[ Followups | Post Followup | Comparative Economic Systems Discussion | Help ]

Re: Are Communist Parties Anti-communist?

Posted by Katherine Clouse on December 7, 1998 at 00:35:32:

In Reply to: Are Communist Parties Anti-communist? posted by Satya Gabriel on October 5, 1998 at 08:02:03:

When we examine the histories of communist parties that have
actually come to power we do not see much attempt to actually
transfer control over the enterprise surpluses to the workers who
produce that surplus (or, alternatively, perform the surplus
labor). If communist parties do not foster communism, then why are
they called communist parties?

In twentieth-century China, as in many contemporary
nation-states, the foundation of a ruling political idealogy is
flexible. This is both practical and necessary to the survival of an
authority in a country in which the population exceeds one billlion
As we see in Mao's interpretation of communism, the ability to
transform and develop under the auspices of a "permanent revolution"
is the mean by which to reach a true communist or egalitarian
system of government and economy. In addition, Mao abandoned the
Stalinist version of communism primarily because of it's
inflexibility and rigidity. Mao did not respect the violent and
oppressive measures used by Stalin to enforce communism throughout
Russia. This inherant flexiblity can be seen in future Communist
public policies in China, especially in current policies that
would seem paradoxical to a contemporary understanding of Communism.
The Communist party of China is not anti-communist, on the contrary
they claim to be on the road to communism, via socialism. An
interpretive measure to be sure, but a smart one. The liberal and
conservative factions of the Communist party in China have
fashioned an economy that continues to amaze economists, foreign
investors and politicians alike. Amidst the Asian economic crisis,
this so called "anti-communism" (which I contend is really only an
interpretation of China's version of communism) of the Chinese
Communist party has prevented a domestic banking crisis, national
decrease in individual income, rioting at worst, and has even
surprised the world by maintaing their share of 10% of the world

Fluidity exists in all manners of political idealogy and Communism
is no exception. Can we honestly define Communism with any more
assurance than we can define American democracy? Not a single
political arena is free of dissention or discord. The truth is,
communism in China is an interpretation based on history and
experience. As such, the Chinese economy is a reflection of the
Communist party's flexible terms for what constitutes a Communist
economy, which may very well incorporate capitalist economics.
Therefore, can we condemn China for diverging from a generic term
of "communism" that is, of course, defined in so many different
ways, we can hardly begin to singularly identify a Chinese
communist political idealogy at all?


Post a Followup




Optional Link URL:
Title of Link:
Optional Image URL: