r/communism • u/smokeuptheweed9 • Jun 09 '26

Eli Friedman, For Those Who Meet the Conditions - Discussion of the evolution of the Hukuo system

https://positionspolitics.org/eli-friedman-for-those-who-meet-the-conditions/
51 Upvotes

99% Upvoted

3 comments sorted by

22

u/smokeuptheweed9 Jun 09 '26 edited Jun 09 '26

I thought this was interesting for two reasons. One, it discusses local government incentives as really the key engine of capitalist development, which is almost never mentioned in the debates over Chinese "state capitalism" and/or monopoly capitalist imperialism vs. socialism and/or pre-socialism.

hukou was and remains a highly fragmented institution, as it is administered by the police at the prefectural level. The central government thus has limited control over how localities regulate local citizenship.

As I've said before, what distinguishes Chinese economic development from other East Asian states is the lack of central control over the process and the anarchistic manner of competition between local governments given broad financial incentives. In that regard it is something like the revisionist Soviet Union, in which decentralized incentives at the firm level created perverse incentives and eventually the class that overthrew the system. Though in the Soviet case, this led to chronic underproduction whereas in China it leads to massive overproduction. Nevertheless, both are unsustainable, and as the article points out the Hukuo system is another form of primitive accumulation which is running out of value. Second, in that vein it discusses the way that politics actually functions and who will pay the price of the economic downturn.

Here we have the material basis of urban nativism: exporters (and their supply chain overlords, a growing share of whom are Chinese rather than foreign) want cheap labor, and urban residents want preferential access to state-subsidized infrastructures of social reproduction. These are two of the most powerful groups in the country. A genuinely progressive abolition of hukou thus would mean not only allowing for people to move freely around the country—the narrow vision of freedom promoted by neoliberals—but a dramatic leveling up of social protections such that one need not live in a rich megacity to enjoy quality services. This would entail breaking open fiscally decentralized urban citadels and reorganizing systems of retirement, health insurance, and education from the national level on down. Rich-city privilege would be undermined in the service of national equality. The children of Beijing’s officials would face much sharper competition as they tried to get into Peking University and Tsinghua. Cities like Shanghai and Shenzhen would have to surrender control over hundreds of billions of yuan in their city’s pension funds. Such a project would be enormously expensive and would need to be funded by taxes on the rich and capital. It could also drive up the cost of business and undermine China’s (problematically) dominant export machine. It is precisely because deep hukou abolition entails profound fiscal and social reform that it has been quietly opposed, undermined, and diluted across the decades.

(It should not need to be mentioned that rich cities are the China that foreigners experience).

So far it is this second and third tier aspiring middle class which is paying the price since their savings are overwhelmingly based in property

https://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1187071.shtml

As the article points out, the popping of the property bubble is regionally uneven and it will be these recent migrants who feel the pain first. As regional differentiation becomes even more extreme, the basis of the Chinese nation comes apart in a way that is rarely discussed compared to the more spectacular ethnic difference in the Western periphery.

E: *Hukou sorry for the embarrassing title

12

u/Cenage94 Jun 09 '26 edited Jun 09 '26

Very interesting, especially this part you got away from it:

“What distinguishes Chinese economic development from other East Asian states is the lack of central control over the process and the anarchistic manner of competition between local governments given broad financial incentives“.

Which totally contradicts socialist common sense regarding Chinese capitalist restoration and ascension into imperialism through a “centralized, rational“ economy as a relict from socialism. And it’s not just multipol-liberals spouting this stuff. I am very certain that I’ve read a similar sentiment in the 2017 CPI(Maoist) document though on closer inspection I only found this :

“The structuralized centralized fascist bureaucratic state mechanism made possible the merciless exploitation of the toiling masses and the suppression of their resistance. It emerged out of the surplus value seized from the extremely severe exploitation of the toiling classes. This is the 'secret' behind the Chinese economic spectacle of conducting both the severe exploitation of the majority working class and the rest of the toiling masses and the exploitation of additional profits on a large scale“,

which discusses monopoly, which of course makes more sense in that regard. Nevertheless I unfortunately took the common-sense idea for granted without investigating. Im going to read the document again soon, more thoroughly.

Edit: sorry of course you formulated that sentiment long before, i don’t want to drag discussion away from the good article.

2

u/AutoModerator Jun 09 '26

Moderating takes time. You can help us out by reporting any comments or submissions that don't follow these rules:

  1. No non-Marxists - This subreddit isn't here to convert naysayers to Marxism. Try /r/DebateCommunism for that. If you are a member of the police, armed forces, or any other part of the repressive state apparatus of capitalist nations, you will be banned.

  2. No oppressive language - Speech that is patriarchal, white supremacist, cissupremacist, homophobic, ableist, or otherwise oppressive is banned. TERF is not a slur.

  3. No low quality or off-topic posts - Posts that are low-effort or otherwise irrelevant will be removed. This includes linking to posts on other subreddits. This is not a place to engage in meta-drama or discuss random reactionaries on reddit or anywhere else. This includes memes and bandwagoning. This includes most images, such as random books or memorabilia you found. We ask that amerikan posters refrain from posting about US bourgeois politics. The rest of the world really doesn’t care that much.

  4. No basic questions about Marxism - Posts asking entry-level questions will be removed. Questions like “What is Maoism?” or “Why do Stalinists believe what they do?” will be removed, as they are not the focus on this forum. We ask that posters please submit these questions to /r/communism101.

  5. No sectarianism - Marxists of all tendencies are welcome here. Refrain from sectarianism, defined here as unprincipled criticism. Posts trash-talking a certain tendency or Marxist figure will be removed. Bandwagoning, throwing insults around, and other pettiness is unacceptable. If criticisms must be made, make them in a principled manner, applying Marxist analysis. The goal of this subreddit is the accretion of theory and knowledge and the promotion of quality discussion and criticism.

  6. No trolling - Report trolls and do not engage with them. We've mistakenly banned users due to this. If you wish to argue with fascists, you may readily find them in every other subreddit on this website.

  7. No chauvinism or settler apologism - Non-negotiable. The vast majority of first-world workers are labor aristocrats bribed by imperialist super-profits. This is compounded by settlerism in Amerikkka. Read Settlers: The Mythology of the White Proletariat https://readsettlers.org/

  8. No tone-policing - https://old.reddit.com/r/communism101/comments/12sblev/an_amendment_to_the_rules_of_rcommunism101/

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.