People's Democracy(Weekly Organ of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) |
Vol. XXXVII
No. 39 September 29, 2013 |
CPI(M)
DELEGATION’S VISIT TO Spectacular
Progress,
Formidable Challenges – (3) Ashok Dhawale IN this penultimate
article of the series
on the CPI(M) delegation’s visit to ALL-ROUND PROGRESS In our visit, we
actually saw for
ourselves and learnt about the all-round progress made by
“The socialist
market economy of
“ “ “ Some other The national life
expectancy at birth rose
from about 35 years in 1949 to 74.8 years in
2012, and infant mortality
decreased from 300 per thousand in the 1950s to around
15.6 per thousand in
2012. The Three Gorges Dam
over the By the end of 2011,
China's expressways
had reached a total length of 85,000 km. China
possesses the world's
longest high-speed
rail network, with
over 9,676 km of service routes. In 2011, REASONS FOR STUNNING SUCCESS What are the reasons
for this unparalleled
all-round success? The Chinese comrades whom we met
stressed that this was the
success of the unique model of socialism with Chinese
characteristics that had
been followed since 1949. At every point in our
visit, they
underlined the fact that ever since the Chinese
Revolution, all land in China
was owned either by the State (in the cities) or
collectively (in the villages)
and that this was an integral part of their socialism. This public ownership
of land also gave
the State the leeway to use that land for developmental
projects that were
designed to achieve the common good. In fact, one of the
most impressive and
striking aspects of everything in China is the
meticulously planned development
process seen everywhere – the beautiful lay-out of roads,
highways, bridges,
buildings, factories, parks, gardens and trees. Nationalisation
of Land: This
first point about collective ownership of land and its
relationship to
socialism has been effectively made by the renowned
Marxist intellectual Samir
Amin in a penetrating article titled “China 2013” in Monthly
Review. He
writes: “I must emphasise
the quite specific
nature of the response given to the agrarian question by
the Chinese
Revolution. The distributed (agricultural) land was not
privatised; it remained
the property of the nation represented by village communes
and only the use was
given to rural families. . . . . “Why was the
implementation of the
principle that agricultural land is not a commodity
possible in “Mao drew the
lessons from this history
(of the Russian Revolution) and developed a completely
different line of
political action. Beginning in the 1930s in southern “This ‘Chinese
specificity’ -- whose
consequences are of major importance -- absolutely
prevents us from
characterising contemporary China (even in 2013) as
‘capitalist’ because the
capitalist road is based on the transformation of land
into a commodity.” Taking account of the
post-1978
developments in Chinese agriculture, like the introduction
of the Family
Contract Responsibility System, Samir Amin writes, “The
fact remains that the
inventive diversity of forms of using commonly held land
has led to phenomenal
results. First of all, in terms of economic efficiency,
although urban
population has grown from 20 to 50 per cent of total
population, SOEs - Backbone
of the Economy: The
second point to note is that even today, large state-owned
enterprises (SOEs) are
the backbone of China's industrial economy in strategic
sectors like mining,
petroleum, gas, steel,
coal,
energy,
telecom,
railways,
ports,
shipping,
water
resources, aviation,
banking and insurance. Next to the As per the recent
figures
released by the Chinese finance ministry, However, the other
side of the picture
should also be clearly stated. The World Bank has given
the following information:
"In FACING THE GLOBAL FINANCIAL CRISIS The Chinese comrades
stressed that with the
financial crisis in the advanced capitalist countries,
which broke out in 2008
and which was still continuing, definite limitations were
imposed on the
export-led growth trajectory that had been followed by To deal with the
global financial crisis,
in November 2008 the Chinese central government announced
an unprecedented 4
trillion yuan stimulus package. Of this, the central
government would
contribute 1.18 trillion yuan and local governments
another 1.23 trillion yuan.
The rest would be bank loans to SOEs. In sharp contrast to
the capitalist world,
which dealt with the financial crisis by giving massive
bail-out packages to
the corporates (who had brought about the crisis in the
first place) and by
imposing harsh austerity measures on the workers and
peasants, the composition
of the Chinese fiscal stimulus package was very
instructive and it was as
follows: Major Infrastructure (mainly railways,
expressways, airports and
electricity grid) – 1500 billion yuan (37.5 per cent),
Post-Quake
Reconstruction in Sichuan province- 1000 (25 per cent),
Low Income Housing -
400 (10 per cent), Rural Development - 370 (9.3 per cent)
Industry and
Technology - 370 (9.3 per cent), Environment - 210 (5.3
per cent), Health,
Education and Culture - 150 (3.8 per cent), Total Spending
- 4000 billion yuan
(100.0 per cent). As Vineet Kohli of
TISS, Mumbai, has
pointed out in his research note The Fiscal Stimulus
Package in China:
“Apart from the 4-trillion-yuan package, Everywhere that we
went – whether it was
in Beijing, Shanghai or Lanzhou – there was tremendous
construction activity
and the building of infrastructure in the form of
buildings, factories, roads,
highways, bridges, parks – and a large part of this
expenditure was borne by
the central or provincial government. For instance, in the
Bei Cai Yet another
interesting feature that we
learnt in Shanghai was that apart from the large
contribution of the central
government for developmental activities, developed cities
like Shanghai and
Beijing, and developed provinces on or near the East Coast
also regularly made
large financial contributions to the rapid development of
relatively backward
cities and provinces in Central and Western China. This in
turn greatly
improved the living and working conditions of the people
in these backward
areas and expanded domestic consumer demand. (To be continued)