A study reportedly issue by Bank of America Merrill Lynch estimated that China's current antigraft campaign would cost the Chinese economy more than $100 billion. See, BBC, China Blog, the Real Costs of China's Anti-Corruption Crackdown, April 2, 2014, available at -china-blog-26864134.
The China Study Epub Mobi 17
We should remember his words. To be superficial means to consider neitherthe characteristics of a contradiction in its totality nor the characteristicsof each of its aspects; it means to deny the necessity for probing deeplyinto a thing and minutely studying the characteristics of its contradiction,but instead merely to look from afar and, after glimpsing the rough outline,immediately to try to resolve the contradiction (to answer a question, settlea dispute, handle work, or direct a military operation). This way of doingthings is bound to lead to trouble. The reason the dogmatist and empiricistcomrades in China have made mistakes lies precisely in their subjectivist,one-sided and superficial way of looking at things. To be one-sided andsuperficial is at the same time to be subjective. For all objective thingsare actually interconnected and are governed by inner laws, but instead ofundertaking the task of reflecting things as they really are some peopleonly look at things one-sidedly or superficially and who know neither theirinterconnections nor their inner laws, and so their method is subjectivist.Not only does the whole process of the movement of opposites in the developmentof a thing, both in their interconnections and in each of the aspects, haveparticular features to which we must give attention, but each stagein the process has its particular features to which we must give attentiontoo.The fundamental contradiction in the process of development of a thing andthe essence of the process determined by this fundamental contradiction willnot disappear until the process is completed; but in a lengthy process theconditions usually differ at each stage. The reason is that, although thenature of the fundamental contradiction in the process of development ofa thing and the essence of the process remain unchanged, the fundamentalcontradiction becomes more and more intensified as it passes from one stageto another in the lengthy process. In addition, among the numerous majorand minor contradictions which are determined or influenced by the fundamentalcontradiction, some become intensified, some are temporarily or partiallyresolved or mitigated, and some new ones emerge; hence the process is markedby stages. If people do not pay attention to the stages in the process ofdevelopment of a thing, they cannot deal with its contradictions properly.For instance, when the capitalism of the era of free competition developedinto imperialism, there was no change in the class nature of the two classesin fundamental contradiction, namely, the proletariat and the bourgeoisie,or in the capitalist essence of society; however, the contradiction betweenthese two classes became intensified, the contradiction between monopolyand non-monopoly capital emerged, the contradiction between the colonialpowers and the colonies became intensified, the contradiction among thecapitalist countries resulting from their uneven development manifested itselfwith particular sharpness, and thus there arose the special stage of capitalism,the stage of imperialism. Leninism is the Marxism of the era of imperialismand proletarian revolution precisely because Lenin and Stalin have correctlyexplained these contradictions and correctly formulated the theory and tacticsof the proletarian revolution for their resolution.Take the process of China's bourgeois-democratic revolution, which beganwith the Revolution of 1911; it, too, has several distinct stages. In particular,the revolution in its period of bourgeois leadership and the revolution inits period of proletarian leadership represent two vastly different historicalstages. In other words, proletarian leadership has fundamentally changedthe whole face of the revolution, has brought about a new alignment of classes,given rise to a tremendous upsurge in the peasant revolution, impartedthoroughness to the revolution against imperialism and feudalism, createdthe possibility of the transition from the democratic revolution to the socialistrevolution, and so on. None of these was possible in the period when therevolution was under bourgeois leadership. Although no change has taken placein the nature of the fundamental contradiction in the process as a whole,i.e., in the anti-imperialist, anti- feudal, democratic-revolutionarynature of the process (the opposite of which is its semi-colonial and semi-feudalnature), nonetheless this process has passed through several stages ofdevelopment in the course of more than twenty years; during this time manygreat events have taken place-- the failure of the Revolution of 1911 andthe establishment of the regime of the Northern warlords, the formation ofthe first national united front and the revolution of 1924-27, the break-upof the united front and the desertion of the bourgeoisie to the side of thecounterrevolution, the wars among the new warlords, the Agrarian RevolutionaryWar, the establishment of the second national united front and the War ofResistance Against Japan. These stages are marked by particular featuressuch as the intensification of certain contradictions (e.g., the AgrarianRevolutionary War and the Japanese invasion of the four northeastern provinces),the partial or temporary resolution of other contradictions (e.g., thedestruction of the Northern warlords and our confiscation of the land ofthe landlords), and the emergence of yet other contradictions (e.g., theconflicts among the new warlords, and the landlords' recapture of the landafter the loss of our revolutionary base areas in the south).In studying the particularities of the contradictions at each stage in theprocess of development of a thing, we must not only observe them in theirinterconnections or their totality, we must also examine the two aspectsof each contradiction.For instance, consider the Kuomintang and the Communist Party. Take one aspect,the Kuomintang. In the period of the first united front, the Kuomintang carriedout Sun Yat-sen's Three Great Policies of alliance with Russia, co-operationwith the Communist Party, and assistance to the peasants and workers; henceit was revolutionary and vigorous, it was an alliance of various classesfor the democratic revolution. After 1927, however, the Kuomintang changedinto its opposite and became a reactionary bloc of the landlords and bigbourgeoisie. After the Sian Incident in December 1936, it began another changein the direction of ending the civil war and co-operating with the CommunistParty for joint opposition to Japanese imperialism. Such have been the particularfeatures of the Kuomintang in the three stages. Of course, these featureshave arisen from a variety of causes. Now take the other aspect, the ChineseCommunist Party. In the period of the first united front, the Chinese CommunistParty was in its infancy; it courageously led the revolution of 1924-27 butrevealed its immaturity in its understanding of the character, the tasksand the methods of the revolution, and consequently it became possible forChen Tu-hsiuism, which appeared during the latter part of this revolution,to assert itself and bring about the defeat of the revolution. After 1927,the Communist Party courageously led the Agrarian Revolutionary War and createdthe revolutionary army and revolutionary base areas; however, it committedadventurist errors which brought about very great losses both to the armyand to the base areas. Since 1935 the Party has corrected these errors andhas been leading the new united front for resistance to Japan; this greatstruggle is now developing. At the present stage, the Communist Party isa Party that has gone through the test of two revolutions and acquired awealth of experience. Such have been the particular features of the ChineseCommunist Party in the three stages. These features, too, have arisen froma variety of causes. Without studying both these sets of features we cannotunderstand the particular relations between the two parties during the variousstages of their development, namely, the establishment of a united front,the break-up of the united front, and the establishment of another unitedfront. What is even more fundamental for the study of the particular featuresof the two parties is the examination of the class basis of the two partiesand the resultant contradictions which have arisen between each party andother forces at different periods. For instance, in the period of its firstcooperation with the Communist Party, the Kuomintang stood in contradictionto foreign imperialism and was therefore anti-imperialist; on the other hand,it stood in contradiction to the great masses of the people within thecountry--although in words it promised many benefits to the working people,in fact it gave them little or nothing. In the period when it carried onthe anti-Communist war, the Kuomintang collaborated with imperialism andfeudalism against the great masses of the people and wiped out all the gainsthey had won in the revolution, and thereby intensified its contradictionswith them. In the present period of the anti-Japanese war, the Kuomintangstands in contradiction to Japanese imperialism and wants co-operation withthe Communist Party, without however relaxing its struggle against the CommunistParty and the people or its oppression of them. As for the Communist Party,it has always, in every period, stood with the great masses of the peopleagainst imperialism and feudalism, but in the present period of the anti-Japanesewar, it has adopted a moderate policy towards the Kuomintang and the domesticfeudal forces because the Kuomintang has pressed itself in favour of resistingJapan. The above circumstances have resulted now in alliance between thetwo parties and now in struggle between them, and even during the periodsof alliance there has been a complicated state of simultaneous alliance andstruggle. If we do not study the particular features of both aspects of thecontradiction, we shall fail to understand not only the relations of eachparty with the other forces, but also the relations between the two parties.It can thus be seen that in studying the particularity of any kind ofcontradiction--the contradiction in each form of motion of matter, thecontradiction in each of its processes of development, the two aspects ofthe contradiction in each process, the contradiction at each stage of a process,and the two aspects of the contradiction at each stage--in studying theparticularity of all these contradictions, we must not be subjective andarbitrary but must analyse it concretely. Without concrete analysis therecan be no knowledge of the particularity of any contradiction. We must alwaysremember Lenin's words, the concrete analysis of concrete conditions.Marx and Engels were the first to provide us with excellent models of suchconcrete analysis.When Marx and Engels applied the law of contradiction in things to the studyof the socio-historical process, they discovered the contradiction betweenthe productive forces and the relations of production, they discovered thecontradiction between the exploiting and exploited classes and also the resultantcontradiction between the economic base and its superstructure (politics,ideology, etc.), and they discovered how these contradictions inevitablylead to different kinds of social revolution in different kinds of classsociety.When Marx applied this law to the study of the economic structure of capitalistsociety, he discovered that the basic contradiction of this society is thecontradiction between the social character of production and the privatecharacter of ownership. This contradiction manifests itself in the contradictionbetween the organized character of production in individual enterprises andthe anarchic character of production in society as a whole. In terms of classrelations, it manifests itself in the contradiction between the bourgeoisieand the proletariat.Because the range of things is vast and there is no limit to their development,what is universal in one context becomes particular in another. Conversely,what is particular in one context becomes universal in another. The contradictionin the capitalist system between the social character of production and theprivate ownership of the means of production is common to all countries wherecapitalism exists and develops; as far as capitalism is concerned, thisconstitutes the universality of contradiction. But this contradiction ofcapitalism belongs only to a certain historical stage in the general developmentof class society; as far as the contradiction between the productive forcesand the relations of production in class society as a whole is concerned,it constitutes the particularity of contradiction. However, in the courseof dissecting the particularity of all these contradictions in capitalistsociety, Marx gave a still more profound, more adequate and more completeelucidation of the universality of the contradiction between the productiveforces and the relations of production in class society in general.Since the particular is united with the universal and since the universalityas well as the particularity of contradiction is inherent in everything,universality residing in particularity, we should, when studying an object,try to discover both the particular and the universal and their interconnection,to discover both particularity and universality and also their interconnectionwithin the object itself, and to discover the interconnections of this objectwith the many objects outside it. When Stalin explained the historical rootsof Leninism in his famous work, The Foundations of Leninism, he analysedthe international situation in which Leninism arose, analysed thosecontradictions of capitalism which reached their culmination under imperialism,and showed how these contradictions made proletarian revolution a matterfor immediate action and created favourable conditions for a direct onslaughton capitalism. What is more, he analysed the reasons why Russia became thecradle of Leninism, why tsarist Russia became the focus of all the contradictionsof imperialism, and why it was possible for the Russian proletariat to becomethe vanguard of the international revolutionary proletariat. Thus, Stalinanalysed the universality of contradiction in imperialism, showing why Leninismis the Marxism of the era of imperialism and proletarian revolution, andat the same time analysed the particularity of tsarist Russian imperialismwithin this general contradiction, showing why Russia became the birthplaceof the theory and tactics of proletarian revolution and how the universalityof contradiction is contained in this particularity. Stalin's analysis providesus with a model for understanding the particularity and the universalityof contradiction and their interconnection.On the question of using dialectics in the study of objective phenomena,Marx and Engels, and likewise Lenin and Stalin, always enjoin people notto be in any way subjective and arbitrary but, from the concrete conditionsin the actual objective movement of these phenomena, to discover their concretecontradictions, the concrete position of each aspect of every contradictionand the concrete interrelations of the contradictions. Our dogmatists donot have this attitude in study and therefore can never get anything right.We must take warning from their failure and learn to acquire this attitude,which is the only correct one in study.The relationship between the universality and the particularity of contradictionis the relationship between the general character and the individual characterof contradiction. By the former we mean that contradiction exists in andruns through all processes from beginning to end; motion, things, processes,thinking--all are contradictions. To deny contradiction is to deny everything.This is a universal truth for all times and all countries, which admits ofno exception. Hence the general character, the absoluteness of contradiction.But this general character is contained in every individual character; withoutindividual character there can be no general character. If all individualcharacter were removed, what general character would remain? It is becauseeach contradiction is particular that individual character arises. All individualcharacter exists conditionally and temporarily, and hence is relative.This truth concerning general and individual character, concerning absolutenessand relativity, is the quintessence of the problem of contradiction in things;failure to understand it is tantamount to abandoning dialectics.IV. THE PRINCIPAL CONTRADICTION AND THE PRINCIPAL ASPECT OF A CONTRADICTIONThere are still two points in the problem of the particularity of contradictionwhich must be singled out for analysis, namely, the principal contradictionand the principal aspect of a contradiction.There are many contradictions in the process of development of a complexthing, and one of them is necessarily the principal contradiction whose existenceand development determine or influence the existence and development of theother contradictions.For instance, in capitalist society the two forces in contradiction, theproletariat and the bourgeoisie, form the principal contradiction. The othercontradictions, such as those between the remnant feudal class and thebourgeoisie, between the peasant petty bourgeoisie ant the bourgeoisie, betweenthe proletariat and the peasant petty bourgeoisie, between the non-monopolycapitalists and the monopoly capitalists, between bourgeois democracy andbourgeois fascism, among the capitalist countries and between imperialismand the colonies, are all determined or influenced by this principalcontradiction.In a semi-colonial country such as China, the relationship between the principalcontradiction and the non-principal contradictions presents a complicatedpicture.When imperialism launches a war of aggression against such a country, allits various classes, except for some traitors, can temporarily unite in anational war against imperialism. At such a time, the contradiction betweenimperialism and the country concerned becomes the principal contradiction,while all the contradictions among the various classes within the country(including what was the principal contradiction, between the feudal systemand the great masses of the people) are temporarily relegated to a secondaryand subordinate position. So it was in China in the Opium War of 1840, theSino-Japanese War of 1894 and the Yi Ho Tuan War of 1900, and so it is nowin the present Sino-Japanese War.But in another situation, the contradictions change position. When imperialismcarries on its oppression not by war, but by milder means--political, economicand cultural--the ruling classes in semi-colonial countries capitulate toimperialism, and the two form an alliance for the joint oppression of themasses of the people. At such a time, the masses often resort to civil waragainst the alliance of imperialism and the feudal classes, while imperialismoften employs indirect methods rather than direct action in helping thereactionaries in the semi-colonial countries to oppress the people, and thusthe internal contradictions become particularly sharp. This is what happenedin China in the Revolutionary War of 1911, the Revolutionary War of 1924-27,and the ten years of Agrarian Revolutionary War after 1927. Wars among thevarious reactionary ruling groups in the semi-colonial countries, e.g., thewars among the warlords in China, fall into the same category.When a revolutionary civil war develops to the point of threatening the veryexistence of imperialism and its running dogs, the domestic reactionaries,imperialism often adopts other methods in order to maintain its rule; iteither tries to split the revolutionary front from within or sends armedforces to help the domestic reactionaries directly. At such a time, foreignimperialism and domestic reaction stand quite openly at one pole while themasses of the people stand at the other pole, thus forming the principalcontradiction which determines or influences the development of the othercontradictions. The assistance given by various capitalist countries to theRussian reactionaries after the October Revolution is an example of armedintervention. Chiang Kai-shek's betrayal in 1927 is an example of splittingthe revolutionary front.But whatever happens, there is no doubt at all that at every stage in thedevelopment of a process, there is only one principal contradiction whichplays the leading role.Hence, if in any process there are a number of contradictions, one of themmust be the principal contradiction playing the leading and decisive role,while the rest occupy a secondary and subordinate position. Therefore, instudying any complex process in which there are two or more contradictions,we must devote every effort to funding its principal contradiction. Oncethis principal contradiction is grasped, all problems can be readily solved.This is the method Marx taught us in his study of capitalist society. LikewiseLenin and Stalin taught us this method when they studied imperialism andthe general crisis of capitalism and when they studied the Soviet economy.There are thousands of scholars and men of action who do not understand it,and the result is that, lost in a fog, they are unable to get to the heartof a problem and naturally cannot find a way to resolve its contradictions.As we have said, one must not treat all the contradictions in a process asbeing equal but must distinguish between the principal and the secondarycontradictions, and pay special attention to grasping the principal one.But, in any given contradiction, whether principal or secondary, should thetwo contradictory aspects be treated as equal? Again, no. In any contradictionthe development of the contradictory aspects is uneven. Sometimes they seemto be in equilibrium, which is however only temporary and relative, whileunevenness is basic. Of the two contradictory aspects, one must be principaland the other secondary. The principal aspect is the one playing the leadingrole in the contradiction. The nature of a thing is determined mainly bythe principal aspect of a contradiction, the aspect which has gained thedominant position.But this situation is not static; the principal and the non-principal aspectsof a contradiction transform themselves into each other and the nature ofthe thing changes accordingly. In a given process or at a given stage inthe development of a contradiction, A is the principal aspect and B is thenon-principal aspect; at another stage or in another process the roles arereversed--a change determined by the extent of the increase or decrease inthe force of each aspect in its struggle against the other in the courseof the development of a thing.We often speak of "the new superseding the old". The supersession of theold by the new is a general, eternal and inviolable law of the universe.The transformation of one thing into another, through leaps of differentforms in accordance with its essence and external conditions--this is theprocess of the new superseding the old. In each thing there is contradictionbetween its new and its old aspects, and this gives rise to a series of struggleswith many twists and turns. As a result of these struggles, the new aspectchanges from being minor to being major and rises to predominance, whilethe old aspect changes from being major to being minor and gradually diesout. And the moment the new aspect gains dominance over the old, the oldthing changes qualitatively into a new thing. It can thus be seen that thenature of a thing is mainly determined by the principal aspect of thecontradiction, the aspect which has gained predominance. When the principalaspect which has gained predominance changes, the nature of a thing changesaccordingly.In capitalist society, capitalism has changed its position from being asubordinate force in the old feudal era to being the dominant force, andthe nature of society has accordingly changed from feudal to capitalist.In the new, capitalist era, the feudal forces changed from their former dominantposition to a subordinate one, gradually dying out. Such was the case, forexample, in Britain and France. With the development of the productive forces,the bourgeoisie changes from being a new class playing a progressive roleto being an old class playing a reactionary role, until it is finally overthrownby the proletariat and becomes a class deprived of privately owned meansof production and stripped of power, when it, too, gradually dies out. Theproletariat, which is much more numerous than the bourgeoisie and growssimultaneously with it but under its rule, is a new force which, initiallysubordinate to the bourgeoisie, gradually gains strength, becomes an independentclass playing the leading role in history, and finally seizes political powerand becomes the ruling class. Thereupon the nature of society changes andthe old capitalist society becomes the new socialist society. This is thepath already taken by the Soviet Union, a path that all other countries willinevitably take.Look at China, for instance. Imperialism occupies the principal positionin the contradiction in which China has been reduced to a semi-colony, itoppresses the Chinese people, and China has been changed from an independentcountry into a semi-colonial one. But this state of affairs will inevitablychange; in the struggle between the two sides, the power of the Chinese peoplewhich is growing under the leadership of the proletariat will inevitablychange China from a semi-colony into an independent country, whereas imperialismwill be overthrown and old China will inevitably change into New China.The change of old China into New China also involves a change in the relationbetween the old feudal forces and the new popular forces within the country.The old feudal landlord class will be overthrown, and from being the rulerit will change into being the ruled; and this class, too, will graduallydie out. From being the ruled the people, led by the proletariat, will becomethe rulers. Thereupon, the nature of Chinese society will change and theold, semi-colonial and semi-feudal society will change into a new democraticsociety.Instances of such reciprocal transformation are found in our past experience.The Ching Dynasty which ruled China for nearly three hundred years was overthrownin the Revolution of 1911, and the revolutionary Tung Meng Hui underSun Yat-sen's leadership was victorious for a time. In the RevolutionaryWar of 1924-27, the revolutionary forces of the Communist-Kuomintang alliancein the south changed from being weak to being strong and won victory in theNorthern Expedition, while the Northern warlords who once ruled the roostwere overthrown. In 1927, the people's forces led by the Communist Partywere greatly reduced numerically under the attacks of Kuomintang reaction,but with the elimination of opportunism within their ranks they graduallygrew again. In the revolutionary base areas under Communist leadership, thepeasants have been transformed from being the ruled to being the rulers,while the landlords have undergone a reverse transformation. It is alwaysso in the world, the new displacing the old, the old being superseded bythe new, the old being eliminated to make way for the new, and the new emergingout of the old.At certain times in the revolutionary struggle, the difficulties outweighthe favourable conditions and so constitute the principal aspect of thecontradiction and the favourable conditions constitute the secondary aspect.But through their efforts the revolutionaries can overcome the difficultiesstep by step and open up a favourable new situation; thus a difficult situationyields place to a favourable one. This- is what happened after the failureof the revolution in China in 1927 and during the Long March of the ChineseRed Army. In the present Sino-Japanese War, China is again in a difficultposition, but we can change this and fundamentally transform the situationas between China and Japan. Conversely, favourable conditions can be transformedinto difficulty if the revolutionaries make mistakes. Thus the victory ofthe revolution of 1924-27 turned into defeat. The revolutionary base areaswhich grew up in the southern provinces after 1927 had all suffered defeatby 1934.When we engage in study, the same holds good for the contradiction in thepassage from ignorance to knowledge. At the very beginning of our study ofMarxism, our ignorance of or scanty acquaintance with Marxism stands incontradiction to knowledge of Marxism. But by assiduous study, ignorancecan be transformed into knowledge, scanty knowledge into substantial knowledge,and blindness in the application of Marxism into mastery of its application.Some people think that this is not true of certain contradictions. For instance,in the contradiction between the productive forces and the relations ofproduction, the productive forces are the principal aspect; in the contradictionbetween theory and practice, practice is the principal aspect; in thecontradiction between the economic base and the superstructure, the economicbase is the principal aspect; and there is no change in their respectivepositions. This is the mechanical materialist conception, not the dialecticalmaterialist conception. True, the productive forces, practice and the economicbase generally play the principal and decisive role; whoever denies thisis not a materialist. But it must also be admitted that in certain conditions,such aspects as the relations of production, theory and the superstructurein turn manifest themselves in the principal and decisive role. When it isimpossible for the productive forces to develop without a change in the relationsof production, then the change in the relations of production plays the principaland decisive role. The creation and advocacy of revolutionary theory playsthe principal and decisive role in those times of which Lenin said, "Withoutrevolutionary theory there can be no revolutionary movement."[15] When a task, no matter which, has to be performed,but there is as yet no guiding line, method, plan or policy, the principaland decisive thing is to decide on a guiding line, method, plan or policy.When the superstructure (politics, culture, etc.) obstructs the developmentof the economic base, political and cultural changes become principal anddecisive. Are we going against materialism when we say this? No. The reasonis that while we recognize that in the general development of history thematerial determines the mental and social being determines social consciousness,we also--and indeed must--recognize the reaction of mental on material things,of social consciousness on social being and of the superstructure on theeconomic base. This does not go against materialism; on the contrary, itavoids mechanical materialism and firmly upholds dialectical materialism.In studying the particularity of contradiction, unless we examine these twofacets--the principal and the non-principal contradictions in a process,and the principal and the non-principal aspects of a contradiction--thatis, unless we examine the distinctive character of these two facets ofcontradiction, we shall get bogged down in abstractions, be unable to understandcontradiction concretely and consequently be unable to find the correct methodof resolving it. The distinctive character or particularity of these twofacets of contradiction represents the unevenness of the forces that arein contradiction. Nothing in this world develops absolutely evenly; we mustoppose the theory of even development or the theory of equilibrium. Moreover,it is these concrete features of a contradiction and the changes in the principaland non-principal aspects of a contradiction in the course of its developmentthat manifest the force of the new superseding the old. The study of thevarious states of unevenness in contradictions, of the principal andnon-principal contradictions and of the principal and the non-principal aspectsof a contradiction constitutes an essential method by which a revolutionarypolitical party correctly determines its strategic and tactical policiesboth in political and in military affairs. All Communists must give it attention.V. THE IDENTITY AND STRUGGLE OF THE ASPECTS OF A CONTRADICTIONWhen we understand the universality and the particularity of contradiction,we must proceed to study the problem of the identity and struggle of theaspects of a contradiction.Identity, unity, coincidence, interpenetration, interpermeation, interdependence(or mutual dependence for existence), interconnection or mutual co-operation--allthese different terms mean the same thing and refer to the followingtwo points: first, the existence of each of the two aspects of a contradictionin the process of the development of a thing presupposes the existence ofthe other aspect, and both aspects coexist in a single entity; second, ingiven conditions, each of the two contradictory aspects transforms itselfinto its opposite. This is the meaning of identity.Lenin said: Dialectics is the teaching which shows how opposites can be and how they happen to be (how they become) identical--under what conditions they are identical, transforming themselves into one another,--why the human mind should take these opposites not as dead, rigid, but as living, conditional, mobile, transforming themselves into one another. [16] 2ff7e9595c
Comments