Re Doug's question on China reversal

[Rubyg580@xxxxxxx]

In a message dated 96-04-12 01:37:32 EDT, you write:

>At 8:34 PM 4/11/96, Rubyg580@xxxxxxx wrote:
>
>>The leadership in China now says "to get rich is glorious" because that is
>>what those leaders have been saying since the 70s.  Mao called them
>>"capitalist roaders" and led theChinese people to defeat them thru the
>>upheaval of the cultural revolution and the struggle in the mid 70s against
>>the "right deviationist wind."
>>>>>
>This isn't really an explanation. Did the Chinese revolution depend
>entirely on Mao, and once he was gone, the capitalist roaders took power?
>Is that a serious social analysis in the Marxian tradition? What happened
>in Chinese society that led to this reversal? Is it just a matter of a
>handful of gerontocrats turning their back on Mao Zedong thought?
>
>Doug

In 1976, a few weeks after Mao died, the faction led by Deng Xiaoping
siezed power in China, by arresting Chiang Ching, Chang Chungchao,
Wang Hungwen and Yao Wenyuan.  These were the people they called
the "Gang of Four", and villified mercilessly in the press from then on.

These four were leaders of the Cultural Revolution, and in the struggle
against the right deviationist wind, i.e., against Deng and his clique of
capitalist roaders.  The capitalist roaders aparently had enough control
of the army that they were able to pull off this coup, defeating the
resistance that was mounted in various parts of China, particularly in
Shanghai, where the Cultural Revolution had been particularly intense.
(In January, 1967, the masses overthrew the old city government and
elected a Revolutionary Committee to run the city;  I believe this was
the first municipal Revolutionary Committee in the country)

There aparently was some disorganization and confusion among the
revolutionary masses, too.  They were not prepared to respond quickly
and strongly enough to an attempted coup after Mao's death.

These problems indicate the truth of what Mao himself said about the
question of which class would win out being an unsettled quesiton
all the way through the period of socialism (which he defined as the
transition to communism--not "prosperity for all" or whatever phrase
was used a few days ago on this list.)These are his words:

     "Socialist society covers a considerably long historical period.
     In the historical period of socialism, there are still classes, class
     contradictions and class struggle, there is the struggle between
     the socialist road and the capitalist road, and there is the danger
     of capitalist restoration.  We must recognize the protracted and
     complex nature of this struggle.  We must heighten our vigilance.
     We must conduct socialist education.  We must correctly
     understand and handle class contradictions and class struggle,
     distinguish the contradictions between ourselves and the ensmy
     from those among  the people and handle them correctly.
     Otherwise a socialist country like ours will turn into its opposite
     and degenerate, and a capitalist restoration will take place.
     From now on we must remind ourselves of this every year,
     every month and every day so that we can retain a relatively
     sober understanding and have a Marxist-Leninist line.
           ---quoted in Peking Review, No. 43, October 26, 1973, P.5;
              in an article titled "Importance Must Be Attached to the
              Party's Basic Line"


It also illustrated the very real problem of the confusion generated by the
fact that a new bourgeoisie arises "daily, hourly, and on a mass scale",
and is concentrated within the Communist Party itself during the period
of socialism due to what Lenin called the "birthmarks" of socialism: the
aspects of capitalist relations of production, particularly in the realm of
distribution and consumption.Mao spoke about this in 1975:

     "Why did Lenin speak of exercising dictatorship over the bourgeoisie?
      It is essential to get this question claer. lack of clarity on this
     quesiton will lead to revisionism. This should be made known to the
     whole nation....Our country at present practices a commodity
     system, the wage system is unequal too, as in the eight-grade
     wage scale, and so forth.  Under the dictatorship of the proletariat
     such things can only be restricted.  Therefore if people like Lin
     Piao come to power, it will be quite easy for them to rig up the
     capitalist system. "That is why we should do more reading of
     Marxist-Leninist works."

     "Lenin said that 'small production engenders capitalism and the
     bourgeoisie continuously, daily, hourly, spontaneously, and on
     a mass scale.'  They are also engendered among a part of the
     working class and of the Party membership.  Both within the
     ranks of the proletariat and among the personnel of state and
     other organs there are people who take to the bourgeois style
     of life."

The thing is, no country is isolated unto itself.  It exists in a world
so far still dominated by imperialism.  The capitalist roaders had
powerful allies in the imperialist world, particularly in the U.S.  To
think that the Chinese revolution depended entirely on Mao, and
once he was gone, the capitalist roaders took power, is certainly
not consistent with using dialectical and historical materialism to
understand the events of history.

I can't recount blow by blow what happened in the coup and all the
contributing factors.  I recommend the book "China Winter" by
Edoarda Masi, E.P. Dutton, NY, 1982.  She was a witness to the
events of 1976-77 in Shanghai.

Gina/ Detroit




     --- from list marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---