Zhou Qiang: A History of the Chinese Translation of Several Concepts in Lenin's Economic Works
At the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century, the world's major capitalist countries successively entered the monopoly stage—the stage of imperialism—from the stage of free competition. Departing from the projections of Marx and Engels, the socialist revolution first achieved victory in Russia, the "weakest link in the imperialist chain." In order to explore the path of socialist economic construction in Soviet Russia, where small-peasant production predominated, Lenin creatively enriched and developed the Marxist economic doctrines that had emerged from the era of free competition. He theoretically deepened the understanding of concepts such as the market, the commodity economy, and state capitalism, and provided a creative answer to the question of how countries with relatively backward economies and cultures could transition to socialism. "The salvos of the October Revolution brought Marxism-Leninism to China." With the early dissemination of Marxism-Leninism in China, Lenin's works and theories were also translated and introduced, initiating a preliminary process of Sinicization and providing beneficial references for the theory and practice of socialism with Chinese characteristics.
I. Lenin's Economic Writings and Their Dissemination in China
Lenin did not produce many works that focused exclusively on economic issues; many of his views and discourses on the economy are scattered throughout various types of writings. At the end of the 19th century, as the development of world capitalism entered the imperialist stage, the further development of Marxist economic theory became particularly necessary. In the process of theoretical struggle against the Narodniks [1], Lenin wrote a series of articles and works centered on the development of capitalism in Russia, such as New Economic Developments in Peasant Life, On the So-called Market Question, and What the "Friends of the People" Are and How They Fight the Social-Democrats. He pointed out that the development of capitalism in Russia caused the peasantry in the countryside to differentiate into an agrarian bourgeoisie and a proletariat—namely, kulaks and farm laborers. Therefore, although the level of economic development still lagged far behind most European countries, Russia was already a capitalist country. At the beginning of the 20th century, in works such as Anarchism and Socialism, The Agrarian Question and the Forces of the Revolution, and The Agrarian Question in Russia at the End of the Nineteenth Century, Lenin applied the basic principles of Marxism to analyze the Russian land situation and elaborated on issues such as the market, commodity economy, land, banks, and currency in capitalist society. Around the time of the October Revolution, in response to problems emerging in Russia’s economic development, the transformation of the nature of the means of production, and the vision of a "direct transition" to communism, Lenin continued the traditional view of opposing the commodity economy and state capitalism to socialism in works such as The Tasks of the Proletariat in the Present Revolution, The Impending Catastrophe and How to Combat It, and the Draft Programme of the R.C.P.(B.). Later, based on profound reflections on the setbacks suffered in socialist construction, Lenin discussed the commodity economy and state capitalism in socialist society in his Report on the Substitution of a Tax in Kind for the Surplus-Grain Appropriation System at the 10th Congress of the RCP(B), the Political Report of the Central Committee at the 11th Congress of the RCP(B), as well as in The Tax in Kind and On Cooperation.
After the May Fourth Movement [2], these writings containing Lenin’s economic thought entered China successively in the form of extracted translations, partial translations, and translated summaries. For example, in 1920, WPK and Zhen Ying respectively translated portions of Economics and Politics in the Era of the Dictatorship of the Proletariat, in which Lenin explained the economic characteristics of the socialist transition period. In 1921, Li Li translated and introduced The Immediate Tasks of the Soviet Government, a work in which Lenin argued for socialist economic construction measures based on traditional socialist concepts. In 1921, 1922, and 1924, Wei Zhi, Mo Han, and Li Chunfan respectively translated portions of The Tax in Kind. In 1924, Song Yu translated On Cooperation. After the outbreak of the First Revolutionary Civil War [3], due to the shift in the revolutionary situation, Lenin’s writings related to proletarian revolution and Party building became the focus of translation and introduction. From the Yan’an period [4] to the period around the founding of the People's Republic of China, in conjunction with the needs of economic construction, Lenin's economic writings were widely translated. These primarily included collected Chinese translations of writings containing Lenin’s economic doctrines, such as Volume 16 of the Chinese edition of the Selected Works of Lenin published by Jiefangshe in 1945, Volume 2 of the Selected Writings of Lenin published by the Foreign Languages Publishing Bureau in 1947, Lenin on the New Economic Policy published by Zhongwai Publishers in 1949, and Volume I of Lenin and Stalin on Socialist Economic Construction, a required reading for cadres published by Jiefangshe. Since the reform and opening up, Chinese translations of Lenin’s works related to economic construction have increased significantly. For instance, Lenin on Socialist Economic Construction in Soviet Russia published by People's Publishing House in 1979, and "Two Draft Revisions of Lenin’s Outlines for the Implementation of the New Economic Policy" published in the 14th issue of Translated Materials of Marxist-Leninist Works (CCTB) in 1981, have had an important influence on Chinese Communists studying and drawing on Lenin's thoughts on economic construction to guide socialist practice.
Simultaneously with the appearance of Chinese translations of Lenin’s economic thought, the study and research of Lenin’s economic ideas by Chinese Marxists and Chinese Communists commenced. As early as the end of the 19th century, Marxist doctrine was introduced to China from Japan through Sino-Japanese interactions. During the process of translating early Japanese Marxist works into Chinese by intellectuals studying in Japan, Chinese concepts such as "market" (市场), "economy" (经济), "economics" (经济学), "property" (财产), "ownership" (所有制), and "means of production" (生产资料) either emerged as the situation required or underwent significant changes. After the October Revolution, the early dissemination of Leninism in China and the Chinese translation of Lenin’s works brought terms with Leninist characteristics—such as commodity economy, market, market economy, cooperatives, and state capitalism—into the field of vision of Sinicized Marxism. These included both Lenin's original concepts and concepts that Lenin gradually deepened during the practice of socialist construction. After the founding of New China, Chinese Communists consistently combined Marxism-Leninism with Chinese reality in socialist economic construction. Especially around the start of the reform and opening up, Lenin’s series of explorations regarding the New Economic Policy [5] once again drew the attention of Chinese Communists and Chinese Marxists; many vivid elements of Lenin’s economic thought became precursors to China’s reform and opening up. In the process of actively drawing on the experiences and lessons of Soviet socialist economic construction, Chinese Communists have continuously deepened their understanding of the laws of socialist economic construction. Concepts such as the market, commodity economy, and state capitalism, which were originally regarded as part of the capitalist category, were also incorporated into the socialist category. Through continuous shifts and enrichment of meaning in Chinese practice, they have played an important role in China's socialist economic construction.
Concepts are the cornerstones of theory. Chinese Communists have learned Lenin's economic thought through the interaction of theory and practice. By absorbing, invoking, and adapting the terminology and concepts of Lenin's original texts, they have constructed a political economy with Chinese characteristics. This article selects the concepts of "market," "commodity economy," and "state capitalism"—which still possess vivid vitality today—as subjects for investigating the evolution of conceptual meaning during the process of translating Lenin's works into Chinese. The concept of "market" is both the starting point of Lenin’s economic theoretical research and a red thread running through Lenin’s leadership of the proletarian revolution and the practice of socialist construction; the concept of "commodity economy" is closely related to the concept of "market economy" in the political economy of socialism with Chinese characteristics; and the concept of "state capitalism" once played an important role in promoting the socialist transformation of private ownership of the means of production in China. The deepening and re-elaboration of Lenin's understanding of these concepts reflects his profound reflection on what socialism is and how to build it in the face of setbacks in the vision of a "direct transition" to a communist society. Clarifying the trajectory of the reproduction of meaning for these concepts, and studying the laws of "change and constancy" inherent in the transformation of original Marxist concepts into Sinicized Marxist concepts, is of great significance for upholding the basic principles of Marxism, promoting the revolution of terminology in Marxist political economy, and persisting in and developing 21st-century Sinicized Marxist political economy.
II. The Return and Semantic Shift of the "Market" Concept
The term "market" (市场, shìchǎng) has existed in ancient Chinese; its original meaning referred to a specific place where ordinary people conducted commodity exchange (buying and selling) activities, commonly known as a "fair" or "bazaar" (jíshì). For example, Wei Chi-wo of the Southern Tang Dynasty stated in Stories of the Central Dynasties (Zhōngcháo Gùshì): "Whenever inspecting the market (shìchǎng) or going up to a wine shop, he would be delighted upon meeting anyone." Here, "market" contains the aforementioned meaning. At the end of the 19th century, the Wasei-kango [6] term "market" (市场), carrying modern connotations, was introduced to China from Japan as a loanword along with its meaning. According to relevant research, the kanji form of "market" (shijō) was first produced in Japanese by translating the English words "market" and "market place" (in 1862 using the kun'yomi reading ichiba; in 1886 using the on'yomi reading shijō). When this word entered China, it referred to the area where commodities were marketed or the venue for commodity transactions. In the Chinese language, the earliest appearance of the concept of "market" in its modern sense can be traced back to 1877. At that time, He Ruzhang, the first Qing dynasty minister to Japan, introduced new concepts derived from Japan such as "market" (shìchǎng), "park" (gōngyuán), "railway" (tiědào), and "expenditure" (jīngfèi) in his Brief Account of a Mission to the East (Shǐ Dōng Shùlüè). Furthermore, the word "market" also appeared in Treatise on Japan (Rìběnguó Zhì) written by Huang Zunxian in 1890: "The high or low price of Japanese silk and tea is entirely controlled by the European market (shìchǎng), and has nothing to do with the heavy or light costs in the Orient." We can observe that the concept of "market" here had quietly undergone a change compared to its original meaning in ancient Chinese. By the beginning of the 20th century, while the concept of "market" was undergoing its first semantic shift and being accepted by the Chinese people, it also appeared in the early dissemination of Marxism. Chen Wangdao, in the first full Chinese translation of The Communist Manifesto, translated it as follows: "Under the industrial organization of the feudal era, production was monopolized by guilds; by this time, they could no longer meet the increase in demand in the new markets (shìchǎng); thus the manufacturing system took its place." Clearly, this is the concept of "market" following its first semantic shift, still belonging to the capitalist category.
The "market" is both a core term of Marxist political economy and the starting point for Lenin’s study of economic issues. The shift in Lenin's attitude toward the market occurred during the period when the New Economic Policy was proposed and implemented. Initially, in his theoretical struggle against the Narodniks at the end of the 19th century, Lenin criticized the erroneous view that the differentiation of the peasantry would lead to the closure of markets, arguing that as long as social division of labor and commodity production existed, a market would inevitably exist. He also discussed "market general" issues within the capitalist category, such as the causes of the Russian domestic market and the relationship between the market and the social division of labor. While affirming the role of the market in regulating production, Lenin explicitly stated that in a society with public ownership of the means of production, "the regulator of production will not be the market, as it is now, but the producers themselves, the society of workers itself; then the means of production will not belong to private individuals but to the whole of society." Clearly, at this time, Lenin believed that the "market" belonged to the category of capitalism rather than socialism, and pointed out through an analysis of the market's role and nature that it was incompatible with socialist society.
By the beginning of the 20th century, Lenin, in conjunction with the Russian land question, clarified that money power, commodity production, and the market were the foundations of capitalist society, stating: "As long as the market economy exists, as long as money power and the power of capital are maintained, no law in the world can eliminate inequality and exploitation. Only by establishing a large-scale, socialized planned economy, where all land, factories, and tools are transferred to the ownership of the working class, will it be possible to eliminate all exploitation." While pointing out the opposition between "market economy" and "planned economy," Lenin also believed that under capitalist relations of production, the existence of a market would inevitably lead to commodity exchange, thereby creating the power of money, turning agricultural products and labor into money, and making commodity production into capitalist production. Under these circumstances, the concept of the market was naturally excluded from the socialist category. Therefore, after the October Revolution, proceeding from the traditional view of abolishing capitalist private ownership and establishing socialism, he advocated replacing the market with the production and distribution of products under the supervision of the Soviets of Workers' Deputies. Especially during the period of implementing the policy of "War Communism" [7], he further advocated for the gradual elimination of private trade through the planned exchange of products, completely closing the market, which was regarded as belonging to the capitalist category.
However, as Soviet Russia encountered setbacks in socialist construction, Lenin deepened his understanding of the market through reflection. Specifically, the convening of the Tenth Congress of the Russian Communist Party (Bolsheviks) marked the beginning of Soviet Russia's shift to the New Economic Policy. It was during this process that Lenin's thought on utilizing the existing market to develop the economy began to sprout. By late 1921, as commodity exchange transformed into private buying and selling and monetary circulation, Lenin’s understanding of the market deepened further. In his article "Fourth Anniversary of the October Revolution," he pointed out: "We planned (or perhaps it would be more correct to say we presumed without sufficient calculation) to regulate the state production and distribution of products on communist principles in a small-peasant country by direct orders of the proletarian state. Real life has shown us our mistake." Consequently, Lenin began to experiment with state regulation of commerce and monetary circulation, allowing the market—as a channel and means for commodity exchange—to gradually shift from a supporting role to a leading role. However, in his later years, Lenin continued to emphasize the role of cooperatives in socialist construction, and since Soviet Russia's use of the market to restore and develop the economy occurred only during the implementation of the New Economic Policy, "Lenin's thought on the combination of planning and the market in the early stages of socialist construction was still in an embryonic state and should not be overestimated... in particular, he did not propose the idea of the market acting as the basis for resource allocation." Nevertheless, Lenin’s practice of utilizing international and domestic markets to restore and develop the economy served as an enlightenment for our country’s implementation of reform and opening up and the development of a market economy, while also providing room for exploration in our adherence to the path of socialism with Chinese characteristics.
As early as June 1921, introductions to the Soviet New Economic Policy and Chinese translations of Lenin’s related writings appeared in Chinese periodicals. However, these were neither a priority for Chinese Communists at the time nor did they attract substantial attention from Chinese Marxists. From June 22 to September 23, 1921, Morning Post (Chenbao) serialized Qu Qiubai's long correspondence, "The Humanization of Communism: The Tenth All-Russian Congress of the Communist Party." While providing panoramic coverage of the Tenth Congress of the RCP(B), it also introduced Soviet Russia's "tax in kind" [8] policy, noting that it "prohibits private buying and selling" while "allowing peasants and workers to exchange among themselves and engage in free small-scale trade, while still preserving centralism," and that "the Communist Party’s implementation of the taxation method is based on the hope that peasants will cultivate more land and increase agricultural output." Among Lenin’s writings on the New Economic Policy, The Tax in Kind was the most widely translated and introduced in early China. This included: an abridged translation by Wei Zhi titled "Russia's Recent Economic Status" in The Eastern Miscellany (Dongfang Zazhi), Vol. 18, No. 22 (November 25, 1921); an abridged translation by Mo Han titled "The Current Status of Russia's Economy" in the monthly Today (Jinri) (February 15, 1922); a serialized abridged translation by Li Chunfan titled "The Significance of the Agricultural Tax" in Awakening (Juewu), a supplement to the Republic Daily (Minguo Ribao) (February 1924); and the same content included in the Lenin Memorial Volume issued in Beijing and other places for the "National Memorial Meeting for Lenin" on March 24, 1924. Additionally, on March 10, 1924, The Eastern Miscellany, Vol. 21, No. 5, published Song Yu’s translation of "Cooperatives and the New Economic Policy" (i.e., On Cooperation). Volume 16 of the Chinese edition of Selected Works of Lenin published by the Liberation Agency in Yan'an, as well as the second volume of the two-volume Selected Works of Lenin published by the Foreign Languages Publishing House in 1947, also included some of Lenin's documents on the New Economic Policy. After the founding of New China, these documents were centrally collected in works such as the Collected Works of Lenin and Selected Works of Lenin.
In the late 1970s and early 1980s, against the backdrop of reform and opening up, content related to the New Economic Policy received concentrated attention in China. Chinese Communists actively drew on Soviet experiences and lessons in practice, deepening their understanding of the laws governing socialist economic construction. They incorporated the concept of "market" into the socialist category and achieved a brand-new understanding and mastery of it. While exploring what socialism is and how to build it, Deng Xiaoping highly identified with and fully drew upon Lenin’s ideas regarding the New Economic Policy. He pointed out: "As to what socialism is, the Soviet Union worked at it for many years and did not get it entirely clear. Perhaps Lenin’s approach was better—he implemented the New Economic Policy." In February 1987, Deng Xiaoping further noted: "Planning and markets are both methods. As long as they are beneficial to the development of the productive forces, they can be utilized. If they serve socialism, they are socialist; if they serve capitalism, they are capitalist." In early 1992, during his southern tour talks, Deng Xiaoping stripped "the market" from the essential level that distinguishes the nature of social systems: "Whether there is more planning or more market is not the essential distinction between socialism and capitalism... both planning and markets are economic means." Thus, the market was no longer a signifier for distinguishing the nature of a society, but a method for promoting and regulating production, and a mode or means of resource allocation under the principle of the exchange of commodities at equal value. Its relationship with planning transformed into a relationship with the government. With the development of the practice of socialism with Chinese characteristics, the status of the market in resource allocation transitioned from "planning as the primary, market as the secondary" to the market "playing a basic role," and finally to "playing a decisive role." In October 2017, the report of the 19th National Congress of the CPC, grounded in the new temporal coordinates [9] and changes in the principal contradiction in society, further emphasized "letting the market play a decisive role in resource allocation and letting the government play its role better." After its dissemination and adaptation in China, the concept of the market in Marxist political economy was accepted by the political economy of socialism with Chinese characteristics through a second semantic shift.
III. The Appropriation and Adaptation of the Concept of "Commodity Economy"
The concept of "commodity economy" was absorbed from Lenin’s economic doctrines, and it is beyond doubt that the term has deep Russian roots. The Chinese shāngpǐn jīngjì is translated from the term tovarnoye khozyaystvo in Lenin’s original texts. As research has verified: "'Commodity economy' is a Russian word expressing the same content as 'money economy' and 'credit economy,' whereas the German language lacks the specific term 'commodity economy' (Warenwirtschaft); consequently, Marx used only concepts such as 'money economy,' 'credit economy,' and 'exchange economy' in Das Kapital."
At the end of the 19th century, Lenin proposed the concept of "commodity economy" during his theoretical struggle against the Narodniks [10]. In 1893, Lenin wrote in "New Economic Developments in Peasant Life": "To prove that small-scale economy is inevitably squeezed out by large-scale economy, it is not enough to establish that large-scale economy is more profitable (the cost of products is much lower); one must also establish that the money economy (more precisely, the commodity economy) prevails over the natural economy." When Lenin first proposed the concept of commodity economy, he not only affirmed its progressive nature relative to the natural economy but also equated it with "money economy" within the capitalist category. In 1894, Lenin pointed out clearly in What the "Friends of the People" Are and How They Fight the Social-Democrats: "The basis of our economic system is commodity economy, and the leader of commodity economy, in our country as everywhere else, is the bourgeoisie." This identified the capitalist attributes of the commodity economy. In "The Economic Content of Narodnism and the Criticism of it in Mr. Struve's Book," Lenin noted even more bluntly: "Russian data also confirm the law that 'commodity economy is capitalist economy.'" Thus, it can be seen that the "commodity economy" initially proposed by Lenin was a concept corresponding to the natural economy and belonging to the capitalist category.
Prior to the implementation of the New Economic Policy, during the practice of "direct transition" [11] to socialism, Lenin consistently adhered to traditional Marxist ideas, viewing the commodity economy as something alien to socialism. He said: "Socialism calls for the abolition of the power of money and of capital, the abolition of all private ownership of the means of production, and the abolition of commodity economy." "As long as exchange still exists, to speak of socialism is ridiculous." After the October Revolution, Lenin further implemented the idea that commodity economy was incompatible with socialism in the practice of socialist construction. On one hand, he took measures to "expropriate the expropriators," attempting to abolish the private ownership of the means of production—the basis for the existence of commodity economy—and achieve public ownership through the nationalization of banks, land, transport, posts, and telecommunications. On the other hand, he sought to eliminate commodity economy at the level of commodity exchange. Particularly during the period of War Communism from 1918 to 1920, Lenin advocated regulating the nation’s production and distribution according to communist principles, attempting to further eliminate commodity economy through measures such as abolishing commodity-money relations, closing markets, and replacing free trade with the planned exchange of products.
In March 1921, the Tenth Congress of the RCP(B) passed a resolution to transition from War Communism to the New Economic Policy. In the early stages of the NEP, for the purpose of consolidating the relationship between the proletariat and the peasantry, restoring and developing agricultural production, and obtaining the minimum grain required by cities and factories, Lenin stated that as long as one could "keep within bounds," it was permissible to "restore freedom of trade for the small peasant to a certain extent." This allowed for the existence of the commodity economy to a certain degree. By late 1921, after the exchange of commodities carried out through cooperatives transformed into commodity trade, buying and selling, monetary circulation, and cash transactions, Lenin proposed the vision of the state withdrawing further and only playing a regulatory role in commerce and monetary circulation. This was, in fact, already a breakthrough from traditional Marxist concepts. Although he proposed in 1922 to "master commerce, guide commerce, and keep it within certain limits," and even re-emphasized the importance of cooperatives for building socialism in On Cooperation—still viewing "commodity economy" as an antithesis to the socialist category—he had, after all, made a breakthrough regarding the traditional conception of "commodity economy."
As an original concept of Lenin's, "commodity economy" entered China in the 1920s with the early spread of Leninism and the Chinese translation of Lenin's works. Its initial meaning referred to "an economic form in which production is carried out for exchange." In 1920, the journals The Dawn (Shuguang), Vol. 2, No. 1, and New Youth (Xin Qingnian), Vol. 8, No. 4, published translations of "Economy in the Transition Era" by WPK and Zhen Ying respectively—referring to the work Economics and Politics in the Era of the Dictatorship of the Proletariat written by Lenin on the second anniversary of the establishment of Soviet power. These translations contained scattered mentions of some of Lenin's views on the commodity economy. In the abridged translations of The Tax in Kind by Wei Zhi, Mo Han, and Li Chunfan in 1921, 1922, and 1924, there were also analyses of the five economic sectors [12] in the Russian economy and content regarding utilizing commerce—a capitalist factor—to restore agricultural development. For example, Lenin pointed out: "We cannot completely prohibit or prevent the development of private exchange, i.e., commerce, i.e., capitalism, which does not pass through the hands of the state; it and the existence of countless small producers are both inevitable."
In June 1923, Qu Qiubai began to appropriate the term "commodity economy" in The Development of the Chinese Bourgeoisie. In September of the same year, he used the concept again in From Civil Rightsism to Socialism, pointing out: "On the basis of commodity economy, the development of capitalism is inevitable. No matter what, the growth of the bourgeoisie cannot be prohibited. Attempting to leap over the bourgeoisie to immediately realize Utopia is an absolute impossibility." By the late 1920s and early 1930s, the concept of "commodity economy" within the capitalist category had been absorbed into the Chinese language. For example, the Chinese Encyclopedic Dictionary published in 1930 defined it as: "Under the system of capitalist private property, all products produced not for one's own needs but for the market are commodities; an economy producing for the market is a commodity economy."
Unlike the translation and introduction of the "market" concept in China, Lenin’s view that the "commodity economy"—characterized by commodity-money relations—should be used during the socialist transition period to develop the socialist economy by utilizing capitalism attracted great attention from Chinese Marxists after the "Three Great Transformations" [13]. After the founding of New China, the problem of understanding the commodity economy gradually surfaced. Particularly after the completion of the "Three Great Transformations" and the establishment of the socialist system, the "Great Leap Forward" and the "Communist Wind" [14] that appeared in economic construction led to a "leftist" erroneous trend of thought holding that the commodity economy must be eliminated. In November 1958, addressing this issue, Mao Zedong pointed out: "Only when the state has the right to dispose of all products will it be possible for the commodity economy to become unnecessary and disappear. As long as two types of ownership [15] exist, commodity production and commodity exchange are extremely necessary and extremely useful."
Although Chinese Communists invoked the concept of the commodity economy quite early on, a true adaptation in line with Chinese realities occurred only after the Reform and Opening-up. In October 1984, the "Decision of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China on Reform of the Economic Structure," adopted at the Third Plenary Session of the 12th Central Committee, pointed out: "The socialist planned economy is a planned commodity economy based on public ownership"; "the full development of the commodity economy is an insurmountable stage in the development of a socialist economy"; and "we must break through the traditional concept of pitting the planned economy against the commodity economy." It further stated: "The difference between a socialist economy and a capitalist economy lies not in whether a commodity economy exists or whether the law of value [16] plays a role, but in the difference in ownership, in whether an exploiting class exists... and in what production purposes are served." This theoretically elucidated the relationship between the nature of society and the commodity economy as one of determination and being determined, breaking free from the ideological shackles of the traditional view that the commodity economy was antithetical to socialism. In April 1986, the "Report on the Seventh Five-Year Plan," approved by the Fourth Session of the Sixth National People's Congress, further noted: "The commodity economy we want to develop is, in its totality, a socialist commodity economy. This commodity economy is based on public ownership, implements the principle of distribution according to work [17], and is planned and controlled."
The proposal of a "socialist commodity economy" developed Lenin's concept of the "commodity economy," equating its systems and mechanisms with the socialist market economy to serve the economic construction of socialism with Chinese characteristics.
IV. The Introduction and Application of the Concept of "State Capitalism"
"State capitalism" originally belonged to the category of capitalist economics; it only came into high-frequency use as a socialist category during the period of the New Economic Policy in Soviet Russia. As a basic Marxist concept, Lenin's "state capitalism" refers to "a capitalist economic form held by the state. Its nature and role are determined by the nature of the state." At the end of 1916, Lenin first used this concept in his "Draft Theses on the Message from the International Socialist Committee and the Socialist Parties of Various Countries" to reveal the essence of capitalist changes during World War I. Lenin pointed out: "World capitalism has not only taken a step forward toward general concentration, but also toward the transition from general monopoly to state capitalism on a larger scale than in the past." Clearly, the concept of "state capitalism" used by Lenin here refers to state-monopoly capitalism—capitalism under the direct control of a capitalist state under the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie—and thus belongs to the category of capitalism.
Around the time of the October Revolution, Lenin proposed the idea of transforming and utilizing state capitalism, even viewing it as a preparatory stage, an economic component, and a strategic line for socialism; however, in essence, it was still placed within the capitalist category. During the implementation of the New Economic Policy, faced with the question of what state capitalism would look like in a communist society, Lenin established a special concept of "state capitalism" under the dictatorship of the proletariat based on a profound reflection on the practice of socialist construction. First, Lenin proposed four plus one ("4+1") main forms of state capitalism under the dictatorship of the proletariat. In April 1921, in "The Tax in Kind," Lenin detailed four main forms of state capitalism: the concession system for foreign capitalists, the cooperative system in alliance with small commodity producers, the commission agency system (consisting of purchasing and selling on behalf of the state) with domestic merchants, and the leasing system with domestic large capitalists. In January 1923, Lenin pointed out in "On Cooperation": "Under our present system, cooperative enterprises differ from private capitalist enterprises because they are collective enterprises, but do not differ from socialist enterprises." This essentially brought cooperative enterprises—which united private capitalist enterprises under the socialist system with purely socialist enterprises—into the socialist category. Second, Lenin re-elucidated the concept of "state capitalism" under the dictatorship of the proletariat. In July 1921, in his "Report on the Tactics of the Russian Communist Party" delivered at the Third Congress of the Communist International, Lenin stated that while the practices of state capitalism might be the same in states of two different natures, in a proletarian state, such capitalism—even if it meant paying a "tribute" to the bourgeoisie—would still be beneficial to the working class. In March 1922, in the "Political Report of the Central Committee" at the Eleventh Congress of the RCP (B), Lenin explained the concept of "state capitalism" in a proletarian state: "It is capitalism that we shall be able to restrain, and the limits of which we shall be able to fix. This state capitalism is connected with the state, and the state is the workers, the advanced section of the workers, the vanguard—is us." Here, the concept of "state capitalism" discussed by Lenin is capitalism determined by the nature of the "state"; it is the combination of capital with socialist state power, an economic form of capitalism under the control and mastery of the proletarian state. Thus, after profound reflection on the setbacks of socialist construction, Lenin moved the concept of "state capitalism" from the capitalist category into the socialist category.
After the May Fourth Movement [18], the concept of "state capitalism" entered China along with the early dissemination of Leninism. Its initial meaning referred to a system where the state, dominated by the bourgeoisie, nationalized production apparatuses and industries were managed by the state. According to existing historical research, as early as September 1, 1920, the Chinese concept of "state capitalism" (国家资本主义) appeared as a translation of the English term "State Capitalism" in Wilfred K. Humphries’s "My Life in Russia," translated by Han Jun and published in New Youth (Xin Qingnian). Subsequently, during the translation of Lenin's works into Chinese, this concept converged with Lenin's original term "Gosudarstvennyy kapitalizm" (Государственный капитализм). From May 12 to June 15, 1921, Qu Qiubai recounted the four main forms of state capitalism proposed by Lenin in a series of reports titled "Economic Issues in Soviet Russia." On July 3 of the same year, Zuo Lin published "Lenin's Talk on Statism" in Morning Post (Chenbao), which included an excerpted translation of Lenin's discourses on state capitalism: "Lenin said: state capitalism—that is, organized production under the rule and management of the state on the basis of capitalism—represents a great step forward for Russia." "Advancing to a kind of state capitalism cannot be said to be a return to the old position. In fact, it is a legitimate progress." On August 10, 1922, Lin Keyi published "Why Russia Changed to the New Economic Policy" in The Eastern Miscellany (Dongfang Zazhi), Vol. 19, No. 15, recounting Lenin's concept of "state capitalism" under the dictatorship of the proletariat: "The state capitalism they practice is naturally not meant to establish capitalism, but to facilitate the socialist transition." "State capitalism practiced under the proletarian dictatorship can have its national economic forces directed by the will of the proletariat."
The earliest appearance of the concept of "state capitalism" in extant Chinese translations of Lenin’s works is in "The Tax in Kind." On November 25, 1921, The Eastern Miscellany, Vol. 18, No. 22, published an abridged translation by Wei Zhi titled "The Current Economic Status of Russia," which was the first translated text of Lenin's work to explain "state capitalism," containing part of Lenin’s contemporary discourses on the subject. In 1922 and 1924, identical translated texts by Mohan and Li Chunfan appeared successively. On June 15, 1923, the first issue of New Youth published an abridged translation of Lenin’s report to the Fourth Congress of the Communist International, "Five Years of the Russian Revolution and the Prospects of the World Revolution," titled "Five Years of the Russian Revolution," which stated: "Our state capitalism is thus different from ordinary state capitalism. The land belongs to the proletarian state, and the most vital industries also belong to the proletarian state." On March 10, 1924, The Eastern Miscellany, Vol. 21, No. 5, published a translation of "On Cooperation" containing Lenin's discourse on "state capitalism." During the Yan'an period [19], the 1947 edition of the Selected Works of Lenin, Volume II, also included other writings related to state capitalism during the implementation of the New Economic Policy.
However, under the historical conditions of Soviet Russia at that time, state capitalism did not see significant development. After the founding of the New China, Chinese Communists invoked Lenin's concept of "state capitalism" during the socialist transformation of national capitalist industry and commerce, while making adjustments. First, regarding the forms of implementation, China adopted two transitional forms: primary and advanced. Primary forms included commissioned processing, planned ordering, and centralized purchasing and marketing in industry, as well as commissioned sales and agency purchasing/selling in commerce. Advanced forms referred to the joint state-private ownership [20] of individual enterprises starting in 1953 and the whole-industry joint ownership starting in 1955. This involved public shares entering private enterprises with public representatives in charge, while the original capitalists served as representatives for the private side; production profits were distributed according to the "four horses sharing fat" [21] method. By the end of 1956, China had basically completed the socialist transformation of capitalist industry and commerce, thereby further enriching and developing the Marxist-Leninist theory of the socialist transition period in theory and practice. Second, in the current stage of China's basic economic system—where public ownership is the mainstay and multiple forms of ownership develop together—economic components of state capitalism are retained. These include Chinese-foreign joint ventures, wholly foreign-owned enterprises, and private enterprises that process or manufacture for state-owned enterprises. The essence of these economic forms is that the state under the people's democratic dictatorship can restrict them and define the scope of their activities; they serve as a beneficial supplement to China's socialist economy.
V. Conclusion
The process of translating Marxist classics into Chinese is an indispensable step in the Sinicization of Marxism. It not only promoted the wide dissemination of Marxism-Leninism in China but also influenced the historical process of the emergence and development of Sinicized Marxism, exerting a profound impact especially on the generation of conceptual terminology. The evolution of conceptual meanings in the translation of Lenin's economic works is a microcosm of the Sinicization of Marxism. The Chinese translation of these texts has had a major influence on Chinese Marxists and Sinicized Marxism during the different periods of China's revolution, construction, and reform.
By examining the evolution of the meanings of "market," "commodity economy," and "state capitalism" in the translation of Lenin's economic works, we can clearly see the following: First, political economy with Chinese characteristics is a creative inheritance and innovative development of Marxist-Leninist political economy. This is primarily manifested in the fact that after Lenin's economic thought was introduced to China, through our continuous translation, study, and dissemination of the classic original works, new economic concepts and terms were either introduced or generated, and some old terms underwent new changes. These changes maintained dialectical materialism and historical materialism while embodying the unique understanding of early Chinese progressive intellectuals. They not only fit the Chinese context better but also aligned more closely with Chinese reality, deepening our understanding of Marxist-Leninist economic theory. Second, the existence of specificities such as temporal and spatial contexts, national culture, differences in thinking, and the cross-linguistic dissemination of language determines that the dissemination of Marxist-Leninist economic theory in China would inevitably result in the phenomenon of shifts and enrichment in conceptual meaning. These changes are not simple distortions, trimmings, or graftings, but are new developments of the theory that combine concrete reality based on the persistence of Marxist positions, viewpoints, and methods. This both avoided the rigidification and dogmatization of Marxist-Leninist economic theory and promoted its dissemination and reception in China, leading to the birth of the economic theory of socialism with Chinese characteristics and ensuring that the torch of Marxist-Leninist economic theory was passed down in China. Therefore, through the succession of conceptual terminology, we can see that the transition from the original concepts of Marxist-Leninist economics to the concepts of Sinicized Marxist political economy is a process of continuous movement between text and practice, and between theory and practice, rather than a linear input of theory or mere "planting of seeds."
At present, China’s reform and opening up has spanned more than 40 years; we have not only achieved immense success in practice but have also made significant progress in theory. Particularly since the 18th National Congress of the CPC, Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era—including his economic thought—has achieved a new leap in the Sinicization of Marxism. Reviewing the evolution of conceptual meanings in the history of the Chinese translation of Lenin's economic works, we can see that the basic concepts and terminology of Marxist-Leninist economic thought were not immutable after entering China. Rather, they have been exceptionally vivid and vital; promoting the revolution of concepts and terminology is both a fine tradition of Marxism-Leninism and an inexhaustible driving force and internal law for promoting the innovative development of Marxist-Leninist theory. This remains of important reference significance for us to further emancipate the mind [22] and promote the revolution of concepts and terminology as well as the theoretical development and innovation of political economy with Chinese characteristics.
On May 17, 2016, General Secretary Xi Jinping delivered an important speech at the Symposium on the Work of Philosophy and Social Sciences, pointing out: "To give play to the role of our country’s philosophy and social sciences, we must pay attention to strengthening the construction of the discourse system. In interpreting Chinese practice and constructing Chinese theory, we should have the greatest right to speak; however, in reality, the voice of our country’s philosophy and social sciences in the international arena is still relatively small, and we are still in a situation where we have the truth but cannot speak it, or if we speak it, it does not spread. We must be adept at refining identifying concepts and creating new concepts, new categories, and new expressions that are easily understood and accepted by the international community, thereby guiding the international academic community to carry out research and discussion." In summary, on the basis of firmly adhering to dialectical materialism and historical materialism, we should be adept at integrating the basic principles of Marxism with China's specific realities and with fine traditional Chinese culture (the "Two Combinations") [23]. We must scientifically create and condense new concepts, new terms, and new expressions of political economy with Chinese characteristics that possess Chinese characteristics, Chinese style, and Chinese spirit [24], while also being capable of connecting China and the outside world, so as to proactively promote the innovative and creative development of Marxist-Leninist political economic thought in China.
(Author: Zhou Qiang, School of Marxism, Guangxi Normal University) Web Editor: Tongxin Source: Foreign Theoretical Trends, Issue 2, 2022