china Communism Huáng Píng

How the Communist Party of China Renews and Improves Itself

An in-depth analysis of the Communist Party of China by Chinese researcher Huang Ping.

Editor’s Note: This article was distributed by a Chinese government accepted source, but we believe it is worthy of a wider audience because it provides documentation of important ongoing dialogue within top circles in China unavailable elsewhere.

By Huáng Píng | 经济导刊(Economic Herald)

We are about to celebrate the 101st anniversary of the founding of the Communist Party of China. Looking back on more than 100 years of history and summarizing real-life experiences is especially relevant today when global capitalist countries are generally facing deep-rooted problems. Researcher Huang Ping of the Institute of European Studies of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences previously gave an in-depth analysis of the relevant theoretical issues in a media interview.

How is the CCP different from Western political parties?

Q: China operates a socialist system with Chinese characteristics under the leadership of the Communist Party of China, which is very different from Western political parties that are mainly election-oriented. And this used to be difficult for many people overseas to understand and even create negative perceptions. How is the CCP different from Western political parties?

Huang Ping: After 100 years, the Chinese Communist Party is already an old party. But compared with some older parties in the West, the CCP is still a young party, and it is currently the largest party in the world, and the largest ruling party.

In the modern history of China, countless aspirants have tried many paths to save the country, whether it be scientific salvation, educational salvation, industrial salvation, or the Hundred Days Reform and the Xinhai Revolution, but all have failed to succeed.

After the October Revolution in the Soviet Union, Marxism and socialism were introduced to China, and a group of intellectuals and patriotic young people who were at the forefront of the New Culture Movement and the May Fourth Movement founded the Chinese Communist Party with the support of the Soviet Union and the Communist International. It can be said that the CCP was a party born out of the crisis of internal and external troubles and even the crisis of national extinction in modern China.

It was influenced by the Communist International and the Soviet Union in its early days, but it has since continued to adapt to Chinese reality, overcome dogmatism and fundamentalism, and embarked on the path of seeking truth from facts, as well as becoming more and more closely connected with Chinese history, culture and civilization. Such a Marxist-Chinese party is completely different from a party in the narrow sense of the Western sense.

Political parties in the West represent more the interests of a particular group or class and have special demands, mainly in response to the political needs of their institutional environment. The CCP was founded in response to the unprecedented changes in Chinese society in the millennium, from saving the country to saving the people, from rousing the workers and peasants to opposing imperialism and feudalism. From the founding of the CPC in 1921 to the founding of New China in 1949, it has endured 28 years of hard trials and warfare, made tremendous sacrifices, and formed a highly organized team with rich experience in struggle.

After 1949, many CCP members became managers and builders of the new society. After decades of experience, their ability to organize, manage and serve was unimaginable to many in the West.

The CPC is not a narrow association, a party group or a party faction, and it does not represent the narrow interests of only a certain group of people. In his July 1 speech, President Xi pointed out clearly that “the CPC always represents the fundamental interests of the broadest number of people, shares the people’s solidarity and lives and dies with them, and has no special interests of its own, and never represents the interests of any interest group, any powerful group, or any privileged class. ” Therefore, the CPC is broadly representative and represents the fundamental interests of the people and the long-term interests of the nation.

Stills from “The Age of Awakening”

Some people say that the CCP is a party that pursues the public will, as the French thinker Rousseau said, rather than a party that represents the “will of the many” in the West. In fact, the CCP is more holistic, holistic and long-term than Rousseau’s pursuit of public will. In this sense, the CCP has actually inherited the traditional Chinese culture’s philosophy of governance: “carrying justice on an iron shoulder” and “the world is public”.

In order to ensure the Party’s peoplehood and broad representation, the CCP has always continuously engaged in active criticism and self-criticism, which is not a Western-style power struggle, much less a personal battle, but a criticism and struggle to prevent and correct those tendencies that forget the Party’s purpose and the overall interests of the country and the nation.

The CCP is creating a new political party paradigm

Q: From this perspective, do you think it is possible for the CCP to create a new party theory?

Huang Ping: It is not possible, but is being created. 100 years ago, the CPC has already connected with the most basic “Great Way” concept in China’s governance for thousands of years, and inherited it, and in practice, the road has become more and more open. Only on the basis of an objective view of the CCP and its historical role can we understand the formation of a new political party theory.

Not only should the Party and the people recognize and acknowledge it, and tell it deeply and thoroughly, but also to gain more understanding from the outside world, which involves doing a good job of external communication and “telling the Chinese story”, so that the theoretical system and practice of the CPC can be known and understood by people outside.

Many people in the West believe that sooner or later the CCP will become the kind of party they imagine it to be. They are too ignorant about China and the CCP, behind which there is too much arrogance and ideological bias. They always think that their system is the only paradigm, and that sooner or later China will have to learn from and lean on them. As a result, they make their perceptions more and more closed, not seeing the diversity of the world and the strengths and vitality that other systems and cultures have.

The Chinese Communist Party is the masterpiece of revolution in the modern era.

Q: Some experts believe that the Communist Party of China is the final accomplishment of successive generations of martyrs since the late Qing Dynasty to save the country, the collector of the modern Chinese revolution, and the final organized form of the victory of the Chinese revolution.

Huang Ping: This means that the Chinese Communists are the inheritance and innovation based on countless predecessors, and the CCP is the best of the benevolent people who have saved the country for more than 100 years. Of course, the CCP is also in the process of inheriting and promoting the tradition of governance, constantly summarizing and improving its ability and level of governance. Therefore, the CCP is also the collector of the revolution since modern times, and the inheritor and promoter of China’s excellent culture and tradition.

Lenin argued that the spontaneous movement of workers alone cannot produce Marxism, but only trade unionism or trade unionism. Even in Western Europe or Russia, the workers’ movement needed to be driven and promoted by the advanced elements.

The revolution in China since modern times has been to solve the land issue first and foremost, and the main force of the democratic revolution was also the peasants. But the revolution it led was not simply a repetition of the peasant uprisings of the past, but had to be initiated, inspired and led by the vanguard. This process requires the advanced elements to go deep into practice and into the grassroots, to learn from the workers and peasants, and to obtain sustenance and inspiration from the workers and peasants. Mao Zedong said that intellectuals will accomplish nothing if they do not combine with workers and peasants.

How can the Chinese Communist Party avoid “the gentleman’s zeitgeist is decimated in five generations”

Q: Standing in the perspective of history since the Opium War, the changes that the CCP has brought to China have indeed been very successful, and China has never been closer to its goal of becoming rich and powerful than it is today. But there is still a question: How long will the CCP’s advancement last? The Communists of the generation at the beginning of the CCP were mostly revolutionaries with extraordinary ambitions and sentiments who had endured various tests. But as the ancients said, a gentleman’s zeitgeist is decimated in five generations. For the CCP, how can the new generation keep itself advanced after the older generation has gradually left?

Huang Ping: After nearly 30 years of struggle and the victory of the democratic revolution, from the establishment of people’s power to the inheritance and innovation in political construction, including the establishment of the core position of the Party leadership, the people’s congress system, the multi-party consultation and cooperation system, the regional autonomy of ethnic groups, as well as the grassroots elections since the reform and opening up, the implementation of “one country, two systems” in Hong Kong and Macao ” and so on, as well as various aspects of social construction, such as national infrastructure construction, land reform, universal literacy and basic education, public health construction in society, and a series of innovations and pioneering since the reform and opening up, China has maintained sustained rapid economic development, achieved the largest scale of poverty eradication and the most profound social changes (urban and rural, industrial and rural, intergenerational, and many other aspects ). These are undeniable historical facts. These achievements would not have been conceivable without the advanced Party and its pivotal role.

Speaking of advancement, I recall the song of the Anti-Japanese Military University, “On the banks of the Yellow River, a group of outstanding sons and daughters of the Chinese nation are gathered. The responsibility of human liberation and national salvation rests on us”. At that time, Yan’an was a place where many young people from all over the world were gathered and went to the front line of the war to fight against Japan and save the country and to realize their lofty ideals.

Going back even further, Mao Zedong wrote as a student: “The world is our world! The nation, our nation! The society, our society! If we don’t say it, who will say it? If we don’t do it, who will?” The young Zhou Enlai also wrote, “After ten years of facing the wall and trying to break through it, it is difficult to reward the heroes for their efforts. At that time, the revolutionaries of that generation had the ideal of saving the country and the people, and later, after decades of great waves, they sacrificed countless martyrs, but finally managed to develop and grow in the struggle until they established New China and led the construction and reform of New China.

Throughout its history, the CPC has developed mature theories after long and difficult exploration and various twists and turns, the most important kernel of which is seeking truth from facts, the mass line and independence. During the revolutionary war years, the Party also developed the three major styles of “linking theory with practice, close contact with the masses, and criticism and self-criticism”. In my opinion, adhering to these three kernels and promoting these three styles provides the foundation for maintaining the theoretical and practical aspects of advancement.

During the war years, the Communist Party of China (CPC) also had “three major treasures”: armed struggle, the united front and party building. The united front is still an important way to reach out to and unite all sectors. Party building includes political, organizational, disciplinary and style building, as well as ideological and theoretical building, which we have always insisted on. All these are for the purification and optimization of Party members and cadres, and are important safeguards for maintaining the Party’s advanced character.

On May 12, 2021, the Propaganda Department of the CPC Central Committee held a meeting with Chinese and foreign journalists in Beijing, inviting representatives of young party members to meet and exchange views with Chinese and foreign journalists on the topic of “Youth’s role in the new era”. [ Xinhua News Agency]

The question of how the CCP can maintain its advanced nature is a very important and realistic one, and it is also a key proposition to be truly responsible for the nation and the country. The reason we repeatedly emphasize “not forgetting the original intention and remembering the mission” today is that the number of Party members alone is not enough to prove the legitimacy of the CPC today and its advancement in the future.

Before the Party Central Committee entered Beijing in 1949, Mao Zedong admonished the Party: “To seize national victory is only the first step in the Long March of Ten Thousand Miles …… and the journey beyond is longer, the work greater and more arduous”; “Be sure to make Comrades must continue to maintain a modest, cautious, not arrogant, not impatient style, must make sure that comrades continue to maintain the style of hard work.”

After the founding of the country, the CPC has always attached great importance to this issue. Especially since the reform and opening up of the economy, Chen Yun said at that time, “the Party style of the ruling party is a matter of life and death for the Party”, “the Party style issue must be tightly engaged and forever engaged”, “without a good Without good party spirit, reform will not work”.

After the CCP entered the city and became the ruling party, it no longer experienced the test of life and death, but also held the power in its hands, and people came to cater to it. Those who applied to join the Party were not exactly young people with ideals and aspirations, and some were not even excluded for fame and fortune, or even for promotion and wealth. There are also some people who once agreed with the purpose of the party, have ideals and aspirations, but a long time as an official, may be detached from the grassroots, detached from the reality, detached from the masses.

The Party and the military had a fish-and-water relationship with the people during the revolutionary period, but the situation is different when they are in power. Moreover, it is not possible to ensure legitimacy merely by speaking of revolutionary history and glorious traditions, but must keep pace with the times, constantly learn to better govern society and serve the people, constantly renew and improve itself, and constantly accept criticism and supervision from the people. Revolutionary history and glorious traditions must of course be told, thereby educating the youth and our future generations. But after all, greatness in the past is not the same as greatness today, and greatness today is not the same as greatness in the future. How can we remain advanced forever is indeed a real question.

In the 1950s, then-U.S. Secretary of State Dulles said that the capitalist world needed to have a “fundamental belief” that “if [socialist countries like the Soviet Union, Eastern Europe and China] continue to have children, and if their children have children, their descendants will be free “. He pinned his hopes on the peaceful evolution of the second and third generations of these countries.

At that time, Mao Zedong and the leaders of the Communist Party of China (CPC) were very vigilant in this regard and wanted to put their hopes of “peaceful evolution” out of business. Today, the Party Central Committee has repeatedly said “not forgetting the original intention and remembering the mission”, and has repeatedly stressed the need to continue to ensure the Party’s advancement in the process of entering the second century, which is also a sense of worry and bottom-line awareness in the new era.

What should we do? To achieve the “two imperatives”, we must also remain open and inclusive to the outside world and the future, and maintain autonomy in openness. A viable political system must be open and inclusive, not stagnant. Keep learning, keep reviewing, and keep absorbing new things, and the road will get wider and wider. This is one of the “secrets” of China’s rapid development. The CCP is always learning and summing up experiences and lessons from both positive and negative aspects, and is always ready to uphold the truth and correct mistakes. In addition to the official work report at each Party Congress, the CPC is constantly improving its work through continuous study and seminars to find gaps. This is one of the sources of the Party’s vitality. Without self-improvement and self-improvement, it will definitely be bureaucratic and rigid and lag behind the times.

As for sustainability, by combining socialism with a market economy on the one hand, and combining socialism with the excellent traditional Chinese culture on the other, China has come out with a path of socialism with Chinese characteristics, which will make its sustainability more evident on the basis of the previous 40-70-100 years. I have always believed that anything that spans a longer period of time, covers a wider space, and contains more individuals, the more universal it is and the more sustainable it is.

Marx’s critique is still valid

Q: The West, known as capitalism, is now increasingly focused on affirmative action, labor welfare, and social security. In Northern Europe, “democratic socialism” has also been promoted. In the face of such facts, do you think Marx’s views are outdated? Is the West still a capitalist country?

Huang Ping: This issue has to be seen from several levels. First, in the early 1980s, we saw the gap between the development of China and the West, which to a certain extent contributed to the reform and opening up of China. However, it is important to see that the situation in terms of economic development and welfare protection presented in Western and Northern Europe at that time was related to both the development of productive forces and scientific and technological progress, but also closely related to social movements, workers’ movements, women’s movements, student movements and anti-war movements in Europe and elsewhere, including those inspired by the socialist practices in the Soviet Union and China, which led to various social movements with left-wing tendencies in European society. forcing the original capitalist system in Europe to make changes.

At that time, the United States was also influenced by the anti-war movement triggered by the Vietnam War, and the civil rights and women’s movements of the 1960s.

Secondly, any society is in the process of continuous development. With the development of economy, science and technology, urban construction and public services have been improved, and people’s health and living standard have been improved accordingly. After World War II, the U.S. has indeed undergone great changes since Roosevelt’s New Deal, especially after the U.S. Civil Rights Movement in the 1960s. The situation of the working class in England in the 19th century as described by Marx and Engels has changed greatly, and the France at that time was different from both the France written by Hugo and Balzac and the situation when Zhou Enlai and Deng Xiaoping went to France for work and study.

It is not that the capitalists have been kind-hearted and changed their profit-seeking nature, but a historical process, from the early stage of primitive accumulation of capital, which was full of blood and fire and “blood dripping from every pore”, to the post-war stage of capitalism. After so many crises, including the Great Depression and two world wars, Western capitalism had to reflect and adjust, which led to welfarism plus Keynesianism, which partially changed the way of naked exploitation of early capitalism through policies such as secondary distribution. This did lead to a lot of changes in Western societies, especially in Northern Western Europe, even if there were later neoliberal backsliding and “going backwards”.

Third, there is also a temporal misalignment in our perception of that period of history. The social scene in Europe and the United States seen at the beginning of China’s reform and opening up was the result of post-war welfare and Keynesian policies. At that time, it was the early stage of our opening to the outside world and economic reform, and many people mistakenly thought that the status quo seen in Europe and the United States at that time was brought about by the neoliberal policies of Thatcher and Reagan, who had just come to power.

Fourth, there is a very important factor, namely, the U.S.-led round of globalization, which gradually transferred a large number of sweatshops and environmentally polluting production processes to developing countries. So at that time, we saw that many places in Europe and America were blue sky, clean air and beautiful environment, but we did not see the cruel side of the capitalist mode of production.

The production base of early Western capitalism was basically domestic, importing raw materials at low prices and exporting goods at high prices. With the globalization of capital, the United States and the West, driven by the capital nature of pursuing lower costs and higher profits, industrial capital moved a large number of factories out of the country, leaving the high profit segments such as product design, sales and financial services at home.

From a worldwide perspective, the logic of the pursuit of excessive profits by capital based on inequality has not only not changed, but has even intensified because capital knows no borders. The miserable production and living conditions of workers can be seen everywhere in many developing countries, and such a situation is fundamentally brought about by the unequal relationship between the Western and non-Western worlds.

Nowadays, some people in Western countries like to talk about human rights, care for vulnerable groups and animal protection, and use them to blame developing countries. But in many cases, their “human rights talk” is typical of “standing and talking without pain”. They do not see or understand the twists and turns, suffering and hopes of the third world, and they are not even in their field of vision, let alone reflecting on why.

Therefore, in the Western world today, the logic of capital still plays a dominant role. Moreover, after the end of the Cold War, the monopoly of developed countries’ super multinational enterprises on markets, resources and information has become even greater, and the gap between the North and the South, and the disparity between the rich and the poor in the Western world has widened.

Under such circumstances, it is increasingly difficult for the Western world to conceal its hypocrisy if it talks about freedom, democracy, human rights, etc., not to mention repeatedly using it as a diplomatic and political tool to accuse and suppress other countries and regions for no reason. This is particularly evident in the “black lives are lives” controversy in the United States in 2020 and the U.S. government’s disrespect for life in the whole process of preventing and fighting the epidemic.

Q: So what do you think of China’s socialist system?

Huang Ping: Over the past century, from the early communists such as Li Dazhao and Mao Zedong who identified and proved that only socialism could save China, to the insistence on the development path of socialism since the founding of New China, the socialist system has been closely integrated with China. Today, it would not make sense for China to speak of socialism without China, or to speak of socialism without China.

First, socialism is the ideal belief of the Communist Party of China, but also a solemn commitment to the people and the nation, it is a flag, once this flag is lost, capital hegemony, wealth disparity, pornography, gambling, corruption and even the division of the country will become justified. The scandalous acts of corrupt officials uncovered over the years are not allowed to see the light of day, nor to be on the stage, because China is a socialist country, a people’s power, the Party and the government’s most basic socialist commitment to the people’s fairness and justice, is the standard for measuring right and wrong.

Second, at the practical level, Chinese socialism is still in its primary stage, and socialism is still developing in combination with Chinese conditions and Chinese characteristics. It is still being enriched and improved, and new situations, new challenges, new risks or uncertainties are emerging, which have to be understood in depth in the deepening practice, and theories have to be developed continuously.

China’s socialism is neither a simple copy of the early theses of Marx and Engels, nor a copy of the Soviet model, nor can it be cut from the Nordic “socialism”. The practical development of China’s revolutionary construction since modern times, and the increasingly smooth path China has taken, is due to the fact that it did not engage in dogmatic essentialism, but took its own path from the practical point of view.

Third, socialism has profoundly changed China. Socialism is not only a system of ideas and an ideal belief, but also includes a basic institutional framework and a series of specific institutional designs, a series of social policies, organizational arrangements and governance models, and a practical model that has become China’s way of carrying out economic and social construction and national governance for decades – it is both a socialist and a Chinese concrete practice. Its path, system, experience, and achievements have become inseparable from the production, life, interactions, and thinking of hundreds of millions of Chinese people. It is the result of the painstaking practice and relentless pursuit of hundreds of millions of people, and it is the choice of hundreds of millions of people themselves.

Q: So you are against some of the criticisms of China, such as “bureaucratic monopoly capitalism”.

Huang Ping: The only “usefulness” of these claims is to remind us to prevent Chinese socialism from becoming deformed and degenerating, regardless of the intentions of the claimants. Objectively speaking, China is the most viable socialism in the world today, the most likely to bring human society beyond the confines of capitalism, to bring ideological inspiration and social practice. If this socialism is to continue, it must have the strong leadership of the Communist Party and the basic security of the country, otherwise socialism will be at most a talking point in the bookstore or a “public policy” that only does something in the secondary distribution. Ensuring the leadership of the Communist Party of China and the basic institutional security of the country is not intrinsically linked to the so-called “monopoly”.

Deng Xiaoping had clearly stated that China must prevent polarization

Q: In recent years, China’s top brass has begun to revisit the common prosperity that Deng Xiaoping said back then, and Zhejiang has been used as a demonstration zone for common socialist prosperity. Deng Xiaoping said, “The essence of socialism is to liberate the productive forces, develop them, eliminate exploitation, eliminate polarization, and ultimately achieve common prosperity.” He advocated that some people and some regions should get rich first, and the rich first should bring the rich later to reach common prosperity. Now that China is reintroducing common prosperity, does it mean that China will make substantial progress in promoting common prosperity in the future?

Huang Ping: Back then, when reform and opening up started, Deng Xiaoping had an important judgment on the world situation, namely, peace and development were the two major themes in the world: peace was to solve the cold war between the East and West, and development was to solve the problem of the gap between the North and the South of the world. Specifically to China at that time, Comrade Xiaoping had two famous quotes, “Development is the hard truth” and “Poverty is not socialism”.

He emphasizes this because after the first 30 years of construction, New China has, on the one hand, established the basic system of socialism and achieved great progress in social infrastructure, people’s basic health and basic education; but on the other hand, “the population is large, the foundation is thin”, the level of socio-economic development is very low, and the people’s living standard is also very low. The people’s living standard is also very low. Therefore, Comrade Xiaoping broke some misunderstandings of the time by asserting that “development is the hard truth”, and the specific policy and strategy was to let some people and some regions get rich first.

Even so, Comrade Xiaoping clearly mentioned at that time the need to prevent polarization and ultimately to achieve common prosperity. In his view, letting some people and regions get rich first was only a necessary way and process. Therefore, Comrade Xiaoping clearly said: “The purpose of socialism is to achieve common prosperity for the whole country, not polarization. If our policy leads to polarization, we have failed; if any new bourgeoisie arises, then we have really taken the evil road.”

With the rapid development and great achievements of the country brought by more than 40 years of reform and opening up, the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China (CPC) has continuously emphasized not forgetting the original intention and started to explore specifically how to steadily achieve common wealth.

Stills from “Love on the Mountain and Sea”

Q: Can we assume that if China’s focus in the first 40 years was on solving the problem of insufficient development, then the focus now should tend to solve the problem of uneven development and move towards the goal of common prosperity.

Huang Ping: Even in the past 40 years, China has never abandoned the principles of socialism. The work of preventing polarization in the pursuit of development has always been done, whether it is the large-scale poverty alleviation, the implementation of the western development, or various policies to benefit farmers and abolish agricultural taxes, as well as the establishment of a broad-coverage basic social welfare system and health care system, the implementation of nine-year compulsory education, and so on, has actually been advancing the practice of socialist values of equity and justice with Chinese characteristics.

Now that China has escaped from absolute poverty, achieved moderate prosperity and entered a new stage of socialist modernization, the emphasis is more on the path of common prosperity, and the CPC attaches more importance to Party members and cadres not forgetting their original intention and remembering their mission.

Q: Is there any hope of solving the problems of education, medical care, housing and pensions, which are commonly criticized by Chinese society?

Huang Ping: After solving the absolute poverty, then we have to solve the relative poverty and other problems. If these problems are not solved or not solved well, as the pillars of society, the youth may not have the strength. The new generation of young people are ardent patriots, all want to fight for socialist modernization and national rejuvenation. But if their practical problems are not solved, or if they are not solved in a timely and secure manner, it will not only affect their own development and progress, but also hinder the progress of our country from the first century to the second. The proper resolution of these problems is the proper way to implement the new concept of Chinese socialism in the new stage and to come out of the new pattern of development.

The world faces the contradiction between the globalization of capital and the world order dominated by nation-states

Q: Many people have observed that capital-led globalization is facing serious problems, such as polarization between rich and poor, social injustice, the North-South divide, consumerism, money supremacy, destruction of the environment, and exploitation of the fishing industry. Capitalism seems to have come to a certain point in history and needs a new path or change to find a way out. But there is a fundamental contradiction in the world today: the globalization of capital, the borderlessness of capital, and the contradiction that the world order dominated by nation-states has produced a political and economic disengagement.

Huang Ping: Globalization has a very prominent contradiction, that is, the separation of economy and politics. The economy is becoming more and more globalized, but politics is still based on the sovereign state as the basic unit. It is even more obvious in Western countries that political parties focus their debates on domestic or local issues and problems; while world and international issues are either not paid attention to or not understood. The post-war and post-cold war world order is still the same as before, but the world is in the midst of a major change that has not been seen in a century, the original international pattern has changed, international relations are being reorganized, international rules are being rewritten, and the international order is being reconstructed. The “order” imposed by the West in the interests of Western countries is becoming less and less effective. Not to mention that the “jungle rules” and “zero-sum game” of international relations formed over the centuries is not the way out for mankind.

While adhering to the path of socialism with Chinese characteristics, we have always advocated that all countries should respect each other, coexist peacefully, and achieve win-win through mutually beneficial cooperation; we advocate building a new type of international relations and moving towards a community of human destiny. But the major Western countries, led by the United States, either focus on their own interests or stick to their original “rule-based order,” which is actually an “order” based on the rules they set and in line with their interests, without any regulation for big There is no regulation of big capital and monopolistic transnational capital, nor is there any restriction on the hegemonic practices of the powerful.

Q: The inability to effectively regulate capital, the globalization of capital and the nation-state have posed a fundamental contradiction. In this situation, what do you see as the way forward?

Huang Ping: First of all, there is a need to establish a new global world political landscape, and a global world economy must be matched by world politics, not just limited to the scope of individual “countries”. The United Nations is a global organization, but it is still far from playing the role it should play. The EU is also a regional organization, and now there is also the AU, LAC, ASEAN, etc. These regional organizations have emerged because individual Western-style nation-states are no longer sufficient to meet global challenges. Strictly speaking, if economics is the foundation and politics is the centralized expression of economics, then as today’s economy (capital investment, commercial trade, etc.) increasingly takes the globe as its sphere of mobility and space of activity, then politics must also be worldwide.

As for how to carry out worldwide politics, the first thing is for the United Nations to play its rightful role, followed by regional organizations and cooperation frameworks, and then to reach a basic global consensus and cooperation, but not just a small Western circle like the G-7, let alone a return to isolationism. Isolationism cannot address global challenges, risks, crises and uncertainties.

Secondly, information technology today has linked the world into one, even spreading instantaneously and in parallel, and is no longer confined to Western countries. This is also a possible path to break the localization of politics, although information technology also brings new uncertainties. The past pattern of international relations is no longer sufficient to deal with today’s world issues and global problems, so it is necessary to start constructing new international relations and work on building a community of destiny, instead of retreating to the jungle game where the strongest is king and the winner takes all.

16 comments

  1. I woke up this morning to find that my long delayed and first Kindle version of William Robinson’s epochal “Can Global Capitalism Endure” has arrived.

    This work, built from two decades of wrestling with Capitalism and Empire in America, is now available to the type of “these ‘Times’ they are a-changing” informed readers will LOVE.

    However, even the less informed, but interested folks who just want to absorb information in humorous movie version, can watch and learn from the Adam McKay, Ron “We’re an Empire now” Suskind, and David Sirota’s version by watching “Don’t Look UP”.

    There is, IMHO, a chance now, to take constructive action against a bad ending, if we “take the path least traveled”.

    1. BTW, Xi Jinping committed three years ago at the Party Congress to a “socialist system with Chinese characteristics”, then later Xi again “upped the ante” to add the term “democracy”, as a commitment to a “socialist democratic system with Chinese characters”.

      One would have thought that with this reaching-out as a peaceful offer, that a smart and flexible American President would have “called Xi’s hand” with an offer of committing to an American ‘democratic socialist system with American characteristics”.

      But, Noooooo. —– as John Belushi, used to say on “Saturday Night Live” — this God Damned; insane, intransigent, stubborn, and arrogantly self-named “Quiet American” — Masters of the Universe EMPIRE, which rules ‘our own’ country through arrogance, deceit, power, money, and propaganda — would not even give Xi a single effin chance to dialog and consider anything but WAR and EMPIRE.

      China learned from millennia that EMPIRE is BAD — and always, like Warren Beatty said in “Bulworth” — “it must be the money — it turns everything into crap”.

      The “Quiet American” Empire is run as a:

      Disguised Global Crony Capitalist Racist Propagandist Criminal Ecocidal Child-Killing & War-Starting EMPIRE, controlled by the ‘Ruling-Elite’, UHNWI, <0.003%ers, TCCers, arrogantly self-appointed "Masters of the Universe", and "Evil (not-so) Geniuses" [Kurt Andersen] — which hides Empire behind their totally corrupted dual-party Vichy-facade of faux-democracy.

      While any smart, peaceful, and even semi-cooperative country which was formed by overcoming EMPIRE would be willing to understand that EMPIRE is BAD, and that 'democratic socialist political-economics', is GOOD.

      LOVE OVER
      POWER, MONEY,
      HATE & EMPIRE

      BTW2,

      “We’re #1”, “We’re #1”, “We’re #1” in GINI Coefficient of Wealth INEQUALITY in the world, having just surpassed Russia at the GINI Wealth of 0.879 — and while China's GINI Coefficient of Wealth Inequality is very moderate, and BELOW the MEAN of all countries at 0.70 — how's them apples?

      The GINI Coefficient of Wealth INEQUALITY scale is that 0.0 means that all people in a country share the SAME Wealth, and where a GINI Coefficient of Wealth INEQUALITY of 1.0 means that all the Wealth in a country is held, controlled, and hogged by one single super-acumulation Greedy Bastard!

  2. Sadly what could have been a vital source of information about real China turned into regurgitation of nonsensical CCP agitation pamphlets. It is Orwellian.

    In this supposedly historical /contemporary piece words like socialism or communism are devoid of their historical meaning. References to Marx and Lenin are selective, politically expedient and highly hypocritical. History of CCP is simplified, flatten into a blatant lie.

    The communist parties of Third International were splinter groups of socialist parties of Second International as socialist parties’s leadership betrayed international workers Revolution and supported nationalists during WWI.

    But I guess in the west era of intellectual curiosity and enlightenment has ended and hence reality of the past, present or even future doesn’t matter a bit as capable of critical thought people are thrown into desperate rat race to the bottom of their ignorance in search of bliss. That is real achievement of capitalism China aspires to.

    Why jailing bodies when it is enough to jail people’s minds behind invisible walls of their own ignorance as a condition of sociopolitical liberalism.

    It doesn’t matter for the westerners that CCP is not a communist party that supposed to enable socialist Revolution leading to abolition of private/corporate capital and capitalist social relations based on power and money.

    A party that was in 1921 tasked with creating conditions for new equal, equitable, egalitarian self governed society of caring and sharing eliminating alienation of labor, exploitation, greed and profit and utterly failed. As a results did not emancipated but re-enslaved Chinese people.

    No matter. The west still calls Chinese clique as communists amid rampant domestic and foreign exploitation of working class and enormous greed and matching profits of CCP leadership cronies. CCP is not building socialist classless society for a long time. Instead they built up capitalist class with cooperation with western Capital.

    In fact CCP is neither revolutionary nor communist anymore.

    It is old, calcified, bureaucratic institution preoccupied with its own institutional interests of preservation of power and social control so political and economic cliques and their minions may thrive. CCP became a tool of new Chinese empire, built first class infrastructure to defend and project it abroad.

    There is no shred of content in their contemporary party manifesto that resembles their own communist party program of 1921 a legacy they still hypocritically claim. CCP even abandoned communist rhetoric as working class was removed as leading sociopolitical force in China.

    And Chinese working class in their trade-syndicalist ways let CCP know what they think about the formerly workers party’s capitalist paradise by about 50,000 strikes and labor protests a year in last two decades.

    CCP turned conservative nation of savers into rampant consumers and parlor gamblers, protectors of neo-colonialist billionaires’ interests and petty bourgeois opportunists.

    By 2021 CPP finally evolved itself out of international communism of 1921 into bourgeois autocratic political party of a nationalist state with Chinese characteristics. Nearly identical to Taiwan Nationalists whose real agenda is unification with China under their own leadership.

    1. Kalen’s diatribe is just a re-hash of anti-China, anti-communist propaganda, working to discredit China’s socialist system. Whether or not Kalen has any basis for his claims, he seems to miss that the whole tenor of “Socialism with Chinese Characteristics” is to develop beyond the thinking of the 19th century and embrace the problems of the 21st. Marxism is not static, and socialism is neither the same as it was in 19th century or modernly, in disparate countries around the world, i.e. Cuban socialism is not the same as Chinese socialism, but they share a foundation.

      1. Your comment exemplifies post modernist attitudes of lapsed Marxists all over the world including China’s CCP.

        Marxism as ideology and social theory is dynamic but it is rigidly defined by its fundamental principles, methods and objectives. Changing them means nothing but abandoning Marxism for other sociopolitical and socioeconomic theory. That is what CCP did.

        CCP Peking duck is no longer walking communist, no longer talking communist and even no longer looking communist and hence is not communist despite all the Orwellian propaganda word play.

        Apparently you did not carefully read my comment as there was no shred of Criticism of China as a country or peoples or any ideologically anti communist attitudes in there.

        It was criticism of betrayal of Marxism and Chinese working class by CCP and Orwellian western mislabeling CCP as communist party.

        Building up impressive and in many cases desperately needed infrastructure is not equivalent to communist agenda or serving working class needs as any dictators like Mussolini (former socialist) Hitler ( member of DAP calling for nationalization) or Stalin did that not for their peoples but to secure their own power and control.

        There cannot be anything more Marxism denying as telling people what’s good without relegation ultimate decision power to them I.e. direct democracy.

        My major point was that CCP as a political party in power not longer adhere to socialist principles of supporting if not implementing social equality, equity, egalitarianism as well as strong self governance of working class.

        Instead CCP policies produced soaring inequality and rampant exploitation and alienation of Chinese labor in large part to benefit of foreign Neocolonialists and global capital while building Chinese billionaires class influencing political power and forcing CCP departure from communist socioeconomic legacy and political program .

        CCP economic policies of last four decades bankrolled US economy and military aggression enforcing US hegemony worldwide. China is now on receiving end of monster she helped to feed by breaking with Marxism.

        The phony CCP declarations of supposed concern about growing extreme inequality in China clash with actually being implemented Chinese economic, fiscal, monetary policies that are in most part supporting big Chinese capital interests on global stage serving state interests with impact on population as secondary factor.

        In realm of capitalism CCP achieved great success, produced most billionaires in the world but is utter failure in bringing socialism and social justice to the people.

      2. Simply put, your very use of “CCP” betrays your antipathy to China and its Communist Party. Linguistics betrays you.
        If you have not noticed, China has developed herself rapidly and as fairly as possible given reality. There is no doubt that China had to modify Soviet principles in order to develop, but she did not abandon Marxism. To think that Marxism is a static, unyielding set of principles such as Newton’s physics is unrealistic. For one, ‘finance capitalism’ was just showing stretch marks when Marx was writing. Lenin and Bukharin addressed finance capitalism in its nascent stages and Marxism in the Soviet times adapted. Likewise, Marxists have grown and adapted to changing conditions. I believe that only Trotskyites have a rigid understanding of Marx.
        To conclude, when Xi Jin Ping advocates “Share Prosperity”, he means it.

  3. Good glory! Our national conversation sits in the Dark Ages while China’s in touch with today’s fundamental realities. Our allowing the overweening dominance and control by corporations in every sphere of our lives fuels our darkness about everything except what to buy. Thank you very much for this enlightening Chinese view which should be in every USA newspaper if only to become aware of how the “enemy” sees the USA, themselves and the world. That said, Google the artist Wei Wei for one Chinese citizen’s view of the whole enchilada. Still, Big Thanks.

  4. Chinese culture incomprehensible to anglos—guanxi could never exist in North America

  5. Plenty of dogma and rhetoric in this unenlightening piece. One interesting tidbit, China’s goal to become “rich” and “powerful” according to the interviewee. With a population of 1.5 billion methinks “survival” or “meeting needs” considering limits to national resources would be ambitious goals. Then again, U.S. elite rhetoric is just as bad or worse and not helpful while behavior is certainly worse. I am not feeling very hopeful for sure. More facts and numbers, less rhetoric next time please.

    1. false equivalence—China has virtually eradicated all poverty—no homeless. 93% own their home…state subsidized university education—many in Russia Kazakstan UK, German universities…universal health care

  6. Can humanity live in peace, justice, and prosperity for very long? It hasn’t done very well so far. I hope that the Chinese can solve this problem. It would be the most significant advance in human history.

  7. I was interested to read, “In the 1950s, then-U.S. Secretary of State Dulles said that the capitalist world needed to have a “fundamental belief” that “if [socialist countries like the Soviet Union, Eastern Europe and China] continue to have children, and if their children have children, their descendants will be free “. He pinned his hopes on the peaceful evolution of the second and third generations of these countries.”
    Clearly, John Foster Dulles had this fundamental belief in freedom still resonates today, except that it is an Orwellian notion where ‘free’ means the freedom to exploit in a predatory manner to gain personal and familial wealth at the expense of everyone else.

    1. If ever there was a fraternal pair that should have been strangled in their cribs, those Dulles boys lead the list… Though the Bush tribe teems with multigenerational candidates.

      As America spirals down the drain, her worst villains are immortalized in the names of it’s larger airports.

  8. Always pleased to see that the Chinese government can adapt especially in the case where nets were strung outside Apple production sites so that workers jumping out of the buildings (Foxconn) wouldn’t kill themselves.

    1. Dan Newll, you do know that Foxconn is a Taiwanese company operating in Shenzhen in a “special economic zone” and has no relationship to the CPC or Chinese government? If it did, Chinese workers rights laws would apply, but it isn’t and they don’t.
      Why do you liberals choose to demonize China whenever you can? It serves no purpose and only increases negativity towards China that manufactures consent for war.

      1. Bullshit.
        Those are Chinese nationals working in those factories in China, Hundreds of thousands of them.
        So if the Chinese government sets up a special zone they can’t apply their labor laws?? That just means they reap the financial reward from the exploitation of the workers. And it isn’t just in a special zone, they have other factories in China.
        Foxconn is just a modern version of American coal companies setting up a company town and controlling and owning every financial aspect of peoples lives. In fact it dates back to 1895 when the song Company Store was written. You ought to listen to it.
        Same jive, different century.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: