When Mao Zedong proclaimed the founding of the Chinese People’s Republic in Tiananmen Square in 1949, he staded that people of China had stood up after centuries of servitude and oppression. His ideas formed the basis of the most interesting branch of Marxist ideology in the post-war-world. Differing from its Soviet counterpart, Chinese Communism – known universally at its peak of popularity as maoism – was tailored by the Chinese leaders for an underveloped nation with a strong Confucian legacy. As such it appealed to other Third World intellectuals and nationalists leaders seeking a radical ideology appropriate for developing countries in the afermath of Western imperialism. It came from an impeccable non-European source, untained by colonialist prejudices. Chinese Communist ideas were formed by Mao and his colleagues after 1949. The story of these ideas, via Deng Xiaoping’s reforms and setback of the Tiananmen Square massacre, show both resilience of Chinese Communist thought in coping with contemporary dilemmas and his continuing intrinsic contradictions. Plans for Mao’s birthday have highlighted China’s cultural divide. Yet, Xi Jinping has really shown a fondness for Maoist rethoric, but in ideological terms, Xi is no a Maoist. Still, Mao, however, continues to exert a powerful influence over the party and public opinion. The primary concern of the Chinese Communists in and out of government has always been the salvation and rebirth of the Chinese nation – to result in a society based not on the principles of Confucianism, which was responsible for China’s decline, but on the tenets of a European doctrine, Marxism-Leninism. These, therefore, are the two immutable aims of Chinese Communism – to produce a society that is both Marxist, in that it formally represents and promotes the people’s dignity and livelihood, and Chinese, in that it is run without foreign interference. Some Western commentators therefore label Chinese Communism as “Leninist Confucianism”, to rub in the authoritarian and reactionary nature of the Chinese Party. Neither term is appropriate, however, to explain Chinese Communism, and put together they are positively unhelpful. It would be fair to say that in 1949 Chinese Communism offered a model of development towards a more equitable society, but after many years of national government the Party has been unable to live to those expectations.It woul be wise, however, when talking about wether he thought the French Revoloution had been a success – “it is too early to say”, he replied. But the new Chineseness will not be the old Chineseness of Confucianism or Kang Yuwei or Sun Yat-sen – or even Mao Zedong. It will have been transmuted in the fire of Maoism to reveal new characteristics more appropriate to the time. How the next generations after Den Xiaoping era, especially today with the new Communist leadership of Xi Jinping, will resolve these contradictions will depend on the course of these social and political (and capitalist) adjustments. We may not see the true impact of Chinese Communism until well into the next years. This is Mao’s legacy.
