Showing posts with label hua guofeng. Show all posts
Showing posts with label hua guofeng. Show all posts

Wednesday, November 23, 2011

From Mao to Deng

Just a little more today on what changed and what didn’t:

The first thing to note was a sense of grief and a hole to fill was left for so many Chinese by the death of Mao after he had effectively (and otherwise, it must be said) ruled China for a generation. Deng’s form of hole-filling by radical reform proved to be another kind of revolution for the many who had never known any system other than Maoism.

China still was (as it still is today) both relatively poor and relatively isolated in world terms but progress had been made (and would continue to be under Deng’s reforms). Mao’s and Deng’s goals weren’t really so different after all. China would be strong.

But many of the Chinese needed a rest as much as many others remained restless. Continuous revolution was not fun for everyone. Virtually every year since 1949 it must have seemed a violent major purge or at least a personal denunciation was liable to be just around the corner.
The CR was one of many of these types of occasions as my earlier posts record. Deng himself was a prime example having, himself, been purged and rehabilitated more than once. The violence of millions of Red Guards had barely subsided when Mao died, the Gang of Four instated their own purges, Hua had them arrested in turn in his best Mao imitation and the retributive purges continued even as Deng assumed control.
But Deng seemed inclined to lower the boom on terrorist government (at least on Mao’s scale) and there must have been many sighs of relief on all sides. Even the Red Guards themselves who ultimately felt betrayed by Mao (who had finally banished them to the countryside, remember) now breathed more freely.
Deng was a CCP man, though. So what did this mean? There would always be enemies of Communism that needed to be rooted out, that’s what.
Ironically some of the most prominent of these enemies of Communism turned out to be disillusioned Red Guards. One of the first acts of rebellion they became involved in if not against Communism then at least against the current system (even before Deng had had the chance to spell out how he intended to reform it) was the Democracy Wall movement that began in Beijing in 1978 and remained centred there. Many of those now involved in the movement were of course first politicised when they had become Red Guards during the CR.
Refreshingly, Deng announced his approval of the movement (Mao had done something similar, though, with his ‘Hundred Flowers’ comments – could Deng be trusted any more than Mao?) And in this case this was just before he assumed power. As had occurred with Mao, expressions of approval of an ideological movement spurred it on – they chose to again trust their at least hoped-for leadership.
Deng then brought in his reforms and the people waited to see how it would turn out. Would he ultimately welcome the democracy first sought by the May Fourth Movement in 1919? Maybe not.
Better international relations were now on the agenda. The US and China were ready for rapprochement. By 1 January 1979 they had established full diplomatic relations and later that month Deng visited President Carter becoming the first Chinese leader ever to visit the US. Deng was impressed by the technology and material conditions he witnessed on this visit. He, in turn, impressed everybody he met in the US with his vision for China and its relations with the West.
Like Mao, Deng was prepared to turn on dissenters and soon the democracy wall demonstrators that had supported his own rise to power were going too far for him. Deng had wanted four modernisations and Wei Jingsheng, for example, suggested democracy as a fifth.





Deng as readily referred to people like Wei as counter revolutionary as Mao had called Deng that. He began to suppress the movement in Mao style (if a little less violently) and the wall was soon shut down. Notably most of the wall activity had actually been conducted with due regard to the Four Cardinal Principles Deng delineated that I will refer to in a later post.
The reality was that Deng copied Mao’s legal methods in that laws that no one could possibly follow were always kept in reserve to justify any repression as and when it was desired by the leader.

Deng’s next concern in terms of dissent would be potentially brought about by the local devastating drought in Anhui province (also in 1978). Chinese agriculture was still close to a subsistence proposition in a typical year and employing most Chinese so drought was a particular concern in China. The large communes didn’t help matters. In response, local authorities, inspired by the peasants themselves, tried the system that would work and later go national. The productivity in Anhui boomed in response to this new incentivisation. Famine was averted but rolling out the scheme nationally still turned out to be a test of Deng’s power base.
Deng’s ‘capitalist roader’ tag still had the power to tie his hands regardless of how successful (and in fact saving) capitalism could be shown to be. He was finally able to squeeze the reform through, however. It also proved itself almost immediately nationwide in terms of productivity. Along with the local produce and other markets, small factories producing consumer items for market also began to spontaneously sprout up in rural areas.
The two major figures standing with Deng then were Hu Yaobang and Zhao Ziyang and they both also favoured the market.
Foreign capitalists found they were now welcomed, too (initially principally in the SEZs). The foreigners in the zones were popular with locals because they had deeper pockets and this attracted Chinese from all over China hoping for a share of their apparent largesse. Chinese wages and standards of living were higher there but the increases eventually flowed throughout much of the Chinese economy especially in the south of the country (because most of the initial zones were concentrated there. The coastal city special areas were more evenly spread between north and south).
The youth of these zones soon began to live a noticeably more decadent and capitalist lifestyle and to lose some respect for socialism. Prostitution and other supposed signs of vice soon began to flourish there.
Deng’s response (under some pressure from the left to prove his credentials) was to begin a campaign against ‘moral pollution’. After decades of Maoism this comparatively mild effort was treated as a bit of a joke, though. In one oft repeated story a particularly zealous official involving himself in the campaign criticised somebody who possessed a book containing a picture of a western woman with a low cut dress. The woman in question turned out to be Marx’s wife. Meanwhile, investors apparently weren’t getting the joke and Deng was forced to end the scary campaign before it had really begun to assuage their fears. Nevertheless thousands of smugglers had been arrested as part of the campaign.
Deng successfully negotiated the 1997 handover of Hong Kong following the expiration of Britain’s lease with the Thatcher government despite Thatcher’s apparent misgivings, another coup for south China. He used a combination of a few threats and agreement to the concept of ‘one state two systems’ to get that happening, the latter leading to more local name-calling to the effect that he was excessively ‘rightist’. The name-callers probably never had to deal with the “Iron Lady” themselves and in fact Deng once remarked that in these discussions he was “the Iron Man meeting the Iron Lady”.
Deng’s other two notable reforms were to allow the practice of religions more freely again and to reduce the length of the working week. All in all, the economic and social reforms I’ve outlined in these last couple of posts saw Deng riding a wave of popularity by the time of the PRC’s 35th anniversary celebrations in 1984. In the next few posts I’ll focus a little more on political, party and legal reforms in the Deng era especially as it continued from here (and prospects for more).

Sunday, November 20, 2011

Deng the Economist and ‘Capitalist Roader’

So now it’s time to move on from Mao and all his successes and failures and consider what did Deng do? As I mentioned earlier I also want to explore the surprisingly positive economic legacy of Mao. I'll also do that here.

Incidentally Liao Yiwu is in Surry Hills Monday night (21 November 2011) as a belated part of this year's Sydney Writers' Festival (he was refused permission by the Chinese authorities that are Deng's successors to visit the US in April and attend the festival in May - he is now in exile since having apparently been forced to exit China irregularly). See http://www.swf.org.au/201110251054/home-page/liao-yiwu.html (the festival page for the event - it's apparently at the Belvoir Theatre) for more details. He seems to think he may be able to end his exile with the end of Hu Jintao's term in office next year (per an article in the New Yorker). Kommt zeit kommt rat!

After Mao’s death in 1976 a struggle for power ensued that Deng finally won in 1978. In so doing he and his supporters defeated the Gang of Four and their less numerous and less ardent supporters. Besides the Gang of Four, a possible compromise candidate, Hua Guofeng, also looked like a player for a time. He was also apparently Mao’s final personal choice for a successor. His policies were derided by all sides however as ‘whateverism’ policies as he had the tendency to model himself upon Mao and explicitly prefer doing ‘whatever Mao did’.

Deng’s victory became clear publicly at the 3rd Plenum of the 11th Central Committee in December 1978 when he also propounded his programme. By this time Hua had had the Gang of Four arrested and become himself a mere figurehead.

There would be a shift in CCP focus from class struggle to economic construction via the ‘four modernisations’. This was a Zhou term. The point of the change was to dial the politics back in favour of pragmatism. In defending his black-hatted (from Mao’s perspective) and ‘capitalist road’ approach to economic development Deng was wont to say something like “it doesn’t matter whether the cat is black or white so long as it catches mice”. Political ‘colour’ was less important in the moment than what got the economic job done.

The more radical of Mao’s ideas were explicitly rejected and his class labels were all repudiated (as long as one didn’t oppose Deng or Dengism – that could still lead to a lifelong label that one still wouldn’t like and that could also stick to one's family). The vast majority of formerly specifically denounced bureaucrats and others were given their old jobs back. The term used for this was ‘rehabilitation’. And finally in 1981 we had the 70% good 30% bad statement in the CCP’s Resolution on Party History about which I have written in earlier posts. This was an assessment of Mao as both a man and a leader.

Just let’s have a brief look at Mao’s economic record, though, before we move on, as that was now to be Deng’s explicit interest. In fact the economic record may be surprisingly good to some (and his social record, too, was at least generally fair). China is regarded in the fields of Economic History and Developmental Economics as one of the 'major economy late modernisers' or 'late industrialisers' (along with Germany, Japan and the USSR) so it is fairest to compare China’s fundamentals with those of those three economies in their respective growth spurt periods (usually a few decades was the crucial period – early developers took longer as they had to invent more things from scratch).

Germany’s growth rate per decade in its spurt period (1880 to 1914) was 33%, Japan’s (from 1874 to 1929) was 43%, the USSR’s (from 1928 to 1958) was 54% and China’s (from 1952 to 1972) was 64%. So it’s not a bad record over a sustained spurt period even if we allow that China may have come from a slightly lower base. The down side is that China seems to have run out of spurt a little sooner (after two decades compared to Japan’s at the most impressive five and a half decades).

From 1952 to 1977 industrial output increased 11.3% per annum, agricultural output increased 2.3% per annum and population increased by 2.0% per annum. Here are some more impressive and more specific output and demography figures for China for around that period:


1952

1976

Steel output

1.3 million tons

23 million tons

Coal mined

66 million tons

448 million tons

Crude oil produced

0 million tons

28 million tons

Fertilizer produced

0.2 million tons

28 million tons

Cement produced

3 million tons

49 million tons

Electricity produced

7 billion kilowatt hours

133 billion kilowatt hours

Size of Employed Industrial Workforce

3 million industrial workers

50 million industrial workers

Size of Employed Scientific Workforce

50,000 scientists (1949)

5,000,000 scientists

There were also fair records in educational development that made the above possible but especially of girls and young women and in both rural and urban settings that if anything Deng’s accession interrupted (albeit briefly). Sixty percent of fifteen year old girls in China in 1946 had received no formal education according to statistics produced by Wenfang Tang and William L. Parish in Chinese Urban Life under Reform: the Changing Social Contract (Cambridge University Press: 2000) but half had received a least some Junior Secondary education by the year of Mao’s death according to Tang and Parish’s statistics. That’s the change over thirty years. The small percentage who had received advanced education also nearly tripled (from around 2.5% to around 7.5%). I don’t have the text to hand but that information may be specific to rural females (despite a title that might suggest an urban focus) but, wherever it relates to, the trend is the notable thing rather than absolutes and locations. It’s possibly even more impressive if they are rural figures, though. So Mao was (perhaps more than adequately) setting Deng up for some success.