When "Peter Franssen, journalist with the Belgian weekly Solidaire and researcher at the Institute for Marxist Studies, wrote a contribution, 'Friedrich Engels and scientific socialism in contemporary China[1], (Peter Franssen is also member of the leading organs of the Workers Party of Belgium) at "an international symposium was held in the Chinese city of Wuhan, organised by the University of Wuhan, the Central Compilation and Translation Bureau of the CC of the Communist Party of China and the Academy of Social Sciences of China"[2], he has to make the following -although formal - statement:
The mode of production and the structure of the economy have in the last 25 years taken big steps towards the level where social ownership of all important means of production will once again become necessary.
But who will lead this proces of renewed expropriation? And how will it be done? By a communist party who said: "enrich yourselves"? A communist party whose official point of view is that the moments of class-struggle and socialisation ( The Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution) were "moments of anarchy, voluntarism and chaos never to be repeated"? By a communist party were more and more capitalists become member ( and so, as member will contribute to the political line of the party)? A communist party who led the privatisation of state-enterprises that ar now "quasi-owned" by cadres of the communist party? Will the capitalists expropriate themselves? Peter Franssen says that there are now, more industrial workers compared with the numbers in 1949. But with a deterioration of the "dictature of the proletariat", more and more the installlation of the "dictature of the bourgeoisie" become reality. Than "social ownership of all important means of production" means the construction of ….state-capitalism in a state ruled by the bourgoisie.
Peter Franssen:
When the revolution took place in 1949 agriculture and individual craft industry made up 90 % of the economy. There were scarcely 3 million industrial workers, 0.6 % of the population. Agriculture has since dropped to less than 20 % and will according to plan make up only 10 % in 2010. The proportion for industry will then be 50 % and for the tertiary sector 40 %.[3]
Now he wil show clearly his revisionist method of analyse under "marxist fraseology", here in the form of eclecticistic dogmatism", where he continues:
We have seen how Engels and Marx sketch the dialectical relationship between mode of production and production relations and how the Utopians set themselves outside this reality and daydream about a perfect society. …
Friedrich Engels …wrote: “The utopians, we saw, were utopians because they could be nothing else at a time when capitalist production was as yet so little developed. They necessarily had to construct the elements of a new society out of their own heads, because within the old society the elements of the new were not as yet generally apparent; for the basic plan of the new edifice they could only appeal to reason, just because they could not as yet appeal to contemporary history. ”[4]
Here, Peter Franssen shows how he want to "prove" with al lot of eclecticism and dogmatism via historical analogies, that Martin Hart-Landsberg, Paul Burkett and Barbara Foley make thet identical "utopic-socialist mistakes" as "the Utopians" who lived at the beginning of the capitalist development. Yes they lived BEFORE Engels and Marx made their analysises. They lived BEFORE Engels and Marx COULD make them because capitalism had a certain development whereby the economic laws of capitalist development only then could show themselves. Read what Peter Franssen says:
However, the Utopians who lived in Engels’ day and those of today, Martin Hart-Landsberg, Paul Burkett and Barbara Foley no longer have that excuse. They can read what Engels says: “Since the historical appearance of the capitalist mode of production, the appropriation by society of all the means of production has often been dreamed of, more or less vaguely, by individuals, as well as by sects, as the ideal of the future. But it could become possible, could become a historical necessity, only when the actual conditions for its realisation were there. Like every other social advance, it becomes practicable, not by men understanding that the existence of classes is in contradiction to justice, equality, etc., not by the mere willingness to abolish these classes, but by virtue of certain new economic conditions. ”[5]
With these general statements of Engels, bound to specific concrete historical situations, Peter Franssen let Engels (out of his grave?) make an anlalysis of the situation in
So "by the utopists of today… the appropriation by society of all the means of production has …been dreamed of… as the ideal of the future…. But it could become possible, … only when the actual conditions for its realisation are there. …it becomes practicable, … by virtue of certain new economic conditions". And Mao is not an utopist for Peter Franssen and Deng Xiaoping when he says….:
After the revolution of 1949, Mao Zedong invoked these same economic conditions to plead for good relations and a united front with the national bourgeoisie. He declared: “The view held by certain people that it is possible to eliminate capitalism and realise socialism at an early date is wrong, it does not tally with our national conditions. ”[6]
…But when Mao said otherwise he became an utopist for Peter Franssen and for Deng Xiaoping. (I will prove this later with other texts of Peter Franssen and texts of Deng Xiaoping himself)
You can here read my further analysis of the text of Peter Franssen.
[1] The text itself you can read here, I started an analyse of this text here in this article.
[3] Li Jingwen and Zhang Xiao, China's Environmental Policies in the 21st Century, Chinese Academy of Social Science, Beijing, 1999.
[4] Friedrich Engels, Anti-Dühring, Marx & Engels, Collected Works, Volume 25 http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1877/anti-duhring/ch23.htm
[5] Ibidem, http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1877/anti-duhring/ch24.htm.
[6] Mao Zedong, Fight for a Fundamental Turn for the Better in the Nation’s Financial and Economic Situation, Selected Works, Foreign Languages Press, Beijing, 1977, Volume V, p.30.
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten