Wang Fanxi, a leader of the Chinese Trotskyists, wrote this book on Mao more than fifty years ago. He did so while in exile in the then Portuguese colony of Macau, across the water from Hong Kong, where he had been sent in 1949 to represent his comrades in China, soon to disappear for decades into Mao’s jails. The book is an analytical study whose strength lies less in describing Mao’s life than in explaining Maoism and setting out a radical view on it as a political movement and a current of thought within the Marxist tradition to which both Wang and Mao belonged. With its clear and provoking thesis, it has, since its writing, stood the test of time far better than the hundreds of descriptive studies that have in the meantime come and gone.
Over the past seven decades—since the 1949 Revolution—every aspect of Chinese society has been profoundly transformed multiple times. No sector has experienced more tumultuous twists and turns than industry. The eight articles contained in this volume examine these twists and turns, focusing on those aspects of industrial relations that involve contention and power, that is, factory politics. They were selected among articles that have appeared in the Chinese journal
Open Times (开放时代) over the past decade. Because
Open Times has a well-earned reputation for publishing diverse viewpoints, it has been able to attract some of the very best scholarship in China.
China has become a land of protests, though the Chinese state possesses considerable administrative capacity. In this volume, Manfred Elfstrom and Yao Li provide an overview of Chinese contentious politics. They dig deep into major forms of social conflict, explore structural explanations for
why protest occurs in China, and describe the ways in which various organizations and framings of issues by citizens affect
how protests play out. Shifting to
where grassroots activism ultimately leads, Elfstrom and Li survey China’s coercive and conciliatory institutions for maintaining social control, document and explain patterns in the state’s handling of different types of resistance, and examine the social and political impact of unrest. This work not only contributes to a deeper understanding of contentious politics and governance in China, but also provides insights for studies of social movements and authoritarian politics in general.
This article analyzes the “internal labor subcontracting” production model within a state-owned enterprise through the lens of labor process theory. Analyzing the emergence and development of internal labor subcontracting shows how the rise of transnational labor processes under economic globalization and market transition shaped the practical logic behind the reform of China’s state-owned enterprises and helped state-owned enterprises integrate themselves into a local practice of neoliberal globalization characterized by “flexible accumulation.” This paper argues that the change in production models was spurred by two logics: (1) the reorganization of production under transnational labor processes and (2) labor substitution under shop floor politics. If Western enterprises shifted from Fordism-Keynesianism to flexible accumulation by “spatial adjustment” strategies, then Chinese state-owned enterprises integrated themselves into a global production system dependent upon flexible accumulation by utilizing an informal labor market to directly transform internal production models.
Since the 1990s, Walmart, the world’s largest retailer, has faced growing public criticism for using sweatshop labor in its supply chains. In 1992, when corporate social responsibility practices centering on adoption and implementation of codes of conduct regarding labor standards were gaining steam, Walmart also adopted its own codes of conduct, “Standards for Suppliers,” requiring its overseas suppliers to comply with certain minimum labor standards. Based on empirical studies at three of Walmart’s toy supplier factories located in Shenzhen, this paper examines the dynamics and effectiveness of Walmart codes on workplace labor standards.
The 2012 direct union elections in Guangdong Province have received widespread attention from the public and are widely regarded as the direction of reform for China’s unions. Behind this reform lies not only bottom-up pressure of the workers’ movement, but also top-down demands for social development, as well as the outcomes of Guangdong’s industrial transformation policies. Although Guangdong’s model of direct union elections has been successful in some enterprises, especially with regard to collective bargaining and the work style of union officials, the further adoption of direct union elections has continued to encounter many obstacles, including the power of capital, the level of maturity of the workers themselves, the local government’s way of thinking, and the attitudes of higher level unions. These obstacles have impeded the further development and improvement of direct union elections.
Soon after the founding of the People’s Republic, workers’ social status and standard of living saw dramatic increases. Ordinary people displayed passion and enthusiasm for their work. However, the state began to ignore the needs of workers as it slowly became committed to plans for modernization and sought to impose control of production through pressure from individual officials, political campaigns, and production targets. In order to protect their own interests, direct producers responded to this pressure in many different ways. In this historical process, labor enthusiasm was slowly replaced by passivity, negativity, cheating, and fraudulent practices. High modernist planners often believed their vision for society was more carefully considered and farsighted than the facts would justify, but their plans often ended up harming the intended beneficiaries and impeding development.
In The Politics of Production, Michael Burawoy emphasized how different production regimes shape the political and ideological aspects of workers’ resistance. However, the present study’s analysis of collective struggles by the new generation of Chinese migrant workers shows that, aside from the regulatory role of production regimes themselves, the unique life experiences and social traits of China’s new workers influence how different production regimes are experienced. Moreover, through the combination of different production regimes, workers’ experiences and traits also engender unique forms of life, bonds of solidarity, and methods of mobilization. This article emphasizes the political significance of life. The social relations and experiences forged through production and life give rise to three patterns of struggle among China’s new workers: (a) offensive struggles to advance their interests based on relationships among coworkers and classmates, (b) atomized struggles to both defend and advance their interests, and (c) riots. Each pattern of struggle demarcates a unique challenge in China, “the world’s workshop.”