Comments on: Seven Currents of Social Thought in People’s China

By: michael lebowitz

michael lebowitz — Sat, 12 Oct 2013 19:30:31 +0000

With respect to Cheng Enfu’s comments about the New Left, Han Deqiang: told me 10 years ago at a Marx Conference in Havana that he did not consider himself a Marxist. When I asked him how he could say this (given that it was quite contrary to my impression), he said it was because he did not believe in ‘the theory of productive forces’. Which is to say— he did not believe that development of the productive forces leads to socialism. His focus was on relations of production and class, and his presentation at the conference stressed that a counter-revolution had occurred in China.

By: Gwendolyn Midlo Ha

Gwendolyn Midlo Ha — Sat, 12 Oct 2013 03:37:22 +0000

Valid criticism. But the questions it implies are important. Often questions mean more than answers, especially pat answers.

By: Carl Davidson

Carl Davidson — Thu, 10 Oct 2013 11:38:06 +0000

It’s quite interesting to many people, having received five times the ‘reads’ of our average post, ie, several thousand. Sorry you didn’t care for it. Offer a detailed critique, if you like. The Online University of the Left is open to all trends of the left who want to see the project succeed.

By: Jason Schulman

Jason Schulman — Thu, 10 Oct 2013 03:55:41 +0000

Why is this empty, cliched “Marxist-Leninist” crap being republished here?

By: Jerry Harris

Jerry Harris — Mon, 07 Oct 2013 16:37:35 +0000

The review of the different trends is interesting. But the trend represented by the writer has a number of problems. State ownership of the means of production is important, but doesn’t guarantee a socialist society. Have we’ve learned nothing from the failure of socialism in the USSR? The author doesn’t directly confront the corruption, inequality and protests that are everywhere in China. Only in general political rhetoric are these problems looked at. The Party cannot guide the nation without direct participation by the masses. What the essence of Mao’s mass line was. The author mentions “participatory democracy” once at the very end. But his whole approach is to let the Party lead and make decisions in all areas. There isn’t one concrete idea on how the masses should participate. Should unions play a more independent role, should peasant movements against corruption be empowered at the local level, should workers cooperatives be a basic building block of the economy? All this is avoided.