On Thursday 24 October, Friends of Socialist China participated in an event in New York City to celebrate the release of two revolutionary books: People’s China at 75: The Flag Stays Red, and Western Marxism by Domenico Losurdo, translated into English for the first time.
The event, which was held at the International Action Center HQ, featured a panel discussion with Carlos Martinez (co-editor of People’s China at 75), Gabriel Rockhill (editor of Western Marxism), and Danny Haiphong (independent journalist and broadcaster). The panel was chaired by Sara Flounders of the International Action Center.
Embedded below is a video of the event, which was live-streamed on Danny Haiphong’s YouTube channel, followed by the approximate text of Carlos’s remarks connecting the two books.
What was the reason for putting People’s China at 75 together?
The main motivation was that this milestone, the 75th anniversary of the founding of the People’s Republic of China, when Mao Zedong famously proclaimed in Tiananmen Square that “the Chinese people have stood up”, provided an opportunity to reflect on the significance of that event.
And it’s an evolving significance. The Chinese people are still living that history; indeed the world is living that history. The Chinese Revolution changed the world forever, and the processes of building socialism and struggling against imperialism are ongoing processes that modern China is very much a part of.
So we wanted to examine China’s trajectory since 1949 and to help people get to grips with China’s socialist project in all its different phases. Certainly this is a topic that’s very little understood in the Western world, including among many on the left.
And that’s perhaps where the overlap lies between the two books we’re discussing this evening.
The Western Marxism described by Losurdo is essentially dogmatic; it considers socialism from an abstract, purely theoretical viewpoint.
For these Western Marxists, it’s a handful of academics spending their time in conferences and writing vast impenetrable volumes that are at the cutting edge of knowledge production.
For the Eastern Marxists on the other hand – the people that are oriented to the actually existing struggle against imperialism and for socialism – it’s precisely those states, movements and parties that are engaged in the process of building socialism and struggling against hegemony that are making the major contribution to moving humanity’s collective understanding forward.
The dialectical relationship between theory and practice is at the core of Marxism. As Mao famously put it in his essay ‘On Practice’, “if you want knowledge, you must take part in the practice of changing reality. If you want to know the taste of a pear, you must change the pear by eating it yourself.”
Abstract theory won’t help us much when it comes to understanding modern China.
Where in Marx’s Capital or Theories of Surplus Value can you find a reference point for China’s reform and opening up process, which was launched in 1978? Nowhere.
Apart from anything else, Marx and Engels didn’t live to see the emergence of socialist states – beyond the early experiment of the Paris Commune – and couldn’t be expected to predict what problems might face a socialist state, recently emerged from semi-colonial semi-feudal status, thirty years after its founding, faced with imperialist encirclement and nuclear blackmail, and dealing with the responsibility of feeding a fifth of the world’s population with 6 percent of the world’s arable land.
Just as no battle plan survives contact with the enemy, no revolutionary process proceeds along straight and predictable lines. Or as Lenin put it when discussing the heroic 1916 Easter Rising in Ireland: “Whoever expects a ‘pure’ social revolution will never live to see it. Such a person pays lip service to revolution without understanding what revolution is.”
People see huge inequality in China, people see private capital in China, people see billionaires in China, people see McDonalds and KFC in China, and they pronounce: this isn’t socialism.
But what about the elimination of absolute poverty? What about the extraordinary improvements in people’s living standards? What about the fact that in this vast Asian country of 1.4 billion people, nobody suffers malnutrition, everybody has sufficient food, everybody has a roof over their head, everyone has clothing, everyone has access to education, healthcare, running water and modern energy.
Here we are in New York, in the heart of global capitalism. Do people here have those basic rights? How far would I have to walk from this building to find someone that doesn’t have a roof over their head, or who doesn’t have healthcare? I suspect not very far.
Why is it that China’s been able to solve these problems? Why is it that China is so focused on living standards and meeting people’s most fundamental human rights? Why is it that China is so far out in front when it comes to renewable energy, electric vehicles, forestation and biodiversity protection? Why is it that China made so much effort to prevent loss of life during the Covid-19 pandemic, whereas in the US over a million people died?
Clearly, the answer relates to China’s economic, political and social project. That China remains on the path to socialism, that has a mixed economy in which the commanding heights are publicly owned, that is run by a Marxist-Leninist party, and where the capitalist class is denied the right to organise in its own political interests.
So in terms of the line Losurdo draws in Western Marxism, I think it’s reasonable to say that on one side of that line you have people who only criticise and condemn China, who label it as capitalist or imperialist, who push the slogan ‘Neither Washington Nor Beijing’; and on the other side you have people who stand in solidarity with China, who seek to learn from China, who showcase China as an example of what can be achieved under socialism, and who resolutely oppose the US’s plans to contain and encircle China.
One thought on “People’s China and Western Marxism”