The highlights of China’s history can be summarized in the Chinese Communist Party’s realization that it has finally emerged from both the structural and superstructural contradictions, which have accompanied its century-long struggle for the redemption of the People and all of China against Western imperialism, former Soviet social-imperialism, colonialism, and neocolonialism.
The People’s Republic of China and the Communist Party of China are demonstrating to the peoples downtrodden and oppressed by the superpowers of the past and of today that it is possible to break free from third-party domination through the ability to rely on one’s own strengths, while being – like China itself – developing and emerging countries. This means to strive for multipolarism in a world that should not have colonizers and colonized people.
Through its ability to constantly summarize history and always maintain a balance, the CPC has avoided the mistakes of other Marxist parties in other countries and has been able to achieve success.
The mistakes of the Communist parties – at least in Europe – were to self-impose a model that was not national, but referred to Russia: a form of political and strategic servility that, by contrast, the People’s Republic of China has always tried to avoid. The party, State and government leaders of the Warsaw Pact countries did not notoriously stand out for their originality: Russia’s decisions turned out to be decisive, and there was no need for some special initiative. Their function (with the exception of Nicolae Ceauşescu – of whom I was a friend – who was overthrown in 1989 by a coup d’état, prepared by the Gorbachev’s KGB, and the Albanian Enver Hoxha, who died in his bed in 1985) was merely a choreographic-institutional function confined to the UN or to memorial parades.
But the same applies also to the Communist parties of the Western countries, NATO or non-NATO ones: from Russia’s mere puppets, to a dead mother, they have been turned into “Harlequin servant of two masters”, as in the playwright’s play by the Venetian Marco Polo’s fellow citizen, Carlo Goldoni (1707-93). They changed their names and immediately placed themselves in the service of the United States of America. They had not previously produced anything original, except for “Eurocommunism,” i.e. a recipe that already opened towards NATO.
On the 30th anniversary of the collapse of the Soviet Union, celebrated in 2021, the different choices made by the People’s Republic of China and the Soviet Union in building socialism pose questions about their different fates. It should be said at once that, while in the People’s Republic of China the Communist Party of China has always had a dialectic – even a harsh one – between the policy lines existing within it, thus giving the possibility of expressing participatory democracy within the party itself, as we mentioned above, in the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, monolithism was a constant feature when Stalin was appointed General Secretary of the Communist (Bolshevik) Party on April 3, 1922. However, while Stalin pursued a policy line that would make the USSR a messianic power both economically, and politically and militarily, with the advent of Khrushchev, Marxism as a centrality of thought was abandoned, opting for peaceful coexistence, wanting to emulate the United States from the viewpoint of a race for prosperity, while at the same time implementing failed policies both from the viewpoint of armaments and economy, and in international relations, even looking at the People’s Republic of China as an adversary.
In the early 1960s, an inane nomenklatura was created that was supposed to be the opposite of the Stalinist bjurokratja, but ultimately rode on the downward parabola – of which Brezhnev and his successors were the gravediggers – of a State that no longer had anything to say in terms of ideological and structural palingenesis. I have known many politicians from around the world for many years, and I have caught differences between Chinese party officials and Western politicians. Chinese politicians are people who come from thousands of years of history. They are the heirs of Emperor Qin Shi Huangdi, if not of the Yellow Emperor Xuanyuan Huangdi. They are realistic and look at concrete aspects and at the interests of their own country, so that harmony is created among the peoples of the earth, and no one can overpower the others. Western politicians, who are said to be the heirs of the 1789 French Revolution, have nothing revolutionary about them, and what is concrete is their interest in the welfare of banks, and credit institutions, even to the detriment of the welfare achieved after World War II.
They delude themselves that they are creating a united Europe, in which – just to make a borderline example – no citizen would ever put up with the suppression of his or her national soccer team in favour of a melting pot-style Europe Football Club. European politicians – under the banner of US-style human rights – lately favour military interventions in distant countries, where they can establish domination of their point of reference without any scruples. In contrast, I appreciate much more US politicians who – although lacking the wisdom, refinement and sophistication of those in China – are people who do their country’s interests, answering to no one, such as Henry Kissinger. With specific reference to EU internal activities, European politicians in general are very attentive to what used to be called the itches of the bourgeoisie and, as is written in the Gospel of Luke, “How can you say to your brother, “Brother, let me remove that splinter in your eye, when you do not even notice the wooden beam in your own eye?” As far as we Italians are concerned, the outlook is very grim and departs from the great politicians of the past, such as Fanfani, Moro, Andreotti, Cossiga, Craxi and many others in the opposition. Another aspect to be analysed is the great platitudes, clichés and catchphrases of Western society about the CPC, and the ways in which they have been formulated.
Western politicians’ biggest commonplace about the CPC is that it is not democratic. To say this, they obviously assume that the “real” democracy is their own. The one that drops bombs on peoples to impose it on ignorant, backward people and dictators who, however, are not their friends. For a long time, the image of the CPC in the West has been demonized by media and politicians. We must consider the reasons why these Western factions make continuous and sustained smear campaigns against the CPC. The smear campaigns against the People’s Republic of China are actually led by the United States, and the NATO countries and their governments can do nothing else – through media, social networks, press and TV stations – but obey the White House. I believe the opinion of the peoples in these States is very different.
On closer inspection, in the aftermath of the USSR collapse – when the People’s Republic of China had not yet emerged as it has today – China was not frightening but, after 30 years, things have changed considerably, and Public Enemy No. 1 – after the Muslim interlude – is again a Marxist, namely the Communist Party of China and the country that expresses it. Let us not forget the People’s Republic of China’s privileged relationship with developing countries, an issue that greatly annoys the United States and the former colonizing countries of the past. While providing aid and assistance to foreign States, the People’s Republic of China always respects the sovereignty of recipient countries, with no strings attached, and pursues results with a win-win approach. Chinese aid and assistance have brought real benefits to the developing countries concerned and have received their appreciation.