Contradictions

["Charles Brown" <CharlesB@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Contradictions in Socialism with Chinese Characteristics
By Sidney J. Gluck
Presented at Philosophy Conference
Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing China
October 30 and 31, 2000

    At the outset it should be clear that a discussion of
 contradictions in Socialism with Chinese Characteristics is
 not a pejorative. On the contrary, it defines the struggle for
 a better life. Every society has its contradictions which are
 the levers of change. Understanding contradictions helps
 initiate actions and movements to affect the outcome of
 class interests. This is as true of China as it is for the USA
 and the rest of the world, North and South.

    There are two distinct categories of conflicts: one,
 contradictions in nature and two, contradictions in human
 society.

Humankind versus nature is a constant challenge, always in
 flux. Technology sets the range of ability to use the
 elements and forces of nature at will for human survival. A
 major contradiction arises when destructive class interests
 or neglect cause ecological imbalances leading to
 significant changes in a natural phenomenon, i.e. global
 warming threatening society itself.

    The advent of private property opened the way to
 exploitation of man by man, culminating in capitalism's
 introduction of socialized production for individual profit,
 fraught with contradictions, and it remains dominant in
the 21st century because two technological revolutions in
the 20th century gave it new life and growth.

Because of the contradiction between underdevelopment
and the need to integrate rapidly into the world economy on
 a high technological plane, methods honed by capitalism
 must be adopted in China to achieve competitive
status without sacrificing socially and collectively owned
 public enterprise. This follows a period in China when
 technology and management were de-emphasized though
 collectivity and social concerns were practices within
low productivity and living standards. Modernization,
 therefore, has sharpened this threat.

    The ideological campaign launched in February has
 answered the growing contradiction between adaptation of
 capitalist economic mechanisms without its class content.
 Nonetheless, a growing disparity in income, while
reflecting a socialist tenet, ("from each according to ability,
 to each according to contribution"), and financial incentives to
 stimulate productivity requires special
 regulation, fiscal policy, taxation, social propaganda and
 raising the level of the lower income sectors and shaming
 ostentation. The rate of share in the benefits of
 modernization in cities versus the countryside is a growing
 contradiction. Uneven geographic development,
 particularly in the West and Northwestern ethnically
 populated regions, lags in national development as a
 whole. The Chinese government and Party are to be
 commended as the first nation in history to plan the full
integration of backward regions in order to achieve a
 balanced development. The introduction of high-tech,
 medium and small enterprises and a service sector in these
 areas counter the effects of underdevelopment, combined
 with the development of infrastructure to tie the region to
 the rest of the country.

    We do not look upon the misuse of freedom through
 economic crime, drugs, prostitution and other degrading
 elements that came with the opening as contradictions in
 and of themselves, but as reflections of the diminution of
Socialist morality.

    A further consequence of opening is a set-back from the
 equal treatment of men and women under SOE
 employment and social benefits. The changed social
contract within joint ventures and the private sector tends to
 employ men in better positions than women. This has
 affected family life and relations between the sexes. The
 ideological campaign is a welcome antidote.

In foreign relations China faces western corporate
domination of trade and investment as reflected in GATT
 and WTO, which stand in contradiction to
independent choices by underdeveloped countries
 struggling to improve their own standards regardless of
 internal class formations. China stands as a champion of
 the underdeveloped. Hence, when China joins the WTO,
 we may expect and intensification of internal debate as a
 major feature and a battleground for humane world
 development within the WTO. China appears willing to
 accept this role.

    While friendly relations through trade and investment are
 major objectives of both the USA and China, there are
 fundamental differences in political and economic
 expectations. Friendship and understanding must be
based on reality. China's chosen direction is Socialism.

 It allocates its national capital accumulation for public
 development, giving priority to investments fostering
 economic integration through development of
 infrastructure, power generation, public transportation,
ecology, land improvement etc, etc, and to the stimulation

 of a rapid rise in living standards. China will champion the
 underdeveloped nations against imperialist remnants,
 support regionalism and the UN, oppose unilateralism,
make efforts to maintain stability and avert war, all this, in
 contradiction to single power hegemony.

    President Clinton, on the other hand, clearly defines the
 underlying political motivation for working with China
 economically as the encouragement of private
 entrepreneurial ideology and formation of an "independent
 middle class that will divert China from Socialism".

    China is not blind to this contradiction. It is admirably
 steadfast in its modernization and opening to the West,
 confident that stability and peace are in the best interest of
 both countries.

    Ironically, the USA is the undoubted economic leader;
 but China leads the political direction.

    In the light of dealing with contradictions, I would like to
 share some random considerations.

1. There is much confusion about the nature of Socialism
among Marxists. Socialism is not a fixed economic
system established in a cataclysmic qualitative change
from capitalism. For Marx, the central concept of historical
 materialism is that "Communism is something that
 develops out of capitalism". Socialism is not scholastically
invented, but involves a process of economic maturity to an
ultimately "fully developed Communism". Between
this beginning and end (capitalism and Communism), there
 is incompletely developed Communism with concessions
 to elements of capitalism, "bourgeois rights". Marx called
this the lower of two levels of Communism. The lower
 level begins in struggle for economic and political
democracy within capitalism, emerging victorious after
prolonged birth pangs from the capitalist controlled society.
 A dialectical approach recognizes Socialism as a
 developmental process shaped by particularities of the
 class struggle in each nation, arriving to Communism each
 on its own unique path while taking strength from each
 other against the common enemy- capitalist reaction.
 Socialism, therefore, as we know it, is a most complex,
 most contradiction riddled moment in a society in flux,
 especially in a developing country with lagging feudal
 strains seeking modernization in a high-tech world.

2. For Marxists, the very question of public socialist
 accumulation posits a new idea. Capital itself now has
more than one character (as distinct from Marx' seminal
work); privately accumulated and allocated or socially
 accumulated and allocated - private capital and socialist
 capital. This is a major threat to corporate capitalism
 because it establishes economic independence from the
 dominant system.

3. There is a contradiction between interdependence of
 national economies in world economic integration (the true
process of globalization) and the independence of each
 nation to develop its own economy in the context of its
own history and culture.

4. In the 20th century, accepted Marxian dialectic assumed
 that every qualitative change in a serial negation of the
 negation was a forward movement in history, failing to
 anticipate that a negation could be retrogressive. The
 Soviet Union began the historic process of Socialist
 Transformation in the 20th century, but failed. The
 Chinese are on a new path to the same goal in the 21st
 century.

5. It is significant that the Soviet Union, with all its
technological development, was never integrated into world
economy, though it traded. There was no dependence of the
Western world on Russian production as there is on
China's ability to produce and compete and its willingness
 to face the tensions of economic integration. China's
 success as in independent economic and cultural entity is
 the measuring rod of 21st century progress. It is no
accident that there are elements in the USA unhappy with
stable US-China relations which reflect archaic 20th
 century Cold War attitudes. We hope that China's efforts to
 shape the direction of the outcome of manifold
contradictions will in the end prove that Socialism with its
national characteristics is the road to Communism.

6. It is heartening to witness the intensity of the ideological
 campaign within the Communist Party of China and
ultimately its interaction with the people. This movement,
undertaken out of necessity because of the intensification of
contradictions and the ramifications of China's integration
 into world economy, is a guarantee of independent
socialist construction. Zhang Jemin's emphasis on the three
 diversifications: technology, the economy and Chinese
culture, points the way to independent development and
success for the Chinese people. It stands as a model of
Socialism with national characteristics, taking into account
 a people's history, culture, economy and development. The
 three diversifications are a beacon illuminating that road to
 Socialism in the 21st century.

Postscript:

Underlying much of the frustration in economic unification
of China are the impediments to political coordination
between the central government and the relatively
independence leaders of provinces and local
administrations.  This is probably the most sensitive
contradiction in China.  Failure of coordination is
evidenced in the handling of allocations for development
and social needs transferred by the central government and
administered by provincial governments that do not carry
out policies as directed by Beijing.

Having had to bail out two provincial international
investment trusts in the past two years, Beijing has reason
to anticipate provincial disregard for trade agreements with
the US and others to pave the way for entry into the
World Trade Organization.  Local leaders are prone to
nepotism and personal power in carrying out government
allocations of social funds, distorting directives and
retarding the tempo of economic development.

The USA system of delineating federal and states' rights is
erroneously held as an example. The relationship between
state and federal governments in the USA was codified in
the establishment of a strong federal government of the
original 13 colonies as their center, subordinating state
constitution to that of the federal constitution.  States that
joined the Union subsequently had to accept the primacy of
central government over their own laws.

In China, political unification was established through
concessions by the central government to feudal leaders in
the provinces which in many instances even retained
control of their armed forces.  Traditionally, therefore,
there emerged a different relationship between the
provincial and central governments in China than that of
the federal and state governments of the USA.

This political contradiction has necessitated the retraining
program now taking place as a central process in the
ideological campaign.  2000 local and provincial Party
leaders are now undergoing six months of reeducation at
a special school built this year for that very purpose.
During the next few years, every six months, another 2000
cadre will go through retraining.  It is hoped that the
results will be a more consistent political and economic
unification that will enhance and speed up modernization.

Sidney J. Gluck
Beijing, November 1, 2000