Deng Xiaoping Theory
Text
Why China Still Needs Deng Xiaoping
Particularly in foreign policy, China should be careful not to abandon Deng’s productive approach. Yang Hengjun By Yang Hengjun November 19, 2014 There’s no doubt that China needs to develop and surpass “Deng Xiaoping Theory.” In truth, when it comes to reform of the political system, thought liberation, and even the economy, in the post-Deng era China has still basically been stuck on the thoughts put forward during Deng’s southern tour and his idea of a market economy. In over 20 years, China hasn’t really had any larger breakthroughs either in theory or in practice (although the recent drive to truly implement the “rule of law” could be considered the start of such a breakthrough). Though China as a whole hesitates on how to push forward with political reforms and thought liberation, when it comes to foreign policy and cross-strait relations there are some scholars in Beijing who have repeatedly tried to “keep up with the times” by “surpassing” Deng Xiaoping. There’s no problem with that. The question is how China will inherit and surpass the legacy of Deng Xiaoping: by moving forward or backward? In the 1980s, Deng Xiaoping laid the foundation for friendly relations between China and Japan. During his 1978 visit to Japan, Deng advocated developing friendly relations between the two countries, always with an eye to the future. When it came to the Diaoyu Islands, Deng Xiaoping suggested shelving the dispute and leaving it to later generations since discussions over the matter would get nowhere. When China was badly in need of overseas capital and technology, Japan became one of the first few developed countries to invest in the mainland. Japan made a much larger contribution than other western countries to China’s early reform and opening up period. During Deng Xiaoping’s lifetime, the China-Japan relationship was relatively smooth. What about China-U.S.relations? Mao Zedong and Zhou Enlai tried to open the door to Sino-U.S. relations while they were still alive. After they passed away, none of the elder statesmen, let alone nominal leader Hua Guofeng, dared to get to close to the “American imperialists.” But Deng Xiaoping, who had studied in France for two years, decided to establish diplomatic ties with the United States less than two years after he came to power. He visited America as the deputy prime minister for a few days after the establishment of diplomatic ties between China and the United States. Even though China and the U.S. have signed three joint communiques to govern their relationship, we have to remember that America also passed the “Taiwan Relations Act” in 1979. In accepting this situation, there’s no doubt that Beijing made a surprising concession. This sort of concession could only be made by a courageous leader like Deng Xiaoping. Enjoying this article? Click here to subscribe for full access. Just $5 a month. So, why was Deng so eager to establish diplomatic ties with the United States? Li Shenzhi, then the vice president of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, traveled with Deng to America. According to the records of the time, while they were both on the plane, Li asked Deng, “Why do we attach such great importance to our relationship with the United States?” Deng Xiaoping said, “Look back at the last several decades. All the countries that foster good relations with the U.S. become rich.” When we look back now, we cannot deny that this is almost a self-evident fact. The countries that take the lead in anti-American sentiments are almost all poor dictatorships. The problem is that people who are suffering or even starving to death will often jump at the chance to become “anti-American heroes.” Using anti-American sentiment to rally popular support is the last-ditch hope for dictators. So in my opinion, Deng’s determination to develop friendly relations with the United States at that time was not just a diplomatic task, but also an important breakthrough in thought liberation. When Deng Xiaoping was in power, we had a relatively harmonious relationship with the United States, Japan, and Taiwan. Even when serious problems appeared, Deng would restore relationships by making concessions while always holding fast to China’s principles and bottom line. For example, Deng Xiaoping stopped the on-again, off-again 20-year bombardment of Taiwan’s Jinmen soon after he came into power and opened cross-strait talks. China’s diplomacy faced a new situation after the events of June 1989. The emergence of a variety of serious problems in China’s relations with foreign countries after the mid-90s was, I think, caused by the lack of a leader like Deng Xiaoping: someone modest but confident in foreign exchanges, principled but flexible, neither humble nor overbearing. Among Chinese officials and analysts, you’re more likely to find people who are arrogant on the surface but self-abasing on the inside. It’s no wonder that there have been so many twists and turns in U.S.-China relations and cross-strait relations, including the deployment of two U.S. carrier groups to the Taiwan Strait in 1996. Often China’s officials encourage and plan anti-American movements while secretly sending their children to the United States. Of course, the relationship between China and Japan is even stranger. If it is America’s love for “peaceful evolution” that causes the many twists and turns in China-U.S. relations, Japan should be no problem since it never mentions “human rights” and “democracy” in exchanges with China, right? But over the years, China and Japan have been involved in many quarrels. And, of course, these so-called “quarrels” mainly involve Chinese people calling each other “traitors” or young hot-heads smashing Japanese cars and sushi bars owned by their fellow Chinese or even busting the heads of their compatriots. We’ve quarreled so many times, and haven’t gotten a single stone of the Diaoyu Islands back. Some say these “quarrels” are meant to shift people’s focus (especially for young people who more and more cannot see hope for their futures) by pointing out Japan’s faults. By giving Chinese hearts an enemy, it gives the people a ready-made object for venting all their feelings of dissatisfaction. If that’s really the case, then there’s nothing I can say. But there are a group of scholars and thinkers who argue differently. They believe that Deng Xiaoping is out of date and that it is time to change Deng’s “weak” foreign policies. Their reason is quite simple: this is no longer the past, and China has grown strong. It’s the perfect image of an upstart! Every time they speak, they arrogantly flaunt their wealth. It is no wonder that their “foreign policy” causes fear and hatred in China’s neighbors. They don’t know what serious reflection means. Some hypocritical scholars have even embraced the Western imperialist idea that a strong country doesn’t need diplomacy. But when a massive empire shouts that it doesn’t need to practice diplomacy, a hundred smaller countries – whose combined strength is greater than ours – will label China as a future villain. How can these scholars not know this? Some people have an exaggerated opinion of their abilities and attempt to change the path of peaceful development put forward by Deng Xiaoping. They have made enemies everywhere. They take it for granted that China chose the path of peaceful development as a temporary expedient, because the country wasn’t strong enough to do otherwise. Of course, these people will begin to understand reality after they run into enough walls in the international community. What I fear most is that these “upstarts” and their “confidence” will turn against fellow Chinese, including those in Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan. Recently a long-time researcher on Hong Kong who now advises China’s leaders tried to sway me to his side. He argued that when Deng Xiaoping put forward the principle “one country, two systems”, with Hong Kong “remaining unchanged for 50 years,” and when the central government adopted the idea of “Hong Kong people governing Hong Kong with a high degree of autonomy,” Hong Kong’s per capita income was nearly 20 times higher than on the mainland. Hong Kong also had a variety of management experience which could not be found in the mainland. But things are different now, he said: China is now much wealthier, the world’s second biggest economy, and also has more experience governing and managing the country. Many Chinese cities like Beijing, Shanghai, Shenzhen, Guangzhou, and Chongqing are now internationalized and are just as good as Hong Kong. We don’t need Hong Kong anymore, he argued. He implied that the people of Hong Kong cannot govern themselves, so they should invite the heroes who successfully created the “China model” to govern Hong Kong before the situation becomes worse. Seeing him talk on and on, I felt especially uncomfortable because I saw in him the face of an upstart who thinks of himself as number two in the world. I hardly need to mention that Deng Xiaoping did not put forward the “one country, two systems” policy for the reasons he listed. If China really wanted to take Hong Kong back under a policy of “one country, one system,” Mao Zedong and Zhou Enlai could have done it themselves without help from Deng Xiaoping. Why would anyone need this scholar’s help? Besides, in the cities he mentioned, from Beijing to Guangzhou, we’ve seen major scandals involving officials like Chen Xitong, Chen Liangyu, Xu Zongheng, Bo Xilai and Wan Qingliang. Is this what you call “good governance”? Deng Xiaoping’s theories of domestic management and foreign affairs need to be inherited and developed, and even more they need to be surpassed by new theories. But some people simply can’t see global trends and the future of China. If they ignore Comrade Deng’s strategies for creating order from chaos, China will move from radicalism to conservatism. This isn’t moving forward, it’s moving backward. Some people become restless when they see that China has the world’s number two economy and an aircraft carrier. They can’t bear to be patient but want to follow in the footsteps of the Soviet Union in the Cold War and Germany before World War II. That is the path to self-destruction! This piece originally appeared in Chinese on Yang Hengjun’s blog. The original post can be found here. Yang Hengjun is a Chinese independent scholar, novelist, and blogger. He once worked in the Chinese Foreign Ministry and as a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council in Washington, DC. Yang received his Ph.D. from the University of Technology, Sydney in Australia. His Chinese language blog is featured on major Chinese current affairs and international relations portals and his pieces receive millions of hits. Yang’s blog can be accessed at www.yanghengjun.com.
Deng Xiaoping Theory and the Historical Destiny of Socialism
Tremendous changes have taken place in the history of mankind during the twentieth century. In the first half of the century socialism shocked the world with its great successes over large areas of the earth. However, in the final years of the century its setbacks also astounded the world, especially its failure in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe. These great changes raised the question of the future and destiny of socialism. In view of the ecstatic response of Western hostile forces to the "grand failure of communism," and the pessimism of those who once believed in socialism, Deng Xiaoping said categorically, "After a long time, socialism will necessarily supersede capitalism. This is an irreversible general trend of historical development.....Some countries have suffered major setbacks, and socialism appears to have been weakened. But the people have been tempered by the setbacks and have drawn lessons from them, and that will make socialism develop in a healthier direction."[i] This conclusion has been borne out by the successful practice of socialism with Chinese characteristics in China and will be further borne out in the coming century by socialist practice throughout the world, including that in China. I. Socialism Is a Historical Process With Twist and Turns in Its Development Dialectical materialism tells us that things develop with a combination of progress and reverses. The general trend in towards progress and development, but the road is full of twists and turns. This is the case in the natural world and also in social life. Every new social system undergoes numerous difficulties during its birth and development. Capitalism was finally substituted for feudalism after 48 years of struggle against the restoration of feudalism in Britain, and 86 years of repeated trails of strength in France. It took two to three hundred years for capitalism as a whole to grow from its infancy to a mature stage amidst continuous economic and political crises. This was the case in the development of capitalism, in which a new form of exploitation replaced the old, let alone the socialist movement that will destroy all systems of exploitation. It is entirely impractical to expect socialism to enjoy a favorable wind all the way and encounter no resistance. Socialism has experience many setbacks and low ebbs, but the general trend towards socialism replacing capitalism has never changed. During the more than 150 years since the appearance of the theory of scientific socialism, it has developed from the conception of revolutionary teachers into the guiding principle of the workers' movement all over the world, from theory into practice, and from the practice in one country into that in many countries, presenting a constantly growing dynamic movement. It is inevitable that there will be local reverses and temporary low tides or even reverses during this process. Marxists who keep a clear head with regard to the development law of human society do not feel puzzled by these outward phenomena, but unswervingly believe in the final victory of socialism and communism, and face the harsh realities with high morale, calmly taking up the gauntlet. In 1987 during the Paris Commune uprising, Karl Marx scientifically predicted that, "whatever therefore its fate in Paris, it will make le tour du monde."[ii] More than forty years later, the victory of the October Revolution in Russia confirmed Marx's brilliant foresight. When the first socialist country in the world faced grave crises due to armed intervention from fourteen imperialist states, in addition to domestic rebellion, Lenin firmly pointed out that, "Only a proletarian socialist revolution can lead humanity out of the impasse which imperialism and imperialist wars have created. Whatever difficulties the revolution may have to encounter, whatever possible temporary setbacks or waves of counter-revolution it may have to contend with, the final victory of the proletariat is inevitable."[iii] The revolutionary road followed by the Chinese people was even more difficult and convoluted. In the 28 years before the founding of the People's Republic of China, the Chinese democratic revolution suffered repeated setbacks and failures. On 12 April 1927, Jiang Jieshi staged a bloody coup d'etat against the revolution and threw the Chinese people into bloodshed. But the Communist Party of China (CPC) and the Chinese people were neither cowed, conquered nor exterminated. They picked themselves up, wiped off the blood, buried their fallen comrades and went into battle again. Furthermore, they learned to use armed revolution against armed counterrevolution and went to the countryside to build rural base areas. In the beginning, in the face of a very powerful enemy, some people asked: "How long will the red flag fly?" With foresight comrade Mao Zedong pointed out that, "A single spark can start a prairie fire." But the prairie fire also experienced many ups and downs and, particularly the last days of the land revolution, Wang Ming's "Left error led to the loss of 90 per cent of the Party and revolutionary forcers in the base areas and an almost complete loss in the Guomindang-controlled areas. However, after the Red Army arrived in northern Shaanxi, the CPC summed up its experiences and lessons learned and went on to defeat all its enemies and win the final victory of the democratic revolution. The road to socialist construction was equally uneven. In addition to minor upheavals, there were two events of major significance; the three-years Great Leap Forward beginning in 1958, and the ten-year "cultural revolution" beginning in 1966. These errors caused enormous losses and led to grave crises in China. However, after the Third Session of the Eleventh Central Committee of the CPC we became more mature and initiated a new phase of constructing socialism with Chinese characteristics. History is a mirror and tells us that no matter how difficult the situation, and whatever setbacks the revolution may experience, it will win in the end because it follows the law and direction of historical development. Violent changes took place in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe in the late 1980s and early 90s. The communist parties lost their ruling position, socialism was abandoned, and the world socialist movement suffered its greatest setback this century. Hostile forces in the West were excited and asserted categorically that Marxism and socialism were bankrupt. The future and destiny were pregnant with grim possibilities and some people became pessimistic. Confronted by local failure and temporary setbacks, Comrade Deng Xiaoping solemnly stated with the foresight of a great statesman, "Don't panic, don't think that Marxism has disappeared, that it's not useful any more and that it has been defeated. Nothing of the sort!"[iv] When socialism was at a low ebb across the world it radiated vigor and dynamism in China. China's economy has been developing rapidly and in a healthy manner, the living conditions of the people have been improving and the overall capacity of the country has been strengthened. All these indisputable achievements have been highly appreciated by all those who harbor no prejudice against China. The great cause of building socialism with Chinese characteristics under the guidance of Deng Xiaoping theory is not only a pioneering undertaking in. China but also of world significance. Deng Xiaoping pointed out that if we can achieve the strategic goal of reaching the level of moderately developed countries by the middle of the next century, "we shall not only have blazed a new path for the peoples of the Third World, who represent three quarters of world's population, but also - and is even more important - we shall have demonstrated to mankind that socialism is the only path and that it is superior to capitalism."[v] Complex objective and subjective reasons account for the twist and turns in the development of socialism. First, the long-term existence of class struggle both at home and abroad. "The tree desires stillness but the wind will not cease." Class struggle exists independent of man's will. Where there is a struggle there will inevitably be fluctuations, and high and low tides, victory and defeat, and progress and setbacks are just normal phenomena and are not unexpected. Second, the socialist system is a completely new social system in the history of mankind and its development has to undergo a long historical process from inexperience to experience, from imperfect to perfect, from immature to mature. It is hard to completely avoid mistakes, twists and reverses during this process. We can try to arrive at a correct understanding by following the patter, "practice, knowledge, and then back to practice, knowledge," constantly summing up our experiences and moving step by step from the realm of necessity to the realm of freedom. Third, if the party and government leadership of a socialist country cannot earnestly correct their political errors or effectively combat corruption within their ranks, the situation will become complex and grave, and major reverses or even great historical retrogression will follow. The first two are objective in nature, while the third is subjective. If no major problems occur with regard to the leadership, the wheel of history will not be turned back even though it is impossible to avoid minor setbacks. However, from a long-term perspective, no matter what twists and turns may take place, these only constitute a link in the whole chain of historical development, they do not, and cannot, after the general trend of historical development. This is just like the, Yellow River: it has many turns and meanderings, but it nevertheless continues to flow into the eastern seas. In this regard we must pay attention to the following points: 1. Do not take the temporary setbacks as the end of point of historical development. On the contrary, we should observe things from the perspective of historical development and take the setbacks for what they reality are, a temporary phenomenon and a link in the chain in human history. We must be firm in our faith and conviction in the face of any difficulties and grasp the general trend of historical development. 2. We should earnestly summarize our experience and the lessons learned and try by every means to avoid losses that could be avoided. The pivotal point in this connection is to strengthen the building of the Party and maintain the correctness of leadership. 3. We are convinced that even in the Soviet Union and Eastern European countries in which there have been great historical reverses, the broad masses and the true communists will re-select the socialist road after conscientious reflection - this process may be and painful, but undoubtedly things will develop in this direction - this is a historical law independent of man's will. II. Summarizing the Historical Experience of Socialism in a Scientific Way Engels pointed out that, "There is no better road to theoretical clearness of comprehension than to learn by one's mistakes, durch Schaden klug werden."[vi] Deng Xiaoping said, "In building socialism we have had both positive and negative experience, and they are equally useful to us."[vii] "The experience of successes is valuable, and so is the experience of mistakes and defeats. Formulating principles and policies in this way enables us to unify the thinking of the whole Party so as to achieve a new unity: unity formed on this basis is most reliable."[viii] In summarizing our experience we must, first of all, have a correct approach, for different approaches lead to different, even opposite, conclusions. We should abide by at least three principles when summarizing the historical experiences of socialism under the guidance of Marxist philosophy: Firstly, emphasis should be given to the analysis of internal causes rather than the role of external causes. In this regard there are both positive and negative examples both in history and in the present. At the Zunyi Meeting in 1935 there was heated dispute over why the fifth counter-campaign against the enemy's "encirclement and suppression" had failed. Otto Braun (1901-1974), a German and the military adviser from the Communist International, made a speech at the meeting, Braun said the sole reason for the failure was that the enemy was too powerful. Such a conclusion was completely useless since in the initial period of a revolution the enemy is invariably more powerful. If we were doomed to failure because the enemy was more powerful then there would never be any hope of victory. Mao Zedong refuted Braun's argument at the meeting. Mao later conducted a philosophical analysis of this question. On pages 105-108 of Mao Zedong Zhexue ji (Collected Philosophical Notes of Mao Zedong) there is a lengthy discussion on this issue. These ideas were later incorporated into his exposition on the relationship between internal and external causes in the chapter "The Two World Outlooks" in on contradiction. Mao Zedong wrote in Collected Philosophical Notes, "The view that 'you can't blame the failure on the command because it was the decree of Heaven' is erroneous. The overwhelming power of the enemy was one of the reasons for the failure of the fifth counter-campaign against the 'encirclement and suppression,' but it was not the main reason. The main reason lay in the mistakes in the command, the cadre policy, the foreign policy and military adventurism. In a word, opportunism is responsible for the failure."[ix] He also pointed out in On Contradiction that, "In battle, one army is victorious and the other is defeated: both the victory and the defeat are determined by internal causes." "External causes become operative through internal causes ." "In China in 1927, the defeat of the proletariat by the big bourgeoisie came about through the opportunism then to be found within the Chinese proletariat itself (inside the Chinese Communist Party). When we liquidated this opportunism, the Chinese revolution resumed its advance. Later, the Chinese revolution again suffered severe setbacks at the hands of the enemy, because adventurism had risen within our Party. When we liquidated this adventurism, our cause advanced once again."[x] It is thus clear that when we summarize experience emphasis should be placed on the analysis of the internal causes; the key issue is whether or not the Party has a correct political line. If a political party is to lead the revolution to victory it has to rely on its correct political line and consolidated organisation. Although the strategy of peaceful revolution of hostile forces a role to play, the fundamental cause of the failure of socialism in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe was to be found inside the Party, in the Party's political line, and in the Party's policies. The historical reason was the long-term ossified thinking and structure that made it impossible to bring the superiority of socialism into full play and caused dissatisfaction among the people. In some countries the enemy directly utilised such dissatisfaction and overthrew the socialist system, while in other countries the leadership were aware of the problems and attempted to find a solution and initiated reform. But they chose a Right opportunist line and the enemy made use of the opportunism and went from weak to strong, finally seizing power from either within or outside and bringing about the collapse of socialism. However, socialism stands lofty firm and has been developing vigorously in China. This demonstrates in a positive way that if the Communist Party pursues a Marxist line, any plotting by internal or external hostile forces towards peaceful evolution will fail. Following the dramatic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, Deng Xiaoping said with foresight that the key link was to manage our own affairs well. He also pointed out in his talks during his tour to the southern provinces that, "if any problem arises in China, it will arise inside the Communist Party." "In the final analysis we must manage the Party affairs in such a way as to prevent trouble." First and foremost the Communist Party must have a correct political line. If we firmly hold to the basic line of "one central task, two basic points"[xi] and eliminate interference from Right and "Left" there will be no major disturbances; if problems do occur, they will be easy to resolve. Secondly, in summarising our experience we should emphasize the content and causes of the errors rather than blaming certain individuals. This involves whether or not we uphold historical materialism. Of course, if there are errors in the Party line, the leaders, the principal leader in particular, must bear the main responsibility. They should be unequivocally criticized for their mistakes And organisational measures should be taken if necessary. However, we should not put all the blame on individuals, nor should we give them all the credit. In discussing summarizing experience of the democratic revolution in "Our Study And Current Situation ," Mao Zedong said, "In dealing with questions of Party history we should lay the stress not on the responsibility of certain individual comrades but on the analysis of the circumstances in which the errors were committed, on the content of these errors and on their social, historical and ideological roots."[xii] Only in this way can we draw lessons in earnest and find a solution to the mistakes while examining these mistakes. Neither of the resolutions on certain historical questions in the history of the CPC placed too great an emphasis on the responsibility of individuals, but both stressed an analysis of the historical conditions under which the errors were committed, on the content and causes of these errors, and on how to correct them; this embodied the guiding principle of "achieving the twofold objective of clarity in ideology and unity among comrades" advocated by Mao Zedong. The Soviet leaders did not adopt such an attitude towards Stalin. Over a period of 39 years, beginning with Nikita Khrushchev and going all the way to Mikhail Gorbachaev, they continued to curse Stalin, as if everything would have been all right had Stalin been completely discredited. At the same time, they paid little attention to, let alone conducting a penetrating and concrete analysis of, the historical environment and the ideological and institutional reasons for the mistakes made by Stalin. Needless to say, they did not draw any useful experience and lessons for the whole party and were thus unable to find a solution to these problems. On the contrary, in the great movement against Stalin the way was opened for opportunism to run wild. Thirdly in summing up our experience we should treat all questions analytically, neither affirming nor negating everything. During the Stalinist period, the Soviet Communist Party made serious mistakes in its political, economic, foreign and religious policies and policies on ethnic affairs. These mistakes caused great damage to the socialist system of the Soviet Union, and had a very influence on other socialist countries. However, we should adopt a realistic and practical attitude and should not think that in the Soviet Union under Stalin everything went wrong and Stalin was wrong in everything. Otherwise how can we explain why the Soviet economy once had rapid growth, how it withstood the trials of World War II and defeated Fascist Germany, and how an originally backward Russia became a superpower vying with Americas in only a few decades? Negating everything could only lead to the negation of the Soviet Communist Party, the negation of socialism and the negation of Marxism. We should also conduct concrete analyses of the Soviet model, that is, the over-concentrated economic and political system established in the 1930s. On the one hand, this system did have drawbacks that had to be corrected; on the other hand, we must admit that it had its roots in history. In war time and faced by the threat of war the highly concentrated system played a vital role. Our party did not adopt the metaphysical approach that negates everything in summarizing historical experiences, including the experiences and lessons of the 'cultural revolution," The "Resolution" points out, on the one hand, that the "cultural revolution" was "an internal disorder that was wrongly started by the leader, was made use of by the counterrevolutionary clique and brought about serious disasters to the Party, the state and the people of all nationalities." On the other, it declares, "during this period none of the Party, the people's power, the people's army and the whole society changed its color, "while indicating the serious mistakes made by Mao Zedong in his later years the "Resolution" says, "So far as his whole life is concerned, his contributions to the Chinese revolutions are far greater than his errors. His contributions are primary and his errors are secondary." Thus, while pointing out that the original socialist structure had serious drawbacks and that it was imperative to carry out reform, we stressed that we must keep to the basic socialist system. The reform is self-improvement of socialism, and under no, circumstance should we turn correction of "Left" mistakes into negation of Marxism and socialism. Just as Deng Xiaoping said, we must see two sides of a problem; if we see only one side we will make mistakes. Only when we appraise our work from the perspective that not everything is either completely positive or completely negative can we scientifically sum up historical experiences. III. We Must Adhere to Dialectical Materialism And Historical Materialism in Constructing Socialism Deng Xiaoping pointed out that, "The experience of the last 20 years has taught us one very important principle: to build socialism we must adhere to Marxist dialectical materialism and historical materialism or, as Comrade Mao Zedong put it, in everything we do we must seek truth from facts - in other words, we must proceed from reality."[xiii] This is a brilliant summation of the historical experience of socialism. Seeking truth from facts is the quintessence of Marxism-Leninism, the quintessence of Mao Zedong Thought and the quintessence of Deng Xiaoping theory. Marxism is scientific because it is always based on objective realities. Engles said, "To make a science a socialism, it had first to be placed upon a real basis."[xiv] Marx and Engles were wiser than the Utopian socialist, not only in that they portrayed a set of more elaborate and detailed ideal pictures of socialism than the latter, but also in that they created historical materialism, discovered in the history of labour the key to the mystery of man's social development, and revealed the general law of the development of human society. Guided by this general law, they then investigated the law governing contradictions in capitalist society and established the theory of surplus value, by means of which they revealed the secrets of capitalist exploitation of workers and aroused the main force for burying capitalism - the proletariat. Engels wrote in "The German Ideology" 150 years ago, "Communism is for us not a state of affairs which is to be established, an ideal to which reality will have to adjust itself. We call communism the real movement which abolishes the present state of things."[xv] That is to say, they did not begin to design an ideal society using wishful thinking and abstract principles of reason and justice, but always proceeded from reality and tried to discover a new world by criticizing the old, and looked for solutions by criticizing current conditions. Guided by dialectical materialism and historical materialism, Marx and Engels changed socialism from a Utopian to a scientific theory. However, during the process of its realisation, the theory of scientific socialism would have produced only empty fantasies if it had been divorced from the guidance of dialectical materialism and historical materialism. In the past, regardless of the actual level of productive forces, we sought pure, unadulterated socialism in readjusting the relations of production and were over-anxious for quick results in developing productive forces. We also persisted in "taking class struggle as the key link" even when class struggle was no longer the principal contradiction under the new historical conditions. All these were reflections of socialist fantasies, which led to gross mistakes in the political line and policy decisions. The Third Session of the Eleventh Central Committee of the CPC was a great historical turning point in China's socialist cause. This change began with the rectification of the ideological line. Without the great debate over the criteria of truth and the reestablishment of the ideological line of emancipating the mind and seeking truth facts, it would have been impossible to correct the previous "Left" mistakes, shift the focus of work to economic construction, and introduce a complete new set of policies of reform and opening-up. This clearly demonstrates that a correct ideological line is of decisive importance for a ruling party directing socialist construction. This is the case in China, as it is in other socialist countries. It is true that the reasons for the violent changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe are very complex and vary with different countries, but in the final analysis the ideological of these countries went wrong. For a relatively long period of time dogmatism and personality cults were rampant. They made the "Left" mistake of magnifying the extent of class struggle and produced a rigid socialist model, with the result that the superiority of socialism could not be brought into full play. When the reform was initiated they then went to the other extreme and made "Rightist" mistakes. For example, ideologically Marxism was treated as dogma, but subsequently Marxism was denied its leading role. Politically, they exaggerated class struggle, but then denied the existence of class struggle and trumpeted the so-called "socialism with a human face." They had deprived the people of their right to democracy, but then opposed the leadership of the Communist Party under the cloak of "political pluralism" and practiced a "multi-party system." Economically, they pursued a policy of pure public ownership, but then privatised everything. All these factors demonstrate that the root cause of the failure of socialism in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe was the wrong ideological line, just as Mao Zedong pointed out, "All big political mistakes are rooted in their deviation from dialectical materialism."[xvi] From the historical experience we have realised that: First, in constructing socialism we must proceed from reality and persist in integrating Marxism with the specific conditions. The theory of socialism created by Marx and Engels reveals the historical inevitability of the substitution of socialism for capitalism, and the basic laws to be followed in accomplishing this substitution. However, it does not provide every country with a ready answer to its problems. In leading the people towards the construction of socialism, the proletarian party in each country must proceed from its national conditions and search for a socialist road with its own characteristics. There is no fixed model of socialism. The fundamental lesson learnt from the practice of socialism in the past, particularly the Soviet experience and model, is not to make a dogma out of Marxism. Mao Zedong was aware of this and tried to break away from this model and blaze a path of his own, but failed for various reasons. It was only after the Third Session of the Eleventh Central Committee of the CPC that the Chinese Communists headed by Deng Xiaoping raised the clarion call of "building socialism with Chinese characteristics," and opened up a new road, under the guidance of the ideological line of emancipating the mind the seeing truth from facts. Deng Xiaoping said, "We have repeatedly declared that we shall adhere to Marxism and keep to the socialist road. But by Marxism we mean Marxism that is integrated with Chinese conditions, and by socialism we mean a socialism that is tailored to Chinese conditions and has a specifically Chinese character."[xvii] He added, "After a successful revolution each country must build socialism according to its own conditions. There are not and cannot be fixed models."[xviii] This is a scientific summation of historical experiences in socialist construction at home and abroad and has universal significance. Breaking away from ideological rigidity and following one's road hinges on a scientific understanding of the national conditions. One of the most important questions involved making a sober estimate of the stage socialism has reached in a particular country. A common mistake in the international communist movement is to overestimate the maturity of socialism in one's own country, which results in the error of overstepping historical conditions. After a long period of practice and exploration, China began to have a clear understanding of its national conditions in the primary stage of socialism, found its correct position in the long process of socialist development and formulated the basic line of "one central task, two basic points" and a full set of principles and policies. Second, the theory of scientific socialism must develop with the development of practice and science. Tremendous changes have taken place over the more than one hundred yeas since the appearance of the theory of scientific socialism, and especially in recent decades the violence and depth of these changes have been beyond man's imagination. Deng Xiaoping said, "The World changes every day, and modern science and technology in particular develop rapidly. A year today is the equivalent of several decades, a century or even a longer period in ancient times. Anyone who fails to carry Marxism forward with new thinking and a new view point is not a true Marxist."[xix] We cannot expect Marx to provide a ready solution to the problems arising a hundred years or more after his death. A true Marxist, while adhering to the cardinal principles of Marxism, must advance new theories to solve new problems in accordance with the changing times and new situations and tasks. Deng Xiaoping theory, as Marxism in contemporary China, did not denounce the basic tenets of Marxism, but offered many new propositions which were strange to Marxism yet conformed to current realities, for example: Revolution means the emancipation of productive forces, as does reform, reform is the Second revolution in China; Science and technology are productive forces and the primary productive forces, economic development must rely on science, technology and education; A planned economy does not equate with socialism, a market economy does not equate with capitalism, and a market economy can be practiced under socialism; The modern world is an open world, China cannot develop without the rest of the world, and opening to the outside world is one of China's basic national policies. Deng also observed the world from a Marxist perspective and made correct analyses of the epochal characteristics of out times and the general international situation, the successes and failures of other socialist countries, the gains and losses of the developing countries during their development drive, and the configuration and contradictions of the growth of the developed countries. On the basis of these analyses Deng Xiaoping made a series of a scientific judgments. In short, Deng Xiaoping theory is creative Marxism and his great vitality. On the solid basis of new practice, it inherited the fine tradition of Marxism, broke with outmoded conventions and opened up a new realm of Marxism. IV. The Most Important Thing Is to Make Clear What Socialism Is and How It is to be Constructed The key to adhering to Marxist dialectical materialism and historical materialism or, in other words, adhering to the ideological line of seeking truth from facts, is to make clear what socialism is and how it is to be constructed. This is a question of prime importance confronting socialism in contemporary times. After summing up the historical experience of the victories and setbacks of socialism in China, and learning from the practices in other socialist countries. Deng Xiaoping gave a scientific answer to this question, thereby raising the understanding of socialism to a new level. Firstly, neither poverty nor slow de
The New Ideological Banner: Deng Xiaoping Theory
Manoranjan Mohanty THEORETICAL STATEMENT A theoretical perspective of the reforms in post-Mao China has finally crystallised. Even though the fourteenth Party Congress of the CPC in 1992 had proclaimed ’Deng Xiaoping’s Theory of Building Socialism with Chinese Characteristics’, it was the fifteenth Congress which spelt it out in detail, located it in the history of Marxism and institutionalised it by making it part of the guiding ideology stated in the CPC Constitution. One of Deng’s formulations was the concept of Primary Stage of Socialism which has also been proclaimed as the theoretical framework governing policies for the next century. POLITICAL FUNCTIONS OF IDEOLOGY Like all ideological exercises of the scale performed by the fifteenth Congress, this decision, too, sought to accomplish three tasks. 1. The adoption of Deng Xiaoping’s Theory, firmly put forth an enabling framework of policies which Jiang Zemin can carry forward and can also innovate in changed conditions. The central principle of Deng’s Theory expressly taken over from Mao but used for a different purpose, is ’seeking truth from facts’ which permits the leaders to ’learn as you go on’ and adjust one’s perspective to new situations. 2. It contributes to the process of political consolidation of the Jiang Zemin leadership, thus sidelining all those who oppose the ’banner’ of Deng’s Theory or those who differ with Jiang. Not being a charismatic leader like Mao or Deng, Jiang needs the ’banner’ to protect his core position. 3. It allows rationalisation of power and policy. Deng’s Theory is described as being responsible for China’s steady economic growth, its rising 102 international status and improvement in the people’s standard of living. With that banner up, the prevailing leadership can pursue policies that it thinks fit and can also defend its power and defend purges, shifts, or retirements of Jiang’s critics in the party. Thus, when Jiang called Deng’s Theory the ’soul of the current Congress’ he was using ideology to consolidate his power and rationalise his decisions. THEORY, LINE AND BANNER When Mao Zedong struck off ism (zhuyi) from the draft of a document and modestly approved of thought (sixiang) as the term for his guiding ideology of the CPC, what got enshrined in the Party Constitution was Marxism-Leninism- Mao Zedong Thought. The fifteenth Congress has added Deng’s Theory of Building Socialism with Chinese Characteristics to the earlier formulation. The suffix ism is reserved for the founder philosopher Marx and the leader of the world’s first socialist revolution. But the term ’theory’ (lilun) does not reduce its centrality in contemporary China. Just as Mao Zedong Thought was the Marxism of his times, Deng’s Theory is regarded as the Marxism of present-day China. In other words, everyone is asked to interpret Marx, Lenin and Mao the way Deng Xiaoping did. No doubt, Deng’s stress on testing every idea with reference to facts or practice apparently allows alternative assessments but these assessments of past policies have been already made and summed up by Deng. Many other issues such as forms of ownership, role of the market, mode of distribution, pattern of enterprise management, use of technology, exercise of state power among others have also been settled and Deng’s Theory is the epitome of these approaches. Thus, a fairly comprehensive system of ideas is embodied in Deng’s Theory. So, but for the political decision by perhaps Deng himself, it could qualify for the higher status of an ism and as was also possible in the case of Mao. Since the Third Plenum of the Eleventh Central Committee, the CPC has talked about the new line (luxian) and policies, though it has refrained from using the expression ’two line struggle’ which was at the core of the Cultural Revolution (CR) discourse. Deng’s new line started as a critique of the class struggle perspective of the CR. The first few years decided mainly on the new focus on economic development. This focus has continued to be the central theme in the reform period as well as the core of Deng’s Theory. This focus was put forward as a programme of ’Reform and Open Door’-reform meaning changes in ownership forms, management practices, attitude to the market and distribution systems and open door meaning opening China to foreign capital and technology. 103 ’Reform and Open Door’ was considered good enough as the perspective for China’s four modernisation programme. As a political safeguard to put the reforms under the CPC leadership, Deng formulated the Four Cardinal Principles in February 1979 which he invoked everytime he had to cope with political disturbances. Since then, ’one central focus and two points’ constituted the ideological line or the basic line of the party. At the Thirteenth Congress in 1987 some of these policies were explained in terms of a formulation on the Primary Stage of Socialism. It was argued that since China had not gone through a capitalist phase, the forces of production had remained backward; hence there was a need for a long period of the primary stage when production could develop emulating even some capitalist experiences in the fields of advanced technology and market practices. But this notion was not used consistently during the intervening period. The Fifteenth Congress has affirmed it as a part of Deng’s Theory and Jiang Zemin has explained it in detail in a separate section devoted to the Primary Stage of Socialism. The Fourteenth Congress formulations of the Socialist Market Economy and Deng Xiaoping’s Theory laid down elements of a theoretical framework which were widely discussed during Mao’s birth centenary celebrations in 1993. The Central Party School led by Hu Jintao, the CASS and Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences published numerous writings on the new theoretical line of Deng. The publication of Deng’s Selected Works (3 vols) during the same year was followed by a drive to study Deng’s works. The banner of Deng’s Theory like the banner of Mao Zedong Thought during the Cultural Revolution divides the loyalists from the dissidents. It also isolates the ideological critics of the current path of development thus uniting the Dengist forces to pursue the present political line. CONSTITUTING PRINCIPLES OF DENG’S THEORY 1. Method: Seeking Truth from Facts: Rejecting dogmatic formulations derived from texts or foreign models or sayings of great leaders, Deng invoked Mao’s method articulated in Yan’an during the Rectification Movement and laid down the principle of ’seeking truth from facts’. As he explained in a speech in 1978 all policies must be based on an evaluation of experience. This may mean breaking completely with conventional ideas and principles which had become outmoded in the course of practice. This he called ’emancipation of the mind’ (jiefang sixiang). It is this method which Jiang Zemin has described as the quintessence of Deng’s Theory. It is this outlook which allows one to make bold experiments, taking risks and correcting policies as one moves toward. 104 While this method, as it was in the case of Mao, has enormous possibilities for creative developments in Marxism, we also know that there are no objective tests of truth in such contexts. The party leadership . is the innovator as well as the one who proclaims its validity. 2. Focus on economic construction: Deng’s Theory embodies a new understanding of socialism at the scientific level. Stressing the centrality of productive forces in socialism, Deng shifted the emphasis from class struggle to economic development. He rejected the isolationist or closed or partly closed economic system under socialism and promoted structural reform and open door for foreign capital. The transformation of the planned economy to a socialist market economy was the most radical step. A reassessment of institutions such as the market which was regarded as an essentiality capitalist institution was Deng’s contribution. Are these only applicable to the Chinese experiment in socialism or are they new considerations for socialism anywhere in the world? The other question is as to how it would be different from capitalism? Deng’s answer probably would be that with a Communist Party in power it would lead the economic process in the direction of socialism. But then with the rise of capitalist classes in society, the social basis of the Communist Party may have changed during the long process of such development and this would perhaps create a prosperous but unequal, consumerist and immoral society. That is why Mao had argued that mere development of the productive forces was not socialism; it had to create a new human being committed to socialist values. Thus, the problem remains as to the conceptualisation of socialism. The mention of building both material and spiritual civilisations and the reference to ethical values in the party programme does not seem to be an adequate guarantee to create conditions of socialist freedom-material, cultural and political conditions of human liberation. 3. Response to the changed world situation: Jiang Zemin says in his report that Deng’s Theory reflects a correct analysis of the features of our times, the successes or failures of the socialist countries, the gains and losses of . the developing countries, the trends and conflicts of the developed countries. Actually, what Jiang meant by this was that Deng had to respond to the period of revival of capitalism in the west and its global drive. Under the regimes of Reagan and Thatcher, western capitalism . recouped greatly while the USSR declined at a rapid pace for domestic and international reasons. The Third World countries were engulfed in serious crises of political instability and economic failures. In this situation , Deng recognised the need to build up the economic strength of China. He grasped the role that ’daily advances of science and technology’ played in modern life and economy. Thus, when much of the world was debating the evil effects of modernisation, Deng asserted it as China’s central objective and made it a basis of mobilising Chinese people’s 105 nationalist sentiments. The programme of quadrupling the 1980 level of China’s GNP, doubling that of 2000 by the year 2010, building a comprehensive and modern economy by 2021, the centenary of the founding of the CPC and achieving the status of a developed country with the world’s second highest GNP-in 2049, the PRC’s centenaryare indeed lofty nationalist ideas to catch up with the west. This strategy to join the race with the west in western terms of economic growth, science and technology despite the repeated protestations about the Chinese characteristics has its cost. The adoption of the framework of the industrial revolution on the claim that it was a universal force and not typical of capitalism has serious implications. It is a sure way to assimilate China into the global capitalist system. 4. Special situation of China: It is interesting that while the first three elements of Deng’s Theory are presented in universalist terms without, however, openly claiming its universal applicability, the fourth point in Jiang’s report refers to ’the scientific system of building socialism with Chinese characteristics’. He says, for the first time it has given preliminary but systematic answers to a series of basic questions concerning the road to socialism in China, the stages of development, the fundamental tasks, the motive force, the external conditions, the political guarantee, the strategic steps, the Party leadership, the forces to be relied on and the reunification of the motherland. It is claimed that dealing these issues had produced a ’fairly complete scientific system’ which is called Deng’s Theory which, of course, needs to be ’further enriched and developed’. No doubt it is a new package of guiding policies. But it was still evolving as a package. It required Deng’s personal intervention first in mid-1989 when he called in the PLA to crush youth demonstrations and then in early 1992 when in the course of his Southern Tour he called for further reform and opening and accelerated growth. Therefore, the comparison with the 1945 Seventh Congress articulation of Mao Zedong Thought with the Fifteenth Congress formulation on Deng’s Theory may be somewhat unnatural even though both statements summed up about twenty years’ political practice. However, it should be noted that in both cases chosen objectives had been substantially attained: Mao’s new democratic revolution and. Deng’s economic development, or socialism with Chinese characteristics as conceptualised by Deng. Author’s Address: Department of Political Science, University of Delhi, Delhi 110 007.
Knowledge Graph
Examples
1 Deng Xiaoping Theory also known as Dengism, is the series of political and economic ideologies first developed by Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping
2 Deng Xiaoping Theory argues that upholding Mao Zedong Thought does not mean blindly imitating Mao's actions without deviation as seen in the government of Hua Guofeng, and doing so would actually "contradict Mao Zedong Thought".[4]
3 Deng xiaoping Theory was entrenched into the Communist Party of China's Constitution as a guiding ideology in 1997