Soviet-Empire.com U.S.S.R. and communism historical discussion.
[ Active ]
[ Login ]
Log-in to remove these advertisements.

What do you think of Dengism / China's economic reforms?

POST REPLY

What do you think of Dengism / China's economic reforms?

Good
6
24%
Bad
10
40%
Other
9
36%
 
Total votes : 25
Loz
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 11879
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 06 Dec 2009, 23:17
Philosophized
Post 07 Jun 2012, 16:28
What do you think of China's economic reforms started by Deng and Co in the late seventies.
Do you support such a "radical" turn?
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 4415
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 07 Oct 2004, 22:04
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Resident Soviet
Post 07 Jun 2012, 17:20
Here's a thought: What options did the leadership have in the post-Mao era? Maoist-style communal economic management and a never-ending cultural revolution in society and politics were unsustainable. Soviet-style socialism wasn't possible, given the decades of vitriol aimed at everything from the north. Was there even another type of radical socialist thinking for the Chinese to implement? In part I'm really asking a question to which I don't know the answer. In part I'm making a comment on how seriously Mao messed up Chinese politics, economy and society through his reign.

As for Deng's reforms, they were a step in a counterrevolutionary direction, but at least they didn't apparently have as their goal the full-scale destruction of socialism, the CP's monopoly on power, or the country itself, as Gorbachev's did.
"The thing about capitalism is that it sounds awful on paper and is horrendous in practice. Communism sounds wonderful on paper and when it was put into practice it was done pretty well for what they had to work with." -MiG
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 172
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 28 Feb 2012, 16:12
Ideology: Left Communism
Pioneer
Post 07 Jun 2012, 18:55
Reactionary but unavoidable. China could not build socialism in isolation under their material conditions. They needed to develop productive forces ASAP: As long as the productive forces weren't developed, attempts to jump to advanced socialism or communism were doomed to fail. Given their options, it was either State Capitalism or Titoism, and they went the state-capitalist route.

It sucked, but there was no other option. As for the sweatshop conditions, IIRC they're currently improving.... And it ain't like working conditions in the USSR during the 20s-30s were particularly enjoyable either.

The problem isn't that Deng made his reforms... The problem is that China has not chosen to roll them back even though their NEP has already served its purpose. It's particularly damning that they didn't choose to get back to socialism in 2008: Had they taken that option in the middle of the Crisis of Capitalism, they woulda knocked world capitalism down beyond repair.
Cm'on baby, eat the rich!!! - Motörhead
[+-]
Soviet cogitations: 57
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 17 Oct 2009, 09:10
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Pioneer
Post 07 Jun 2012, 19:23
Current Chinese Political leadership has no interest in going back to pre liberal era at all. It isn't going to be about a "choice" of this leadership but only a second revolution can remedy this.

But still I agree it was unavoidable.
Mankind is divided into rich and poor, into property owners and exploited; and to abstract oneself from this fundamental division; and from the antagonism between poor and rich means abstracting oneself from fundamental facts.
Joseph Stalin
Soviet cogitations: 1128
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 30 Aug 2008, 18:12
Party Member
Post 07 Jun 2012, 23:51
Other

People have already given good reasons why the reforms were necessary. I'm not sure how far Deng intended the reforms to go and how reversible they are. My guess is not very. I don't like the way Jiang Zemin allowed the bourgeoisie to become party members. This now allows for special interest groups to become established within the party who will naturally resist any return to socialism. If the party does decide to change back it will require a political purge so extensive that makes Stalin's efforts look like a minor reshuffle.

Quote:
The problem is that China has not chosen to roll them back even though their NEP has already served its purpose.


No it hasn't. China is still very undeveloped in many areas (particularly the rural western regions). It also needs to promote its own domestic market and become more creative in technological innovation. The party officially says that Deng's reforms will last for at least 100 years.

Quote:
China is in the primary stage of socialism and will remain so for a long time to come. This is a historical stage which cannot be skipped in socialist modernization in China which is backward economically and culturally. It will last for over a hundred years. In socialist construction the Party must proceed from China's specific conditions and take the path of socialism with Chinese characteristics. At the present stage, the principal contradiction in Chinese society is one between the ever-growing material and cultural needs of the people and the low level of production. Owing to both domestic circumstances and foreign influences, class struggle will continue to exist within a certain scope for a long time and may possibly grow acute under certain conditions, but it is no longer the principal contradiction. In building socialism, the basic task is to further release and develop the productive forces and achieve socialist modernization step by step by carrying out reform in those aspects and links of the production relations and the superstructure that do not conform to the development of the productive forces. The Party must uphold and improve the basic economic system, with public ownership playing a dominant role and different economic sectors developing side by side, as well as the system of distribution under which distribution according to work is dominant and a variety of modes of distribution coexist, encourage some areas and some people to become rich first, gradually eliminate poverty, achieve common prosperity, continuously meet the people's ever-growing material and cultural needs on the basis of the growth of production and social wealth and promote people's all-round development.


http://english.cpc.people.com.cn/65732/6758063.html
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 2820
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 16 Feb 2005, 02:51
Party Bureaucrat
Post 09 Jun 2012, 03:17
KlassWar wrote:
The problem isn't that Deng made his reforms... The problem is that China has not chosen to roll them back even though their NEP has already served its purpose. It's particularly damning that they didn't choose to get back to socialism in 2008: Had they taken that option in the middle of the Crisis of Capitalism, they woulda knocked world capitalism down beyond repair.

I disagree with this point, almost half of China's population is still agrarian, and the per capita GDP in China around USD, that's roughly in the same league as Jamaica and Dominican Republic, if you think that the latter two are ready for post-capitalist mode of production, then so is China.

And no, the current world financial order may go down beyond repair, capitalism itself would not, as for large parts of the world, it is still the more advanced mode of production, and the material conditions in those societies will push them towards it.

gRed Britain wrote:
People have already given good reasons why the reforms were necessary. I'm not sure how far Deng intended the reforms to go and how reversible they are. My guess is not very. I don't like the way Jiang Zemin allowed the bourgeoisie to become party members. This now allows for special interest groups to become established within the party who will naturally resist any return to socialism. If the party does decide to change back it will require a political purge so extensive that makes Stalin's efforts look like a minor reshuffle.

As long as the development of capitalism continues, it will eventually reach an end, the party itself will not matter.
Soviet cogitations: 2407
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 01 Nov 2003, 13:17
Ideology: Other
Forum Commissar
Post 12 Jun 2012, 04:18
Quote:
Here's a thought: What options did the leadership have in the post-Mao era? Maoist-style communal economic management and a never-ending cultural revolution in society and politics were unsustainable. Soviet-style socialism wasn't possible, given the decades of vitriol aimed at everything from the north.


It was possible for them to adopt a top down command economy. After the Cultural Revolution ended in the 1970s and the Red Guards were brought under control a more Soviet style was adopted. Also Hua Guofeng wanted Soviet style planning but he did not succeed against Deng Xiaoping's camp.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 3711
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 07 Jul 2006, 04:49
Ideology: Juche
Old Bolshevik
Post 13 Jun 2012, 00:17
Negatively. I believe that even if market reforms were neccessary, that China should have done this in a better way that left the proletariat in charge of the MoP.

Quote:
I don't like the way Jiang Zemin allowed the bourgeoisie to become party members. This now allows for special interest groups to become established within the party who will naturally resist any return to socialism. If the party does decide to change back it will require a political purge so extensive that makes Stalin's efforts look like a minor reshuffle.


It won't. Socialism generally does not come from above, and I don't think that China will be an exception. When people say that the party will "eventually" reform, it reminds me of Social-Democratic rhetoric about how Capitalism will be overcome by reforms.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 4953
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 13 Feb 2008, 15:25
Ideology: Other Leftist
Politburo
Post 13 Jun 2012, 04:10
Misuzu wrote:
It won't. Socialism generally does not come from above, and I don't think that China will be an exception. When people say that the party will "eventually" reform, it reminds me of Social-Democratic rhetoric about how Capitalism will be overcome by reforms.


China cannot be compared to the West. It's history and material conditions are entirely different. The main difference between Social democracy in the West and reform in China is that the latter already has a Communist party in power. Right now, the right wing of the party is dominant, but all it will take for change to take place is for the left faction to become dominant. China's revolution has already taken place, it just needs to continue, not be renewed.
Loz
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 11879
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 06 Dec 2009, 23:17
Philosophized
Post 13 Jun 2012, 14:52
No, that's not how things work.
Misuzu is right and you're wrong, because you are on anti-Marxist positions.
But go ahead.
Soviet cogitations: 2051
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 24 Jun 2011, 08:37
Party Bureaucrat
Post 14 Jun 2012, 00:17
and while we wait for the revolution to carry on, we'll all get cheap ipods, right?
Soviet America is Free America!

Under communism, there is no freedom; you are not free to live in poverty, be homeless, to be without an education, to starve, or to be without a job
Soviet cogitations: 91
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 11 Dec 2011, 09:04
Pioneer
Post 23 Jul 2012, 16:37
30% good 70% bad

Do try to avoid one-liners. Helpful in doing so is explaining your point so people know what you mean and where you're coming from. Please expand on what you mean. -RD
Alternative Display:
Mobile view
More Forums: The History Forum. The UK Politics Forum.
© 2000- Soviet-Empire.com. Privacy.