China marked Mao Zedong’s 120th birth anniversary on December 26. How do leading Chinese intellectuals look at the reform path ahead for the country? In the first of a series, liberal economist Mao Yushi speaks of threats to political and economic reforms from interest groups
The Communist Party of China (CPC) finds itself in an
awkward position as it goes forward after commemorating the 120th birth
anniversary of the most important of its founding fathers. A year ago,
the CPC’s propaganda chiefs decreed that Mao Zedong’s 120th birth
anniversary, which fell on December 26, would be celebrated with
fanfare, aimed at underlining the Great Helmsman’s lasting contributions
in founding a new China and, at the same time, boosting the party’s
legitimacy at a time when it is struggling to renew its ideological
appeal.
But in the weeks leading up to the
anniversary, the party appeared to have had a change of heart. First,
the official broadcaster, China Central Television (CCTV), said it would
cancel a long-planned 100-episode television series about the life of
Mao, scheduled to coincide with his birth anniversary. Then, the CPC’s
new leader, President Xi Jinping, on a visit to Mao’s native Hunan
province told provincial officials any planned celebrations needed to be
“pragmatic.”
Divisive issue
What
is clear is that Mao’s legacy continues to be a divisive issue in
China. For those on the conservative Left, Mao’s political
authoritarianism is often framed as a platform to oppose economic and
political reforms, which they view as a fundamental threat to the
party’s future. Those on the liberal Right, who favour market reforms
and political loosening, see his persisting political legacy as an
obstacle.
The Party under Mr. Xi finds itself caught in the middle, the respected economist Mao Yushi told
The Hindu
in an interview. “Today,” he said, “the party is facing many
contradictions. Mao Zedong’s path, and the CPC’s path, are different.
Mao Zedong believed in the need to establish an equal society. Now we
have an unequal society. Mao believed in Communism. Today, the party
follows Capitalism. So there is a contradiction.”
Mao
Yushi has, over the past two decades, become one of China’s most
influential intellectuals. An economist by training, the 84-year-old
retired scholar (no relation to Mao Zedong) heads the pro-reform Unirule
Institute of Economics in Beijing, which he established with four other
economists two decades ago when China was beginning to embark on its
second round of reforms. Famed in China as an economist — several of his
works have become best-sellers there — he has also emerged as the
country’s most prominent critic of Maoism in recent years. Two years
ago, he faced threats to his life as several thousand Mao supporters put
forward a petition demanding his arrest after he wrote a brave article
criticising Mao’s legacy. Unsurprisingly, he sees “Mao’s supporters” as
“the biggest threat” to the CPC — and one reason behind the restrained
celebrations this year. “Mao’s supporters think our road today is
completely wrong. So there is no way the ruling party can celebrate this
anniversary as a big event.”
Going forward
Professor
Mao sees the party’s new leader, Mr. Xi Jinping, who has now been in
office for a little over a year, as appearing “confused” about plotting a
course forward, leaving “both liberals and Maoists disappointed.” On
Thursday, December 26, Mr. Xi seemed to attempt a careful balancing act
in a speech at a symposium to mark Mao’s anniversary held at the Great
Hall of the People in Beijing — just about the only official event to
commemorate the occasion. While he defended Mao’s legacy by describing
him as “a great figure who changed the face of the nation and led the
Chinese people to a new destiny,” he also said “revolutionary leaders
are not gods, but human beings.”
In the year he has
been in office, Mr. Xi has made clear he plans to go forward with
economic reforms that include boosting the role of the market and
trimming the power of the influential state-run sector, according to an
ambitious blueprint unveiled at the Central Committee’s third plenum in
November. Mr. Xi has himself sought to invoke comparisons with former
leader Deng Xiaoping, who unveiled China’s reforms at another third
plenum meeting, in 1978. At the same time, he also hit out at those
questioning Mao Zedong’s legacy and seeking to negate the results of the
first 30 years of the CPC’s history — a turbulent time that saw the
Great Leap Forward (1958) that resulted in famine and tens of millions
of deaths, and the Cultural Revolution (1966-76) where Mao’s Red Guards
persecuted millions.
State enterprises
Mao
Yushi, however, believes that enabling the Chinese people to have a
true understanding of Mao Zedong’s legacy is crucial for the country’s
political future. In 2011, he penned an article arguing for the
restoration of “Mao Zedong as a man,” highlighting his direct
responsibility for the famine and the Cultural Revolution, events which
find “no mention in our textbooks.” He said the first 30 years of new
China were “a misery,” while “the backstage boss who destroyed the
country still has his portrait on Tiananmen Square.” His article
triggered a storm of controversy, angering Party mouthpieces,
conservatives and the Left, but winning praise from historians and
progressives. Although he faced death threats and calls from neo-Maoists
for his arrest, the Chinese government did not take any action.
“The
government tries to cover Mao’s crimes,” he said. “In textbooks, there
is nothing about Mao’s crimes. It never talks about the three years’
great famine, how many people died. The young generation does not know
the past history. The history they study is fabricated history, so it
gets people’s ideas very confused” about the need for political reforms
and democratisation. “The future of change in China on the political
side,” he added, “depends on how big is the force of the pro-Mao people.
Economic change depends on how strong vested interest groups are.”
He
sees state-owned Enterprises (SOEs), which still control vast swathes
of the economy, as the biggest interest group. “The SOEs sector —
railways, energy, communication — is very strong. The price they set,
whether the interest rate, or power price, is by themselves. So they
earn a big profit, not because of their efficiency but because they
monopolise the sector.” Mao Yushi and many other Chinese economists see
SOE reform as a key step towards addressing China’s economic imbalances,
as the country attempts to move away from a State-investment driven
model, promote innovation and address widening inequality.
Mr.
Xi, in the November plenum, took a tentative step towards curbing SOE
power, by declaring they will have to return a greater share of their
profits and opening them up to private capital. But Professor Mao says
the move will not have much impact, pointing out that 20 years ago, when
profits had to be returned to the government, SOEs simply “used up all
their profits.”
“If you look at Singapore or France,
SOEs are efficient because they are totally separated from the
government. In our case, they are just one body, so this is the problem.
Board members of these SOEs come from the government. They exchange
positions because board members earn 10 million Yuan (Rs.10 crore) a
year, but as a minister earn may be a hundred thousand. The board
members are told by the government, ‘You take this position, earn 10
million year, come back after three years and let someone else take the
position!’”
Professor Mao thinks that “economically
it is clear China is going in the direction of a more open and liberal
way.” “Politically, generally there are some improvements towards
greater rule of law, but Mr. Xi’s long-term vision in political terms is
not clear.” He believes that the decade under Mr. Xi may not “bring big
reforms,” but “the next generation 10 years on could bring a big
change.” “If you look at Taiwan, when officials who studied overseas
came back and took high positions, like [President] Ma Ying-jeou, the
political environment changed,” he said. “In China’s case, one or two
ministers are overseas returned, but that number is going up very fast.”
ananth.krishnan@thehindu.co.in
‘If you look
at Singapore or France, state-owned enterprises are efficient because
they are totally separated from the government.’
Comments
Post a Comment