Editor’s note: “The Campaign to Condemn ‘Features’” is a document compiled by the Marxist-Leninist organization directly led by the predecessor of the association and established by members in a certain middle school. This book, through detailed historical materials and rigorous logic, thoroughly exposes the reactionary essence of revisionist China. Because it was compiled relatively early and at that time the ideological struggle and theoretical study of the study group were not yet deeply developed, there are inevitably some shortcomings. However, these flaws are ultimately minor. As a spear, “The Campaign to Condemn ‘Features’” powerfully pierces through the shameless lies fabricated by the Chinese revisionists such as “The First Rich Leads the Second Rich” and “Our country is in the primary stage of socialism,” and firmly defends the dead workers, peasants, and students of the “64 Incident,” exposing the true nature of movements like “Criticize and Investigate,” “Clean Up the Three Types of People,” and “Severe Crackdown.” It also powerfully exposes the essence of Deng Xiaoping’s so-called “Reform and Opening Up” by the bandit gang. With the approval of the association, the full text is reprinted here for comrades’ reference and study.
The Dictatorship of the Bourgeoisie and the People’s Resistance
(1) Socialist China with “Features” is a Capitalist Country
- Composition of the National Party Congress and the National People’s Congress Deputies
- Composition of Model Workers
- Amendments to the Constitution
- Conclusion
(2) The Working Class’s Struggle and the Suppression of “Features” - Political Movements
- “Criticize and Investigate” Movement
- June Fourth Incident
(1) Beginning — Death of Hu Yaobang
(2) Xinhua Gate Incident
(3) April 26 Editorial
(4) Student Hunger Strike
(5) Martial Law Order
(6) Clearing the Square Order
(7) Muxidi Conflict
(8) The Massacre Begins
(9) Aftermath
(10) Evaluation - Strikes and Defense of Rights
- Conclusion
- Distortion of Marx, Lenin, and Mao by “Features”
Philosophy
Dialectical Materialism and Idealism
Materialist Dialectics
Contradictions
Historical Materialism
Base and Superstructure
Class Struggle
Capitalism and Socialism
Theory of Productive Forces
Revisionism and Social Imperialism
Privatization of Means of Production and Relative Poverty of the Proletariat - Debunking Superstitions — Without a Market Economy, China Cannot Prosper
- Energy Consumption and Power Generation
- Agriculture
- Industrial Output
- Transportation Issues
- Conclusion
- Household Contract Responsibility System — Fake Cooperation, True Individualization
- Regress to the Disastrous Consequences of Small-Scale Farming
(1) Lag or Reversal of Agricultural Mechanization
(2) Abandonment of Water Conservancy Facilities
(3) Lack of Technical Guidance for Farmers
(4) Falling Grain Prices Harm Farmers
(5) “Landlords” Return
(6) Many Farmers Become Exploited Proletarians - Brief Discussion on Capital Going to the Countryside
- Conclusion
- Regress to the Disastrous Consequences of Small-Scale Farming
- State-Owned Enterprise Reform — Loss of Leadership of the Working Class
- From Decentralization and Profit-Sharing to Economic Responsibility System
- Tax Reform and Budget Adjustment to Loans
- The “One-Long” System and Decreased Worker Enthusiasm
- Large-Scale Layoffs
- Contemporary State-Owned Enterprises — Tools of Bureaucratic Monopolist Capitalist Oligarchy
- Conclusion
- Blood and Tears — Exploitation and Poverty of the Working Class
- Can Labor Laws Truly Protect Workers’ Interests?
- Various Forms of Exploitation
(1) Sweatshop Workers
(2) Child Labor
(3) Excessively Long Working Hours
(4) “Life-and-Death Contracts” - Relative Poverty of the Proletariat
(1) Gini Coefficient
(2) National Income and Actual National Income - Conclusion
Reflecting on history to understand the roots of the reactionary essence today
- The Substance of Bourgeois Legal Rights
- The Necessity of Bourgeois Legal Rights in Socialist Society
- Restricting or Expanding Bourgeois Legal Rights
- Bourgeois Legal Rights in China’s Reversal to Capitalism
Campaign to Condemn “Features”
Foreign Forces
February 2021
Proletarians of the World, Unite!
The Dictatorship of the Bourgeoisie and the People’s Resistance
(1) Socialist China with "Features"China is a capitalist country
Tip: The following quotes are mostly from the vanguard newspaper “Vanguard Newspaper”
Political parties are political organizations established based on class interests, and the state is a violent machine for the ruling class to implement dictatorship.
1. Composition of the National Party Congress and National People’s Congress Deputies
The highest leading organ of the party is the National Congress of the Party and the Central Committee elected by it. The National People’s Congress is the highest organ of state power.
In simple terms, the party is composed of the most combative members of the class it represents. A political party must represent the interests of its class. So it is easy to understand that the leaders elected by party members are responsible for the interests of the entire class.
The party’s congress is precisely to hear the demands of the class it represents and to unify them into a joint force to achieve these demands.
So, the composition of the highest organ of a country and a party—doesn’t it clearly indicate whose interests this country and party represent?
The workers and peasants representatives at the 19th National Congress of the CPC total 284 people, accounting for 12.5%
The workers and peasants representatives at the 13th National People’s Congress of China are 468 people, accounting for 15.7%
The remaining delegate quotas are basically divided among representatives of the party, government, military, and enterprise leaders (that is, capitalists).
Moreover, the numbers of these so-called worker-peasant representatives are inflated:
“Meanwhile, among the 19th Congress representatives, there are also some union cadres distributed across various delegations… Among the 19th Congress representatives, many frontline workers are union part-time vice chairpersons. Including Qu Mingyi, Guo Mingyi, and Ju Xiaolin, who are part-time vice chairpersons of the All-China Federation of Trade Unions, Chinese Education, Culture, and Health Union, Hui ethnic teacher He Guiqin, China National Defense Post and Telecommunications Union part-time vice chairperson, fitter Xue Ying, China Finance, Trade, Light Industry, and Tobacco Union part-time vice chairperson, electrical technician Deng Jianjun…”
Most comrades probably understand a truth—what is the so-called legal union? Who is the person recognized by the state as the chairman of the enterprise union?
Can these people be called the proletariat?! They are just bourgeois lapdogs with the so-called worker representative title!
And what about the remaining worker representatives? Let’s take a closer look at their quality:
Mr. Huang Guisong, currently a process engineer in the display division of Guangdong Shantou Ultrasonic Electronics Co., Ltd., is a delegate to the 13th National People’s Congress. When dividing the composition of delegates, he was “honorably” classified as a worker representative.
Yes, an engineer responsible for leading a team, an engineer managing many workers, is considered a “worker” representative.
Similar examples are not rare; it can be imagined how many of these micro-minuscule worker representatives are actually engineering managers like Mr. Huang Guisong.
Such representatives, are they not only representing the interests of the bourgeoisie?
Let’s look again at the “vanguard” members of the bourgeoisie:
Inheriting the family business, grasping the imperial court, the descendants of the capitalists do not forget their original intentions, still firmly controlling the state, using it to exploit and oppress the proletariat, greatly deepening their ancestors’ persecution of the laboring masses. Not “rooted and red.”
2. Composition of Model Workers
The bourgeois vanguard continues to maintain its rule by pretending to uphold the socialist system’s model worker selection activities, hoping to defend its reputation. But frankly, they forcibly impose the glorious activities of the proletariat under socialism onto the stability maintenance activities under capitalism, using the selection of model workers as a cover for their oppression and neglect of workers’ safety. This cover has also begun to be tainted with the smell of capital, which is truly crazy.
Take the 2015 Beijing model worker selection as an example:
Bai Yongming (Manchu) Director of R&D at Beijing Peking Duck Group Co., Ltd.
Li Xueling (female) Leader of the No. 3 Female Fecal Pumping Team, Dongcheng District Environmental Sanitation Service Center 2, Beijing
Liu Jun Senior engineer at Beijing Jiyeda Electric Co., Ltd.
Liu Shichun Chairman and senior engineer at Financial Street Holdings Co., Ltd.
Chen Xuelian (female) Director of Hairdressing at Beijing Ailian New Makeup Beauty & Hairdressing Co., Ltd.
Liang Huilan (female) Housekeeper at Bali Zhuang Dongli Community, Chaoyang District, Beijing
Wang Zihua Chairman of Beijing Jingao Port Group
Jia Lei Chief architect of Baidu Online Network Technology (Beijing) Co., Ltd.
Chen Zhibin Secretary-General of Beijing Charity Volunteer Association
Yin Zhiqiang Chairman of Beijing Jinpeng Tianrun Real Estate Investment Management Co., Ltd.
Zhao Jianguo Chairman and General Manager of Jimei Holding Group Co., Ltd.
Zhu Yuhua (female) Technical Director and Assistant Engineer at Beijing Shouzi New Energy Technology Co., Ltd.
Jia Shuqing Security Team Leader at Shijingshan Branch of Beijing Security Service General Company
Liu Gang Director of Changqing Vine Entrepreneurship Research Center, Shijingshan District, Beijing
Zhao Wu Supervisor of Garbage Transportation Team, Shijingshan District, Beijing
Hu Fengcai Director of Jingxi Ancient Road Scenic Area Management Center, Beijing
You Xisen (Manchu) Engineer at Han Village River Longmen Agricultural Ecological Tourism Co., Ltd., Beijing
Zhang Suozhong (Hui) Party Secretary of Doudian Village, Doudian Town, Fangshan District, Beijing
Qiao Yong Project Manager and Engineer at Boda Jingkai Construction Co., Ltd., Beijing
Cai Xiaoming Construction Team Leader and Senior Engineer at Jianghuai Construction Labor Co., Ltd., Anhui
Chen Lanying (female) Business Team Leader at Dongsi Post Office, Beijing
Cong Huimin (female) Deputy Director of Beijing Dairy Center, Senior Veterinarian
Duan Xuefei (female) Deputy Manager of Market Department at Beijing International Hotel
Fang Qiuzhi (female) Team Leader at Beijing Capital Highway Development Group, Jingshen Expressway Branch, Beijing
Gao Yuaiai (female) Director of Ruitong Section, Beijing Municipal Road and Bridge Maintenance Group
Gao Yushu Director of Grain Storage and Transportation Department, Southwest Suburb Grain Depot, Beijing
Guo Yuquan Deputy Director of Clinker Preparation Workshop, Liulihe Cement Co., Ltd., Beijing
Han Xiao (female) Tour Guide at Summer Palace Management Office, Beijing
Huang Yongqiang Technical Director at Zhong’an Te Bao (Beijing) International Trade Co., Ltd.
Ju Xiaolin Technician at the Sixth Section, Second Contact Network Team, China Railway Electrification Bureau Group First Engineering Co., Ltd.
Lai Haijiang Deputy Director of High-Pressure Pipeline Network Division, Beijing Gas Group Co., Ltd.
Li Zheng Chief Engineer and Senior Engineer of the Second Engineering Bureau, China State Construction Engineering Corporation
This is just the tip of the iceberg. Most of these names include words like “engineer,” “senior,” “director,” “team leader,” “chairman,” etc. Do these words belong to the proletariat? No, no, no, these people are members of the bourgeoisie or petty bourgeoisie! The bourgeois vanguard honors them because they have made great contributions to the rise of capitalism, rewarding their ruthless exploitation and oppression of the proletariat, allowing the bourgeoisie to sit firmly above the laboring masses; rewarding their pretended efforts, so that the proletariat continues to frantically compete internally, taking these “model workers” as examples, exhausting their energy and lives, striving to become what capitalists favor most, ultimately becoming numb puppets!
The red list originally belonging to the proletariat has also turned into a bourgeois white list. These bloodsuckers and pests are not worthy of appearing on this list; their names should be on big-character posters, on execution lists, and on dog tags for street demonstrations!
3. Amendments to the Constitution
On September 29, 1949, at the first plenary session of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, the “Common Program of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference” explicitly stipulated in the “General Program”: “The People’s Republic of China is a new democratic state, implementing the dictatorship of the proletariat, based on the alliance of workers and peasants, uniting all democratic classes and all ethnic groups within the country, fighting against imperialism, feudalism, and bureaucratic capitalism.” This “Common Program,” which had a temporary constitutional role before the National People’s Congress convened and drafted the constitution, with its stipulation of “…the leadership of the working class, based on the alliance of workers and peasants…,” marked the beginning of a new era with epoch-making significance. From then on, the fundamental law laid an unshakable foundation for the leadership of the working class in the state system of the People’s Republic of China.
On September 20, 1954, the First Session of the First National People’s Congress of the People’s Republic of China adopted the “Constitution of the People’s Republic of China.” This was the first constitution of New China; a constitution that summarized historical experience, especially the five years since the founding of the country; a socialist-type constitution that transitioned New China toward socialism. The “Constitution” made multiple specific provisions for the proletariat:
Chapter One, General Principles, Article 1: The People’s Republic of China is a socialist state led by the working class and based on the alliance of workers and peasants.
Article 4: The People’s Republic of China relies on state organs and social forces to gradually eliminate the exploitation system through socialist industrialization and socialist transformation, establishing a socialist society.
Article 16: Labor is a glorious thing for all citizens capable of working in the People’s Republic of China. The state encourages citizens’ enthusiasm and creativity in labor.
Article 17: Citizens of the People’s Republic of China have freedom of speech, publication, assembly, association, procession, and demonstration. The state provides necessary material conveniences to ensure citizens enjoy these freedoms.
Article 91: Citizens of the People’s Republic of China have the right to work. The state plans the national economy to gradually expand employment, improve working conditions and wages, ensuring citizens enjoy this right.
Article 92: Workers and employees have the right to rest. The state stipulates working and vacation systems for workers and staff, gradually improving the material conditions for rest and recuperation, ensuring workers enjoy this right.
Article 93: When workers are old, ill, or lose their ability to work, they have the right to material assistance. The state organizes social insurance, social relief, and public health services, gradually expanding these facilities to ensure workers enjoy this right.
The above provisions of the “Constitution of the People’s Republic of China” have, compared to the old society before the founding of the People’s Republic, elevated the social status of Chinese workers and laboring people to an unprecedented level of dignity and happiness rights. For the first time, workers living on Chinese land truly felt like masters of society.
In 1966, Comrade Mao Zedong launched the “Cultural Revolution.” Since then, China experienced a special period of development. After large-scale internal party struggles and mass movements, the party held the 9th and 10th National Congresses. Based on this, the “Constitution of the People’s Republic of China” was amended at the First Session of the Fourth National People’s Congress in January 1975.
The revised preamble states:
“The socialist society is a relatively long historical stage. During this stage, class, class contradictions, and class struggle always exist; the struggle between socialism and capitalism continues; the danger of capitalist restoration exists; the threat of imperialism and social imperialism to subvert and invade China exists. These contradictions can only be resolved through the theory and practice of continuing revolution under the dictatorship of the proletariat.”
The 1975 “Constitution” changed the phrase “People’s democratic state” in Article 1 of the 1955 “Constitution” to “Proletarian dictatorship of the socialist state.”
The 1975 “Constitution” has important articles related to the proletariat, such as Article 9: “The state implements the socialist distribution principles of ‘no one who does not work shall eat’ and ‘from each according to his ability, to each according to his work’”; and Article 12: “The proletariat must exercise comprehensive dictatorship over the bourgeoisie in the superstructure, including various cultural fields…”
Article 13: “The Great Debate, the Great Publication, the Great Argument, and the Big Character Posters are new forms of socialist revolution created by the masses. The state guarantees the use of these forms to create a political situation that is both centralized and democratic, disciplined and free, unified in will and personally relaxed and lively, to consolidate the leadership of the Chinese Communist Party and the dictatorship of the proletariat.”
In Article 28, on the suggestion of Mao Zedong, the right of citizens to “strike” was added. The 1975 “Constitution” made a significant revision from the 1954 “Constitution.” It started from the theory of continuing revolution under the proletarian dictatorship, elevating the position of the proletariat and proletarian democracy, demanding that the working class shoulder greater responsibilities, granting greater powers, and playing a larger role; and designed a framework for the socialist democratic centralism of the proletariat through dialectical unity.
The “Constitution of the People’s Republic of China” was amended six times in 1978, 1982, 1988, 1993, 1999, and 2004, with varying degrees of change. Such frequent amendments to the fundamental law of the state are rare in human constitutional history and precisely reflect the dramatic changes China has undergone during this period.
In March 1978, the Fifth National People’s Congress convened and amended the “Constitution.” The 1978 amendment removed the following paragraph from the “Preamble” of the 1975 “Constitution”: “The socialist society is a relatively long historical stage… These contradictions can only be resolved through the theory and practice of continuing revolution under the dictatorship of the proletariat.” It replaced it with: “The victory of the first proletarian cultural revolution marks a new period of socialist revolution and construction in our country. According to the basic line of the Chinese Communist Party throughout the socialist historical stage, the overall task of the people in the new period is to: uphold the continuing revolution under the dictatorship of the proletariat, carry out the three great revolutionary movements of class struggle, production struggle, and scientific experimentation, and build a great socialist power of agriculture, industry, national defense, and science and technology within this century.”
The “Preamble” also states: “We must uphold the struggle of the proletariat against the bourgeoisie, the struggle between the socialist road and the capitalist road, oppose revisionism, prevent capitalist restoration, and prepare to counter the subversion and invasion by social imperialism and imperialism.” The 1978 “Constitution” increased the articles related to workers but removed the “Article 12: The proletariat must exercise comprehensive dictatorship over the bourgeoisie in the superstructure…” and simplified the “Article 13” to “The right to use mass protests, large-scale debates, and big-character posters.” Other than that, there were few changes. Some spirit of the Cultural Revolution remained.
In 1982, the “Constitution” was extensively revised. This was four years after the 11th Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party held its third plenary session in December 1982.
This revision completely removed the text about “the continuing revolution under the proletarian dictatorship…” from the “Preamble.” The statement about class issues was: “In our country, the exploiting class as a class has been eliminated, but class struggle will still exist within a certain scope for a long time. The Chinese people must fight against hostile and destructive forces and elements at home and abroad that oppose and undermine our socialist system.” The “Preamble” declared: “The fundamental task of the state from now on is to concentrate efforts on socialist modernization.”
The first article changed “…a socialist state under the dictatorship of the proletariat” to “a socialist state under the people’s democratic dictatorship.”
Regarding the ownership of means of production, the 1978 “Article 5” “The current major forms of ownership of the means of production in the People’s Republic of China are socialist public ownership and socialist collective ownership” was changed to “Article 6: The basic economic system of the People’s Republic of China is the socialist public ownership of the means of production, that is, state ownership and collective ownership by the working masses.” The phrase “state-owned economy… is the leading force” was changed to “the dominant force.”
In terms of distribution, the 1978 “Constitution” removed the socialist principles of “no one who does not work shall eat” and “from each according to his ability, to each according to his work,” replacing them with “socialist public ownership is the system that eliminates exploitation of man by man, implementing the principle of everyone doing their best and distribution according to work.” Additionally, the 1982 “Constitution” added: “Article 16: State-owned enterprises, under the premise of obeying the unified leadership of the state and fully completing the national plan, have management autonomy within the scope prescribed by law,” with an added clause: “State-owned enterprises, according to law, implement democratic management through workers’ congresses and other forms.” “Article 17: Collective economic organizations, under the guidance of the state plan and in compliance with relevant laws, are elected and dismissed by all their laborers, who decide major management issues.” These regulations about workers’ congresses and democratic management, which had already begun to be implemented after the founding of the PRC, were not explicitly stipulated in previous constitutions. This seemingly clarifies workers’ democratic management rights but also implies that enterprises should become more independent and autonomous from higher administrative management.
The 1982 “Constitution” added: “Article 18: The People’s Republic of China allows foreign enterprises and other economic organizations or individuals to invest in China according to Chinese law, and to carry out various forms of economic cooperation with Chinese enterprises or organizations…” These provisions indicate that China’s ownership of the means of production and its fundamental economic system have begun to quietly evolve.
An important aspect of the 1982 “Constitution” is the removal of the clause in the 1978 “Constitution” Article 15: “Citizens have the right to strike, and the right to use ‘mass protests, large debates, and big-character posters’.” The right to strike is recognized worldwide as a fundamental citizen’s right.
In 1988, the “Constitution” was amended twice. One change was to add in Article 11: “The state permits the existence and development of the private economy within the scope prescribed by law. The private economy is a supplement to the socialist public economy. The state protects the lawful rights and interests of the private economy, guiding, supervising, and managing it.” Another change was to Article 10, paragraph 4:
“No organization or individual shall occupy, buy, sell, rent, or transfer land illegally in other ways.”
Removing the word “rent” and adding at the end: “The use rights of land can be transferred according to law,” opening the door for land leasing and legal transfer of land use rights.
In October 1992, the Chinese Communist Party held its 14th National Congress, which decided that “the goal of our country’s economic system reform is to establish a socialist market economy.” The 8th National People’s Congress in 1993 made significant amendments to the “Constitution.” “Preface” states: “Our country is in the primary stage of socialism. … According to the theory of building socialism with Chinese characteristics, … adhere to reform and opening up, …” Article 5, change “state-owned economy” to “public economy.” Article 8, remove the original “rural people’s communes,” and include “family contract responsibility system in rural areas as the main form of production, … is the collective ownership economy of the socialist working masses.” Article 15, change “The state implements planned economy on the basis of socialist public ownership. Through the comprehensive balance of economic plans and the auxiliary role of market regulation, it ensures the coordinated development of the national economy in proportion.” “Prohibit any organization or individual from disrupting social and economic order, damaging the national economic plan.” to “The state implements a socialist market economy.” “The state strengthens economic legislation, improves macro-control.” “The state lawfully prohibits any organization or individual from disrupting social and economic order.” Article 16, change “State-owned enterprises, under the premise of serving the unified leadership of the state and fully completing the national plan, have management autonomy within the scope prescribed by law.” to “State-owned enterprises have the right to operate independently within the scope prescribed by law.” Article 17, change “Collective economic organizations, under the guidance of the national plan and in compliance with relevant laws, have autonomous rights to carry out economic activities.” to “Collective economic organizations, in compliance with relevant laws, have autonomous rights to carry out economic activities.” The 1993 revision further changed some fundamental aspects of the socialist economy.
In September 1997, the Communist Party of China held the 15th National Congress. The 15th Congress decided “to establish Deng Xiaoping Theory as the guiding ideology of the Party.” The Congress further elaborated on “the primary stage of socialism,” believing “it will take at least one hundred years. As for consolidating and developing the socialist system, that will require a much longer time, requiring the persistent efforts of several generations, more than ten generations, even dozens of generations.” The March 1999, the Second Session of the 9th National People’s Congress’ amendment to the Constitution was in accordance with the spirit of the 15th Party Congress. Among them, in the “Preamble,” after “Marxism-Leninism, Mao Zedong Thought,” add “Deng Xiaoping Theory,” becoming “… under the guidance of Deng Xiaoping Theory, upholding the people’s democratic dictatorship, …” and after “continuously improving various socialist systems,” add “developing socialist market economy, …” Article 6, after “Socialist public ownership is the system that eliminates the exploitation of man by man, implements the principle of everyone doing their best and distribution according to labor,” add “In the primary stage of socialism, the state adheres to the basic economic system of public ownership as the main body and the coexistence of various forms of ownership, and adheres to the distribution system of distribution according to labor as the main body and multiple distribution methods.” Article 8, first paragraph: “The household contract responsibility system in rural areas as the main form of production, …” change to “Rural collective organizations implement a household contracting management system based on family contracting, combined with unified management and distribution.” Article 11, paragraph two, change “Private economy is a supplement to socialist public economy” to “It is an important component of the socialist market economy.”
Entering the 21st century, Jiang Zemin proposed the “Three Represents” thought. He introduced a concept of “Constructors of socialism with Chinese characteristics” beyond “socialist workers,” and emphasized the need to deepen the understanding of Marxist theories on labor and labor value; also proclaimed: “Achieving communism is a very long historical process.” “… it is neither possible nor necessary to make specific plans and portray distant future.” In November 2002, the 16th National Congress of the Communist Party of China declared: “The important thought of the ‘Three Represents’ is the inheritance and development of Marxism-Leninism, Mao Zedong Thought, and Deng Xiaoping Theory, reflecting the changes in the world and China’s development and new requirements for the Party and the country’s work. It is a powerful theoretical weapon to strengthen and improve the Party’s construction, promote China’s socialist self-improvement and development. It is the crystallization of the collective wisdom of the entire Party and a guiding ideology that must be adhered to for a long time. Always practicing the ‘Three Represents’ is the fundamental basis of our Party’s founding, the foundation of governance, and the source of strength.”
In March 2004, the Second Session of the 10th National People’s Congress carried out amendments to the Constitution in accordance with the spirit of the 16th Party Congress. Change “In the preamble, ‘guided by Marxism-Leninism, Mao Zedong Thought, Deng Xiaoping Theory,’” to “guided by Marxism-Leninism, Mao Zedong Thought, Deng Xiaoping Theory, and the ‘Three Represents’ important thought.” After “including all socialist workers,” add “builders of the socialist cause.” Article 11, paragraph two, change “The state protects the rights and interests of individual economy, private economy, implements guidance, supervision, and management” to “The state protects the lawful rights and interests of individual economy, private economy, and other non-public ownership economy. The state encourages, supports, and guides the development of non-public ownership economy, and lawfully supervises and manages it.”
Article 13, change “The state protects citizens’ lawful income, savings, houses, and other lawful property rights” to “Citizens’ lawful private property shall not be infringed upon,” and “The state, according to regulations, shall expropriate or requisition citizens’ private property and provide compensation.”
Above, from 1978 to 2004, the six amendments to the Constitution show that China’s social evolution has been step by step based on the recognition that “our country will be in the primary stage of socialism for a long time” and that what we are building is “socialism with Chinese characteristics,” from the ownership of means of production, labor system, distribution system, and from planned economy to market economy. It is a gradual process of eliminating public ownership of means of production, developing private ownership, and turning public ownership into private ownership. It is also a process of abandoning the principle of distribution according to labor, allowing capital to suppress workers’ wages to some of the lowest levels in the world, making Chinese workers cheap labor, while expanding income distribution based on capital, causing abnormal social disparities, polarization, and widening the gap between rich and poor.
IV. Conclusion
Without a super-class state, the state power is held by whichever class is in control, which determines the nature of the state. Currently, there are very few worker and peasant representatives in the NPC; the top leaders within the Party are all children of high-ranking officials; the four freedoms (large-scale criticism, free speech, debate, and big-character posters) have been removed from the Constitution. Under these circumstances, what reason do we have to believe China is a socialist country rather than a capitalist one?
(2) Workers’ Resistance and “Characteristics” Suppression
1. Political Movements
1. “Criticism and Self-Criticism” Movement
“Criticism and Self-Criticism” was a counterattack against the Cultural Revolution, where all active participants in the Cultural Revolution faced sanctions, suppression, and treatment during the “purge.” Essentially, it was a nationwide, extensive political struggle by the revisionist faction to seize power and establish bourgeois dictatorship, targeting revolutionary cadres and masses of the proletariat. For example, in Henan Province, according to Comrade Ding’s article “The ‘Criticism and Self-Criticism’ Movement in Henan after the Cultural Revolution,” from 1977 to 1983, over 70,000 party members lost their qualifications, 1,700 were arrested and sentenced, and another 2,400 were subsequently sentenced. Many veteran cadres, including those who participated in the Red Army and early Anti-Japanese War, such as former Lankao County Party Secretary Zhang Qinli, a comrade of Jiao Yulu during his lifetime, who worked in Lankao for decades with diligence and integrity, was sentenced to 13 years for “instigating the Cultural Revolution in Lankao County” and “fabricating Jiao Yulu’s deeds.” Among provincial and municipal cadres, 33 at the deputy or ministerial level were scrutinized, criticized, or dealt with, including 4 sentenced, 3 expelled from the Party, 2 placed under Party watch, 6 dismissed, 1 severely warned, 4 retired after criticism, and 2 demoted; all 18 prefecture-level Party secretaries were criticized or disciplined, with 97 out of 118 deputy secretaries criticized, accounting for 82%. During the investigation and criticism, 7 died, 17 were sentenced, 4 expelled from the Party, 9 placed under Party watch, 18 dismissed, 4 severely warned, 28 retired after criticism, 10 demoted or reassigned; the heads of provincial departments and bureaus, except 5, were all criticized or dealt with, including removal from posts, warnings, or dismissals; most county Party leaders were scrutinized and criticized, with few remaining in their original positions without scrutiny.
In the “Criticism and Self-Criticism” movement, Zhou Shaoxian, Secretary of the County Party Committee and first commander of the Hongqi Canal project in Lin County, Henan, was removed from all positions, expelled from the Party, and died unjustly; Deputy County Head Ma Youjin was forced to attempt suicide and died unjustly; heroes such as model worker Ren Yangcheng, tunnel expert Wang Shicun, and self-sacrificing Li Geyun were subjected to struggle sessions; Guo Qiuying, leader of the Iron Girl team, and hero artilleryman Chang Genhu were criticized and dismissed; County Party Committee Standing Committee Member and Propaganda Minister Wang Shoufu was dismissed from all positions, expelled from the Party, and died unjustly.
The book “Bloodshed Report Written by History” collected by Teacher Qiu Shike reveals that from November 1976 to February 1980, in Zhejiang Province, from provincial to local units and rural production teams, all cadres and masses involved in leadership groups at all levels were scrutinized and subjected to struggle sessions, some directly executed, some tortured to death, some sentenced to death with reprieve, some sentenced to life imprisonment, and thousands of cadres and masses were severely injured or disabled during this movement. According to incomplete statistics, over four million people in the entire province were persecuted; in Taizhou alone, about 2 people were executed, 11 forced to death, 23 sentenced, 50 expelled from the Party, and over 3,200 private teachers dismissed and sent home, with other forms of persecution impossible to count.
Furthermore, the “Yunnan ‘Criticism and Self-Criticism’ and the Summary of Rights Protection for the Poor and Vulnerable Groups over Thirteen Years” reports that in Yunnan, from provincial agencies to grassroots factories and rural areas, over 1.5 million people were scrutinized and subjected to struggle sessions; over 150,000 were disciplined, expelled, or imprisoned; over 50,000 were sentenced to death or imprisonment; 2 were executed; and more than 1,000 were killed or disabled. Especially in rural areas, “Criticism and Self-Criticism” involved beatings and physical abuse, with casualties impossible to quantify.
Below are some collected documents:
Zhou Jinchang et al.: When Will the 28 Years of Injustice EndRespectful Chairman of the Military Commission Hu Jintao and Director Xiao Yang: After Chairman Mao Zedong’s death, the “Criticism and Self-Criticism” movement in Yunnan involved over 1.5 million people, with over 50,000 sentenced to reform through labor, over 150,000 disciplined or expelled from the Party. We are veterans in our sixties and seventies, some in their eighties and nineties, old Red Army and Old Eighth Route Army members. During this movement in Yunnan, we suffered greatly; overnight, we were branded counterrevolutionaries. Therefore, we hereby appeal our unjust cases. 1. The Yunnan Provincial Party Committee violated the central policies (77)4 and (82)9, and other guidelines for the “Criticism and Self-Criticism” movement, creating countless unjust, false, and wrong cases. The central policy clearly states: “The Cultural Revolution was wrong. Both factions of mass organizations were wrong.” However, in Yunnan, the “Criticism and Self-Criticism” movement branded the “Eight Factions” as gang-like organizations of the “Gang of Four,” and arrested or persecuted many. For example, in Kunming Qiao Steel Plant, three men were labeled as “Little Four” of the “Gang of Four,” and a normal female worker was falsely accused of being Jiang Qing, forming a “Four of the Four.” The Yunnan Provincial Party Committee used cadres and masses involved in the “Puppet Faction” as the leadership core and special task force for the “Criticism and Self-Criticism” movement. For example, Yang Xiujie, director of Civil Affairs in Yuxi, born in 1946, joined the PLA in 1962, joined the Party in 1965, and participated in the Lüliang, Huaihai, and crossing-the-Yangtze campaigns, earning two major merits. During the “Criticism and Self-Criticism” movement in Yunnan, he was sentenced to death for “counterrevolution” on September 19, 1978, and was executed, his body discarded in the wilderness. Another example is Luo Qingming, a PE teacher at Puer County Primary School, born in 1949, who joined the PLA and served as company commander, participated in the Tibet suppression campaign, and earned third-class merits. He was sentenced to death for “counterrevolution” during the “Criticism and Self-Criticism” movement in Yunnan, executed on September 19, 1978. Tu Xun, a national-level hero, female, was labeled as “counterrevolution” and sentenced to 10 years of forced labor during the movement. Luo Tingzu, a teacher at Puer County Primary School, born in 1978, was sentenced to 6 years for “counterrevolution” by the county party committee in 1978, and after release, lost his household registration and became stateless. Huang Junjie, a veteran of the Volunteer Army and a third-degree disabled person, was sentenced to forced labor for “beating, smashing, and swinging” during the movement. Huang Jijiang, head of the Jingbei District Propaganda Department, and Han Qingkui, a staff officer, were falsely accused and sentenced to forced labor. Thirteen persons, including revolutionaries from Dali Prefecture, such as Ji Zhenhua, Zhou Jinchang, Bu Lian, Zhao Jiaping, etc., were labeled as counterrevolutionaries and sentenced to forced labor during the movement. 2. The Yunnan Provincial Party Committee violated laws and discipline, used dictatorial tools, and prevented unjust victims from petitioning or appealing. For 28 years, we veterans, who love the Party and the socialist motherland, have fought alongside the Party since childhood. How did we become counterrevolutionaries during the “Criticism and Self-Criticism” movement in Yunnan?! We are truly innocent. Therefore, we repeatedly petitioned the relevant departments in Yunnan Province, but were met with suppression by the provincial Party Committee, which deployed police and security forces to track and prevent us from petitioning. For example, Li Shulin, a veteran who joined the PLA in 1946, was sentenced to 5 years of reform through labor for “counterrevolution” during the movement, and in October 2001, he petitioned in Beijing but was followed and monitored by police, detained at Kunming Railway Station, and interrogated at Daguanlou Police Station for 23 hours before being released.
3. The tragic plight of unjust victims
We, the old soldiers, dedicated our youth to national defense. Now in our sixties and seventies, we have no jobs, no livelihood, no money for medical treatment, some have lost their families and lives due to persecution, and are in dire circumstances. For example, Liu Shaozu of Kunming Railway Bureau, born in 1948, joined the PLA, served as platoon leader, later worked as political director at the railway hospital. During the “Criticism and Self-Criticism” movement in Yunnan, he was labeled as “counterrevolution,” sentenced to 7 years, and after release, his family was broken, and the unit did not provide a livelihood. He died of starvation at home after eight days; neighbors found his body with rat bites on the face, nose, ears, and feet. Humanity, where is your respect for human rights?!
4. The reasons why the 28-year injustice has not been resolved
1. No place to appeal, no way to complain. Over 28 years, we have repeatedly appealed to courts and procuratorates at all levels in Yunnan Province. The procuratorate said: “We don’t handle this; you should go to the courts.” When we appealed to the provincial court, they said: “You are a large group, the Party Committee has no policy, so we cannot handle it.” Thus, our unjust cases have been delayed and unresolved.
2. Disobedience of orders. Former Yunnan Party Secretary Liu Hexian said: “Those who have not reformed the Gang of Four’s faction are trying to overturn the case.” Are we members of the Gang of Four? No. We followed the central (82)9 document and legitimately appealed. Was that wrong? It was the violation of the central (82)9 document by the Yunnan Provincial Party Committee that caused our injustice.
3. Lying and deceiving. Now, Yunnan Party Secretary Bai Enpei claims: “There are no unjust, false, or wrong cases in Yunnan.” In the preface of “A Brief History of Modern Yunnan,” Bai Enpei wrote: “In the ‘Criticism and Self-Criticism’ movement in Yunnan, 7,569 people were scrutinized, only 24 sentenced, 425 disciplined by Party, and 226 disciplined by government.” This is a combination of power and falsehood, deceiving the public and covering up the truth. The fact is: during the “Criticism and Self-Criticism” movement in Yunnan, over 1.5 million people were scrutinized, more than 50,000 sentenced to reform through labor, and over 150,000 disciplined or expelled from the Party. These are undeniable facts that cannot be denied.
5. Demands:
1. Request the Central Military Commission and the Supreme Court to send joint investigation teams to Yunnan to verify whether there are any unjust, false, or wrong cases in the “Criticism and Self-Criticism” movement. Do not rely solely on reports from those in power; listen to the voices of the unjustly persecuted.
2. “If there are mistakes, they must be corrected; if there is opposition, it must be suppressed” — this has been the Party’s consistent policy. If investigations confirm that these are unjust, false, or wrong cases, the victims should be cleared, exonerated, and their livelihoods restored.
Signatures of some victims and veterans:
Zheng Jiaping, joined the Red Army in 1972, aged 91. Huang Ni Tai, joined the Red Army in 1972, aged 90.
Wang Zhongyuan, joined the Red Army in 1972, aged 89. Wang Qi, joined the Eighth Route Army in 1937, aged 83.
Li Shucheng, joined the Eighth Route Army in 1937, aged 84. Li Shulin, Yang Qian, Xu Zhixuan, Liu Rongguang, Wu Peixin, Lin Jinliang, Mei Zhengquan, Zhang Wenxue, Fang Zurong, Gui Xirun, Zhu Kunquan, Huang Junjie, Li Wenying, He Boying, Li Bingchen, Liu Qihan, Liang Jianping, Huang Jijiang, Qiao Zhengtian, Han Qingkui, Lan Yingtian, An Juxiang, Song Tianxi, Yue Yongxuan, Na Tianyou, Li Guohan, Li Yunchang, Meng Yucai, Gu Ansheng, Wang Xingwu, Mei Yongnian, Zhou Jinchang
March 18, 2005
Contact: Zhou Jinchang
Pager: 95960—200585
Address: Building 5, No. 10, Donghua Turnaround Housing, Kunming
(Source: Qi Zhi Wang)Moreover, special attention should be paid to clearing out those who performed actively during the “Cultural Revolution,” committed bad deeds, caused serious consequences, are now relatively young, hiding themselves, and pose great harm to the Party, as well as those who manipulate behind the scenes.The children of high-ranking officials who were overthrown during the Cultural Revolution were the most vigorous in smashing, looting, and rioting at the beginning of the Cultural Revolution (also known as the old Red Guards, and later the most demonized group during the Cultural Revolution), and yet none of them were held accountable after the end of the Cultural Revolution. What does this indicate? (See Aizibing’s “Mainly Two Points”)
Aizibing: Deng Xiaoping's "Strict Crackdown" was used in conjunction with the "Revelation, Criticism, and Investigation" campaign>“The Three Types of People” mainly refers to the so-called Lin Biao and the Gang of Four “extreme left” elements who opposed capitalism and Deng Xiaoping, and does not include Deng’s capitalist revisionists and their children of high-ranking officials.
Suppressing the “Three Types of People” is one of Deng’s crimes, not his achievements!
57 years ago, I don’t know how Deng, then the “Anti-Right Office Director,” “expanded the Anti-Right Campaign” and how many people he targeted, nor do I speak of Liu Deng’s work team who carried out the White Terror for over fifty days during the Cultural Revolution. I only speak of the post-reform period.
After Deng’s reform, to oppose Mao and deny socialism, to suppress and eliminate the so-called “Cultural Revolution Three Types of People” (leftist forces), not only was liberal right-wing extremism unleashed, but also collusion with liberal right-wing elements was protected and tolerated, using methods like street reports, scar literature, and other means to continuously demonize Mao’s era. They even launched the “Death Penalty for 100,000, Stability for 10 Years” campaign and the “Crackdown” movement to cooperate with nationwide efforts to arrest the “Cultural Revolution Three Types of People.”
Since these two campaigns were implemented, they have caused countless wrongful convictions. As I know (someone recently petitioned for redress), alone in Yunnan, the “Criticize and Investigate” movement involved over 1.5 million people, with over 50,000 sentenced to reform through labor, and 150,000 disciplined by the Party or government. How many people across the country were implicated is beyond our knowledge. The “Crackdown” methods were also very brutal, ostensibly to handle social crime, but behind the scenes, they also targeted the “Cultural Revolution Three Types of People,” used together with the “Criticize and Investigate” movement. Since the 1980s when the death penalty was decentralized to local intermediate courts, anyone committing crimes during the “Crackdown” period was subject to the policy of “killing one or two people in each place to curb the so-called crime wave,” even for petty theft, robbery, extortion of a few yuan, or shoplifting, they could be sentenced to death under the strict policy. Deng used such brutal “White Terror” tactics to govern the country and eliminate the so-called “Cultural Revolution Three Types of People” (leftist forces).
From the 1980s to the early 1990s, during the “White Terror,” I do not know exactly how many people were arrested, harmed, or how many wrongful convictions were made, but I know it was not fewer than during the Cultural Revolution. The Cultural Revolution was the result of conflicts among the ruling bourgeoisie, conservative monarchists, and later various rebellious factions, while Deng’s reform was a full-scale purge and persecution by the ruling bourgeoisie seeking to restore capitalism and usurp power, targeting the so-called “Cultural Revolution Three Types of People” (i.e., leftist forces).
2. June Fourth Incident
“The ‘June Fourth’ of 1989 is a watershed in modern Chinese history. Nothing better demonstrates the uniqueness of the ‘reform’ era: the People’s Liberation Army openly opened fire on unarmed civilians during the Tiananmen Square protests. It’s like a lightning bolt illuminating the night sky, revealing the reactionary nature of China’s current ruling group.” — William Han Ting: 《Great Reversal》
(1) Beginning — Death of Hu Yaobang
On April 15, 1989, Hu Yaobang, who had served as Chairman of the Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party and General Secretary of the CCP in the 1980s, died of a heart attack, sparking strong reactions and mourning among students, becoming the initial motivation for mass gatherings. On the afternoon of April 17, at 5 p.m., 500 students from China University of Political Science and Law arrived at the East Gate of the Great Hall of the People near Tiananmen Square to express condolences for Hu Yaobang. Led by some students, what was originally a simple mourning activity turned into demands for the government to control inflation, address unemployment, combat corruption, hold officials accountable, press for press freedom, democracy, and freedom of association. Because it was seen as obstructing the operation of the Great Hall of the People, police quickly intervened to disperse the demonstrators and tried to persuade students to leave Tiananmen Square. That night, over 3,000 Peking University students held a march on Tiananmen Square, soon joined by nearly a thousand students from Tsinghua University. After arriving at Tiananmen Square, the two groups of students quickly merged with the crowd already gathered there.
(2) Xinhua Gate Incident
On the morning of April 18, students continued to stay in Tiananmen Square. Some gathered around the Monument to the People’s Heroes singing patriotic songs, while others held speeches on the square. Meanwhile, thousands of students gathered at Xinhua Gate at the entrance to Zhongnanhai, the residence of Chinese Communist Party leaders, demanding dialogue between top CCP leaders and students. Police restricted students from entering Zhongnanhai, and students decided to sit-in protest to express their dissatisfaction. That evening, thousands of students from Peking University, Renmin University, Beijing Normal University, and other schools gathered at Xinhua Gate, with onlookers numbering six to seven thousand. Students repeatedly chanted “Li Peng, come out!” and tried six times to break through police lines but failed.
The Xinhua Gate incident angered many students, including those who had not previously participated actively in politics, prompting them to join the protests. During this period, the Beijing Workers’ Autonomous Federation distributed two leaflets challenging the central leadership’s rule.
(3) April 26 Editorial
On April 26, the front page of the CCP’s official newspaper, People’s Daily, published an editorial titled “Must Clearly Oppose Turmoil” (April 26 Editorial), accusing a “very few malicious people” of conspiring to overthrow the CCP and the current political system. However, this statement angered students, who believed it was the CCP’s deliberate attempt to suppress the protests.
(4) Student Hunger Strike
On the eve of Soviet General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev’s high-profile state visit to China, students began a hunger strike on May 13, reading a “Hunger Letter” drafted by Chai Ling. Student leaders believed that the welcoming ceremony for Gorbachev would be held on Tiananmen Square, and they used the hunger strike as leverage to pressure the government to meet their demands. The hunger strike also gained widespread sympathy from the public, turning the student movement into a moral act and garnering popular support. The protests in Beijing prompted other cities’ universities to organize protests and strikes, with many students traveling to Beijing to participate in demonstrations. By the afternoon of May 13, about 300,000 people had gathered in Tiananmen Square. Overall, the demonstrations remained orderly, with students from different regions in Beijing marching daily to express their demands and show solidarity, often singing “The Internationale,” a famous proletarian internationalist song. In mid-May, students launched a hunger strike, which led over 400 cities across China to hold protests and express support.
On May 18, Premier Li Peng met with student representatives at the Great Hall of the People, aiming to calm the hunger strike. During the talks, student leaders again demanded the government revoke the “April 26 Editorial” and recognized the student movement as a “patriotic act,” but Li Peng responded that the government’s main concern was the patients hospitalized due to the hunger strike. Although the discussion achieved only limited tangible results, student leaders gained the opportunity to appear on important national television programs. In the early morning of May 19, Zhao Ziyang, accompanied by Wen Jiabao, went to Tiananmen Square, but Li Peng, who was also present, left immediately upon arrival. Zhao Ziyang used a loudspeaker at 4:50 a.m. to call on students to end the hunger strike, telling them to live healthily and see China achieve the Four Modernizations.
(5) Martial Law Declaration
On May 19, members of the Standing Committee of the CCP Politburo, military leaders, and CCP elders met. Deng Xiaoping personally chaired the meeting, stating that martial law was the only option. During the meeting, Deng admitted that he had “erroneously” chosen Hu Yaobang and Zhao Ziyang as his successors and decided to exclude Zhao from the top leadership meetings of the CCP. Deng also vowed to crack down hard on Zhao’s supporters and began propaganda efforts. On May 20, the government officially announced martial law, mobilizing at least 30 divisions from five major military districts, including at least 14 divisions from the 24 Group Army of the PLA. About 250,000 soldiers were dispatched to Beijing, some via air and rail transport. The Guangzhou Civil Aviation Authority even arranged regular tickets for troop transportation. That afternoon, Yang Shangkun explicitly appointed Zhou Yibing, commander of the Beijing Military Region, to command the martial law operation. However, upon entering the city, the PLA was met with large crowds blocking their way, surrounding military vehicles and preventing their advance or retreat. Protesters also spoke to soldiers, urging them to join their cause, providing food, water, and supplies. Unable to advance into the city, the military withdrew to bases outside the city on May 24, though the government continued to mobilize troops across China for subsequent actions.
On the evening of June 2, a police jeep accidentally hit four civilians, killing three, which caused protesters to worry that the military and police might attempt to enter Tiananmen Square. Student leaders issued an urgent order to set up barricades at major intersections to prevent troop entry. On the morning of June 3, students and residents discovered undercover soldiers attempting to carry weapons into the city; students detained and returned the weapons to police. Students protested outside the Zhongnanhai gates but were driven back by tear gas. Another group of unarmed soldiers appeared at the Great Hall of the People and was quickly surrounded by protesters, resulting in injuries; both sides sat down and sang songs, and the soldiers eventually retreated into the hall. In the evening, CCTV announced that martial law troops would suppress the unrest and warned citizens not to go to Tiananmen Square.
(6) Clearing Order
At 4:30 p.m. on June 3, Li Peng, Qiao Shi, and Yao Yilin, three Politburo Standing Committee members, met with military leaders, CCP Beijing Committee Secretary Li Ximing, Beijing Mayor Chen Xitong, and State Council Secretary-General Luo Gan. They finalized the specific measures for implementing martial law. The meeting confirmed that the incident was a “counter-revolutionary riot,” and decisive measures were necessary to reverse the situation. It was decided to take action that night, with Zhou Yibing commanding the PLA and armed police to quickly enter Tiananmen Square and enforce martial law. The CCP leaders supervised the execution of this plan from the Great Hall of the People and Zhongnanhai.
(7) Muxidi Clash
On the evening of June 3, state television repeatedly warned residents of Beijing to stay indoors; however, inspired by the successful obstruction of the military two weeks earlier, many citizens took to the streets to block the troops. The PLA advanced from all directions toward Tiananmen Square, led by the 38th Group Army, 63rd Group Army, and 28th Group Army from the west; the 15th Airborne Army, 20th Group Army, 26th Group Army, and 54th Group Army from the south; the 39th Group Army and the Garrison Division from the east; and the 40th Group Army and 64th Group Army from the north. Around 10 p.m., the 38th Group Army opened fire on protesters at the Wukesong intersection about 10 km west of the square. Shocked by the live ammunition, protesters began throwing objects at the troops. That night, 32-year-old aerospace engineer Song Xiaoming became the first confirmed fatality. At 10:30 p.m., civilians pushed trolleybuses onto the street and set them on fire, forcing the troops to halt about 5 km west of Tiananmen at Muxidi, trying to clear these barricades. Residents nearby attempted to block the military convoy, but the 38th Group Army fired again, causing significant casualties. The troops eventually used armored personnel carriers to break through the trolleybuses and continued confrontations with protesters attempting to build barricades or form human chains, resulting in injuries and deaths along Chang’an Avenue, Nali Street, Fuxingmen, and Xidan. The 15th Airborne Army also used live ammunition, causing civilian casualties at Zhushikou, Tianqiao, and Qianmen.
(8) The Massacre Begins
Around 12:15 a.m., the military began firing flares for illumination. The first Type 63 armored personnel carrier appeared from the west side of Tiananmen Square and quickly moved along the road in front of the square. About five minutes later, a second armored vehicle appeared, both heading east along Chang’an Avenue. Around 12:30 a.m., two armored personnel carriers arrived at the south side of Tiananmen, and students began throwing cement blocks at the military vehicles. One of the vehicles suddenly broke down and could not move; protesters then damaged the vehicle with sticks and set it on fire with gasoline-soaked quilts. The three soldiers escaping the burning vehicle were beaten by protesters, but students formed a protective line and escorted the wounded to an emergency station at the National Museum on the east side of the square.
At about 1:30 a.m., the front lines of the 38th Group Army and the 15th Airborne Army reached the north and south sides of Tiananmen. They began sealing off the square and separating protesters and supporting residents inside. Several protesters were killed during this process. Meanwhile, the 27th Group Army and the 65th Group Army appeared from the west side of the Great Hall of the People, and the 24th Group Army began deployment on the east side at the National Museum. After being surrounded by troops, thousands of protesters and residents remaining in the square gathered around the Monument to the People’s Heroes. After 2 a.m., the troops tried to pressure protesters near the monument; students repeatedly urged the soldiers to abandon violence, saying: “We are peacefully petitioning for democracy and freedom for the motherland, for the prosperity of the Chinese nation. Please follow the will of the people and do not use force against peaceful petitioners…” Around 2:30 a.m., some workers began setting up machine guns taken from armored vehicles at the monument and vowed to avenge those killed. Under the persuasion of Hou Dejian, the workers chose to abandon their weapons, and Liu Xiaobo smashed a non-loaded rifle on the monument’s railing to reaffirm the non-violent stance.
At 4:30 a.m., Tiananmen Square was lit again with a series of red signal flares. Meanwhile, troops approached the monument from all directions and redeployed around 10 meters from the gathered protesters. Around 4:40 a.m., soldiers in camouflage rushed to the monument and destroyed students’ broadcasting facilities; other troops beat dozens of students nearby and confiscated or damaged their cameras and recording devices. Soldiers then forcibly dispersed the crowd around the monument, and some students and professors tried to persuade those still sitting at the base to leave.
At about 5:10 a.m., students began leaving the monument, and protesters linked hands to evacuate through designated channels at the southeast corner of the square. Many students in the northern part of the square left from the north side. The military demanded that students refusing to leave must join the evacuation, using gunfire to force the remaining crowd out, and deployed Type 59 tanks to block the roads leading to the square. According to students who withdrew from the north, troops set up machine guns facing the students at the north of the monument and fired. After confirming all protesters had left, the military used helicopters to transport large plastic bags and began cleaning the square. Medical personnel in Beijing reported that the army packed bodies into plastic bags and flew them away by military helicopters. By 6 a.m. on June 4, the students who had left Tiananmen Square were preparing to return to campus along the West Chang’an Street bike lane when three tanks from Tiananmen Square fired tear gas and rammed into crowds near Xidan, injuring 11 students. On the morning of June 4, thousands of protesters and the parents of those injured in the clearing operation, as well as workers enraged by the government’s actions, attempted to re-enter Tiananmen Square from East Chang’an Street. When approaching the troops, soldiers immediately opened fire as a warning. Several people were shot, and the discontented crowd temporarily retreated but then tried again to occupy the square. The crowd repeatedly attempted to enter Tiananmen Square, but the military maintained control and kept the square closed to the public for two weeks.
(9) Aftermath
After June 4, the military controlled Tiananmen Square, and Beijing gradually stabilized. However, Hong Kong and Macau soon launched large-scale demonstrations in support of Beijing protesters, with Macau having over 100,000 to 200,000 participants, accounting for half of Macau’s population. This was the largest demonstration in Macau’s history. Several countries also protested the military’s clearing of the square. News of students returning to their campuses and the military’s clearing operation spread, leading to large protests in cities like Chengdu, Xi’an, Wuhan, Nanjing, Shanghai, and Guangzhou, lasting several days. In Guangzhou, tens of thousands of students occupied major roads like Haizhu Bridge for four days, paralyzing city traffic. By the 8th, as the military was about to enter the city, crowds dispersed. According to Amnesty International, at least 300 people were killed in Chengdu on June 5, with local troops using stun grenades, batons, bayonets, and electric batons against civilians. That night, police deliberately ordered hospitals not to accept students or provide ambulances. In Xi’an, from June 5 to 6, students organized large protests and workers set up barricades.
On June 10, in Chengdu, about 500 workers from Gaoshengqiao Auto Repair Factory protested near Gaoshengqiao on the city’s First Ring Road, being blocked by police; at least five workers were injured, and three were detained. On the morning of June 28, over 1,000 workers from Chuzhou Textile Factory in Chuzhou suddenly stormed the station, blocking the railway from Chuzhou to Shanghai; three organizers were arrested that evening. In December, over 2,000 workers from Daqing Second Construction Company in Heilongjiang blocked the railway from Qiqihar to Harbin; five workers were later detained.
(10) Evaluation
In the spring and summer of 1989, workers and young students across the country took to the streets to protest, sternly demanding anti-corruption and anti-officialdom policies, igniting the first wave of resistance against the bourgeois restoration after capitalism was reintroduced in China. Therefore, the 1989 political struggle was not just a student movement; it was a nationwide patriotic movement led by students and involving all social classes and strata, opposing bureaucratic monopoly capitalism. It also proved Mao’s famous statement: “Revisionism coming to power means capitalism coming to power, and it is the worst form of capitalism — fascism.”
二、Strike and Rights Defense
On the afternoon of December 8, 1999, about 2,000 retired workers from Chongqing Special Steel Plant demonstrated in the streets because they only received 70% of their pension. During the protest, clashes with police occurred, with four workers injured and six detained.
- At the end of February 2000, during a workers’ protest at Yangjiazhangzi Molybdenum Mine in Huludao, Liaoning Province, authorities mobilized 17 police officers, over 2,000 armed police, and 400 PLA soldiers to disperse protesters, firing tear gas and warning shots into the air.
- On April 1, 2000, 500 workers from Liuzhi Coal Mine in Sichuan Province blocked roads to protest, but were dispersed by hundreds of police summoned by authorities.
- On May 15, 2000, 5,000 workers and retirees from the Iron and Steel Factory in Liaoyang, Liaoning Province, blocked roads in protest. The next day at 1 p.m., 700 police and 200 armed police forcibly dispersed the workers, injuring at least 50 and detaining three organizers.
- On January 12, 2001, nearly 1,000 workers from Guiyang Cotton Spinning Factory gathered outside the factory gates protesting low compensation standards. Over 200 police were dispatched, injuring ten.
- At the end of August 2001, over 100 workers and their families from a liquor factory in Shuangyang District, Changchun, protested at the district government, being blocked by over 60 police officers; seven workers were injured, one hospitalized.
- In September and October 2001, hundreds of female workers from Daqing Blanket Factory in Heilongjiang Province petitioned the city government for several days, twice being driven away by armed police, with many injured.
- On June 10, 2002, 500 workers from Gaoshengqiao Auto Repair Factory in Chengdu, Sichuan, protested near Gaoshengqiao on the First Ring Road, being blocked by police; at least five workers were injured, and three detained.
- At 10 a.m. on November 28, 2000, over 1,000 workers from Chuzhou Textile Factory stormed Chuzhou Station, lying on the railway from Beijing to Shanghai; three organizers were arrested that evening.
- In December 2000, over 2,000 workers from Daqing Second Construction Company in Heilongjiang blocked the railway from Qiqihar to Harbin; five workers were later detained. - From June 24 to 27, 2002, hundreds of workers at the Nanchuanmao Textile Factory in Shuikou Town, Huizhou City, Guangdong Province, clashed with security personnel hired by the factory, and at least 20 workers were detained by the police.
- From April to July 2002, retired laid-off workers at Jilin Oilfield held a 100-day collective protest. During the latter part of the protest, police began arresting workers, who were required to publicly admit on the oilfield’s TV station that petitioning was illegal before being released. It is said that dozens of workers were arrested in total.
- During the collective action of unemployed workers at Changzheng Brick and Tile Factory in Baotou City, Inner Mongolia, from July 15 to 17, 2002, 4 people were detained by the police.
- From December 4 to 8, 2002, workers at Jiamusi Textile Factory in Heilongjiang Province blocked railway traffic in protest for several days, and at least a dozen workers were detained afterward.
- From June 11 to 18, 2003, about 4,000 textile workers in Ninghai County, Zhejiang Province, held a strike and demonstration, and 3 workers were detained by the police.
- Starting September 20, 2003, over 400 employees at Liangshan Steel Plant in Sichuan Province petitioned the city government for two consecutive days with banners. On the same day, over 40 people were detained by the police. When workers took to the streets again the next day, more than 100 were arrested.
- From July to August 2003, 1,800 workers at Huazhong Fertilizer Factory in Zaoyang City, Hubei Province, went on strike. By August 18, three workers had been officially arrested, two others were administratively detained for 15 days, and the police issued notices requiring 10 workers and their families to report to the police station.
- From October 7 to 16, 2003, over 5,000 employees at Nanchong Cotton Textile Factory in Sichuan Province went on a three-day strike. According to local sources, police used cameras to target workers during the day and arrested them in the early morning hours.
- From October 19 to 22, 2003, workers at Chengdu People’s Department Store held a three-day strike, and on the afternoon of the 22nd, authorities dispatched riot police to arrest the organizers of the strike.
- From March 1 to 2, 2004, over 1,000 workers at Gujing Group Gujing Distillery in Anhui Province staged demonstrations in Bozhou City, Anhui Province, and three workers were detained afterward.
- From April 21 to 23, 2004, two branches of Dongguan Xingang Shoe Industry International Co., Ltd. in Guangdong Province experienced large-scale protests. Twenty workers were detained, and ten were tried.
- On May 26, 2004, over a thousand taxi drivers in Suzhou City, Anhui Province, went on strike, and 18 people were detained afterward.
- In July 2004, hundreds of workers at the First Polyester Factory in Heze City, Shandong Province, went on strike. Worker representatives went to Jinan, the provincial capital, to dialogue with government departments. When the workers returned to Heze, three were arrested.
- On August 18, 2004, workers at Shanhua Special Vehicles Factory in Chongqing City went on strike and blocked the factory gates. After a conflict with police in the early morning of August 30, two workers were detained.
- During the strikes of workers at Xianyang Tianwang Textile Company in Shaanxi Province in September and October 2004, more than 40 workers were detained by the police.
- From September to October 2004, hundreds of workers at Zhongheng Textile Co., Ltd. in Fucheng County, Yancheng City, Jiangsu Province, protested and demonstrated against corporate bankruptcy and demands for fair economic compensation. Starting October 14, police detained protesting workers, and on October 20, workers Ding Xiulan and Liu Meifeng were formally arrested on suspicion of “disrupting social order.”
- On February 2, 2005, thousands of workers at Jingyi Industrial Co., Ltd. in Bao’an District, Shenzhen, Guangdong Province, attempted to demonstrate on the streets to protest wage deductions, but were blocked by hundreds of police, and several workers were injured in the clash.
- On February 26, 2005, over a thousand employees at a printing factory in Buji Town, Shenzhen, gathered for a demonstration. Later, dozens of workers blocked roads in front of the government, and police dispersed them. Four workers were detained.
- On April 23, 2005, over a thousand employees at Sichuan Shehong County Silk Factory sat in protest in front of Zigong City government, and more than 200 police dispersed them. Two female workers were beaten.
- On May 10, 2005, hundreds of workers at Eryou Jewelry Materials Co., Ltd. in Shunde District, Foshan City, Guangdong Province, attempted to block major traffic routes at Sanshui Bridge. Police stopped them, and two workers were beaten.
- Around 8 a.m. on June 3, 2005, 3,000 workers at Futai Woollen Mill in Xintang Town, Zengcheng City, Guangdong Province, went on strike due to low wages. According to media reports, over 300 police forcibly dispersed the strikers, used tear gas, and detained more than 20 people.
- On June 4 and 5, 2005, for two consecutive days, about 200 workers from the former Inner Mongolia Second Machinery Factory sat in protest at the factory gate, and police forcibly drove them away. Three workers were injured.
- After the bankruptcy announcement of Chongqing Special Steel Plant in July 2005, thousands of workers blocked roads to petition from mid-August. On the morning of October 7, the local government deployed thousands of police to arrest worker representatives petitioning at the city hall, resulting in conflicts that injured over 20 workers and family members, with several workers detained.
- On September 29, 2005, over 100 workers from Xin Village Zhiya Shoes Factory in Zhongluotan Town, Baiyun District, Guangzhou, protested on the street demanding unpaid wages. The local government dispatched multiple police cars and over a hundred police officers to disperse the workers, and six workers were detained afterward.
- On October 25, 2005, 400 workers at Sichuan An County Paper Mill went on strike demanding economic compensation and social insurance. On October 31, police dispatched more than 40 officers to the factory and detained several workers.
- On the evening of November 4, 2005, over a thousand construction workers from four state-owned construction companies in Shenzhen demonstrated in the streets. Police detained worker representatives and their spouses; on the evening of the 6th, over 5,000 workers surrounded the police station demanding release, and in the early morning of the 7th, clashes occurred.
- On the evening of December 23, 2005, over a thousand workers gathered near Hangzhou Pushu Garment Co., Ltd., demanding unpaid wages. The local government dispatched hundreds of police to disperse the workers, injuring six and detaining three.
- On January 18, 2006, 5,000 workers and their families at Sanyi 354 Military Industry Factory in Chengdu, Sichuan Province, protested, demanding overdue wages and settlement fees. Over a thousand police entered the factory in the evening, clashing with workers, injuring over 50, and seriously injuring more than 10, with at least four detained.
- On August 8, 2007, more than 800 miners at Tanjiashan Coal Mine in Xiangtan City, Hunan Province, went on strike, demanding overdue “buyout severance pay” and social insurance. Early on August 15, the mine hired over 200 temporary security guards to force workers back to work and assaulted some workers. The attacked miners fought back, resulting in at least one miner and one security guard being seriously injured or killed, over 20 injured, and the angry workers later destroyed two police vehicles.
- After the strike at Yunnai Power Co., Ltd. in Chengdu, Sichuan Province, in August 2007, some workers surrounded the office building and beat the company’s party secretary, chairman, and union president.
- On January 14, 2008, a worker at Maersk Group’s Guangdong Dongguan plant was injured by security personnel in the cafeteria. Subsequently, hundreds of workers smashed the glass windows of the office building with bricks and set fire to the security office and dormitory. Some workers stated that the factory kept increasing workload but wages did not rise, and security personnel often beat workers without cause. They knew it was impulsive but deep-seated resentment existed.
- On the morning of October 23, 2009, over a hundred workers at a toy factory in Chang’an Town, Dongguan City, Guangdong Province, blocked roads demanding wages. Workers reported being chased and injured by over 200 riot police and security personnel, including many women, and one young worker was beaten unconscious.
- On January 15, 2010, over 2,000 workers at Suzhou United Construction Technology Co., Ltd. in Suzhou Industrial Park, Jiangsu Province, went on strike. They clashed fiercely with hundreds of riot police, and more than ten workers were taken away by police.
- On June 6, 2010, over 1,000 workers at Shuyuan Machinery Factory in Kunshan City, Jiangsu Province, went on strike. The local government deployed over 200 police, and clashes resulted in more than 50 workers injured.
- On June 17, 2010, workers at Toyota Synthesis in Tianjin City went on strike. In the early morning of the 18th, about 250 police and security personnel entered the factory where workers were gathered, demanding they return to work. During the process, six workers were injured, and 16 were taken away by police.
- On October 13, 2010, 1,300 workers at Ricoh Company in Shenzhen, Guangdong Province, began a strike. After two weeks, the local government sent 500 officials and riot police into the factory, demanding workers return to work and threatening to arrest those who refused under the charges of “disrupting social order.”
- On May 7, 2010, workers at Nikon Optical Instruments (China) Co., Ltd. in Wuxi City, Jiangsu Province, went on strike. On the morning of the 11th, as workers prepared to demonstrate at Wuxi City Hall, the local government mobilized hundreds of riot police, resulting in about 20 injuries and several arrests.
- On December 18, 2010, workers at Shaanxi Ninth Cotton Textile Factory occupied the plant and detained two managers in protest against the company’s bankruptcy settlement costs. The local government then dispatched riot police, leading to physical clashes with workers.
- From May 18 to 20, 2010, workers and families at Xinghuo Pharmaceutical Factory in Datong City, Shanxi Province, blocked roads to protest the forced bankruptcy of the factory and the “buyout severance” at 15,000 yuan per person. In the afternoon of the 20th, the government deployed police, armed police, and city management to disperse the protesters, resulting in clashes and injuries to over 30 workers.
- On May 14, 2010, workers at Pingdingshan Pingmian Textile Group in Henan Province gathered in the factory area to protest the company’s standard for economic compensation, which led to sympathy from on-duty workers, and thousands of workers went on strike. On June 1, the local government deployed over 2,000 police to disperse the workers and force them back to work, resulting in physical clashes.
- On July 17, 2012, workers at Taiyuan Laundry (private) in Guangzhou, Guangdong Province, protested after the boss fled, owing four months of wages. Unable to get help from the local government, they blocked roads in protest.
- On November 3, 2012, the owner of Chuangmeng Electronics Co., Ltd. (Taiwan-funded) in Dongguan, Guangdong, suddenly went bankrupt, and the boss and senior managers disappeared. Owing wages to over 1,000 workers, they protested by blocking roads. To prevent escalation before the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party, the local government asked the village committee where the factory was located to raise funds to pay wages.
- On November 21, 2012, the owner of Tengxin Garment Factory in Dongguan, Guangdong, suddenly disappeared, owing workers 620,000 yuan for two months’ wages. Workers collectively protested by walking on the street. The local government asked the village committee to pay wages, but they could only cover three-tenths of the minimum wage. On October 29, 2013, hundreds of workers at Huasheng Electric Factory in Foshan, Guangdong, took to the streets to block roads. Workers involved in the action said that the boss owed wages, and they had repeatedly appealed to the government, but officials always said the complaint materials were incomplete and asked them to return to supplement. Out of frustration, they resorted to blocking roads.
- On December 30, 2013, workers at Yingli Pu Technology Co., Ltd. (Hong Kong-funded) in Shenzhen, Guangdong, petitioned at the city government to recover unpaid wages. Workers said they had previously visited the labor department, but officials told them they needed half a month to explain the reasons for the unpaid wages, even though they had not received wages for four months.
- On January 2, 2014, 300 workers at Yinuo Engineering Tires Co., Ltd. (private) in Zaozhuang, Shandong Province, petitioned at the city government. They reported that the company owed wages for up to seven months. They had repeatedly reported the situation to multiple government departments, but no resolution was reached, so they petitioned at the city hall. During the reporting period, over a thousand workers at Earth Guardian Environmental New Materials Co., Ltd. (private) in Wangqing County, Yanbian Autonomous Prefecture, Jilin Province, launched four protests to demand overdue wages and social insurance for up to ten months. Workers said they petitioned the provincial and state governments, but officials there told them to return to Wangqing County to resolve the issue. They also hired lawyers for rights protection, but the lawyers gave up after being threatened by the government. Ultimately, workers had no choice but to protest by blocking roads to express their dissatisfaction.
[Images omitted for brevity] “All contradictory aspects exist because under certain conditions they possess different qualities, hence called contradictions, yet they also possess the same qualities, thus interconnected.” (On Contradiction) Everything in the world, including human thoughts, contains such contradictory aspects; they mutually exclude and depend on each other, and under certain conditions can transform into each other, for example, the bourgeoisie exploits the proletariat, but without the proletariat, there is no bourgeoisie. Through proletarian revolution, the proletariat transforms from a subordinate to a ruling position. Contradictions exist objectively and are not subject to human will. At the same time, they are the driving force of the development of things**“Contradictions continually emerge and are continually resolved, which is the dialectical law of the development of things” (On the Correct Handling of Contradictions Among the People)**. Chairman Mao taught us that analyzing contradictions requires focusing on two points: the theory of principal and secondary aspects, which involves dividing contradictions into two sides to analyze their good and bad, and distinguishing primary from secondary contradictions, focusing on the main contradiction. As Marxist-Leninist-Maoist, we should not fear or evade contradictions, but admit, expose, carefully analyze, and resolve them to correctly understand the essence of things.
Materialist View of History
The materialist view of history is the proletariat’s perspective, derived from Marx’s practical experience and study of human history after analyzing class struggle. It reveals the law of class struggle and identifies the fundamental driving force of historical development—class struggle. “Class struggle—some classes win, some classes are eliminated. This is history, this is the history of thousands of years of civilization. Explaining history from this perspective is called historical materialism; its opposite is idealism.” (On the Wrong Ideas That Lead to Mistakes and the Correct Ideas That Lead to Struggles). Historical materialism developed through long-term struggle against idealism. The exploiting classes, to conceal class contradictions, promote heroic history, and whitewash reactionaries, such as advocating “self-restraint and returning to rites,” disregarding the revolutionary peasant movements against slavery in historical contexts, and serving the declining slave-owning class like Confucianism, which advocates “only the wise above and the foolish below are unchangeable,” and the scheming Confucius, who aimed to restore feudal slavery, is praised as a sage; promoting “preserve the natural order and eliminate human desires” to suppress social progress, with Zhu Xi being venerated as a great Confucian; after suppressing the Taiping Heavenly Kingdom, Zeng Guofan’s mass slaughter of civilians in Nanjing is praised. Clearly, only by studying historical materialism can we correctly understand social development laws and avoid being deceived by the bourgeoisie.
Economic Base and Superstructure
The economic base encompasses all aspects of social productive relations (ownership of means of production, interpersonal relations, distribution of products). The superstructure is built upon the economic base and includes political and legal systems and social ideology. Throughout history, each social formation is a dialectical unity of a certain economic base and superstructure. Generally, the economic base determines the superstructure, which is a product of the economic base. For example, in old capitalist countries like Britain and France, the means of production are privately owned, state enterprises are also capitalist, and the proletariat can only perform wage labor. Based on this capitalist economic foundation, bourgeois dictatorship and bourgeois ideology are established. Marxism also affirms the reciprocal influence of the superstructure on the economic base. When the economic base no longer suits the productive forces, and the superstructure obstructs economic transformation, only through revolutionary change of the superstructure—violent seizure—can the economic base be transformed, and productive forces liberated.
“When the political, cultural, and other superstructures hinder the development of the economic base, then political and cultural reforms become the main decisive factors.” (On Contradiction). From this, we summarize the law that “the economic base determines the superstructure, and the superstructure reacts back on the economic base.” Further, when in capitalist or imperialist countries politicians claim to serve the people, we can clearly see that the “people” they refer to are essentially the supporting bourgeoisie, because those who serve the proletariat cannot enter the bourgeoisie system.
Class Struggle
Refers to the struggle between the exploiting and the exploited classes, and between the ruling and the ruled classes. Due to fundamental conflicts of interest among opposing classes, class struggle is inevitable. “(Since the disintegration of primitive communal land ownership) all social history has been a history of class struggle… Modern bourgeois society has not eliminated class contradictions. It merely replaced old ones with new classes, new oppression conditions, and new forms of struggle.” (The Communist Manifesto). Class struggle is the true driving force of class society’s development. Without slaves fighting against slave owners, peasants against landlords, workers against capitalists, human history would not progress. “Only those who recognize class struggle and also recognize the dictatorship of the proletariat are Marxists. The greatest difference between Marxists and petty bourgeoisie (and big bourgeoisie) lies here. This is the touchstone to test whether one truly understands and admits Marxism.” (On the State and Revolution). Opportunists only advocate parliamentary struggle, legal struggle, oppose violent revolution, and oppose proletarian dictatorship. Trotsky, a traitor, said: “The political task of the proletariat is not to destroy the state apparatus,” but “to cause a certain shift in the balance of power within the state.” He sought to limit class struggle within the framework of capitalism, preventing the proletariat from seizing power. Social imperialist countries claim: “Socialism has solved a huge social problem—eliminating the exploiting classes and the causes of human exploitation” and that “domestic class struggle has ceased,” which is actually bourgeois dictatorship and fascist dictatorship, representing a small group of new bureaucratic bourgeoisie, ruthlessly exploiting and oppressing workers and the masses. In socialist society, class, class contradictions, and class struggle still exist. The struggle between the proletariat and bourgeoisie, among various political forces, and the ideological struggle between classes are long-term, tortuous, sometimes even fierce. The proletariat must transform the world according to its worldview, and the bourgeoisie also transforms the world according to its worldview. The question of who wins between socialism and capitalism has not been truly resolved. (On the Correct Handling of Contradictions Among the People).
Capitalism and Socialism
Capitalist system is based on capitalists owning the means of production and exploiting wage labor. Under capitalism, the market rules everything. Commodity production becomes universal, and labor power also becomes a commodity. Capitalists extract surplus value created by workers and seek profit as the sole purpose of capitalist production. “The bourgeois economic theory that the interests of capital and labor are aligned, and that free competition will inevitably lead to harmony and universal happiness, is complete nonsense.” (Anti-Dühring). The fundamental contradiction in capitalism is between the social nature of production and the private ownership of the means of production. This contradiction manifests in periodic economic crises. Economic crises are an inevitable product of capitalism. They cause great disasters to the proletariat and lead to explosive conflicts between the proletariat and bourgeoisie, shaking the entire bourgeois rule. The socialist system is based on social ownership of the means of production and the dictatorship of the proletariat. It cannot spontaneously emerge within the old society; it can only be established and developed through the proletariat’s violent revolution overthrowing bourgeois dictatorship.
Theory of Productive Forces
Believes that when social productive forces develop to a certain point, society will naturally progress, or that only when productive forces are stagnating can the superstructure change. This idea is called the theory of productive forces. It distorts and negates Marxist dialectics by distorting politics and economics, the dialectical relationship between revolution and production, exaggerating the role of increasing production; it negates the influence of productive relations on productive forces and the superstructure on the economic base. Bernstein, the head of revisionism, first proposed the theory of productive forces, which was later promoted by his followers like Kautsky and Bukharin. They vehemently opposed the October Revolution, claiming “Russia’s productive forces have not yet reached the level necessary for socialism.” Lenin shattered this view: “All the heroes of the Second International, including Sukhanov, regarded this statement as a treasure (the theory of productive forces)… Why can’t we first use revolutionary means to reach this level, then build on the basis of the proletarian and peasant power and Soviet system to catch up with other nations?” (On the Revolution in Our Country). The outbreak of revolution is influenced by many factors; when contradictions are ripe, revolution will occur regardless of one’s wishes. Those who see productive forces as the only criterion, using it to oppose proletarian revolution, fall into the trap of the theory of productive forces. During the New Democratic Revolution, Chen Duxiu and Liu Shaoqi used “China’s low productive forces” as an excuse to oppose proletarian power. After establishing New China, Liu Shaoqi used the need to “strengthen the new democratic” as a pretext for his restoration conspiracy. Chairman Mao taught us: “All revolutionary history proves that it is not that advanced productive forces must first be developed before transforming backward relations, but that first, public opinion must be created, revolution must be carried out, and power seized. Only then can old relations be abolished and new relations established, paving the way for new productive forces.” (Notes and Talks on Mao Zedong’s Reading of Socialist Political Economy). This is “liberating productive forces,” not first having new relations, then developing productive forces. It is the dialectical relationship between productive forces and relations of production. Conversely, if productive forces are regarded as the only standard for revolution, Lenin’s statement that “revolution will occur at the weak link of imperialism” becomes a complete fallacy; he should wait until decades later (or longer) for Russia’s productive forces to catch up with the U.S. before revolution. We should also support Chiang Kai-shek’s development into the world’s leading power before revolution—who would be so foolish? The social imperialist propaganda of “focusing on developing productive forces” and “developing productive forces as the only standard” aims to cover up their exploitation and violence, distort the course of history, and is a thoroughly idealist worldview.
Revisionism and Social Imperialism
Revisionism is bourgeois ideology disguised as Marxism, emerging in the late 19th century. It places personal interests above the interests of the proletariat, betraying and selling out the proletariat. Its root lies in old bourgeois ideas and legal rights. Social imperialism is imperialism under the guise of socialism. Bourgeois elements seize control of domestic party and government power, dominate in economy, military, and politics, forming a new bureaucratic monopoly group—the big bourgeoisie. This group exploits state power to sell out the people’s interests, transforming socialist ownership into capitalist ownership, turning the socialist economy into a capitalist economy, and transforming socialist states into capitalist states. They ruthlessly exploit and oppress the people, sitting on their heads, implementing brutal repression internally, invading and expanding externally, and conducting economic colonialism in the Third World. They promote nationalism, causing the proletariat to ignore class contradictions, suppress proletarian resistance, and harbor intense hatred toward socialist states and parties (social imperialist countries, i.e., the Soviet Union after Stalin’s death, usurped by Khrushchev’s revisionist group).No other指）
Privatization of Means of Production and Relative Poverty of the Proletariat
(1) Breaking Superstitions — Without a Market Economy, China Cannot Prosper
“Black cats or white cats, as long as they can catch mice, they are good cats.” This section, in the spirit of “seeking truth from facts and emancipating the mind,” will speak with data and see whether the market economy’s black cat is truly a good cat that can catch mice!
1. Energy Consumption and Power Generation
First, look at energy consumption and power generation, which are barometers of industry, especially heavy industry. Heavy industry is the cornerstone of the national economy. Comparing several representative economic periods, the average annual growth rate during the Great Leap Forward was higher than during several special periods after reform and opening up. Even if we dismiss the exaggerated data of the Great Leap Forward for not reflecting reality, the development reflected in the line chart after reform is still inferior to that before reform. Notably, during the Cultural Revolution, the average annual growth rate of power generation reached 10.52%, achieved under the conditions of “planned economy” and “class struggle as the focus,” which is quite impressive. If we evaluate the Cultural Revolution as “on the brink of collapse” according to “special characteristics” textbooks, then the slow growth in the first 20 years after reform (1979-1997 energy consumption growth rate of 4.5% annually, power generation 7.7%) would seem to be a complete collapse? Of course, the slowdown in these two indicators is partly due to improved energy utilization efficiency, but there’s no need to defend the slow development from 1979 to 2000 with this reason, as there’s no technology that could have suddenly increased energy efficiency several times, nor can it explain the rapid growth of these indicators from 2001 to 2011 (did energy-saving technology suddenly disappear?).
2. Agriculture
The line charts above most clearly reflect the insufficient momentum of small-scale agriculture. In the first ten years after land redistribution, grain output maintained a growth rate comparable to that during the Cultural Revolution due to temporary “enthusiasm,” but this quickly declined as arable land area and fertilizer use slowed down. Only when the authorities realized that rural areas losing a large amount of labor force would pose a major hidden danger to food security did they promote rural collective economic development, which temporarily boosted grain output growth.
3. Industrial Output
The three indicators—crude steel output, coal output, and cement output—are important signs of industrial, especially heavy industrial, development. The growth rates between 1969-76 were higher than during the main periods after reform and opening (noting that in 1990-1991, cement and crude steel growth was slightly higher than during the Cultural Revolution, possibly due to government support or changes in statistical standards). The “Golden Decade” only surpassed these figures—though cement, even in the “Golden Decade,” did not catch up (these eleven years still coincided with a real estate boom).
4. Transportation Issues
Data shows that from 1950-1980, China’s total road mileage increased by about 756,600 km, averaging 25,220 km per year; from 1980-2000, it increased by about 519,400 km, averaging 25,970 km per year. During the twenty years of “focusing solely on economic construction,” the annual growth in road mileage was comparable to the “non-economical” era.
Looking at the growth rate of newly added roads, after reform and opening up, especially during 1980-1990—a decade most people associate with rapid development—the annual increase was only 14,500 km, even less than half of the difficult decade from 1951-1962.
China’s railway mileage from 1950-1995:
- 1950-1980: 27,700 km, averaging 923 km/year
- 1980-1995: 4,700 km, averaging 313 km/year
- 1950-1978: 26,400 km, averaging 942 km/year
- 1978-1995: 6,000 km, averaging 353 km/year
—“Total mileage of roads and railways in China over the years”
Thus, in the twenty years from 1980-2000, China’s transportation infrastructure did not make significant progress, and in some aspects, even regressed compared to 1949-1970.
5. Conclusion
All the data listed above reveal a clear pattern: the growth rates of various economic indicators in the first 20 years before reform and opening up were generally lower than during the Cultural Revolution. It was only around 2000, after China fully integrated into the capitalist world through WTO accession, that growth rates caught up with those of the Cultural Revolution. From this, a clear conclusion can be drawn: China can become rich without a market economy. Some believe that without integrating into the capitalist world, productivity cannot continue to develop, and they might hastily argue: “Doesn’t this pattern also prove that as long as the economy is sufficiently open, growth can match that of the Cultural Revolution? I think for stable economic development, we should wait until modernization before eliminating capitalism.” I want to counter this view by saying: (1) If we can develop the economy rapidly without exploiting workers and peasants, why should we burden the people with additional bloodsucking parasites? (2) The more developed the capitalist economy, the more reactionary the ruling bourgeoisie becomes. If some comrades’ prediction that capitalism will be eliminated only by 2050, then by that time, the bourgeoisie that has already monopolized the market and tightly controlled the state machinery will require the people to shed much blood and tears to overthrow. Some comrades also promote the “make-up lessons” theory, believing that China lacks capitalist development, so it should vigorously develop capitalist economy first. First, I think enough has already been “made up”—we are now the world’s second-largest economy. Do we really need to fight for world dominance with the US? Furthermore, Chairman Mao believed, “It is not that we first develop new productive forces sufficiently and then transform backward relations, but that new relations must be created first to fully develop new productive forces.” Historically, the US almost never developed feudal economy, yet it still achieved victory in the Civil War and became an imperialist power within forty years. If the northern bourgeoisie believed in the “make-up lessons” theory, the US might still be in the “initial stage of capitalist development with Chinese characteristics.”
(2) The Great Contract — Collective Farming is Fake, Individual Farming is Real
“Hard work for thirty years, returning to the pre-liberation era overnight.”
“Why do I take land contract to households so seriously? China is a big agricultural country. If the rural ownership system changes, the industrial base serving the collective economy will shake, and who will industrial products be sold to? State-owned industry will also change someday. The polarization is rapid. Since the existence of imperialism, China has been a big market vulnerable to the strong prey on the weak. Today, they have advantages in various fields, both internally and externally attacking. How can the Communist Party protect the interests of the people, workers, and farmers? How to protect and develop our national industry and strengthen national defense? China is a big and poor country. Will imperialism allow China to become truly strong? What do others rely on to show off their might? If we rely on others, the country will be unstable.”
1. Regress to the Disastrous Consequences of Small-Scale Farming
“From 1949 to 1985, the People’s Commune was disbanded, and China’s total grain output increased by 235%, population grew by 95%, and per capita grain output increased by 71%.”
“However, from 1986 when the People’s Commune disbanded to 2008, China’s population increased by 23%, but per capita grain output only increased by 9%.”
“And what about the period of land contract to households? The average growth rate from 1980-1984 was 4.17%, a very good figure. It seemed to have worked, but the magic of land contracting to households suddenly vanished. From 1985-1989, the average growth rate plummeted to 0.01%, almost no growth. After that, the growth rate fluctuated but stayed below 1.9%. From 2000-2004, it dropped again to a low of 0.61%. Even during the better periods of 2010-2014, it only reached 2.72%. Over 27 years of collectivization (1953-1979), the overall average growth rate was 2.64%, but over 35 years of land contracting to households (1980-2014), it was only 1.74%. Under the “eleven consecutive increases,” the hidden worries of grain self-sufficiency are growing, because after land contracting to households, grain growth has been slow (from 1980-2003, the annual growth rate was only 1.09%, compared to 2.41% from 1953-78). To maintain grain self-sufficiency, revisionists could only abandon soybeans and other oil crops, opening up imports. In 1990, oil crop imports were less than 10,000 tons; by 2001, they increased to 20.66 million tons, and by 2014, to 71.4 million tons. Abandoning oil crop self-sufficiency releases arable land for grain. The current strict import limit is that imports do not exceed 5% of domestic production. In 2012, after the “Nine-Linked Increase,” grain imports accounted for 2.2% of domestic output, seemingly small, but it was three times that of 2011. In 2014, grain imports reached 106 million tons, accounting for 9.92% of the 1,067.93 million tons of grain output.
From the above, it is clear that land contracting initially motivated farmers and achieved short-term success, but this was based on a short-lived “blood transfusion” of extended labor, which quickly shattered farmers’ illusions.
(1) Lagging or Regressive Agricultural Machinery
Since land division, the total power of small tractors increased rapidly, but the total power of large and medium-sized agricultural machinery grew slowly, even regressed around 1994. It was only in recent decades, with the revival of rural collective economy, that growth accelerated. This is because, in the past, each land parcel was divided into multiple plots, making large machinery unusable. Sometimes a family’s five acres were split into six or seven plots, making large machinery useless. Even small machinery worth 20,000-30,000 yuan was wasted. This caused huge waste of funds and machinery.
(2) Abandonment of Water Conservancy Facilities
“By the end of the Fifth Five-Year Plan in 1979, China had 730 million mu (about 48.7 million hectares) of effective irrigated land, accounting for a quarter of the world’s irrigated area, with per capita irrigation exceeding the global average. The irrigation density reached 46%, leading the world. Also, 260 million mu of drainage and 62 million mu of saline-alkali land were treated.”
“By 1980, China’s water conservancy system could irrigate 1.6 million square kilometers of farmland, but by 1990, this had shrunk to 1.58 million square kilometers.”
The farmland infrastructure built during Mao’s era, especially water conservancy projects, was largely neglected after land division, leading to destruction. As a result, farmers had to increase irrigation costs by three to five times, which was labor-intensive and time-consuming. Previously, in production teams, irrigation with river water took only a few days with a few people. The rivers gradually fell into disrepair. Each household had to use well water, and during droughts, almost the entire village had to rush to use the same well, causing many disputes. It could take half a month to irrigate fully.
(3) Lack of Technical Guidance for Farmers
“The first statistics on fertilizer use appeared in 1970, with the ratio of fertilizer application to sowing area being 29.45 kg/hectare, rising to 91.09 kg in 1979, 210.07 kg in 1989, 364.46 kg in 1999, and reaching a peak of 528.53 kg in 2013, which is 17.95 times that of 1970. Even with such massive fertilizer application, grain output under small-scale household management remained weak.”
Without professional technicians in production teams, individual farmers find it difficult to master pesticide, breeding, and fertilizer techniques. Coupled with the lack of water conservancy facilities and high costs of mechanization, even large fertilizer use yields poor results.
(4) Cheap Grain Hurts Farmers
“For example, 1984 was a bumper year, but after the harvest, grain output plummeted and grew slowly until 1989, when output surpassed 1984 again. Similar fluctuations occurred at the end of the century: 1996-1999 saw four consecutive bumper years, with 1998 as the peak, but in 2000, 2001, and 2003, output fell sharply, and growth was slow. It was only in 2008 that output again exceeded 1998, but the media now calculates from the 2003 bottom, claiming ‘eleven consecutive increases’ from 2004-2014.”
Ideally, bumper harvests should motivate farmers to produce more, but in reality, after bumper harvests, several years of decline often follow. This is because during bumper harvests, grain prices collapse, and farmers find that producing more grain does not increase income but decreases it, discouraging production enthusiasm.
(5) The Return of “Lords”
With the disbandment of the People’s Commune and the promotion of “rich first, then the rest,” wealthy farmers responded to the state’s call, bringing poor neighbors into their ponds, orchards, and farms, telling them that as long as they work hard, they too can become rich through “management and operation.” This obvious form of capitalist exploitation is called “factor distribution” by theorists, ignoring the income and labor income gap brought by capital. These new “lords” do not stop at “hard work to get rich.” Once they gain economic status, they quickly collude with local officials and become local “tycoons.” Some comrades naively believe that the root of local evil is the corruption of “unscrupulous” wealthy people and local officials, hoping that two years of crackdown on crime can solve the “lords and tycoons” problem. First, this movement was initiated by bureaucratic monopoly bourgeoisie, aimed at strengthening the control of the “special” party over localities and eliminating internal corruption to ensure long-term bourgeois exploitation. Moreover, under the rule of the exploiting class, officials are appointed to serve the dictatorship of the exploiting class. Was Hai Rui honest? Yet, the purpose of forcing large landlords to give up land was still “if they do not give up more than half, the customs are dangerous, and it should be stopped. To be rich and unkind harms the public, and is detrimental and useless, serving as a warning to future generations… The goal is to have landlords give up more than half of their land, so that the country can be peaceful in the future; do not be surprised.”; Was Zeng Guofan’s Xiang Army disciplined? Its role was to suppress the Taiping Heavenly Kingdom and kill rebellious farmers. Zeng Guofan even got the nickname “Zeng Shaving Head” because of this; Bo Xilai’s red song campaign in Chongqing was also to arrest taxi drivers striking under the guise of cracking down on crime. In today’s full-capitalist revival, our public servants cannot possibly kick out all “landlords and tycoons” to become local officials. They might prosecute some exploiters harmful to social stability but will never overthrow all “landlords and tycoons.”
(6) Many farmers have become exploited proletarians
“According to the 2018 survey report on migrant workers by the National Bureau of Statistics, there were about 288 million migrant workers in China in 2018, an increase of 0.6% over the previous year. About 116 million worked locally, and 173 million worked outside their hometowns, with 135 million working in cities.”
What benefits can such a detrimental agricultural policy bring? Clearly, it benefits capitalist industry’s demand for cheap labor in coastal areas. The high costs of individual farming and market price instability force farmers to migrate to cities, becoming proletarians, providing a large supply of cheap labor for “private entrepreneurs.” Sadly, farmers who made great contributions to the New Democratic Revolution and socialist construction are now becoming exploited workers alongside their industrial worker brothers.
2. Brief Discussion on Capital Going to the Countryside
With decades of capitalist economic development, urban markets are nearing saturation. The “special” party has turned its gaze back to the slow-developing rural areas. The reason for the continuous seven-year inclusion of “accelerating agricultural modernization” in the central No. 1 Document from 2014 to 2020 is a clear sign of capital’s frantic expansion into the countryside for profit. No matter how the policies are dressed up or called land transfer or land rights confirmation, they cannot hide the wolfish ambition of capital rushing to the countryside. The Chinese peasantry faces the fate of land grabbing in the 21st century (the Shandong homestead incident early last year is a good example). Promoting capital going to the countryside and capitalist urbanization can absorb excess urban capital to increase corporate profits, improve the organic composition of agricultural capital, gradually transform rural labor into agricultural workers, and reduce the prices of agricultural products to further depress labor value and increase relative surplus value. As capital flows into the countryside and capitalist urbanization deepens, many farmers will be expropriated and displaced, losing their land and means of production, forced to sell their labor to survive. Most rural Chinese farmers, who only farm without special skills, will have no choice but to sell their labor, except for a small part of agricultural capitalists.The original text is very long. Please provide a specific section or paragraph you would like me to translate.On the 28th of the month, China Business Daily
What kind of ownership does this Liu Si North Kiln Factory originally belong to? It was actually transferred and contracted out to two “peasants” bullies. They hired a gang of thugs to deceive people in society, even forcing people to become slaves at this kiln factory in a manner similar to the “drafting” before liberation. Under the bright daylight, no one knows, and no one cares—what is going on? Where have the grassroots party organizations and judicial authorities gone?
(2) Child labor
Some say: “Anyone’s individual ownership of means of production does not constitute coercion and slavery of others’ labor,” “Both labor and capital sides are equal citizens”; private enterprises and workers “are not necessarily exploitative.” Is this really the case? Please look at the following examples of illegal use and brutal abuse of child labor:
Zhaoyuan Donglianghe Line Factory's illegal employment of child labor and underage workersLiaoning Economic Daily, Guo YuanjinShandong Zhaoyuan City Xinzhuang Town Donglianghe Line Factory is a village-run enterprise with about 150 employees, most of whom are recruited cheaply from rural areas across Shandong. The average monthly wage is less than 200 yuan, paid at the end of the year. After deducting meal costs, some workers only receive over 500 yuan at year’s end, and the most veteran workers get only about 2,600 yuan. Most seriously, the factory violates the “Labor Law of the People’s Republic of China” and relevant labor regulations issued by Shandong Province by employing child labor and underage workers. Due to poor management, there have been multiple work-related injuries involving mechanical crushing of fingers, with medical expenses deducted from workers’ wages. For example, Wang Maowen from Zhiping Village, Taiping Township, Jiyang County, was 15 years old, had not graduated from junior high school, and went to work at this factory in March 1999. According to Wang Maowen, all employees at the line factory, including child workers, had not received safety education or labor skills training as required by regulations. In April 1999, Wang Maowen’s right index finger was crushed below the second joint by machinery. By October, he returned home, having spent eight months in the factory, with 622 yuan deducted for meals and over 250 yuan for medical expenses. The factory even claimed Wang owed them more than 400 yuan (Wang has a handwritten IOU from the factory). In late February this year, Wang Maowen and his father Wang Siyin traveled thousands of miles to the factory to seek justice and compensation according to law. Factory director Liu Shengfu said: “Don’t try to fool me with the law. If you want to sue, go ahead. At worst, I’ll just stop being the factory director!” A female clerk about 30 years old said: “What’s a missing finger? There are others who lost two, three, or four!” After negotiations, the director pulled up data from the computer: “Wang Maowen worked 203 days plus 15 days (disability work), earning 8 yuan per day, totaling 1,176 yuan; after deducting 622 yuan for meals, an advance of 400 yuan, the remaining 154 yuan.” Confronted with the facts, the factory no longer mentioned Wang’s debt or medical expenses. On the morning of February 26, Wang Siyin went to the Xin Zhuang Town government petition office and judicial office. A comrade surnamed Guo told them to report to the arbitration department of Zhaoyuan City Labor Bureau. A middle-aged man from the arbitration office said: “According to document Lu Gao Fa (1998) No. 149, they only accept labor disputes involving enterprises above the township level. Cases involving village-run enterprises can be directly prosecuted in people’s courts.” Wang Siyin said: “It’s too far to go to court, we can’t afford it.” So they returned home with their child. According to Wang Maowen, there are many other child workers and underage workers like him in the factory, such as Yang (female), who started working at 14; Lu (female), 15; Liu (male), 15; Wang (female), 15; Jia (female), 16, etc. This year, the factory recruited some child laborers. However, such a village-run enterprise that seriously violates the “Labor Law of the People’s Republic of China” and repeatedly harms minors’ physical and mental health has received numerous honors in recent years, such as Yantai City Administration for Industry and Commerce “Contract-Respecting and Trustworthy Enterprise,” Yantai City Consumer Association “Consumer Satisfaction Unit,” Shandong Provincial Township Enterprise Bureau “Shandong Provincial Township Enterprise Financial Management Advanced Unit,” Zhaoyuan Municipal Party Committee and Municipal Government “Star Enterprise,” etc. This is perplexing. (See People’s Daily, April 23, 2000)
(3) Excessively long working hours
Sleep no more than 6 hours, finish work and not pay wagesHow can this outsider boss hire workers like thisEditor colleagues:
We are a few migrant workers from Jiangxi Province and Fujian Province. From March to June this year, Wu Zhengshan from Donglian Township, Leqing City, Zhejiang Province, hired us in Tianjin, to work at his clothing workshop near “Wenzhou City” in the Dongli District. At that time, he signed a “Employment Contract” and a “Labor Service Agreement” with us, which clearly stipulated: “Working hours shall comply with national regulations,” “Party A (Wu Zhengshan) shall provide the necessary production (work) conditions in accordance with relevant national regulations and respect the full and physical health of Party B,” “The working hours, rest, leave, and treatment of the employed personnel shall be implemented according to relevant national regulations.” However, after Wu Zhengshan employed us, he did not treat us as human beings at all. We worked 18 to 19 hours every day. After work, we ate, showered, and it took about an hour, so we could only sleep three or four hours a day. Due to the heavy workload, our physical strength was exhausted, and we could not meet the boss’s requirements every day, and we were scolded and insulted. Long-term work like this made some workers fall ill, but the boss did not let us rest, making us unable to continue working. We wanted to leave, but the boss not only refused to pay us wages but also beat Fan Xinhua among us. We are all outsiders in Tianjin, unfamiliar with the place, and dare not provoke him. We hope relevant departments can help us and resolve our problems.
Fan Xinhua, Li Xiufeng, Wu Xiuming, etc.
(Tianjin Daily, November 9, 1999)
(4) “Life-and-death contract”
Imbalance in labor relations: the "Life-and-death Contract" culpritLi KejieInvestigations show that the Sunjiawan Coal Mine of Liaoning Fuxin Mining Group, where the mine disaster occurred, actually did not have insurance “group policies,” and even the accident injury insurance for miners was very limited. Preliminary statistics show that only about 10% of the victims had insurance, paid by their families. In stark contrast, every miner going underground signed a “Life-and-death Contract” with the mine. The contract stipulates that in case of injury or death during underground operations, with partial or total loss of labor ability, the coal mine will pay a one-time living subsidy of 4,000 yuan or 6,000 yuan, and in case of death, a one-time condolence payment of 20,000 yuan, with all other aftermath expenses borne by the miner. It is said that in many coal mines, the prevalence of “Life-and-death Contracts” exceeds that of insurance procedures. (China Youth Daily, February 23) Certainly, coal mines providing insurance for miners is a way to transfer safety risks, and signing “Life-and-death Contracts” is also a way to mitigate accident risks and reduce enterprise burdens. But these two methods are fundamentally different, with different consequences. Insurance is mutually beneficial, while “Life-and-death Contracts” are a unilateral responsibility-shifting and risk-increasing act by enterprises, which is a serious violation of law. So it is puzzling why mine owners can and dare not to enforce mandatory insurance but still sign “Life-and-death Contracts” with miners. Why do miners willingly (at least on the surface) sign such contracts for only 20,000 yuan, essentially “selling” their lives? Regarding miners’ “voluntary” signing of “Life-and-death Contracts” instead of purchasing insurance, we should not simply blame miners for weak safety awareness, nor blame them for not valuing life. In fact, the unbalanced labor relations force miners to sign “Life-and-death Contracts.”
Today in China, the supply of labor exceeds demand, which is an unchangeable reality. Almost every industry and position has a large number of competitors. From the millions of migrant workers rushing around after the Spring Festival, desperately seeking jobs, it is evident that employment opportunities and job positions are scarce and precious. Under such circumstances, abnormal relations in the labor market are inevitable, giving rise to the dominant position of enterprises and employers, while workers lack the capital and courage to bargain. Therefore, in employment relations, workers almost obey the commands of enterprises and employers, fearing dismissal for any misconduct. Enterprises and employers refuse to sign labor contracts or sign unfair contracts, refuse to pay pension and insurance contributions, arbitrarily extend working hours, require unpaid overtime, delay wages, or deduct wages at will. Workers dare not complain, which repeatedly confirms the imbalance in labor relations. This severe imbalance in labor relations, in turn, fosters some enterprises and employers to ignore workers’ interests and safety, leading to frequent safety accidents and a vicious cycle.
(People’s Daily, February 25, 2005)
III. The Relative Poverty of the Proletariat
Lenin said: “The relative impoverishment of workers, that is, their decreasing share of social income, is more obvious. Workers’ proportion of wealth in rapidly growing capitalist societies is becoming smaller and smaller because the wealth of millionaires is increasing faster and faster.”
(1) Gini coefficient
The Gini coefficient is a commonly used international indicator to measure income disparity among residents of a country or region. The Gini coefficient ranges from 0 (perfect equality) to 1 (maximum inequality). The higher the Gini coefficient, the greater the wealth gap.
In 2016, the National Bureau of Statistics announced China’s Gini coefficient as 0.465. Compared to 2012, it decreased from 0.474 to 0.465. However, data from other agencies are much higher: Southwest University of Finance and Economics reported 0.62 (up from 0.61), Peking University reported 0.5 for income Gini coefficient, and the asset Gini coefficient from Peking University’s statistics reached as high as 0.78 (up from 0.73).
The data from the China Household Finance Survey by Southwest University of Finance and Economics show that in 2010, China’s Gini coefficient was 0.61, far above the global average of 0.44. The report indicates that in 2010, the Gini coefficient for Chinese households was 0.61, with urban households at 0.56 and rural households at 0.60. Regionally, the eastern region’s Gini coefficient was 0.59, the central region 0.57, and the western region 0.55. The “China Social Sciences Survey” published the “China Livelihood Development Report 2014”: China’s wealth inequality has been rising rapidly: in 1995, the Gini coefficient was 0.45; in 2002, 0.55; and in 2012, the net household wealth Gini coefficient reached 0.73, with the top 1% of households owning more than one-third of the country’s wealth, while the bottom 25% held only about 1%.
—— “Southwest University of Finance and Economics China Household Finance Survey Report”International norms consider a Gini coefficient below 0.2 as absolute income equality, 0.2-0.3 as relatively equal, 0.3-0.4 as relatively reasonable, 0.4-0.5 as large income disparity, and above 0.5 as income disparity. Regardless of which agency’s data is used, China’s Gini coefficient has already crossed the danger warning line. Looking at the United States: in 2016, the income Gini coefficient increased to 0.49, and the asset Gini coefficient was 0.84. China’s resident income Gini coefficient is much higher than that of the United States, and even the asset Gini coefficient is very close to this veteran capitalist country. The problem is obvious. China’s Gini coefficient is so high that it seems to reflect regional wealth disparities, but beneath the surface, it still reveals class contradictions. We need not discuss the income gap between residents in Tibet and Beijing, just look at the difference within the same city between urban and rural areas. Take Shanghai as an example: in 2015, urban residents’ income was 52,962 yuan, while rural residents’ income was 23,205 yuan—urban income was more than twice that of rural residents.
(2) National income and real national income
(3) Distribution of per capita monthly household income in China
IV. Conclusion
The endless forms of exploitation and the huge gap between rich and poor—are these what a socialist country should have? Phenomena reflect the essence. Are these characteristics unique to capitalist countries? Do they not serve as strong evidence that capitalism has long since been reborn in China? If our “PARTY” truly serves the people and is committed to the socialist path, would the country’s masters shed so much blood and sweat, and would the wealth gap be so large?
在前两段中，我们分别说明了中国的“特色”资本主义对无产阶级的剥削与压迫，以及中国的无产阶级为生存所做出的反击与抗争，那么为何中国会由一个社会主义国家蜕变为资本主义国家呢？发生资本主义复辟的原因是什么。每一个社会形态都是经济基础和上层建筑的辩证统一。一般条件下，经济基础起决定作用，上层建筑对经济基础起反作用，但在一定条件下，上层建筑起决定性作用。在无产阶级专政条件下政治路线起决定作用，体现在经济路线上的资产阶级法权则是资本主义滋生的土壤，走资派扩大资产阶级法权为他们在政治路线上的斗争服务。因此研究资本主义经济产生与复辟的第一步，就是研究资本主义的生产关系。研究资本主义生产关系的第一步，就是研究资本主义生产关系的产生源泉——资本主义法权。通过对资产阶级法权的分析，可以阐明资本主义社会产生的原因以及社会主义国家中走资本主义路线的反动派产生的原因，可以表现出阶级斗争的情况，可以指出党内两条路线斗争的实质以及对上层建筑领域的社会主义革命的重要性。研究清楚这些问题，对于我们明确斗争路线，明确斗争方向有着重要的意义。
一.资产阶级法权的实质
资产阶级法权，就是资本主义生产关系的法律表现。就是表现在法律上面的资本主义的生产关系。众所周知，资本主义的生产关系就是在平等的口号下实行的不平等制度，也是产生新的资产阶级分子的条件。那么，资本主义生产关系实质是什么？在社会中表现为什么样呢？
马克思在分析资本主义经济时，从资本主义最单纯的因素——商品开始研究，是科学的方法论。要了解某一事物，必须先了解他最简单的运动形式，从中找出一般的特点，然后进一步分析复杂形式。因此，我们研究资本主义生产关系，必须从资本主义社会开始。
生产关系包括三个方面：生产资料的所有制形式；人们在生产中的地位和他们的相互关系；产品分配形式。其中生产资料所有制是主要方面，它决定生产关系的性质。资本主义社会的生产关系是每个无产阶级都能感受到的。从所有制关系来看，这个社会的生产资料由少数剥削阶级占有，而雇佣工人却 “自由得一无所有”（《资本论》） 不得不在市场中出卖自己的劳动力，这意味着在生产过程中双方关系是不平等的。资本家在市场上购得了工人的劳动力，因此在劳动过程中，工人已经无权支配自己的劳动力，他们的劳动属于资本家所有，也是在资本家监督下进行的。这种劳动是强制性的，它对于劳动者只是一种痛苦和沉重的负担，而不是“自由性”“创造性”的劳动。这是资本家统治压迫与劳动者被剥削的阶级对立的关系。而资本家给予工人的工资远远低于劳动力的价值，更不必说被窃取的剩余价值。资本家不劳而获，工人劳而不获，这就是资本主义的产品分配形式。上述的一切就是资本主义社会的资产阶级法权表现形态。我们从中可以看到，资本主义生产关系是一种掩盖平等口号下的不平等制度，资产阶级法权关系本质是最大的不平等关系。正如马克思所说这是 “公开的、无耻的、直接的、露骨的剥削。”（《共产党宣言》）
从上面的分析中我们能够得出资产阶级法权的几个特点。在所有制方面，生产资料层面上占有的差别，会体现在分配方面，这种差别即不平等会滋生资产阶级法权。例如私有制或者集体所有制，即使是社会主义的集体所有制，各生产队因为设备条件，自然环境等原因，在收入上是不平等的，这仍会体现资产阶级的法权，这是主要方面。而生产阶段的不平等关系和产品分配阶段的不平等分配，这两点对所有制的发展起着重要的反作用，进而也会滋生资产阶级法权。从总的方面来看，资产阶级法权就是掩盖平等之下的不平等关系。
二.资产阶级法权在社会主义社会存在的必然性
资本主义社会存在资产阶级法权，那么社会主义呢？马克思在《哥达纲领批判》中指出，社会主义社会是刚刚从资本主义社会中产生出的“我们这里所说的是这样的共产主义社会，它不是在它自身基础已经发展了的，恰好相反，是刚刚从资本主义社会中产生出来的，因此它在各方面，在经济、道德和精神方面都还带着它脱胎出来的那个旧社会的痕迹。”这种痕迹表现在生产关系上，就是资产阶级法权。“其实，无论在自然界或在社会中，实际生活随时随地都使我们看到新事物中有旧的残余。马克思并不是随便把一小块“资产阶级”法权塞到共产主义中去，而是抓住了从资本主义脱胎出来的社会里那种在经济上和政治上不可避免的东西。”（《国家与革命》）社会主义的生产关系是一种不成熟的共产主义生产关系，它既有生长着的共产主义因素，又有资产阶级法权这种衰亡着的资本主义因素，这两对矛盾无时无刻不在斗争，这仍然是无产阶级与资产阶级间的阶级矛盾，只不过换了种表现形式。这种斗争的表现，我们可以从生产关系的三个方面来分析，在新社会的所有制问题上。以我国举例，三大改造后，我国建立了以全民所有制和集体所有制为基础的生产资料所有制，这是同生产力的发展水平相适应的。其中集体所有制是用来引导个体劳动者，特别是个体农民走上社会主义道路，是发展农业生产力的客观要求。但同全民所有制相比，它的公有化程度不够高，生产资料属于社会的某一部分劳动人民所有，而不是属于全社会劳动人民所有，不能接受国家统一支配，为全体劳动人民利益服务，由于各个大队，公社之间的自然条件，设备能力等等各方面的差别，社员的个人收入之间不可避免的存在差别，作物的价值之间不可避免的存在差别。这些差别和不平等体现了资产阶级的法权。另外，我国还存在小部分私有制残余，在农村还存在少数非工业的个体劳动者，人民公社的社员还保留着部分的家庭副业，商业也存在个体商贩，这更是无时无刻不在滋生小生产思想。因此，我们绝不能丢掉阶级斗争这杆大旗，要不断扩大集体所有制的基本单位，从互助组到人民公社，未来人民公社这种集体所有制也一定要向全民所有制过渡。在思想方面更要以政治挂帅，对个体劳动人员进行社会主义教育，避免导致出现新的资产阶级分子。在相互关系方面，社会主义的相互关系是以社会主义公有制为前提的，在生产中劳动人民是相互合作，相互促进的同志关系。但此时的社会仍然存在“三大差别”，即工农差别、城乡差别、脑力劳动和体力劳动的差别。在社会主义社会，尽管工农，城乡间对立已经消失，取而代之的是相互协作、支援的新型关系，但工业与农业仍然存在生产资料公有化程度高低的差异，城乡间仍然存在生产技术、文化、生活方面的差异，城乡间的关系表现为形式上平等但事实上不平等。关于脑力劳动和体力劳动之间的立，列宁说这是 “现代社会不平等的最重要的根源之一。”（《国家与革命》） 在社会主义制度下，这两种劳动者之间没有根本利害冲突，但旧的分工没有完全消除，脑力劳动者仍然处于比较优越的地位，“技术至上”的资产阶级思想仍然有复辟的可能，这是产生新的资产阶级分子的重要温床。社会主义的领导与被领导关系是相互关系的重要方面。毛主席一九六九年四月二十八日在党的九届一中全会上说过： **“看来，无产阶级文化大革命不搞是不行的，我们这个基础不稳固。据我观察，不讲个体，也不讲绝大多数，恐怕是相当大的一个多数的工厂里头，领导权不在真正的马克思主义者，不在工人群众手里。过去领导工厂的，不是没有好人。有好人，党委书记、副书记、委员，都有好人，支部书记有好人。但是，他是跟着过去刘少奇那种路线走，无非是搞什么物质刺激，利润挂帅，不提倡无产阶级政治，搞什么奖金，等等。”“但是，工厂里确有坏人。”“就是说明革命没有完。”毛主席的指示告诉我们，看问题不仅要看形式，更要看实际内容。如果全民所有制的企业的领导权被资产阶级篡夺，那所谓全民所有制也是有名无实，即使是好人掌权，如果路线错了，问题也并没有解决。政治是经济的集中体现，政治路线决定了领导权在哪个阶级手中。
社会主义的产品分配是平等的吗？也不是。马克思和列宁无数次地提及，在全部生产资料归整个社会所有的前提下，劳动者参加劳动后领取的消费品是与自己的劳动量相当的。由此可见，社会主义的产品分配，遵循的是按劳分配这个调节商品关系的等价交换原则，按劳分配是平等的吗？我们很清楚，每个人的劳动能力是不同等的，有的人体力或智力比其他人强，有的人家中要赡养的人多一些，因此事实上某些人得到的就比另一些多一些，比另一些人富一些。这些设想是建立在全部生产资料归整个社会所有这个前提下，而现在提到的资产阶级法权比设想中范围还要广。这是因为社会主义社会不能一下子建立全民所有制，在相当长的一段时间内还存在集体所有制，以及个体所有制残余。这个弊病在社会主义是不可避免的，只有进入共产主义，消灭三大差别，人们的政治思想极大提高，社会产品极大丰富时，才能够消灭资产阶级法权，才能做到“各尽所能，按需分配”。毛主席在谈到社会主义产品分配时说： “总而言之，中国属于社会主义国家，解放前跟资本主义差不多，现在还实行八级工资制，按劳分配，货币交换，这些跟旧社会没有多少差别。所不同的是所有制变更了”“我国现在实行的是商品制度，工资制度也不平等，有八级工资制，等等。这只能在无产阶级专政下加以限制。所以,林彪一类如台, 搞资本主义制度很容易。因此，要多看点马列主义的书。”（转引自1975 年 2 月 22 日《人民日报》）。
三.限制还是扩大资产阶级法权
在新中国成立后，社会上仍然存在两个阶级——无产阶级和资产阶级，仍然存在两条道路——社会主义和资本主义。因此，限制还是扩大资产阶级法权，抵制还是推行资本主义路线，成为了党内两条路线斗争的重要内容，体现在经济路线上的资产阶级法权是资本主义滋生的土壤，走资派扩大资产阶级法权为他们在政治路线上的斗争服务，资产阶级法权直观的表现了阶级斗争的情况。
早在全国解放时，毛主席就认识到国内的主要矛盾是无产阶级与资产阶级的矛盾。因此，党没收了官僚资本家的一切资本，并对民族资本家进行利用、限制、改造，对私人资本主义进行社会主义改造。很大程度上取消了生产资料所有制范围的资产阶级法权。同时毛主席也预料到 “对于私人资本主义采取限制政策，是必然要受到资产阶级在各种程度和各种方式上的反抗的。”（《在中国共产党第七届中央委员会第二次全体会议上的报告》） 果不其然，修正主义头子刘少奇对社会主义改造无比敌视，他先后在华东、天津等地流窜，对资本家宣扬“剥削有功”，说什么“今天中国资本主义不是太多了，而是太少了”“对资本主义工商业七八年内不要限制”“我们要大量保留市场才能发展生产力”“有钱大家赚”他还提出要“巩固新民主主义”的口号，实质就是要在政治上“巩固”资产阶级地位，在经济上“巩固”资本主义生产关系，就是要“巩固”并扩大资产阶级法权，复辟资本主义道路。毛主席一针见血的指出 “有人在民主革命成功以后，仍然停留在原来的地方，他们没有懂得革命性质的专门，还在继续搞他们的“新民主主义”，不去搞社会主义改造，这就要犯右倾的错误。”（《中国农村两条道路的斗争》） 毛主席将新中国成立到社会主义改造基本完成这段时间定义为过渡时期，是对刘少奇一伙的修正路线的有力批判。
在对资本主义工商业进行社会主义改造的同时，也在对个体农户进行社会主义改造，这是限制农业生产资料所有制方面的资产阶级法权。广大农民按照毛主席的指示，组织互助社，建立初级合作社，发展高级合作社，不断扩大集体所有制，向全民所有制发展。刘少奇这时又跳出来反对合作运动。他说“未来合作社势必要缩小”“多流出来一些富农也好”。还伙同林彪贴出了所谓的“四大自由”，即自由租地、自由贷款、自由雇工、自由贸易。实质上是让资本主义生产关系“自由”泛滥，保护他们的生产资料私有制。
然而这种机会主义路线是阻挡不住历史潮流的，人民群众在实践中认识到只有集体合作才是农村的唯一出路，广大贫下中农的热情空前高涨，提出“把互助组提高一步，办成农业合作社”的要求。这可吓坏党内的走资派，他们从资产阶级的反动立场出发，先是指责这是“错误的，危险的，空想的农业社会主义思想”。又刮起“反冒进”妖风，逼迫农民“退（合作）社转（互助）组”。刘少奇趁毛主席不在北京，又亲自制定了“停缩整”的反动方针，砍掉了全国二十万个合作社。在这个关键时刻，毛主席做出了著名的报告《关于农业合作化问题》，高度赞扬了广大农民的社会主义积极性，并痛斥了党内的右派与机会主义分子，他们是 “站在资产阶级，富农，或者具有资本主义自发倾向的富裕中农的立场上替较少的人打主意。”（《关于农业和合作化问题》） 再一次打碎了刘少奇等人的反革命阴谋。
一九五六年，我国完成了三大改造，基本上取消课生产资料所有制范围内的资产阶级法权，建立了社会主义经济基础，但两条路线的斗争远没有结束。刘少奇与陈伯达又宣布国内主要矛盾是“先进的社会主义制度同落后的社会生产力之间的矛盾”。他们的目的就是让大家埋头生产，好使他们完成私有制复辟，使资产阶级法权在取消的范围内卷土重来这些不可告人的阴谋。但人民群众再一次在斗争中取得了胜利，经过五七年整风和反右派的斗争，广大人民认清了这些腐朽的意识形态的实质，对不适应生产关系的上层建筑进行有力冲击。毛主席于一九五八年提出限制资产阶级法权和批判资产阶级法权思想的问题，并在报刊上展开了一场限制还是扩大资产阶级法权的大论战，这场论战的实质是毛主席革命路线与刘少奇林彪等人修正主义的路线斗争。
刘少奇一伙人为了完成复辟的阴谋又改变方法。从五八年后，先是以“左”的面目出现，鼓吹“跑步进入共产主义”“取消商品生产”放卫星，大刮“共产风”毛主席在《关于人民公社若干问题决议》中揭露了他们形左实右的真面目 “这种想法是对发展社会主义建设不利的，因而是不正确的。” 刘少奇等人不甘示弱，又恢复原来的面目，抛出所谓的“三自一包”（自负盈亏、自由市场、自留地和包产到户）“利润挂帅”，对工人进行物质刺激，用小我破坏大我。又叫嚷“不要怕资本主义泛滥”“自由市场还是要搞下去的”。他们这些开历史的倒车的行为，是违反人民群众的根本利益的。农民们说 “单干好比独木桥，走一步来摇三摇；互助组好比石板桥，风吹雨打不坚牢；合作社铁桥虽然好，人多车稠挤不了；人民公社是金桥，通向天堂路一条。”
刘少奇、林彪多次向党的正确路线进攻，人民群众在毛主席的革命路线指导下不断反击，毛主席发动了无产阶级文化大革命，发动群众斗倒走资派。在农村，革命的农民和干部与走资派干部，地主，有落后思想的农民斗争；在城市，革命的工人和无产阶级干部与走资派干部和党外走资派斗争。基层的无产阶级干部和革命人民与走资派干部斗争，中央的革命力量则是和刘少奇，邓小平，林彪这些司令部斗争。在斗争中，中国人民彻底粉碎了刘少奇这个资产阶级司令部的阴谋，然而刘少奇垮台后，还有邓小平、叶剑英等死不悔改的分子，还有林彪这种阴谋分子跳出来对新生事物进行恶毒的攻击，无产阶级和资产阶级的路线斗争一直在进行。对于限制资产阶级法权抱什么态度，是无产阶级和资产阶级斗争，马克思主义和修正主义斗争的重要内容。要消灭复辟的土壤，消灭资本主义法权，惟有长期与资产阶级作斗争，并消灭“四个一切”，即 消灭一切阶级差别，消灭这些差别所由产生的一切生产关系，消灭和这些生产关系相适应的一切社会关系，改变由这些社会关系产生出来的一切观念。（《一八四八年至一八五零年的法兰西阶级斗争》）
四.资产阶级法权在中国复辟
以上，我们分别分析了资本主义社会和社会主义社会中资产阶级法权的表现形式，分析了如何限制资产阶级法权，使他的范围和作用逐步缩小，分析了走资派的复辟阴谋以及复辟资产阶级法权的行为。在最后一节，我们要分析资本主义生产关系是如何复辟的，分析经济基础与上层建筑之间的关系，以此明确我们斗争的方向。
般条件下，经济基础决定上层建筑，但后者对前者起反作用，并在一定条件下起决定作用。在无产阶级专政条件下，政治路线是起决定作用的。 生产力和生产关系的矛盾，生产力是主要的；理论和实践的矛盾，实践是主要的；经济基础和上层建筑的矛盾，经济基础是主要的：它们的地位并不互相转化。这是机械唯物论的见解，不是辩证唯物论的见解。诚然，生产力、实践、经济基础，一般地表现为主要的决定的作用，谁不承认这一点，谁就不是唯物论者。然而，生产关系、理论、上层建筑这些方面，在一定条件之下，又转过来表现其为主要的决定的作用，这也是必须承认的。当着不变更生产关系，生产力就不能发展的时候，生产关系的变更就起了主要的决定的作用。（《矛盾论》） 因此，资产阶级颠覆无产阶级政权，就会用政治手段，例如，军事政变。
一九七六年毛主席逝世后，邓小平、叶剑英、华国锋等人在怀仁堂谋划了一场无比黑暗的宫廷政变，这场政变令中国倒退了几十年，亿万的革命群众与无产阶级战士的鲜血付诸东流。如火如荼的无产阶级文化大革命也被迫停止。但如果以这次政变来证明无产阶级文化大革命的失败，是绝对的谬论。一场走资派领导几千士兵发动的军事政变，并且后发者毫无准备，这不能证明从下而上，亿万人的文化大革命的失败。这场政变在行动上只有几天，但按过程来说长达两年，七六年夺权，七七年“十一大”进行组织上的清洗，七八年的十一届三中全会，代表着修正主义在思想理论方面达到完备。
关于修正主义的复辟，我们可以分为政治，经济，思想三方面。本文重点是经济方面，政治是经济的集中表现，因而对于另外两点就不多加笔墨。
政治上文已经大致说明，在思想方面，修正主义者为了扩大自己的盟友队伍，逐步加强了基层资产阶级分子的力量，他们释放了监狱中的地主贵族（尤其是西北地区），平反那些走资产阶级路线的厂长、干部、富农，由他们协助统治，稳定局面；他们还抛出了自己的法宝“不争论”。不争论政变的性质，不争论政变后的道路，一旦群众中出现不同的意见立刻封杀，轻则打骂软禁，重则动武入狱。简略解释他们的可耻行径，“揭批查”“清洗三种人”两词即可。（后附文《揭批查运动才是真正的浩劫》）
在经济上，农业是国民经济的基础，因而这第一把屠刀，就砍在农业上。前文说过，我国建国来，走的是互助组到合作社，合作社到人民公社的光辉道路。如今这把屠刀，把公社、合作社通通拆分，把社员们十余年心血浇灌的大片耕地切得七零八落，把集体购买的农具牲畜分给个人，把大型的农业机器全部拆散，取消集体的统购统销，集体的森林树木开采砍伐，然后拉到个人家中，集体的医疗，学校，民兵组织…不论是农村福利还是革命体制，通通都是“极左余孽”，通通拆散或者归个人所有，用群众的福利为个人谋取利益。广大贫下中农面对改革却无能为力，只得心痛地喊出“辛辛苦苦几十年，一夜回到解放前。”
工业是国民经济的主导，修正主义者对工人的恶行同样是罄竹难书，他们抛出自己那套物质刺激，利润挂帅，先是解除工人的政治武装，然后将鞍钢宪法的“干部参与劳动，工人参与管理”彻底扔掉，改为厂长制，将企业交到个人手中，紧接着推行股份制，把工矿变为私人企业，最后则是露出自己私有化的獠牙，把企业送给私人老板，彻底砸烂社会主义的铁饭碗。而工厂周围的附属医院，学校等等，也拆的一干二净，舍弃工人的福利换取短暂的经济增速，以此来麻痹群众。工人彻底沦为市场的打工仔，跌入下岗失业的深渊。 Today, countless proletarians (including you and me in the future) have long lost all the benefits of socialism, leaving only a shell of surplus value from production. The ownership of production tools is so solidified, the gap between capitalists and the proletariat is so vast; their relationship is so vastly different, whether it’s 996 or delayed wages, it’s all normal in society, “Will he die early? There are still many people outside us!”; the speed of price increases is so fast that it has already surpassed wage growth. How is the total national output distributed among classes? How is property distributed among classes? How much money does a fight between enterprises cost the boss? How many employees lose their jobs because of it? The anxiety sold by the bourgeoisie has turned schools and workplaces into what they are today. Have their offspring ever been wronged because of this? Are their money earned through labor? How many cents do we earn from our labor? How deeply rooted is the bourgeois legal authority in life, how enormous is the capitalist production relationship established by it, how firm is the bourgeois government decided by them? Even a small official from Lüliang needs millions to hold office, and higher bureaucrats must loot even more people’s flesh and blood. Social existence determines social consciousness; the leaders of the bourgeoisie can never be Marxists. The economic base determines the superstructure; those who can become officials naturally represent the interests of capitalists. The superstructure reacts back on the economic base; bureaucrats protect the interests of capitalists. Socialist public ownership cannot arise under capitalist conditions. Khrushchev denied this point and proposed his own “Three Harmonies and Two Completes.” Only by replacing the bourgeois dictatorship with the proletarian dictatorship can the capitalist government be overthrown and the capitalist system eliminated. To eliminate poverty, we must eliminate the capitalist system; to eliminate unemployment, we must eliminate the capitalist system; to eliminate war, we must eliminate the capitalist system; to eliminate exploitation, we must eliminate the capitalist system.
Conclusion
Attached PDF file:
Critique of the Special Path to Capitalism.pdf (3.5 MB)