- The Guardian
- Issue #2134
Reform and Opening Up
Comrade Editor
A small note on the recent editorial on China: I note that the Editorial published 10 February places China’s population at 1.3 billion people, but its population has now surpassed 1.4 billion. The editorial is an excellent summary of the general trend of Chinese revolutionary history, and China’s path towards constructing a socialist society.
I would however add some complexity to the “Reform and Opening Up” period, which was a correct decision implemented by Deng Xiaoping, but was achieved through strenuous debate. The decision to pursue Reform and Opening Up came from the intense ‘Truth Criterion Debate’ of 1978, one of the most important debates in twentieth-century Marxist theory and practice, between Hua Guofeng’s ‘Two Whatevers’ and Deng Xiaoping’s ‘Reform and Opening Up.’ The debate was rightly won by Deng, but there has been a tendency to read this as a victory against ‘Maoism’ rather than in many ways a continuation of many aspects of Mao Zedong Thought, which remains a cornerstone of CPC philosophy and is written permanently into the Constitution. Deng strenuously opposed bourgeois liberalisation, and did not oppose Mao in many respects. What Deng opposed was the “Whateverism” of Hua. However, the “wild nineties” as it is sometimes called, did pose a threat to the dictatorship of the proletariat and some aspects had to be brought under control. The issue of corruption posed a threat to the survival of the CPC, which Xi Jinping has paid special attention to in recent years.
Reform and Opening Up brought in various problems, but the CPC has made the right decision to continue to pursue it, while acknowledging the difficulties that arise; by cracking down on capital expansion, eliminating corruption among CPC officials, looking at problems squarely using Marxist-Leninist science, and with “practice as the sole criterion of testing truth” as the guide.
Fraternally,
A Carruthers
International Women’s Day
It is 124 years since this day was commemorated in 1911 with over one million people celebrating in Austria, Denmark, Germany, and Switzerland. It was inspired by the women garment workers’ protest in New York City, on 8 March 1857, but in 1911 women were demanding the right to vote, to fight against sex discrimination in the workplace, and the right to hold public office.
This day is more important than ever for women to protest as there is still ongoing gender inequality and increasing violence towards women. So why the silence, girls? Do we realise that this might be caused by the rampant competition which a globalised, capitalist society encourages? It has never been more pronounced, leading to the complete lack of ethics or morals by those in power: exemplified by the current incumbent of the Office of President of the USA, whose prevailing contempt for women is also pervading our society here in Australia, aided and abetted by the LNP and the Murdoch media.
The treatment of women who report rape cases is still beneath contempt and predatory men are encouraged by this. It’s all part of the capitalist dialectic, which sees a brave new world built on exploitation, where the ‘winners’ are those that are the strongest, e.g. it’s okay to be a bully as long as you achieve your goal. While men (and some women) keep thinking in this way, violence against women will continue, as does the rape of Mother Earth that we’re currently witnessing, or the genocide of Palestinians and the thinking behind such an atrocity.
So, I ask again. Why aren’t women marching on 8 March? It’s no less important now than it was in 1911. We have to keep fighting for a better world and, in WA on 8 March, let’s hope voters do just that.
Eileen Whitehead
Too little too late
Comrade Editor,
When I read your account of the state of school funding (“Government funding for private schools outpaces public schools,” Guardian #2133) I had a sense of deja vu. The Australian Education Union has said it’s grateful for the Albanese government’s recent commitment to “deliver full and fair funding of 100 per cent of the Schooling Resource Standard (SRS) by 2034.”
Two words stand our there for me: ‘recent’ and ‘2034’. Funding public schools at 100 per cent of SRS is something Albanese could have gotten cracking on three years ago. Instead, ‘Albo’ has pulled this out of his hat at the last minute, no doubt after saving it up as a ‘goodie’ to give out just before the election, instead of the top priority adequate education funding should be. Compare and contrast with the speed the ALP showed on AUKUS and tax cuts for the rich.
It’s a bit like Joe Biden and Cuba: Biden promised to take Cuba off the list of State Sponsors of Terrorism before he was elected President. He then did nothing about it until a week before he left power, no doubt thinking only of his legacy,
In both cases, a promise delayed until the last minute, the promise-maker thinking only of themself.
Peter Farmer
Melbourne
Dear editor,
I was quite impressed to see the reprint of the 1931 Draft Program against Slavery in Issue #2132 (10 February), and I admired comrade Che’s introduction to and reproduction of the article. It’s a fascinating document and represents a very early example of the militancy of the party with respect to Aboriginal rights.
Whilst the Draft Program was drawn up under the leadership of Herbert Moxon, it actually has its origins in the Australian Aboriginal Progressive Association (AAPA), one of the first dedicated and militant organisations that fought for Aboriginal rights. The organisation was led by Aboriginal people, for Aboriginal people, founded by Worimi man Fred Maynard in 1924. Inspired heavily by Marcus Garvey and his own experience as a unionist on the waterfront, the AAPA was very successful in mobilising and organising Aboriginal people to fight against the discrimination and oppressive policies of the various state Aboriginal protection boards. Unfortunately, the repression of those boards, particularly in New South Wales meant the AAPA ceased operating in 1927.
There is little to suggest that the CPA was aware of the AAPA when it was operating, or that it had aimed to cooperate or collaborate with the organisation in any way. Moxon’s 1931 program did however follow a dedicated effort by CPA members to analyse the nature of colonial oppression on the continent. In doing so, they were able to draw heavily upon the manifesto and program of the AAPA. There is much in the 1931 Draft Program that replicates the demands of the AAPA from the years prior.
I would recommend interested comrades read Fight for Liberty and Freedom by John Maynard for more about the AAPA It was a very interesting organisation and one who’s work should have continued for much longer. Paddy Gibson, a researcher in NSW has also published an excellent thesis on the subject.
My thanks again to the Sunshine Coast comrades for raising this in the Guardian.
Yours comradely,
Lachlan
Brisbane/Magandjin
Dear Comrade Editor,
Re “German Election and the march of fascism” by William Briggs Guardian page 14
Briggs says that “The ruling centre-right Christian Democratic Union (CDU) has been blamed for opportunistically failing to stand against the right (AfD)”. It’s worth pointing out that before the 2025 election, there was a coalition of the SPD, the Free Democrats and the Greens.
During a visit to Germany in late January and early February 2025, I was able to see for my self what was happening on the ground in one mid sized southern German city, Karlsruhe. Karlsruhe is notable for being the birthplace for the German Greens, but there is little love for the Greens there now, and I saw a number of their placards defaced. Activists had also been busy defacing the Christian Democratic Union (CDU) posters by drawing moustaches on the the CDU candidates – especially as a consequence of the CDU joining forces with the Alternative for Deutschland in the German Parliament to try to force the closure of the German borders and restrict immigration.
The German people took to the streets in a heart beat. I was invited to a rally on attended by over 7,000 people. People of all ages, genders, and ethnic backgrounds flooded the the central square of the city. To chants of “Nazis Raus” (Nazis out), “Never again means never again,” and alle Gegen fascismus (everyone against fascism) people rallied and marched through the city.
What is most important about the current German election campaign is what it leaves out, which is climate change. Summers and winters have become progressively warmer in Germany, it is rare now for many German cities to see snow. But most German political parties have put addressing climate change in the too-hard basket. Even the Greens, seem too busy deal-making with their coalition partner, the Social Democratic Party to address the system changes needed to avoid climate change. Only the Marxist-Leninist Party Deutschland and Die Linke (The Left) are daring to go there.
My German relatives recently travelled to protest at the Munich Security Conference last weekend which was attended by all leading German politicians and foreign politicians including US Vice President JD Vance and Ukrainian President V Zelensky. The protesters were against the use of weapons to solve conflicts, against the stationing of US missiles in Germany, speeches in support of the Palestinians in Gaza and the Kurds in Syria. The authorities in right wing Munich were not taking any chances with protesters, and the police contingent outnumbered the protesters 2 to 1.
Thank you.
Richard Titelius
