Wei
Jingsheng Foundation News and Article Release Issue: A682-W421
魏京生基金会新闻与文章发布号： A682-W421
Release
Date: Jan. 14, 2012
发布日：2012年1月14日
Topic:
The Way Out for China (Part XLVIII): Reformism Is Not Feasible in China -- Wei
Jingsheng
标题：《中国的出路》之四十八：改良主义不可行 -- 魏京生
Original
Language Version: Chinese (Chinese version at the end)
此号以中文为准（英文在前，中文在后）
Note:
Please use "Simplified Chinese (GB2312)" encoding to view the Chinese
parts of this release. If this
mail does not display properly in your email program, please send your request
for special delivery to us or visit:
http://www.weijingsheng.org/report/report2012/report2012-01/WeiJS120114ChinaWayOut48reformnotfeasibleA682-W421.htm which
contains identical information.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The
Way Out for China (Part XLVIII): Reformism Is Not Feasible in China
--
Wei Jingsheng
Now
many people have realized that reformism is not feasible. However, there are still many people
who think that there is still hope for reform, and accuse the people who
advocate revolution. Some of these
people are secret agents propagandizing for the Communist Party, which is a
traditional job for the Chinese secret police. I am going to put these people aside and talk about the
other kind, who are bigots that could cause harm despite good intentions, just
like the Mr. Dong Guo in the Chinese fable who saved the wolf and ended up
being eaten by the wolf. These
people are acting in good faith but are unrealistic. The result is to help the villains but betray the friends.
I
am sure that they are certainly not convinced of my description. "Is not reform something
good?" "Would you only
be satisfied when blood is running like rivers and cities become broken
ruins?" These thoughts would
be serious accusations. These
people think I am not being kind when I am against their idea of waiting for
bread to fall out of the sky for the hungry. The issue is not that it would be wonderful or not to feed
on bread that falls from the sky, but that is just not realistic. What is the reality then? That reality is that from the beginning
of Mao Zedong, until Deng Xiaoping and Zhao Ziyang, all have tried to reform,
even on a fairly large scale.
However, due to the reality of one party dictatorship, it was impossible
to achieve a good result from these reforms. Thus, we demand for democracy and human rights. We want to restore various rights that
belong to the people, even through the means of revolution. That is the reality.
People
do know that Deng Xiaoping and Hu Yaobang wanted reform. However, to say that Mao Zedong also
wanted reform, many will question.
Is not that true that Mao self-claimed the Proletarian Cultural
Revolution? How did that turn into
a reform? Well, we should not take
the propaganda of the Communist Party as a guideline. Rather we should understand it after some analysis. What is the fundamental difference
between reform and revolution? The
difference lies that both reform and improvement do not touch the basic
principle, that is the essential autocracy. However, what the revolution wants to change is exactly this
essential autocracy. Did the
so-called revolution by Mao Zedong touch the essence of so-called proletariat
dictatorship? No. So no matter how ferociously he
claimed, to the best, it was only improvement.
Look
at the reality of this Cultural Revolution that we now know. Burning books, burying scholars, and
smashing the "four olds" of ideology, culture, customs and habits
were the ideals for the May Fourth Movement in 1919. Completely wiping out the traditional Chinese culture for a
total Westernization, thus enabling the achievement of Western-style democracy
or socialism was the common ideal of several generations of the intellectual
elite in China around the May Fourth Movement. Mao Zedong was the person who truly and completely realized
this ideal, thus bringing about a cultural catastrophe to China. When Mao Zedong launched the Cultural
Revolution, the members of the Central Committee of the Communist Party
unanimously agreed without objection, exactly because that was their common
ideal.
After
the Chinese Communist Party achieved its one-party dictatorship, it quickly
started its corruption and autocracy, which began people's resentment and
resistance. Eliminating the
corrupt elements so people could have democracy directly in the form of a Paris
Commune were the ideals of that generation of communists. Mao Zedong also made his experiments
during the Cultural Revolution that finally ended in failure. In the first seventeen years after the
Chinese Communists seized power, they were not engaged in a complete
Soviet-style planned economy. Mao
Zedong believed that the unsatisfactory economic development was due to this
reason, instead of just the reverse.
Therefore, the biggest action during the Cultural Revolution period was
to carry out a complete implementation of the planned economy, even to the
degree that farmers' private plots were cut off as the tails of
capitalism. The result was that
the economy remained in trouble, while people's living conditions
declined. The only exception was
in northeast China, where the Communist chief Li Desheng was able to raise the
monthly ration of 5 oz of cooking oil to 8 oz. At that time, that extra 3 oz per month of cooking oil
brought the local people enormous happiness.
There
is no evidence that proves the Cultural Revolution changed the one-party
dictatorship. Instead, it
strengthened both one-party dictatorship and personal dictatorship, a fact
everyone recognizes. So no matter
how much action was taken, that was only a reform, not a revolution. Further, it also illustrates that the
purpose for Mao Zedong to launch the Cultural Revolution was not for the sole
purpose of seizing power. Seizing
power was only one of his goals, which was accomplished easily at the
beginning. After that, Mao spent
most of his time and effort to reform the irrational reality, to realize the
ideals that his generation had fought for when they were young. From this perspective, Mao Zedong was
indeed an idealist. His
stubbornness was the root reason that he broke off with Lin Biao and the
others. It was the rebellion of
Lin Biao that prompted Mao to admit a defeat in his heart, which left an opportunity
to continue the improvement effort for Hua Guofeng and Deng Xiaoping later on.
Hua
Guofeng was relatively slow-witted.
Mao did not admit his own mistake, so Hua thought that there really was
no mistake, to the degree that he thought people's hails were sincere. The result was that Hua left the
opportunity of reform to Deng Xiaoping.
At that time, most of the people did not support our appeal for
revolution. They had yet to
realize that the root cause was the one-party dictatorship. They kindly thought that reform would
come at relatively less cost, so why not push for it? So, Deng Xiaoping received almost unanimous support from top
to bottom of the society at that time.
Actually, Deng's actions were big: he got rid of much of the remaining communist
system including the basic Stalinist planned economy. However, Deng did not say that this was a revolution, and
modestly said it was only reform.
Indeed,
in theory, Deng only got rid of half of the Communist system, while retaining
the even more fundamental one-party dictatorship. So we can only say that it was improvement, instead of
revolution. There were a large
number of people both inside and outside the Communist Party who tried to hit
the one-party dictatorship in the name of reform. Yet, Deng suppressed them without hesitation, even
mercilessly suppressing the two General Secretaries of the Communist Party that
he personally promoted, and even launching a military coup without hesitation. Deng Xiaoping had faithfully
implemented the "continuing revolution under the proletariat
dictatorship" theory of Mao Zedong.
Deng's
results had the same fate as Mao's.
In his later years, Deng had to admit defeat in his heart. Of course, just like Mao Zedong, Deng
Xiaoping would never admit it in words.
Such may be the common character of all dictators. Should we continue with more
improvements? But what else could
be improved? Most people with
lofty ideals can see it clearly enough.
All that could be tried was tried and there are no new tricks
anymore. So nowadays there are
people even starting to recommend the leftovers from Mao of "singing
praises for the red and hitting the black society" movement. This kind of politically retarded
intelligence that only dines on others’ leftovers will only become the laughing
stock of history.
There
is only one way left out for China.
That is to get rid of the one-party dictatorial political system. Further, no matter what way is used to
end the one-party dictatorship, it will be a revolution. The people's rebellion is a
revolution. A bloody coup is a
revolution. A political coup
without bloodshed, which has very little chance but is still a possibility, is
also a revolution. Only by getting
rid of the one-party dictatorship can most of the problems in China be
solved. Otherwise, it is difficult
to get rid of all the ills due to this one-party dictatorship.
To
hear Mr. Wei Jingsheng's related commentary, please visit:
http://www.weijingsheng.org/RFA/RFA2011/WeiJS110915ChinaWayOut48reformnotfeasible.mp3
(Written
on September 14, 2011 and recorded on September 15, 2011. Broadcasted by Radio Free Asia.)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
This
is a message from WeiJingSheng.org
The
Wei Jingsheng Foundation and the Overseas Chinese Democracy Coalition are
dedicated to the promotion of human rights and democratization in China. We appreciate your assistance and help
in any means. We pledge solidarity
to all who struggle for human rights and democratic governance on this
planet.
You
are welcome to use or distribute this release. However, please credit with this foundation and its website
at: www.weijingsheng.org
Although
we are unable to afford to pay royalty fees at this time, we are seeking your
contribution as well. You may send
your articles, comments and opinions to: HCP@weijingsheng.org. Please remember, only in text files,
not in attachments.
For
website issues and suggestions, you may contact our professional staff and web
master at: webmaster@Weijingsheng.org
To
find out more about us, please also visit our websites at: www.WeiJingSheng.org
and www.ChinaLaborUnion.org for news and information for Overseas Chinese
Democracy Coalition and human rights and democracy movement as whole,
especially our Chinese Labor Union Base.
You
may contact Ciping Huang at: HCP@Weijingsheng.org or
Wei
Jingsheng Foundation office at: 1-202-270-6980
Wei
Jingsheng Foundation's postal address is:
Wei
Jingsheng Foundation, P. O. Box 15449, Washington, DC 20003, USA
You
are receiving this message because you had previous shown your interest in
learning more about Mr. Wei Jingsheng and the Chinese Democratic Movement. To be removed from the list, simply
reply this message and use "unsubscribe" as the Subject. Please allow us a few days to process
your request.
*****************************************************************
中文版
Wei
Jingsheng Foundation News and Article Release Issue: A682-W421
魏京生基金会新闻与文章发布号： A682-W421
Release
Date: Jan. 14, 2012
发布日：2012年1月14日
Topic:
The Way Out for China (Part XLVIII): Reformism Is Not Feasible in China -- Wei
Jingsheng
标题：《中国的出路》之四十八：改良主义不可行 -- 魏京生
Original
Language Version: Chinese (Chinese version at the end)
此号以中文为准（英文在前，中文在后）
如有中文乱码问题，请与我们联系或访问:
http://www.weijingsheng.org/report/report2012/report2012-01/WeiJS120114ChinaWayOut48reformnotfeasibleA682-W421.htm
-----------------------------------------------------------------
《中国的出路》之四十八：改良主义不可行
-- 魏京生
现在很多人已经意识到了改良不可行。但是,还是有不少人以为改良还有希望，还在指责主张革命的朋友。这里边有些人是共产党专门制造谣言的特务，这个行当是中共特务机关的传统行当。这些人放在一边不论。另外的大部分执迷不悟者，是好心办坏事的东郭先生。他们是出于好心但是不切实际，结果是帮了恶人骗了朋友。
我这么说他们肯定不服气。改良有什么不好，难道非得要血流成河，残垣断壁才让你们满意吗？这个指责可是够严重的：你们不怀好意居然反对天上掉馅饼，是可忍孰不可忍。孰不知天上掉馅饼固然是美的太，只是不现实。现实是什么呢？就是从毛泽东开始，到邓小平、赵紫阳都在尝试着改革，甚至改的幅度也不小。无奈一党专政这个现实，不可能改得好。所以大家才要民主，要人权，要以革命的手段恢复本来就属于老百姓的各项权利。这就是现实。
说邓小平、胡耀邦搞改革大家都知道。说毛泽东搞改革大家可能会打个问号。他不是自称无产阶级文化大革命吗，怎么就成了改革呢？咱们不要以共产党的宣传为准则，仔细分析一下就明白了。改革和革命有什么区别呢？区别就在于改革和改良都不触及根本的原则，也就是不触及专制的本质。而革命要改的恰恰是专制的本质。毛泽东的所谓革命触及了无产阶级专政的本质了吗？没有。所以无论他折腾得有多凶猛，至多也不过是改良而已。
看看文革的现实就知道了。焚书坑儒破四旧，那是五四运动的理想。要彻底消灭中国传统文化，全盘西化，才能够实现西方的民主或者社会主义，这是五四前后那几代知识精英的共同理想。毛泽东是真正彻底实现了这个理想的人，这才带来一场文化上的浩劫。毛泽东发动文化革命时中央委员们一致通过无异议，正是因为这是他们的共同理想。
中共实现一党专政之后，很快就腐败专权，引起人民的反感和反抗。打倒这些腐败分子，让人民直接民主，搞个什么巴黎公社之类的玩意儿，这也是那一代共产党人的理想。毛泽东在文革中也作了实验，最后以失败告终。中共夺取政权后的前十七年，搞苏联式的计划经济不彻底。毛泽东认为经济发展不理想的原因在此，而不是相反。所以文革时期的最大动作，是彻底实行了计划经济，连农民的自留地都当成资本主义的尾巴割掉了。结果是经济陷入了困境，人民的生活逐年下降。唯一的例外是东北人民欢呼的李半斤代替了陈三两。每个月增加了二两食用油就是莫大的幸福了。
不但没有任何证据说明文革改变了一党专政，而且它恰恰是加强了一党专政和个人独裁，所有人都承认这个事实。所以无论折腾得动作有多大，那也是一场改良，不是革命。而且也可以说明毛泽东并不是为了夺权才发动文化革命，夺权只是他的目标之一，而且很容易就完成了。之后，他的大部分时间和大部分的努力，是为了改革不合理的现实，实现他们那一代人年轻时为之奋斗的理想。从这个角度看，毛泽东的确是个理想主义者。他的执迷不悟，是他和林彪等人决裂的根本原因。正是林彪的反叛，促使他在内心承认了失败，给后来的华国锋、邓小平留下了继续改良的机会。
华国锋比较愚钝。老毛不承认错了，华就真的以为没错，而且愚蠢到以为老百姓山呼万岁是真心的。结果把改革的机会留给了邓小平。当时大部分的老百姓并不支持我们要求革命的呼吁。他们并没有意识到病根在于一党专政。他们善良地以为改良一下损失比较小，何乐而不为呢。于是邓小平获得了几乎是上下一致的支持。他的动作其实不比毛泽东小，他改掉了除了一党专政以外的所有共产党制度，包括斯大林主义的根本计划经济制度。但他不说这是革命，而谦虚地说这只是改革。
确实，从理论上讲邓只改掉了共产党制度的一半，保留了更加根本的一党专政。所以也只能说是改良，不能说是革命。党内党外都有一大批人企图以改良为借口触及一党专政。邓毫不手软地加以镇压，即使对他亲自提拔的前后两届总书记也不手软，即使发动军事政变也毫不犹豫。邓小平忠实地执行着老毛无产阶级专政下继续革命的理论。
结果和老毛同样的命运，邓在晚年不得不在内心承认自己的失败。当然也和毛泽东一样，邓在口头上绝不会认错。这可能是所有独裁者的共同性格吧。还要继续改良吗？还有什么可以改良的呢？大部分仁人志士们都看得再清楚不过了。能改的都尝试过了，再聪明也搞不出什么新花样了。所以有人竟然搞起了毛泽东玩剩下的什么唱红打黑。这种食人唾余的政治弱智，只能成为历史的笑柄。
剩下的出路只有一条。这就是改掉一党专政的政治体制，这只能是革命。而且无论用什么方式结束一党专政，都是革命。人民造反是革命，流血的政变是革命。就是机会很小但还有可能的不流血的政变，也是革命。只有改掉一党专政，中国的大部分问题才有解决的可能。否则，很难改掉一党专政带来的所有弊病。
聆听魏京生先生的相关录音，请访问：
http://www.weijingsheng.org/RFA/RFA2011/WeiJS110915ChinaWayOut48reformnotfeasible.mp3
（撰写于2011年9月14日。录音于2011年9月15日。自由亚洲电台播出。）
-----------------------------------------------------------------
魏京生基金会及中国民主运动海外联席会议以推动中国的人权与民主为己任。
我们欢迎任何形式的帮助与贡献。我们愿与世界上为人权与民主而奋斗的人们一起努力。
我们希望您能够帮助我们散发我们的资料。但请标明出处与我们的网址：www.weijingsheng.org
欢迎投稿（暂无稿费）或批评建议，请寄信箱： HCP@WEIJINGSHENG.ORG
魏京生基金会通讯地址：
Wei
Jingsheng Foundation, P. O. Box 15449, Washington, DC 20003, USA
电话： 1-202-270-6980
魏京生基金会网址：WWW.weijingsheng.org
中国民主运动海外联席会议及中国团结工会的网址为：www.ChinaLaborUnion.org
阁下之所以收到本信，是因为阁下以前曾表示有兴趣了解魏京生先生和中国民主运动。
倘若阁下希望不再收到类似信息，请回复本信并用 unsubscribe 作为主题(Subject)。