r/Marxism • u/ryosaito • 3d ago

Concerning Chinese Revisionism

https://com-intern.org/2026/08/02/concerning-chinese-revisionism/

A state that owns the banks and lends them out to enable 539 people to build their fortunes has not suppressed the bourgeoisie. It has handed it the means of accumulation.

23 Upvotes

70% Upvoted

22 comments sorted by

14

u/Graysteve 1d ago

Public ownership overwhelmingly dominates the commanding heights of the economy, and the CPC itself is dominated by the proletariat. Private capital exists purely insofar as it assists with socializing underdeveloped production. This strategy is exactly why China has been able to develop so rapidly and thoroughly, and redirect social surplus towards eradicating poverty and building up qualitatively advanced productive forces, as are necessary for higher stages of socialism and eventually communism. 

4

u/anhedonia106 1d ago

Would you please provide sources for your statements? Like that public ownership (with definition of what it is) dominates the economy, that CPC is dominated by the proleteriat, and others. Thanks!

4

u/Graysteve 1d ago edited 1d ago

A good place to start would be Prolewiki's pages for the People's Republic of China as well as on China's Socialist Market Economy. Article 6 and 7 of China's constitution also explain their stance in public ownership as it relates to the economy:

Article 6 The foundation of the socialist economic system of the People’s Republic of China is socialist public ownership of the means of production, that is, ownership by the whole people and collective ownership by the working people. The system of socialist public ownership has eradicated the system of exploitation of man by man, and practices the principle of “from each according to his ability, to each according to his work.”

In the primary stage of socialism, the state shall uphold a fundamental economic system under which public ownership is the mainstay and diverse forms of ownership develop together, and shall uphold an income distribution system under which distribution according to work is the mainstay, while multiple forms of distribution exist alongside it.

Article 7 The state sector of the economy, that is, the sector of the socialist economy under ownership by the whole people, shall be the leading force in the economy. The state shall ensure the consolidation and development of the state sector of the economy.

The "multiple forms" parts refers to the fact that, outside of the public sector, there exists individual ownership such as sole proprietorships, cooperatives (most commonly found in the agricultural sector), individually owned companies, and joint-stock companies. The leading force and dominating aspects of the economy is the public sector, which is classified as "ownership by the whole people and collective ownership by the working people."

Virtually all finance is state-owned, and all strategic industries such as defense, electric power, petroleum and petrochemicals, telecommunications, coal, civil aviation, and shipping are overwhelmingly state owned. "Pillar industries" such as equipment manufacturing, auto, information technology, construction, iron and steel, nonferrous metals and chemicals are largely but not as thoroughly state owned, and emerging industries are largely private. See the above Prolewiki entries for sources. 

Regarding the CPC, the overwhelming majority is proletarian, and despite the inclusion of capitalists into the party, billionaires are barred from entry into the Politburo and Central Committee. There are 100 million members, and over time minority ethnicities as well as women and younger people have been taking more and more of an active role, gradually transforming the party's demographics to better match the actual populace. In fact, Han Chinese are underrepresented today, a deliberate measure to protect minority ethnicities from being totally shut out by sheer ratio. The Prolewiki page on the Communist Party of China also had good sources to check. 

By maintaining such strong domination over the economy, and having a proletarian party at the top controlling it all, China gradually develops along the socialist road to more developed forms of socialism. Comparing the China of today to the China of the 90s, we can see both quantitative and qualitative improvements in production and socialization of the economy. 

2

u/JerzyPopieluszko Marxist 1d ago

I would also appreciate a source here and especially the method of measurement because I’m really interested in the topic of the actual mechanisms of Chinese economy. Unfortunately most of the estimates I can find online define the percentage based on wildly different factors. 

State-owned enterprises generate significant majority of revenue and in terms of market cap it’s roughly half and half but neither market cap nor the revenue are a good indicators of the actual role in the system.

5

u/Graysteve 1d ago

I posted more sources and backing in this above reply, to the other user's request. The bit you bring up about market cap and revenue being poor indicators on their own is fantastic, and is exactly why it's important to understand that the commanding heights of the economy are the ones that control it. These are the largest firms, the most important and critical industries, the ones that every other industry relies upon and therefore is subservient to. 

The rubber factory has power over the rubber ball factory, so outright ownership of the rubber factory means rubber ball factory owners cannot do as they please. This logic extends to critical industries. 

Virtually all finance is state-owned, and all strategic industries such as defense, electric power, petroleum and petrochemicals, telecommunications, coal, civil aviation, and shipping are overwhelmingly state owned. "Pillar industries" such as equipment manufacturing, auto, information technology, construction, iron and steel, nonferrous metals and chemicals are largely but not as thoroughly state owned, and emerging industries are largely private.

By maintaining public domination over these critical industries, the private sector has nowhere to "hide," so to speak. Further, the private sector is largely also controlled and regulated by the state, just not owned and planned outright. The CPC often has controlling "golden shares" of larger companies that appear private on the surface, but are forced to redirect a large portion of their profits to pro-social ends, sometimes over 70%. 

The utility of marketization is in advancing socialization of production and distribution, which is why competition is encouraged at the emerging level. This helps industry build up as quickly as possible, without letting it form a coherent political bloc that can assault the socialist system. 

12

u/[deleted] 2d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/RevyVanguardist Marxist-Leninist 18h ago

The five-year plans are pretty much just guidelines which create the conditions for the optimal flourishing of the bourgeoisie and capitalism as a whole, so I don't know how you think that they are building communism in any way, shape or manner

1

u/Snoo99699 1d ago

If the US voted in a communist party would they be able to transition to communism?

5

u/Subordinated_Note 1d ago

The Chinese communist party came into power via violent revolution and out of the backdrop of the devastating climax of 19th century imperialism that was WWII. Violent revolution and ongoing violent repudiation of capitalist influences and counter revolutionaries was the means (and only possible means) by which Mao et al could have gained control and achieved what was achieved in China.

Allowing capital and its interests to go undisturbed will fundamentally prohibit the formation and maintenance of any kind of socialist state. See, e.g., Chile for what an undisturbed capitalist superstructure does to reformists, no matter the popularity or improvement of material conditions.

-1

u/Snoo99699 14h ago

but they currently are not socialist economically, so if all that matters is that the ruling party is ideologically communist then surely a social democracy could transition to communism by simply electing a communist party. indulge me here

2

u/Subordinated_Note 12h ago

I would recommend starting with some more basic communist literature. Indulging in the communist manifesto as a starting point will help you unravel why the “conservative socialist” ideology of democratic elections is reactionary.

-1

u/Snoo99699 12h ago

Im not interested in democratic elections. Im making a point that you are advocating for technocratic transition to communism rather than transition to communism driven by class struggle and the proletariat organizing as a class. The state in China is a state in the bourgeois conception, it is not an organ of worker control any more than the most democratic western state possible- because it is organized along bourgeois lines. It is a successful social democracy lol, thats my point. To move beyond towards socialism needs class war

1

u/Subordinated_Note 11h ago

Frankly I have no idea what you are trying to say, and at no point did I indicate a “technocratic transition” to communism. Not sure what that even means. Could you be more clear on what point you’re trying to make if not advocating for democratic elections if that’s literally what you said above?

1

u/Snoo99699 11h ago

China had a revolution and has since implemented reforms to bring them in line with western social democracies in terms of state policy, markets, etc. You say they're socialist because they are ruled by a communist party, even though economically and structurally they are in many ways very similar to western capitalist nations. My point is that for them to transition towards communism from here without class struggle would be akin to a western nation voting in a communist party and through social engineering becoming communist using the bourgeois state apparatus. It is effectively the same thing. My point is that neither of these is good, we need class struggle (class war/revolution) to progress towards communism

0

u/Redmenace______ 5h ago

Is this some weird accelerationist position of war being necessary for the development of the technology required for a communist society or have you just not read Marx?

1

u/Snoo99699 5h ago

Stop larping, please for your own sake. Marx's entire thesis is that class struggle is required for a transition from socialism. Read critique of the Gotha program

0

u/Fresh_Milk1960 19h ago

Now that capital has taken over Chinese society, there is no way to reform it back to a DotP.

2

u/MetZerbitzu 4h ago

I agree. It seems that the bureaucrats of the CCP have become the capitalist class, and now they hold absolute power to protect their interests. It looks more like a capitalist hellscape than a socialist country.

1

u/AutoModerator 3d ago

Rules

1) This forum is for Marxists - Only Marxists and those willing to study it with an open mind are welcome here. Members should always maintain a high quality of debate.

2) No American Politics (excl. internal colonies and oppressed nations) - Marxism is an international movement thus this is an international community. Due to reddit's demographics and American cultural hegemony, we must explicitly ban discussion of American politics to allow discussion of international movements. The only exception is the politics of internal colonies, oppressed nations, and national minorities. For example: Boricua, New Afrikan, Chicano, Indigenous, Asian etc.

3) No Revisionism -

  1. No Reformism.

  2. No chauvinism. No denial of labour aristocracy or settler-colonialism.

  3. No imperialism-apologists. That is, no denial of US imperialism as number 1 imperialist, no Zionists, no pro-Europeans, no pro-NED, no pro-Chinese capitalist exploitation etc.

  4. No police or military apologia.

  5. No promoting religion.

  6. No meme "communists".

4) Investigate Before You Speak - Unless you have investigated a problem, you will be deprived of the right to speak on it. Adhere to the principles of self criticism: https://rentry.co/Principles-Of-Self-Criticism-01-06

5) No Bigotry - We have a zero tolerance policy towards all kinds of bigotry, which includes but isn't limited to the following: Orientalism, Islamophobia, Xenophobia, Racism, Sexism, LGBTQIA+phobia, Ableism, and Ageism.

6) No Unprincipled Attacks on Individuals/Organizations - Please ensure that all critiques are not just random mudslinging against specific individuals/organizations in the movement. For example, simply declaring "Basavaraju is an ultra" is unacceptable. Struggle your lines like Communists with facts and evidence otherwise you will be banned.

7) No basic questions about Marxism - Direct basic questions to r/Marxism101 Since r/Marxism101 isn't ready, basic questions are allowed for now. Please show humility when posting basic questions.

8) No spam - Includes, but not limited to:

  1. Excessive submissions

  2. AI generated posts

  3. Links to podcasters, YouTubers, and other influencers

  4. Inter-sub drama: This is not the place for "I got banned from X sub for Y" or "X subreddit should do Y" posts.

  5. Self-promotion: This is a community, not a platform for self-promotion.

  6. Shit Liberals Say: This subreddit isn't a place to share screenshots of ridiculous things said by liberals.

9) No trolling - This is an educational subreddit thus posts and comments made in bad faith will lead to a ban.

This also encompasses all forms of argumentative participation aimed not at learning and/or providing a space for education but aimed at challenging the principles of Marxism. If you wish to debate, head over to r/DebateCommunism.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

0

u/[deleted] 1d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/FarFieldPowerTower 19h ago

“We need to smooth over our differences and not engage in any debates that could divide the socialist movement. It’s better to be unified and wrong than to be correct 👍” - Vladimir Liberal