u/AllHeilWilson - originally from r/GenZhou
I am soon participating in a local seminar discussing whether China is a socialist country or a newly emerging imperialist power. I expect Neo-trotskyist presence to be extremely strong. Their main argument is (predicted to be) as follows:
- Chinese revolution is not a proletarian revolution, but a national liberation movement led by the non-comprador, national bourgeoisie (Their evidence is that Mao emphasized the Chinese people and his theory of the people’s state outlined in “On the People’s Democracy” contains ideas of bourgeois nationalism)
- Citing Isabella Weber’s “How China avoided Shock Therapy”, that China supposedly appropriated surplus value from the country-side, exploiting the peasantry and thereby supporting state capitalism under Mao’s rule
- China is not a socialist country, but a state capitalist one (Whatever that means)
- Repression of sexual/ethnic minorities (the “Uyghur Genocide”…)
- Export oriented strategy underscores China’s subservience to the global neocolonial system (Its participation in UN peacekeeping campaigns are attempts at extending its military arm to enforce value transfer into China (!)
- China’s Belt and Road initiative as an expression of its desire to export finance capital abroad
- Exploitation of the domestic working class
To be clear, they already understand that US and western imperialism is the leading force of imperialism in the world today. They support the DPRK (whilst denouncing it as a state capitalist country) against US aggression.
Their theoretical line is somewhat similar to the Socialist Worker’s Party in the UK: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialist_Workers_Party_(UK)
https://socialistworker.co.uk/art/52023/Chinas+champions+of+state+capitalism
https://socialistworker.co.uk/art/49999/Imperialist+rivalries+heighten+the+crisis
Please help me out here. They are very sectarian and will bite at anyone who dares to deviate even slightly from their theoretical line. The dominance of their theoretical line will be detrimental for the local movement here. Please provide me with some evidence against their claims. Concrete data (e.g. – calculation of value transfer from Africa to China etc) is always welcome.
u/Webbedtrout2 - originally from r/GenZhouThis argument rests on a belief that any degree of surplus accumulation would indicate a non socialist economy. This position was investigated by Marx in Critique of the Gotha Programme where he argues that in the aftermath of a presumed proletarian revolution, the existence of surplus accumulation would persist as the development of industries and other socially necessary development would persist.
Perhaps tautologically argued by Stalin in Economic Problems of the USSR, even if the whole of someone’s labour is not accounted in the USSR, the worker is not exploited as the whole of society owns the means of production of all socialized industry thus the worker cannot exploit themselves.
Returning to the nature of accumulation of surplus value(profit), we must inquire for what reason is this accumulation taking place. Further argued by Stalin, in capitalism the purpose is to maximize the rate of profit. The making of money is the ultimate reason for economic activity. In socialism, production and the profit earned is for the purpose of fulfilling a social need and the general elevation of the standard of living.
Regarding modern China, while capitalist are allowed to exist and large sectors organize production through the market, they cannot fully act as they please and at some level must fulfill some object set by the CPC or have identified an unrealized societal need. One of the core tenants of the CPC is ‘serve the people’ and this is seen in their agendas and actions throughout China.
Again, we must analyse the purpose of the Belt and Road Initiative and the form this export of Capital details. It is factual to say that China is exporting capital through the belt and road initiative. But, the purpose of BRI is not to bolster the rate of profit in China but to improve the foundational infastructure of partnered countries. Presumably these infastructure project will improve the economies of the partnered countries and China. We can conclude that the BRI is not principally about increasing the rate of profits for Chinese firms but and expression of Chinese internationalism.