The fightback
User avatar
Posts: 3917
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle island

Re: China

Post by blindpig » Tue Jun 04, 2019 1:00 pm

"1989 Tiananmen Square Incident" Pictures Show
What happened before and after June 3, 1989
at Tiananmen Square
-- Pictures released by Chinese government after the incident
(Source: The Beijing Riot - A Photo Record by New Star Publishers, Beijing 1989) ... 9_home.htm
"We ask no compassion from you. When our turn comes, we shall not make excuses for the terror."

User avatar
Posts: 3917
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle island

Re: China

Post by blindpig » Mon Jul 01, 2019 3:26 pm

China braces for compulsory garbage sorting, with Shanghai taking the lead
Updated 09:19, 01-Jul-2019
By Hu Yiwei


Starting Monday, Shanghai residents are required by law to sort garbage into four different categories, or they could face fines.

Individuals, including tourists, can be fined 200 yuan (29 U.S. dollars) for failing to sort their waste properly, while companies and institutions can be fined up to 50,000 yuan.

Shanghai's most heated topic of "which is the right bin for my garbage" may sweep other cities in the near future, as the national legislation is planning to speed up mandatory garbage sorting by writing it into law.


Shanghai is among China's first cities to introduce garbage classification and also the country’s most serious in its implementation.

Its regulation covers reducing the amount of garbage produced at sources, ensuring separate transportation of different trashes, upgrading treatment and promoting social participation.

Necessity of sorting

The initiative is part of a nationwide push to tackle China's growing mountains of domestic wastes.

In 2018, the total volume of domestic garbage in Shanghai hit nine million tonnes, which means Shanghai households produced nearly 26,000 tonnes of garbage a day – enough to build the city's 420-meter-high Jinmao Tower every two weeks.


The nationwide volume of domestic wastes has also jumped significantly in recent years.

In 2013, each of China's large and medium-sized cities generated an average of 0.6 million tonnes of domestic wastes. The number soared to one million tonnes in 2017, according to calculations based on reports released by China's Ministry of Ecology and Environment.

The amount of wastes is straining the capacity of China's waste management facilities and posing a threat to the environment.

Garbage sorting is the best way and the first step to slashing the social cost of waste treatment and boost recycling, experts said.


Handling difficulties

The biggest challenge in implementing waste classification is getting residents to develop the habit and fully participate in it.

Low participation, lack of public awareness and insufficient classification facilities were all reasons for a lack of waste sorting, according to past surveys.

Residents are also struggling with how to sort waste properly. For example, the right way to sort a cup of leftover bubble tea and half-eaten crayfish have sparked great debate on social media.

Other problems also include harsh time and place requirements for trash dumping and improper disposal of sorted garbage, as some cases in Shanghai showed.


But the situation is improving. The municipal government has set up online apps to handle sorting inquiries, and issued guidelines to address the "one-size-fits-all" method.

Cities like Beijing and Shanghai have launched point-rewarding scheme to motivate its residents by allowing them to exchange for daily products with points earned through proper sorting.

The country will also invest over 21 billion yuan (three billion U.S. dollars) in the construction of garbage processing facilities to meet demands, officials said last Friday.


China is embracing the era of compulsory garbage sorting with its cities enacting or revising regulations on garbage classification. And these efforts are taking effects already – Chinese households practicing garbage sorting in 2018 increased by 11.4 percent from a year earlier, authorities said.

Garbage sorting is good for the environment and essential for the country’s sustainable development, and may finally turn out to be a promising industry as well.

A growing number of companies are turning to garbage disposal solutions for profits. Alipay, for example, is offering a garbage pick-up service that allows users to place orders to sell their wastes.

Stocks related to household trash sorting business have also surged recently.

(With input from Xinhua. Graphics: Li Jingjie, Jia Jieqiong) ... index.html

China moves forward while the West moves backwards, paralyzed at best.

Damn planned economy can't get nuttin done...
"We ask no compassion from you. When our turn comes, we shall not make excuses for the terror."

User avatar
Posts: 3917
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle island

Re: China

Post by blindpig » Mon Jul 01, 2019 4:28 pm

Colonial Policy by Other Means: Losurdo on Hong Kong’s Supposed ‘Self-Determination’
18 june, 2019 by stalinsmoustache,

A small number of former colonial powers are fond of trotting out the mantra of ‘self-determination’ for parts of the world they would like to control. Hong Kong and Taiwan are good examples (even though the USA has the world’s strongest measures against self-determination of its own states). In the last few days, deliberate misinformation concerning Hong Kong has been peddled in a small number of places. If you want to get a fuller picture, see the reports here, here, here, here and here.

So it is worth recalling Losurdo’s observations on such a matter. The first comes from his essay, ‘Lenin and Herrenvolk Democracy’ (2007):

Colonial domination has left its mark: on the economic level, the inequality of development among different regions has been accentuated; while the hegemonic presence at every level of the great powers and the policy of ethnic engineering, often promoted by them, has accentuated cultural, linguistic, and religious fragmentation. Secessionist tendencies of every kind are once again lying in wait, regularly fed by the ex-colonial powers. When it wrested Hong Kong from China, Great Britain certainly did not conceive of self-determination, and it did not remember it even during the long years in which it exercised its dominion. But, suddenly, on the eve of Hong Kong’s return to China, to the motherland, the governor sent by London, Chris Patten, a conservative, had a species of illumination and improvised conversion: he appealed to the inhabitants of Hong Kong to claim their right to ‘self-determination’ against the motherland, thus remaining within the orbit of the British Empire.

Analogous considerations are true for Taiwan. When, at the beginning of 1947, the Kuomintang, which had fled from continental China and the victorious People’s Army, let loose a terrible repression that provoked about ten thousand deaths, the United States was careful not to invoke the right to self-determination for the inhabitants of the island; on the contrary, it sought to impose the thesis according to which Chiang Kai-shek’s government was the legitimate government not only of Taiwan but also of the whole of China. The great Asian country had to remain united but under the control of Chiang Kai-shek, reduced to a simple pro-consul of Washington’s sovereign imperialism. As the dream of reconquering the mainland slowly faded away, and the stronger became the aspiration of the whole Chinese people to achieve full territorial integration and independence, ending the tragic chapter of colonial history, so the presidents of the United States experienced an illumination and a conversion similar to that of Chris Patten. They too began to caress the idea of ‘self-determination’. Incoherence? Not at all: ‘self-determination’ is the continuation of imperial policy by other means. If it was not really possible to get their hands on China as a whole, it was, meanwhile, convenient to secure control of Hong Kong or Taiwan (249-50)

And as he writes in one his last books, Class Struggle (2016):

Perhaps it would be better to learn the lesson of old Hegel, who, with the Sanfedista and anti-Semitic agitation of his time in mind, observed that sometimes ‘courage consists not in attacking rulers, but in defending them’. The populist rebel who would be bound to consider Hegel insufficiently revolutionary could always heed Gramsci’s warning against the phraseology of ‘primitive, elementary “rebellionism,” “subversionism” and “anti-statism,” which are ultimately an expression of de facto “a-politicism”’ (337). ... rmination/


American hand’ seen behind HK bill protest
By Zhao Junxi in Hong Kong Source:Global Times Published: 2019/6/17 22:33:40


Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) Chief Executive Carrie Lam announces on June 15, 2019 that the HKSAR government will suspend the amendments to the Fugitive Offenders Ordinance and the Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Ordinance until further communication and explanation work is completed.(Photo: Xinhua)

The American hand behind the radical forces in protests against Hong Kong's extradition bill, has launched all-around attacks to obstruct the regional government's legislative process, a Hong Kong alliance convener who supports the bill said.

The alliance's website has been attacked several times, and investigations showed that most attacks were from the US, Kennedy Wong Ying-ho, convener of Safeguard HK, Support the Surrender of Fugitive Offenders Legislation, told the Global Times on Monday.

The alliance, with over 1 million members from 360 Hong Kong organizations, launched an online petition to support the bill in April. More than 930,000 Hong Kong residents have signed in support as of press time.

The US was the first foreign country to comment on the bill after the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (SAR) government submitted it to the Legislative Council, or LegCo, in March.

The US State Department expressed "grave concern" over the bill and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi vowed to review Hong Kong's special trading privileges if the bill gets passed. US allies, including Britain, Canada and Australia, followed suit.

In the latest move, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said on Sunday that US President Donald Trump would raise the issue of Hong Kong human rights with Chinese leaders during the G20 summit in Japan this month.

Those moves come as radical opposition figures had gone to the US several times for help against the extradition bill, Wong said.

"Radical Hong Kong forces have spread leaflets everywhere that distort the bill and incite students who did not read the bill to join their protest," Wong, also a member of the National Committee of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC), said.

One such leaflet obtained by Wang said that the bill could lead to unemployment, suppression of religion and cancellation of visa-free policies to other countries.

However, none of those were actually mentioned in the bill.

The SAR government has suspended the exercise to amend the Fugitive Offenders Ordinance and Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Ordinance, which aims at plugging loopholes in Hong Kong's overall judicial mechanism.

The amendments, which allow Hong Kong to transfer fugitives to Taiwan and the Chinese mainland, were originally scheduled to be discussed at a LegCo meeting on June 12, but were postponed due to riots around the LegCo building last week.

"Pressure from radical forces did not force the SAR government to suspend deliberations, but rather out of concerns over possible growing confrontation and public safety," Wong noted.

Wong said the frequent US "concerns" over the bill have nothing to do with concern for Hong Kong, and Americans in Hong Kong are only interested in making money.

"Only the SAR and central governments really care for Hong Kong, and Hong Kong residents have to identify who are our people and who are outsiders," Wong said.

Wong believes that the protest will eventually die down, and said he is confident in Hong Kong's future and the SAR government, as the past 30 years have proven that Hong Kong is strong and able of resisting pressure.


HK residents slam violence against extradition bill
By Yang Sheng Source:Global Times Published: 2019/6/13 0:03:40

Passing the bill will weaken US influence in Hong Kong

A view of Hong Kong's Peak Tram, one of the world's oldest and most famous funicular railways, April 22, 2019. A project to upgrade the tram will involve a significant investment of HK$684 million, replacing the current tram cars, which have a capacity of 120 passengers, with new 210-passenger tram cars. The first suspension of the Peak Tram service will begin on April 23 and last approximately two to three months. Photo: China News Service

Violent activities continued in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) and have caused the city's Legislative Council to postpone a meeting to scrutinize the extradition bill that could allow the Chinese mainland to extradite criminals from Hong Kong.

A South China Morning Post report on Wednesday said many masked violent activists "armed with umbrellas and goggles are occupying all roads leading to Hong Kong's legislature as the government was forced to delay debate on the extradition bill."

These violent activists are mostly young people who had camped there overnight. They built metal barricades and walls of loose bricks in a face-off with riot police bearing shields and batons. Police used pepper spray on the crowds earlier, the Hong Kong-based newspaper said.

Hung Wai-man, a deputy of the HKSAR to the National People's Congress, told the Global Times that although the extradition bill is contentious, both sides of the bill strongly oppose violence.

"Those violent activists are a group of extreme and radical people who do not represent the mainstream of the city at all," Hung said.

Hung said local citizens believe the police is capable of controlling the situation using legal measures, and he suggests that the police should take more effective and direct action to stop the violence in the city.

Chan Cheuk-hay, a Hong Kong member of the National Committee of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference, said that the lack of knowledge of both the bill and national security among the locals has allowed protesters to radicalize many people.

"This has made reasonable dialogue very difficult. Many people distort the extradition bill… in fact, the bill is necessary and can guarantee the rights and freedom of Hong Kong citizens, so if protesters know the details of the bill, I think most of them will change their minds," Chan said.

Presidents of 10 Hong Kong universities issued a joint statement urging the different groups to consult each other to solve the dispute on the extradition bill as the situation became more intense on Wednesday, Mingpao reported.

Many Hong Kong web users on Hong Kong news portal websites like and criticized those who oppose the extradition bill and the violence in recent days.

"The mainland cannot extradite criminals from Hong Kong? Is there anything that can be more ridiculous than this? We are in one country! Those criminals should oppose the bill, not ordinary people of the city," said one named Charles Choy on

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Geng Shuang said at a routine press conference on Wednesday that the Chinese central government firmly supports the HKSAR to push forward the work of the legislation amendment on extradition, and any behavior that harms Hong Kong's prosperity and stability would be opposed by the mainstream public opinion of the city.

Geng also said China expressed strong dissatisfaction and resolute opposition to US figures for their irresponsible statements on the Hong Kong issue as this is a purely Chinese matter that no country or individual has the right to interfere in.

One reason why the US interrupts China's affairs in Hong Kong is that if the extradition bill is passed, Washington's inappropriate influence in the city will be weakened and proxy foreign forces in Hong Kong that created trouble and conflict between the citizens and government will be punished by law more effectively, Tian Feilong, an associate professor at Beihang University in Beijing and an expert on Hong Kong, told the Global Times on Wednesday.

and 'here':

US using Hong Kong unrest as bargaining chip
Source:Global Times Published: 2019/6/17 22:11:00


Photo: IC

Heightened interference by external forces including the US and Europe in fomenting unrest in Hong Kong has encouraged protesters to create more trouble in the city.

These forces claimed that if the amendment to the extradition bill is passed, rights and legal protection to their personnel and institutions based in Hong Kong will be weakened.

At the same time, the US and Europe took advantage of the concern among Hongkongers to play the Hong Kong card, aiming to pressure China. Washington apparently wants to use Hong Kong to strong-arm Beijing.

The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) tried to restore calm by announcing on Saturday that it will suspend the process of amending the bill. The HKSAR government wants to prevent turmoil, injuries and defend fundamental national interests.

The suspension was a compromise, but the opposition wouldn't necessarily buy it. A protest on Sunday demanded the bill be scrapped. Such being the case, whether the suspension will lead to the protests folding up depends on how the opposition and external forces behind it treat Hong Kong.

The revised extradition bill will have no real impact on Hongkongers who abide by laws. The reason society in Hong Kong reacted so strongly was that the opposition used it to create fear among citizens.

Many Hongkongers don't understand that the amendment helps improve the rule of law in Hong Kong. Because of their distrust of judiciary and rule of law on the mainland and their scarce knowledge, they were full of fear of someday being handed over to the mainland and sentenced there. Young people, in particular, accepted opposition propaganda without going into details of the proposal.

The episode showed that Hong Kong lacks quality national education. Many people's knowledge of the national system and rule of law on the mainland is still superficial. This is what both central and HKSAR governments should take seriously because it is related to Hongkongers' national identity. Otherwise, any legislation and decision in the future that involves national integration may meet the same fate.

The central government has adopted many policies, such as developing the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area, to help solve livelihood problems in Hong Kong and promote the development of the city and the mainland. But not many Hongkongers hail the policies.

Due to Hong Kong's colonial history of more than 150 years and a sense of superiority complex, most Hongkongers don't have the urge and opportunity to visit the mainland and thus don't really know about it. This means that even though the central government has a set of proactive policies, the actual effects accrue slowly.

Authorities' previous work has overlooked that Hong Kong itself needs to make some changes. Current measures to integrate Hong Kong with the mainland's development could have certain limitations.

Hence, some changes are needed. Authorities should consider how to let Hongkongers be part of integrated development and what changes Hong Kong itself should make. If the city's education system and sociocultural atmosphere don't change, policies from the outside will have limited effect.

Many liberals in Hong Kong admire US-style liberalism. However, many of them were disillusioned after US President Donald Trump took office, and then became lost. The violence during protests is an outcome of such confusion. The Hong Kong elites have values consistent with those of the West. When they were motivated and supported by the US, they would participate in the protests more enthusiastically.

Resorting to violence during demonstrations has actually jeopardized Hongkongers' own interest. Hong Kong's society inherently had zero-tolerance for violence, but now people have learnt to tolerate and indulge in it. This signals that social movements in Hong Kong are becoming increasingly radical and populist.

The street movements in Hong Kong have shown a tendency to damage the "One Country, Two systems" policy and hurt prosperity and stability. These movements abused liberalism; they conform neither to traditional British liberalism nor to the striving spirit of Hongkongers, but bring about deterioration of rule of law.

Not only the HKSAR government but also elites in Hong Kong should be vigilant and work jointly to restrain such a tendency. They must be aware that the rational nature of their society is changing.

The article was compiled by Global Times reporter Xu Hailin based on an interview with Tian Feilong, associate professor at the Law School of Beihang University and member of Beijing-based Chinese Association of Hong Kong and Macao Studies.
"We ask no compassion from you. When our turn comes, we shall not make excuses for the terror."

User avatar
Posts: 3917
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle island

Re: China

Post by blindpig » Thu Aug 08, 2019 1:22 pm

U.S. organization accused of funding violent HK protesters


A U.S. organization is being accused of having links with violent Hong Kong protesters.

The National Endowment for Democracy (NED) presents itself as a private, non-profit organization dedicated to strengthening democratic institutions around the world. But it has been suspected of being a channel for the Central Intelligence Agency, and accused of playing a role in covert actions against governments. It has also come under fire by Chinese experts for having a hand in the turmoil that has gripped the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region over the past few weeks.

"NED has a better disguise as a promoter of so-called democracy," Current Affairs Commentator Victor Gao told CGTN. "In recent years, the NED has been involved in color revolutions and regime changes, and also creating disturbance and chaos in many countries or regions."

"This time, it's in Hong Kong," he added.

The entity has been active in Hong Kong through two of its four branches, namely the Solidarity Center and the National Democratic Institute. It has granted some 355,000 U.S. dollars to these two organizations for their work in the city last year alone, and has been in contact with the so-called "pro-independence movement."

According to Gao, the NED is not just offering financial support to unruly protesters, but also assisting in arranging political meetings between leaders of Hong Kong opposition parties and officials in Washington.

"My best interpretation is that the NED will not be happier unless they see greater disturbances in Hong Kong," the expert added. ... index.html


China urges U.S. to stop condoning violent crimes in Hong Kong
China on Wednesday again urged relevant U.S. politicians to immediately stop condoning violent crimes and grossly interfering in Hong Kong affairs, saying any attempt to interfere in China's internal affairs is doomed to fail.

Foreign Ministry spokesperson Hua Chunying made the call in response to U.S. senators Cotton and Romney's recent remarks on Hong Kong. They said China's Communist Party seems to be ready to repress Hong Kong protesters with violence.

"Any attempt to undermine 'One Country, Two Systems' and Hong Kong's prosperity and stability will surely be resolutely opposed by all Chinese people, including the Hong Kong compatriots," Hua warned.

She said, "The recent protests and demonstrations in Hong Kong have turned into radical, violent behavior that seriously violates the law, undermines security and social order in Hong Kong, and endangers local people's safety, property and normal life."

No responsible government will turn a blind eye to such serious violent crimes, Hua stressed.

"I want to ask these U.S. senators, do you still remember how the American police dealt with the 'Occupy Wall Street' movement in 2011?" said Hua. "If Hong Kong's radical, violent and illegal activities happened in the U.S., what would the American police do?"

Spokesperson criticized the U.S. side for calling black white and talking nothing about the serious consequences of the radical, violent and illegal acts.

She also questioned U.S. politicians' intention toward Hong Kong, saying that some U.S. senators smeared the just actions taken by the Hong Kong police, who have been professional, highly restrained and committed to safeguarding the rule of law and social order.

The central government firmly supports Chief Executive Carrie Lam in leading the Special Administrative Region (SAR) government in accordance with the law. The central government also supports the Hong Kong police in strictly enforcing the law and firmly supports punishing violent criminals under the law, Hua said.

"Chinese people do not believe in fallacy, nor are we afraid of evil forces," she said, adding that "Chinese people do not make trouble, but we are not cowards when involved in trouble." ... index.html


China will not allow turmoil beyond the control of HKSAR government
Updated 23:11, 07-Aug-2019


Zhang Xiaoming, director of the State Council's Hong Kong and Macao Affairs Office, said the central government will intervene if the situation in Hong Kong escalates into turmoil that is beyond the control of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) government, vowing to take timely action to end the violence should it occur.

"According to the Basic Law (of the HKSAR), the central authorities have ample methods as well as sufficient strength to promptly settle any possible turmoil," he said, warning those behind the protests to not misjudge the situation and mistake Beijing's restraint for weakness.

Zhang made the remarks Wednesday in Shenzhen at a symposium jointly held by Hong Kong and Macao Affairs Office of the State Council and the Liaison Office of the Central People's Government in the HKSAR.

He stressed that the most pressing and overriding task in Hong Kong is to end violence and restore order as the region faces the most severe situation since the 1997 handover, urging people in Hong Kong to stand up and guard their homeland at this "crucial moment."

"Since June 9, the violence has escalated and taken a heavy toll on society. Hong Kong is facing the most serious situation since its return to the motherland," he said, adding the central government is highly concerned about Hong Kong's situation, and trying to analyze, make decisions and arrangements from a strategic level.

People in Hong Kong assemble to support the police and call for an end to violence in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR), China, July 20, 2019. /Reuters Photo

If the violence and chaos continue, not only the safety of Hong Kong residents' lives and property will be endangered, the authority of the HKSAR government, the cornerstone of the rule of law in Hong Kong, the prosperity and stability of Hong Kong, and the "One Country, Two Systems" will also be destroyed, Zhang said.

"People of Hong Kong will not allow this to happen. All the people of China will not allow this to happen," he stressed, warning those who aim to destabilize Hong Kong to "not underestimate the firm determination and tremendous strength of the central government and the people of the whole country to safeguard Hong Kong's prosperity and stability, and safeguard the fundamental interests of the country."

Reiterating the central government's unswerving support for Chief Executive Carrie Lam in leading the HKSAR government, Zhang also praised the Hong Kong police in enforcing laws in face of pressure and threats.

He said whoever participates in violent and criminal activities would be held accountable according to the law, adding the central government believes that the HKSAR government and police are fully capable of punishing criminals and restoring public order and stability.

Over 500 representatives from Hong Kong attended the event, including HKSAR deputies to the National People's Congress, leaders of patriotic political and social organizations in Hong Kong, as well as those from relevant youth, education and professional organizations and mainland enterprises operating in Hong Kong. ... index.html
"We ask no compassion from you. When our turn comes, we shall not make excuses for the terror."

User avatar
Posts: 3917
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle island

Re: China

Post by blindpig » Mon Aug 26, 2019 8:45 pm


Commentary: How much has the U.S. offered to Hong Kong rioters?
(People's Daily Online) 17:40, August 26, 2019
Over past weeks, repeated attacks by violent radicals in China's Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (SAR) have caused law-based governance and freedom, the two things cherished the most by Hong Kong citizens, to be trampled on the ground.

Anti-China forces in the U.S. have not only openly cheered the violent protesters on and made irresponsible remarks about the riots, but provided money, benefits, and advice to the rioters.

According to Ta Kung Pao, one of the most important newspapers in Hong Kong, Hong Kong Human Rights Monitor, a non-governmental organization (NGO) which played a vanguard role in the protests against amendments to Hong Kong's extradition law, has received funds from the U.S. National Endowment for Democracy (NED) since 1995, amounting to a total of more than 15 million HK dollars (around $1.9 million).

From 1995 to the beginning of 2015, NED, through its subordinate body, provided $3.95 million to opposition organizations in Hong Kong, as shown by a report from Wen Wei Po, a Hong Kong-based Chinese language newspaper.

In addition, data released by NED in 2018 revealed that of all the countries that NED allocated funds to, China topped the list at $6.5 million.

These figures are just the tip of the iceberg, as it's believed that most NED spending was not disclosed due to its "sensitivity".

While calling itself an NGO, NED played the role of a backstage manipulator in multiple color revolutions and has an inextricable connection with the U.S. Congress as well as intelligence agencies.

Looking back to the demonstrations in Hong Kong in recent years, it's not hard to find NED's inglorious role in these incidents. For instance, representatives of the opposition organizations of Hong Kong, including Martin Lee Chu-ming and Nathan Law Kwun-chung, went to the U.S. this May to attend and deliver speeches at a forum held by NED, imploring NED to interfere in the proposed amendments to Hong Kong's extradition law.

During the forum, an executive of NED Asian program said to Nathan Law Kwun-chung that from 2014 to 2017, he asked Law the same questions every year: What can we do for you? How can we help you?

As they expected, disturbances in Hong Kong escalated, and demonstrations were turned into violent riots and became increasingly fierce.

Ironically, when riots in Hong Kong were in full swing, Nathan Law Kwun-chung flew to the U.S. to begin his college life at Yale University. Some internet users commented that "he went to his U.S. masters to claim his reward."

According to WikiLeaks, Jimmy Lai Chee-ying, chairman of Hong Kong-based media Next Digital Ltd., is a super funder of opposition organizations in Hong Kong and the middleman between the U.S. and some forces in Hong Kong. Lai spent both money and efforts to fuel the recent protests in Hong Kong, taking a leading position in the disturbances.

As an article published on the website of German newspaper Handelsblatt pointed out, while urging Hong Kong and Beijing to exercise restraint, the U.S. itself was fanning the flames of the confrontation with advice, action and money.

Former U.S. President Abraham Lincoln once said, "You can fool all the people some of the time, some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all of the time." Following the clues of monetary aid to opposition organizations in Hong Kong, it's easy to see the conspiracy to turn Hong Kong into chaos in the interests of certain parties.

The recent riots in Hong Kong are a product of the U.S., which spent substantial resources and efforts to manipulate Hong Kong.

All in all, the backstage manipulator wants to turn Hong Kong into trouble for China, to contain or stifle China's development.

It must be clear that Hong Kong is part of China. The Chinese government will never allow any external forces to interfere in Hong Kong affairs, let alone turn the city into a mess.

The U.S. had better stop such tricks, obey international law and the basic norms of international relations, make a clean break with the rioters, stop sending obverse signals to radicals, and pull back before it is too late. ... Eg.twitter
"We ask no compassion from you. When our turn comes, we shall not make excuses for the terror."

User avatar
Posts: 3917
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle island

Re: China

Post by blindpig » Tue Sep 03, 2019 6:31 pm

Hong Kong Rioters Wage Sabotage Campaign To Press Congress Into Punishing China
The Associated Press is doing its best to make the Hong Kong police look bad by describing an incident without its context:

Late at night Saturday, video from Hong Kong broadcaster TVB showed police on the platform of Prince Edward subway station swinging batons at passengers who backed into one end of a train car behind umbrellas. The video also shows pepper spray being shot through an open door at a group seated on the floor while one man holds up his hands.
Police officers said at a briefing Monday that they rejected accusations that they “beat up” ordinary citizens without first confirming their identities. They said they specifically targeted those who they believed to be rioters, including those who had changed out of their black protester outfits, and arrested 63 people on suspicion of illegal assembly and possessing explosives and offensive weapons.

The incident described in the first paragraph above did indeed happen. But it was only the last part of a larger story which the AP fails to mention. Here is how it started:

The violence in Prince Edward Station began during a dispute between protesters and some older men who were insulting them. One of the men swung a hammer at the protesters, who threw water bottles and umbrellas and later appeared to set off fire extinguishers in the car. After the clashes, the subway system suspended service across much of Hong Kong. Three stations remained closed on Sunday.


Some 30 black clad people with gas masks and helmets had entered a train to ride to another place to create another of their usual flash mob riots. The other passengers clearly disagree with the rioters' plans. Some made remarks the black clad youth disliked.

They later dismounted the train but an argument continued. The black clad people reacted quite aggressively. They stopped the train from leaving by blocking its doors. They threw stuff at the middle aged passengers and tried to hit them with umbrellas and sticks. Some of them rushed back into the train, hit at some passengers and were again pushed out. This went back and forth for a full ten minutes. Finally someone in the black clad crowd snatched a fire extinguisher and let it go off within the subway car. The passengers then tried to get out and more scuffle ensued.

A full 10 minutes long video of the scene can be watched here.

It was the above incident that led the MTR, the public Mass Transit Railway operator, to stop the traffic at the station and to call up the police. When the riot police entered the station it immediately faced resistance:

This train then departed and protesters used umbrellas as a screen to change their clothes, before crossing the platform and boarding a Central-bound train. Before this train left, the Raptors arrived shortly before 11pm.
Protesters confronted the elite force with umbrellas and hard objects while police fought back with pepper spray and batons.

After the Raptors left the train, it was stopped at Yau Ma Tei station and all passengers were asked to leave. Police intercepted and arrested seven people and seized two bags of slingshots and metal balls on the platform.

A badly cut SCMP video of the event is here (scroll down).

The whole scene was not an isolated incident. Black clad folks ripped wastebaskets off the wall and threw them on the rail tacks. They smashed customer service centers, vandalized subway entry gates and hit regular passengers who disliked their behavior. This happened not only in one subway station but was part of a systematic attempt to disrupt the whole service:

The MTR Corporation later issued a statement strongly condemning the continuous vandalism at stations. It said a number of stations including Tung Chung, Tsing Yi, Lam Tin, Kwun Tong, Diamond Hill, Lok Fu, Tsuen Wan, Lai King, Sha Tin, Sha Tin Wai, Siu Hong and Tin Shui Wai were targeted on Sunday, with CCTV cameras, ticket issuing machines and other facilities damaged.
On Saturday, protesters severely damaged facilities at 32 stations.

The intent was obviously not to protest but a well planned and coordinated sabotage campaign against the city's indispensable mass transport system. Sabotaging infrastructure is an old CIA tactic to "harass and demoralize enemy administrators and police".

Which brings me to a Lambert Strether's piece at Naked Capitalism which he headlined:

Clever Tactics “Add Oil” to Hong Kong Protests (and not “Hidden Hands”).

Strether asserts that there are no outside forces fueling the protests in Hong Kong:

[T]his post will have a simple thesis: The people of Hong Kong have considerable experience in running protests, and we don’t need to multiply invisible entities (“hidden hands”) to give an account of what they’re doing. For example, it’s not necessary to postulate that the participants in the 2019 Hong Kong anti-extradition bill protests consulted CIA handlers on tactics; their tactics are often available, in open source, on the Internet; other tactics are based on Hong Kong material culture, things and situations that come readily to hand and can be adapted by creative people (which the protesters clearly are).
If one ignores the evidence of U.S. influence one can indeed come that conclusion.

A commentator to Strether's piece correctly notes that this is not a question of either - or:

I am genuinely puzzled, and I have to say concerned, about the way this issue has been framed here. One does not have to accept the argument that *either* (1) the protests are completely spontaneous and genuine; *or* (2) the protests are mainly the product of CIA manipulation of otherwise clueless dupes (a whole lot of them apparently!). This is a false dichotomy. None of the critics of the mainstream Hong Kong narrative that I am familiar with take a position any where close to (2). It is a straw-man position if applied to most reputable “skeptics.”
Rather, the argument I have seen most often among these skeptics (including some commenters here) is that, while the protests *were* authentic and directed at real issues of concern to protesters, there have also been efforts on the part of Western agents to manipulate this situation. This included support of particular, strategically significant leaders and groups and, of course, control of the Western media narrative. We have pictures and stories in even the mainstream press of US officials and representatives of western NGOs meeting with such individuals. Hell, we have US politicians bragging about it.

(There are indeed two distinct groups of protesters which I hope to discuss soon in another piece.)

To claim that the U.S. is not heavily involved in the events in Hong Kong is nonsense. It is obviously not by chance that the U.S. sponsored Hong Kong rabble rouser Joshua Wong gets published in the New York Times with a call for U.S. Congress action against China:

American legislators are supposed to vote on a bill, the Human Rights and Democracy Act, that would give the president of the United States power to penalize Chinese officials who interfere in Hong Kong’s affairs. The law could also allow the United States to revoke the special economic treatment that Hong Kong enjoys, as separate from the mainland.
If the United States Congress passes the bill, it will be delivering a firm message both to other silent allies of Hong Kong and to China’s dictators. The clock is ticking in Hong Kong. Our future is being determined now.

The Trump administration strategy towards the new super villain China is a general decoupling between the 'west' and China. The violent protests in Hong Kong are obviously one instrument it applies to achieve that.

The Trump administration and the rioters hope that the Chinese military will intervene and create another Tianamen situation:

Some of the frustration of the protesters – and I read this more than once in, the go-to online forum for the city’s disaffected youth – comes from Beijing not having sent in mainland troops. For all their efforts and perceived self-sacrifice, many of them would rather face Chinese troops than Hong Kong police because the latter, though considered evil or illegitimate by some in the city, are at least seen as doing their job by most foreign observers. But the presence of Chinese troops in the city, no matter what they do, would immediately cause global condemnation while legitimising and glorifying the local resistance movement universally.
Well, if you wonder why the central government hasn’t sent troops, it’s because they think along the same line as the protesters.

Tianamen was, as we now know, a CIA led color revolution attempt, set up within a background of general protests, in which the U.S. regime change mastermind Gene Sharp was directly involved. The mostly falsely reported incident, during which soldiers were lynched and protesters gunned down, led to 'western' sanctions against China.

Beijing is not going to fall for the same trick twice.

The Joshua Wong op-ed shows that the aim has now been lowered. The riots and the inevitable police response to them are now supposed to push Congress to give the Treasury a tool to sanction Chinese officials for interfering in a Chinese(!) city's affairs.

Imagine the possibilities!


Naked Capitalism provides a daily "Links" post that is a valuable aggregation of interesting and important stuff to read. Up to August 2 the daily "Links" roundup, often edited by Lambert Strether, regularly included links to current Moon of Alabama pieces.

On August 2 your host took to the NC comments sections to argue against this balderdash which, incidentally, was posted by Lambert Strether:

On the question of whether the Hong Kong protests are a US-sponsored “color revolution,” alert NC reader MsExPat threw this over the transom:
"The line about foreign interference is Beijing boilerplate. Everyone here knows it’s bullshit. Laughable. ..."

I commented:

I call bullshit on MsExPat.
The Hong Kong stuff is clearly a U.S. instigated “color revolution” just like the Umbrella movement 2014. ...

MsExPat responded:

The National Endowment for Democracy funding is old news, consistently trotted out by pro-China trolls as a smoking gun. But NED donated to the pan-Democratic old school parties, not to the independent Civil Human Rights front, which is the only large organization that has been involved in these protests from day one ...
Funny how one can assert that the Civil Human Rights front is an 'independent' front when it largely consists of U.S. sponsored "pan-Democratic old schools parties" and other U.S. sponsored entities and when its former convener Ching Yin 'Johnson' Yeung is now a well paid "fellow" at the U.S. National Endowment for Democracy.

Anyway. My argument had consequences. Since August 2 no more links to Moon of Alabama pieces were posted in the daily Naked Capitalism "Links" roundup. I had expected less parochialism from an otherwise open minded site.

Posted by b on September 2, 2019 at 18:59 UTC | Permalink ... china.html
"We ask no compassion from you. When our turn comes, we shall not make excuses for the terror."

User avatar
Posts: 3917
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle island

Re: China

Post by blindpig » Wed Sep 04, 2019 5:28 pm

Here's a Fb post which adds more than a little context to the Sheriff of HK's walk-back of the extradition law"
Hong Kong Bilingual News 香江日報
Yesterday at 12:01 PM ·
Manifesto of a Hong Kong Revolutionary Group, Citing Ronald Reagan. Chapman Chen, HKBNews, reports
In a 9-thousand-word Chinese article, "2019 Frontline Revolution Declaration 前線革命宣言", which started to circulate on various social media on Sept 3, a self-proclaimed Hong Kong revolution group, to whom Victor, admin of the telegram group / hk612tactics2, belongs, claims responsibility for the 2019-8-30 knife attack on an off-duty cop in Kwai Fong. The group states that they want to regularly assassinate HK police officers in order to destroy their morale, instill fear in them, and force them to switch to them.

China Violates Sino-British Joint Declaration

The group points out that Communist China is a big cheat, e.g., in declaring the Sino-British Joint Declaration invalid, that even if it agrees to Hongkongers' 5 demands, it may go back on its promise any moment and rake things against Hongkonges. "Without a military force of our own, even ordinances in black and white will be misinterpreted. Now, with our language, speech, culture and land being forcefully taken away, how can we defend our home, freedom and democracy without a military force of our own?" the group questions.

The Military is China's Weak Spot

It asserts that the military is China's weak spot (as it has not deployed the PLA for 30 years) and propaganda its strongest merit, that it is unreasonable for Hongkongers to have challenged China in the latter rather than the former. The article explains that peaceful resistance strategies like strikes, mass rallies, spending millions of dollars on placing ads on international papers, raising funds for lawsuits, running in elections have never worked cost-effectively. (Contrastively, just a couple of activists smearing on July 21 the national anthem of China's Liaison Office in HK with a paint spray that cost less than HKD100 could already make its way to the front page of international media.) Unable to see a pathway to success, young HK people feel deeply depressed and some have even committed suicide.

Military Training Camps in Taiwan and USA

"The only exit is to forcefully overthrow the current regime." That's why the group is going to recruit HK dissidents in exile and train them up in Taiwan and/or the United States to be warriors, who will then be assigned to various places to set up revolution-branches. The group emphasizes that they will only recruit those who are not afraid of death, for the victory of any revolution is determined by the amount of physical force and casualties.

The Number of Revolutionaries Does not Have to be Large

As told by the group, what is important is determination and organization. Dr. Sun Yat-sen began with the "Four Bandits" at 24, Gough Street on the HK Island. With just 100 people, the 1911 Yellow Flower Mound Uprising in Canton came close to overthrowing the entire Qing Dynasty which had a population of 0.4 billion people. And when Che Guevara landed on Cuba and conducted guerilla warfare in the mountain, he had only twenty people. The Chinese Communist Party started with 12.

Collection of Revolution Taxes

As well-off Hongkongers would not fund them, they will make a living by organizing fraudulent casino games for Mainland Chinese and collecting revolution taxes from children of rich HK and China tycoons. They, however, will not harm the family of HK police officers, as they are independence revolutionaries rather than terrorists.

"God helps those who help themselves"

The groups thinks that it is despicable and unpractical to expect the United States to send their soldiers to die for Hong Kong. "God helps those who help themselves." Only when Hong Kong people build up their own armed forces, may the US supply them with weapons and equipments.

Ronald Reagan on Moral Courage

Lastly, the article quotes Ronald Reagan:- "No weapon is so formidable as the will and moral courage of free men and women." "Unless we pick up our weapons and fight, the Hong Kong nation will be exterminated and cleansed," the group concludes.

Pic credit: AP Photo

FB link: ... ?__tn__=-R

Web link:… ... on-of-a-ho

Source:…/19uVZkLMrMdpr ... obilebasic

#ccp #communistchina #hongkongrevolution #ronaldreagan #donaldtrump #maga2020 #extraditionlaw #pla #SinoBritishJointDeclaration #trump2020 #chapmanchen #HKBNews #SunYatsen #前線革命宣言

Declaration of a Hong Kong Revolutionary Group. By Chapman Chen, HKBNews
A self-proclaimed Hong Kong revolution group claims responsibility for the 2019-8-30 knife attack on an off-duty cop, stressing that without a military force, H ... __tn__=K-R
The rioters can take their little victory and chill or.... enter the PLA....knowing that they won't chill.

Stupid fuckin' proxies.
"We ask no compassion from you. When our turn comes, we shall not make excuses for the terror."

User avatar
Posts: 3917
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle island

Re: China

Post by blindpig » Tue Sep 17, 2019 8:15 pm


On State Capitalism
16 september, 2019 by stalinsmoustache, posted in china, lenin, marxism, socialist market economy
The following is the fourth part of the lecture on why foreign scholars are as yet unable to understand China’s socialist market economy. It deals with ‘state capitalism’, which is probably the most widely used term in both Marxist and non-Marxist traditions. As will become clear, what they mean differs considerably.

By 2008’s Atlantic financial crisis, or what is now called ‘The Great Recession’, the neoliberal project effectively came to an end. Since then, it has been in retreat, to the consternation of the true believers. The WTO is no longer setting the agenda in the way it used to do, for it is being changed from within, the ability of the United States to coerce others is in noticeable decline, the United States and Europe no longer see eye to eye, and a series of alternative international structures have gained significant influence, such as the Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank, the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation and the Belt and Road Initiative. How to make sense of these developments? On the back foot, more and more neoliberal true believers have begun once again to speak of the spread of ‘state capitalism’, with dire warnings as to its effects. By state capitalism they mean that the state is a large and influential corporation in its own right, a business enterprise and indeed core component that controls significant parts of a capitalist market economy.

But I have leapt ahead of myself, for the terminology of ‘state capitalism’ was developed mostly in the Marxist tradition, particularly in Lenin’s hands. The term itself may be older, used in relation to Bismarck’s project in Germany, but it is from the Marxist tradition that its most sophisticated sense arose. So let us consider Lenin’s contribution, after which I analyse a number of different paths that arose after Lenin.

Towards the end of his life, Lenin used ‘state capitalism’ on quite a number of occasions (Lenin 1918 [1965]-b, 1918 [1969]-b, 1918 [1965]-a, 1918 [1969]-a, 1921 [1965]-a, 1921 [1970]-a), but the fullest statement may be found in the key work, ‘The Tax in Kind’ (Lenin 1921 [1965]-b, 1921 [1970]-b). Lenin argued that in light of the sheer devastation and economic collapse caused by the First World War and the Civil War, as well as the very premature state of socialism in Russia, a measure of private enterprise was necessary to get the economy moving again. Peasants could sell the grain left over after paying the ‘tax in kind’, small private light-scale industry could be established, and concessions and leases would be given to foreign capitalist enterprises. All of this would entail the extraordinary dialectical point of building socialism through capitalism, or of private capital helping socialism.[1] How so? It would enable the initial impetus for the ‘development of the productive forces’ (Lenin 1921 [1965]-b, 342-43, 345-46).

Of course, Lenin had to overcome ‘left-wing’ opposition to do so, making two crucial points. First, he mapped out a process of transition, since it was not possible to move from a backward, imperialist situation immediately to full-blown socialism. Thus, he envisaged a series of transitions, from petty-bourgeois capitalism (and later from ‘War Communism’), through state capitalism, to socialism itself, during which elements of capitalism would remain.[2] Or, as he puts it more simply, from capitalism, through state capitalism, to socialism. Second, it all depends on the over-arching socio-economic and political system. His two examples are Germany (after Bismarck’s reforms) and Russia after the October Revolution. In Germany, this ‘state capitalism’ was firmly in the hands of ‘Junker-bourgeois imperialism’; by contrast, in Russia the socialist system already emerging was the key, with the nature of the socialist state and the proletarian dictatorship playing the major roles. Thus, argued Lenin, it would be highly advisable to learn from the German model and locate it within the Russian socialist system.

What has been the fate of Lenin’s insights? Four paths may be identified. First, some Western Marxists have sought to use ‘state capitalism’ to speak of socialist countries, albeit without acknowledging Lenin’s careful development of the idea. Thus, they have applied ‘state capitalism’ to both the Soviet Union and China in a purely negative sense. They do by ignoring Lenin’s key insights and understand ‘state capitalism’ as a system – with its new ‘bourgeoisie’ as exploiters – that is diametrically at odds with socialism, let alone communism (Cliff 1948 (2003); Pannekoek 1937; Norman 1955; Crump and Buick 1986; James 1986; Weil 1996, 26-27; Hooper 2017). Common to these works is a Western ‘betrayal narrative’, trying to find some moment when the Marxist tradition was ‘betrayed’ (see more below).

Intriguingly (and this is the second path), they also come close to a more recent group of non-Marxist scholars, who have begun to use ‘state capitalism’ in relation to a significant number of countries – including socialist ones – that have either refused or turned away from neoliberal approaches. In more detail, they see state capitalism as significant and long-term ‘intervention’ of the state in ‘the market’, by which they mean an entity separate from society and the state. They are also fond of using tired old categories, such as the opposition between ‘autocratic’ and bourgeois ‘democratic’, inefficient and efficient, so that state capitalism means inefficient ‘authoritarian’ capitalism and is contrasted with efficient ‘free-market’ capitalism. It should be no surprise that they see the spread of such state capitalism as a threat and hope to identify its shortcomings. Although they often focus on China as a favoured example (Haley and Haley 2013; MacDonald and Lemco 2015, 43-69; Naughton and Tsai 2015; Kurlantzick 2016; Chen 2015; Hundt and Uttam 2016, 189-220), this type of ‘state capitalism’ in certainly not restricted to China. The number identified is relatively large, whether one offers an analysis of the current situation or takes a historical perspective. In terms of the current context, the list includes most countries in East Asia, Central Asia, more and more Latin American and African countries, Russia and some Scandinavian countries. Historical surveys like to begin with modern state forms in Europe after the Peace of Westphalia of 1648, and then identify various forms of state capitalist ‘intervention’ in mercantilism, European colonialism, the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, the welfare state in Europe (especially Scandinavia), many post-colonial states in Africa and Asia, and the Asian economic rise in the last 30 years or so, with particular focus on Singapore and South Korea (Kurlantzick 2016, 49-63; see also MacDonald and Lemco 2015, 17-42). One does begin to wonder whether ‘state capitalism’ has become a catch-all category that can be applied to all states to a greater or lesser degree.[3] Ultimately, this tendency is less of a problem than the fundamentally flawed assumptions and its oppositions – state versus market, autocracy versus bourgeois democracy, efficiency and inefficiency – that arise from the Western European liberal tradition, a tradition that has for too long seen the rest of the world in its own image. Unable to think outside this tradition, unable to seek truth from facts, they have resorted to the category of ‘state capitalism’ to try to understand the global shifts that became apparent in 2008.

Third, a few foreign Marxist scholars have continued to use the term, and to their credit they do so through careful engagement with Lenin and the New Economic Policy (which ran for almost a decade in the 1920s). More specifically, they propose that China’s Reform and Opening Up is a longer version, developed in terms of specific conditions, of the NEP (Kenny 2007). This brings us to the fourth direction arising from Lenin’s work, concerning which I need to mention Chinese scholarship. These scholars have pointed out that part of the inspiration for Deng Xiaoping’s breakthrough with the Reform and Opening Up was precisely Lenin’s New Economic Policy (1985 [1993], 143; 1985 [2008], 140; Yang and Li 1998; Le 2000; Wang 2001; Tao 2008).[4] But there is one very important feature of this argument concerning the influence on Deng Xiaoping: the scholars in question rarely, if ever, use the term ‘state capitalism’. Let me put it this way: as we look back after a century, we can see certain shortcomings in Lenin’s approach. Notably, he assumed that private enterprise and market exchange were by definition capitalist, while public ownership and a planned economy were necessarily socialist. We now know that this is not the case, for market economies have existed under many different – and non-capitalist – conditions (as Marx already argued in his analysis of ancient Greece (Marx 1894 [1998], 588-605; 1894 [2004], 583-99)). At the same time, Lenin did make the crucial point that everything depends on the underlying system within which a market economy works. But in order to understand how this point remains relevant, we need to clarify the terms. Lenin called this ‘state capitalism’, in light of the evidence and knowledge available at the time, especially from Germany. But in light of subsequent historical research and current experience, especially in China, it would be better to speak of a market economy as a component of a larger socialist system (Huang 1994). Let me emphasise that this point is not made by foreign scholars, since they tend not to use Chinese sources for their work.

To sum up, state capitalism has an intriguing and complex history, with its initial development in the Marxist tradition through Lenin, its subsequent misuse by a number of Western Marxists in relation to the Soviet Union and China, its redeployment (without knowledge of the Marxist tradition) to try and understand the turn away from the neoliberal project, its Leninist sense by a small number of Marxists in relation to China, and then Chinese scholarship that fully acknowledges Lenin’s influence on Deng Xiaoping but then takes his insights a significant step further.

Bibliography - see link, it is extensive. ... apitalism/
"We ask no compassion from you. When our turn comes, we shall not make excuses for the terror."

User avatar
Posts: 3917
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle island

Re: China

Post by blindpig » Sat Sep 21, 2019 11:12 am

Xi Jinping In Translation: China’s Guiding Ideology

Dong Fang/The 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China

What ideology guides the star of rising Chinese power? General Secretary Xi Jinping’s answer to this question is unequivocal: “Socialism with Chinese characteristics is socialism, not any other ‘ism.’” Xi is adamant that his Party adheres to what he calls the “lofty ideals of communism.” But what exactly do those ideals mean in 21st century China? What does Marx have to do with Zhongnanhai?

Of late, this question has much vexed the Communist Party of China. Over the last year we have witnessed a string of campaigns, slogans, speeches, and study sessions meant to reinforce the importance of the Party’s Marxist heritage. It is clear that continuity ranks among the highest priorities of the Party. Its leadership is wary of the impacts which growing wealth and an increasing Chinese diaspora might have on its political foundations.

The speech translated below is part of this effort. It was originally given shortly after Xi Jinping became General Secretary, on January 5th, 2013, to the Party’s then-newly elected Central Committee. An extremely abbreviated version of it was published in Xi Jinping’s first book, The Governance of China. Two months ago the Party’s premier ideological journal, Qiushi, published a much larger version. This is the version that has been translated below. The original speech was given behind closed doors; we do not know what changes have been made to its text between then and now. This is what we can be certain of: the version published here is seen by Party leadership to be particularly relevant to the challenges China faces at the current moment.

One of the most striking aspects of this speech is the language Xi Jinping invokes: party members must have “faith” (xìnyǎng) in the eventual victory of socialism; proper communists must be “devout” (qiánchéng) in their work; and Party members must be prepared to “sacrifice” (xīshēng) everything, up to their own blood, for revolutionary “ideals that reach higher than heaven” (gémìng lǐxiǎng gāo yú tiān).

Behind this religiously charged language is a man deeply worried that the cadres of his generation are not prepared to make the sort of sacrifices their parents and grandparents did for China’s revolutionary cause. Xi’s verdict is that such people do not have enough faith in the “eventual demise of capitalism and the ultimate victory of socialism.” Their “views lack a firm grounding in historical materialism,” leading them to doubt that “socialism is bound to win.” This has practical consequences. The cadre without communist convictions will act “hedonistically” and “self-interestedly.” Worst of all, he might begin to believe “false arguments that we should abandon socialism” altogether.

For Xi, this would be a grave betrayal of the Party’s heritage. The Communist Party of China is tasked with “building a socialism that is superior to capitalism” whose economic and technological prowess will give it “the dominant position” in world affairs. And though Xi asserts that this is inevitable, “the road will be tortuous.” Party members must fiercely fend off ideological attacks on socialism with Chinese characteristics. The most pressing ideological problems identified in this speech are two ‘false arguments:’ First, that the mass death, cruelty, and poverty of Maoist China undermines the credibility of the Party leadership today, and second, that socialism with Chinese characteristics is not really socialism at all.

However, readers should note that Xi offers very little in the way of classical Marxist exegesis to justify his claim that “an economic system in which publicly owned enterprises are the principle part” and the “political system of the National People’s Congress” are the natural extension of Marxist theory to current world conditions. The claim is asserted more than proven; one suspects he would rather not have the readers of Qiushi thinking too hard about the details of classical Marxist texts.

More significant than Xi’s use of Marxist theory to justify any particular policy is his conviction that he leads an ideological-political system distinct from that of the capitalist world. Threats to this system are not framed in military or economic terms, but ideological ones. The Soviet Union fell, he declares, “because ideological competition is fierce.” If the faith of its cadres remains fervent, Xi believes his Party will succeed where the Soviet Union could not.

The footnotes below detail the context and sources behind some of the language Xi uses in his speech. They vary from Chinese historical texts to work by Deng Xiaoping and the CCP, as well as Marx himself.

Uphold and Develop Socialism with Chinese Characteristics
Xi Jinping

First of all: Socialism with Chinese Characteristics is socialism. It is not any other sort of “ism.” The foundational, scientific principles of socialism cannot be abandoned; only if they are abandoned would our system no longer be socialist. From first to the last our Party has emphasized that “Socialism with Chinese Characteristics” adheres to the basic principles of scientific socialism and is imbued with characteristically Chinese features bestowed by the conditions of the times. Socialism with Chinese characteristics is socialism, not any other ‘ism.’

Which ideological system a country implements depends on one crucial issue: can this ideology resolve the historical problems facing the country? In the days when the Chinese people were poor, weak, and at the mercy of others, all sorts of ideologies and theories were attempted. The capitalist road was tried and found wanting. Reformism, liberalism, social Darwinism, anarchism, pragmatism, populism, syndicalism—they all were given their moment on the stage. They all failed to solve the problems of China’s future destiny. It is Marxism-Leninism and Mao Zedong Thought that guided the Chinese people out of the darkness of that long night and established a New China; it is through socialism with Chinese characteristics that China has developed so quickly.

Now from the moment China’s opening up and reform began—and especially after the dissolution of the Soviet Union and the tremendous changes in Eastern Europe—international public opinion has continuously railed against China. There has been no end to the different flavors of “China collapse” theory. Yet China has not collapsed. To the contrary, our comprehensive national strength increases day by day. The living standards of the people are constantly improving. “The scene before us is unique in its beauty.”[ii]

Both history and our present reality tell us that only socialism can save China—and only socialism with Chinese characteristics can develop China.[iii] This is the conclusion of history, the choice of our people.

In recent years there have been a few commentators—both at home and abroad—that have asked if what modern China is doing can really be called socialism. Some have said we have engaged in a sort of “capital socialism;” others have been more straightforward, calling it “state capitalism” or “bureaucratic capitalism.” These labels are completely wrong. We say that socialism with Chinese characteristics is socialism. No matter how we reform and open up, we should always adhere to the socialist road with Chinese characteristics, the theoretical systems of socialism with Chinese characteristics, the structure of socialism with Chinese characteristics, and the basic requirements put forward by the Eighteenth National Congress of the Communist Party of China for a new victory of socialism.[iv]

These include: the absolute leadership of the Communist Party of China, grounding policy in national conditions, putting economic construction at the center, adhering to the “Four Cardinal Principles”[v] and to the program of reform and opening up, liberating and developing productive social forces, building a socialist market economy, socialist democratic politics, an advanced socialist culture, a harmonious socialist society, and an ecological socialist civilization.[vi] It includes promoting the comprehensive development of the people, gradually realizing the common prosperity of all the people, and building a modern, prosperous, strong, democratic, civilized and harmonious socialist country—including adhering to the fundamental political system of the National People’s Congress, a Communist Party led system of multi-party cooperation and political consultation, a system of regional ethnic autonomy, a system of grassroots self-government, a legal system with Chinese characteristics, and an economic system in which publicly owned enterprises are the principle part, which develop side by side with diverse forms of ownership.[vii] These features embody the basic principles of scientific socialism under our new historical conditions. If we lose these, we lose socialism.

Comrade Deng Xiaoping once made a profound observation: “Our modernization must flow from Chinese realities. No matter if it is revolution or construction, we should pay attention to, learn from, and borrow from foreign experience. However, copying other countries’ experiences and models has never been successful. We have learned a lot in this respect.”[viii]

In the past it was impossible to import the Soviet system full-scale; today it is just as impossible for us to import the Western system full-scale. After the conclusion of the Cold War many developing countries were forced to adopt the Western model. The consequence of this has been party feuds, social unrest, and peoples left homeless and wandering—all of which have, to this day, been difficult to stabilize.

I recall the story written in Zhuangzi’s ‘Autumn Floods:’

“Perhaps you’ve never heard about the young boy of Shouling who went to learn the Handan Walk? He hadn’t mastered what the Handan people had to teach him when he forgot his old way of walking, so he had to crawl all the way back home.”[ix]

We must not ever “go to Handan to learn to walk and forget our native stride.” Instead, we have taken Marxism and Sinicized it. That is socialism with Chinese characteristics.

In recent years, with the rise of China’s comprehensive national strength and international status, there has been much international discussion and study of the “Beijing Consensus,” “China Model,” and the “China Road.” Among these studies there is no shortage of praise. Some foreign academics believe that the rapid pace of China’s development has called Western theories into question. A new form of Marxist theory is overturning the traditional theories of the West!

Yet from beginning to end, we have maintained that every country’s road to development should be decided by the people of that country. The so-called “China model,” the road of socialism with Chinese characteristics, was created through the Chinese people’s own struggles. We firmly believe that as socialism with Chinese characteristics develops further, our system will inevitably mature; it is likewise inevitable that the superiority of our socialist system will be increasingly apparent. Inevitably, our road will become wider; inevitably, our country’s road of development will have increasingly greater influence on the world. We need just this sort of confidence—confidence in our theories, confidence in our system, and confidence in our road. We will truly be what the poets called “like cliffside bamboo, standing strong despite countless hardships, beaten about by gales on every side.”[x]

Secondly: Our party has led the people two historical periods of building socialism: before the “reform and opening-up” and afterwards. These are two periods are interrelated. They also had significant differences, but in essence they were both practical explorations made by our Party in leading the people in socialist construction. Socialism with Chinese characteristics was first initiated in the period of reform and opening up. However, it was during the New China era that the basic socialist system was built, and socialism with Chinese characteristics could only have been initiated on this twenty-year foundation of socialist construction.

To correctly understand this issue, we must grasp three points. First, if our party did not decisively decide to implement reform and opening up in 1978, unswervingly promote reform and opening up, and staunchly grasp the correct direction of reform and opening up, socialist China might not be in the favorable situation it is today. It may be facing serious crises—perhaps even the sort of crises faced by the Soviet Union and the countries of Eastern Europe, crises which brought about the death of their parties and their states. Yet if New China was never established in 1949 and we did not pursue socialist revolution and construction at that time, then the prerequisite ideological, material, and institutional wherewithal needed to smoothly implement reform and opening up would never have accumulated. We needed those experiences—both the positive and the negative ones.

Second, even though the guidance, policy, and actual work of building socialism in these two historical eras had large differences, they are by no means cut off from each other, much less inherently antithetical to each other. In the midst of building practical socialism, our Party put forward many correct propositions. But at that time these propositions were not implemented. Only after the reform and opening up were they fully carried out. In the future these concepts will need to be both adhered to and further developed. Like Marx said long ago: “Men make their own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make it under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing already, given and transmitted from the past.”[xi]

Third, we must correctly evaluate the historical period that came before reform and opening up. We cannot use the post-reform period to repudiate the pre-reform period. Nor can we repudiate the post-reform period with the history of the pre-reform era. The exploration of socialist practice before reform and opening-up created the necessary conditions for the exploration of socialist practice after reform and opening-up. Our explorations of socialist practice in the post-reform era are a continuation and development of what came before. Thus, in regard to the exploration of socialist practice before reform and opening up, we should adhere to the ideological line of seeking truth from facts, clearly distinguish the essential from the nonessential, adhere to truth, correct errors, develop our experience and draw lessons from it. On this foundation we can continue to push forward the cause of the Party and the people.

The reason why I emphasize this problem is because it is a major political issue. If it is not handled well, it will have serious political consequences. As one ancient said: “To destroy a people, you must first destroy their history.”[xii] Hostile forces at home and abroad often write essays on the history of the Chinese revolution or of New China, doing all in their power to smear and vilify that era. Their fundamental purpose is to confuse the hearts of the people. They aim to incite them into overthrowing both the Communist Party of China’s leadership and the socialist system of our country.

Why did the Soviet Union disintegrate? Why did the Communist Party of the Soviet Union fall to pieces? An important reason is that in the ideological domain, competition is fierce! To completely repudiate the historical experience of the Soviet Union, to repudiate the history of the CPSU, to repudiate Lenin, to repudiate Stalin was to wreck chaos in Soviet ideology and engage in historical nihilism. It caused Party organizations at all levels to have barely any function whatsoever. It robbed the Party of its leadership of the military. In the end the CPSU—as great a Party as it was—scattered like a flock of frightened beasts! The Soviet Union—as great a country as it was—shattered into a dozen pieces. This is a lesson from the past!

Comrade Deng Xiaoping pointed out: “The banner of Mao Zedong Thought cannot be discarded. Throwing this banner out negates the glorious history of our Party. Generally speaking, our Party’s history is still a glorious one. Although our Party has made some large mistakes in its history, including in the 30 years since the founding of the People’s Republic, even mistakes as large as the Cultural Revolution, in the end it was our Party that made the revolution successful. China’s status in the world was significantly improved after the founding of the People’s Republic of China. Only the founding of the People’s Republic of China enabled us, a big country with a population of nearly one fourth of the Earth’s total, to stand up and stand strong in the world.”[xiii]

He also emphasized, “The appraisal of Comrade Mao and the exegesis of Mao Zedong Thought does not solely touch upon the personal issues of Comrade Mao. These things cannot be cut away from the entire history of our Party and our country. To grasp this is to grasp everything. This is not just an intellectual issue—it is a political issue. It is a great political issue, both here and at home.”[xiv]

This is the vision of a great Marxist politician. Just think: if at the time of reform Comrade Mao had been completely repudiated, would our Party still be standing? Would our country’s system of socialism still be standing? And if it was not still standing, what would we have? A world of chaos.

Therefore, correctly handling the relationship between socialist practice and exploration both before reform and opening-up and after cannot be seen as a mere historical issue. It is a political one. To better understand this, I recommend you all take the time to read the “Resolution on Certain Questions in the History of our Party since the Founding of the People’s Republic of China.”[xv]

My third point: Marxism always develops along with the social realities and technology of the times. Marxism cannot stagnate. After the start of opening-up, socialism has only continued to advance. Upholding the development of socialism with Chinese characteristics is much like a great book. To establish foundational principles and ideas, Comrade Deng Xiaoping etched his part in. The Party Central Committee’s third generation, with Comrade Jiang Zemin as its core and Comrade Hu Jintao as general secretary, added their own brilliant chapters to this book. The responsibility of this generation of Communist Party members is to write the next chapter of this great work.

More than 30 years have passed since socialism with Chinese characteristics began; in that time, it has succeeded in many a grand endeavor. This is besides the accomplishments made in the founding of New China, a foundation that has allowed China to stand tall and stride far. Our understanding of socialism, and our grasp of the laws that govern socialism with Chinese characteristics, have reached unprecedented heights. This is unquestionably true. Yet at the same time, we should also recognize that the socialism of our country is still in its infancy. We still face many problems that we have not grasped clearly and dilemmas that have not been resolved. It is also unquestionably true that our understanding and handling of many significant issues is still deepening. Understanding anything requires a process. We have only engaged in socialism for a few decades. Our grasp on these things is still very limited; in practice, we must constantly develop further.

To uphold Marxism and socialism, we must take the perspective of development. We must take the practical problems of China’s modernization and reform and put these things we are doing at the center of our vision. Then we must focus our view of them through the perspective of Marxist theory, the sort of theoretical thinking that addresses practical problems, and through the new practices and forms of development that result from this. We have said that there is no one-size-fits-all path of development for the entire world. There also is no path of development that does not require change. Our past achievements in theory and practice will help us better face the problems of our forward march. However, we cannot let them become an excuse for arrogance and complacency, or even worse, a weight that drags this march down. As our cause advances and develops, the situations we encounter will be less familiar, the challenges and risks we face will grow greater, and we will meet with a growing number of events that cannot now be foreseen. We must become more alert to potential misfortune. We must prepare for danger in a time of peace.

Liberate your mind. Seek truth from facts. Keep pace with the times. This is the living soul of Marxism. These are the fundamental ideological weapons for adapting to new terrain, understanding new things, and accomplishing new tasks. Yet first and foremost, all Party cadres at all levels must adhere to the Marxist viewpoint of development, insist that practice is the only criterion for testing truth, bring into play historical initiative and creativity, and clearly perceive both continuity and change in the Party, the country, and the broader world. We must always have the spirit of “opening roads where we find mountains and building bridges where we meet rivers.” We should be enterprising, bold, and daring as we analyze and answer the pressing questions of real life and issues of mass ideology. We will continue to deepen reform and opening up, continue to discover, create, and advance, and continue to promote institutional, theoretical, and practical innovations.

Fourth: From beginning to end our Party has always adhered to the lofty ideals of communism. Party members, especially leading cadres, should be firm believers and faithful practitioners of the lofty ideal of communism and the common ideals of socialism with Chinese characteristics. Faith in Marxism, a socialist and communist conviction, is the political soul of the Communist Party member. They are the spiritual pillar that give him the strength to undergo any test. The Party Constitution clearly stipulates that the Party’s highest ideal and ultimate goal is to achieve communism. At the same time, the Party Constitution also clearly stipulates that the high ideal of communism can only be realized by a highly developed socialist society.[xvi] To pause for a moment or two and then suddenly enter communism—that isn’t realistic.

Comrade Deng Xiaoping said that the consolidation and development of the socialist system will require its own long period of history. He said it will require the tireless struggle of generations, up to ten generations, or perhaps even tens of generations of communists. Tens of generations—that is a long time! From the time of Confucius to the present day we have not seen more than seventy generations. Looking at the problem in this way is a real demonstration of the soberness of the Communist Party of China.

We must recognize that our labors today and the unceasing work of so many generations in the future are paired together, all moving towards the ultimate goal of achieving communism. If we throw away our Communist Party’s lofty ideals, we will lose our direction and become coldly utilitarian. At the same time, we must recognize that the realization of communism is a very long historical process. We must ground ourselves in the struggles of the present moment and keep our work down to earth.

Socialism with Chinese characteristics is our Party’s most fundamental, unifying program. The program of socialism with Chinese characteristics is, in a nutshell, to build a prosperous, strong, democratic, civilized, modernized and harmonious socialist country. Not only is this program based on the basic national conditions in which our country is now in, and the primary stage of socialism in which it must remain in for a long time—it also does not depart from the highest ideals of the Party.

Thus we must tread the road of socialism with Chinese characteristics with resolve. We must keep the sublime ideals of Communism in our hearts, and with unswerving conviction implement the Party’s basic line and program for the primary stage of socialism. Every job we do must be done well.

Revolutionary ideals reach higher than the heavens. Without lofty ideals, you do not reach the standards of a Communist Party member. Yet those who abandon their work in the real world to vainly preach such ideals also do not reach this standard. In our Party’s ninety years of history, one generation of Communists after another did not hesitate to shed their blood and lay down their lives for the independence and liberation of the people. They did this by relying on their faith and ideals. Even though they knew that their ideals would not be realized by their own hands, they firmly believed that as long as the generations to come continued laboring, as long as the generations to come sacrificed for this goal, then their sublime ideals would be realized.

Today, there are objective criteria to measure whether a Communist Party member or a leading cadre aspires to the lofty ideals of communism. Will he devote his whole heart and purpose to the service of the people? Will he suffer hardship first and postpone enjoyment until later? Will he work diligently and perform his duties honestly? Is he willing to dash ahead regardless of danger, fight, and consecrate his entire spirit, his entire life, for these ideals? Every hesitant, undecided conviction, every hedonistic way of thinking, every self-interested behavior, and every style of inaction is incompatible with these ideals.

There are people who believe that communism is an unattainable hope, or even that it is beyond hoping for—that communism is an illusion. This touches upon whether historical materialism or historical idealism is the proper frame through which to view world affairs.[xvii] The fundamental reason why some of our comrades have weak ideals and faltering beliefs is that their views lack a firm grounding in historical materialism. We should educate and guide cadres and the broader mass of Party members so that we can unite our the common ideal of practicing socialism with Chinese characteristics together with our lofty ideal of securing Communism. Our actions must be devout, determined, profound, and sincere. With firm ideals and convictions, we will stand taller, our vision will grow wider, and our mind will grow broader. We will be able to adhere to the correct political orientation, stand without arrogance in victory, without despair in adversity, enduring all sorts of risk and adversity, consciously resisting the corrosion of decedent philosophies, forever fostering the political essence of a Communist.

Facts have repeatedly told us that Marx and Engels’ analysis of the basic contradictions in capitalist society is not outdated, nor is the historical materialist view that capitalism is bound to die out and socialism is bound to win. This is an inevitable trend in social and historical development. But the road is tortuous. The eventual demise of capitalism and the ultimate victory of socialism will require a long historical process to reach completion. In the meantime, we must have a deep appreciation for capitalism’s ability to self-correct, and a full, objective assessment of the real long-term advantages that the developed Western nations have in the economic, technological, and military spheres. Then we must diligently prepare for a long period of cooperation and of conflict between these two social systems in each of these domains.

For a fairly long time yet, socialism in its primary stage will exist alongside a more productive and developed capitalist system. In this long period of cooperation and conflict, socialism must learn from the boons that capitalism has brought to civilization. We must face the reality that people will use the strengths of developed, Western countries to denounce our country’s socialist development. Here we must have a great strategic determination, resolutely rejecting all false arguments that we should abandon socialism. We must consciously correct the various ideas that do not accord with our current stage. Most importantly, we must concentrate our efforts on bettering our own affairs, continually broadening our comprehensive national power, improving the lives of our people, building a socialism that is superior to capitalism, and laying the foundation for a future where we will win the initiative and have the dominant position.

From this analysis, we gain a deeper appreciation of the fact that the ideological road we choose to follow is the central problem that will determine the victory or defeat of our Party’s work, the very fate of the Party itself. As Comrade Mao Zedong once said: “A revolutionary party is the guide of the masses. In revolutions, there has never been a revolutionary party that led its people onto the wrong road whose revolution did not fail.”

Our Party, in the time of revolution, construction, and reform, has adhered to the national conditions of our country, explored and formed a new democratic revolutionary road, a road of socialist transformation and construction. This is the road of socialism with Chinese characteristics. This spirit of exploration, this resolution to stick to our own road, is the true reason this Party has always been able to reawaken itself after set-backs and spring from triumph to triumph.

The great writer Lu Xun coined a famous saying: “Even if there is no road, when enough people walk through, a road will be made.” Socialism with Chinese characteristics is the dialectical unity of the theoretical logic of scientific socialism and the historical logic of China’s social development. It is a scientific socialism rooted in China’s soil, one that reflects the aspirations of the Chinese people, and one that is adapted to the conditions of progress in our times. It is the only way to comprehensively build a prosperous society, accelerate socialist modernization and realize the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation. As long as we stick to our own path and unswervingly adhere to and develop socialism with Chinese characteristics, we will surely be able to comprehensively build a moderately prosperous society by the centennial anniversary of the founding of the Communist Party of China, and a prosperous, democratic, civilized, modernized, and harmonious socialist country by the centennial anniversary of the founding of New China.


“New China” is a rhetorical term for the People’s Republic of China, designed originally to highlight the revolutionary nature of the new regime. It has a strong Maoist flavor, and the phrase “New China Era” is often used as a shorthand for the era Westerners would label “Maoist China.”

[ii] The quotation is from a 1937 poem written by Mao Zedong (“Huichang”) often played to orchestral accompaniment.

[iii] Variations of the phrase “Only socialism can save China” have been used since Maoist times; the “develop” clause was added in the Dengist era. Xi first used it as General Secretary just a few days after his new role as Genera Secretary had been announced (see Xi Jinping, Governance of China, vol I, p. 7).

[iv] The 18th National Congress was convened in 2012. The various work reports produced by the conference can be accessed here.

[v] The Four Cardinal Principles are: 1) Adhering to the socialist path, 2) the people’s democratic dictatorship, 3) The supreme leadership of the Communist Party of China, and 4) Marxism-Leninism and Mao Zedong Thought.

[vi] Each of these terms are enshrined in the Chinese constitution’s “basic line”. The five categories listed—economic, political, cultural, social, and ecological—have become standard frames through which policy, political campaigns, and even threats to the regime are understood. On that last one, see Samantha Hoffman, “Programming China: the Communist Party’s autonomic approach to managing state security,” PhD diss, University of Nottingham (2017), chapter 2

[vii] No clause in this sentence is of Xi Jinping’s invention; each and every part is a sloganized summary of a policy platform or institutional arrangement of the China’s party-state. Timothy Heath explains why Party leaders communicate through staid slogans like these:

[In the Chinese theory system there are many] specialized concepts designed specifically to drive policy on very specific issues. For example, “socialist harmonious society.” There’s a major strategic concept. It is a very important term that the Chinese identified as an ideal that had the Marxist vetting and was grounded in Marxist theory needed to­­­­­ allow their bureaucrats to develop policy to address social welfare issues: healthcare, retirement, education. That’s all wrapped up in this word ‘socialist harmonious society.’ It is designed primarily for bureaucrats, officials and decision makers. It is not really designed to mobilize the people. In fact most people ridicule, deride, and make fun of these archaic sounding Marxist concepts. But here is the thing: the Communist Party does not really care all that much. What they really care about is that their officials get it. That they understand what to do with these concepts, how to develop them into policies, and how to implement them. That is really where a lot of the CPC’s energy is focused on today. Informing the bureaucratic elite instead of mobilizing the entire people.

From Timothy Heath, “China’s New Governing Party Paradigm,” speech at the USC U.S.-China Institute, Feb 19, 2015. This speech can be seen on youtube here.

[viii] Deng Xiaoping, Address to the 13th National Congress, 1987.

[ix] The Zhuangzi was a work of Daoist philosophy from the Warring States Era. This translation of the passage is taken from Burton Watson, trans., Zhuangzi: Basic Writings (New York: Columbia University Press, 2003), 111.

[x] The line comes from Zheng Xie’s (1693-1765) poem, “Bamboo Amid Rocks.”

[xi] Karl Marx, “18th Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte,” (1852) ... /ch01.html. It is not surprising that Xi does not quote the sentence that follows: “And just as they seem to be occupied with revolutionizing themselves and things, creating something that did not exist before, precisely in such epochs of revolutionary crisis they anxiously conjure up the spirits of the past to their service, borrowing from them names, battle slogans, and costumes in order to present this new scene in world history in time-honored disguise and borrowed language.”

[xii] A line taken from Gong Zichen’s (1792-1841), Ding An Collection, “Discussing History and the Present.”

[xiii] Deng Xiaoping, Selected Works of Deng Xiaoping, vol II, p. 298.

[xiv] Deng Xiaoping, “My Opinion of the ‘Resolution on Certain Questions in the History of our Party,’” address given on October 25th 1980, accessed at ... 94734.html

[xv] This resolution was formally adopted by at the 11th Central Committee of the Communist Party of China on June 27, 1981. It was a decisive landmark in the Party’s decision to shift away from Maoist political economy and towards “reform and opening up.” Among other things, this resolution condemned the Cultural Revolution for “conform[ing] neither to Marxism, Leninism nor to Chinese reality,” blaming Mao personally for the disaster. The resolution honors both Mao and the Party for its earlier revolutionary achievements, but concedes that the Party now recognizes that “[China] was not fully prepared, either ideologically or in terms of scientific study, for the swift advent of the new-born socialist society and for socialist construction on a national scale.” It contains explicit guidance on what elements of Mao Zedong thought were to be retained by the Party moving forward, and which were to be discarded.

The full text of the resolution can be found at: ... ory/01.htm

[xvi] The relevant text of the Party constitution (18th Congress version) reads:

The Communist Party of China is the vanguard both of the Chinese working class and of the Chinese people and the Chinese nation. It is the core of leadership for the cause of socialism with Chinese characteristics and represents the development trend of China’s advanced productive forces, the orientation of China’s advanced culture and the fundamental interests of the overwhelming majority of the Chinese people. The realization of communism is the highest ideal and ultimate goal of the Party.

The Communist Party of China takes Marxism-Leninism, Mao Zedong Thought, Deng Xiaoping Theory, the important thought of Three Represents and the Scientific Outlook on Development as its guide to action.

Marxism-Leninism brings to light the laws governing the development of the history of human society. Its basic tenets are correct and have tremendous vitality. The highest ideal of communism pursued by the Chinese Communists can be realized only when the socialist society is fully developed and highly advanced. The development and improvement of the socialist system is a long historical process. So long as the Chinese Communists uphold the basic tenets of Marxism-Leninism and follow the road suited to China’s specific conditions and chosen by the Chinese people of their own accord, the socialist cause in China will be crowned with final victory.

“Constitution of the Communist Party of China,” English Edition of Qiushi Journal, Vol.4 (2012), No.4.

[xvii] Timothy Heath’s short primer on the way these terms are used in Party discourse is useful:

Materialist conception of history. The CCP retains the Marxist notion that history operates according to certain inherent natural laws, and that the most essential of these laws concern economic production. As one theorist explained, the most essential “driving force for social development is the production of material and material productive forces” (Wang H. 2004). One implication of this view is that the CCP prioritizes the development of economic production as the greatest enabler of the development of the social, cultural, and political life of all people.

Dialectical view of history. CCP theorists also emphasize the idea that history moves through the resolution of contradictions. Theorists define the dialectical view of history as the repeated, progressive manifestation of contradictions between forces of production and between the economic base and superstructure. The dialectical view directs CCP theorists to discern evidence that economic development has begun to outpace developments in the political and social life of a people, since it is the resolution of these contradictions which brings progress (Wang H. 2004). ... -ideology/

Left Coms & POTUS are equally clueless as to the content and meaning of this speech.
"We ask no compassion from you. When our turn comes, we shall not make excuses for the terror."

User avatar
Posts: 3917
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle island

Re: China

Post by blindpig » Tue Oct 01, 2019 1:59 pm

Live: Grand celebration honoring 70th anniversary of PRC's founding 庆祝中华人民共和国成立70周年

China is holding a grand celebration with military and mass parade at Tian'anmen Square on October 1, the National Day, to mark the 70th founding anniversary of the People's Republic of China (PRC). For the mass parade, 100,000 people and 70 sets of flower-festooned floats form 36 formations. The mass parade lasts 65 minutes. The military parade showcases China's achievements in building its national defense and armed forces in the past 70 years and reflects the outcomes of the reform of the People's Liberation Army (PLA).

"We ask no compassion from you. When our turn comes, we shall not make excuses for the terror."

Post Reply