As China develops, it is becoming more difficult to explain how its government is still retaining a Marxist system. The poverty in the urban centres is undeniable as the beggars, the homeless, and the sick are a prominent part of the city landscape. There is no hiding the income disparity or the hopelessness of the average rural citizen who dreams of one day travelling to the big city. The city is only a train ride away but few can even afford this journey. Meanwhile, stories of corruption are rampant at every level of society. The only way to earn more income and move up the social ladder is to become an official party member. Even then, it is always necessary to increase social and political status through guanxi, or “making connections,” often through giving gifts or money.
So how do officials rationalize their system as communist? Using fancy wordplay to manipulate public opinion can only last so long. As a foreigner during my trip to China last summer, I was surprised to speak with both a Chinese university student and a Chinese journalist who agreed with my view that there is a fine (or even non-existent) distinction between guanxi and corruption. This type of business dealing does not seem to be consistent with communist theory, although it is sustained as a traditional practice.
Another phrase I continue to have doubts about is the term “market economy,” which, like guanxi, holds a complex position in the Chinese Communist Party system. A party member who works as a part-time translator and also guest lectures at Chinese universities about communism tried to define this term for me.
He explained (rather convolutedly from my Western perspective) that a market economy creates competition in order to motivate development. This type of economy is merely a means for development in order to make everyone equally rich, rather than equally poor, which was the case a quarter century ago. Somehow the gap between rich and poor has to be bridged to maintain the idea of a communist society, and supposedly a market economy will ensure this bridge by promoting competition and development.
Although our discussion was helpful in that it broadened my understanding of the Chinese perspective, the party member did not define his notion of capitalism nor explain how exactly capitalism differs from a market economy.
In recent weeks, Canadian newspapers have also been questioning the state of communism in China. The February 15 edition of the The Globe and Mail reported that “in a China of ruthless capitalism and rising inequality, it’s not easy being red.” Even party officials are having trouble believing in Marxism, and the government has been forced to crack down on corruption, punishing over 115,000 party members for corruption in one year alone. The March 6 edition of the National Post describes the Communist Party’s plans to re-indoctrinate party officials to be more in tune with Marxism.
However, for a country that has 200 million people living on less than one dollar a day, and where “the richest ten per cent control forty-five per cent of the country’s wealth,” the party’s challenge to maintain and continue reinforcing Marxist ideals seems implausible while the system remains undeniably capitalist in practice.
