German and Chinese Comrades Talk on Socialism 3.0 Version in China
June 2022
Jan Turowski, Chief Representative of the Rosa Luxemburg Foundation in Beijing, and Yang Ping, President and Editor-in-Chief of Culture Horizon, held a discussion on topics such as “What is socialism with Chinese characteristics”, “Why does China want to achieve common prosperity”, and “What role will socialist China play on the world stage”.
The Rosa Luxemburg Foundation is a German foundation that leans towards the German Left Party (Die Linke), and is headquartered in Berlin, the capital of Germany. To date, it has offices in 18 countries, three of which are in Asia (Beijing, Vietnam Hanoi and New Delhi). The Rosa Luxemburg Foundation has established a good relationship of cooperation and mutual trust with the Chinese government and the Liaison Department of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China. The Rosa Luxemburg Foundation Beijing Office was established in 2008. So far, the Foundation has offices in more than 20 countries and its business covers more than 80 countries.
Why is it necessary to “explain socialism clearly ” ?
Host : What was the original intention of the Rosa Luxemburg Foundation to plan and publish the book “Debating Socialism with Chinese Characteristics”? Why did you choose “Cultural Horizons” as the partner of this book?
Jan Turowski: When discussing socialism in the 21st century, China’s voice cannot be ignored. China has now risen to become the world’s second largest economy and has a significant impact on the entire world situation. This is the basic motivation for us to plan this book. There is also a special motivation: I have repeatedly found in Germany that their understanding and discussion of Chinese socialism is very inconsistent with China’s current situation. In fact, socialism is a very complex issue. The magazine “Cultural Horizon” has established a series of important academic standards for the discussion of socialism in China, and has been leading and promoting the deepening of the discussion, and all the discussions are very insightful. Therefore, we chose “Cultural Horizon” among many possible partners. For German readers and observers, it is very meaningful to have a real understanding of China.
Host : There is a very important article in this book called “Socialism 3.0”, written in 2015, which comprehensively sorts out and summarizes the theme of this book, that is, the discussion on socialism. Under what circumstances did “Cultural Horizons” come up with this topic?
Yang Ping : Our magazine was founded in 2008, at a very important time point: in 2008, the financial crisis broke out in the United States, which was an important historical turning point. In 2020, the COVID-19 crisis occurred. In 2021, the United States had a constitutional crisis and the Capitol Hill incident. In addition, the Ukrainian crisis also broke out this year. We have seen that the capitalist world system has encountered a major crisis. The magazine “Cultural Horizon” was born in such an era, so we have to face the problems of this era.
The purpose of “Cultural Horizon” is cultural reconstruction. This is because the world socialist movement encountered setbacks in the 1980s, and a large number of Chinese people were disappointed with socialism and lost their faith in socialism. Cultural reconstruction is actually the reconstruction of values, that is, to rediscover the value of socialism and raise the banner of socialism again. Why do we need to discuss the issue of socialism? After the reform and opening up, some people said that “socialism cannot be explained clearly.” Under the circumstances at that time, Soviet socialism failed, and the object of China’s reform and learning was the United States, with privatization as the main trend, so socialism could not be explained clearly. True socialists need to seriously discuss and summarize the relationship between China’s reform and opening up and socialism. “Socialism 3.0” actually touches on such a topic when most people cannot explain socialism clearly, hoping to achieve a breakthrough in theory and make the most difficult issues clear.
Today, it seems that this article only explains part of it, or even a small part. Why? Because socialism is still in the process of further practice, and practice itself is constantly raising new problems and challenges. Before these problems are solved, socialism is still a process of practice. So I think that discussing socialism is a mission for Chinese socialists. Looking back today, this article is still not perfect in theory, so these discussions will move forward as time goes by.
Book Launch of the German Edition of “Debating Socialism with Chinese Characteristics”
Host : According to the time division of the article, China just entered Socialism 3.0 in 2015. Now it is 2022, and 7 years have passed. In the practice of Socialism 1.0 and 2.0, our society has shown a state of losing one thing while gaining another: the 1.0 stage is to maintain social equality under a low level of economic development; the 2.0 stage is to some extent at the expense of social inequality in exchange for rapid economic development. Then in the 3.0 stage, China faces a problem: how to break through the production mode and distribution mechanism under the social structure with socialist public ownership as the main body? Do you think China has made breakthroughs in these two aspects, or what efforts have been made towards breakthroughs?
Yang Ping : Regarding Socialism 3.0, there are actually two ways to divide it. One is that socialism can be divided into three waves worldwide. The first wave was in the 19th century, when Marxism was born, the Communist International was born, the international workers’ movement was surging, workers’ parties appeared in various countries, and labor rights became a very important content and form of the working class struggle. In the 19th century, socialism had not yet appeared in the form of a country, it appeared in the form of a workers’ movement, which was the first wave.
The second wave was from the October Revolution of 1917 to the disintegration of the Soviet Union in 1991. This period included the October Revolution in the Soviet Union, the emergence of the socialist camp in Eastern Europe, the success of the 1949 Revolution in China, and the national independence and liberation movements in Asia, Africa and Latin America that were highly related to the socialist movement. The core features of the second wave of socialism were the implementation of public ownership, planned economy and distribution according to work. Most of these countries completed the initial accumulation of industrialization. By the 1990s, the second wave of socialism ended.
The third wave of socialism should be the rise of socialism with Chinese characteristics from the 1990s to today. There are two core signs. The first sign is that China combines socialism with the market economy and builds a socialist market economic system; the second sign is that China has risen and become a very important force on the world stage, and has changed the current world pattern.
Judging socialism based on the three waves is an international perspective. To discuss socialism in China, we can make a narrow division: from 1949 to 1978 was the 1.0 stage of socialism. This stage was mainly led by Mao Zedong, who implemented the Soviet-style planned economy, public ownership, and distribution according to work, and finally completed the industrialization accumulation of the socialist country. In the nearly 30 years from 1949 to 1978, China built a relatively independent and relatively complete industrial system, and transformed from an agricultural country to an industrial country. At the same time, China also enabled the majority of ordinary people to develop themselves and the country in a relatively fair situation during the industrialization process. This is the first 30 years.
The 2.0 stage is the second 30 years, which can be counted from the reform and opening up in 1978 or the 1980s to the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China in 2012. These 30 years are mainly about reforming the original planned economic system and the single public ownership system and building a socialist market economic system. The core of the socialist market economic system is that state-owned enterprises are dominant, but the private economy is encouraged to develop extensively and mixed ownership is implemented. While promoting the strategic leadership of the state, various enthusiasms in the market economy are mobilized to maximize the efficiency of the market economy. This is the main content of reform and opening up. In this process, China’s economy has grown rapidly, and the key is to solve the relationship between socialism and market economy. In classic textbooks, socialism can only be combined with planned economy, and market economy can only be combined with capitalism. China has made a bold breakthrough and combined socialism with market economy. It has been proved that this socialist market economy system is successful.
After 2012, China entered a new era, which is the 3.0 stage of socialism. What should we do in this stage? What should we do in response to the widening gap between the rich and the poor in the market economy, the decline of social morality, and the increasingly serious environmental damage? At this time, we need to use socialist factors to regulate and control the capital factors in the market economy, narrow the gap between the rich and the poor, solve environmental problems, and improve people’s moral standards. To express it in four words, it is called “common prosperity”. The 3.0 stage of socialism mainly solves two problems. The first is to solve the problem of low efficiency in the 1.0 stage of socialism. To maintain the efficiency of development, development is the first priority; the second problem is that socialism must achieve common prosperity and common development. It is necessary to solve the gradually widening gap between the rich and the poor in the 2.0 stage and pursue the further development of socialism in common prosperity. This is what we call socialism 3.0. At present, this stage has just begun. How to achieve common prosperity is a brand-new topic. Therefore, we believe that the 3.0 stage of socialism faces a process of continuous practice and innovation.
Host : Dear Jan , you as a Western left-wing scholar who has worked and lived in China for a long time, what do you think of China’s socialist practice? What is the significance of these practices to other countries or the entire international community?
Jan : There are big differences between the discussion of socialism in China and Germany. The discussion of socialism in the West inevitably falls into a binary opposition, and pays more attention to whether the form of the country is “socialist” or “non-socialist”, which is a bit extreme. China’s discussion of socialism is more extensive and diversified. It regards socialism as a process, a process with different stages of development, and pays more attention to the characteristics of each stage of socialism. In the face of some complex contradictions, what attitude should be taken to view and deal with them? I think it is very important that China brings these contradictions into the discussion with a more open attitude: admit that these contradictions exist, although they cannot be solved now, but they can be put aside temporarily, and other problems that are prerequisites can be solved first. China is very flexible in dealing with contradictions and problems, which happens to be the most fundamental difference between China and the West when discussing socialism. Westerners do not have this flexibility.
What does China’s practice of common prosperity mean to the world?
Host :Achieving common prosperity has always been the political ideal of the Communist Party of China, whether in the 1.0 or 2.0 stage. Deng Xiaoping once proposed that the rich should lead the poor to eventually achieve common prosperity. However, in the 2.0 period, common prosperity was more of a vision, while today’s common prosperity is the baton of political governance practice. But we know that China’s wealth today is actually accumulated on the basis of introducing market competition, capital logic and other characteristics of capitalist economic operation in the 2.0 era, which also includes national wealth and various private wealth. In December 2021, “Cultural Horizon” published a special issue to discuss common prosperity. I would also like to ask President Yang to combine the content of this issue to talk more in depth about how you understand “common prosperity” in socialist China?
Yang Ping : I would like to talk about socialism with Chinese characteristics and common prosperity together. Although socialism with Chinese characteristics is very flexible, it seems to have some obvious regulations today. The main characteristics of the Socialist 1.0 era were planned economy, public ownership, and distribution according to work. Today, these three points are no longer the main characteristics of socialism with Chinese characteristics, but socialism with Chinese characteristics can still be summarized in the following main regulations:
First, state-owned enterprises are dominant. China’s vast land belongs to the state; there are hundreds of trillions of state-owned assets; strategic industries and basic industries are all controlled by the state. Under the premise that the means of production are largely owned by the state, the distribution of social wealth is also mostly owned by the state. Then the distribution share that individuals can obtain, and the resulting gap between the rich and the poor, can be easily controlled. The huge state-owned land, state-owned finance, and state-owned enterprise assets limit the distribution in the market economy, and the gap between the rich and the poor caused by them must be limited. This is a very important feature.
Second, development is the first principle of socialism. When we talk about socialism, we always pay more attention to the issue of distribution. Compared with production and development, distribution is a secondary arrangement. For example, China is a country with a large gap between the north and the south, and between the east and the west. The areas close to the southeast coast are naturally well developed, while those close to the central and western mountainous areas and inland areas are naturally underdeveloped. The gap between the rich and the poor naturally widens along the differences in geographical environment. At this time, it is necessary to break the imbalance in production factors, productivity layout, and investment areas in advance, and invest more in major projects in those underdeveloped areas in the central and western regions, rather than simply making arrangements from the perspective of distribution. Development is the first principle here, and in the process of development, we always pay attention to the balance between the east and the west, the balance between urban and rural areas, and the balance between classes . This is a very important feature of socialism with Chinese characteristics.
Third, the government has promoted a lot of resources to bridge the gap between the rich and the poor. For example, in the past five years, China has solved the absolute poverty problem of nearly 100 million people, which has never happened in human history. In a country that relies on vote politics and private property is sacred and inviolable, it is unimaginable to invest a lot of resources and wealth in poor areas to enable poor people to develop, but China can do it. China also has counterpart assistance, which is to let large state-owned enterprises, governments of developed regions, and private enterprises in developed regions help the development of poor areas. For example, in Xinjiang, basically every prefecture-level city has a province in the east to provide counterpart assistance, so as to ensure that the development of the entire Xinjiang will not lag behind too much. This is an important means for socialism with Chinese characteristics to eliminate gaps and pursue fairness. In addition, there is a very important system in national distribution, called transfer payments: the state collects money from developed regions to the central government through taxation, and then redistributes it according to the different development needs of each region, solving a large number of financial and development problems in poor areas in the central and western regions. This measure has greatly curbed the polarization between the rich and the poor in China.
Therefore, when discussing common prosperity, the most important thing is not to view fair distribution statically. Without such a reasonable and fair resource arrangement across the country, only talking about local and micro-level fair distribution cannot solve the problem of wealth disparity. At present, socialism with Chinese characteristics has done a lot of practice and exploration on the road to common prosperity. I believe there will be greater achievements in the future. When that time comes, we will make further summaries.
Host : The widening gap between the rich and the poor has always been a nightmare that capitalism cannot get rid of. Continuously narrowing the gap between the rich and the poor and promoting social fairness is also an important political task for Western capitalist countries, especially under the impetus of left-wing political forces, such as establishing a welfare state. Jan comes from Germany, a typical welfare country, and has lived in China for many years. What do you think of China’s proposal of common prosperity and related practices?
Jan : I would like to add something to Yang Ping’s words. Common prosperity is not a new term. It was already mentioned in the Deng Xiaoping era, but it has been pushed to the forefront again in recent years. But Deng Xiaoping said that some people should get rich first, and then achieve common prosperity. In Western discussions, the part of “letting some people get rich first” may be emphasized more, but the part of “common prosperity” is often ignored. China is now re-proposing it as a key point, and only after socialism 2.0, on the basis of huge economic growth, can common prosperity be achieved. This shows that China’s socialism is materialistic.
Social inequality and the disparity between the rich and the poor certainly exist in Western capitalist countries. After World War II, Western Europe avoided extreme poverty through the construction of a series of welfare state systems. However, after four decades of neoliberalism, our social welfare system has begun to stagnate or even retreat in the past few years, and society has begun to polarize. In this regard, should we use the post-war social democratic mechanism to save the crisis, or create a brand-new system to overcome these difficulties? This is the question that the West is currently confused about. In the past few years, China has shown us that real mass consumption has been growing in large quantities, indicating that China has controlled the gap between the rich and the poor through a series of mechanisms. In the future, China may provide more answers to this question, so let’s wait and see.
Host : Capitalism occupies an absolutely mainstream position in the entire international discourse. China has actually been practicing socialism and carrying out reform and opening up in this international environment. On the one hand, China has used the advantages of socialist political resources to rapidly promote industrialization and modernization and integrate into the world market; on the other hand, China has long suffered from coercion and pressure from Western capitalism based on maintaining capital interests, and digitalization and networking have provided greater space for capital to cross borders and practice more covert profit-seeking. Please give us an outlook here. What is the development prospect of socialist China on the international stage in the future?
Yang Ping : This is a very good question. We must objectively admit that socialism with Chinese characteristics has grown up in the era of global capitalism. We will inevitably have to deal with various capitalist factors around the world. All aspects and elements of capitalism will also affect various institutional arrangements within China. Therefore, it is particularly difficult to promote socialism in China in the era of global capitalism. In the past, Marx also said that it is impossible for a country to build socialism alone. Today, China has encountered the same problem. How to ensure that the national economy can keep up with international development within the scope of a sovereign state, while not being influenced by international capitalist factors, is the biggest and most acute challenge facing China.
For example, China’s reform and opening up has been about introducing foreign capital since the beginning. In fact, international capital dumped labor-intensive industries into China and re-divided the labor. Its profits have been distributed at the front end of the industrial chain. In the distribution, developed capitalist countries will get the lion’s share, and China’s share of profits is very small. This has led to particularly tense labor-capital relations in some parts of China. This is caused by the distribution of the capitalist world system, and this division of labor has had a major impact on China. But China has no choice but to take this path. What should it do?
For example, half a year ago, a famous Chinese company, Didi, went public in the United States. It has a large amount of user data, but it was listed in the United States without reporting to the Chinese government. It fully respected the rules of the US capital market, but did not respect and ignored the requirements of China’s national security. So the relevant Chinese authorities punished it, and later its market value dropped sharply, and it was finally forced to cancel its listing plan in the United States. This is a typical contradiction and struggle between the nation-state and transnational capital. If it is not handled properly, one possibility is that it will affect the development of production, and the other possibility is that it will be completely controlled by international capital.
So I think the Communist Party of China is gradually learning to play games and fight with transnational capital. The most important thing is to expand and strengthen state-owned enterprises. Only when the state truly masters strong capital and technology can it cope with huge international financial capital. In this process, there must be various mistakes, experiences and lessons, but as long as we grasp the fundamentals of state-owned finance and state-owned capital, expand and strengthen them, we will have the strength to play games with external capital.
Jan : First of all, from the perspective of the national economy, China will become a country with a relatively high national income and will change the world economic structure in the future. For me, there is another more important point: China has chosen its own path and presented itself to the world as a unique global economic model. Of course , achieving a balance between social, economic and environmental development, as well as social equality, is not an easy task for China, Germany, or the world. I believe that China will find its own unique answer, and German socialists are also full of expectations for this.
Why does the European left not understand Chinese socialism ?
Host :Regarding the debate on socialism and Marxism in China, the opposition voices from the European left have not decreased, but increased. The global “team mentality” seems to be being copied by the left. They seem to neither understand the inherent diversity of Marxism nor are they willing to question the so-called truth of their own Eurocentrism. Do you have the same impression?
Yang Ping : We have a lot to say to our European left-wing friends. I think European socialists have made a big mistake on this issue. What is the mistake? The mistake is to view Marxism in a dogmatic way, and to regard some basic contents of Marxism in European practice as dogmas that are also generally applicable in other parts of the world, such as environmental issues and human rights issues that European left-wing friends are very concerned about. In our view, human rights are a historical process that is constantly changing with the changes in the mode of production. In our view, human rights, constitutionalism, democracy, and the environment are all products of industrialization and modernization. Without industrialization and modernization, there would be no awareness of these rights. Today, China’s core task is still to complete industrialization and modernization, so its main task is development. In the process of development, the issues of rights and the environment must be taken care of, but it cannot be regarded as a dogma to demand today’s China. This is not objective and realistic. Today, due to the development of network information, the awareness of rights generally believed in by European and American countries has spread all over the world, as if these are all natural and justified, but they have forgotten that 200 years ago, 150 years ago, how could Europeans have these rights? Therefore, European left-wing friends must restore the rights issue and the practical problems faced by Chinese socialism to the historical process and regard it as a natural result of industrialization. When the problems of industrialization and development have not been solved, excessive demands for these rights will hinder China’s development.
Jan : As I said before, the West did not take into account the entire historical development context when discussing these issues. For most Chinese people today, the basic freedoms they enjoy, such as equal opportunities and social fairness, have greatly improved compared to 20 years ago. But when discussing these issues, China does not ignore the existing contradictions and problems, such as the relationship between overall social development and individual freedom. Conversely , the West also has the same contradictions. Social development and individual development, as well as individual rights in society, are also things we need to explore. So we still need to explore and solve problems carefully, rather than taking them to extremes.
Host : Observing this change from a Chinese perspective, how important is the European/“Western” debate on Marxism/socialism in Chinese discourse? What significance and impact does the Western discussion on Chinese socialism have on China?
Yang Ping : Marxism has also undergone many developments in the West. For example, Soviet Leninism had a huge impact on China, especially Lenin’s party-building principles and democratic centralism, which were even more profound than Marxism on China. In the 1940s, Western Marxism represented by Gramsci, Marcuse, Althusser, etc. emerged. Their criticism of the shortcomings of capitalism had a relatively large impact on Chinese socialists, but the scope of influence was mainly in the academic community, and it had little impact on China’s ruling party. Contemporary Western Marxism has an even smaller impact on China. Instead, the socialist practices in Latin America and South Asia have caused more discussion in China’s intellectual circles.
Jan : I agree with you. In the discussion of Chinese socialism in the West, the focus is probably still on the Mao Zedong era, while Chinese Marxism itself is more focused on understanding the Chinese cultural background, and Mao Zedong Thought is not really regarded as the development of Marxism. Since the 1960s, Western Marxism has become more and more academic, and has been separated from social practice, and has become a study of Marxism from the perspective of national culture. Chinese Marxism takes the contradiction between the economic system and Marxism itself as the theme to develop its ideas and solve specific problems in China, such as the problem of the gap between the rich and the poor. In contrast, the application of Western Marxism in national decision-making is actually becoming less and less.
Host : What is the current debate on socialism among the Chinese public/media?
Yang Ping : This is a good question. Twelve years ago, China’s mainstream media and academic journals often touched on socialist issues, but the main ideological tendency of that era was confusion about the socialist ideal. After 2012, the discussion on socialism with Chinese characteristics has become heated again. The main feature of this era is self-confidence. The Communist Party of China named it the “four confidences” – confidence in the path, confidence in theory, confidence in the system, and confidence in culture. What is the theoretical stipulation of socialism with Chinese characteristics in the academic community now ? What should be done next in the primary stage of socialism? How can the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation be achieved? What is the relationship between China’s modernization process and the primary stage of socialism… Discussions on these issues are very active, but in-depth discussions are mainly concentrated in the academic community.
Jan : When I discuss the economic and social issues of Chinese socialism with people around me, the answer I often get is “China is a socialist country”, as if this premise explains a lot of problems, but in fact, the discussion of this issue needs to go into more details. From the perspective of the whole society, young Chinese people are becoming more and more confident and more and more interested in the question of “what is socialism”. There has been a huge change in the past few decades. When I first came to China, everyone was still very interested in the West, thinking that the West was rich and advanced, and everything in the West was good. But in the past few years, I have found that young Chinese people have less and less blind trust in the West, but are more confident in China, and are willing to understand and promote the development of socialism. Of course, there are still many problems to be solved. Many problems in the theory and practice of Chinese socialism are very exciting, so we also hope to make a little contribution to the world’s understanding of China through this book.
Yang Ping : Regarding the public discussion on socialism, as comrade Jan just said, young people are not very concerned about political ideology. In the adult world, there are relatively few people who discuss socialism in an ideological way. They all talk about how to solve the development problems of modernization in a more pragmatic way. However, in some very important academic journals, including “Cultural Horizons”, socialism is a very popular issue. Socialism is currently at a low ebb worldwide, so it is normal that the majority of Chinese people do not talk about it much. But I believe that once the conditions of the times change, a new high tide of socialism will come.