From Engels to Lenin to Mao, all have expressed their sheer repulsion towards dogmatism. Mao has even written one text after another and spoken in multiple meetings about battling this problem in the party. He, along with other materialists, has made it clear that the Markets are a historical category that have existed since before capitalism. Capitalism =/= Commerce.
Then how is it some Marxists who claim to have read theory call China capitalist and label its supporters as ‘Dengists’? Socialists created the fastest growing economy ever observed in human history that lifted hundreds of millions of people out of absolute poverty. And now these dogmatists wanna give its credit to capitalism!?
Their entire prejudice is based on the misconception that Deng Xioping did not follow on Mao’s thoughts. Deng literally heeded Maoist ideas such as “Let a hundred flowers bloom, let a hundred schools of thought contend” and “The masses are the real heroes, while we ourselves are often childish and ignorant”. He built the productive forces for the Chinese people based on—not in spite of—the continuing influence of Mao Zedong’s ideology. Now Xi Jingping is continuing both of their legacies.
So people who make such non-materialist and often times liberal critique of the Chinese economy have either not read theory or did not develop any dialectical and historical materialism to understand the theory!
As Marxists and materialists, it is our responsibility to confront these reductionist elements in our movement and bring back the pendulum at its correct course when it swings too much to either sides; right-wing revisionism or left-wing dogmatism.
“No investigation, no right to speak.” - Mao Zedong
Yeah, we’re definitely not starting today, heh. May my great great grandkids rest in the shade of the trees we plant. Or something like that, you get what I mean. I should add, too, that Lenin acknowledges this in his own writings post revolution:
From Better Fewer, But Better. The second part of Lenin’s letter to the 12th Congres “How we Should Reorganise The Workers’ and Peasants’ Inspection”.
I’m not sure how he can look at Lenin, and then also the NED, and somehow not see the through line from the Lenin, the NED, and the Deng reforms. As socialists, are we supposed to believe that our state exists in a vacuum, unbothered by the global economy and global capitalist dominance? How is a socialist state supposed to maintain a command economy fully surrounded by capitalist economic schemes? The deal the Chinese made regarding technology sharing during the reform and opening up is what allowed them to own their productive capacity, instead of it being owned by the west.
I could go on and on, but to deny China’s path, is to deny Dialectical Materialism, to deny the Laws of Uneven and Combined Development. It’s dogmatic, plain and simple.
That’s an excellent excerpt, comrade, hadn’t read that before! I agree, there’s no one true socialism, and China’s choice to take advantage of market forces for developing themselves while retaining the principle aspects of the economy in the public sphere is fully in line with Marxism-Leninism. Fantastically well-said.