الاشتراكية بخصائص صينية

الاشتراكية بخصائص صينية
الصينية المبسطة	中国特色社会主义
الصينية التقليدية	中國特色社會主義
Hanyu Pinyin	Zhōngguó tèsè shèhuìzhǔyì
النسخ Standard Mandarin Hanyu Pinyin Zhōngguó tèsè shèhuìzhǔyì Bopomofo ㄓㄨㄥ ㄍㄨㄛˊ ㄊㄜˋ ㄙㄜˋ ㄕㄜˋ ㄏㄨㄟˋ ㄓㄨˇ ㄧˋ Wade–Giles Chung1-kuo2 t'e4-se4 she4-hui4-chu3-i4 Tongyong Pinyin Jhongguó tè-sè shè-huèi-jhǔ-yì IPA [tʂʊ́ŋ.kwɔ̌ tʰɤ̂.sɤ̂ ʂɤ̂.xwêɪ.tʂù.î]

النظام النظري الاشتراكية بخصائص صينية (صينية: 中国特色社会主义؛ پن‌ين: Zhōngguó tèsè shèhuìzhǔyì�؛ حرفياً zhōngguó tèsè تعني "السمات الصينية"؛ و shèhuì zhǔyì تعني "اشتراكية"؛ إنگليزية: socialism with Chinese characteristics) هو مصطلح فضفاض للنظريات السياسية والسياسات التي يراها مؤيدوها تمثل الماركسية-اللنينية المكيَّفة مع الظروف الصينية والفترات الزمنية المعينة. فعل سبيل المثال، في هذه النظرة يُعتبر فكر شي جن‌پنگ ممثلاً للسياسات الماركسية-اللنينية المناسبة للوضع الحاضر للصين بينما كانت نظرية دنگ شياوپنگ تُعتبر مناسبة للفترة التي صيغت فيها. أُدرج المصطلح في الاستخدام الشائع خلال عهد دنگ شياوپنگ، كان مرتبطاً ببرنامج دنگ الشامل لاعتماد عناصر اقتصاد السوق إلى حدٍ كبير، وذلك كوسيلة لتعزيز النمو باستخدام الاستثمار الأجنبي وزيادة الإنتاجية (خاصة في الريف حيث يعيش 80٪ من سكان الصين) بينما احتفظ الحزب الشيوعي الصيني بالتزامه الرسمي لتحقيق الشيوعية واحتكاره للسلطة السياسية.في الرواية الرسمية للحزب، الاشتراكية ذات الخصائص الصينية هي الماركسية اللينينية المتكيفة مع الظروف الصينية ونتاج الاشتراكية العلمية. نصت النظرية على أن الصين كانت في المرحلة الأولية للاشتراكية نظراً لانخفاض مستوى الثروة المادية وحاجتها إلى المشاركة في النمو الاقتصادي وقبل أن تسعى إلى شكلاً أكثر مساواة من الاشتراكية، الأمر الذي سيؤدي بدوره إلى المجتمع الشيوعي الموصوف في الأرثوذكسية الماركسية.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

 المرحلة الأولية للاشتراكية

المقالة الرئيسية: المرحلة الأولية للاشتراكية

 أثناء عهد ماو زى‌دونگ

كان مفهوم المرحلة الأولية للاشتراكية مُتخيل قبل أن تقدم الصين الإصلاحات الاقتصادي.، في أوائل الخمسينيات من القرن الماضي، أثار الاقتصاديون يو گوانگيوان و شيويه ماگتشاو و سان يافانگ مسألة التحول الاشتراكي الذي كان فيه اقتصاد الصين المنخفض القوة الإنتاجية في الفترة الانتقالية وهو الموقف الذي أقر به ماو زى‌دونگ لفترة وجيزة حتى عام. عند مناقشة ضرورة العلاقات السلعية في تشانگ تشو الأول. في مؤتمر 1957 (2-10 نوفمبر 1958)، على سبيل المثال، قال ماو - رئيس الحزب الشيوعي الصيني في اللجنة المركزية للحزب الشيوعي الصيني  — أن الصين كانت في "المرحلة الأولى من الاشتراكية".ومع ذلك، لم يشرح ماو الفكرة مطلقًا وترك خلفاؤه للقيام بذلك.

 بعد وفاة ماو زى‌دونگ

Some have called our road "Social Capitalism", others "State Capitalism", and yet others "Technocratic Capitalism". These are all completely wrong. We respond that socialism with Chinese characteristics is socialism, by which we mean that despite reform we adhere to the socialist road – our road, our theory, our system, and the goals we set out at the 18th National Party Congress. ... Socialism with Chinese characteristics is the dialectical unity of the theoretical logic of scientific socialism and the historical logic of China's social development. It's scientific socialism rooted in Chinese realities, reflecting the will of Chinese people, and adapted to the requirements of China and its circumstances.

— Xi Jinping, speech to the Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party, 5 January 2013

في 5 مايو 1978، the article "Putting into Effect the Socialist Principle of Distribution According to Work" (贯彻执行按劳分配的社会主义原则) elaborated on the idea that China was still at the first stage of reaching a communist society and that it had not become a truly socialist society. The article was written by members in the State Council's Political Research Office led by economist Yu Guangyuan on the orders of Deng Xiaoping so as to "criticize and repudiate" the beliefs of the communist left. After reading it, Deng himself authored a brief memo saying that it was "well-written, and shows that the nature of distribution by labor is not capitalist, but socialist [...] [and] to implement this principle, many things are to be done, and many institutions to be revived. In all, this is to give incentives for us to do better". The term reappeared at the 6th plenum of the 11th Central Committee on 27 June 1981 in the document "Resolution on Certain Questions in the History of our Party since the Founding of the PRC". Hu Yaobang, the CCP General Secretary, used the term in his report to the 12th National Congress on 1 September 1982. It was not until the "Resolution Concerning the Guiding Principle in Building Socialist Spiritual Civilization" at the 6th plenum of the 12th Central Committee that the term was used in the defense of the economic reforms which were being introduced.

At the 13th National Congress, acting General Secretary Zhao Ziyang on behalf of the 12th Central Committee delivered the report "Advance Along the Road of Socialism with Chinese characteristics". He wrote that China was a socialist society, but that socialism in China was in its primary stage, a Chinese peculiarity which was due to the undeveloped state of the country's productive forces. During this phase of development, Zhao recommended introducing a planned commodity economy on the basis of public ownership. The main failure of the communist right according to Zhao was that they failed to acknowledge that China could reach socialism by bypassing capitalism. The main failure of the communist left was that they held the "utopian position" that China could bypass the primary stage of socialism in which the productive forces are to be modernized.

On 5 October 1987, Yu Guangyuan, a major author of the concept, published an article entitled "Economy in the Initial Stage of Socialism" and speculated that this historical stage will last for two decades and perhaps much longer. This represents, says Ian Wilson, "a severe blight on the expectations raised during the early 70s, when the old eight-grade wage scale was being compressed to only three levels and a more even distributive system was assumed to be an important national goal". On 25 October, Zhao further expounded on the concept of the primary stage of socialism and said that the party line was to follow "One Center, Two Basic Points"—the central focus of the Chinese state was economic development, but that this should occur simultaneously through centralized political control (i.e. the Four Cardinal Principles) and upholding the policy of reform and opening up.

General Secretary Jiang Zemin further elaborated on the concept ten years later, first during a speech to the CCP Central Party School on 29 May 1997 and again in his report to the 15th National Congress on 12 September. According to Jiang, the 3rd plenum of the 11th Central Committee correctly analyzed and formulated a scientifically correct program for the problems facing China and socialism. In Jiang's words, the primary stage of socialism was an "undeveloped stage". The fundamental task of socialism is to develop the productive forces, therefore the main aim during the primary stage should be the further development of the national productive forces. The primary contradiction in Chinese society during the primary stage of socialism is "the growing material and cultural needs of the people and the backwardness of production". This contradiction will remain until China has completed the process of primary stage of socialism—and because of it—economic development should remain the party's main focus during this stage.

Jiang elaborated on three points to develop the primary stage of socialism. The first—to develop a socialist economy with Chinese characteristics—meant developing the economy by emancipating and modernizing the forces of production while developing a market economy. The second—building socialist politics with Chinese characteristics—meant "managing state affairs according to the law", developing socialist democracy under the party and making the "people the masters of the country". The third point—building socialist culture with Chinese characteristics—meant turning Marxism into the guide to train the people so as to give them "high ideals, moral integrity, a good education, and a strong sense of discipline, and developing a national scientific, and popular socialist culture geared to the needs of modernization, of the world, and of the future".

When asked how long the primary stage of socialism would last, Zhao replied "[i]t will be at least 100 years [...] [before] socialist modernization will have been in the main accomplished". The state constitution states that "China will be in the primary stage of socialism for a long time to come". As with Zhao, Jiang believed that it would take at least 100 years to reach a more advanced stage.

 اقتصاد السوق الاشتراكي

المقالة الرئيسية: اقتصاد السوق الاشتراكي

What is socialism and what is Marxism? We were not quite clear about this in the past. Marxism attaches utmost importance to developing the productive forces. We have said that socialism is the primary stage of communism and that at the advanced stage the principle of from each according to his ability and to each according to his needs will be applied. This calls for highly developed productive forces and an overwhelming abundance of material wealth. Therefore, the fundamental task for the socialist stage is to develop the productive forces. The superiority of the socialist system is demonstrated, in the final analysis, by faster and greater development of those forces than under the capitalist system. As they develop, the people's material and cultural life will constantly improve. One of our shortcomings after the founding of the People's Republic was that we didn't pay enough attention to developing the productive forces. Socialism means eliminating poverty. Pauperism is not socialism, still less communism.

— Deng Xiaoping, speech discussing Marxist theory at a Central Committee plenum, 30 June 1984

Deng Xiaoping, the architect of the Chinese economic reforms, did not believe that the market economy was synonymous with capitalism or that planning was synonymous with socialism. During his southern tour, he said that "planning and market forces are not the essential difference between socialism and capitalism. A planned economy is not the definition of socialism, because there is planning under capitalism; the market economy happens under socialism, too. Planning and market forces are both ways of controlling economic activity".

 التبرير الأيديولوجي

In the 1980s, it became evident to Chinese economists that the Marxist theory of the law of value—understood as the expression of the labor theory of value—could not serve as the basis of China's pricing system. They concluded that Marx never intended his theory of law of value to work "as an expression of 'concretized labor time'". Marx's notion of "prices of production" was meaningless to the Soviet-styled planned economies since price formations were according to Marx established by markets. Soviet planners had used the law of value as a basis to rationalize prices in the planned economy. According to Soviet sources, prices were "planned with an eye to the [...] basic requirements of the law of value". However, the primary fault with the Soviet interpretation was that they tried to calibrate prices without a competitive market since according to Marx competitive markets allowed for an equilibrium of profit rates which led to an increase in the prices of production. The rejection of the Soviet interpretation of the law of value led to the acceptance of the idea that China was still in the primary stage of socialism. The basic argument was that conditions envisaged by Marx for reaching the socialist stage of development did not yet exist in China.

Mao said that the imposition of "progressive relations of production" would revolutionize production. His successor's rejection of this view according to A. James Gregor has thwarted the ideological continuity of Maoism—officially Mao Zedong Thought. Classical Marxism had argued that a socialist revolution would only take place in advanced capitalist societies and its success would signal the transition from a capitalist commodity-based economy to a "product economy" in which goods would be distributed for people's need and not for profit. If because of a lack of a coherent explanation in the chance of failure this revolution did not occur, the revolutionaries would be forced to take over the responsibilities of the bourgeoisie. Chinese communists are thus looking for a new Marxist theory of development. CCP theorist Luo Rongqu recognized that the founders of Marxism had never "formulated any systematic theory on the development of the non-Western world" and said that the CCP should "establish their own synthesized theoretical framework to study the problem of modern development". According to A. James Gregor, the implication of this stance is that "Chinese Marxism is currently in a state of profound theoretical discontinuity".

 الملكية الخاصة

The Chinese government's understanding of private ownership is claimed to be rooted in classical Marxism. According to party theorists, since China adopted state ownership when it was a semi-feudal and semi-colonial country, it is claimed to be in the primary stage of socialism. Because of this, certain policies and system characteristics — such as commodity production for the market, the existence of a private sector and the reliance of the profit motive in enterprise management—were changed. These changes were allowed as long as they improved productivity and modernized the means of production, thus furthering the development of socialism.

The CCP still considers private ownership to be non-socialist. However, according to party theorists, the existence and growth of private ownership does not necessarily undermine socialism or promote capitalism in China. They argue that Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels never proposed the immediate abolishment of private ownership. According to Engels' book Principles of Communism, the proletariat can only abolish private ownership when the necessary conditions have been met. In the phase before the abolishment of private ownership, Engels proposed progressive taxation, high inheritance taxes and compulsory bond purchases to restrict private property, while using the competitive powers of state-owned enterprises to expand the public sector. Marx and Engels proposed similar measures in The Communist Manifesto with regard to advanced countries, but since China was economically undeveloped, party theorists called for flexibility regarding the party's handling of private property. According to party theorist Liu Shuiyuan, the New Economic Policy program initiated by Soviet authorities in the aftermath of the war communism program is a good example of flexibility by socialist authorities.

Party theorist Li Xuai said that private ownership inevitably involved capitalist exploitation. However, Li regards private property and exploitation as necessary in the primary stage of socialism, claiming that capitalism in its primary stage uses remnants of the old society to build itself. Sun Liancheng and Lin Huiyong said that Marx and Engels—in their interpretation of The Communist Manifesto—criticized private ownership when it was owned solely by the bourgeoisie, but not individual ownership in which everyone owns the means of production, hence this cannot be exploited by others. Individual ownership is considered consistent with socialism, since Marx wrote that a post-capitalist society would entail the rebuilding of "associated social individual ownership".

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

 الأساس العامة

إن الأساس العام للاشتراكية ذات الخصائص الصينية هو المرحلة الأولية للاشتراكية. يقصد بالمرحلة الأولية للاشتراكية وضع الصين وواقعها الأساسيان في العصر الحاضر، إذ ينبغي للحزب الشيوعي الصيني والحكومة الصينية التمسك بهذا الوضع بثبات في كل الأحوال، والانطلاق من هذا الواقع في دفع الإصلاح والتنمية في أي جانب من الجوانب المختلفة. وليس من الضروري فقط الانطلاق من المرحلة الأولية في البناء الاقتصادي، بل من الضروري الاحتفاظ بها في البناء السياسي والبناء الثقافي والبناء الاجتماعي وبناء الحضارة الإيكولوجية؛ ليس من الضروري فقط الاحتفاظ بالمرحلة الأولية في ظل انخفاض الحجم الاقتصادي، بل يقتضي الاحتفاظ بها بعد ارتفاع الحجم الاقتصادي؛ ليس من الضروري الاحتفاظ بالمرحلة الأولية في تخطيط التنمية الطويلة الأمد فحسب، بل من الضروري الاحتفاظ بها في الأعمال اليومية أيضا.

 وجهات نظر

بالنسبة للكاتب والباحث ياشنگ هوانگ وكثيرين غيره، فإن النظرية الاقتصادية في الصين ليست اشتراكية ذات خصائص صينية، بل هي العكس رأسمالية ذات خصائص صينية.

 انظر أيضاً

• أيديولوجية الحزب الشيوعي الصيني
• الرجعية (الماركسية)
• الأيديولوجية الاشتراكية للكومن‌تانگ
• اقتصاد السوق الاشتراكي
• رأسمالية الدولة
• الحلم الصيني
• العصرنات الأربع
• رأسمالية الحزب-الدولة
• Primary stage of socialism
• Socialism in one country
• براعم الرأسمالية, features of the economy of the late Ming and early Qing dynasties (القرون 16 إلى 18)

 المراجع

 المصادر

• Gregor, A. James (1999). Marxism, China & Development: Reflections on Theory and Reality. Transaction Publishers. ISBN 9780765806345.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: ref duplicates default (link)
• He, Henry Yuhuai (2001). Dictionary of the Political Thought of the People's Republic of China. M.E. Sharpe. ISBN 9780765605696.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: ref duplicates default (link)
• Hsu, Robert (1991). Economic Theories in China, 1979–1988. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9780521365673.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: ref duplicates default (link)
• Li, Gucheng (1995). A Glossary of Political Terms of the People's Republic of China. Chinese University Press. ISBN 9789622016156.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: ref duplicates default (link)
• Schram, Stuart (1989). The Thought of Mao Tse-Tung. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9780521310628.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: ref duplicates default (link)
• Vogel, Ezra (2011). Deng Xiaoping and the Transformation of China. Harvard University Press. ISBN 9780674055445.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: ref duplicates default (link)

 للاستزادة

• Gregor, A. James (2014). Marxism and the Making of China. A Doctrinal History. Palgrave Macmillan.