"Recently the college and university students created some disturbances. It is not the students themselves who are to blame for it but a small number of persons with ulterior motives, mainly higher intellectuals inside the Party who incited them to action. We have dealt with the matter sternly. But the struggle against bourgeois liberalization has not ended. Some people are still not clear what we are doing now in China. Everyone says that the modernization programme is a good thing, but some people have an understanding of it that is different from ours. By modernization we mean socialist modernization, but what those people advocate is modernization without socialism. This shows that they have forgotten the essence of the matter and that they have departed from the road China must take in its development.
“This question is vital: here we can make no concessions. We shall continue to struggle against bourgeois liberalization throughout the process of modernization, not only in this century but in the next. However, precisely because this will be a long-term struggle, instead of launching a political movement we shall use mainly the method of education. Education and persuasion are also a form of struggle. But only our achievements in economic development can eventually convince those who do not believe in socialism. If we can become comparatively prosperous by the end of this century, they will be partly convinced, and when we have turned China into a moderately developed socialist country by the middle of the next century they will be completely convinced. By that time most of them will have recognized their mistake. I think it will be possible for us to reach that magnificent goal.”
This instantly reminded me of China’s goal of building socialism by 2050. It’s beautiful to see how coherent China has been in practice, considering this was written almost 40 years ago!
Long live marxism-leninism, the scientific conception of the world!
I feel the West was under the impression that China had capitulated to them when her economy was liberalised and have just now come to the realisation that things are not how they thought they were. Is this a fair understanding of the situation or not? Feels weird in hindsight because Deng’s writings at least give the impression that he is a principled Marxist-Leninist. So it looks like the West capitulated to China instead.
Is this a fair understanding of the situation or not?
Yes, it absolutely is. They realized they fucked up when China was not affected by the 2008 crisis. After the 2011 “Occupy Wall Street”, they started to become desperate. They used biological warfare against China (coronavirus) to try to undermine its economy, and they didn’t expect that China would recover so quickly.
Now the bourgeoisie is using coronavirus politically to pressure the workers not to organize and control them.
I have evidence of all this, and I will publicly share more information about this in an article and fully cited with references in ProleWiki:Critique when I finish organizing some stuff first.
Just read this and see if they do not sound desperate:
America, under President Trump’s leadership, has finally awoken to the threat the Chinese Communist Party’s actions and the threat they pose to our very way of life. For decades, conventional wisdom in both U.S. political parties, the business community, academia, and media, has held that it was only a matter of time before China would become more liberal, first economically and, then, politically. The more we opened our markets to China, the thinking went, the more we invested capital in China, the more we trained PRC bureaucrats, scientists, engineers, and even military officers, the more China would become like us.
(…)
Let us be clear, the Chinese Communist Party is a Marxist-Leninist organization. The Party General Secretary Xi Jinping sees himself as Josef Stalin’s successor. In fact, as the journalist and former Australian government official John Garnaut has noted, the Chinese Communist Party is the last “ruling communist party that never split with Stalin, with the partial exception of North Korea.” Yes, Stalin – the man whose brutal dictatorship and disastrous policies killed roughly 20 million Russians and others through famine, forced collectivization, executions, and labor camps. As interpreted and practiced by Lenin, Stalin, and Mao, communism is a totalitarian ideology.This is the fucking White House speaking. They are fucking nuts to literally acknowledge a communist threat in that manner. They seem to not understand the own theory they use for propaganda against workers; if the enemy is more stable and cooperative than you, you become the enemy. They don’t understand their own history.
The bourgeoisie dominated Nazi Germany through mass privatization. The end of the Second World War, won by the Soviets, made A LOT of communist parties around the world to “dangerously” grow. The United States then started to build a massive propaganda campaign to promote the idea that “the US” won the war. Then the Khruschevite capitalist infiltration divided all communist parties in the world.
They are mentioning China and Stalin as horrible things, but China will develop its productive forces, its commodities will become cheaper and cheaper due to automation and less workers needed, and the capitalist mode of production won’t be able to compete with the increasingly socialist China. This means China will become the future, and everything associated with that nation, including all the Cold War propaganda produced by the US, will be seen in a positive manner. By publicly acknowledging and denouncing China, publicly mentioning marxism-leninism, they are digging their own grave. For instance, the anti-China rhetoric has been associated with Trump, which is bound to become a very hated historical character.
Capitalism is already a reactionary mode of production, because we already have the technology for automation and less working hours, but the capitalists CANNOT innovate their mass production unless they want to cause a massive economic crisis, which would mean more unemployed because of automation, or in another words, 1929 all over again.
There’s a massive global crisis about to hit, and I sadly don’t think the revolutionary parties in the world are up to the task at the moment, but that could change through time. Workers need to organize urgently, and educate themselves before it’s too late, otherwise our propaganda work will probably be done through internet monopolies (Twitter, YouTube, Facebook, etc.), and we all know how hard it is to do that on the internet because of bourgeois domination of the means of communication (i.e. Reddit deletes our resources)
When the productive forces, especially of China, reach a certain level, where goods are sold for a lower value than in capitalist countries, this will produce a yet-to-come capitalist crisis which will globally affect all countries. One proposed “way out” that the capitalists are promoting is Universal Basic Income. I, however, still have no idea how that one will play out.
I feel the US is so depraved that it will end up waging war (more explicitly than it does now) when the crisis gets out of hand. There are no new territories to colonise, no new markets, attempts at coup and destabilisation are failing. Just fucking die already. But it.won’t die on it’s own. Someone has to kill it.
It’s up to the Statian people
I’m talking to a few Chinese people on WeChat right now.
They really like Deng as much as they do Mao, but as always, they say that Mao and Deng were not perfect and that things must be approached scientifically.
Chinese people learned from the mistakes of personality cult, which we can’t deny happened. Even Mao tried to combat this personality cult for some time, but it was almost inevitable, as the people were very thankful for Mao’s work before, during and after the revolution.
Once Mao began to show some quite concerning left-wing deviations, communists inside the Party had trouble questioning Mao’s policies, since he was adored by the people and because of that, he had way too much authority inside the Party. That’s when shit hit the fan.
Deng was popular after he lead the charge against the Gang of Four; many hate the Gang of Four even today.
Thanks comrade, reminds me I should read a lot more Deng.
The positive result of the student unrest is that it has reminded us to review the experience gained in economic development over the past few years and has enabled us to see more clearly where things went wrong. The principles and policies we have formulated in recent years have been proved correct. Nevertheless, economic development has brought with it some negative effects, and if we want it to proceed in a sound way, we have to eliminate them. These negative effects have manifested themselves mainly in the spheres of theory, ideology and culture. That is why we have particularly stressed the need to uphold the Four Cardinal Principles and combat bourgeois liberalization. At the same time, we must do a better job of persuasion and education, improve our political and ideological work and struggle against undesirable conduct, including the tendency to seek privileges. The “cultural revolution” had a pernicious influence on the younger generation. That is why we encourage all our people, including cadres, to have high ideals, moral integrity, a good education and a strong sense of discipline.
The ideals of the exponents of bourgeois liberalization are different from ours. We advocate socialist and communist ideals, and they advocate capitalist ideals. After the Opium War of 1840 China was reduced to the status of a semi-colonial, semi-feudal society, and the Chinese nation was known as “the sick man of Asia”. For almost a century after that war, high-minded persons, including Dr. Sun Yat-sen, tried to find ways to save China. At first Dr. Sun Yat-sen looked to the West — that is, to capitalism. But later, when he found that what he learned from the capitalist West did not work in China, he put forward the idea of learning from Russia, which had been through the October Revolution. He initiated cooperation between the Kuomintang and the Communist Party, which brought about the success of the Northern Expedition [in 1926 against the northern warlords]. After Dr. Sun Yat-sen died, China under the rule of the Kuomintang remained a miserable semi-colonial and semi-feudal country, and when the Japanese invaded, a large part of its territory was turned into a Japanese colony. Under the oppression of imperialism, feudalism and the bureaucrat-capitalism that developed later, the country became poorer and poorer.
This history teaches us that capitalism would lead China nowhere and that we must follow the socialist road — there is no alternative. If China abandoned that road, it would return to its semi-colonial and semi-feudal status, and the Chinese people would not have enough food and clothing, let alone become prosperous. So we have to know the history of our country. Since our young people do not know much about our past, we should tell them about it, and the rest of the people too.
Didn’t the Deng era do a bunch of historical revisionism against Mao and the Maoist era? Like massively inflated claims of cannibalism during the Great Leap Forward, for instance.
Edit: I’d appreciate a response over a downvote so I can improve if I’m wrong.
There was a lot of struggle after Mao’s death. And in fact, there were some ultra-leftists inside the party who advocated for not developing China’s economy and maintaining things like they were. They were, in the end, arrested and they became forgotten. The people hated them.
Didn’t the Deng era do a bunch of historical revisionism against Mao and the Maoist era? Like massively inflated claims of cannibalism during the Great Leap Forward, for instance.
Do you really think the communist party could easily change history in front of a billion people who witnessed those events? The Deng era made a scientific reassessment of those events, and to learn from the mistakes that happened in the past.
Deng Xiaoping comments on these subjects:
About the ultra-leftist maoists:We must make a clear distinction between the nature of Chairman Mao’s mistakes and the crimes of Lin Biao and the Gang of Four. For most of his life, Chairman Mao did very good things. Many times he saved the Party and the state from crises. Without him the Chinese people would, at the very least, have spent much more time groping in the dark. Chairman Mao’s greatest contribution was that he applied the principles of Marxism-Leninism to the concrete practice of the Chinese revolution, pointing the way to victory. It should be said that before the sixties or the late fifties many of his ideas brought us victories, and the fundamental principles he advanced were quite correct. He creatively applied Marxism-Leninism to every aspect of the Chinese revolution, and he had creative views on philosophy, political science, military science, literature and art, and so on.
Unfortunately, in the evening of his life, particularly during the “Cultural Revolution”, he made mistakes — and they were not minor ones — which brought many misfortunes upon our Party, our state and our people. As you know, during the Yan’an days our Party summed up Chairman Mao’s thinking in various fields as Mao Zedong Thought, and we made it our guiding ideology. We won great victories for the revolution precisely because we adhered to Mao Zedong Thought. Of course, Mao Zedong Thought was not created by Comrade Mao alone — other revolutionaries of the older generation played a part in forming and developing it — but primarily it embodies Comrade Mao’s thinking.
Nevertheless, victory made him less prudent, so that in his later years some unsound features and unsound ideas, chiefly “Left” ones, began to emerge. In quite a number of instances he went counter to his own ideas, counter to the fine and correct propositions he had previously put forward, and counter to the style of work he himself had advocated. At this time he increasingly lost touch with reality. He didn’t maintain a good style of work. He did not consistently practise democratic centralism and the mass line, for instance, and he failed to institutionalize them during his lifetime.
This was not the fault of Comrade Mao Zedong alone. Other revolutionaries of the older generation, including me, should also be held responsible. Some abnormalities appeared in the political life of our Party and state — patriarchal ways or styles of work developed, and glorification of the individual was rife; political life in general wasn’t too healthy. Eventually these things led to the “Cultural Revolution”, which was a mistake.About the historical events of China:
We will make an objective assessment of Chairman Mao’s contributions and his mistakes. We will reaffirm that his contributions are primary and his mistakes secondary. We will adopt a realistic approach towards the mistakes he made late in life. We will continue to adhere to Mao Zedong Thought, which represents the correct part of Chairman Mao’s life. Not only did Mao Zedong Thought lead us to victory in the revolution in the past; it is — and will continue to be — a treasured possession of the Chinese Communist Party and of our country.
That is why we will forever keep Chairman Mao’s portrait on Tiananmen Gate as a symbol of our country, and we will always remember him as a founder of our Party and state. Moreover, we will adhere to Mao Zedong Thought. We will not do to Chairman Mao what Khrushchov did to Stalin.Source: https://dengxiaopingworks.wordpress.com/2013/02/25/answers-to-the-italian-journalist-oriana-fallaci/
