{"id":221620,"date":"2021-08-15T00:01:26","date_gmt":"2021-08-14T18:31:26","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/?p=221620"},"modified":"2021-08-20T00:54:13","modified_gmt":"2021-08-19T19:24:13","slug":"ideological-class-contradictions-in-chinas-education-sector","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/index.php\/ideological-class-contradictions-in-chinas-education-sector\/","title":{"rendered":"Ideological & Class Contradictions In China\u2019s Education Sector"},"content":{"rendered":"

By Kumar David<\/a> –<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>

Prof. Kumar David<\/p><\/div>\n

Two important aspects of Chinese polity help explain why recent interventions of the state in education have created dislocation, or reform, depending on your pro- or anti-China political proclivities. To use an old-fashioned term, the state in China is Stalinist in the sense that it embraces all power and is unwilling to tolerate dissent or criticism. (There are those who say that this is what ensured rapid economic growth and eradicated poverty, but that\u2019s a different side that I don\u2019t wish to be dragged into today). The Chinese CP is ideologically totalitarian: \u201cTotal\u201d in the sense that it will not share space and air with other ideologies (bourgeois or capitalist creeds, the Christian Churches, Fulan Gong, competing political theories or \u2018heretical\u2019 Marxist interpretations). This is because the CCP is theoretically insecure and alarmed by competition in \u201cbelief space\u201d; its Marxism is formulaic. This essay does not embark on an assessment of the rights and wrongs of CCP ideology; for today I only want you to stay with my description for the remainder of this essay.<\/span><\/p>\n

The other aspect of Chinese state, society and economy that I take as a premise is that China is not a capitalist State, whatever features of capitalism it integrates into its economic and institutional structures. I argued this at length and depth in a paper at the<\/span> Hector Abhayavardena Felicitation Symposium in 2000, \u201cChina\u2019s Socialist Market Economy: Viable Concept or Oxymoron\u201d. (Proceedings edited by Rajan Philips and published by Marshal Fernando\u2019s Ecumenical Institute for Study and Dialogue in 2001). The thesis advanced in that paper remains remarkably valid still, 21 years on. If this monkey may be allowed to shamelessly praise its own tail, it is the best characterisation of the Chinese State to date. I cannot summarise a 30 or 40 page paper here but a few cardinal points are worth recalling. The mode of production, extraction of surplus value and the processes of reproduction in China do not correspond to what Marx described as capitalism. Nor do they mirror capitalism now prevailing in American and Western manifestations. Sure there are rich entrepreneurs and investors (capitalists) in China and an educated fast advancing middleclass. The commanding heights of \u2018old\u2019 economy (oil, minerals, energy, heavy industry) are exclusively state owned. Entrepreneurship and new technology (export industry, high-tech, and finance-capital) are predominantly in the hands of a new capitalist class. China possesses a prominent capitalist class (owners of capital) but that class is not at the helm of state. A monopoly of state power rests with the Communist Party and the foundation of the Party is 80 million strong \u2013 a mass base. Oh hell! You wail that you don\u2019t know what descriptive label to stick on this animal. You are at a loss for a good definition for this state form? Welcome to the club; let\u2019s call it a Duckbilled Platypus. Biology and history go their way and care not a whit for your bookish travails.<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>

Learning factories in China<\/p><\/div>\n

To return to the theme of this essay, the sudden changes that have been made in the educational structure were so unexpected that it took the country by surprise. I cannot detail it all, so I have provided you with four URLs to Hong Kong and American sites. Furthermore these changes in education parallel radical state interventions in the control of private enterprises undertaken in recent months.<\/span><\/p>\n