This column is the translation of the column posted in Japanese on this homepage on November 15, 2014.
The true nature of the Xi Jinping administration has now become apparent. In 2013, he was appointed head of the Central State Security Committee: CSSC(中央国家安全委員会) (a Chinese version of the NSC + KGB) in November, and leader of the Central Deep Reorganization (中央全面深化改革
领导小
组) in December. Then in 2014 he was appointed chief of the Central Leading Group for Internet Security and Information (中央网
络安全和信息化
领导小
组) (cyber-attacks) in February, chief of the Central Leading Group for National Defense and Military Reform(中央
军委深化国防和
军队改革
领导小
组) (reforming the military), Central Foreign Affairs LSG(中央外事工作
领导小
组), and the Central Taiwan Affairs LS(中央
对台工作
领导小
组) in March, and chief of the Central Finance and Economy LSG(中共中央
财经领导小
组) (control post for economic management) in June. In particular, it is customary for the premier to concurrently head the Central Finance and Economy LSG. Usually the president does not concurrently oversee these departments, and in the case of Japan, it would be as if the prime minister were concurrently playing the roles of six ministers-an inconceivable situation. The Xi Jinping administration is thus clearly building a dictatorial system. Xi Jinping is scrapping the conventional "China 9" and "China 7" collective leadership systems so that he alone will hold full authority over the party, state, government, and military. What are his aims?
Currently in China, not only are income gaps widening, but also a monopolization of wealth is taking place. *See Gini coefficient below. High-ranking government officials in collusion with overbearing regional bureaucrats, and a portion of the bourgeoisie are monopolizing the wealth and storing it in a shadowy world. Low-ranking government officials are flocking to receive a tiny share of this. If this type of situation continues, it is likely that the masses will eventually rise up and revolt. Already the limit has been reached for suppressing the people with armed police and the military. The accumulation of wealth and the exploitation of the masses must be carried out within a scope that is permissible by the central authorities, and wealth that can no longer be controlled must be seized. This seems to be paradoxical, and it in fact is paradoxical, but this is the only way to protect the Communist Party of China from conflicts with laborers and farmers-and this is the objective of the Xi Jinping administration.
The first step is exposing the bureaucrats, "from the powerless flies to the tigers." In 2014, Xu Caihou, former Vice Chairman of the Central Military Commission and People's Liberation Army leader, was exposed in June, and Zhou Yongkang, former member of the Politburo Standing Committee, was exposed in July. As for the "flies," in this year alone, over 50,000 low-ranking and middle-ranking government officials were arrested.
In regard to the bourgeoisie, the first aim is to eliminate wealth by intentionally neglecting the real estate bubble. The second is to strengthen state-owned companies. The world used to think that China would advance capitalism and privatization through reform and opening policies. Now, however, the country is taking away economic rights from those in favor of market liberalization (Jiang Zemin and the Shanghai clique), and shifting toward economic policies that are centered on state-owned corporations. For these state-owned corporations, health insurance and pension systems have been achieved.
The fight to take away wealth from bureaucrats and the bourgeoisie has been quietly progressing as a power struggle comparable to Mao Zedong's Cultural Revolution of the past. The conflicts among factions, and power struggles between the Shanghai clique, Communist Youth League, and Crown Prince Party(Ta`izi Dang) are intricately connected with regional cliques and the People's Liberation Army military clique-which is by no means alone. The difference with Japan, Europe, and the United States is that in China a power struggle involving a bloody feud is a possibility. China would not collapse as the result of such an occurrence. This has been proven by history. Other conflicts include ones with surrounding ethnic groups, and ones with Xinjiang, Tibet, Taiwan, and Hong Kong.
The Xi Jinping administration will win these conflicts, and will rebuild the Chinese empire at the center of the world that had been built by the Qing dynasty and other dynasties of the past. This is Xi Jinping's aspiration. According to a GDP estimate by Angus Maddison, the Qing dynasty at its peak accounted for one-third of the world's GDP. At that time, the United States accounted for just 1.8%. The United Kingdom's daily paper the Financial Times has reported that it expects that in terms of purchasing power parity, China will overtake the United States in GDP before the end of this year, and this is further motivating Xi Jinping. Monetary policies are also gradually moving to the next stage, based on ideas of setting up a BRICS bank and the establishment of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB). Nevertheless, it is not the case that Xi Jinping has a political philosophy. His ambitions lie in the power of China itself. China is a mysterious nation that is neither bourgeois democratic nor socialist. When splitting heads in the South China Sea (Zhongnanhai), it strays into nonsensical adventurism. Prime Minister Shinzo Abe feels that China is a realistic threat.
What about us? We can expect, and should expect that no matter how authoritarian and adventurist the Xi Jinping administration becomes, the laborers and farmers will undoubtedly oppose and rise up in rebellion against him. Abe is counterpoising Xi Jinping's adventurism by strengthening the military, but we are against a conflict with the laborers and farmers. Will our struggle require democratization? Unfortunately the call for democratization is linked with the bourgeoisie, which are seeking the downfall of the Communist Party of China. Like the struggle of the Ukrainian democratic wing (the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists), the call for democratization is also strongly linked with the neo-conservative in the United States. Therefore, the laborers and farmers need to clearly indicate their political demands. In other words, instead of making general, vague calls for democratization, and simply opposing the Communist Party of China's bureaucratic one-party rule, they must advance their struggle based on expelling the greedy bourgeoisie and neo-conservative from their own ranks. It seems that only through such a process of contention will democracy be able to win out.
We condemn fraudulent, forced detention on agricultural land!!
Give laborers the freedom to form autonomous and independent labor unions!!
Give minorities the right of self-determination, including autonomy and independence!!
Oppressed laborers and farmers of China, renounce the communist party of Mao Zedong and Deng Xiaoping, and build a truly Marxist-Leninist communist party!!
*Gini coefficient: This is an index that is mainly for measuring the inequality of income distribution in a society. The range of the coefficient is 0 to 1. A coefficient closer to 0 means less disparity, and a coefficient closer to 1 means more disparity. When the coefficient is 0, this means that there is perfect "equality" and everyone is receiving the same income. When it is 1, all of the income is held by a single person. The warning line at which there are frequent social disturbances is 0.4, and the danger line is 0.6. The Beijing University Chinese social science investigation center released the "Chinese public welfare development report 2014" in which it reported that the Gini coefficient had reached 0.73. Converting this Gini coefficient of 0.73 into an easy-to-understand model, the top 3% wealthy class accounts for 50% of the total income, and receives 17 times the average level of income. Meanwhile, the 7% middle class accounts for 30% of the income, receiving four times the average level of income. The remaining 90% poor class accounts for just 20% of the income, receiving only one-fifth the average level of income.