The sixtieth anniversary of the Chinese Revolution was commemorated understandably with much fanfare, pomp and pageantry throughout China recently. Its reverberations were heard worldwide, passing the shores of that vast land. China today is not the sleeping giant, that Napoleon witnessed, but a mighty world power that will replace soon at the rate it is growing even the United States of America, that fading colossus. Therefore what really happens in China is of much significance to every single citizen of the world, more so to a Marxist.

Despite the economic recession that has affected almost all the capitalist countries, both in the west and the east, China’s economy is continuing to grow. She has shed her inward looking policy and is spreading her influence by dominating the world market. China is investing heavily on the exploration of oil and other resources especially in Africa and South America. Her GDP has risen from $ 67.9 billion in 1952 to $ 30607 billion in 2008.

All these are tantalizing successes. But what of the social system that forefathers spearheaded by the great Mao Zedong strived to achieve in that great land. I was both amused and amazed by two news items that appeared in "The Island" newspaper (15.10.2009), and "The Sunday Island" paper (18.10.2009). The former said China now has 130 billionaires, second only to United States of America. It further states that "China’s rich are getting richer with the average wealth on the list, $ 360 million up almost one third on last year." But as the saying goes the sting is in the tail. The final paragraph in the same article, has this to say, "One third of the people on the thousand name rich list are believed to be communist party members!."

Then what is the lot of the common man? the article titled "China anniversary; why communist party still enjoys the support of its people" (Sunday Island). Answers this query. The writer of this article offers evidence of improved living conditions of the ordinary Chinese, by interviewing some of them. The essence of what he points out is that the living conditions of the ordinary Chinese are much better now, compared to the arduous days of the revolutions and the immediate aftermath to that event.

But are not these only small mercies when compared to the expectation of a classless society where, "from each according to their capabilities" and "to each according to their needs" was the driving motto? In fact this is nothing more than the trickling effect advocated by the capitalist mode of development. Has China given only this much to her common man and allowed the "filthy rich" to fatten themselves at the expense of the ordinary Chinese.

The Constitution of the Peoples’ Republic of China which was adopted in 1954, says in its preamble. "The system of peoples’ democracy – the system of new democracy of the Peoples Republic of China, guarantees that our country can in a peaceful way eliminate exploitation and poverty, and build a prosperous and happy socialist society.

From the founding of the Peoples Republic of China to the attainment of a socialist society is a period of transition. The general task of the state during the transition period are, step by step to bring about the socialist industrialization of the country and step by step to accomplish socialist transformation of agriculture, handicraft and capitalist industry and commerce."

It is clear from the above that the true aim of the communist party of China was to transform both industry and agriculture gradually from private ownership to that of public ownership during the period of transition. The said Constitution in its article 5 has identified the main categories of ownership of means of production in the Peoples Republic of China as follows. State ownership, Corporative ownership by the masses of working people, and Capitalist ownership.

Has China from the days of the establishment of the Peoples Republic, succeeded in achieving her avowed aims after 60 long years? In other words has China eliminated the capitalist ownership, in the ensuing years or has it perpetuated and encouraged it?

Until Mao Zedong held the helms of power in China, he waged a relentless struggle to achieve these aims both ideologically and economically. He started the transformation of the economy with the changes he brought about in the agricultural sector. Agriculture predominated in the economy of China as in any other developing country.

The peasantry was divided into categories as, poor, lower middle, upper middle, rich and also absentee landlords who lived in towns. All lands that belonged to upper middle, rich and landlords were taken over and distributed among the poor peasants. Immediately after this land reform collectivization of agriculture was introduced in the form of cooperatives, and by 1956 the greater part of agriculture was collectivized. Each village in the main formed a community of common economic interest, and most of the work of the cooperative members was on land held in common. In 1958, these cooperatives were further amalgamated in to larger people’s communes.

Mao’s policy concerning the management of industry was much more gradual than that of agriculture. At the inception the industrial base of China was very weak. The available industries were confined to major towns and the infra-structural base for these industries was poor. For instance half the industrial production at that time was concentrated in and around Shanghai. All industry previously owned by the Japanese and the other foreign companies were nationalized without compensation. However the enterprises of those capitalists who did not support the Kuomintang government of Chiang-Kai-Check were allowed to retain them, but under severe restrictions. This policy of restrictions also envisaged the gradual step by step transformation of capitalists from share holding independent managers into joint state – private industry, which would finally become state industry.

Thus it is clear that the early attempts at transforming both agriculture and industry by the communist party of China were aimed at establishing common ownership by eliminating private ownership and seeing and end to capitalists as a class.

But the utter failure of the "great leap forward" to kick start the sagging economy and the attempt to augment the primitive capitalist accumulation in order to establish a modern industrial society wrecked these experiments. The unleashing of the Cultural Revolution in 1966, to root out the "capitalist roaders" further aggravated this situation.

The great famine which brought, death through starvation to millions of rural Chinese indicated the gravity of the problem. The famine continued from 1958 to 1961 and by the end of that year it had claimed 20 million victims. The Central Authority of the party was undermined. Factions appeared in the party hierarchy. Unemployment rose. If not for the fear of reprisals the general population would have revolted.

After the demise of Mao Zedong in 1976, Deng Zio-Ping who was harassed during the Cultural Revolution and who was stripped of his position in the party as a "capitalist roader" took the reins of the government after a bitter struggle with the "gang of four" who wanted the status-quo to prevail.

A shrewd and a pragmatic politician and a tactician, he was the one single person who turned China on its head. The situation that prevailed at the time of the takeover by Deng is described vividly by Richard Evans: "social order was poor. Crime and industrial absenteeism had become endemic and gangstersim was still common on railways. Urban levels of unemployment were high, boosted by the return from the countryside of many former red guards. In the villagers many party officials turned into local tyrants. Corruption was prevalent and cynicism has replaced the enthusiasm and readiness that prevailed in 1950’s" (Deng-Shio-Ping and making of Modern China).

Deng introduced the concept of Socialism with Chinese characteristics, which he justified by pointing out that China should proceed from Chinese reality and emphasized that country and the party should "blaze a path of our own".

The reforms started with the dissolution of agricultural communes. Although the land remained in collective ownership they were parceled out among the farmers for a long period of time and they were allowed to sell their produce in the open market after paying a quota to the collective. Later on, they were given the freedom to cultivate the crops which had a market demand. Thus agriculture was gradually privatized, in all but name.

Reforms in the industrial sector were equally dramatic. Central planning was given up. More powers in planning, procurement and marketing were given to individual managers and provincial governments. A two tier arrangement of fixing prices was introduced. Within these limits prices were allowed to fluctuate. The result was to create new markets to stimulate enterprise, but also to increase corruption and to reduce the ability of the Central Government to control the composition and circulation of industrial output and functioning of national economy.

Vast areas were set apart as special economic zones, to attract foreign capital and to establish industries. Ample concessions were given to them including the free and unrestricted transfer of profits to their countries. Although foreign investment was confined to the special economic zones at the inception this restriction was gradually relaxed as it was apparent that the local industries outside these zones were in need of more and more capital investment to expand and diversify their industries. In order to meet this requirement a system of joint ventures between the management of these factories and the foreign companies was introduced.

Thus all possible measures were taken to set China on the path of capitalist development. For more than two decades China pursued this path. What are the social consequences of these developments?

The strains of two contradictory systems within one society are increasingly felt in China. "On the one hand vestiges of revolutionary socialism, promoted vigorously by Mao Zedong, emphasizing public ownership and welfare, mass based collectivism and egalitarianism and the market reforms of Deng-Shio-Ping with their increasingly capitalistic characteristics, privatized property and class polarization have now reached a level of contradiction. Although market socialism claimed to combine the best of both worlds, has instead increasingly shown the worst distortions that could come attempting to unite those two forms of social organization in a single system" (Richard Evans).

What are the reactions of the general populace to these drastic changes? In a country with the population of 1.2 billion and with such vast far-flung stretches of land it is difficult to fathom the true sentiments of the people. More over the Communist party exercises a rigid control over the affairs of the entire country through its monolithic organizations. Dissent of every form to the national policies is suppressed with vehemence.

No one can deny that the general lot of the Chinese people has improved due to these changes. But it is wrong to conclude that this fact alone keeps the people apathetic to what is happening around them. In a country where the objective was to achieve egalitarian socialism through collective ownership and arresting the hegemony of the exploiting classes; there is still a considerable section, who if given the opportunity would opt to move away once again from free markets and the current rush towards capitalism and turn back towards the revolutionary socialism and collectivism of the past. They are really perturbed because under this type of marketization, the most rapacious and uncontrolled stages of early western development is taking place rather than a regulated market economy.

On the other hand there is a considerable section of the people which is pushing for more and more vigourous marketization of the economy. They want the state to dismantle what ever semblances of socialism that are in place, and give free rein to market forces. The cry for a place in the political establishment is bound to come from these social forces. The new rich classes will not keep silent for long in this regard. In fact the eruption that occurred in 1989 at Tianamen square and its brutal suppression, is a stark example of things to come. What gives additional strength to these forces is the fact that the top government party leaders and specially their family members are enjoying the benefits of these reforms. They unabashly use their official positions for personal benefit.

From all this, it is evident that China in the 21st century is well and truly at the crossroads. The option before her is either to reestablish a more egalitarian socialist society which was the original intention of Mao Sedong or to throw away the psuedo trappings of socialism, which is only an euphemism for state capitalism, and embrace full fledged capitalism, with its warts and all.