of the First and the liberation character of the Second World War speak more about it. The victorious imperialist countries, which themselves were subjected to an aggressive policy of the recently defeated and growing imperialist, fascist forces, joined the world democratic anti-fascist front, gathered around the international communist movement and the USSR. On the other hand, given the blatant anti-communism of modern revisionism, no more developed democratic tendencies can be expected in its lap; it leaves its infamous mark on history and is still a fresh historical phenomenon, which connects with the contemporary, again complex image of the world. In conclusion, the inevitable scientific Marxist analysis of China as a country of monopolies, a revisionist-imperialist superpower—still does not mean an anti-Chinese position.

But what is important here is not to be a naive idolatrous fool who believes that China nurtures a policy of proletarian internationalism and support for revolutionary movements and peoples. Who has ever received such support from Chinese revisionists? The Vietnamese people well remember this, typically Chinese revisionist, calculating "support" that ended with a knife in the back. People still see this "support" in international relations, which has become an established part of the corrupt geopolitical game. Such support was not received even by those revisionists who opportunistically do not give up on it—despite constant public appearances and attempts at the doors of the Chinese embassy. The revisionists rely in vain on an agreement with imperialism, both domestically and internationally, because, as Enver would say: the bourgeoisie will use, but will never accept even false communists.

China exports capital that is the subject of its interest, not the proletarian revolution and the building of socialism. None of the capitalist countries, especially the young ones, on the rise, could overcome the accumulated contradictions of such a system, so China will not succeed either, no matter how enterprising its top capitalist management is in the form of a "communist" party. The current successes of the Chinese capitalist economy are only a prologue to the capitalist crisis, which is part of the general world crisis of capitalism.

These are topics of crucial importance, but idolaters and populists, as a rule, do not know how to argue. They are simple, helpless fanatics, who offer themselves to this or that powerful man. They are, in Lenin's words, "fighters under the flags of others."

[Source: Revolutionary Labour Union of Serbia]

Back to Home Page

Vol. 53, No. 40, Apr 4 - 10, 2021