Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-01T04:08:18.808Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Leninism and Maoism: Some Populist Perspectives in Marxism-Leninism in China

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 February 2009

Maurice Meisner
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Isaac Deutscher once observed that the Chinese Communist revolution presents the paradox of “the most archaic of nations avidly absorbing the most modern of revolutionary doctrines, the last word in revolution, and translating it into action. Lacking any native ancestry, Chinese Communism descends straight from Bolshevism. Mao stands on Lenin's shoulders.” This echoes the generally accepted view of the historical relationship between Maoism and Leninism. Among most western students of Chinese communism it is something of a truism that Marxism came to China in its Leninist form; for different reasons, Maoists have long been saying that Mao (and now only Mao) is the true heir of Lenin. Indeed, the “thought of Mao Tse-tung” is no longer simply considered the practical application of “the universal truths” of Marxism-Leninism to the specifically Chinese historical situation, but is explicitly celebrated as a new and higher stage of universally valid revolutionary theory; it is “invincible Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tsetung Thought” that now propels world history forward. In contemporary Maoist eyes, Mao stands on the shoulders of Lenin as firmly as Lenin presumably stands on the shoulders of Marx.

Type
Research Article
Information
The China Quarterly , Volume 45 , March 1971 , pp. 2 - 36
Copyright
Copyright © The China Quarterly 1971

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Deutscher, Isaac, Ironies of History (London: Oxford University Press, 1966), pp. 89–90.Google Scholar

2 This recent and rather awkward term is more-or-less officially canonized in “Leninism or Social-Imperialism?—In Commemoration of the Centenary of the Birth of the Great Lenin” (Editorial in Jen-min jih-pao, Chieh-fang-chün pao and Hung-ch'i). See Peking Review (24 04 1970), pp. 5–15.Google Scholar

3 “Classical Russian Populism” generally refers to the movement (largely inspired by the writings of Herzen and Chernyshevsky) between about 1850 and 1880, the period prior to the degeneration of Populism into revolutionary terrorism and prior to the widespread influence of Marxism among the Russian intelligentsia. The discussion here will be confined to the intellectual rather than the political tendencies of the movement and will focus on those aspects of Populist ideology particularly relevant for contemporary comparative purposes. The discussion is based largely on the following: Venturi, Franco, Roots of Revolution (New York, 1966)Google Scholar; lonescu, G. and Gellner, E., Populism, Its Meaning and National Characteristics (London, 1969)Google Scholar; Walicki, A., The Controversy Over Capitalism: Studies in the Social Philosophy of the Russian Populists (London, 1969)Google Scholar; Haimson, Leopold, The Russian Marxists and the Origins of Bolshevism (Cambridge, Mass., 1955)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and various writings of Herzen and Chemyshevsky available in English translation. For an excellent discussion of the semantic, conceptual and historical problems involved in defining the “classical era” of Russian Populism, see Walicki, A., The Controversy Over Capitalism, pp. 1–28.Google Scholar

4 These ideas are expressed with particular clarity in Herzen's influential letter to Michelet, Jules entitled “The Russian People and Socialism” (1851).Google Scholar See Herzen, Alexander, From the Other Shore (London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1956), pp. 165–208.Google Scholar

5 Quoted in Venturi, Franco, Roots of Revolution, p. 34.Google Scholar

6 Herzen, , “The Russian People and Socialism,” in From the Other Shore, p. 189.Google Scholar

7 Quoted in Venturi, , Roots of Revolution, p. 35.Google Scholar

8 Quoted in Venturi, , Roots of Revolution, p. 35 (emphases added).Google Scholar

9 Introduction to Venturi, , Roots of Revolution, p. xviii.Google Scholar

10 Kautsky, Karl, Class Struggle (Chicago: Kerr, 1910), p. 119.Google Scholar

11 For a highly perceptive discussion of the influence of Chernyskevsky of Lenin, see Haimson, Leopold, The Russian Marxists and the Origins of Bolshevism (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1955), especially pp. 97–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

12 These views, of course, are most clearly presented by Lenin in his famous treatise of 1902, What is to be Done?

13 Luxemburg, Rosa, The Russian Revolution and Leninism or Marxism? (Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, 1961), p. 88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar The article quoted here under the title “Leninism or Marxism?” was originally published in 1904 in Iskra and Neue Zeit with the title “Organizational Questore of the Russian Social Democracy.”

14 Ibid. p. 102.

15 Ibid. pp. 71–72.

16 Moore, Barrington, Soviet Politics—The Dilemma of Power (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1959), pp. 81–82.Google Scholar

17 Ibid. p. 60.

18 Schwartz, Benjamin, “The Intelligentsia in Communist China: A Tentative Comparison,” Daedalus (Summer, 1960), p. 615.Google Scholar

19 See, for example, Pi-an, T'an, “O-kuo min-ts'ui-chu-i tui t'ung-meng-hui ti ying-hsiang” (“The Influence of Russian Populism on the T'ung-meng-hui”), Li-shih yen-chiu (Historical Research), No. 1 (1959), pp. 35–44Google Scholar; and Meng-yüan, Jeng, “Hsin-hai ko-ming ch'ien Chung-kuo shu-k'an shang tui Ma-k'o-ssu-chu-i ti chieh-shao” (“The Introduction of Marxism in Chinese Publications before the 1911 Revolution”), Hsin chien-she (New Construction), No. 3 (1953), p. 9.Google Scholar

20 Useful information on these student movements is provided in ling Shou-ho, Hsü-i, Yin and Po-ch'ao, Chang, Shih-yüeh ko-ming tui Chung-kuo ko-ming ti ying-hsiang (The Influence of the October Revolution on the Chinese Revolution) (Peking, 1957), esp. pp. 137–142.Google Scholar On P'eng P'ai, see Shinkichi, Eto, “Hai-lu-feng: The First Chinese Soviet Government,” The China Quarterly, Nos. 8 & 9.Google Scholar

21 On Li's Populist views, see Meisner, Maurice, Li Ta-chao and the Origins of Chinese Marxism (Harvard University Press, 1967).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

22 From extracts from Mao's articles in the Hsiang-chiang p'ing-lun of 07 and 08 1919Google Scholar, translated by Schram, Stuart in The Political Thought of Mao Tse-tung (New York: Praeger, 1969), p. 163.Google Scholar

23 “Report of an Investigation into the Peasant Movement in Hunan,” Selected Works of Mao Tse-tung (London: Lawrence and Wishart Ltd., 1954), Vol. I, p. 22.Google Scholar

24 Ibid. pp. 56–57.

25 Ibid. p. 22.

26 Schwartz, Benjamin I., Chinese Communism and the Rise of Mao (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1952), p. 76.Google Scholar

27 The comment was made during the utopian fervour of the early Great Leap Forward period. See Hung-ch'i (Red Flag) (1 06 1958), p. 3.Google Scholar

28 From Mao's recently revealed “secret speeches,” as translated in Joint Publications Research Service (JPRS) No. 49826 (Translations on Communist China No. 90; 12 02 1970), 30.Google Scholar

29 Murphey, Rhoads, “Man and Nature in China,” Modern Asian Studies, Vol. I, No. 4 (10 1967), pp. 325–326.Google Scholar

30 Schram, , Mao Tse-tung (New York: Praeger 1966), p. 318.Google Scholar

31 Talmon, J. L., The Origins of Totalitarian Democracy (New York: Praeger, 1965), p. 244.Google Scholar

32 Herzen, , “The Russian People and Socialism,”Google Scholar in From the Other Shore, pp. 166–167.Google Scholar

33 As quoted by Walicki, A., “Russia,” in Ionescu, Ghita and Gellner, Ernest, Populism (London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1969), p. 84.Google Scholar For a somewhat different translation see Gerschenkron, A., Economic Backwardness in Historical Perspective (New York: 1962), p. 173.Google Scholar

34 Quoted in Walicki, , The Controversy Over Capitalism, p. 117.Google Scholar

35 This idea is implicit in Mao's 1919 writings in Hsiang-chiang p'ing-lun referred to earlier.

36 JPRS, No. 49826, p. 48Google Scholar, and from “The little Red Book”: “Young people are the most active and vital force in society.” Quotations from Chairman Mao (Peking, 1966) p. 290.Google Scholar

37 On New Democracy (Peking, 1968), p. 62.Google Scholar

38 “The Russian People and Socialism,” in From the Other Shore, p. 199.Google Scholar

39 “Oppose Bookism” (1930), translated in Rue, John E., Mao Tse-tung in Opposition, 1927–1935 (Stanford University Press, 1966), p. 310.Google Scholar

40 For an extraordinary condemnation of “the twenty manifestations” of bureaucratic evils in a speech of 1967, see JPRS, No. 49826, pp. 40–43.Google Scholar

41 Mao, of course, celebrates his own alleged status as a non-intellectual: “Being an unpolished man, I am not too cultured” were the words with which he prefaced a speech in 1959.

42 On the Correct Handling of Contradictions among the People (Peking: Foreign Languages Press, 1957), p. 50.Google Scholar

43 New Republic (27 02 1965), pp. 17–23.Google Scholar

44 “The Orientation of the Youth Movement,” Selected Works (London, 1954), Vol. III, p. 20.Google Scholar

45 “On Coalition Government,” Selected Works (London, 1956) Vol. IV, p. 296.Google Scholar

46 “Preface and Postcript to ‘Rural Survey’,” Selected Works (London, 1956), Vol. IV, p. 8.Google Scholar

47 “Oppose Bookism,” in Rue, Mao Tse-tung in Opposition, p. 307.Google Scholar

48 “Draw in Large Numbers of Intellectuals” (12, 1939)Google Scholar, Selected Works (London, 1954), Vol. III, p. 70–71.Google Scholar

49 “It is my wish,” Mao wrote in 1941, “that, together with comrades of the whole Party, I should continue to be a pupil of the masses and learn from them.” Selected Works (London, 1956), Vol. IV, p. 10.Google Scholar

50 “The Question of Agricultural Co-operation” (31 07 1955).Google Scholar For an earlier translation, using slightly different wording, see Bowie, Robert R. and Fairbank, John K., Communist China 1955–1959, Policy Documents with Analysis (Cambridge, Mass., 1962), p. 96.Google Scholar

51 Introductory notes to Volume II of the Chinese edition of Socialist Upsurge in China's Countryside. For the current Peking-English rendition of these passages, see Quotations from Chairman Mao, pp. 118–121.Google Scholar In the earlier one-volume English-language edition, the latter phrase is translated: “The people are filled with an immense enthusiasm for socialism.” Socialist Upsurge (Peking, 1957), p. 44.Google Scholar

52 Proceeding from different lines of inquiry this is suggested by both Schwartz, Benjamin, “The Reign of Virtue: Some Broad Perspectives on Leader and Party in the Cultural Revolution,” The China Quarterly, No. 35 (07–09 1968), pp. 1–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar and Schram, Stuart, “The Party in Chinese Communist Ideology,” The China Quarterly, No. 38 (04–06, 1969), pp. 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar Both of these articles now appear in Lewis, John W. (ed.) Party Leadership and Revolutionary Power in China (London: Cambridge University Press, 1970).Google Scholar

53 Weber, Max, The Theory of Social and Economic Organization (New York, 1964, p. 340.Google Scholar

54 “This great evil, bureaucracy, must be thrown into the cesspool,” Mao typically demanded in 1933. Selected Works (London, 1954), Vol. I, p. 135.Google Scholar

55 For a definition and brief discussion of the concept, see Schram, , The Political Thought at Mao Tse-hmg, pp. 98–101.Google Scholar A fatter analysis is provided by Schram, in La ‘Revolution permanente’ en Chine (Paris: Mouton, 1963).Google Scholar

56 Although it is difficult to employ “Populism” as a general socio-historical concept, the difficulties are no greater (and perhaps less misleading) than the widespread use of such terms as “nationalism” and “modernization” as general concepts. Peter Worsley has made the most fruitful attempt to define and apply Populism as a general socio-historical term. See The Third World (London, 1964)Google Scholar, esp. Chapter 4; and “The Concept of Populism” in lonescu, and Gellner, , Populism pp. 212–250.Google Scholar

57 Stewart, Angus, “The Social Roots,”Google Scholar in lonescu, and Gellner, , Populism, p. 181.Google Scholar

58 “The Economic Content of Narodism,” in Lenin, V. I., Collected Works (Moscow, 1960), Vol. I, p. 503.Google Scholar

59 See, for example, Stewart, , “The Social Roots,”Google Scholar in Ionescu, and Gellner, , Populism, pp. 186–191.Google Scholar

60 For a discussion of “Catonism,” see Moore, Harrington, Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy (Boston: Beacon Press, 1966), pp. 490–496.Google Scholar

61 Ibid. pp. 494–495.

62 “Once progressive, as the first to pose the problem of capitalism,” Lenin wrote in 1897, “nowadays Narodism is a reactionary and harmful theory which misleads social thought and plays into the hands of stagnation and Asiatic backwardness.” “The Heritage We Renounce,” in Collected Works (Moscow, 1960), Vol. II, p. 516.Google Scholar

63 “Chung-kuo koming ho nung-min yün-tung ti ts'e-lüeh” (“The Chinese Revolution and the Strategy of the Peasant Movement”), Pu-erh-sat-wei-k'e (The Bolshevik), Vol. III, Nos. 4–5 (12 05 1930), pp. 114 and 141.Google Scholar

64 For example, the Pravda article “Scientific Socialism and Petty Bourgeois Ideology” (24 10 1966)Google Scholar, in Current Digest of the Soviet Press, Vol. XVIII, No. 43, pp. 4–6.Google Scholar