China represents the final bastion of 20th century Khrushchevite revisionism and social imperialism. It characterizes the modern imperialist split between true Marxists and social chauvinists.
Enver Hoxha: Imperialism and the Revolution (1979)
https://www.bannedthought.net/International/Red-Path/01/RP-8.5x11-IsChinaAnImperialistCountry-140320.pdf
https://m.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLXUFLW8t2snvDQq4jbn-LhzGa6eQCO35T
Let’s start with comrade Enver Hoxha, “We are now witnessing the efforts of another big state, today's China, to become a super power because it, too, is proceeding rapidly on the road of Capitalism. But China lacks colonies, lacks large-scale developed industry, lacks a strong economy in general, and a great thermo-nuclear potential on the same scale as the other two imperialist superpowers.
To become a superpower it is absolutely essential to have a developed economy, an army equipped with atomic bombs, to ensure markets and spheres of influence, investment of capital in foreign countries, etc. China is bent on ensuring these conditions as quickly as possible. This was expressed in Chou En-lai's speech in the People's Assembly in 1975 and was repeated at the 11th Congress of the Communist Party of China, where it was proclaimed that, before the end of this century, China will become a powerful modern country, with the objective of catching up with the United States of America and the Soviet Union. Now this whole plan has been extended and set out in precise detail in what is called the policy of the "four modernizations". But what road has China chosen so that it, too, will become a superpower?
At present, the colonies and markets in the world are occupied by others. The creation of an economic and military potential equal to that of the Americans and Soviets, within 20 years, and with their own forces, as the Chinese leaders claim they will do, is impossible.
In these conditions, in order to become a superpower, China will have to go through two main phases: first, it must seek credits and investments from US imperialism and the other developed capitalist countries, purchase new technology in order to exploit its local wealth, a great part of which will go as dividends for the creditors. Second, it will invest the surplus value extracted at the expense of the Chinese people in states of various continents, just as the US imperialists and Soviet social-imperialists are doing today.”
Quite clear on its own, but let us proceed with a quote from Xi Jinping, ““The “Invisible Hand” and the “Visible Hand” We should let the market play the decisive role in allocating resources, while allowing the government to better perform its functions.”
-Xi Jinping The Governance of China volume 1
Does this sound Marxist Leninist to you? Socialist, even? No. At best, merely social democratic. China is imperialist in the leninist definition as it has the export of capital, the prominence of monopolies which operate for-profit(primarily the SOEs), and requires new markets.
“China isn’t opening new markets!” One chauvinistic “socialist,” may object, but on the contrary they openly boast and brag about their “mutually beneficial trade” and development of Africa. This is not humanitarian development or some other nonsense, this is China shifting away from the old capitalist order to the new one by using its Belt and Road initiative to develop people beyond subsistence farmers into proletarians to then purchase commodities.
Let us continue further by turning to my other sources, namely now the one by the CPI(M)(I am of course a Hoxhaist so I do have my gripes with this text but I digress);
“Deng revisionist government did not utilize the private sector, did not impose restrictions on it, did not transform it and gradually eliminate it, but followed a policy without any rules and regulations. They destroyed the industries in state ownership (i.e., in the ownership of all the Chinese people) that played the most decisive role for a long time in the economic system. Ownership was divorced from management. Qualified Managers were selected through competition. They were given all the responsibilities. Depending on their economic performance they were given rewards, their properties were increased or decreased and compensation was also imposed. The rights of ownership of all the people were put aside. They started selling off small companies to communities and individuals. A few were given to the earlier owners too.
In the market system in China, as Deng said, ‘not only a commodity market and a policy of production for consumptive commodities, but there would be markets for the aspects necessary for production – for example funds, labour, technology, information and real estate. Revisionists implemented the following forms of distribution since the period of first reforms (1979-89). They were – interest would be paid to those who buy bonds; shareholders would get dividends; there would be additional income for the managers who take risk; the owners of private companies who engage workers in a specific number would gain income without any difficulty.”
And from the Xi Jinping quote I gave earlier, it is absurdly clear nothing has changed, and comrade Hoxha was correct.
Continuing, “In this period of first reforms a policy of ‘opening the doors for the outside world’ was implemented to invite imperialist forces to exploit China. Foreign companies could avail expected facilities. State monopoly on foreign trade was abolished. State allowed companies to conduct foreign trade independently. China became an inseparable part of the world imperialist market by becoming a market for the imperialist commodities and through opening up doors for their capital. Special right was given for the foreign companies to gain more profits. The right to decide wages and salaries and to retrench workers according to their wish is an example of this. By 1994 they agreed to invest nearly 150 billion dollars of foreign capital in one lakh 86,000 companies with foreign investment.
TheProfit Partnership Agreements led the local government officers and factory managers to hunt for profits. This happened in the SEZs. The lifting of restrictions on trade and commerce in the SEZs gave way to the Chinese trading class in Taiwan, Hong Kong and East Asia to send small amounts to their country and thus to the development of small-scale business and industries in the private sector at a fast pace. So there was a demand for workers in the private sector. Labourers from the peasantry who lost their livelihood due to industrial manufacturing supplies from the central government sector and due to the agricultural reforms fulfilled this demand. Thus Chinese business class obtained the way and opportunity to utilize the profits they gained and this led to the expansion of capitalist production. With this the production of urban cooperative organisations, Town and Village Enterprises (TVE) or the business enterprises developed on a big scale and led to capitalist economic development. This started to lose control speedily.”(Ibid. pg 20)
Well I’d say that settles it, wouldn’t you? But I’m certainly not done. Switching over to the work by NB Turner Is “China an Imperialist Country?” we proceed;
Quoting Lenin, ““Imperialism is capitalism in that stage of development in which the dominance of monopolies and finance capital has established itself; in which the export of capital has acquired pronounced importance; in which the division of the world among the international trusts has begun; in which the division of all territories of the globe among the biggest capitalist powers has been completed.” Continuing, “The deal to bring China into this international capitalist-imperialist system required China:
1) To continue its already existing economic transformation back to capitalism at home, and to make a commitment to mostly do this along Western monopoly capitalist lines. (State monopoly capitalism was to be more and more cut back, or made nominal, which China was already doing anyway.)
2) To (more or less) fully open up its economy to foreign investment by MNCs based in other countries, and allow them to also exploit local low-paid Chinese labor both for the Chinese market and for export.
3) To (more or less) play by the international rules of this world imperialist system, including the rules promulgated by the IMF and WTO.
1) Granted membership in the WTO and access on nearly equal terms to the international markets for its goods. Unequal tariff barriers and such were qualitatively lowered.
2) In a much better position to acquire foreign technology, not only in foreign factories operating in China, but also in locally owned Chinese factories.
3) Allowed to export capital to other countries in the world imperialist system, to buy up foreign mines and other companies which are a major source of raw materials needed by the Chinese economy, and to set up subsidiaries of its own corporations (state owned or private) in foreign countries, and to buy up assets all around the world.
As this arrangement developed, and China became ever more important in the world economy, there was a tacit financial agreement tacked on top of this: China would be allowed to run a huge trade surplus provided that it used a large part of this surplus to buy up a great part of the ever-growing government debt that the U.S. and other countries were incurring. The present world economic system could not continue functioning if this was not happening. (It is highly unstable, even as it is!)
So not only is China an integral part of the world capitalist-imperialist system, with its ruling class benefitting tremendously from its participation in this system; this world system has in turn become overwhelmingly dependent on China for its crucial role within it: Both its huge role as a manufacturer of low cost goods, and its critical role as a lender to the U.S. and other countries to prop up the whole international financial system. China is now not only part of the world imperialist system, its economic and financial role within that system has become as essential as America’s military role!
China’s economy is now not only certainly a capitalist economy, but a monopoly capitalist economy. And because its state-owned enterprises (SOEs) now operate much as if they were private multinational corporations, it is from a Leninist standpoint unambiguously also an imperialist country. (Remember: Capitalist-imperialism in the modern era is the same thing as monopoly capitalism, according to Lenin!)”
From this we can see China is not only not socialist, but its capitalism is deep and entrenched, not upstart and freshly developing as some “Marxist-Leninists” would have you believe.
To finish this, let us turn back to the man who first opposed China on a staunchly Marxist-Leninist platform; Enver Hoxha,
“ In these conditions, in order to become a superpower, China will have to go through two main phases: first, it must seek credits and investments from US imperialism and the other developed capitalist countries, purchase new technology in order to exploit its local wealth, a great part of which will go as dividends for the creditors. Second, it will invest the surplus value extracted at the expense of the Chinese people in states of various continents, just as the US imperialists and Soviet social-imperialists are doing today.”(China’s Plan to Become a World Superpower, the second chapter of the second part of Imperialism and the Revolution.)
Couldn’t have said it better myself comrade.
Is China Imperialist?
Voting ended onOct 13, 2025
amandla
pixelskylines
prguitarman
