Home | List of Publications | Articles | Reviews/Critiques
Biography | About Some Books | Ordering Info | Mail Us...

 

CAPITALISM WITH CHINESE CHARACTERISTICS

 

Ranganayakamma

B.R. Bapuji

 

Introduction

This article is a continuation of our earlier article More Leaps Backward which appeared in 1985 (China Report, May-June 1985). Our earlier article dealt with the developments in Chinese economy, politics and culture between 1978 and 1983. We incorporated the developments of that period in our post-script to the first edition of our Telugu translation of Charles Bettelheim's book CHINA SINCE MAO (Monthly Review Press, 1978). The English version of Bettelheim's book covered the developments up to February 1978 while the Telugu version covered the developments up to September 1983. After a gap of twenty years, we have now brought out the second edition of the Telugu version and added a long post-script that covers the developments in China between October 1983 and December 2002. These developments are presented, as far as the collected data permitted, chronologically and thematically under the title: Exploitation with Chinese characteristics in the name of 'Socialism with Chinese characteristics'. Barring certain comments here and there, the entire data presented here are drawn from various sources ¾ both Chinese and non-Chinese ¾ published during the period covered. The Chinese sources include Beijing Review and books published from China under 'China Basic Series'. The non-Chinese sources include journals like Keesing's Record of World Events, The China Quarterly, The Far Eastern Economic Review and The Journal of Development Studies (an issue of which carried Bettelheim's 1988 article 'Economic Reform in China'.) However, the non-Chinese sources too, to a large extent, have relied on Chinese sources. The second writer gathered and organised the data chronologically and thematically as far as possible while the first writer presented in the present form. The present article is a translation (by the second writer) of the post-script written by the first writer to the latest edition of the Telugu version that came out in March 2003. In this article, we have given the summary of numerous reports and studies on China that appeared in journals and books mentioned above. Hence it is not possible to cite page numbers for every piece of data, observation and conclusion.

 

Revisionism revisited

What follows here is nothing but the continuation and extension of the various forms of Chinese revisionism, which Bettelheim demonstrated way back in 1978.

Although, the Chinese Communist Party (hereafter CCP or Party), until 1976, that is until the passing away of Mao, could not accomplish wonderful changes, committed many mistakes and did not have enough clarity with regard to Marxism, it included a group that followed revolutionary path. The aim of this group was to fight for the emancipation of the proletariat against the class of exploiters. Whatever mistakes it made, it used to proceed in the direction of socialist transformation. It initiated both major and minor socialist changes, with or without sufficient theoretical clarity, in various spheres of society.

What the Revisionists initiated is to reverse all the socialist transformations. They, however, do not abandon the word 'socialism'. They have to depend entirely on this term. They repeatedly recite that the 'Gang of Four' (that is, the supporters of the 'revolutionary line') committed many blunders which they are now rectifying and theirs is the real socialist path. They try to sanctify the capitalist terminology by prefixing the adjective 'socialist'. They call 'market' 'socialist market'! They call 'competition' 'socialist competition'! They call 'price rise' 'socialist price rise'! They call 'profit' 'socialist profit'! This is how they call everything!

The Revisionists are able to present such daring false formulations as socialism since the labouring masses do not know well what socialism is! Any wrong formulation will circulate among ignorant people without any opposition.

If people facing problems learn the necessary knowledge, then such knowledge would turn into a great force. Until this happens, people remain powerless. The Chinese proletariat, which could see a little of newness of socialism is still far away from the theoretical knowledge and is helpless. It is needless to talk about the proletariat of other countries.

Here we will again and again see the hitherto known fact that the present day CCP had turned into a capitalist party a long time ago. Further, we will see its anxiety, zealousness and high speed in becoming capitalistic.

The Chinese Revisionists needed the help of foreign capitalists in order to destroy at the earliest possible the socialism, however rudimentary it might be, which the supporters of the revolutionary line initiated. The objective, which the exploiters of different countries have to achieve collectively, is to eliminate handful of socialist developments that occurred in one country! Here we see such total destruction.

In any society, economic, political and cultural relations are mutually intertwined. It is impossible to separate them. Yet, we need to try to understand those spheres separately as far as possible.

In order to understand how economy in any society acts as fundamental force and how it influences political and cultural spheres, changes in China¾both in the past as well as in the present¾will stand as wonderful examples. Knowledge of these experiences would necessarily give a new strength to the world proletariat.

First let us examine the economic sphere.

 

Comprador-cum-contract economy

At the end of 1980, two trends appeared in the CCP. One trend argued for giving importance to 'market'. Deng was its leader. The second trend argued in favour of reliance on centralized State planning. Chen Yun was its leader. Deng's group, however, enjoyed majority support in the party.

 

Free flow of foreign capital

A change that occurred on a large scale in the Chinese economy since 1983 was the entry of foreign capital into China more freely than before.

On October 11, 1983 'Third China-Europe Business Leaders Symposium' was held in Beijing.  At this symposium, the vice-minister for Economic Relations and Foreign Trade said that the foreign businessmen (capitalists) can set up enterprises using their own exclusive investment in China's coastal areas. They may also sell more of their output on the Chinese market.

By November 1983, the Chinese government bifurcated the functions of 9,028 communes located in 902 counties. The central government confined communes exclusively to economic functions and assigned the administrative functions of the communes to 12, 786 townships. The government ordered that the transformation of communes along these lines must be over by the end of 1984.

December 1983 issue of 'China Finance' reported that the total debts at the end of September 1983 stood at 3,000 million dollars mainly to the International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank and Japan. The figures did not include China's short-term debts, which were estimated by banks to be 1,000-2,000 million dollars.

On January 10, 1984, the Chinese Prime Minister Zhao Zhyang, addressing the American capitalists assured that "China has opened its door and will never close it again".

On March 6, 1984, a report of the State Council noted that there had been widespread growth in "controlled Capitalism" or Private commerce. (This amounts to saying, "although there is capitalism in the country, it is under control". Its growth is 'widespread' while being under control!) According to the same report, in 1983, the number of private enterprises more than doubled to 5,800,000 (from 2,600,000 in 1982).

On April 2, 1984 the World Bank approved a 20-year credit for China worth 220,000,000 dollars to extend the railway network in Henan and Shandong province. (With this credit, China has to buy al the commodities necessary for the railway network from foreign countries. It implies that those foreign companies got orders for their commodities on their own terms. China has to sell its commodities in order to clear that debt: so many commodities equivalent to the 'principal' as well as 'interest'! That too as per the prices determined by those foreign companies. On such occasions as these, all conditions would be as per the wishes of the lenders. In this whole transaction, the World Bank earns 'interest' from China. Whenever we hear the word 'loan', we have to recall the word 'interest'.)

Beijing Review of April 16, 1984 reported that the Chinese government would open 14 more coastal cities for foreign economic activities. The government assured to provide sites for Chinese-foreign joint ventures as well as exclusive foreign investment.

On April 27, 1984, as soon as he arrived in China, Ronald Reagan, the then President of America praised changes in China: You are encouraging farmers by assigning land on contract basis. You have introduced more disciplinary management by making managers responsible for the profits and losses. You have taken membership in IMF and the World Bank. You have established Special Economic Zones where foreign companies can do business at their will. "We salute your courage to change", Reagan said. He also declared, "I am delighted to announce a full three-year Master's degree in Business Administration at the State University of New York for Chinese managers".

The next day, that is on April 28, the top leader of CCP, Deng, when he met Reagan, said that he was "reasonably satisfied" with the flow of U.S. technology into China but he hoped that it would be speeded up.

In May 1984, Zhao, the then Chinese Prime Minister, said in the parliament that the open door policy must be implemented "resolutely" and bigger strides must be taken in using foreign capital and importing technology. "The Special Economic Zone in Xianmen will be extended", he announced. At the same time he assured that 14 more coastal cities would be opened to the foreign capitalists.

(In the beginning the Chinese government permitted foreign companies only in certain limited number of areas¾as if it were a 'minor change'! But gradually, it is extending such permission to more number of areas. This they call 'open-door policy'!)

Beijing Review of June 4, 1984, once again assured the foreign capitalists that China's open door policy remains consistent. It clarified that foreign investors would enjoy preferential treatment, including the reduction or even exemption of Income Tax. Further, they can remit their profits abroad.

In August 1984, while talking to the president of the European Commission, premier Zhao assured, "China's already opened door will open still wider. China will never close its door again". (If the doors are always open, why do you need doors at all Mr. Zhao? They are unnecessarily a hurdle! Why don't you remove the doors, throw them away and declare that "we have removed the doors?" The name should not be 'open door policy' but 'doorless policy'. Has Deng not got such a simple idea?)

Beijing Review of August 13, 1984 lamented that during Cultural Revolution, private business was considered capitalistic and was practically eliminated. But after 1978 many forms of private business started up under the guise of socialism.

Red Flag of November 1984 quoted what Deng said at the party's Central Advisory Commission on October 22, 1984. Deng said that "some capitalism" would be beneficial to the development of China's 'socialist productive forces'. (Capitalism for the development of socialism!)

Deng defended the current economic policy and described the fears of some 'old comrades' about reforms as unwarranted. He said that the basic means of production would remain in the hands of the State and there would be "no new bourgeoisie".

In a speech published on March 8, 1985, Deng emphasized that the purpose of the economic reforms was not to revive capitalism but to strengthen socialism and its "ultimate goal of attaining communism".

The Chinese government permitted individuals and companies to carry on money lending business.

At the 4th session of the 6th National People's Council held in March 1986, Premier Zhao declared that the trend towards liberalization and decentralization would continue. He claimed that the reforms, including the "policy of encouraging some people to become prosperous sooner than others" had increased China's wealth. He said that reforms facilitated the replacement of a "petrified economic structure characterized by excessive and rigid controls" with "a vigorous new one appropriate to the development of planned commodity economy based on public ownership".

(Although the Chinese Revisionists gave numerous assurances to the foreign capitalists, the flow of foreign capital into China was not as encouraging as Revisionists expected. Foreign capitalists did not dare to enter China. They were hesitating with doubts regarding the future, "we can't believe China. If something happens in future all our capital would be confiscated". Hence the Chinese Revisionists keep offering fresh concessions every now and then.)

On October 11, 1986 the Chinese government announced 22 new concessions to encourage foreign capital. The concessions, apart from other things, included preferential rates of taxation, greater operational autonomy and reduced rents and utility charges for enterprises employing foreign capital.

In April 1988, the Chinese parliament made "Sino-foreign joint venture law" according to which foreign partners are entitled to make managerial decisions¾including hiring and firing of workers¾without governmental interference.

On November 19, 1995 the government issued some new orders liberalizing foreign trade. Trade liberalization included reduction by 30% of tariffs on 4,000 important items; elimination of quota, licensing and other import controls on some 170 categories; accounting for over 30% of commodities currently subjected to import quotas and licensing requirement; establishment of Sino-foreign Joint trade venture in Shanghai and other cities and extension of joint venture to retail businesses as well.

According to Financial Times of June 17, 2002 the government had accelerated market access for foreign investors in an unprecedented liberalization that far exceeded commitments made by China upon joining World Trade Organisation (WTO). All cities including Shanghai opened up for foreign investment in key sectors ahead of agreed schedule.

By October 2002, China became source of cheap labour for capitalists from America, Japan and England. For example, Philips Company operates 23 factories and produces about 5 billion-dollar worth of goods in China each year but nearly two-thirds of that is exported overseas. Talking to the reporter of the Far Eastern Economic Review, the Head of the Philips Asian Operations said, "Our initial vision was to sell in China". But things have taken a different turn. (This means, these foreign companies can produce commodities cheaply if they establish their companies in China since workers are very cheap. They can sell their commodities easily in their competition with other companies. Therefore, the spokesman of the company is saying that shifting their company into China is more profitable than exporting their commodities to China.)

Other big companies like General Electric, Samsung Electronics, Toshiba found China as an export base than selling inside China since workers are cheaply available and the foreign companies get more concessions here.

The Far Eastern Economic Review, which reported all this also informed that one American Company decided to shut down its plants in America and expand production in China, which serves as a "cheapest pool of labour".

 

Promotion of Various forms of private capitalism

When agricultural lands in rural areas were in the form of cooperatives and communes, the land was the collective property of the rural, agricultural people. Agricultural people used to work in collective farms and nobody did own land as his/her private property. Every person had job security. (All this happened even though the principal that 'every one must do labour' was not yet properly observed.)

The Chinese Revisionists followed the path of destroying collective agriculture. They began to break collective farms into pieces and gave the land on contract to private individuals, groups and organizations in rural areas. This had, in fact, began much earlier (since 1978).

By 1983 some peasant families in villages had owned tractors, trucks and other agricultural implements to a minimum extent. But the number of privately owned agricultural implements increased gradually.

William Hinton, an American author, who has been studying China since the pre-Revolutionary period, visited China in March 1983 and commented, "Commercial freedom threatens to create merchant princes once more".

On May 15, 1984, Premier Zhao announced the following policy directives in parliament.

*      Promote multiform economic responsibility systems centered in contracting through public bidding. All contracts by tenders. We must encourage competition.

*      Try to extent the experiments in putting urban housing construction on a commercial basis and develop a real estate business.

*      Strive to make Special Economic Zones (SEZ) a success, open more coastal cities and create a new situation in economic and technical exchanges with the outside world. (This he called 'independent' foreign policy!)

*      Consolidate and improve forms of contract system whereby agricultural lands and other production enterprises in rural areas are assigned to private individuals, households or groups.

*      Replace the system of profit delivery with tax payments in state owned enterprises since such replacement has more advantages. The enterprises can retain after-tax profit.

*      Encourage individuals and collectives to run small state owned enterprises under contract or lease or payment of taxes.

 

Emergence of contract labourers

At the same conference, Zhao made several suggestions with regard to employing workers on contract basis: We should gradually reduce the proportion of regular workers and introduce a labour contract system so as to sharply increase the number of temporary and seasonal workers. Enterprises must reduce or stop bonuses or even withhold part of the wages of the workers when they have failed to fulfill their quotas (of the state plan) and paid less taxes and earned less profits. (This is to make workers work more, produce more and bring more profits! In case this does not happen, Mr. Prime Minister advises the capitalists not to pay full wages to workers!)

Le Monde, a French newspaper, carried a part of Zhao's speech in its issue of May 24, 1984 as follows: The decision making power of state enterprises, for which managers and directors would henceforth be fully responsible would be extended in 10 areas¾(1) Planning for production and operation. (2) Sales of products. (3) Pricing. (4) Selection and Purchase of materials. (5) Use of funds. (6) Handling of assets. (7) Structural establishment. (8) Administration of affairs concerning personnel and labour. (9) Wages and bonuses. (10) Inter-unit associated operations.

(All this means, it is the managers and directors who would decide all these matters. The only thing which workers must do is to come to the factory at the right time, do more work and return home. They should have no role in any decision. The Chinese Revisionists are introducing all these regulations with the sole purpose of burying all that had been done during Cultural Revolution. During Cultural Revolution, workers initiated great changes with regard to workers' management teams in the enterprises. Charles Bettelehim's book 'Cultural Revolution and the Industrial Organisation in China' depicts all these changes in great detail. Since Cultural Revolution initiated such revolutionary changes, Revisionists have so much grudge for Cultural Revolution! All the present regulations are meant to eliminate those relevant practices!)

 

All powers to Directors !

Beijing Review of June 18, 1984 carried an article by its economic editor in which he described the powers of the directors of the production enterprises as follows: "Director of an enterprise has the power to decide on the production and sales of products, the purchase of raw and semi-finished materials and the technical transformation of the enterprise, and to control appointments, transfers, rewards and penalties among the workers and staff.

(While the fact remains that workers have no role in the managing the enterprises, the consequences of the appropriation of all powers by directors will be disastrous. Corruption among directors of the enterprises would become rampant. There arise opportunities for them to take bribes in every transaction¾while purchasing raw materials, while selling newly produced goods and appointing workers. Which means, the very nature of this managerial system encourages and nourishes corruption in the enterprises. If workers could intervene in all these matters in the form of 'Workers' Management Teams' by rotation, the decisions would not be made by a couple of directors and none would get an opportunity to take bribes secretly.

 

Public bidding

According to Beijing Review of July 23, 1984 A system of public bidding and investment responsibility will be introduced for all large and medium-sized construction project this year (1984) and next year (1985). It also reported that so far 123 major projects have been contracted without public bidding (This means, officials have given away those contracts after swallowing huge bribes!)

After a week, in its issue of July 30, the economic editor of Beijing Review argued as follows: "Some people think that signing contract through public bidding is a method prevalent in capitalist countries and is incompatible in a socialist planned economy. This is wrong. Experience has proved that it is an objective law which transcends the nature of society and can be used under both capitalism and socialism". (This is their experience because they have been able to introduce Revisionism easily! Contract system is an objective law, they say! This means, in order to attach value to any dirty job, add before it words like 'objective', 'logical', 'rational' or 'socialist'. This is the tactic, which the Chinese Revisionists are following.)

 

 

Emergence of rural capitalist class

The Central Committee (CC) of CCP in its document 1 of 1984 announced its policy on private ownership in agriculture. The system of contracting lands was already there. But now the government enhanced the period of contract up to 15 or more years. In case a peasant household wants to withdraw from that contract, it need not hand over the land to the government. The household can transfer that land to another household for lease. The second household would pay rent to the government. A national conference on this policy hoped that leasing or selling of land to other peasants would encourage a gradual transfer of contracted land plots into the hands of those skilled in cultivation. (But, there is scope for the first household to get some bribe from the second household.)

Another aspect of the agricultural policy is that peasants could fix prices as they wish. They called all such policies 'reforms'. (These are in fact actions that would defend private property rights and lead to exploitation.)

The conference said that a longer contracting period was necessary to encourage "more rational and effective use of land". It would give peasants an incentive to invest more capital and labour. (This means, the assigned land would become the private property of the individual or that household.) Around this time, the director of the Rural Policy Research Bureau said that in future peasants would be allowed to hire up to seven labourers. (This means, there was permission to hire less than seven labourers. Now they re raising the number of labourers.)

But none of these rules would be effective. One would hire as many labourers as he needs but would show the legally permitted number in the records. Once the system of hiring labour exists, all other regulations would remain futile.

Disappearance of collective mode of production implies loss of employment. When the system of leasing the land comes into operation, the household that took the land for lease would cultivate the land in 3 ways¾(1) without hiring labourers (2) performing labour along with the labourers or (3) exclusively by hiring labourers.

But land would gradually goes into the possession of rich households. A system becomes established whereby all kinds of agricultural labour are carried out by means of hired labourers.

After the elimination of collective farming, people who cannot afford to take land on lease and those who cannot sustain that lease would inevitably turn into hired agricultural labourers. The same director (of Rural Policy Research) is describing the process of rural population becoming rich as follows: "Currently, some people are prospering quickly, some slowly and some not at all. To let all people eventually get rich, it is necessary to let some get rich first. At the same time, efforts are being made to let others get rich gradually. To prosper together does not mean prospering simultaneously".

(It follows that those who take land on lease make labourers do labour and become rich first. Thereafter, those labourers too would get rich. After some time all people would get rich! No other expression except 'senseless gibes' is appropriate to this kind of talk. The director of the Rural Policy Research is talking so senselessly, thinking that labourers cannot understand what is wrong in his talk! Thinking that labourers would feel happy thus, "perhaps we too may get rich after some time, as Mr. Director said!"

Labourers would really feel happy if they do not know what 'getting rich' means. One gets rich only if he exploits certain portion of the labour of the labourers. If the households of masters get rich, the households of the labourers would remain poor. It will never happen that all people become rich. All people live happily if we imagine that all people do labour, that the class of masters and exploitation do not exist!

Capitalism in the rural areas began with such changes as leasing of agricultural land to private individuals, and permitting them to hire workers.

In October 1984,  a resolution of the CC of the CCP defined the 'individual enterprises' as an 'indispensable complement to the socialist economy'. The individual enterprises were, initially permitted to hire 7 workers and subsequently the limit was abolished. It follows that one can hire any number of workers. (Still, it is a socialist society, according to them!)

By the end of 1984 about 25 million rural families transferred their lands to other families and started other businesses like workshops and small factories. All those masters who hired labourers form rural capitalist class. They are called 'prosperous households' in China.

 

Extreme poverty

According to a Chinese official report in 1987, about 100 million people¾mostly rural¾were suffering from extreme poverty. Most of them belonged to poor peasant families. They could not retain the lands, which they took on lease from the government. As they could not provide themselves with necessary resources to carry on agriculture, then transferred the lands to the rich peasant households, left villages and began to migrate to nearby small and large towns. (Had those families cultivated those lands collectively, mobilizing resources would have been their collective responsibility. It would not have been the responsibility of a single individual family. When land is collectively owned, the portion of the 'surplus value' would remain with the collective of peasants since there won't be masters and hence it won't go into the pockets of the masters. Thus, the collective would be able to mobilize easily all the resources necessary at the place of production. Then the problem of 'livelihood' does not arise.)

In March-April 1988, the Chinese parliament made certain laws which: gave a free hand to managers in running enterprises, hiring and dismissing workers; legitimized the existence of the private sector and thereby encouraged its expansion; and legalized the right to buy and sell land.

 

Dependence of women

Before the introduction of privatization of land during the existence of collective farming, women used to work in the collective farms and earned their own income. But when the same lands were assigned to individual households, women in a given household would not get a specified amount of income of their own even though they do labour in their own contracted land. The entire income would be in the hands of men. Thus, the privatization and contract system make women dependent on men.

 

Abolition of free higher education

On May 28, 1985 the CC of CCP published a document entitled 'Decision on Educational Reform". Among other things, it said: "Henceforth higher education students would have to pay tuition fees and living expenses; any payment of scholarship money would depend upon a academic performance. Some groups, however, including those studying to be teachers and those from very poor families, were exempted from paying fees."

 

Law of inheritance

The CC of the CCP approved China's first law on the inheritance of property effective from October 1, 1985. The law allowed surviving spouses to inherit half of the property of the deceased partner, the other half of the property, going to other family members.

(If it were a society without private property, property would always belong to the collectives.)

 

Stock exchange under 'communist' party rule

On September 26, 1986, the first Chinese stock exchange to operate since the founding of the People's Republic in 1949 opened in Shanghai. However, the market dealing in bonds issued by local companies had previously opened in Shanghai  on August 5.

On October 14, the official Economic Daily described the development as a means "to relieve our country's shortage of capital, to develop production and make workers more concerned about the future of their companies". (The meaning of this statement is that workers would work hard in order to secure more profits if they too buy shares. When workers are totally ignorant of economic matters, every false argument would become a great principle!)

 

New code on labour contracts

On October 1, 1986 a new code on labour contracts came into operation. As per this code, the officials of the enterprises have the right to remove workers if there is a need for economic and technical rationalization. This code marked a significant departure from the previous policy, which had guaranteed lifetime job security for workers. (They justify their actions in terms of 'rationalization'. Yes, this is their 'rationality'!)

 

Price 'reforms'

On March 25, 1987 Premier Zhao in parliament: Reform the country's pricing system! ('Price reforms' imply that all capitalist commodity owners can fix the prices of their commodities as per their estimate. The motive behind the price reform is this: collectives did not have the power to fix prices at their will during Cultural Revolution. The state used to interfere in the price-related decisions. The present reforms are meant to eliminate the role of the State in fixing the prices!)

Zhao talked about the price reforms further: Reform in the price system is an essential step in the construction of "the perfect socialist market system" and the development of a full "socialist commodity economy". (Add the word 'socialist' before the word 'market'! Add 'full' before 'socialist'! Full socialist market! Price reform is meant for such a market in which capitalists can fix prices according to their wishes!)

On October 25, 1987 Zhao's speech at the party is 13th Congress: Markets which are related to capital, commodities and labour are "not unique to capitalism" and "socialism can and should utilize them for its own benefit". We want "socialist planned commodity economy" which inherently integrates planning with the market: This is not tantamount to a return to capitalism, since the continued predominance of public ownership would ensure that the country's socialist essence is preserved.

On March 25, 1988, talking to 7th National People's Congress (Parliament) claimed that the country's economy was excellent. However, he admitted that inflation had been an outstanding problem. Rising prices had "affected the improvement of the people's livelihood".

 

In defence of stock market

By 1989, the leaders of CCP described Chinese economy as the elementary stage of socialism in order to defend the stock markets, business in bonds and sale of lands to private individuals. As if all these practices are inevitable since it is an elementary stage in socialism. They said that this stage continues for 50 years and all these practices would continue. (Later, there won't be any need for 'socialist guise'! It means that they would remove it!)

They also said: This market system and stock exchanges come under commerce and they are neither socialism nor socialism. Any society can use these systems. (If these systems can be followed in any kind of society, why did they say that the stage in which these systems are followed is the 'elementary stage' and they are inevitable in this stage? They said so because there is no one to question them. They did not find it necessary to talk little cautiously while taking such gibes.)

China's second stock exchange officially opened in the Shenzhen Special Economic Zone on July 3, 1991 following the opening of the Shanghai exchange in December 1990.

On August 9-11, about 1,000,000 people arrived in Shenzhen from all over China to purchase application forms to buy shares. Applicants queued for two days for a total of 5,000,000 application forms. Only one in 10 applicants would be eligible to buy up to 1,000 shares in 14 companies. People in the queues protested that forms were sold at 8 times the original price and accused officials of reserving share applications for family and friends. Protestors attacked police, one vehicle set on fire. Raised the slogan: 'Down with corruption!' Police used electric batons, sticks and tear gas to disperse the protestors. One killed, 200 hospitalized and 20 arrested. Chinese media ignored the incident describing it as "slight disruption of sales".

 

Call for 'socialist market economy'

The CC of CCP met on Novermber-14, 1993 and released a document on the establishment of socialist market economy. This document called for better conditions for the development of a market economy. (Which means, they want to develop better conditions based on 'competition' and not on 'socialist planning'!)

 

Inflation and public order

Speaking at the second session of the eight NPC, Premier Li Peng expressed his concern over 'public order' problems due to wide gap between urban-rural living conditions, inflation and corruption. (This is tantamount to admitting the disastrous consequences of capitalist economic maladies.)

 

Rise in cost of living

According to figures issued in mid-June (1994), the overall cost of living in the country's 35 major cities had risen by 23% in the preceding 12 months. More particularly, there was a sharp increase in the cost of many staple foodstuffs.

At the National Conference on Price Monitoring held in the same month, the State officials warned shopkeepers and factory managers against unauthorized price rise. (It was the State, which talked about 'price reform'! That is freedom to fix prices according to market! The same State is warning against price rise! The first act is true while the second one is false. This is a drama to deceive people!)

 

Deliberate destruction of state owned enterprises

According to the official conception, reform of State Owned Enterprises (SOEs) takes place through a variety of means: reorganization, merger, leasing, contract operation, joint stock partnership or sell-off. All these reforms are obviously intended to destroy SOEs deliberately and convert them into Privately Owned Enterprises (POEs).

The State official who explained the nature of reforms also uttered some more great words. According to him, laying off of workers is an inevitable part of the reform process but this would be "good for economic development and the long term interests of the Working Class". (Removal of workers is good for workers, says he! This is true in a sense! If workers, due to removal, are subjected to more sufferings, and revolt against officials and drag them from their seats of power, it will do god to workers, isn't it? This official has a very good foresight!)

 

Privatization of land

All land in China, by June 2002, is nominally owned by the State but land use rights can be purchased by private individuals or organizations for up to 70 years for the construction of residential property and up to 50 years for industrial and 40 years for commercial use. At the end of the contract, one can enter into new contracts. One need not give up the land or enterprises. If they don't need them they can transfer (sell) them to others.

Beijing, according to a detailed report in the Far Eastern Economic Review, is mandating public auctions for the transfer of most types of commercial land. It is introducing other reforms that should make it easier for outsiders to get into real estate in China. As the correspondent of the magazine rightly observed, the reform came at a time when large western institutional investors and developers from USA and Netherlands are making first investments or expanding their China portfolio.

(The Chinese revisionists are describing all this as Socialism. They argue like this, 'These properties will be in the possession of private individuals temporarily for about 50 or 70 years only. But the State possesses the actual rights; that is people possess them. Hence this is Socialism'. But, if a contract is extended for 70 more years after the initial period of 70 years, that property will continue to be in the hands of the private person. Or, if it is transferred to others it would be in somebody else's hands. By means of this, the State would only get some 'tax'. Workers must always be under the private masters. Yet, they say that all the means of production belong to people.)

Growing unemployment and plight of the workers

According to Labour Ministry statistics published in Xinhua on August 16, 1993, the number of unemployed would reach 5,000,000. (We need not believe these figures to be true. The number of unemployed must have been many times more than what they say!) The cause attributed to this is cuts in the work place of SOEs. (But these cuts would be far greater in privately owned enterprises,)

On January 7, 1994, the government announced a minimum wage scale in urban areas to be implemented in July 1994. The provincial and municipal authorities should guarantee each worker at least a half of the average wage in a given region. ('Minimum wage' means ¾ according to the government ¾ half of the 'average' wage! And the government is asking the employers to pay at lest the minimum! This means, the employers were not paying even the minimum!)

On July 5, 1994, the eighth session of eighth standing committee of NPC announced some legislative measures for the welfare of the workers. It is said that it took 15 years and some 30 drafts to complete that legislation. Finally, at last, they have now agreed! The relevant laws would come into force on January 1, 1995.

Do you know what these laws are? Minimum wages to workers. Prohibition of child  labour. Eight hour working day. Maternity leave for women workers. Improvement of workplace safety measures. This is what they discovered after discussing it for 15 years! This is like, to use a Telugu saying, digging at the hill and catching a rat! Making legislation now means that relevant laws are either non-existence or non-operational. Even now, we should not hope that these law would be implemented. Those who sit in the legislature have to play some tricks and hence they play tricks like "workers' welfare".

 

Workers' struggles 

Workers do not exhibit resistance proportionate to their suffering. It is because they do not know whom, how and why they have to resist. The Communist Party has to educate them. If this does not happen, struggles of workers won't be strong. In such a situation, they try to adjust with the problems, however varied their problems are. Yet we can find some struggles in that ignorance as well.

In June, 1997, many workers held demonstrations at their workplaces in Sichuan province. According to the Far Eastern Economic Review, some 600 workers who had turned to driving pedicabs after being made redundant from SOEs protested outside government offices, demanding work.

Some 300 workers had staged protest demonstrations in Zigong of Sichuan province in support of their demand for the payment of wage arrears. Police had broken the protests. (We have to assume again and again that police are present wherever there is a protest demonstration.)

In September 1997, President Jiang Jemin, gave a call to accelerate economic reforms in SOEs. The result was millions of workers lost their jobs.

On October 13, People's Daily reported that 50,000 people in Chengdu, the capital of Sichuan province had lost their jobs in SOEs during the first half of the year.

The Independent of December 5, reported that hundreds of workers in the city of Zigong in Sichuan had recently organised a strike at the No.2 Radio Factory in order to protest about unpaid salaries. They were joined by fellow workers upset about several other state factories being declared bankrupt.

On December 8, in Hufei, the Capital of Anhui province, about 400 workers staged a protest outside the provincial government offices to complain about losing their jobs.  

Further protests during December were held at many places. On December 26, the State media reported that President Jiang Jemin had ordered police to step up efforts to safeguard social stability in the face of increasing labour unrest. (The president of a 'socialist' country is ordering the police to suppress the workers' protests!)

In 1999, in a speech to mark the 78th anniversary of the founding of CCP, President Jiang Jemin ruled out "full blown privatization". (As it was the foundation day of the party one should speak like that, shouldn't he?) He said that some officials had misinterpreted efforts at reform as a call for total privatization of State firms and he condemned those individuals who had sold off State assets to enrich themselves. At the end, he preached sermons to the Party members thus: Retain Marxist outlook! Don't lose faith in the "final victory" of Communism over Capitalism!.

On March 7, 2000, Minister of Labour and Social security informed that as many as 5 million state workers were expected to lose their jobs in 2000. This would add to the 6.5 million people already jobless and bring to a total of 11.5 million workers laid off from State enterprises.

During May 15-17, about 3000 workers surrounded their factory and government offices in Liaoyang and demanded the payment of wages and pension arrears. They dispersed after receiving guarantees from the officials.

The International Herald Tribune of July 19, reported news of agitation of various sections of people. For example, villagers in the drought stricken Shandung province had killed one police officer during riots which began over access to drinking water.

About 1000 workers surrounded a factory in Chengdu following rumors that the plant would be closed down. Police reportedly beat teachers from Jilin province when about 10,000 of them held a demonstration over potential job cuts.

On June 4, 2001, an official report of CCP publicly admitted that its rule could be undermined by social discontent over the implementation of the country's free market reforms. The report also admitted with unusual frankness that protests by up to 10,000 people had become increasingly common, especially in rural areas. The party report predicted that "massive grievances are likely to increase" during coming months.

The Far Eastern Economic Review of November 7, 2002 gave a detailed report on the conditions of unemployment and poverty in China. In Shenyang 70% of the workers were jobless.   

Steel workers, miners and oil men who received benefits like housing, health and education for 50 years are now deprived of all those benefits.

Hu Ming, a 63 year old worker who was laid off after working 40 years in a factory at Tiexi, said to the reporter of the magazine: "The cadres are eating and drinking in hotels and making stupid talk". Another worker commented: "This is not a socialist country any more¾the gap between rich and poor is very wide".

In Shenyang, once model workers now stand on roadsides seeking work with signs around their necks saying, "I am a carpenter!" "I am a plumber"! "I am an electrician!" The magazine carried the photographs of such workers in its issue of November 7, 2002.

The reporter observed that workers with grievances ¾ late wages, pension payments or redundancy  ¾ are no longer just getting mad but they are organizing. For the workers in the first half of 2002 launched a series of apparently coordinated strikes and demonstrations in several old industrial centers ranging from Northeast to the southeast. But the protests petered out because the party officials told the local government authorities to settle them quietly before they could mar the 16th Congress to be held in November.

Another significant news was that rather than being organised by a few intellectuals or political activists, the protests were about bread-and-butter issues and had large-scale support.

According to the Hongkong based China Labour Bulletin, the mass workers' protests, which took place, were all economically driven and work-place based.

In 2002, the life of workers in China is one of low wages, few benefits and short term contracts and a far cry "from the cradle to grave" security promised to earlier generation of factory workers. In this context, just before the party congress, a worker said to the reporter of the Far Eastern Economic Review: "It doesn't matter whether Jiang steps down or goes up. It's useless."

(Fights among bourgeois leaders do not interest workers, do they? This worker indeed is right in his thinking.)

 

Politics of single party dictatorship

In this section, we can see how changes in economy influence politics. First let us see the attitude of Chinese Revisionists toward Marxism and what they are saying to people about it.