22 July, 2015 source: red song club.com
author: guo songmin
(Translator’s Preface:
Bourgeois right is the Achilles Heel of socialism. Socialism cannot do without
bourgeois right, but it must restrict it or face restoration of capitalism by
revisionists and capitalist-roaders in the highest levels of the Party’s
leadership. This is an interesting
article supporting Mao Zedong and Zhang Chunqiao’s calls to restrict bourgeois
right, and the touristy “museum piece” of Nanjie Village which provides a
contemporary model of that restriction.)
After 6 October 1976, Zhang
Chunqiao, who was a member of the Standing Committee of the Political Bureau of
the CPC Central Committee, Vice-Premier of the State Council and Director of
the General Political Department of the Chinese People's Liberation Army,
disappeared from the Chinese media, turning him into a silent political target.
Although he reappeared in the spotlight during the "two trials" in
1980, he did not say a word, leaving the world with a huge question mark. It
was not until the publication of Zhang Chunqiao's Family Letters from Prison
in 2015 that it was confirmed that Zhang had always adhered to the theory and
practice of the Cultural Revolution.
There is no doubt that Mao Zedong admired Zhang Chunqiao, because in China at that time, Zhang Chunqiao was probably the only person who could understand Mao's later thinking and explain it clearly. Mao did not have high expectations of the theoretical level of senior Party cadres, and on several occasions he said, "Not many people in our Party really understand Marx and Lenin" or something similar, but he did not hesitate to praise Zhang Chunqiao by saying, "Chunqiao is a thinker", which shows that Mao Zedong's expectations of Zhang Chunqiao were very high.
What is "Chunqiao Thought"?
"Chunqiao Thought was repeatedly criticised during the "Expose, Criticise and Investigate" campaign that followed the "Smashing of the Gang of Four". So, what is the main content of Chunqiao Thought? In my opinion, there are two articles that best represent Zhang Chunqiao's thought, one is "Do away with the ideology of bourgeois right"[1] published in 1958, and the other is "On Exercising All-Round Dictatorship Over the Bourgeoisie"[2] published in 1975.
The first of these two articles can be regarded as a manifesto for Zhang Chunqiao's entry into the political arena, for it was this article that brought him into Mao Zedong's field of vision, and thus gradually into the centre of China's political arena; the second was his curtain call on the political arena, as he lost his right to publish his articles a year later. These two articles shared a central idea: the need to limit bourgeois right under the conditions of the socialist system, which was a decisive issue for "whether the proletariat could overcome the bourgeoisie and whether China would become revisionist" (Zhang Chunqiao: “On Exercising All-Round Dictatorship Over the Bourgeoisie").
Of course, this is not strictly speaking "Chunqiao thought", but Mao Zedong's thought, except that Zhang Chunqiao was the most concerned with this major theoretical and political issue and explained it most systematically.
The concept of "bourgeois right" was a concept introduced by Marx, the founder of scientific socialism, in his late work "Critique of the Gotha Programme" and used to describe the characteristics of a socialist economy. According to Marx, in socialist economic and social relations, because of the principle of the distribution of labour by equal exchange, there are also legal rights of a bourgeois nature, similar to those of capitalist society, which are formally equal but not in fact equal.
Marx's language is rather 'academic', but what does it mean when translated into layman's terms? In short, it means that pay for work (i.e. distribution according to work) - the main distributive principle of the traditional socialist system, and considered an important superiority of the traditional socialist system - is a "legal right of a bourgeois nature", i.e. a bourgeois right.
In general terms, under the traditional socialist system, a person's seniority, merit, status, education, title, etc. could become "capital" for him or her to demand higher wages and better treatment, and therefore such behaviour was a sign of "serious bourgeois right". The main difference between the traditional socialist system and the capitalist system in the field of distribution is simply the absence of landlords and capitalists, i.e. the elimination of the class of land and capital profiteers.
In today's China, the principle of distribution according to labour has long been replaced by "distribution according to essential factors"[3], with land and capitalist profit-takers swallowing up most of the fruits of development, so restoring the principle of distribution according to labour is the goal of many left-wingers' prayers. Many people may not understand why Zhang Chunqiao has cast a wary eye on the principle of distribution according to labour, thinking that this may be the legendary "ultra-left", but it is not.
What is wrong with the distribution according to labour?
Under the traditional socialist system, if the principle of distribution according to work is absolutised, it may indeed lead to "revisionism". For example, in factories, the principle of distribution according to labour can be deduced from the "bonus system", followed by the contracting system → factory manager's responsibility → equity incentive → MBO (management buyout) → privatisation; in the countryside, the principle of distribution according to labour can also be deduced without any sense of contradiction from the road of Xiaogang village[4], which is the road of contracting production to the household, and the next step is land rights → land transfer → land concentration , until the achievements of land reform are completely lost. Thus, whether in the city or in the countryside, following the roadmap of "pay for work" will lead to a "capitalist restoration". It is a short and straight road, which we have just walked, and it is still fresh in our minds.
It is no wonder that in the early 1960s, when there was a debate within the Party about whether to implement "household contract responsibility system" in the countryside and whether the factories should be "bonus-minded" or "political-minded", Mao Zedong immediately defined the nature of the debate as a "two-way struggle" over whether to follow the socialist or capitalist road. Looking back on this period of history today, we cannot help but marvel at the great man's vision and insight into the future.
A more serious problem is
that, as an incentive, pay for work will ultimately prove the superiority of
the capitalist system rather than the socialist one. The logic is simple: the
passion for labour inspired by pay for work cannot in any way match the
enormous greed stirred up by the proliferation of capital. One only has to look
at the number of people today who pin their dreams of overnight riches on the
stock market to understand this.
In addition, the distribution of labour is based on people's selfishness, and it is very easy to deviate from the value guidance. The ideal state of affairs is, of course, "distribution according to work; more work, more gain", but in practice, as "gain" becomes the end of "work" and "work" becomes the means of "gain", the relationship between "work" and "gain" will gradually change from "more work, more gain" to the pursuit of more gain, less work and gain without work. Traditional socialism is a communal society, and values require people to be dedicated to the public good.
As a bourgeois right, payment according to work has such a huge hidden danger, but under the conditions of the traditional socialist system, due to various factors, it has to be used as the main distribution system. What should we do? This put even Mao Zedong, who had the power to turn the tide, in a difficult position, arguing that 'this can only be restricted under the dictatorship of the proletariat', an idea that was enthusiastically supported by Zhang Chunqiao.
Since under traditional socialist conditions one could not rely on land and capital to make a fortune, status and 'knowledge' became the main 'capital', and the main purpose of restricting bourgeois legal power was to limit the impulse of the two classes, cadres and intellectuals, to maximise their own interests. The Cultural Revolution was a massive experiment in restricting bourgeois right, and Zhang Chunqiao's devotion to it made him the sworn enemy of these two classes, and was the main reason why he was not spared "death by a thousand cuts" after the failure of the Cultural Revolution. Mao Zedong, who should have been honoured as the father of the nation, was also branded as having made "serious mistakes" and is to this day a sore thumb for the elite.
(Above: the capitalist-roaders get their revenge: Zhang Chunqiao on trial and sentenced to death)
In short, under the traditional socialist system, the distribution according to labour and the restriction of bourgeois right must co-exist as a pair of mutually corrective institutional arrangements in order to ensure the stability of the system - otherwise, it will be either a Soviet-style disintegration or a Chinese-style reform and opening up.
How can bourgeois legal power be effectively restricted? There are also two types of "Chunqiao Thought": an institutional arrangement, i.e. the restoration of the free supply system, and a non-institutional arrangement, i.e. a self-restraint based mainly on "fighting self and repudiating revisionism" and "the revolutionisation of human thought". "For example, Mao Zedong did not want the rank of marshal and took the initiative to reduce his salary, Chen Yonggui[5] did not receive a pay rise when he became Vice Premier, and he advocated that cadres should participate in labour and intellectuals should be integrated with the workers and peasants, etc.
(Above: Mao greeting Chen Yonggui)
Positive aspects of the free supply system
The focus here is on the system of provisioning. During the revolutionary war, the system of provisioning was a system of distribution in which all those who joined the revolution were provided with the necessities of life free of charge. The scope of provision included personal necessities such as clothing, food, housing, transport, schooling and some out-of-pocket allowances, as well as living expenses and childcare for children born of marriages in the revolutionary ranks. The supply system was a form of equal distribution, with the nature of a wartime communist distribution system. After the founding of New China, after a short transition, the supply system was abolished and replaced by a salary system.
During the revolutionary war, the spirit of "everyone is an equal member of the revolutionary family" embodied in the free supply system greatly motivated hundreds of millions of peasants and workers from the lowest strata of society to devote themselves to the revolution, especially those soldiers of the Guomindang army who were captured or revolted and felt a sense of entering a new world after joining the PLA, and were greatly motivated to fight.
Since the supply system could not be motivated by the promise of "more work, more pay", the main incentive was a high degree of political identification by all members of the community and the leadership's example. If the vanguard does not do a good job, the institutional arrangements of the supply system will look like a deception.
After the founding of New China, the Communist People's Liberation Army moved into the cities and faced a new and complex situation. On the one hand, life in the cities was far more complicated than in the countryside, and the supply system could hardly meet the varied needs of urban life. On the other hand, it was still at the stage of the New Democratic Revolution, and for the sake of maintaining the united front, Mao Zedong agreed to abolish the supply system and replace it with the salary system. But the spirit of equality embodied in the supply system, and the spirit of unity among all members of the revolutionary team in working for the revolution under the supply system, all made Mao Zedong deeply attached to it. So in 1958, when he read Zhang Chunqiao's book, "Do Away With the Ideology of Bourgeois Right", in which he criticised the then-popular talk of disparaging the supply system and advocated the restoration of the fine tradition of equality for all, it was only natural that he sighed with admiration. He not only instructed the People's Daily to reproduce it in full, but also wrote an editor's note himself: "This article by Comrade Zhang Chunqiao, which appeared in the sixth issue of the semi-monthly magazine Liberation in Shanghai, is reproduced here with a view to discussion among comrades. This issue needs to be discussed because it is an important issue at present. In our view, Zhang's article is basically correct, but it is somewhat one-sided, that is to say, it does not explain the historical process completely. However, he raises the issue distinctly and attractively. The article is again easy to understand and very readable."
Nowadays, provisioning is highly politicised, as if the mention of provisioning is "ultra-left", but it is not. In essence, provisioning is a guarantee provided by the community (whether it is the state, the army, a business, a clan, a village community, etc.) to the members of the community, and the social welfare of the modern state is a form of provisioning, since it has the essential feature of being free by virtue of status.
Just a year after the publication of this article, Mao Zedong died, Zhang Chunqiao was "crushed", and "Chunqiao Thought" was labelled as "ultra-left" and sunk into the most obscure corner of history. It seemed impossible that the world would ever know about it again.
The revelation of the Nanjie Village road
(Above: Nanjie Village and Wang Hongbin)
But the most wonderful thing about history is that unexpected things happen all the time. The "Chunqiao idea", although no longer spoken of, did take root, blossom and bear fruit in a part of China known both in China and abroad as Nanjie Village.
I have often lamented that Wang Hongbin[6], the "leader" of Nanjie Village, was born at the wrong time. Moreover, when Chen Yonggui led the Dazhai brigade along the path of socialism, the political climate was very favourable, whereas when Wang Hongbin led Nanjie Village along the path of collective economy, the political trend was to divide the land and work alone. But from another perspective, Wang Hongbin was born at the right time. As the saying goes, it is only when the sea is flowing that the true nature of a hero is revealed, and in the midst of political adversity, Wang Hongbin eloquently proved with his own practice that the path of collective economy is the path to rural prosperity. From this perspective, his contribution is even greater than that of Chen Yonggui.
It is not groundless to say that Wang Hongbin's practice is influenced by "Chunqiao Thought". On April 18, 2000, Wang Hongbin gave a report on Nanjie Village at the National Poverty Alleviation Seminar. He said in his speech: "Looking back to the three years from 1975 to 1977, I, Wang Hongbin was very popular in Linying County. The county party committee called on the youth to learn from Wang Hongbin, a young man who had chosen not to be a worker but had returned to his hometown to be a farmer and doubled his output in a year as a production team leader. Wang Hongbin is indispensable for the promotion of narrowing the three major differences[7]." In 1975, it was Zhang Chunqiao who published "On Exercising All-round Dictatorship Over the Bourgeoisie", the year when a nationwide upsurge of learning theory was set off. "Restricting bourgeois right" was Wang Hongbin's first political love, which profoundly shaped his thoughts, but what he should have never expected was that he had the opportunity to put these thoughts into practice only after the reform and opening up.
(Above: Nanjie Village Square)
Without going into detail about how Nanjie Village became rich, the most striking aspect of Nanjie Village to the outside world is the distribution system. At present, Nanjie Village has a "wage + provision" distribution system, where wages account for 30% and provisions for 70%. The villagers enjoy free water, electricity, gas, flour, holiday food, shopping vouchers, housing, schooling and medical treatment, among other benefits. According to Wang Hongbin's vision, the wage component will become smaller and smaller in the future, the supply component will become larger and larger, and the grade of supply will become higher and higher, "eventually making every Nanjie person so rich that they don't personally have a penny in savings." In other words, the ultimate goal is to implement a complete supply system.
It is malicious disinformation to say that Nanjie Village is getting rich by exploiting more than 10,000 migrant workers. In fact, Nanjie Village is tilted towards migrant workers in terms of distribution, with migrant workers being paid 20-30% more than workers of Nanjie Village origin for the same type of work. The difference between Nanjie Village villagers and migrant workers is mainly in the realm of supply, which, in turn, is a guarantee that the villagers enjoy provisions as owners of the means of production, not as a reward for their labour.
The key factor that enabled Nanjie Village to effectively "limit the legal rights of the bourgeoisie" was, of course, the exemplary leadership of the leading cadres. Nanjie Village assets have reached more than a billion yuan, if in accordance with the popular "operators hold large shares" and other distribution methods, Wang Hongbin should have been a billionaire, but including Wang Hongbin, the Nanjie Village cadres have only been taking 250 yuan of wages. Wang Hongbin said that the reason why it is set at 250 yuan is to remind everyone to be a "two-hundred-and-fifty" person, to give full play to the "two-hundred-and-fifty" spirit, to show the energy of the "two-hundred-and-fifty", and to do get into the habit of doing things the "two-hundred-and-fifty" way. In Wang Hongbin's personal case, he is in charge of 26 enterprises, but his love is working in the most tired laundry room of the hotel; other villagers are living in modern small buildings, but he lives in a bungalow ...... With this spirit, Nanjie Village has become a famous "communist small community".
Here, by the way, how do we evaluate the success or failure of Nanjie Village? In my opinion, the main criterion is whether the internal relations of Nanjie Village have changed. In the sea of market and private economy, Nanjie Village has defined itself with great political wisdom as an external circle and an internal square. The outer circle means that the village has to be connected to the market as a conglomerate and cannot survive without it; the inner square means that it adheres internally to the socialist principle of distribution. If one day Nanjie Village is really "insolvent", as the southern media have hyped, does that mean that the road to Nanjie Village is a failure? I would say: as long as the internal relations of Nanjie Village remain the same, the Nanjie Village Road has not failed. The "insolvency" was only a failure of the Nanjie Village as a market entity, but not of the socialist ideals that the Nanjie Village Road carried. This is the same reasoning as the failure of the Fifth Anti-Encirclement campaign[8], which did not mean the failure of the communist ideal.
The
final victory belongs to socialism
The pursuit of an equal society for all has
been a dream that mankind has never abandoned, and socialism is by far the most
egalitarian institutional arrangement. Since the end of the Cold War, all
theories and practices of socialism have been labelled as "fantasy"
and "madness", and people are not allowed to delve into them. But in
fact, even the most "ultra-left" "Chunqiao Thought" was the
product of rational thinking in exploring the road to socialism, and the practice
of Nanjie Village shows that a socialist system can run smoothly and
efficiently as long as bourgeois right can be effectively restricted.
Capitalism will not last forever; the final victory belongs to socialism.
2015/7/20
郭松民：“限制资产阶级法权”和“南街村道路” -
学者观点 - 红歌会网
(szhgh.com)
[3] Factor-based
distribution is a bourgeois form of distribution, common in China, in which the
users of production factors pay the owners of production factors corresponding
remuneration according to a certain proportion according to the size of the
contribution played by the factors in the production and operation process
under the conditions of market economy.
The distribution by factors is divided into
distribution by land factors, distribution by capital factors, distribution by
labour factors, distribution by technology factors, distribution by management
factors and distribution by information factors.
[4] Xiaogang
Village in Anhui Province was the site of an alleged “secret agreement” by 18
villagers in 1978 to divide communally owned farmland into individual pieces
called household contracts. Despite being pioneers of reform who “risked their
lives” to enter into this arrangement, they were merely implementing, with
strong behind-the-scenes support from Deng Xiaoping, the “household contract
responsibility system” that he and Liu Shaoqi had concocted in the wake of the
Great Leap Forward. Xiaogang was praised to the skies as China’s first
capitalist village; however, beginning in 2018, leaders of this “reform” began
to have second thoughts. Yan Junchang, one of the 18 farmers, was quoted as
saying that “individual farming is no longer generating prosperity. We need to
combine forces to create a more efficient economy."
[5] Chen
Yonggui (1915-1986) was a peasant from Shanxi Province who overcame various
obstacles to take his Dazhai Production Brigade firmly along the path of
collectivisation. Mao launched a national movement to learn from Dazhai in
agriculture and promoted Chen to the senior state position of vice-Premier of
the State Council in January 1975. He had been a member of the Central
Committee from 1969 and a member of the Politburo from 1973. Once the
capitalist-roaders seized power, Chen Yonggui was systematically undermined,
and the example of Dazhai attacked. This
was a necessary preliminary for the capitalist-roaders to introduce the
Xiaogang Village restoration of capitalism in agriculture.
[7] The three major differences were
those between the country and the city, between mental and physical labour, and
between industry and agriculture.
[8] From
25 September 1933 to October 1934, Chiang Kai-shek mobilized about one million
troops and adopted a new strategy of "fortressism" to carry out a
large-scale "siege" of the Central Revolutionary Base Areas. At this
time, Wang Ming's "leftist" dogmatism dominated the Red Army,
refusing to accept Mao Zedong's correct advice, replacing guerrilla and
movement warfare with positional warfare, and replacing people's warfare with
so-called "regular" warfare, leaving the Red Army in a completely
passive position. After a year of bitter fighting, the Red Army was unable to
achieve victory against the "siege". Finally, in October 1934, the
leading organs of the Central Committee and the main forces of the Red Army
were hastily ordered to withdraw from the base areas.
No comments:
Post a Comment