How to treat the history of class society

Since the Third Plenary Session of the Eleventh Central Committee of the Communist Party of China, with the deepening of reform and opening up, great changes have taken place in China's social structure. The traditional method of analyzing social stratum structure can't fully adapt to this change. Therefore, some new analytical methods have been introduced and applied in the theoretical circle. The introduction and application of new methods and the application of traditional analysis methods will help to scientifically analyze the social stratum structure of contemporary China.

one

Before and at the beginning of the reform and opening-up, we analyzed the social class structure of China, mainly using Marxist class analysis method. This method divides members of society into different classes according to the means of production and the occupation of labor. During the period of the new-democratic revolution, Mao Zedong adhered to the Marxist class analysis method and divided the social classes in China into several different classes according to people's economic status, such as the landlord and comprador class, the national bourgeoisie, the petty bourgeoisie and the semi-proletariat. After the founding of People's Republic of China (PRC), our party re-divided the social class structure of China. 1950, the Government Council of the Central People's Government passed the Decision on Dividing Rural Class Composition, and later issued some supplementary decisions, which divided the class composition of China society into landlords, capitalists, enlightened gentlemen, rich peasants, middle peasants, intellectuals, freelancers, religious professionals, small farmers, small traders, poor peasants, workers and the poor. On the end of 19561956, after the socialist transformation of China's means of production was basically completed, it was reasonable to make a new division of China's class structure .56966.999999969965 However, due to various reasons, the division of class composition at the beginning of the founding of the People's Republic of China was preserved. It was not until around the Third Plenary Session of the Eleventh Central Committee that our Party's understanding of social class structure changed greatly. First, at the National Science Conference held in 1978, Deng Xiaoping admitted that intellectuals were part of the working class on behalf of our party. Secondly, after the Third Plenary Session of the Eleventh Central Committee, our party not only took off the "hats" for those social members who were designated as landlords and rich peasants in rural areas, but also restored the status of central plains industrialists and businessmen in cities. In this way, the social structure of China is divided into "two classes and one class" (working class, peasant class and intellectual class).

However, under the historical conditions of socialist market economy, it is not enough to analyze the great changes of social class structure in China only by using the traditional class analysis method. Therefore, some new analytical methods have been introduced in the theoretical circle. Among them, there are three most common methods: one is identity analysis, that is, according to people's different status in economic, political and social life, social members are divided into several groups. The most typical thing is to divide social members into three groups: workers, farmers and cadres according to the different nature of people's household registration and the different establishment in the national labor and personnel system. The other is the interest analysis method, which divides social members into several interest groups mainly according to the different economic interests people get. For example, according to people's gains and losses in the reform and opening up, some scholars divide members of our society into special beneficiaries, ordinary beneficiaries, groups with relatively damaged interests and social bottom groups. Another is the analytic hierarchy process. This method divides social members into classes according to various factors such as occupational division of labor. For example, some scholars divide the members of our society into farmers, management cadres, workers and intellectuals. Among the above three analysis methods, analytic hierarchy process is the most popular.

The widespread use of social stratification method conflicts with the traditional class analysis method. In this regard, China scholars may not consider the relationship between social stratification and class analysis; Or stick to the theoretical and methodological basis of class analysis, learn from the reasonable components of social stratification theory in western sociology, and constantly enrich and develop Marxist class analysis; Or think that the possession of the means of production and labor can not be used as a standard to divide the social stratum structure of contemporary China, but should be divided according to factors such as occupation division and the possession of social resources.

two

The contradiction between social stratification method and class analysis method boils down to one point: is class analysis still valuable in contemporary times? Scholars who advocate class analysis are negative or skeptical about the contemporary value of class analysis; Among the scholars who advocate class analysis, some just regard it as a "talisman" to introduce other methods. In order to correct our attitude towards Marxist class analysis and use it correctly, we must fully understand its contemporary value.

First, the Marxist class analysis method has experienced a great development from "conflict theory" to "function theory", and it can still be used to analyze the social class structure in contemporary China. Among many social stratification theories, some focus on revealing the integration of interests between different classes, which we can call "functional theory". According to this classification, the class analysis methods of Marx, Lenin and Mao Zedong undoubtedly belong to the category of "conflict theory". Now, some people deny and doubt Marxist class analysis method, mainly because class struggle is no longer the main contradiction in contemporary China society, so they think that class analysis method is out of date. People who hold this view obviously fail to see the "functional" factor in class analysis, let alone its creative application in contemporary China. Although the class analysis methods of Marx, Lenin and Mao Zedong belong to "conflict theory", they contain elements of "function theory". For example, the "alliance of workers and peasants" emphasizes the "chorus" of the working class and the peasant class, serving the class struggle of the proletariat and the bourgeoisie. After China's reform and opening-up, the "conflict" feature of the class analysis method weakened and the "function" feature strengthened. Our party has made a judgment that class struggle is no longer the main contradiction in our society, and confirmed that workers, peasants and intellectuals are the three basic forces in socialist modernization. The resulting analysis method of "two classes and one stratum" has greatly developed the Marxist class analysis method and better adapted to the changes in the social structure of contemporary China.

Secondly, the Marxist class analysis method is of great guiding significance for correctly analyzing the relationship between the two basic classes and other classes in contemporary China. In contemporary China, can the analysis of class and stratum be based on the possession of means of production and labor? It should be said that from the basic completion of the socialist transformation of the means of production in China to the reform and opening up, the difference in the possession of the means of production is only manifested in the ownership by the whole people and collective ownership, not in who owns it and who doesn't. Since "one family dominates, two families dominate" can no longer meet the requirements of the development of productive forces in the primary stage of socialism, after the reform and opening up, China has made bold adjustments to the ownership structure. Especially after the 15th National Congress of the Communist Party of China, China's non-public economy has developed rapidly, and the number of self-employed and private entrepreneurs has surged, thus forming a new social class. We can now divide them into a new class by using Marxist class analysis method and taking the possession of means of production and labor as the standard. In recent years, although China's individual economy and private economy have developed rapidly, the proportion of self-employed and private entrepreneurs in all members of society is very low, and they have not formed the same class consciousness. Therefore, it can only be called class, not class.

Thirdly, the Marxist class analysis method is also of great guiding significance for correctly analyzing the relationship between the two basic classes in contemporary China. The Marxist concept of the working class is relative to the bourgeoisie and the peasant class. Although the working class and the peasant class are not antagonistic classes, they are quite different in the possession of the means of production and the degree of socialization of production. Therefore, in Marxist class analysis, there has always been a division between the working class and the peasant class. This is particularly important for analyzing China's social structure. After the founding of People's Republic of China (PRC), with the socialist transformation of the means of production basically completed, the bourgeoisie as the exploiting class has actually been eliminated. This means that the opposition and struggle between the working class and the domestic bourgeoisie no longer exists. On the other hand, the urban-rural dual economic structure, which was formed in China's history and further strengthened during the planned economy period, is restricted by population, resources, policies and other factors and cannot be completely disintegrated in the short term. The differences and contradictions between the working class and the peasant class will exist for a long time. Therefore, in the process of China's modernization, how to deal with the relationship between the working class and the peasant class is a very critical issue. Only by adhering to the Marxist class analysis method and dividing China's social structure into two basic classes, can we correctly analyze the relationship between urban and rural areas and the relationship between workers and peasants, and adopt the correct line, principles and policies accordingly, gradually eliminate the differences between urban and rural areas and between workers and peasants, and promote the all-round advancement of socialist modernization. On the contrary, if we abandon the method of class analysis and divide social classes only from the professional division of labor, the working class will be bound to be defined in such a narrow range as industrial workers, and the contradiction between workers and peasants in the process of modernization in China will be diluted and concealed by many minor contradictions, so that we can't scientifically reveal the relationship between urban and rural areas in the process of modernization, nor can we correctly analyze the relationship between workers and peasants in the process of reform and opening up.

three

Our emphasis on Marxist class analysis does not mean that it can solve all the problems in the analysis of social class structure in contemporary China. In fact, in order to make an accurate and detailed analysis of the social class and stratum structure in contemporary China, it is necessary to introduce and apply other new analytical methods, especially the stratum analysis method.

First of all, in theory, class analysis and class analysis are not contradictory, but complementary. The advantage of class analysis is that it can reveal the relationship between classes scientifically, and the advantage of class analysis is that it can go deep into the class and reveal the whole picture of a certain class concretely. Therefore, class analysis is the premise and foundation of social class analysis, and class analysis is the deepening and development of social class analysis. Because of this, when Marx and Engels used the method of class analysis, they never opposed class analysis and never denied the existence of stratification within the class. In the Manifesto of the Productive Party, Marx and Engels clearly pointed out: "In the past historical era, we can see that society is completely divided into different levels, and social status is divided into various levels almost everywhere. In ancient Rome, there were nobles, knights, civilians and slaves. There were feudal lords, servants, guild masters, helpers and serfs in the Middle Ages, and almost every class had some special classes. " [1] They never deny the existence of social classes other than the basic class, but think that "the actual social structure-society is not only composed of the working class and the industrial capitalist class" [2]. At that time, although Marx and Engels did not study the internal stratification of each class in depth, the above ideas undoubtedly laid a theoretical foundation for us to analyze the internal stratification of each class today.

Secondly, in practice, the class analysis method has been unable to deeply analyze the internal structure of the two basic classes, let alone explain the economic gap formed by members of our society in the reform and opening up. Before the reform and opening up, our society was under the control of highly centralized administrative management system and planned economy system, and social stratification was not complicated. The social structure of China at that time can be explained by class analysis. After the reform and opening up, our society has not only formed some new classes, such as self-employed and private enterprises, which are separated from the peasant class and the working class, but also obvious stratification has appeared within the peasant class and the working class. Within the peasant class, different classes have been formed, such as agricultural laborers, migrant workers, workers in township enterprises, rural managers, managers of township enterprises, private entrepreneurs, individual workers, individual industrial and commercial households and so on. Within the working class, it can no longer be simply divided into cadres and ordinary workers as in the past, but there are different levels such as state and social managers, enterprise managers, industrial workers, professional and technical personnel and private entrepreneurs. Due to the development of socialist market economy and the deepening of the reform of individual distribution system, the income gap of social members has gradually widened, and economic stratification has become more and more obvious. Class analysis often goes beyond this range. Only by introducing and innovating other analytical methods, such as stratum analysis and interest group analysis, can we analyze the social structure of contemporary China deeply and scientifically.

To sum up, today, we must adhere to the Marxist class analysis method, and at the same time we need to learn from the reasonable components in the western social stratification theory and introduce some new analysis methods. Only in this way can we enrich and develop the Marxist theory of social stratification in theory, and constantly push and promote the social strata in contemporary China to move towards socialist modernization in practice.

[References]

[1] Selected Works of Marx and Engels: Volume 1 [C]. Beijing: People's Publishing House, 1995.272-273.

[2] "The Complete Works of Marx and Engels": Volume 26, Volume 2 [C]. Beijing: People's Publishing House, 1973.562.

[Author Brief Introduction] Guo (1966-), male, from Xinghua, Jiangsu, Ph.D., lecturer of Marxist Theory Research Center of Nanjing University.

(Editor Zhou Xiaozhong) Journal of the Central Party School * *No. 1 issue, 2003.