Chinese Economics Thread
- Thread starter Norfolk
- Start date
Not really. To be precise, it is a intrinsic character of market driven economy where individual producers compete for market shares irrespective of social demand which causes over capacity. In Marx's time there was no socialist state, capitalist state is only market driven, so over capacity is connected only to capitalist economy. Deng Xiaoping created something (Socialist Market Economy) that Marx and Lenin did not foresee, so we are looking at a totally new reality.I know, but they are taboos in CP ruled countries because Marx said they were intrinsic characters of capitalist countries and could have been solved well in a socialist country.We all know these and try to solve the problem without challenging Marx. If a new concept can help, why not?
I would not consider it a taboo for CCP as they consciously know and do not hide the fact that they are applying something from the capitalist system in China. Once CCP openly admit that they use capitalist means to serve their purpose, they have already admitted the biggest "taboo", so the "taboo" of over-capacity is peanut.
Also, there is nothing that CCP is challenging Marx, CCP simply proclaimed that they further developed Marx's theory in the new era, they proclaim that Marx could not have know everything of today. The essence is that CCP does not take Marx's theory as something curved on stone, CCP does not treat him as God, CCP is not orthodoxy.
IMO, Marx is not wrong, not proven at least. It is actually that, Marx did not know that his student Deng Xiaoping created a hybrid economy of Socialist and Capitalist. Marx can not be wrong for what the Chinese did some hundred years afterwards.
And Marx accurately pointed out the connection of over-production and market (equal to capitalist in 1800s) economy. Today's China is a market economy, so it will suffer over-capacity, that actually proves that Marx was absolutely right.
What do you mean? China has stopped being a planned economy since 1980 when Deng Xiaoping introduced market economy, of course overproduction can happen in China.
[
Deng said under his "Four Modernizations Concept" That the CCP must uphold Marxism -Leninism along with Mao Zedong thought.
Dont you think has resulted in some deviation?, when
Deng said under his "Four Modernizations Concept" That the CCP must uphold Marxism -Leninism along with Mao Zedong thought.
Last edited:
The upholding was about the CCP leadership, not about planned economy vs. market economy. So that upholding is not in contradictory of Leninism, and not related to Marxism.
An important development (and difference) of Lenin is that he advocate of the establishment of a socialist state surrounded by capitalist states and the survival of the socialist state can only be lead by a communist party. Marx did not envision such stage. He did not point out how to move from capitalism to communism at all. In his vision of communism, there is no state machine, therefor communist party is not needed at all. In Marx vision, communist party is only meant to lead the struggle to overthrow capitalist's state, it has no role in leading and ruling of the society afterwards. Marxism does not equal to Leninism. Marx was more of a theorist even though he was actively involved in actions. On the other hand Lenin, Mao and Deng were more of activists trying to do something unguided by Marx in a harsh reality.
Deng also said that now it is the early/entry-level (初级) socialism, there will be advanced level (less capitalist practice) socialism. So Deng is only acknowledging China's current lack of material base, not changing the ultimate goal of communism. It is not deviation (which would mean a different direction, different end goal), but an early stage (half in and half out) of socialism.
broadsword
Brigadier
I know, but they are taboos in CP ruled countries because Marx said they were intrinsic characters of capitalist countries and could have been solved well in a socialist country.
Anyway, whatever makes you think the Chinese economy is facing an 'economic crisis'? I have not noticed any Western economists' report like those from Forbes and WSJ that have used that description. 6%+ or even 4% is hardly a crisis.
broadsword
Brigadier
Now there is still a potential one. China's big manufacturing enterprises will not be deeply affected by 2~3 percentage slow-down of GDP increasing but those small private companies are, then the banks investing them, and then you know what... We should stop the Domino asap. As Premier Wen said, "China has 1.3 billion population. Any small problem multiplied by this will be big." Of course, he also said, "Any big problem divided by this will be small." So, to be a crisis or not will depend on the capability of government to prevent prevent problem spreading and to mitigate problem leveraging Chinese economic volume.
broadsword
Brigadier
@FirnCavalry ,
In your original post here, https://www.sinodefenceforum.com/chinese-economics-thread.t3715/page-664#post-434510, which started the back and forth, you did not state it was a potential one. No one was saying there was no potential. In that post, you showed that you did not know the difference between the meanings of 'economic crisis' and 'supply-side reform'.
In your original post here, https://www.sinodefenceforum.com/chinese-economics-thread.t3715/page-664#post-434510, which started the back and forth, you did not state it was a potential one. No one was saying there was no potential. In that post, you showed that you did not know the difference between the meanings of 'economic crisis' and 'supply-side reform'.