The Historical Foundations of Communism in China and the Soviet Union - Essay Example

? SYNOPSIS: The historical foundations of communism in China and the Soviet Union were very different. Russia as a military industrial complex and Empire builder was outward looking while Mao looked inward when communism took root in China. Rather than expending reform in the latest weapon technologies and military, Mao and then his successors have focused on a gradual ascent toward liberalization. If the sun is not rising, it is falling, and while both Empires have had human rights atrocities on a significant scale, China's smooth assimilation of Hong Kong in the early nighties was a marked contrast in the same years as the twilight era of the Soviet Era and the birth or emergence Russian Republic. The central achievement of the Bolsheviks headed by Lenin in the first three years following the Revolution, was the establishment of the NEP. The New Economic Policy was a established for the purposes of providing a certain amount of freedom of trade in agrarian products, and which had the further proviso of allowing personal ownership of land, and also, the private entrepreneurship in both industry and in commerce 1[1]. And, in keeping with the notion that socialism or communism must be a gradual transformation, Lenin kept in the foreground of his policies the idea that the proletariat had not yet fully undergone the effects of industrialization2[2], as had their German and English counterparts in Western Europe. But, this notion that Russia or the Soviet Union was in a state of flux, or a state of 'between' Marx's central phases of economic development, came a number of troubling problems, faced not solely by Lenin, but also by his Bolshevik allies, comrades, or peers. For example, there was a struggle as to what extent it was possible in the Soviet Union, where a large number of distinct nationalities existed, to create and in turn maintain a strong central government? The questions of national unity were both raised at the theoretical level among the Bolsheviks, but prompted and coincidental with the actual affairs and events in the Soviet Union in these early years, and as well, to what extent would the trade unions who were already socialist in scope, be given autonomy from the central government, and from the Communist Party itself?3[3] In the very midst of the chaos of the First World War during the time of the Revolution, the Bolsheviks created an administrative structure facilitating the 'Red Army' under Leon Trotsky4[4], which in turn, was a force of troops more successful than the forces which had existed under the Tsar5[5]. Thus, what ensued was a form of terror which was enhanced by the conscription of men, property, as well as a re-direction of labour, food levies, and the imposition of wages paid in kind when there was a currency crisis -- that is, a complete loss of value of their currency 6[6]. In many respects, the measures of 'war communism' had a tyrannical effect, but this was coincidental with the fact that it was also successful in pulling the country together to some extent. The reforming or progressive side of communism, can be said to have ended with the early leadership of Lenin, such as it is lasted until March of 1921[7]7. Part of this restructuring, was the establishment of the NEP, and as mentioned in the above with regard to these policies, the effects were such that within a year or two, three quarters of the country's retail trade lay within private hands. This prompted a phase where the tolerance of dissension was generally and gradually eliminated. And, in turn, the restructuring program of this phase created two new hierarchies, namely the All Russian Congress and the council of People's Commissars 8 [8]. The effect of greater organization, both in terms of the structure as well as the sheer numbers of members which were increasing, was the net silencing of opposition. As the nature and essence of market style capitalism dictates, the survival of this system rests on expansion. In other words, expansion must (historically and in contemporary terms) must find new markets for goods on the one hand, and a continual quest for raw materials on the other -- ideally, the latter of which as being cheaper for the cost efficient production of goods. Thus, beginning in the 19th century, and extended to the time of the Russian revolution (indeed, today) is the expansionism of market economies abroad, which is roughly translatable as imperialism. One of the further reasons of centralization as manifest in the NEP, was the growing threat of imperialism, that is, the Soviet government as it was simultaneously opening the possibility of private ownership under the NEP, saw that it had to compete with foreign investment and foreign purchasing of raw materials produced in the Soviet Union9[9]. Thus, a continual growth of the power of the Communist Party, eventually grew into the extension of 'war communism' to extending neighbours for the purpose of finding a market other than capitalist ones for raw materials and goods, and it further, came the counter movements against foreign trade to a more insular or self-sufficient economy, which, in effect made policy as more and more centralized, creating in turn, power as more centralized. The effect of the NEP and of 'war communism', was a greater degree of centralization of policy making, and hence, of power within the Soviet Union. As mentioned in the introduction, this centralization allowed for Stalin's extremism which can or could be described as ultimately tyrannical10 [10]. It has been argued in this paper that the initial intentions of the Bolshevik's were essentially thwarted by two important contingencies, one was the fact that Lenin did not perceive Russia as ready for communism, which prompted in turn, the emergence of the NEP as a way of regulating a mixed economy, but which had the net effect of creating a greater degree of centralized planning. And, secondly, the contingency of both the First World War, and of the various uprising following the war which required the dimension of 'war communism'. Both centralization, and 'war communism' have of course been the means by which authority had been wielded over this century, and finally, and with regard to their origins, it is difficult, given the historical reality of the 'teens' in this century, to imagine these structures as not having been created. It is the contention and thesis of this analysis, that the roots of the failure of the Soviet Union, can be found within the problems inherent in the militarism of Stalinism Mao never let go of the necessity of an army, but As mentioned in the introduction, one of the first policies implemented by the Chinese Communists, was the Land Reform Law which was passed on June 28, 195011[11]. Within this policy or ‘act’, the peasants were divided into three groups: those who were regarded as wealthy, and determined in terms of anyone who received more than 25 percent of their income from the labour of others, in turn, there was a poor class, and a class of peasants between the wealthy and the near starving. Approximately 300 million peasants were given a total of 700 million mous of land (a mous is about 0.4 hectares), and the minimum a single peasant received was between two or three mous, which amounted to about a hectare per family12[12]. Although industrialization was generally regarded as successful, the population growth was proving to be an obstacle, as mentioned above in the context of the discussion of land reform policies. Further, changes were necessary in Mao’s eyes by the late 1950's because of growing opposition to communist principles, and it was an opposition measured in terms of party membership. It was expected that after a decade of communism, that the vast majority of the Chinese would be members of the communist party, however, by 1959, membership had peaked at only 30 percent of the total population. And, as such, Mao started to become the target of criticism both from members of the party and throughout China (to a lesser or moderate extent).13[ 13] With regard to industry, and in turn, some of the growing problems mentioned above, Mao initiated what was to be known as the “Great Leap Forward”14. This entailed the establishment of massive communes among rural communities, and each would contain about 40,000 people, and in total, there were about 26,000 of these communes established. China chose a path of isolationism, and for reasons mostly stemming from their history. The history of the Chinese has been fraught with conflict and hostility by foreigners since the opium wars with the British in the early to mid nineteenth century. However much he was an advanced social reformer, Mao faced many critics in the 1960's. What followed, or how Mao’s response became manifest, is in many ways difficult to evaluate, as it contained both beneficial as well as detrimental effects on the Chinese people and the economy15[15], and by this manifestation, it is implied in terms of the ‘cultural revolution’ which, at the outset, was entirely Mao’s responsibility. In 1966, and in a series of rallies, Mao invited all of the students throughout China to Beijing, and lectured them as to the dangers of the collapse of communism16 [16]. They in turn, and with Mao’s support, formed or re-formed the Red Guards, out of which chaos followed. They actively sought out and killed or tortured owners of private property, smashed thousands of cultural artifacts, tortured religious practitioners (e.g. Buddhists) and took over the entire party along with the governments bureaucracy17 [17]. In turn, Liu Shaoqi, the Head of State, and Deng Xiaoping, the General Secretary of the Central Committee were forced into exile or hiding, and in the case of Liu, he died in prison and with Deng Xiaoping, he did not re-emerge until after Mao’s death in 1976. In April of 1976, and with Mao’s approval18[18]., they announced that the figure of Hua Guofeng whose was regarded as a moderate was instated in power. By 1980, and four years after Mao’s death, Deng Xiaoping replaced Hua Guogeng as premier with one of his own assistants or protege’s, Zhao Ziyang19[19]. By this time, Deng Xiaoping had already taken charge of the economy, and established what was to become known as the ‘three-year adjustment’. Which meant cutbacks in investment, and in payments toward various services. Further, by the end of 1980, Deng had successfully held a trial of the “Gang of Four” and Jiang Zing20 [20]. In 1982 and 1983, the central government, under Deng, had forced the retirement of over age officials, both from the communist party itself, but also from the burgeoning bureaucracy. Deng also began enforcing or cracking down on political dissent, crime, and unauthorized contact between Chinese and foreigners21 [22]. These strategies are generally regarded as reactionary, and in turn, regarded in terms which suggest that the forms of dissent leading toward Tiananmen Square were already taking place during the early 1980's. Further, he implemented during this period, a measure to stave off an incredible population program. A policy was implemented, and enforced which entailed that couples were limited to having only one child, and in many situations, this was “ruthlessly” enforced by the army and police. Under Deng’s leadership, and in 1984, some important economic reforms were introduced. First, after having changed the collectivization of agriculture, which had been introduced both at the outset of Mao’s leadership in the early 1950's, and furthered in what was known as the “Great Leap Forward” in the late 1950's22, he furthered this process. He did so, by introducing a fairly liberal system, known as the responsibility system, and it was an arrangement, or a system, which was eventually introduced in the areas of industry and various other production sectors. Prices were supposed to be regulated at the local rather than the central level, factory managers were given greater autonomy and subsidies for the urban population for food and housing, and so forth, were lowered, and the consequences of this fairly positive. First, there was 15 % growth which was soon followed by 15 %, and a sizable loss of foreign exchange reserves due to large orders for foreign machinery, and consumer hard goods, a rise in official corruption and a substantial drop in the overall production of grain. As a consequence, many peasants were uprooted, and many were forced to find a new form of work.23[24] Sadly for the Soviet Union, market reforms however gradual were never an agenda paralleling the progress of communism in China. Where Mao worked very early for forms of liberalization, the Soviet Union set on upon a course of empire building. Works Cited: Conquest, Robert. The Harvest of Sorrow. Soviet Collectivation and the Terror-Famine (Edmonton: University of Alberta Press, 1986). Kesselman, Mark, Joel Krieger, Christopher Allen, Stephen Hellman, David Ost, George Ross (3rd edn) European Politics in Transition (Boston/New York: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1997). Laqueur, Walter. The Dream that Failed. Reflections on the Soviet Union (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994). Macfarquhar, Roderick. The Origins of the Cultural Revolution (New York: Columbia University, 1974). Mu, Yi. And Thompson, Mark V. Crisis at Tiananmen (San Francisco: China Books & Periodicals, 1989). Service, Robert. Lenin: A Biography (London: Macmillan, 2000). Spence, Jonathan D. The Gate of Heavenly Peace (New York: Viking Press, 1981). Spence, Jonathan D. The Search for Modern China (New York: W.W. Norton, 1991). Trotsky, Leon. The Revolution Betrayed (New York: Pathfinder, 1972). Uhalley, Stephen Jr., Mao Tse-Tung (New York: New Viewpoints, 1975). Wang, James C. F.. Contemporary Chinese Politics: An Introduction, 7th, edition. (Upper Saddle River, NJ.: Pearson Education, Inc., 2002). Chinese and Russian Communism: The Rising Versus the Fallen Sun. Read More