By Frank Ching
The Communist Party has been constantly adjusting its ideology through revisions to the constitution. Expect this approach, not outside pressure, to produce change.
The 90th anniversary of the Chinese Communist Party on July 1 provided an opportunity for the party to defend its record – and for others to take stock of the evolution of its ideology since it first assumed power in 1949.
A look at the party’s various constitutions through the six decades since the creation of the People’s Republic of China is instructive. A constitution by definition is meant to be a permanent document, and while amendments can be made, they’re not supposed to be able to be made too easily. Yet, the Communist Party has had more than half a dozen constitutions, each of which claimed to provide the definitive guide to action for the party.
Before the party came to power—and indeed for years afterward—congresses were held sporadically until, beginning in the 1980s, they began to be held every five years.
The first congress held after the party assumed power was in 1956, and the constitution issued at that time asserted: ‘The Communist Party of China takes Marxism-Leninism as its guide to action.’
‘Only Marxism-Leninism,’ it said, ‘correctly sets forth the laws of development of society and correctly charts the path leading to the achievement of socialism and communism.’
The next party congress was held 13 years later, at the height of the Cultural Revolution, after head of state Liu Shaoqi and Communist Party General Secretary Deng Xiaoping had both been overthrown. The new party constitution stated that: ‘The Communist Party of China takes Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tsetung Thought as the theoretical basis guiding its thinking. Mao Tsetung Thought is Marxism-Leninism of the era in which imperialism is heading for total collapse and socialism is advancing to worldwide victory.’
So, the party effectively redefined Marxism-Leninism as Mao Tsetung Thought—Marxism-Leninism for the current era.
Constitutions rarely include the names of the living, but this one did. In fact, it specified who the next leader of the Communist Party would be. Lin Biao, the constitution said, was Chairman Mao’s ‘closest comrade-in-arms and successor.’
Lin was killed in 1971 when his plane crashed while he was supposedly fleeing to the Soviet Union after a failed attempt to assassinate Mao. Naturally, then, the constitution naming him as the successor had to be changed. This was done in 1973, the year after the visit to Beijing by US President, Richard Nixon, when it became clear that China was traveling a new path.
But this constitution didn’t last long either. Mao died in 1976 and, the following year, while Hua Guofeng was chairman and premier, a new party congress adopted another new constitution. Here, Mao Thought was defined as ‘the guiding ideology and theoretical basis of the Communist Party of China.’
But eventually, Deng was able to outmaneuver Hua, removing him first as premier – a post given to Zhao Ziyang – and then divesting him of the party chairmanship. Hua was succeeded in that post by Hu Yaobang.
A new party congress had to be held to legitimize this new leadership and, of course, another new party constitution was unveiled. But even though by now Mao had been dead for six years, the 1982 constitution still stated that: ‘The Communist Party of China takes Marxism-Leninism and Mao Zedong Thought as its guide to action.’
A party plenum held the previous year explained that Mao Zedong Thought wasn’t actually the chairman’s individual thinking, but the collective wisdom of the party. Hence, even though Mao was no longer alive, his thought would continue to develop.
Although ordinary people may not care much about ideology, from the party’s standpoint, it has to justify changes in policy ideologically. What the party did after Mao’s death was to abandon his policy of unending class struggle within the country and the support of revolution around the world.
Deng reversed Mao’s policies by focusing on economic development, and to do this he had to transform the party’s ideology. Actually, from 1978 on, Deng became China’s new strongman and his thinking came to replace Mao Thought. He also introduced the concept of ‘socialism with Chinese characteristics,’ noting that since national conditions are different in each country, the socialism being practiced would also need to be integrated into a country’s actual conditions.
Reddit
Digg
StumbleUpon
Delicious
Technorati
Yahoo
Google
Plurk
ozivan
@John D Froelich. How about this view ? Here’s another scenario.
So far, by and large, China is characterised by the following :
1. China produces most of her products…low and mid-tech.. for exports,
2. Has a frugal living culture and lifestyle,
3. Middle class family in the city means having a modest apartment of
your own, a TV, a fridge, a 1300cc to 1500 cc 4 door car, dress well and
smartly, 3 good meals a day, ocassional dining out, 2 local holidays per
annum, etc
In the rural areas, getting and reaching for better living standards
means :
- a modern concrete and tile farm home, with modern amenities of clean water
and electricity,
- 3 good meals a day,
- 1 motorcycle or a motored tri-cycle that carries 3,
- a farm truck that can fit in as family transport, and some modern
farm tools,
- a TV, a fridge, many nice warm cultural clothing,
- weekend outings to the city,
In 2020, when China feels that the US and the world are beginning to
SHOW STRAINS absorbing China’s goods, she will :
Set the wheels of CONSUMERISM moving inside China, and move her
manufacturing up the VALUE CHAIN,
The China in 2020 and thereafter will gradually change, like it happened
to the Western countries 20 years ago into this :
1. Most of her exports becomes more higher tech types,
2. The quality of the products are very high, easily accepted by the
world as reliable in the likes of the Panasonics, Sony, Hitachi, Toyotas, etc
of Japan or the LG, Hyundai, Samsung, etc of South Korea.
3. It’s not uncommon to see most of the world’s commercial airplanes,
cruise liners are made from or comes from China
4. China BRANDS are increasingly accepted and popular,
5. China made automobiles are gradually pushing out the Toyotas,
Nissans, Hyundais like they did to GMs, Fords in the US, or the Holdens in
Australia…leaving the Ferraris, Maseratis, Aston Martins, top end
BMV & Mercedes for the West.
China’s rich and higher middle class start consumerism by (never seen
before) :
1. For the middle class in the city, 3 good meals at home during the
weekdays with a foreign maid around the house, and dining out in the weekends
in fine Chinese dining or fancy Western, Japanese, Korean foods
2. Modern apartment, 2 TVs in the living room, and one each in every
bedrooms, 3 doors fridge, branded leather sofas, etc
3. At least 2 cars, one of which is a 3 series type BMW or Lexus or a
sports Mercedes..any equivalent
4. Owns at least 2 or more apartments, a holiday home in the country or
overseas.
5. International club & golf membership, one or more overseas
holidays per annum
6. For the coastal cities, private ownership of boats and yachts,
increases by leaps and bounds
7. Wear branded clothes, shoes, Rolex watches, Luis Vutton handbags,
etc etc
8. As for the lack of 50 million women in China, the Philippines and
Vietnam, with Asia’s best and prettiest women, would be clashing over the
issue of the “greedy” Chinesemen…instead of over the South China Seas.
The rural Chinese folks naturally moves up too in consequence.
John Froelich, hope you’ll believe in both the US and China.
The US would not be “LOST” and would still be in top running.
Exiting commercial airplanes, America would become the top producers of
tourism spacecrafts, and transport vehicles from earth to the moon and
back, etc.
Trust America, my friends, the Americans are still the top innovators,
and they still have a bellyfull of fight in them.
The 21st Century will be a century of great COLLABORATION,… may not
necessary be one of cold war, ideologies as in the past, or ZERO sum
games.
I am an optimist.
ozivan
Or, rather it is: All men are created equal, but some men are more equal than
others
Animal Farm by George Orwell
John D. Froelich
My long-term projection has been, for the past 20 years, that China is facing great turmoil in the 2019-2021 era. The lack of 50 million women, a sexual imbalance from the one child policy, combines with uneven growth that sent millions from the cities back to primitive villages with no jobs, land problems, etc, etc.
Politicometrically, regimes get a major shakeup at their 72-year points, as the US did with the Civil War, and dozens of other examples. That is 2021, and part of a 36-year cycle, that also appears in dozens of nations.
(See Politicometrics.)
1912 Revolution
1949 Communist takeover
1985 Deng’s Reforms
2021 ??
Russia for Comparison:
1881 Narodnik Reforms
1917 Russian Revolution
1953 Reforms at Stalin;s Death
1989 Perestroika
The largest American problem comes if, during this crisis, a desperate China dumps alot of our debt due to their extreme need. Other than the Islamic Terrorist problems, this is the greatest foreign policy problem.
But there are impacts on other questions, such as how many troops we continue to have in Iraq after the Occupation ended in 2005, when sovereignty was returned to Iraqi authority.
The answer on China: Sharply REDUCE our national debt before the crisis.
I plan, around 2019 to put most of my resources into “selling short” on Chinese stocks.
John Chan
@ John D. Froelich:
Instead of discussing the dynamism of Chinese politics as in the article, you use witchcraft to curse China. On the hindsight is 20-20, you only put forward your projection for two USA hated rivals to gloss up your anti-China slandering. You should make your slandering looks better by putting up projections for the USA, Japan, India, UK, etc. so that your projections become balanced and creditable.
As Chinese believe that bad deed can shorten one’s life, amount of bombing and killing USA has been carrying out around the world that would shorten USA’s politicometrics 36-year cycle to 18-year cycle, therefore the major shake-up for the US would:
2008 USA financial collapse
2024 USA breaks up into 6 pieces as predicted by a Russian Professor
You could make more money by shorting USD and treasury like Jim Rogers and George Soros right now instead of waiting for something another 10 years that might not turn out in your liking. Why do you let your resources sitting idle, your investment decision seems not sound.
Making money in the market is never as easy as fortune telling; otherwise all fortune-tellers would be rich, my investment advice to you is to buy USA treasury notes, at least you can get a constant stream of income before USA defaults on its treasury payment.
ozivan
@John Chan. You said : 2024 USA breaks up into 6 pieces as predicted by a Russian Professor.
Interesting !! What’s the name of this Russian Professor and the book ? Love to read more about it, prior to me writing one day my view on : How Democracy Can Be Used To Destroy Democracies ? or within 30 to 50 years: Democracy Destroys Democracies
Cyrus
This I got to see if it would be possible. Though I doubt it since Americans define themselves as Americans and not by state mostly. So a break up in three ways is hard to picture.
John Chan
@ozivan:
You can google “Russian forecast usa breakup” to get the info. The time I just made it up to rebuff Froehlich’s mean spirited comment.
ozivan
@John Chan. Thanks. I’ve read it. According to Russian Professor Igor Panarin, the breakup of USA would be due mainly to economic reasons.
In one of the many points, when I write about the subject of : Democracy Destroys Democracies….it’s more likely that the State of California will go independent by democratic process. Europe will turn extreme FAR RIGHT to safeguard its European identity.
There are already early signs of such thoughts like what happened to Norwegian Anders Behring Breivik, Dutch MP Geert Wilders, etc. More of their likes will come to the forefront in Europe in the coming years, largely triggered by black and muslim migrants non-assimilable culture and background. Using democratic rights and process, the blacks and muslims citizens in Europe will drive Europe uasunder.
Cyrus
It’s just like Plato’s Republic. Wherein it separates the Producer Class and the Guardian Class. Wherein the Sole purpose of the Guardian Class is to study and learn since they are destined to rule. They should procreate to produce the best genes. From the best of the Guardian Class would be the Philosopher Kings the ultimate head of the Society.
Though the offspring of the Producer Class would have the chance to join the Guardian Class when an exam would be given at certain age to see if the child would either be a Producer or a Guardian. Before then they are under one school system with no discrimination if their parents are producers or Guardians.
Alice Miller
Mr. Ching seems unaware that “Mao Zedong Thought” was added to “Marxism-Lennism” in the CCP constitution adopted at the 7th Congress in 1945, and so the 8th Congress constitution’s reference only to “Marxism-Leninism” reflected the dropping of “Mao Zedong Thought,” consistent with the de-Stalinization effort under way by September 1956.
In addition, he also seems unaware that both the “scientific development concept” and “socialist harmonious society” were added to the preamble of the CCP constitution at the 17th Congress in 2007.
bjd
“All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.”