The Relationship Between Real Socialism and the First Stage of Communism
The author Shi Ruiyang, is an invited researcher at the Center for World Socialism Studies, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, March 2024
Article source: Political Economy Research. 2024 (03)
Abstract: For a long time, there have been two opposing views on the relationship between real socialism and the first stage of communism: one view is that Marx’s socialism is utopian because he did not foresee that commodity economy still exists in socialist society; the other view is that socialist society is a planned economy, and commodity economy is not socialism. Both views are wrong, and the root of their errors lies in confusing the relationship between real socialism and the first stage of communism. Therefore, scientifically explaining the relationship between real socialism and the first stage of communism will help to strengthen the lofty ideal of communism, enhance confidence in the path of socialism with Chinese characteristics, highlight the scientific nature, persuasiveness and combat effectiveness of Marxist theory, correct the misalignment between theory and practice, build socialism down to earth, avoid repeating the mistake of rushing to transition to the higher stage of communism, overcome ideological and political laxity and paralysis, carry forward the spirit of struggle, enhance the ability to struggle, and promote the revival of the world socialist movement.
For a long time, there has been a confused understanding of simply equating and confusing the two on the relationship between real socialism and the first stage of communism. Confusing the relationship between real socialism and the first stage of communism not only negates the lofty ideal of communism, but also negates the common ideal of socialism with Chinese characteristics; it not only causes a misalignment between theory and practice, seriously affecting the scientific nature, persuasiveness and combat effectiveness of Marxism, but also easily repeats the mistakes of the past in rushing to transition to the advanced stage of communism, which is not conducive to building socialism from reality and down-to-earth conduct; it is also easy to cause the proletariat and its political parties to relax and paralyze in ideology and politics, lose their revolutionary will and fighting spirit, and is not conducive to the revival of the world socialist movement. Therefore, scientifically explaining the relationship between real socialism and the first stage of communism has great theoretical and practical significance.
Part 1. This Concept helps to strengthen the lofty ideal of communism
For a period of time, erroneous views that belittle and deny the ideals and beliefs of communism have been rampant. Some people call communism a “utopia” and say that communism cannot be seen or touched. Some people try their best to satirize and ridicule the communist social theory of classic writers.
For example, some people believe that Marx’s argument for socialism and communism is an unsolved case and there are many points that need to be discussed. Some people believe that the social ownership of the means of production in the future society mentioned by Marx and Engels is empty, abstract, unrealistic, and has many obvious academic defects. Some people call the planned economy of the future society described by Marx and Engels a misjudgment of the classical writers, and call distribution according to work egalitarianism① “big pot meal”.
Others call Marx’s communist theory classical socialism and the Soviet model traditional socialism, claiming that such socialism has long been in the grave and must be liberated from the classical and traditional socialist theories. Some people believe that the descriptions of the future society by the classical Marxist writers are 100% utopian and absolutely utopian.
Others have proposed that the future social theory of the founders of Marxism was not summarized based on the actual practice of socialist construction, but was conceived based on the development of Europe in the 19th century. Others believe that Lenin’s “State and Revolution” is full of utopianism. In short, in their view, Marx’s communist theory is outdated. The consequences of denying the lofty ideals of communism have been provided by the collapse of the Soviet Communist Party and the disintegration of the Soviet Union.
Since the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China, Comrade Xi Jinping has spoken about the lofty ideals of communism many times and with the most resolute attitude. Comrade Xi Jinping clearly pointed out: “When I presided over the drafting of the report of the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China, I specifically requested that the following paragraph be written: ‘Faith in Marxism and belief in socialism and communism are the political soul of the Communists and the spiritual pillar that enables the Communists to withstand any test.'”
Comrade Xi Jinping also seriously pointed out: “Various hostile forces at home and abroad have always attempted to make our party change its flag and name. The key is to try to make us lose our faith in Marxism and our faith in socialism and communism.” Emphasizing the lofty ideal of communism is a prominent feature of the party’s work since the 18th National Congress.
Therefore, we must never stand idly by and watch the erroneous remarks that deny the lofty ideal of communism and deny the scientific predictions of the basic characteristics of the future society by the classical Marxist writers. The lofty ideal of communism is by no means dispensable to us. Denying the lofty ideal of communism means denying the objective law and inevitable trend that capitalism will inevitably be replaced by socialism, and fundamentally denying the future direction of human society.
Denying the lofty ideal of communism means denying the spiritual pillar and political soul of the Communists, and the ship of socialism with Chinese characteristics will lose its direction on the sea and will be at a loss. Therefore, whether to uphold or deny the lofty ideal of communism is a question that needs to be clarified at the theoretical level, a question that needs to be implemented at the practical level, and a question that has an important impact at the political level. It is related to the development direction and success or failure of socialism, and even to the future and destiny of the entire human race. If we abandon the lofty ideal of communism, we will repeat the mistakes of the collapse of the CPSU and the disintegration of the Soviet Union. The blood of thousands of revolutionary martyrs will be shed in vain, and the vast majority of working people will suffer twice and be punished twice. This is by no means an alarmist attitude.
Marx and Engels’ scientific prediction of the basic characteristics of communism scientifically reveals the objective laws of human social development and points out the direction for human society to move forward. The reason why the lofty ideal of communism is scientific is determined by the contradiction between the socialization of production and the capitalist private ownership of the means of production. The reason why the lofty ideal of communism is scientific is that the founders of Marxism look at the problem from the height of the complete liberation of the entire human race. The scientific nature of the lofty ideal of communism is precisely derived by the founders of Marxism from the history and reality of the development of capitalism. The truthfulness of the lofty ideal of communism is reflected in the scientific understanding and attitude of the founders of Marxism towards the future society. They only reveal the basic characteristics of the future society and never give a detailed and specific description.
There are many ways for some people to deny the ideals and beliefs of communism and the scientific predictions of the basic characteristics of the future society by the classical writers of Marxism.
One of the most commonly used methods is to first equate and confuse the real socialism since the 20th century with the first stage of communism mentioned by the founders of Marxism, and then create opposition between the two, and use the socialism in real life that people can see with their own eyes to tailor and deny the theory of the first stage of communism of the founders of Marxism.
The most typical view is that the socialism mentioned by the classical writers is a “utopia” because the founders of Marxism did not accurately predict the existence of commodity economy under socialist conditions.
This method of analyzing the problem is completely wrong, and the conclusions drawn are also fundamentally untenable. The real socialist countries since the 20th century have adhered to the basic principles of scientific socialism in at least four aspects, namely, the guiding role of Marxism, public ownership as the main body, the dictatorship of the proletariat and the leadership of the party. ① In this way, these countries are certainly socialist countries, and are by no means other ideologies as some people at home and abroad say. However, real socialism is still in the process of construction and development, and has not yet reached the first stage of communism as believed by the founders of Marxism. Real socialism and socialism in the first stage of communism, which is a stage of the future ideal society as described by the founders of Marxism, are two different stages in the process of socialist development that are both related and different. ②
Therefore, it is untenable to deny the lofty ideal of communism by equating, confusing, and opposing the two. This view that the predictions of the basic characteristics of the first stage of communism by classical writers are utopian is actually using the necessity of developing multiple economic elements and commodity economy in real socialism to deny the scientific nature of the predictions of the basic characteristics of the future society by classical writers. ③
In fact, the multiple economic elements and commodity-money relations no longer exist in the first stage of communism mentioned by Marx, and there is no logical contradiction with the fact that real socialist countries still need to actively develop multiple economic elements and commodity economy, because the two are not the same stage in the process of socialist development. It is wrong to use Marx’s theory of the first stage of communism, which is to implement social ownership and planned economy, to deny the necessity of multiple economic elements and commodity economy in real socialist countries; similarly, it is wrong to use the excuse that socialist countries must develop multiple economic elements and commodity economy at this stage to belittle the scientific nature of Marx’s theory of the first stage of communism
Part II. Helps to strengthen confidence in the road to socialism with Chinese characteristics
For a period of time, as China ‘s reform and opening up continued to deepen, some people abroad continued to doubt, belittle and deny the path of socialism with Chinese characteristics. These public opinions questioned that China’s current socialism is “capitalist socialism”, “state capitalism”, “new bureaucratic capitalism” and so on. At home, some people also constantly questioned the path of socialism with Chinese characteristics. In the early days of reform and opening up, as the country opened its doors, a mentality of worshipping foreign things gradually emerged among some people. They always felt that the moon in the West was rounder than that in China, advocated full Westernization and privatization, worshipped capitalism, and believed that there was no hope and future for socialism. After China became the world’s second largest economy, some people believed that these achievements were the result of capitalism. Some people proposed that the socialism that Marx talked about was a planned economy, but we are now engaged in a market economy. Is this a departure from Marxism? Others said that the socialism that Marx talked about was public ownership, but we now allow the existence and development of non-public economic elements. They are worried that socialism with Chinese characteristics will leave scientific socialism?
The doubts, belittlements and denials of the above foreign scholars urgently need us to give a convincing response. The confusion and doubts of the domestic masses about socialism with Chinese characteristics also urgently need us to make scientific and convincing explanations. The author believes that there is an important reason for the confusion, doubt, devaluation and negation of socialism with Chinese characteristics, which is to simply equate and confuse real socialism with the first stage of communism mentioned by Marx, thus ignoring the internal logic of scientific socialist theory. As we all know, the scientific socialism theory of Marx and Engels actually solved three most basic theoretical problems, namely: the historical inevitability of socialism, the basic characteristics of the future socialist society, and the conditions and path for realizing socialism. In addition, in the view of Marx and Engels, the realization of the future socialist society is a long-term and multi-stage process.
First of all, according to the internal logic of these three basic problems, it is not difficult to see that real socialism and the first stage of communism mentioned by Marx are not actually aimed at the same basic problem of scientific socialism, but two different problems.
The basic characteristics of the first stage of communism mentioned by Marx answer the question of “what will the future socialist society be like”, that is, “the basic characteristics of socialism”, which belongs to the level of “socialist system”. In response to the question of “what will the future socialist society be like”, Marx and Engels have given a scientific answer to this question, that is, their scientific prediction of the basic characteristics of the future society. In their view, only under the conditions of these basic characteristics can the free and all-round development of human beings and the complete liberation of the proletariat truly become a reality. Therefore, Marxist classical writers have always opposed abstractly discussing the free and all-round development of human beings without considering these basic conditions. Real socialism, on the other hand, answers another question, namely, “how to realize socialism” or “how to realize the transition to socialism”, which is what we usually call “how to build socialism”.
To this question, the answer of Marxist classical writers is: we must adhere to the leadership of the vanguard of the proletariat, we must observe problems with class viewpoints and class analysis methods, we must adhere to the nature of the proletarian dictatorship of the state power, we must concentrate the main means of production in the hands of the state, etc. Since the 20th century, all the real socialist countries have had a relatively backward economy and culture. Therefore, in the process of building socialism, it was not possible to immediately eliminate multiple economic elements and commodity economy and directly transition to socialism. It is only possible to develop productive forces with a conscious direction in mind first by utilizing a series of special methods such as multiple economic elements and commodity economy, and then transition to socialism in a roundabout and indirect path (See Lenin. Where he first proposed this idea of roundabout transition https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1921/oct/29.htm)
In other words, in the backward countries after the proletariat seizes power, the conditions for immediately eliminating commodity and money are not yet available, and it is still necessary to use certain positive aspects of capitalism to lay a material foundation for socialism. Since the 20th century, one of the mistakes made by the real socialist countries in their exploration was to build socialism beyond the stage of development and to deviate from the reality of the backward level of productive forces development. Reform and opening up in China is to better liberate and develop productive forces and better build, consolidate and develop socialism based on the reality of backward countries. Therefore, developing multiple economic elements and commodity economy in the primary stage of socialism does not violate scientific socialism, but is the product of the combination of scientific socialism with the specific reality of China at this stage. Therefore, socialism with Chinese characteristics is socialism, not some other kind of ..ism.
Secondly, the realization of socialist society is a long-term and multi-stage process.
From this perspective, it is not difficult to see that real socialism and the first stage of communism mentioned by classical writers are not actually the same stage in the process of socialist development, but they are two different stages.
The first stage of communist society is a primary stage of the ideal society of mankind in the future. Compared with the advanced stage of communism, in the first stage of communism, although all sources of material wealth have not yet been fully flowing, there is still inevitably “bourgeois legal rights” or “de facto inequality” such as “distribution according to work”, and some mandatory functions similar to the state need to be retained, but after all, there are no classes and class differences, no commodity-money relations, and there is no old state as a tool of class rule. Marx made it very clear in “Critique of the Gotha Program”, so I won’t repeat it here. However, real socialism is actually still in a period of transition to the first stage of communism, not a stage of the ideal human society as described by Marxist classical writers.
The view of Marxist classical writers is that in the future first stage of communism, since the means of production are jointly owned throughout the whole society, various economic elements, commodity-money relations, classes and the state will naturally cease to exist. However, they did not say that various economic elements and commodity-money relations will be eliminated during the transition period, and classes and the state have been eliminated.
In addition, Lenin’s New Economic Policy has shown that socialist countries with relatively backward economy and culture cannot immediately eliminate various economic elements and commodity economy during the period of transition to socialism, but also need to allow the existence and development of various economic elements and commodity economy. The first stage of communism and real socialism belong to different stages in the process of socialist development, they are not the same stage. Therefore, the fact that real socialism allows the existence and development of various economic elements is not a falsification of the scientific nature of Marx’s theory of the first stage of communism.
Due to the neglect of the internal logic of scientific socialist theory, real socialism is simply equated and confused with Marx’s first stage of communism, and the direct consequence is that the two negate each other. Or they deny the scientific nature of Marx’s prediction of the basic characteristics of the future society on the grounds that there are still multiple economic elements and commodity-money relations in real socialism; or they deny the practical necessity of the existence of multiple economic elements and commodity-money relations in socialist countries on the pretext that there is no commodity economy in the first stage of communism as stated in Marx’s theory. Real socialism and the first stage of communism mentioned by Marx are two different stages of development that are both related and different. Real socialism is only a stage in socialist construction, and only a stage in the transition process to the first and advanced stages of communism, while the first and advanced stages of communist society are the inevitable destination and future direction of the development of real socialism. Therefore, it is completely wrong to simply equate and confuse real socialism with Marx’s first stage of communism without analysis, and then create an opposition between the two.
In short, doubts, denigration and denial of socialism with Chinese characteristics are untenable. Socialism with Chinese characteristics has neither departed from the basic principles of scientific socialism nor separated from the characteristics of the times of the world today and the basic national conditions of China at the current stage. It is the product of the combination of the basic principles of scientific socialism with the characteristics of the times of the world today and the basic national conditions of China at the current stage, and is the concrete and realization form of the basic principles of scientific socialism in China at the current stage.
Part III. It helps to improve the scientific nature, persuasiveness and combat effectiveness of Marxist theory
Since the founding of the People’s Republic of China, we have established Marxism as the guiding ideology of the Party and the state, guiding the economic and social development of China. Marxist theoretical education and ideological and political work in China have also achieved great results. But at the same time, we cannot ignore the fact that there are still some relatively weak links in our Marxist theoretical education and ideological and political work. One of the most prominent problems is the misalignment between theory and practice, which is the phenomenon of “two skins” that people often say. For example, in the works of Marxist classics, socialist society is a society that implements public ownership of the means of production. However, in the actual practice of socialist construction, a variety of non-public economic elements are being vigorously developed; for example, in the works of Marxist classics, socialist society has eliminated commodity production and commodity exchange. However, in the actual practice of socialist construction, commodity-money relations have to be vigorously developed; for another example, in the works of Marxist classics, socialist society has eliminated classes, class differences and the state. However, in the actual practice of socialist construction, class struggle still exists both internationally and domestically, and the people’s democratic dictatorship must be upheld and strengthened. As for the inconsistency between reality and theory, we often simply use the name of “development” to cover it up, lacking in-depth analysis and explanation of the contradiction between theory and reality, and even ignoring to explore the deep-seated reasons for the conflict between theory and reality. Over time, people no longer believe in our ideological and theoretical education, and regard our Marxist theoretical education and ideological and political work as empty and unrealistic “political preaching”. As a result, the argument that Marxism is “outdated” and the argument that Marxist ideology is “preaching” have become popular among some people, who believe that Marxism has little academic rationality, systematicity, and scientificity.
As a result, there has been a strange phenomenon that Marxism has been marginalized, empty, and labeled, “speechless” in some disciplines, “missing” in textbooks, and “voiceless” in forums. This is what Comrade Xi Jinping calls the “three transformations” and “three losses” of Marxism. Since the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China, Comrade Xi Jinping has attached great importance to the construction of Marxist theoretical disciplines, the construction of Marxism colleges, and the construction of ideological and political theory courses in universities, middle schools, and primary schools, and the passive situation of Marxist theoretical education and ideological and political work has been fundamentally reversed. However, it must be noted that in some places and fields, the phenomenon of “three transformations” and “three losses” of Marxism still exists, and there is still a long way to go to uphold and strengthen the guiding role of Marxism.
One of the important reasons for the phenomenon of “two skins” between theory and practice is that real socialism is directly equated and confused with Marx’s first stage of communism. For a long time, because we are accustomed to simply and directly equating and confusing the two, ignoring the connection and difference between the two, it has seriously affected the full play of the guiding role of Marxist theory. Simply and indiscriminately equating and confusing real socialism with the first stage of communism not only causes contradictions and dislocations between theory and practice, but also causes mutual negation between the two.
As mentioned above, on the one hand, some people often draw the wrong conclusion that Marx’s socialism is utopian on the grounds that real socialism still has commodity economy. Marxist doctrine is originally a scientific theory, but it is regarded as an outdated dogma. On the other hand, some people use Marx’s socialism with planned economy to negate socialism with Chinese characteristics. Simply equating and confusing real socialism with Marx’s first stage of communism is an important reason for the marginalization of Marxism. In fact, the socialism in the first stage of communism mentioned by Marx is socialism in which productive forces has been fully developed and in which the workers have realized the equal possession of the means of production. Therefore, in the first stage of communism, there must be no commodity economy, no classes and class differences, no class struggle and the state in the original sense as a tool of class rule. Since the 20th century, the real socialism has been socialism with a relatively backward economy and culture as the starting point. Not only do there exist two types of public ownership economy, but also it is necessary to develop multiple economic elements including non-public economy. On the basis of such a level of productive forces and such an ownership structure, it is impossible not to have commodity-money relations, classes and the state. Although both are called socialism, they are at different stages of social development. Therefore, it is fundamentally untenable to create a view that the scientific nature of Marx’s theory of the first stage of communism and the necessity of developing a commodity economy in today’s socialist countries are mutually contradictory. Therefore, only by scientifically explaining the connection and difference between real socialism and the first stage of communism can we fully demonstrate the scientific nature, persuasiveness and combat effectiveness of Marxist theory.
Part 4. It is helpful to build socialism in a down to earth manner.
An important lesson of the practice of socialism since the 20th century is that this socialism building practice was impatient and reckless, and we tried to build socialism beyond the stage of development. In 1936, Stalin proposed that the Soviet Union had basically entered socialism. Just three years later, Stalin proposed to transition to communism (referring to the advanced stage of communism). In 1959, Khrushchev proposed at the 21st Congress of the CPSU that the Soviet Union had entered the “period of building communism”.
In 1961, Khrushchev proposed at the 22nd Congress of the CPSU that the Soviet Union would “basically build a communist society in 20 years”. Most of the impatience and recklessness in the construction practice of socialist countries in the 20th century were related to the Soviet Union’s construction of socialism beyond the stage of development.
Of course, Stalin’s mistakes are only secondary to his achievements. It is incorrect to completely deny Stalin’s approach because of his mistakes in the exploration of socialist construction. Comrade Mao Zedong once recognized the problem of disproportion in the process of industrialization in the Soviet Union and clearly proposed to learn from the Soviet Union and explore a development path suitable for China ‘s national conditions. In the process of socialist construction, Mao Zedong realized that socialist society is a very long historical stage, and socialist society can be divided into two stages: “underdeveloped socialism” and “relatively developed socialism”. On the issue of the stage of socialist development, Mao specifically proposed to seriously study the question of which stages the transition period actually includes. Mao also proposed the idea that socialism should vigorously develop commodity economy. These ideas are very valuable. Nevertheless, due to lack of experience and insufficient understanding of the long-term and arduous nature of socialist construction, China has also made a series of mistakes in the process of exploring and building socialism, such as the agricultural “Great Leap Forward” characterized by exaggeration and high targets, the industrial “Great Leap Forward” centered on the mass production of steel, and the people’s commune movement.
It should be noted here that we cannot simply attribute such mistakes of impatience and recklessness to the leadership, but should fully recognize the special historical background and international environment at that time. When the People’s Republic of China was just established, faced with the heavy construction tasks at home and the blockade and sanctions imposed by imperialist countries, the vast majority of working people who had become the masters of the state for the first time all had an urgent mood to race against time to speed up the construction of their own socialist motherland. This was the common wish of almost everyone at that time, from the bottom to the top. Therefore, it is unscientific to blame the mistakes of impatience and recklessness entirely on individual leaders, and it is not a scientific attitude of historical materialism. Impatience and recklessness, rushing into communism, made the mistake of building socialism beyond the stage of development, divorced from the level of development of productive forces, violated the objective laws of economic development, and caused the opposite of what was expected.
Practice has proved that it will be a long historical process for economically and culturally backward countries to transit to the first stage of communism without classes and class differences as described by Marx. The proletariat and its political parties in backward countries must fully recognize the long-term, arduous and complex nature of socialist construction, and combine giving full play to people’s subjective initiative with respect for objective economic laws. The practice of building socialism divorced from the objective level of productive forces, rushing for quick results, and surpassing the stage of development will only cause unnecessary losses.
Since the Third Plenary Session of the 11th CPC Central Committee, our Party has learned from past experiences and lessons of impatience and recklessness, and stressed that everything should proceed from the basic national conditions of China at this stage, and should not go beyond the stage of social development. After more than 40 years of continuous exploration in reform and opening up, we have gradually established a basic economic system suitable to the primary stage of socialism that conforms to China’s national conditions. Since the 18th CPC National Congress, Comrade Xi Jinping has repeatedly stressed that we should oppose the tendency of going beyond the stage of development and rushing for quick results, as well as the tendency of following the old ways and being self-contained.
With the completion of the goal and task of building a moderately prosperous society in all respects, the Party Central Committee with Comrade Xi Jinping as the core has a new understanding of the stage of social development in China. On January 11, 2021, Comrade Xi Jinping clearly put forward the concept of the “new development stage”. Comrade Xi Jinping pointed out: “After building a moderately prosperous society in all respects and achieving the first centenary goal (2021), we must seize the opportunity to embark on a new journey of building a modern socialist country in all respects and march towards the second centenary goal (2049). This marks that China has entered a new stage of development.” Xi Jinping also specifically explained the rich connotation and historical status of the “new development stage”. Comrade Xi Jinping pointed out: “The new development stage is a stage within the primary stage of socialism… an important stage in the process of China ‘s socialist development… and a stage in which China ‘s socialism moves from the primary stage to a higher stage.” ②
Comrade Xi Jinping’s discussion on the new development stage, on the one hand, emphasizes that we must not make the mistake of building socialism beyond the stage that is divorced from the reality of China ‘s current stage. At the same time, it is also a severe criticism of the wrong view that attempts to promote privatization in the name of the primary stage of socialism and evade the lofty ideal of communism. In fact, as early as May 5, 1978, in the article entitled “Implementing the Socialist Principle of Distribution According to Work” published by the People’s Daily in the name of the newspaper’s special commentator, it was proposed: “Admittedly, our current society is not the first stage of communist society envisioned by Marx.” ③
This article has actually put forward a research task for us to further scientifically explain the relationship between real socialism and the first stage of communism in theory. Scientifically explaining the relationship between real socialism and the first stage of communism and admitting that real socialism is not the first stage of communism as Marx said will help us build socialism based on reality and in a down-to-earth manner. Admitting that real socialism has not yet entered the first stage of communism will help us reach ideological unity on the basic economic system of China at this stage. The basic economic system in the primary stage of socialism is the result of our party’s long-term practice and exploration. It not only adheres to the basic principles of scientific socialism, but also fully reflects the objective requirements of China ‘s economic and social development at this stage. Practice has proved that the basic economic system at this stage is completely correct. However, for a long time, there have been different views on the understanding of the basic economic system at this stage.
One view is that socialist society can only have public ownership. China is already a socialist society, so multiple economic elements should not be allowed to exist, especially the existence and development of private economy should not be allowed. They are worried that allowing the existence and development of private economy will lead to capitalism. The starting point of this view is good, but it fails to see that non-public economic elements are only necessary supplements in China and the dominant public economy still determines the nature of Chinese society. Another view is the opposite, which argue that the rapid development of productive forces in China since reform and opening up is the result of the development of multiple economic elements. They call socialism “utopian” and public ownership as “empty/unclear ownership”. ( TR. In reality there is no clear owner of public ownership enterprises)
They believe that Marx’s socialist public ownership is unrealistic, and then understand reform as de-public ownership, and believe that the more thorough privatization, will be better. They only see the positive role of the non-public economy as a supplement, but fail to see the important role and historical contribution of the public economy as the main pillar.
One common point between these two erroneous views is that they first equate and confuse real socialism with the socialism of the first stage of Marx’s communism, and then create mutual opposition and negation between the two. The former uses Marx’s first stage of communism to deny the necessity of developing multiple economic elements in real socialism; the latter uses the necessity of developing multiple economic elements in real socialism to deny the scientific prediction of the founder of Marxism on the basic characteristics of future society. The common mistake of the two is that they do not scientifically understand and grasp the relationship between real socialism and the first stage of communism. Therefore, scientifically explaining the relationship between real socialism and the first stage of communism will help us to embrace the lofty ideal of communism, build socialism down to earth, and avoid the mistake of rushing to transition to the higher stage of communism.
Part V. It Contributes to the revival of the world socialist movement
The world socialist movement in the 20th century has achieved great achievements and profound lessons. Promoting the world socialist movement from low tide to a new climax is inseparable from a clear understanding of the historical orientation of the world socialist movement, the tenacious struggle of the proletariat and its political parties, and the effective unity of the proletariat of the world.
Firstly, scientifically explaining the relationship between actual socialism and the first stage of communism is necessary for correctly understanding the historical orientation of the world socialist movement.
Scientifically explaining the relationship between the two and admitting that the real socialism since the 20th century has not yet entered the first stage of communism as described by Marx is completely consistent with the Marxist term: “the great era”.
The main basis for determining the historical era as stated by the classical Marxist writers is: “Which class is the center of this or that (great) era, determines the main content of the (great) era, the main direction of the development of the (great) era, the main characteristics of the historical background of the (great) era, etc.” ①.
Comrade Xi Jinping clearly pointed out: “We are still in the historical era pointed out by Marxism” ②. The historical era Comrade Xi Jinping is talking about here is the great historical era of the transition of human society from capitalism to socialism opened up by the October Revolution. More than a hundred years have passed since the October Revolution of 1917.
During this period, the world socialist movement first achieved vigorous development from theory to practice, from one country to multiple countries, and then encountered unprecedented twists and turns such as the dramatic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe and the disintegration of the Soviet Union. Looking back at history, we cannot help but clearly realize that although the socialist movement in the 20th century broke the dominance of the capitalist system, the world today is still far from the fifth social form of human social development as described by the founders of Marxism, that is, the classless communist society.
Instead, it is still in the great historical era of the transition of human society from capitalism to socialism opened up by the October Revolution, and it is only in the early stages of this great historical era. The economic globalization of the world today is still dominated by capitalism, and capitalism still has advantages in economy, science and technology.
Therefore, there is still a long way to go to build socialism and ultimately realize communism. We still have to be neither arrogant nor impatient, but work hard and move forward courageously. If we directly regard real socialism as the first stage of communism, we will come to the wrong conclusions such as “the basic contradictions of capitalism no longer exist” and “the threat of imperialist war has disappeared”. This is obviously inconsistent with objective facts and is incorrect. Therefore, scientifically explaining the relationship between real socialism and the first stage of communism, clarifying the historical position of real socialism since the 20th century, and recognizing that real socialism is still in a certain stage of the transition period mentioned by Marx, will help us correctly understand the complex situation facing the world today, help us scientifically judge the historical position of the socialist movement in the world today, help us deepen our understanding of the historical inevitability of socialism replacing capitalism and its long-term, arduous and complex nature, and help us always have a sense of crisis in the complex international environment and win the strategic initiative in the great changes that have not happened in a century.
Secondly, scientifically explaining the relationship between real socialism and the first stage of communism is necessary to carry out a great struggle with many new historical characteristics.
We must clearly see that the contradiction between the two classes of the proletariat and the bourgeoisie and the two roads of socialism and capitalism are still the main contradictions in the world today. The world today is still dominated by capitalism. While we actively participate in international trade cooperation, we must be highly vigilant about security issues from all aspects, and prevent both black swans and gray rhinos. In China, although class contradictions are no longer the main contradictions, due to the multiple influences of domestic and foreign factors, class struggles will continue to exist for a long time within a certain scope.
We must both prevent the expansion of class struggle and be wary of the theory of the extinction of class struggle. The historical tragedy of the drastic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe and the disintegration of the Soviet Union has illustrated this problem with vivid facts. In the era of long-term peaceful construction, it is very dangerous to think that there are really no enemies just because we can’t see the enemies with guns in the past, and to think that the world today is really peaceful and calm and we can rest assured just because we can’t see the smoke of guns on the battlefield in the past. As early as 1932, Stalin and the Soviet Communist Party once believed that the question of “who will win” between Soviet socialism and capitalism “has been completely and forever solved by the victory of socialism”①.
The tragedy of the drastic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe and the disintegration of the Soviet Union tells us: Now it seems that Stalin’s estimate was too optimistic. Practice has proved that after the proletariat seizes power, before entering the first stage of classless communism on a global scale, the question of who will win between socialism and capitalism cannot be solved in the short term. In today’s world, capitalism is strong and socialism is weak. Western hostile forces are determined to destroy us. They will inevitably sabotage and disrupt us through various forms such as economy, politics, culture, and information, and will even launch tangible and intangible wars. We must be prepared to respond to the enemy’s challenges at any time. The Marxist class viewpoint, class analysis method and class struggle theory are not only not outdated, but must be adhered to for a long time. As Comrade Xi Jinping said: “We must adhere to the Marxist political standpoint. The Marxist political standpoint is first of all a class standpoint and conduct class analysis.”②
Abandoning the Marxist class viewpoint and class analysis method is tantamount to automatic surrender. Gorbachev abandoned the class analysis method and class struggle theory and threw away the sharpest ideological weapon of Marxism. Even Western bourgeois politicians looked down on him. ③
In a sense, the collapse of the CPSU and the disintegration of the Soviet Union were the inevitable result of abandoning the Marxist class viewpoint and class analysis method. Faced with the great changes unseen in a century and the complex international situation, “developing socialism with Chinese characteristics is a long-term and arduous historical task, and we must be prepared to carry out a great struggle with many new historical characteristics.”④
We must never lose the spirit of struggle. Comrade Xi Jinping was the first to raise this point and emphasized it the most since the 18th CPC National Congress. Xi Jinping was the first to propose this idea in the report to the 18th CPC National Congress, which he presided over and drafted. In the report to the 19th CPC National Congress, Comrade Xi Jinping further pointed out: “If our Party wants to unite and lead the people to effectively respond to major challenges, resist major risks, overcome major obstacles, and resolve major contradictions, it must carry out a great struggle with many new historical characteristics. Any thoughts and behaviors that seek enjoyment, are passive and lazy, and avoid contradictions are wrong… The whole Party must fully recognize the long-term, complex, and arduous nature of this great struggle, carry forward the spirit of struggle, improve the ability to struggle, and constantly win new victories in the great struggle.”
In the report to the 20th CPC National Congress, Comrade Xi Jinping clearly identified “dare to struggle and be good at struggle” as an important part of the “three musts.” If we simply and without analysis directly regard real socialism as the first stage of communism mentioned by Marx, we will come to the conclusion of “farewell to revolution” and will “advocate only cooperation without struggle”, which is obviously not in line with objective reality and is completely wrong. Therefore, scientifically explaining the relationship between real socialism and the first stage of communism is of great practical significance for thoroughly overcoming and eliminating the thoughts and behaviors of greed for enjoyment, passive laziness and avoidance of contradictions, carrying forward the spirit of struggle, enhancing the ability to struggle, and preparing to launch a great struggle with many new historical characteristics.
Therefore, scientifically explaining the relationship between real socialism and the first stage of communism is necessary to promote the effective unity of the proletariat worldwide and actively promote the building of a community with a shared future for mankind.
The world today is undergoing a major change that has not been seen in a century, facing huge turmoil and uncertainty, financial and fiscal crises are bottomless, trade wars and technology wars are one after another, local wars are filled with smoke.
The lives and safety of people all over the world are threatened and challenged. Imperialism, hegemonism, and power politics are still doing evil and harming mankind. The world today is neither peaceful nor tranquil, and the lives of people in various countries are already very difficult. Now is the time for the proletariat and working people of all countries in the world, and all people who love peace and progress, to unite. At the end of The Communist Manifesto, Marx and Engels called on the proletariat of the world: “Workers of the world, unite!” At the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century, capitalism entered the monopoly stage from the free competition stage. Lenin clearly put forward the slogan: “Workers of the world and oppressed nations, unite!”
Since the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China, Comrade Xi Jinping has clearly put forward the proposition of building a community with a shared future for mankind based on the new characteristics of the world today. The community with a shared future for mankind is different from the “false community” in the capitalist era and the “true community” (Marx) of the ideal society of mankind. In essence, it is a community of mankind in the period of transition from capitalism to socialism and a community of unity and struggle. Its connotation is: unite the proletariat and working people of all countries in the world, as well as all people who love peace and progress, to form the broadest united front, to oppose imperialism, hegemony and power politics, to defend the common interests of the proletariat and the broad masses of working people in the world, and even the common destiny and common interests of the entire mankind.
References
[1] Cheng Enfu, “The Future of World Socialism Depends on the Effective United Action of the International Proletariat”, Foreign Social Sciences, No. 5, 2012.
[2] Cheng Enfu: “Ten Policy Innovations of the New Marxist Economics Synthesis School since Reform and Opening Up”, Hebei University of Economics and Business, No. 3, 2021.
[3] Cheng Enfu and Song Xianping, “New Global Economic Pattern and China’s New Industrialization”, Political Economy Review, No. 5, 2023.
[4] Li Shenming, “Scientifically Determining the Current Era of the World”, Red Flag Manuscripts, No. 1, 2019.
[5] Hou Huiqin, “Scientific Argument for the Decisive Significance of the Communist Ideal”, World Socialist Studies, No. 5, 2023.
[6] Zhang Yang, “Economic Science Research Lays the Theoretical Foundation for Socialism: Commemorating the 200th Anniversary of Engels’ Birth”, World Socialist Studies, No. 11, 2020.
[7] Xiao Bin and Zheng Yongliang: “The Essence, Evaluation and Enlightenment of the Theory of Foreign Left-wing Underdeveloped Political Economy”, Shanghai Economics, No. 2, 2024.
Notes
(1) Shi Zhenping, “On the Adherence and Development of Marx’s Theory of Socialist Development Stages in the New Development Stage”, Political Science Research, No. 2, 2022.
(1) Xi Jinping: The Governance of China, Volume 2, Beijing: Foreign Languages Press, 2017, p. 326.
(2) Xi Jinping: The Governance of China, Volume 2, Beijing: Foreign Languages Press, 2017, p. 327.
(1) Shi Zhenping, “On the Nature of Socialist Political Economy with Chinese Characteristics”, Economic Perspectives, No. 10, 2020.
(2) Shi Ruiyang, “On the Intrinsic Logic of Real Socialism and the First Stage of Communism”, Shanghai Economics, No. 3, 2023.
(3) Shi Zhenping, “Analysis on the erroneous views that deny the lofty ideals of communism”, Journal of Marxism Studies, No. 10, 2023.
(4) Xi Jinping, “On Several Issues Concerning Upholding and Developing Socialism with Chinese Characteristics”, Qiushi, No. 7, 2019.
(1) Xi Jinping: The Governance of China, Volume 2, Beijing: Foreign Languages Press, 2017, p. 329.
(1) Mao Zedong’s Chronicle (1949-1976), Volume 4, Beijing: Central Literature Publishing House, 2013, p. 264.
(2) Mao Zedong’s Chronicle (1949-1976), Volume 4, Beijing: Central Literature Publishing House, 2013, p. 249.
(3) Institute of Contemporary China Studies, Draft History of the People’s Republic of China, Volume 2, Beijing: People’s Publishing House, 2012, p. 68.
(4) Institute of Contemporary China Studies, Draft History of the People’s Republic of China, Volume 2, Beijing: People’s Publishing House, 2012, p. 73.
(1) Xi Jinping: “Deeply study and resolutely implement the spirit of the Fifth Plenary Session of the 19th CPC Central Committee to ensure a good start in building a modern socialist country in an all-round way”, People’s Daily, January 12, 2021.
(2) Xi Jinping: “Deeply study and resolutely implement the spirit of the Fifth Plenary Session of the 19th CPC Central Committee to ensure a good start in building a modern socialist country in an all-round way”, People’s Daily, January 12, 2021.
(3) Special commentator: “Implementing the Socialist Principle of Distribution According to Work,” People’s Daily, May 5, 1978.
(1) Lenin’s Selected Works on Capitalism, Beijing: People’s Publishing House, 2009, p. 91.
(2) Xi Jinping: The Governance of China, Volume 2, Beijing: Foreign Languages Press, 2017, p. 66.
(1) Collection of Resolutions of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and the Soviet Government on Economic Questions, Volume 2, Beijing: China Renmin University Press, 1987, p. 406.
(2) Quoted from Liu Shijun, “The Arrival of a New Era in Chinese Political Science Research”, Wenhui Daily, June 30, 2014; Gong Yun, “Research on Historical Nihilism”, Marxism Studies, No. 6, 2017.
(3) Jack F. Matlock, Jr., Personal Account of the Collapse of the Soviet Union (Volume 1), translated by Wu Naihua et al., Beijing: World Knowledge Publishing House, 1996, p. 169.
(4) Selected Important Documents Since the 18th Congress of the Communist Party of China (Volume 1), Beijing: Central Literature Publishing House, 2014, p. 11.
(1) Xi Jinping, Securing a decisive victory in building a moderately prosperous society in all respects and striving for the great success of socialism with Chinese characteristics for a new era, Beijing: People’s Publishing House, 2017, pp. 15-16.