The penultimate section!!! Thankfully, it was a relatively short piece to translate. Links to earlier sections of Wu Bin's refutation of the pro-capitalist line of Xie Tao are at the bottom.
11. Confusing black and white and reversing the verdict on new and old revisionism
In his “Preface”, Mr Xie Tao goes so far as to make no secret of reversing the verdict on revisionism, wantonly confusing right and wrong. He says things like “‘opposing and guarding against revisionism’ is an ultra-left theory”. He says things like “In the past we confined ourselves to the narrow experience of violent revolution, and accused others of ‘revisionism’, and it seems like we should now restore the reputation of revisionism. Because its not that the social democrats didn’t struggle against the bourgeoisie, they didn’t make unilateral concessions, and they not only ‘revised’ socialism but also ‘revised’ capitalism”. “Thus it can be seen that it’s not that Bernstein ‘revised’ the Marxist theory of violent revolution and put forward the theory of peaceful transition, but that Bernstein only repeated the words of Engels, that he inherited and developed the change in thinking and the revision that Engels directed at the revolutionary theory he and Marx established.”
According to these absurd arguments of Mr Xie Tao, the October Revolution led by Lenin is “revisionism” and the Chinese revolution led by Mao Zedong is also “revisionism” because in Mr Xie Tao’s view, those who stand up to the bourgeoisie at the same time oppose revolution, destroy the revolution, so who is a Marxist? According to the point of view of Mr Xie Tao, are all the victories of the socialist revolution in more than ten countries during the 20th Century anti-Marxist? Did Lenin, Stalin and Mao Zedong all became “revisionists” and were they, moreover, the “biggest revisionists”? And did those traitors in the international communist movement who surrendered to imperialism, such as Bernstein and others, become genuine “Marxists”? This is really peculiar! Really strange! In order to coordinate such propaganda and influence for Mr Xie Tao, the editorial department of “Yanhuang Chunqiu” specially laid out Bernstein’s portrait on the magazine’s front page. Isn’t this nonsense? Isn’t this being blinded by one’s desires? Isn’t this the ravings of a madman? Isn’t this shameless? Aren’t they demons and monsters? Cow demons and snake spirits? I don’t know with what words to express indignation towards and to flog Mr Xie Tao for this type of despicable behaviour!
Engels warned us: “And to-day, the very people who, from the “impartiality” of their superior standpoint, preach to the workers a Socialism soaring high above their class interests and class struggles, and tending to reconcile in a higher humanity the interests of both the contending classes — these people are either neophytes, who have still to learn a great deal, or they are the worst enemies of the workers — wolves in sheep’s clothing (Preface to the English edition, The Condition of the Working Class in England, 1892). Are these people not wolves in sheep’s clothing?!
Lenin also warned us: “The bourgeoisie needs hirelings who enjoy the trust of a section of the working class, whitewash and prettify the bourgeoisie with talk about the reformist path being possible, throw dust in the eyes of the people by such talk, and divert the people from revolution…” (Collected Works, Vol 29, The Tasks of the Third International). Are these people not just such hirelings in the pay of the bourgeoisie?
Lenin also taught us: “the opportunists’ formal membership in workers’ parties by no means disproves their objectively being a political detachment of the bourgeoisie, conductors of its influence, and its agents in the labour movement…It is generally agreed that opportunism is no chance occurrence, sin, slip, or treachery on the part of individuals, but a social product of an entire period of history’ (Collected Works Vol 21 The Collapse of the Second International). Indeed, the appearance of these types of phenomena such as opportunism and revisionism is a product of the struggle of social classes. Seeing the problem from this grand field of vision, then, we can not be surprised at the spread of the influence of the bourgeoisie in the “Preface” and at Mr Xie Tao acting as a spokesman for the bourgeoisie.
A unique phenomenon exists inside China today, namely, that whenever the right opportunist wind starts to blow, the anti-Left clamour lingers on. The majority of the anti-Leftists are not clean around the buttocks, they’re not the Rightists of old, but are new-born running dogs of imperialism.; they are not revisionists, they are unrepentant capitalist-roaders; they are not new rich upstarts, they are the worthy progeny of the landlords, rich people, reactionaries and evil gentry overthrown by the people. So they oppose the Left, oppose Marxism-Leninism-Mao Zedong Thought, oppose taking the socialist road, oppose public ownership and the dictatorship of the proletariat. Information taken from the Internet shows that during the anti-Rightist struggle Mr Xie Tao was a Rightist and was once arrested because of the “Hu Feng Incident”; from this we can see that his all-out “anti-Leftism” has an historical basis. In his “Preface” he uses very long passages to oppose the Left, and apart from attacking the leftism of Lenin, Stalin and Mao Zedong, he also attacks those contemporary comrades of the Left who support Marxism. Mr Xie Tao uses very long passages to attack an article by Comrade Zhang Qinde [head of the poicy and research department of the Central Committee - Trans.] (hereinafter referred to as “the Zhang essay”) and carry out large-scale suppression. There are three main points. (1) He says: “The ‘Zhang essay’ criticises by name several ‘mainstream scholars’ who offered advice and suggestions on, and made contributions to, the reform and opening up, and said their position on promoting a market economy was ‘bourgeois liberalisation’; it divides cadres at all levels in charge of leading the reform and opening into being bourgeois liberalisation reformists and ‘socialist reformists’, and advocated launching a big struggle inside and outside of the Party to seize power from and overthrow the ‘bourgeois liberalisation reformists’. They express themselves towards the domestic political situation thus: ‘In the coming decisive battle, the essence is whether to take the capitalist road or the socialist road, whether it will be the bourgeois liberalisation reformists or the socialist reformists that hold power, whether it will be a future as a dependency of US imperialism or a future in which national independence and state sovereignty are safeguarded, a struggle of life and death between these two destinies’.”
We want to ask Mr Xie Tao, including yourself within the ranks of those “mainstream scholars” who advocate privatisation and capitalist constitutional democracy, are you not “bourgeois liberalisation reformists”? Is this not bourgeois liberalisation reformism? Which class are you “offering advice and suggestions” and “making contributions to”? If the “advice and suggestions” of these people continues, it is hard to believe that it is not going to be “a future as a dependency of US imperialism”, and if not, what is it? Looking at your “Preface”, at what you advocate, Mr Xie Tao, isn’t it hard to believe that it’s not “bourgeois liberalisation reformism”? Isn’t it a question of the struggle between taking the capitalist road or the socialist road?
(2) In relation to the proposal on foreign affairs advanced by the “Zhang essay” to take the socialist countries and the Third World countries “as the core”, to form to some extent “the broadest anti-hegemonic united front”, “to carry out the inevitable struggle against hegemonism”, you feel “shocked”! This is strange, for as a China with a Communist Party and as a socialist country, how can it be “shocking” to take the socialist countries as the core, uniting widely with the Third World to develop a united front to oppose hegemonism? If our foreign affairs were not like this, but rather to the contrary, would we still be the Communist Party and a socialist country? Now that would be “shocking”!
(3) You said: “They think that the present reform and opening is a change in the direction of socialism, that it’s peaceful transition. ‘It’s being influenced by old revisionism’s ‘capitalism can peacefully evolve into socialism’ and present-day revisionism’s fallacy of the category of ‘new thinking’.” These colloquialisms should not utter forth from your gentleman’s mouth, because it is precisely you and your accomplices who are trying to “change the direction of socialism” and “peacefully transform” China! Isn’t this a fact? Your “Preface” and Xin Ziling’s “Mao Zedong: A Century of Merits and Faults” are the hard evidence!
As an ancient saying goes, “there is no point in people taking counsel together who follow different ways”. Marxism and revisionism are “different ways”! Socialism and capitalism are “different ways”! The “Zhang essay” and the “Preface” are obviously also “different ways”! The “way” of the “Zhang essay” is Marxism, socialism and patriotism, while the “way” of the “Preface” is revisionism, capitalism and selling out the country. With such diametrically opposed and completely incompatible “ways”, it is unlikely that you will be able to “take counsel together” and impossible that you will share a common language, common standpoint or common ideals. So, Mr Xie Tao and Comrade Zhang Qinde, or leftists like the present writer, can only speak their own language!
Pt 1: http://mike-servethepeople.blogspot.com/2007/05/democratic-socialism-is-capitalism-pt-1.html
Pt 2: http://mike-servethepeople.blogspot.com/2007/05/democratic-socialism-is-capitalism-part.html
Pt 5: http://mike-servethepeople.blogspot.com/2007/07/democratic-socialism-is-capitalism-pt-5.html
Pt 6: http://mike-servethepeople.blogspot.com/2007/08/democratic-socialism-is-capitalism-pt-6.html
Pt 7: http://mike-servethepeople.blogspot.com/2007/12/democratic-socialism-is-capitalism-part.html
Pt 8: http://mike-servethepeople.blogspot.com/2008/03/democratic-socialism-is-capitalism-pt-8.html
Pt 9: http://mike-servethepeople.blogspot.com/2008/06/democratic-socialism-is-capitalism-pt-9.html
Pt. 10: http://mike-servethepeople.blogspot.com/2008/07/democratic-socialism-is-capitalism-pt.html