File spoon-archives/marxism-general.archive/marxism-general_1997/marxism-general.9705, message 112


Date: Thu, 29 May 1997 13:23:52 -0500
To: marxism-general-AT-jefferson.village.Virginia.EDU,
From: John Bicketts <sfeikema-AT-mach3ww.com>
Subject: Re: M-G: Questions on China


At 09:08 AM 5/28/97 +0200, Rolf Martens wrote:
>Rob wrote, on 27.05:
>
>And OK, now let's (or let me) not engage in any more
>fist fighting, just for the moment, but talk instead.
>
>I've written several postings on this in my "UNITE! Info"
>series. A summary here, very brief:
>
>Chinese revolution: Very good. Brought enormously
>important new experience to the international proletariat.
>
>
>Cultural revolution: Also very good. Did however contain
>some negative things too. I've mentioned one 1966 statement
>by Jiang Qing, later one of the 4-Gang, as an example of the 
>latter.
>
>The 4-Gang and Deng: Both very bad, were rivals of each others'
>and both attacked Mao's line. That is to say, the people
>in question degenerated into becoming reactionaries, had
>made positive contributions earlier.
>
>Tienanmen 1989: Of course a big crime by the Deng gang.
>
>Hong Kong: Well, difficult - I haven't reflected on that
>question. I could say various thing on principle - but,
>for the moment, I think I'll pass.
>
>
>>Just out of curiosity Rolf, what are your views on the Chinese 
>>Revolution, the Cultural Revolution, the Gang of four, Tiennamen, Hong
>>Kong, Deng, the new guy in power,- well China in General.  THIS IS NOT
>>AN ATTCK BY ANY MEANS.  I am simply curious.  You adhere to Mao, and I
>>am wondering what the Maoist approach to China is.  Do you defend the
>>revolution, the state as it is now, why didn't it work out as planned?
>
>"Not work out as planned", that's how the bourgeoisie is trying
>to present things, in the ex-SU too. But you see, class
>struggle continues under socialism, the old, better-educated and
>at least internationally better-organized class still exists
>and tries to subvert and overthrow the dictarorship of the
>proletariat. Against these attempts was the Cultural Revolution
>directed. It succeeeded for a long time - also giving us the
>crucialmethod for preventing bourgeois come-backs in the future.
>But in the end of course, socialism - so far - was defeated
>in China. There has to be another revolution there. 
>

There is the question of WHY these new ruling classes tend to form, as they
did in both Russia aand China.  I thought communism was not supposed to
have internal contradictions like capitalism, but this seems to be one in
the Russian and Chinese implementations- at this point, an apparently fatal
one (at least for now).
  Now, there is the problem of a lack of democratic accountability. Under
the USSR, there just wasn't any peaceful way for the people to depose of
leaders who were
oppressing the people.
The Cultural Revolution was a big "throw the bums out" kind of movement,
but I think it would be much more efficient if this sort of thing could
happen by peaceful means.
 And I think a lot of problems arose from the fact that both countries were
underdevoloped feudal societies mostly made up of illiterate peasants,
which made establishing socialism very difficult. Many of these problems
would not occur in a fully industrialised country with educated workers.
Unfortunately, those workers have it too good to really be motivated for
revolution. Their own ruling class seems like it's trying to fix that,
however...

>>What is your response to the slow introduction of capitalism in China? 
>>If I am correct, Mao acted in spite of Stalinism correct?( Krushchev and
>>Brehnev even Gorbachov were Stalinists, it did not die with that bastard
>>Joe).
>
>No, no, Chrushchev precisely portrayed Stalin as a monster!
>To the great satisfaction of the Western capitalists too.

Sure he did, but it must be admitted that Stalin was much to blame for the
creation of the party bureaucratic class which took the place of a
capitalist class in Russia.
  One of the big problems with the SU was that it was far too authoritarian
and undemocratic- two things which Stalin had in abundance.

>
>Your (Trotskyite) "instruments" of thinking obviously are
>flawed! Please reflect on this!
>
>>Just a few questions!  Thanx!  
>>
>>Comradely
>>
>>Rob
>
>Well, "comradely" or not, I too am interested in factual
>discussions.
>
>Rolf M. 
>
>
>
>     --- from list marxism-general-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
>
>



     --- from list marxism-general-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---

   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005