This evokes an interesting and important question, especially if confusion is to be avoided: Politically in Red China, who actually is on the right, and who is on the left? And what do these terms mean in the context of Communist Chinese politics and policies?
The answer is not easy, since Peking's leaders do not employ terminology similar to Westerners in defining their political views. Consistency is not necessarily a strong suit either. They ordinarily use "conservative" to refer to a foreign political party. "Liberal" some times means an advocate of greater political freedoms, but it can also be a synonym for decadence. There are "capitalist roaders" and those who support "bourgeois liberalization." There are those termed "orthodox" (or sometimes "hardliners") and there are "reformers." There are "rightists" and "leftists." How can all this be sorted out?
"Right" and "left" mean something similar to what the U.S. and other Western countries mean by right and left politically. But even these terms cause some misunderstanding. We can dispel some confusion by identifying people who are considered on the left and the right the in mainland, and then see what each stands for politically.
The left on the political spectrum consists of numerous groupings: Maoists, Communist Party cadres, most officials that joined the Party or government during the Cultural Revolution, former Red Guards (unless they have undergone a conversion), most middle and lower level party and government functionaries (the "bureaucrats"), the military (excluding the technical types), the media, and ideologues (Party and otherwise).
The right is comprised of both economic and political reformers who have recently been in command of the Party and government (though it is now less certain), factory managers (Party members or otherwise), businessmen (actually a very small group), intellectuals, scientists, and technicians.
The peasants are generally rightists. But the unsuccessful ones and those not benefiting from Teng's reforms—including incentives and a form of free market capitalism in agriculture-are not. Workers are split: those favoring incentives, capitalist production techniques, and foreign trade sympathize with the right. Those hurt by the reforms support the left. Shop owners are for the most part on the right politically.
Teng is a rightist. So is, or rather was, recently purged (technically resigned) Communist Party "Secretary General" Hu Yao-pang, who advocated democracy too strongly and is said to have encouraged the student demonstrations which got out of hand and so disturbed the Party leadership. "Premier" Chao Tzu-yang, who is now acting Party "Secretary-General," is also considered a rightist. Intellectual leader Li Fangchi, also recently dumped by the Party for his involvement in the student demonstrations, and others in the Academy of Sciences have been labeled rightists.
To these may be added technocrats in the Party and most newly appointed Party members, especially the younger ones. Students who have returned from abroad to assume positions of importance are also mostly rightists.
On the left is Chen Yun, Red China's elder "economist." Also Peng Chen, a specialist in Party and government organization, who heads the standing committee of the "National People's Congress." Li Hsien-nien, the aging "President" is considered a leftist, as is "Vice Premier" Li Peng, who some say may take Chao's place.
To complicate this listing, however, it must be remembered that Chen, Peng and Li were all Teng's supporters when he returned to power in 1977-78 and ousted the radically leftist "Gang of Four." Where are these three now in the political spectrum? Some say they are rightists or moderates that have turned left. Others say Teng's "radical rightist" policies went too far for them.
What do the rightists and leftists stand for? Policies certainly help tell what the labels mean and clear up some of the confusion.
First, a word of caution. Both the right and the left are of course Communists. Neither has advocated getting rid of Communism, although some on the left have accused the right of this. The left advocates more government and a larger Communist Party with in creased power, authority, and prestige. They want more state ownership, preach egalitarianism, oppose incentives, and laud job security based on state control and ownership. They are isolationist in foreign policy, advocate self-reliance instead of depending on foreign trade, can be identified as anti-Western and anti-American, and are more pro-Soviet than the right.
Moreover, the left is considered more nationalistic and irredentist, at least regarding the issue of Taiwan. The left is tough on crime—seeing it as a manifestation of too much capitalism and Western influence.
In contrast, the right wants to cut the size of the Party, government, and military. Rightists, including Teng and company, want all three of these segments of society to have fewer prerogatives and less authority. The right wants to decentralize political power. At one point, Hu Yao-pang even suggested elections with more than one candidate running.
Economically, the right favors a free market, actually meaning only somewhat freer than it is at present. Teng and his supporters have advocated incentives to increase production, and have promoted foreign trade and foreign investment. They reason the country is better off and stronger if it is wealthier.
The right pushes for a more active foreign policy-a policy they call the "open door," favoring foreign contacts instead of autarky. They argue that foreign influence will help speed up the recovery from Maoism—which, they say, set the nation back a decade or so in everything from economics and technological development to education. :
The right advocates more technology; in the ideological purity debate, they favor "expert" over "Red." Teng has provided more funds for education and has promoted a meritocracy, engendering charges from the left of being "elitist. "
Today, is the right or the left on the ascendancy? In January the right suffered a setback with Hu's ouster. He was Teng's handpicked successor: for eight years his apparent heir. The left subsequently gained influence in the media and the Party, starting a nationwide campaign against "bourgeois liberalization," essentially an attack on any movement toward capitalism and democracy.
Economic policy also shifted left, urging more planning and downplaying any free market mechanisms. At the March session of the "National People's Congress," rightist proposals to give factory managers more authority and Party cadres less say were scrapped. Civil and political liberties advocated by the right have been shelved—perhaps to die. The military at the same time increased its emphasis on ideological awareness among the troops. In short, the left made rather extensive gains during the power struggle. By late summer the jockeying for position and power between right and left became even more difficult to follow as both sides marshaled their forces. But the right seems to be consolidating and holding on to earlier gains.
Just when analysts think there is some clarity in the "right" and "left" picture, an alternative interpretation of this year's events comes to mind: Teng, by sacking Hu, was able himself to move more left, which may well have been his intent all along. He may have sought to demonstrate his power by shifting politically—as Mao had done so many times in his career.
Democracy has become a minor topic lately. Some observers believe that perhaps Teng was not particularly interested in a Western-style government anyway, nor in civil, political, and hu;man rights in general. Teng has spoken out against these, saying that a system of separation of powers was not for China, and that human rights were not of particular concern.
Perhaps Teng used the apparent move toward more democracy to put his opponents off guard before making his changes. In the process he preserved the reforms needed for economic growth, for rightist economic policies have recently seemed as strong as before. At this point, Teng's leadership remains firmly in place, and perhaps even more so after the departure of Hu, who may have been used as a "lightening rod" during this year's political maneuverings.
In sum, the recent moves to the left in mainland China may not mean what moving left means in the West. But clearly the country is not "going conservative" as the word is normally understood. The political winds have shifted many times already in the last three decades, to say nothing of this year. The events of October and in subsequent months promise more change as well, and perhaps more permutations on the definitions of who is "right" and who is "left"—politically and physically. —(Dr. John F. Copper is the Stanley J. Buckman Distinguished Professor of International Studies at Rhodes College, Memphis, Tennessee).