Rebirth: I am in Jin-Cha-Ji

However, if the state implements a high level of accumulation, but this accumulation is not invested in national construction, but becomes the personal enjoyment of party cadres, then this is equivalent to the state-controlled means of production becoming something for the enjoyment of cadres.

This is essentially no different from capitalists controlling the means of production and then exploiting the proletariat for personal enjoyment.

If government agencies still help them maintain order and protect illegal personal enjoyment, then this government will begin to slide towards revisionism and become a capitalist country disguised as socialism.

After the Chairman came back, he kept thinking about this issue.

In the Chairman's view, Khrushchev's wage reforms were already extremely dangerous. However, under the current circumstances, direct conflict between China and the Soviet Union was unacceptable. That would completely shatter the socialist camp, which had finally stabilized. Therefore, the Chairman was reluctant to directly criticize Khrushchev's wage reforms in an article.

This can easily lead to a debate between the two sides.

But the Chairman cannot help but think.

It's just too dangerous.

Will China become like the Soviet Union? Have some within the Party already begun to think this way? They think that now that the revolution has triumphed and the new China has been established, they want to enjoy the fruits of the revolution, seize the means of production, and become the new bourgeoisie?

The Chairman couldn't help but think so.

Look at how many cadres were dealt with during the "Three Antis Movement".

At the time, I simply thought they had relaxed their ideological training and had fallen prey to "sugar-coated bullets." However, after this trip to the Soviet Union, the Chairman's thinking began to change.

This isn't a change for just one or two people.

Rather, it is the emergence of "revisionism".

After returning to China, Chairman Mao and some Party cadres continued to discuss this issue. His message was simple: China could not openly antagonize the Soviet Union. Therefore, Chairman Mao and Party cadres could not directly criticize Khrushchev's wage reforms.

But there must be sufficient understanding within the Party.

China must not follow the path of the Soviet Union, and China's wage reform must not imitate Khrushchev's. Wei Hongjun is currently in charge of Party affairs at the Central Committee, so he frequently discusses these matters with the Chairman.

"Chairman, I have summarized the problems in the Soviet Union. I believe that there are three tendencies in revisionism at present."

Wei Hongjun has also been thinking about this issue.

Because China is a socialist country, it must guard against "revisionism." "Revisionism" is a theoretical issue that the Central Committee must inevitably address, and Wei Hongjun is no exception. As a central leader responsible for Party affairs, Wei Hongjun cannot avoid this issue and must take a clear stance. Wei Hongjun must "oppose revisionism," but this cannot be a society-wide, large-scale "anti-revisionism."

Then Wei Hongjun must find out the problem of "revisionism" theoretically and then stop "revisionism".

It should be said that Chairman Mao's "anti-revisionism" was later criticized more severely. This was because many people saw "anti-revisionism" and "class struggle" as intertwined. In the era of opposing "class struggle," "anti-revisionism" naturally came under criticism. Later, everyone "unanimously" concluded that there was no bourgeois power in the Party, and that "anti-revisionism" was fundamentally wrong.

It wasn't until thirty or forty years after Chairman Mao's death that many people began to reconsider and study his "anti-revisionism" theory, because the issues of "revisionism" raised by the Chairman in his early years subsequently emerged one after another.

Wei Hongjun didn't really understand what "revisionism" was before, nor did he understand why Chairman Mao was always "fighting revisionism." But after so many years in this revolutionary era, doing so much practical work, learning so much theoretical knowledge, and considering the many problems that have arisen since, he has gained a new understanding of "revisionism."

So Wei Hongjun summarized three aspects.

"Talk about it."

The Chairman has his own ideas about revisionism.

I have discussed this topic with many central cadres these days, and everyone has their own opinions. The reason the Chairman is discussing this with everyone is to prevent the emergence of "revisionism" in China.

The Chairman should summarize everyone's ideas, write an article on "anti-revisionism", circulate it among party cadres, and unify the party's understanding.

"The first aspect is the misinterpretation of the socialist principle of 'distribution according to work' as material incentives. Under this guiding ideology, they will continuously reduce the proportion of fixed wages and stimulate production through excess wages and bonuses. This approach will undoubtedly have a very good effect in the short term, greatly stimulating workers' enthusiasm for production and improving production efficiency."

"But over time, this will in effect suppress workers' wages and exploit their labor. On the contrary, cadres' fixed salaries will gradually increase, and their benefits will be far superior to those of workers. This will force workers to work overtime and contribute their own labor to support themselves. Ultimately, the working class will once again become the beasts of burden in capitalist society."

"I support a model of certain excess wages and bonuses. Just like the 'merit recognition campaign' in wartime troops, certain rewards, whether spiritual or material, will stimulate the enthusiasm of the people. Since distribution according to need is not possible in a communist society, whether in our factories, state-owned farms, or even rural cooperatives, there must be a certain amount of excess wages and bonuses. This is a very good way to mobilize enthusiasm within the distribution according to work framework."

"But this is an additional bonus on top of a fixed wage; it cannot become the main source of income for the working class. Fixed wages are the first distribution of wealth. The distribution ratio can clearly show whether a country is socialist or capitalist. In capitalist countries, the majority of increased wealth goes to capitalists, leaving workers with only a small portion, resulting in a large and obvious disparity in fixed income between the two. In socialist countries, however, most important means of production are controlled by the state and collectives. Therefore, fixed wages, the first distribution of social wealth, should have a relatively small disparity and be fair."

"But judging by the current Soviet wage and factory reforms, Comrade Khrushchev changed precisely the most important aspect of wealth distribution, the one that best embodies the characteristics of socialism. The wealth distribution gap between cadres and workers is enormous. And the future trend is that cadres' fixed wages will continue to rise, while workers' fixed wages will continue to fall."

"Many workers were delighted at the beginning of wage reforms because the extra pay and bonuses would significantly increase their incomes in the short term, so they supported the reforms. But over time, the working class gradually lost their initiative and their vigilance. By the time their fixed wages dwindled and they could only survive by working overtime and earning extra pay and bonuses, they had completely lost their ability to resist."

Socialist distribution according to work and increasing excess wages and bonuses by cutting fixed wages are two completely different concepts. But revisionism confuses the two. In the name of distribution according to work, fixed wages are constantly being compressed. Ultimately, this is not distribution according to work, but rather the only means of earning survival expenses is through labor.

The Chairman couldn't help but write down what Wei Hongjun said.

The Chairman had also considered what Wei Hongjun mentioned. But he hadn't thought that far ahead in such a short period of time. But the Chairman was a strategist and a master of theory. After Wei Hongjun's words, the Chairman immediately had a complete idea.

This is a deception.

Under the temptation of high income, the working class thinks this is a good thing. But what they don't know is that the proportion of fixed wages in their income continues to decrease, and their power is constantly being eroded. But they don't feel this.

By the time you understand this, it has already become a fait accompli.

This is the most obvious example of "revisionism".

Many people look down on fixed wages. They believe that piecework wages and excess wages are what motivate people and represent true reform. Therefore, they criticize fixed wages as "eating from the same pot" and "supporting lazy people."

But what they don’t know is that fixed wages are the most important first distribution, and are also an important proof and power of the working class to jointly own the means of production.

When workers gradually give up the pursuit of fixed wages and believe that "working overtime" is the best way to make money, they are actually giving up their right to own and distribute the means of production.

As the gap in "fixed wages" between cadres and workers became increasingly pronounced, the initial distribution of wealth became completely problematic. Once this initial distribution of wealth became problematic, it became very difficult to correct it. Once ownership and distribution rights over the means of production had been lost, it was impossible to regain them through reform.

At that time, only the second and third distributions can be used to adjust the gap between the rich and the poor.

But this is only a temporary solution and not a fundamental solution.

Because the vast majority of the people have lost the power to express objection to the first distribution.

"The first distribution of wealth? This is the first time I've heard of it. Please explain it in detail."

The Chairman was very interested in Wei Hongjun’s statement that fixed wages were the first distribution of wealth.

Because Wei Hongjun has always emphasized the importance of a fixed salary.

"Chairman, I've been considering the issue of wealth distribution within the socialist system, because wealth distribution is the most important aspect of socialist 'common prosperity.' How a socialist country distributes wealth can demonstrate the superiority of the socialist system and ensure equality for all. Therefore, I divide wealth distribution into primary, secondary, and tertiary distributions. You could also call them primary, secondary, and tertiary distributions."

"The first distribution is everyone's first income. It's like our current wages; this is the primary distribution. I believe the primary distribution is the most important. We cannot have too large a disparity in the primary distribution; it is a key way to embody socialist equality. Furthermore, the primary distribution embodies the characteristics of public and collective ownership of the means of production."

"When we established a Sino-foreign joint venture in Guangdong, the salaries of the company's foreign managers and technicians became a major issue. Both British and Chinese businessmen demanded exorbitant salaries from the factory for these managers and technicians. But I opposed this practice. Whether the staff were sent by British or Chinese businessmen, they had to abide by the factory's wage system and could not receive disproportionately high benefits. If they felt their staff were underpaid, they could provide additional compensation, but the factory's wage system could not be changed. I opposed it because the factory's wage system represents the initial distribution of wealth. Wage disparities must not be too severe. If some factory managers and technicians were paid tens or even dozens of times more than ordinary workers, it would be a failure of primary distribution."

The chairman nodded.

Then he said, "Your approach is good. Sino-foreign joint venture wages must not only be incorporated into China's socialist economic system, but their distribution must also comply with our laws. We establish companies in partnership with foreign and Chinese businesses, but this does not mean we acknowledge that these companies do not engage in exploitation or class struggle, or that we can allow these foreign and Chinese businesses to exploit workers. It's just that in the primary stage of socialism, we use distribution methods to mitigate exploitation and class struggle."

The CPSU had begun to abandon the concepts of class struggle and exploitation in theory.

Although it has not yet become the official program of the CPSU.

However, some leaders of the CPSU had begun to say that the Soviet Union was "developed socialism" and that there was no exploitation or class struggle within the Soviet Union. However, the Chairman firmly disagreed with this statement.

The Chairman also clearly pointed out in his “Political Report” at the Ninth National Congress that exploitation and class struggle exist in the primary stage of socialism.

The existence of these contradictions cannot be denied.

Once this contradiction is avoided or not acknowledged, serious problems will arise. Precisely because we acknowledge the existence of class struggle and exploitation, we must use certain policies to ease this contradiction.

"After collecting taxes, the government will make overall plans to develop the national economy. Development is crucial not only for Northeast China and Shanghai, but also for many impoverished provinces like Gansu, Guizhou, and Guangxi, as well as for the border regions of Inner Mongolia, Suiyuan, Xinjiang, and Tibet. However, the economic backwardness of these border and impoverished provinces cannot be addressed solely through primary distribution. The government must step in and invest more resources to support development. At the same time, effective poverty alleviation and relief policies must be established to help truly impoverished families. I call this secondary distribution, relying on government policies to bridge the economic gap."

The chairman nodded repeatedly.

Wei Hongjun's description of both primary and secondary distribution is highly positive. He continued, "The third distribution is the poverty alleviation and relief efforts of non-governmental organizations. This is similar to the Red Cross in my country, which accepts social funds and participates in poverty alleviation and relief efforts. For example, some people with high salaries and extra savings are willing to donate some of their money to support poverty alleviation and relief efforts. This not only involves poverty alleviation and relief efforts in impoverished areas during normal times, but also supports post-disaster reconstruction after natural disasters. I call this the third distribution."

"Primary and secondary distribution are extremely important, while tertiary distribution can only be considered minor adjustments. Comrade Khrushchev's wage reform was precisely due to a major problem with primary distribution. When primary distribution problems become serious in the future, it will be virtually impossible to use secondary and tertiary distribution to solve them. This is because primary distribution is the most important distribution. As long as there are no major problems with primary distribution, the gap between the rich and the poor in a socialist country will not widen significantly."

The chairman thought for a long time.

Then he said, "Comrade Hongjun, your theory of the three-way distribution is very interesting. When you return, please write an article on the 'three-way distribution' and give it to me. Our country should consider the issue of distribution from a theoretical perspective."

"Yes."

The Chairman asked, "Then how do you think we should guard against the first tendency of revisionism?"

1030 Anti-Revisionism 2

"There must be a consensus within the Party, or rather, across society, that the direction of our country's wage reform is to maintain wage differentials between different levels. However, the overall gap should be narrowed, not widened. Currently, the lowest-paid employees in our government are those with general duties, and after this adjustment, their salaries are around 23 yuan. The gap between the government minimum wage and the highest administrative salary is over 20 times. Our wage reform should gradually narrow this gap, first to within 10 times, and ultimately within 5 times. This is because as wages rise, the minimum wage will not be too low. And even a five-fold difference in the minimum wage is still not a small difference in absolute terms."

"Our wage reform must not be like the Soviet Union's. While everyone's wages are rising, cadres' salaries are increasing more, while ordinary workers' salaries are increasing less. If this continues, the wage gap between cadres and ordinary workers will continue to widen. Eventually, the wage gap between cadres and ordinary workers, and between senior cadres and grassroots cadres, will be as vast as heaven and earth."

What is the most unacceptable thing for the Chairman?

polarized.

Although the Chairman also knows that "absolute equality" is wrong, the extreme polarization is even more wrong. Because China is a socialist country, not a capitalist country. If polarization is severe, how can we call it a socialist country?

"Regarding some of our subsidies, they have always been considered hidden benefits. However, we shouldn't engage in hidden benefits. Instead, we should openly disclose them and establish detailed rules for them. What kind of subsidies are provided, what kind of subsidies are provided. What amount of subsidies are provided, what amount of subsidies are provided. Subsidies should be treated the same as wages, with no significant disparity. These subsidies should also be subject to public oversight. Once the government establishes subsidy regulations, no Party committee or government at any level will be allowed to arbitrarily alter them or increase cadre subsidies at will. The intentional widening of the income gap between cadres and staff members under the guise of subsidies is absolutely prohibited."

“Have a plan.”

The Chairman understood what Wei Hongjun meant.

Wei Hongjun nodded.

"Chairman," he said, "with the development of our economy and the improvement of our national finances, we will certainly need to constantly adjust wages and subsidies. We should establish the direction of wage and subsidy reform early on, and establish reform rules. This way, every time we carry out wage reform, we will have a set of rules to follow. At the same time, we must gain recognition within the Party and throughout society, and we must absolutely not arbitrarily change the direction of wage reform."

There will be many opportunities for wage reform in China in the coming period.

In other words, based on the current state of China's economic development, wages are expected to be adjusted every two to three years. Major wage reforms may be necessary every five-year plan. Given this, it's important to establish regulations early on.

Let there be a consensus within the Party and throughout society.

Only when everyone has a consensus can we ensure that no matter how wage reforms are carried out, certain red lines will not be easily crossed. Even if some individuals or certain groups want to cross the red lines, the voices of the public must be taken into consideration.

Wei Hongjun sometimes considers some of the Chairman's past actions. He may have realized that "revisionism" is unstoppable. So, perhaps his goal isn't to truly "bring about chaos and order" or truly "fight revisionism." He wants to create a consensus within society or perhaps serve as a warning to Party leaders.

Having experienced such a severe mass movement, many Party leaders are likely to be deeply afraid of it. Therefore, they will certainly use various methods to prevent it. At the same time, they are also hesitant to overly provoke the masses or cross the red line of socialism.

Of course, these were things Wei Hongjun occasionally thought about. Regardless, what Wei Hongjun needed to do now was to establish some rules and consensus. With consensus, even if the Party Chairman wanted to change things, it wouldn't happen overnight.

The chairman nodded slightly.

"Some things must be clearly defined, and then the people of the country must know them. The power of the people is unlimited. If the people can support us in seizing power, they can also overthrow us."

The Chairman supported Wei Hongjun's idea.

Many things need to be made public so that all the people can know. After discussing this topic, the Chairman said, "Go on with your talk about revisionism."

"Chairman, the second aspect of revisionism is to deprive the people of their right to know, right to participate, and right to supervise in the name of reform. The reforms of Soviet factories, and the reforms of Soviet farms that Comrade Deng Zhihui and I discussed, all use the name of professionalism to strengthen the power of factory directors and farm leaders."

"I support this to some extent. Just as science has its objective laws, warfare has its laws, and production certainly has its laws. So, whether it's a factory, a farm, or even a rural cooperative, we all need leadership from cadres who understand production and business development. In terms of production and operations, we must fully respect the work and opinions of these production cadres. But this is subject to a prerequisite: a cadre division of labor system under the leadership of the Party Committee."

"However, the Soviet Union's reforms were clearly intended, under the guise of reform, to strengthen the power of these production and management cadres, weaken the Party committees, and undermine inner-Party democracy. At the same time, under the guise of strengthening the autonomy of these production and management leaders, they deprived the people of their right to know and participate. After this initial success, they then used this guise to gradually deprive the people of their right to supervise factory operations and their right to participate in the distribution of factory and farm profits, indirectly depriving them of their right to distribution."

"The goal and result of this reform is that cadres who manage the means of production owned by the whole people and collectives will regard these means of production as their own. They will seize these means of production in the name of factories, state farms, and collectives. The difficulty in dealing with this problem lies in the fact that revisionism at the central level will give these cadres special privileges, allowing them to justify their appropriation of these means of production that belong to the whole people and the collective. Khrushchev's factory and farm reforms, which increased the autonomy of factories and farms, seriously lacked inner-party democracy and supervision of farm cadres."

The chairman drew a circle and then a cross.

But I crossed it out in the end.

"Is this also why you brought up the issue of the top leader's appointment?"