How Does the Communist Party of China Manage Development Issues？

Wu Bo， Dong Lei

Jiangxi People’s Publishing House

November， 2017

52.00 （CNY）

Brief introduction：

This book is an extraordinary piece of popular theoretical reading. It answers the worldwide question of how the Chinese Communist Party has led people of all ethnic groups during the past 40 years of reform and opening up to the global market， and achieved a history making developmental miracle. The authors elaborate on the CPC’s achievements， experience， and wisdom in solving developmental problems. The objective and academic style of writing makes this book an excellent report on the “China development program”.

Wu Bo

Doctoral supervisor， researcher of the Institute of Marxism at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. Mr. Wu has been long since engaged in the study of historical materialism and socialism with Chinese characteristics and is the chief expert at the major national social science fund.

“Development” has become a buzzword in modern China， which has been developing on a fast track since 1978， the year when the reform and opening-up began. In discussing issues related to development in contemporary China， we should focus on three basic principles： 1. To properly understand the development in contemporary China， we should compare it with the history of the development of the People’s Republic of China （PRC）， as well as the history of China since 1840， a remarkable year that distinguishes ancient China from modern China. 2. China’s development is based on the success of China’s revolution， making it necessary to incorporate China’s revolution since 1840 into our analysis， especially the New Democratic Revolution （1919-1949）. A lack of analysis of China’s revolution would undermine the foundation of studies on China’s development. 3. As the Communist Party of China （CPC） played a dominant， irreplaceable role in China’s choice of development path and choice of a rocky road of exploring development， we must shed light on the CPC’s relevance in the history of the development of the PRC.

I. The Rocky Road of Exploring China’s Model of Development

Widely known for its brilliant historical and cultural heritage， China contributed greatly to the advancement of human civilization， outperforming the rest of the world for a significant period. China’s commodity production was far more developed than that of Western Europe before the 1400s， which， as well as the commodity flow， remained vigorous in the early 19th century and outshone the West. Paul Kennedy， a famous American scholar， acknowledges， “Of all the civilizations of premodern times， none appeared more advanced， none felt more superior， than that of China.” John King Fairbank， a renowned American sinologist， puts it in greater detail， “As of 1800 … enormous fleets of Chinese sailing vessels （junks） plied the highway of the Yangtze River and its tributaries， while thousands of others sailed up and down the coast of China， taking southern fruit， sugar， and artifacts to Manchuria and bringing back soybeans and furs. One early British observer was amazed to calculate that in the 1840s， more tonnage passed through the port of Shanghai at the mouth of the Yangtze than through the port of London， which was already the hub of Western commerce.” According to Chinese scholar Dai Xu， China had the highest GDP in the world between 1700 and 1820， with its share of global GDP up from 22.3% to 32.9% and its share of the global population up from 22.9% to 36.6%.

These splendid records， however， are a harbinger of the decline of imperial China. The decline is even more prominent when compared with Britain： Britain rose as the first industrialized country since the epoch-making Industrial Revolution first took place in this European country， which overtook the rest of Europe and imperial China. The Industrial Revolution， originally revolving around the textile industry of fur， silk， and cotton， spilled over and influenced other industrial sectors， including transportation， mining， metallurgy， and manufacturing. Britain’s industry became more prominent than its agriculture， and the country became a genuine “factory of the world”， as its share of the world’s production of steel， coal， and cotton was recorded to be 53%， 50%， and almost 50% by 1860， even when only 2% of the global population was British; the country also accounted for 20% of global trade， 33% of global ships， and 40%-45% of the global industrial capacity. In The Communist Manifesto， Marx and Engels exclaimed how they were overwhelmed by the advanced productivity and stride-making development that were made possible by the Industrial Revolution， “The bourgeoisie， during its rule of a meager 100 years， has created more massive and more colossal productive forces than all preceding generations have together. Subjecting nature’s forces to man， machinery， application of chemistry to industry and agriculture， steam-navigation， railways， electric telegraphs， clearing of whole continents for cultivation， canalization of rivers， whole populations conjured out of the ground： what earlier century had even a presentiment that such productive forces slumbered in the lap of social labor？”

The state-endorsed and state-protected Western capital transcended national boundaries and ruthlessly sought profits in the Far East， including China. The modernization of China was， in fact， forced upon it by the West. The Qing Dynasty （1636-1912）， was so corrupt that it was defeated in many wars that invariably led to unequal treaties： two Opium Wars （or Anglo-Chinese Wars， 1840-1842 and 1856-1860）， the Sino-French War （1883-1885）， and the First Sino-Japanese War （1894）. All of these plunged China into a semi-colonial society， and the Chinese nation was thrown into destitution and humiliation.

To save the Chinese nation from crises， the imperial establishment represented by Zeng Guofan， Zhang Zhidong， Zuo Zongtang， and Li Hongzhang launched the Self-Strengthening Movement （1861-1895） and aspired to improve the country’s military capacity and economic development by learning from advanced Western technology. Their efforts were intended to consolidate the ramshackle feudal rule of the Qing government， but the country’s defeat in the First Sino-Japanese War spelled the end to this movement.

As for the peasantry’s efforts to save the nation， resurrections such as the Taiping Rebellion （1851-1864） and the Boxer Uprising （1899-1901） were cracked down on by reactionary forces both at home and abroad， although they heavily weakened the imperialists’ plot of dividing China into concessions and the feudal rulers’ clout over the country.

The poor， backward China in the late 1890s was due to the aggressive imperialism and corrupt feudalism， which gave rise to the bourgeoisie reformists’ attempt at reforming the feudal system. They lost the old world but did not obtain a new world， which made their suffering especially tragic. One prominent figure was Liang Qichao （1873-1929）， who founded Shiwu Bao （Current Affairs Journal） in 1896 to spread the notion of revolution. He founded “Shiwu Xuetang” （the College of Current Affairs， where the coursework was about why the Qing Dynasty should be overthrown） in the following year and admitted dozens of students， who later became the backbones of the 1911 Revolution and the Democratic Revolution （1911-1949）. The attempt at reforming the feudal system was void of any notion of revolution or even constitutional monarchy， as is typical in the Hundred Days’ Reform in 1898： the bourgeoisie reformists’ demand was that the Qing government could reform itself; it was like “carrying out reform while kneeling down”. Such a move was destined to be abortive and lasted no more than a hundred days due to the stubborn， feudal establishment， even Emperor Guangxu himself， who ruled China between 1871 to 1908， refused to constrain the imperial power and adopt constitutional monarchy （the emperor said， “I know what you mean， but there is a basic principle， which is that my power cannot be constrained.”）.

The failure of the establishment， the peasantry， and the bourgeoisie reformists spelled the end to attempts at achieving development through “self-improvement” or farmers’ uprisings because the feudal foundation remained. China in the late 1890s was， as Hu Sheng puts it， far from a modernized country with developed commerce， education， industry， and a democratic system. China， form 1840， was in a conundrum： it had to become independent by eradicating imperialist suppression and achieve modernization， but it could not do both simultaneously. The two problems were contradictory： China was suppressed by imperialism due to its backwardness， and the imperial suppression aggravated its backwardness.

Then the only viable way out for China was democratic revolution， which， in China， was initiated by revolutionist bourgeoisie represented by Dr. Sun Yat-sen. Dr. Sun was hailed as the great forerunner leading China’s democratic revolution， and was praised by Mao as “a great figure that oriented the tide of history”. Unlike the reformists， the revolutionist bourgeoisie resorted to topple the Qing Dynasty through military resurrections. Their efforts culminated in the 1911 Revolution， which put an end to China’s millennia of monarchical autocracy and made it possible for social development.

The revolutionists， however， were not without limitations in that they compromised with， rather than eradicated， the feudal and imperialist forces， without changing Chinese society or improving the people’s livelihoods. This is why China’s development was still fundamentally impossible after 1911， and Dr. Sun commented that “the state was even more corrupt， politically and socially， than the defunct Qing government， while people’s lives were more miserable.” In Mao’s observation， China should be fundamentally changed by embarking on a new model of development in order to avoid the limitation of the 1911 Revolution.

Frustrated by a series of setbacks in the rest of the 1910s， Dr. Sun proposed the “Hsin San-min Doctrine” （New Three Principles of the People） in the mid-1920s， which allowed the Sun-established Kuomintang （KMT） to ally with the Soviet Union and the CPC， and to help the peasantry and workers. This theoretical innovation made the KMT oriented to the interests of the people and expanded its social foundation， finally contributing to the national reunification in 1928 in which the CPC also had a fair share. However， the rightist KMT leader Chiang Kai-shek， who stood for the big bourgeoisie and the big landlord class， ditched the “Hsin San-min Doctrine” and broke the KMT-CPC alliance， leaving no hope for China’s development. The whole nation called for new leadership that would usher in a bright future.