Working Group explores why China is neither capitalist nor imperialist
Commentary by Sam-Kee Cheng*
The 16th annual conference of the International Initiative for Promoting Political Economy (IIPPE) was held at the University Institute of Lisbon & ICS (Institute of Social Sciences) from September 9-12 under the theme Capitalism Moving Beyond Neoliberalism: Crises, Changes, and What Comes Next.
Over 430 scholars from 55 countries registered for the event, among whom 20 came from China. I have been the coordinator for the Political Economy of China’s Development Working Group since 2017 and have witnessed the surge of interest in the political economy of China.
In the early years, the dominant views among Marxian political scientists were that China was a capitalist economy subordinate to the US-led system, and even if it was not totally assimilated into the neoliberal model, it was only some form of variety between state-led or party-led capitalism and could not be a genuine alternative to the profit-oriented capitalist model.
These perspectives have been challenged by some scholars who argue that the revolutionary reconstruction of the state and the economy, brought by the socialist revolution, could not be overlooked even after Reform and Opening-Up. China’s integration into the world market could not be interpreted as the capitulation of Chinese socialism to US capitalism.
The IIPPE China working group has been providing space for stimulating debate between these diverse and even conflicting views. The nature of the Chinese state and the internal dynamics of its development have been the focus of intellectual and political debates around China, while the external impacts of China’s rise – including its overseas investments, international finance, new technologies, ecological developments, and geopolitics – are increasingly being studied and scrutinised. These topics are always discussed in the China panels. The complexities of China’s political economy, as well as its implications for world development – particularly for developing countries seeking sovereign and autonomous development – are fertile ground for research.
The continuous and valuable contributions of researchers all over the world have made the China Working Group one of the most active and talked-about groups in the organisation.
This year, our collaboration with the IIPPE World Economy Working Group has led to seven substantial panels covering wide-ranging topics, including: Mechanisms in China’s Rise; China and Latecomer Development; Understanding Development in China; US-China Rivalry and Hegemony; North-South and BRICS in the World Economy; Geopolitics of Energy Transition; and Finance and Development in the Global South.
Less than a decade ago, it might have been hard to fathom China as one of the leading forces on technological frontiers, but more and more people are taking it seriously and reflecting on how previous misperceptions had prevented them from seeing it until recently. The Communist Party of China’s (CPC) leadership’s advocacy of developing productive forces and the propagation of a new global governance model and people-centred development stand in sharp contrast to the deindustrialisation and declining living standards commonly experienced in advanced capitalist economies.
Social polarisation is on the rise alongside the concentration of wealth. Moving beyond neoliberalism, which requires the restructuring of existing interests, seems like a very distant dream in the West, even when the ailments of neoliberalism and the dangers of inaction are blatantly clear.
China has stood out against the destructive tide of neoliberalism and has managed to forge ahead based on its developmental needs under the banner of socialism with Chinese characteristics.
Why China Is Not Imperialist
Why China Is Not Capitalist
For far too long, the arguments that China is neither capitalist nor imperialist have been pushed aside or considered unorthodox by the Western left. The China Working Group has taken on this challenge and has explained Why China Is Not Imperialist and Why China Is Not Capitalist, based on Marxist analyses, in two consecutive years at the IIPPE Conference.
The workshops have generated traction both online and at the venue in Lisbon, but the debate is nonetheless healthy and very much necessary.
It certainly will take more than one or two workshops to learn about and understand the political economy of China’s development. We may also never come to the exact same conclusion, just like the speakers at the workshop who agree that China is not capitalist but differ on what China actually is.
The most important lesson, I think, is that China has demonstrated that moving beyond neoliberalism is possible, and capital development can be guided and utilised for social development. There are many economic toolkits other countries can learn from China, but ultimately, the foundation for sovereign development relies on the political programme of those who want to move beyond neoliberalism.
*Sam-Kee Cheng is Research Assistant Professor in the Faculty of Social Sciences at the University of Macau (UM) and an Associate Researcher at the University of Macau Advanced Research Institute in Hengqin. She is also the coordinator of the Political Economy of China’s Development Working Group in IIPPE.
