Re: [Marxism] PRC: The Left of the CPC critiques capitalist restorationists

[Louis Proyect <lnp3@xxxxxxxxx>]

Walter wrote:

>What Stalin wrote in 1951 has somewhere between little and zero 
>bearing on what is happing in China over half a century later

I am surprised that you would come to such a conclusion since the 
article that you implicitly put such value in (although I bet you 
didn't read) is filled with references to musty articles from the 
distant past. Here are a few excerpts:

1) As Marx pointed out in the Critique of the Gotha Programme, owing 
to the fact that "it emerges from capitalist society; which is thus 
in every respect, economically, morally and intellectually, still 
stamped with the birth marks of the old society from whose womb it 
emerges." So, as it advances along the road to the higher stage of 
communism, it still needs to continue the revolution, continue the struggle.

2)  In the same year that Chairman Mao directed a powerful rebuff at 
the Krushchov renegade revisionist clique's total repudiation of 
Stalin, he incisively pointed out: "So long as we have an all-round 
view of the problem, then, if we need to talk of "Stalinism", we can 
say, firstly, it is communism, it is Marxism-Leninism. This is the 
main aspect." (Manuscripts of Mao Zedong Since the Founding of the 
Nation, Vol 6 p 283-284 Chinese ed.).

3) Public ownership is the major characteristic of socialism; private 
ownership is the major characteristic of capitalism: without public 
ownership there is no socialism, whereas to implement private 
ownership is capitalism through and through. Marx and Engels pointed 
out: "The distinguishing feature of Communism is not the abolition of 
property generally, but the abolition of bourgeois property. But 
modern bourgeois private property is the final and most complete 
expression of the system of producing and expropriating products, 
that is based on class antagonism, on the exploitation of the many by 
the few. In this sense, the theory of the Communists may be summed up 
in a single sentence: Abolition of private property." (Marx and 
Engels, Manifesto of the Communist Party, p 27-8).

4)  On the continent of Europe, firstly in the iron and steel 
industry, then the chemical industry, the machine manufacturing 
industry and the textile industry, one department after another 
turned into joint-stock companies. Marx regarded this change as 
extremely important and believed that stock companies will abolish 
'capital as private property within the framework of capitalist 
production itself.' 'This is the abolition of the capitalist mode of 
production within the capitalist mode of production itself, and hence 
a self-dissolving contradiction, which prima facie represents a mere 
phase of transition to a new form of production.' (Capital, Vol 3, 
Peoples Publishing House, 2nd ed., p 504 Chinese ed.)

5)  We open Chapter 27 of "Capital", "The Role of Credit in 
Capitalist Production". Both sections of Mr Xie Tao's two passages 
stem from here. In this chapter, Marx is very explicit about 
determining the nature of the joint-stock system of capitalism and 
the stock companies. This author has also extracted three passages 
(Mr Xie Tao, in his, uses two passages, but leaves out the beginning 
and the end, so the meaning is incomplete.) (1) Marx said that in the 
formation of stock companies, the "capital, which in itself rests 
upon a social mode of production and presupposes a social 
concentration of means of production and labour-power, is here 
directly endowed with the form of social capital (capital of directly 
associated individuals) as distinct from private capital, and its 
undertakings assume the form of social undertakings as distinct from 
private undertakings. It is the abolition of capital as private 
property within the framework of capitalist production itself." (2) 
Marx said that "Aside from the stock-company business, which 
represents the abolition of capitalist private industry on the basis 
of the capitalist system itself and destroys private industry as it 
expands and invades new spheres of production, credit offers to the 
individual capitalist, or to one who is regarded as a capitalist, 
absolute control within certain limits over the capital and property 
of others. The control over social capital, not the individual 
capital of its own, gives him control of social labour." Marx said 
that "Success and failure both lead here to a centralisation of 
capital, and thus to expropriation on the most enormous scale. 
Expropriation extends here from the direct producers to the smaller 
and the medium-sized capitalists themselves. It is the point of 
departure for the capitalist mode of production; its accomplishment 
is the goal of this production." (3) Marx said "this expropriation 
appears within the capitalist system in a contradictory form, as 
appropriation of social property by as few?" ("Capital" Vol 3, pp 
501, 502, 504, 505 Chinese ed.)

6) In relation to the question of the so-called "planned capitalism" 
raised by Mr Xie Tao, Lenin, in the same year that he took aim at 
revisionism's twisting of Marx and Engels on the question of the 
"planning" of capitalism, explained in this paragraph of The State 
and Revolution (right): "We shall note in passing that Engels makes 
an exceedingly valuable observation on questions of economics, which 
shows how attentively and thoughtfully he watched the various changes 
being undergone by modern capitalism, and how for this reason he was 
able to foresee to a certain extent the tasks of our present, the 
imperialist, epoch. Here is the passage: referring to the word 
"planlessness" (Planlosigkeit) used in the draft program, as 
characteristic of capitalism, Engels writes: "?When we pass from 
joint-stock companies to trusts which assume control over, and 
monopolize, whole branches of industry, it is not only private 
production that ceases, but also planlessness." (Neue Zeit, Vol XX, 
1, 1901-02 p. 8)

7) Lenin had already quite clearly elaborated on this question. Under 
the capitalist system this type of single enterprise production 
planning is required by the capitalist; however, just like Lenin 
correctly said "The trusts, of course, never produced, do not now 
produce, and cannot produce complete planning." In the whole 
productive activity of capitalism, it is absolutely impossible to 
genuinely put "planning" into practice, to overcome the "anarchy". 
Engels pointed out: "only conscious organisation of social 
production, in which production and distribution are carried on in a 
planned way, can lift mankind above the rest of the animal world as 
regards the social aspect, in the same way that production in general 
has done this for mankind in the specifically biological aspect. 
Historical evolution makes such an organisation daily more 
indispensable, but also with every day more possible. From it will 
date a new epoch of history, in which mankind itself, and with 
mankind, all branches of its activity, and particularly natural 
science, will experience an advance that will put everything 
preceding it in the deepest shade." (Engels, "Introduction to The 
Dialectics of Nature", "Selected Woks of Marx and Engels", Peoples 
Publishing House, 1961 ed, Vol 2 p.75 Chinese ed.) My understanding 
of this is that "the conscious organisation of social production" and 
the "From it will date a new epoch of history" raised by Engels, is 
socialism, and can only be socialism.

I can go on and on but you probably have figured out by now that the 
article is an extended and highly scholastic polemic against a 
Chinese intellectual who favors a capitalist model in line with 
Western Europe rather than the present model that features Chinese CP 
political monopoly over a capitalist economy. The reason this debate 
is confusing is that both sides use Marxist rhetoric to defend what 
are essentially capitalist perspectives. One side draws from 
Bernstein's writings apparently, while the other side answers back 
using quotes from Marx, Engels, Lenin et al. I invite you to read the 
quotes above and try to make sense out of what is happening in China 
today. Good luck. 


________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40archives.econ.utah.edu