Rise of Marxist Classes: Bureaucratic Classification and Class Formation in Early Socialist China

Eddy U

doi:10.1017/S0003975616000011

Rise of Marxist Classes

Bureaucratic Classification and Class Formation in Early Socialist China

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 07 April 2016

Eddy U

Show author details

Eddy U*: Affiliation:
University of California, Davis [[email protected]].

Article contents

Abstract
References

Get access

Abstract

How did “capitalists”, “petty bourgeoisie”, and other class categories based on Marxist critiques of capitalism become highly visible in local society while communist regimes abolished capitalist institutions? Conventional approaches to class lack the necessary tools for unraveling such “Marxist classes”, let alone their impact on class formation in the common sociological sense. I use Weber, Foucault, and others (together with a study of the emergence of a “petty bourgeoisie” in a Chinese school system) to highlight the bureaucratic struggle of the state to classify everyone with a Marxist schema of classes. Spotlighted are “textual corroboration” and “workplace ascription” of class status, two everyday processes carried out by state representatives that normalized the class categories as well as muddied their boundaries. I contend that official conversion of jobholders into different kinds of predefined class subjects rendered any “class-in-itself” or “class-for-itself” virtually impossible. The conclusion suggests how further research on bureaucratic classification and Marxist classes can advance understanding of state-society relations under communism, especially in comparative terms.

Résumé

De quelle manière les « capitalistes », la « petite bourgeoisie » et les autres catégories de classe basées sur la critique marxiste du capitalisme acquièrent-elles une forte visibilité locale, alors que les régimes communistes ont aboli les institutions capitalistes ? Les approches conventionnelles de classes manquent d’outils pour rendre compte de ces « classes marxistes », sans parler de leur impact sur la formation de la catégorie de classe dans le sens commun sociologique. J’utilise Weber, Foucault et d'autres (avec une étude consacrée à l’émergence d'une « petite bourgeoisie » dans un système scolaire chinois) pour mettre en évidence la lutte bureaucratique de l’État pour classer tous les individus à partir d’un un schéma marxiste de classes. Deux processus ordinaires sont particulièrement étudiés (les « corroboration textuelles » et les « ascriptions de lieux de travail ») qui sont tous deux mis en œuvre par des représentants de l’État qui normalisent les catégories tout en brouillant leurs frontières. Je soutiens que la conversion officielle des titulaires de poste en différents types prédéfinis de sujets de classe rend virtuellement impossible toute distinction entre la « classe en soi » et la « classe pour soi ». La conclusion suggère comment la recherche à venir sur la classification bureaucratique et les classes marxistes peut faire progresser la compréhension des relations État-société sous le communisme, en particulier en termes comparatifs.

Zusammenfassung

Wie konnten sich « Kapitalisten », das « niedrige Bürgertum » und andere Gesellschaftsgruppen basierend auf der marxistischen Kritik des Kapitalismus auf lokaler Ebene so hervortun, und dies obwohl die kommunistischen Regime die kapitalistischen Institutionen abgeschafft hatten? Mit herkömmlichen Klassenansätzen können diese „marxistischen Klassen“ nicht dargestellt werden, ganz zu schweigen von ihrem Einfluss auf die Herausbildung der Klassenkategorie im geläufigen soziologischen Sinn. Ich benutze Weber, Foucault und andere (zusammen mit einer Studie, die der Entstehung des niedrigen Bürgertums in einem chinesischen Schulsystem gewidmet ist), um den staatlichen Bürokampf zu untersuchen, alle Individuen anhand des marxistischen Klassenschemas einordnen zu können. Zwei herkömmliche Prozesse werden besonders beleuchtet (die „textbedingten Korroborationen“ und die Arbeitsplatzzugehörigkeit), die jeweils von Staatsvertretern angewandt werden, um auf diese Art und Weise die Kategorien zu normalisieren und gleichzeitig die Grenzen verwischen. Ich behaupte, dass die offizielle Umwandlung der Posteninhaber in verschiedene, vorgefertigte Typen des Klassensubjekts jegliche Unterscheidung zwischen einer eigenen Klasse und einer Klasse für sich virtuell unmöglich macht. Die Schlussfolgerung zeigt auf, wie die zukünftige, der bürokratischen Klassifizierung und den marxistischen Klassen gewidmete Forschung das Beziehungsverhältnis Staat-Gesellschaft unter dem Kommunismus fördern kann, vor allen Dingen in vergleichender Form.

Keywords

Class Communism Classification Bureaucracy Petty bourgeoisie China Classe Communisme Classification Bureaucratie Petite bourgeoisie Chine Klasse Kommunismus Einstufung Bürokratie Kleinbürgertum China

Type: Structures of Violence
Information: European Journal of Sociology / Archives Européennes de Sociologie , Volume 57 , Issue 1 , April 2016 , pp. 1 - 29

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003975616000011 [Opens in a new window]
Copyright: Copyright © A.E.S. 2016

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

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Shanghai Municipal Archives, 1949a. “Wuben Girl Secondary School”, B105-5-110.Google Scholar

Shanghai Municipal Archives, 1949b. “Shanghai Education Bureau’s Holdover Employees”, B105-1-10.Google Scholar

Shanghai Municipal Archives, 1949c. “Reports on Work and Summaries of Plans”, B105-1-5.Google Scholar

Shanghai Municipal Archives, 1950a. “Staffing in the Shanghai Education Bureau”, B105-1-21.Google Scholar

Shanghai Municipal Archives, 1950b. “Preparatory Meeting of the Educational Workers Union”, B105-1-202.Google Scholar

Shanghai Municipal Archives, 1951. “Classes for Politics Instructors”, B105-5-488.Google Scholar

Shanghai Municipal Archives, 1952. “Strengthening Transfer of Party Cadres to Campus”, B105-1-462.Google Scholar

Shanghai Municipal Archives, 1953a. “Disciplinary Actions in Private Schools”, B105-1-733.Google Scholar

Shanghai Municipal Archives, 1953b. “Report on Party Branches”, B105-1-660.Google Scholar

Shanghai Municipal Archives, 1954a. “Presence of the Party in Shanghai Secondary Education”, B105-1-273.Google Scholar

Shanghai Municipal Archives, 1954b. “Implementation of Policy on Intellectuals”, B105-1-906.Google Scholar

Shanghai Municipal Archives, 1954c. “Quality of Education in Nine Secondary Schools in Shanghai”, B105-5-1969.Google Scholar

Shanghai Municipal Archives, 1955a. “Statistics on Counterrevolutionaries in Rural Districts”, A71-2-1885.Google Scholar

Shanghai Municipal Archives, 1955b. “Implementation of the Policy on Intellectuals”, B105-5-1354.Google Scholar

Shanghai Municipal Archives, 1956. “Disciplinary Actions for School Personnel”, B105-2-47.Google Scholar

Shanghai Municipal Archives, 1957. “Disciplinary Actions for School Personnel”, B105-2-329.Google Scholar

Shanghai Municipal Archives, 1958. “Class Backgrounds and Political Attitudes of School Personnel”, B105-2-395.Google Scholar

Shanghai Municipal Archives, 1964. “Shanghai Secondary School No. 67”, B105-5-1082.Google Scholar

Alexopoulous, Golfo, 2003. Stalin’s Outcast. Aliens, Citizens, and the Soviet State, 1926-1936 (Ithaca, Cornell University Press).Google Scholar

Andreas, Joel, 2009. Rise of the Red Engineers: The Cultural Revolution and the Origins of the New Class (Stanford, Stanford University Press).Google Scholar

Bourdieu, Pierre, 1977. Outline of a Theory of Practice (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar

Bourdieu, Pierre, 1980. The Logic of Practice (Stanford, Stanford University Press).Google Scholar

Bourdieu, Pierre, 1991. Language and Symbolic Power (Cambridge, Harvard University Press).Google Scholar

Bourdieu, Pierre, 1998. Practical Reason: On the Theory of Action (Stanford, Stanford University Press).Google Scholar

Bowker, Geoffrey and Star, Susan Leigh, 2000. Sorting Things Out: Classification and Its Consequences (Cambridge, MIT Press).Google Scholar

Browning, Christopher and Seigelbaum, Lewis, 2009. “Framework for Social Engineering: Stalinist Schema of Identification and the Nazi Volksgemeinschaft”in Geyer, M. and Fitzpatrick, S., eds., Beyond Totalitarianism: Stalinism and Nazism Compared (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press: 231-265).Google Scholar

Chen, Theodore, 1960. Thought Reform of the Chinese Intellectuals (Hong Kong, Hong Kong University Press).Google Scholar

Culp, Robert, 2007. Articulating Citizenship: Civic Education and Student Politics in Southeastern China, 1912-1940 (Cambridge, Harvard University Asia Center).Google Scholar

Djilas, Milovan, 1957. The New Class: An Analysis of the Communist System (New York, Praeger).Google Scholar

Dobson, Richard, 1977. “Mobility and Stratification in the Soviet Union”, Annual Review of Sociology, 3: 297-329.Google Scholar

Dubois, Vincent, 2010. The Bureaucrat and the Poor: Encounters in French Welfare Office, Jean-Yves, Bart, trans. (Surrey, Ashgate).Google Scholar

Dutton, Michael, 2005. Policing Chinese Politics (Durham, Duke University Press).Google Scholar

Edgar, Adrienne, 2001. “Genealogy, Class, and ‘Tribal Policy’ in Soviet Turkmenistan, 1924-1934”, Slavic Review, 60 (2): 266-288.Google Scholar

Filtzer, Donald, 1986. Soviet Workers and Stalinist Industrialization: The Formation of Modern Production Relations, 1928-1941 (Armonk, M.E. Sharpe).Google Scholar

Fitzpatrick, Sheila, 2005. Tear Off the Masks: Identity and Imposture in Twentieth-Century Russia (Princeton, Princeton University Press).Google Scholar

Foucault, Michel, 1977. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison (New York, Pantheon Books).Google Scholar

Foucault, Michel, [1965] 1988. Madness and Civilization (New York, Vintage Books).Google Scholar

Foucault, Michel, 2007. Security, Territory, Population: Lectures at the College de France 1977-1978, Senellart, M. and Burchell, G., eds., trans. (New York, Picador).Google Scholar

Harris, James, 2000. “The Purging of Local Cliques in the Ural Regions, 1936-7”in Sheila, Fitzpatrick, ed., Stalinism: New Directions (London, Routledge: 262-285).Google Scholar

JIANSHE (Construction), 25 Dec 1948. “The CCP’s Instruction on Recruitment of Revolutionary Soldiers into the Party” [in Chinese].Google Scholar

Kenney, Padraic, 1994. “Remaking the Polish Working Class: Early Stalinist Models of Labor and Leisure”, Slavic Review, 53 (1): 1-25.Google Scholar

Kolář, Pavel, 2014. “Communism in Eastern Europe”in Smith, S. A.., ed., The Oxford Handbook of the History of Communism (Oxford, Oxford University Press: 203-219).Google Scholar

Kolosi, Tamás, 1988. “Stratification and Social Structure in Hungary”, Annual Review of Sociology, 14: 405-419.Google Scholar

Konrád, Gyorgy and Szelényi, Ivan, 1979. The Intellectuals on the Road to Class Power (New York, Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich).Google Scholar

Kuromiya, Hiroaki, 1988. Stalin’s Industrial Revolution (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar

Kraus, Richard, 1981. Class Conflict in Chinese Socialism (New York, Columbia University Press).Google Scholar

Lamont, Michelle and Molnár, Virag, 2002. “The Study of Boundaries in the Social Sciences”, Annual Review of Sociology, 28: 167-195.Google Scholar

Lane, David, 1982. The End of Social Inequality? Class, Status, and Power under State Socialism (London, George Allen & Unwin).Google Scholar

Lee Hong, Yung, 1978. The Politics of the Cultural Revolution: A Case Study (Berkeley, University of California Press).Google Scholar

Li, Tania Murray, 2007. “Governmentality”, Anthropoligica, 49 (2): 275-329.Google Scholar

Liu, Lydia, 1995. Translingual Practice: Literature, National Culture, and Translated Modernity—China, 1900-1937 (Stanford, Stanford University Press).Google Scholar

Loveman, Mara, 2005. “The Modern State and the Primitive Accumulation of Symbolic Power”, American Journal of Sociology, 110 (6): 1651-1683.Google Scholar

Lü, Xingwei, 1994. History of Shanghai education, 1949-1989 [in Chinese] (Shanghai, Shanghai jiaoyu chubanshe).Google Scholar

MacFarquhar, Roderick and Schoenhals, Michael, 2006. Mao’s Last Revolution (Cambridge, Harvard University Press).Google Scholar

Nove, Alec, 1983. “The Class Nature of the Soviet Union Revisited”, Soviet Studies, 35 (3): 298-312.Google Scholar

Parkin, Frank, 1969. “Class Stratification in Socialist Societies”, British Journal of Sociology, 20 (4): 355-374.Google Scholar

Perry, Elizabeth, 2012. Anyuan: Mining China’s Revolutionary Tradition (Berkeley, University of California Press).Google Scholar

Qin, Yi, 1953. The Thought Reform of the Petty Bourgeoisie [in Chinese] (Shanghai, Shixi chubanshe).Google Scholar

Schram, Stuart, 1984. “Classes, Old and New, in Mao Zedong’s Thought, 1949–1976”in Watson, J., ed., Class and Stratification in Post-Revolution China (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press: 29-55).Google Scholar

Siegelbaum, Lewis, 1999. “The Shaping of Soviet Workers’ Leisure: Workers’ Clubs and Palaces of Culture in the 1930s”, International Labor and Working-Class History, 56: 78-92.Google Scholar

Smith, Dorothy, 1990. The Conceptual Practices of Power: A Feminist Sociology of Knowledge (Boston, Northeastern University Press).Google Scholar

Straus, Kenneth, 1997. Factory and Community in Stalin’s Russia: The Making of an Industrial Working Class (Pittsburgh, University of Pittsburgh Press).Google Scholar

Szreter, Simon, Sholkamy, Hania, and Dharmalingam, A., eds., 2004. Categories and Contexts: Anthropological and Historical Studies in Critical Demography (Oxford, Oxford University Press).CrossRef Google Scholar

Teiwes, Frederick, 1979. Politics and Purges in China: Rectification and the Decline of Party Norms 1950-1965 (White Plains, M.E. Sharpe).Google Scholar

U, Eddy, 2007. Disorganizing China: Counter-Bureaucracy and the Decline of State Socialism (Stanford, Stanford University Press).Google Scholar

Unger, Jonathan, 1984. “The Class System in Rural China: A Case Study”in Watson, J., ed., Class and Stratification in Post-Revolution China (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press: 121-141).Google Scholar

Walder, Andrew, 1986. Communist Neo-Traditionalism: Work and Authority in Chinese Industry (Berkeley, University of California Press).Google Scholar

Walder, Andrew, 1995. “Career Mobility and the Communist Political Order”, American Sociological Review, 60: 309-328.Google Scholar

Walder, Andrew, Li, Bobai and Treiman, Donald, 2000. “Politics and Life Chances in a State Socialist Regime: Dual Career Paths into the Urban Chinese Elite, 1949 to 1996”, American Sociological Review, 65 (2): 191-209.Google Scholar

Watson, James, ed., 1984. Class and Stratification in Post-Revolution China. (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar

Weber, Max, [1904-1911] 1978. Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretative Sociology, Roth, G. and Wittch, C., eds. (Berkeley, University of California Press).Google Scholar

Westphal, James and Khanna, Poonam, 2003. “Keeping Directors in Line: Social Distancing as a Control Mechanism in the Corporate Elite”, Administrative Science Quarterly, 48 (3): 361-398.Google Scholar

Wright, Erik, ed., 2005. Approaches to Class Analysis (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar

Zhang, Xiaojun, 2004. “Land Reform in Yang Village: Symbolic Capital and the Determination of Class Status”, Modern China 30 (1): 3-45.Google Scholar