Socio-political and socio-cultural preconditions, theoretical and methodological tools of the process of chinaization of marxism in the soviet period researches

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru

Socio-political and socio-cultural preconditions,

theoretical and methodological tools of the process of chinaization of marxism in the soviet period researches

Nataliia Yarmolitska, Candidate of Philosophical Sciences, Researcher Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Kyiv, Ukraine

Katherine Gan, Master of Political Science, PhD student Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Kyiv, Ukraine

Наталія Ярмоліцька, д-р філос. наук, наук. співроб.

Київський національний університет імені Тараса Шевченка, Київ, Україна

Катерина Ган, магістр політології, асп.

Київський національний університет імені Тараса Шевченка, Київ, Україна

СОЦІАЛЬНО-ПОЛІТИЧНІ ТА СОЦІОКУЛЬТУРНІ ПЕРЕДУМОВИ, ТЕОРЕТИКО-МЕТОДОЛОГІЧНИЙ ІНСТРУМЕНТАРІЙ ПРОЦЕСУ КИТАЇЗАЦІЇ МАРКСИЗМУ РАДЯНСЬКОГО ПЕРІОДУ ДОСЛІДЖЕННЯ

У статті розглядаються соціально-політичні та соціокультурні передумови китаїзації марксизму в дослідженнях радянського періоду. Автори проаналізували основні концепції, ідеї та підходи в контексті, в якому проводилися дані дослідження. Подано аналіз основних рис досліджень радянських учених, які з позицій ортодоксальної марксистсько-ленінської філософії висвітлювали процес будівництва соціалізму в Китаї. Акцентовано увагу на світоглядно-методологічних засадах філософської системи китаїзованого марксизму, а також на соціально-політичній доктрині "соціалізму з китайською специфікою". Висновки, зроблені авторами, дозволяють стверджувати, що в дослідженнях радянського періоду концептуальною основою розвитку Китаю визнавалася теорія побудови соціалізму з китайською специфікою, основою якої був китаізований марксизм, що здійснювався через практичне поєднання модернізації Китаю та марксизму.

Ключові слова: радянський період, марксизм-ленінізм, китаїзований марксизм, "культурна революція", "великий стрибок", маоїстська ідеологія, політика Мао Цзедуна, соціалістичне будівництво в Китаї.

political marxism chineseization

The article examines the socio-political and socio-cultural prerequisites of the Chineseization of Marxism in the studies of the Soviet period. The authors analyzed the main concepts, ideas, and approaches in the context in which the research data were carried out. An analysis of the main features of the research of Soviet scientists, who, from the standpoint of orthodox Marxist-Leninist philosophy, highlighted the process of building socialism in China, is given. Emphasis is placed on the worldview and methodological foundations of the philosophical system of Chineseized Marxism, as well as on the socio-political doctrine of "socialism with Chinese characteristics". The conclusions reached by the authors allow us to assert that in the studies of the Soviet period, the theory of building socialism with Chinese characteristics was recognized as the conceptual basis of China's development, the basis of which was Chineseized Marxism, which was carried out through a practical combination of China 's modernization and Marxism.

Keywords: Soviet period, Marxism-Leninism, Chineseized Marxism, "Cultural Revolution", "Great Leap Forward", Maoist ideology, Mao Zedong's policy, socialist construction in China.

Introduction

From the very beginning of the formation of the Soviet Union, Marxism was the state ideology, which for many years was decisive in the development of Soviet science and became the cause of its ideologization. This can be seen in the scientific research of Soviet scientists in the 60s and 80s of the 20th century, in which scientific achievements were highlighted from the angle of orthodox Marxism with an indispensable reference to the works of the classics of Marxism-Leninism. From such positions, Soviet scientists approached the coverage of socialist construction in China and emphasized the leading role of Marxism in Chinese ideology. All this was accompanied by criticism of the existing policy if it deviated from orthodox Marxism-Leninism and glorification of the existing ideology if it assured loyalty to Marxism-Leninism, the Communist Party, and dialectical materialism, which was considered the only correct methodology of scientific knowledge.

In the official Soviet thesaurus and Marxist philosophy, it was customary to talk about the role the USSR played in socialist construction in China, its support during the Chinese revolutionary movement, which took place between Marxism-Leninism, proletarian internationalism, and the anti-Marxist and bourgeois-nationalist policies of Mao Zedong. All of this was supported by statements about friendship and cooperation between the USSR and China and the formation of political space for relations between countries under the watchful eye of ideological censorship and toyed with by the Soviet leadership. Despite this, scientific research on the issues of Soviet-Chinese relations in some places bore the imprint of sharp ideological differences between the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and the Communist Party of China. Such aggravations began to unfold in the 60s of the 20th century. In general, scientific studies of the Soviet period have gone through specific periods: from the Soviet-Chinese relations from the founding of the USSR to the beginning of the 50s of the 20th century; The 50s and 60s of the 20th century marked a great friendship between the Soviet and Chinese peoples; after the 1960s, there was a significant deterioration of Soviet-Chinese relations, the departure of the People's Republic of China from the policy of friendship and cooperation with the USSR. Only in the 80s of the 20th century did the tension between the USSR and China gradually ease, which manifested itself in a balanced approach to the research of Soviet-Chinese relations that took place in the publications of Soviet scientists.

Sources

The basis of the study was monographs and brochures of Soviet scientists, which were related to the analysis of socialist construction in China. Sources in the field of research into socialist construction in China during the Soviet period were pamphlets by F. Burlatskyi, O. Bovin, and L. Delyusin, which analyze the causes of the origin of the "cultural revolution", the essence of theoretical views, the main features of Mao Zedong's ideology and politics; the historical origins of the petty-bourgeois ideology of the Maoists are exposed (Burlatskyi, 1967, 1968; Bovin, De- lyusin, 1968), as well as monographs by L. Borokh, which examine the origins of the revolution in China, the creation of the first political organization of Chinese revolutionaries, analyze the history of the penetration of the first information about socialist theories and socialist movements of Western countries, the process of acceptance of Western teachings by Chinese society (Borokh, 1971, 1984). Ya. Berger's brochure "China. Economic and geographical essay" (Berger, 1959). The books of Wang Ming and Yang Hing-shun, who lived and worked in the USSR, analyze the struggle of two paths: between the path of Marxism-Leninism and proletarian internationalism and the path of anti-Marxist Mao Zedongism and bourgeois nationalism, between the path of socialist development of the PRC and the path of antisocialist development of China; issues from the history of the struggle of the Communist Party of China for the triumph of Marxist-Leninist ideology are also briefly covered (Wang Ming, 1969; Yang Hing-shun, 1957).

Methodology

The methodological basis of the study of the prerequisites for the formation of Chineseized Marxism was the system analysis method, which made it possible to investigate the prerequisites, main stages, and theoretical tools of the process of Chineseization in the integral unity of philosophical, scientific-methodological, and cultural-historical contexts. Also, this research methodology was the principles of unity, systematicity, and objectivity. Such a comprehensive approach to studying the socio-political and cultural prerequisites of Chinese-style Marxism implemented during the existence of the totalitarian system of the Soviet period has not been comprehensively applied before. Modern Ukrainian researchers S. Rudenko and I. Liashenko noticed that "in the philosophical literature of the Soviet period (including, of course, the Ukrainian one), there were stylistic cliches that were associated with public and state life of the time" (Rudenko, Liashenko, 2020: 89). Moreover, they note that the general approach to the study of reception studies of the history of philosophy is part of comparative studies and the most effective method of studying the perception of the philosophy of Ancient China in the Ukrainian Soviet philosophy of the second half of the 20th century (Rudenko, Liashenko, 2020).

Results

The results of the perception of the socio-political and socio-cultural prerequisites of the Chineseization of Marxism in the Soviet literature of the second half of the 20th century can be considered from different angles. Currently, the authors of this article focus on the main theoretical models developed by Soviet scientists, the main problems of Chinese public opinion, the history of the formation of Marxism-Leninism in China, and key personalities in Chinese social and political opinion of the 20th century.

It is important to emphasize that in the scientific literature of the Soviet period, the theme of criticism of the rule of the imperialists, feudal lords, and the bourgeoisie, which hindered the development of China, prevailed. The victory of the People's Revolution in China in 1949 made it possible to make a significant leap forward, achieving unprecedented and exceptional successes in all areas of social life in its history. It was noted that China achieved such a victory in socialist construction thanks to the "fraternal help of socialist countries, and primarily the Soviet Union". The growing power of socialist China significantly strengthened the entire camp of socialism (Berger, 1959).

Malthus. While researching the history of China, the Soviet scientist J. Berger noted that for a long time, feudalism, which had already survived in other countries, did not cede its position to another, more progressive social formation. In this, supporters of the "population law" put forward at the end of the 18th century played a significant role in protecting the state system from revolutionary changes. This Malthusian theory, J. Berger noted, was refuted by the classics of Marxism. Neo-Malthusianism found exceptional support in Asian countries with a larger population and a low standard of living. The old Chinese reality could not convincingly refute the theories of the Malthusians, and only the new people's China was able to achieve this. The population of the People's Republic of China gradually began to grow, the population increased annually by an average of 13 million, and the annual grain harvest also increased.

As a result of such successes, China overtook the countries of Western Europe in terms of grain production per capita and made a significant leap to reach the level of the United States. Thus, the People's Revolution erased the features of the past semi-feudal, semi-colonial Chinese society and created a new social system in the country (Berger, 1959: 7-11). Capitalism began to develop in the country. With the development of industry, the appearance of cities also changed. New industrial centers are multiplying, increasing the number of inhabitants. Each era has left both creative and destructive traces in the history of China, but these achievements that have survived are sufficient proof of the high diligence and incredible talent of the Chinese people: the Great Wall of China, the Beijing Temple of Heaven, the Grand Canal (1,700 km.), which connected all the most important waterways of ancient China, Dunhuang frescoes, etc. The unique culture of the Chinese people is quite rich. Significant discoveries such as the invention of gunpowder, the compass, paper, and book printing belong to the Chinese. Fine arts, literature, and theater reached significant heights. The People's Government consistently reformed the Chinese script (Berger, 1959: 22-26).

Soviet researchers associate the prerequisites for the spread of Marxism in China with the influence of the October Revolution. Russian sinologist L. Borokh is one of the most outstanding known researchers of the revolutionary movement and public opinion of China. She studied in detail the spread of scientific socialism in China and traced the turn of Chinese thought to Marxism, which was preceded by the stage of familiarization with Western socialist theories. Although most researchers believe that chronologically this period covered 1901-1907, L. Borokh believes that certain information about the movement of supporters of socialism penetrated China in the 70s of the 19th century. Crossing the historical paths of two civilizations - China and the West - caused profound changes in the traditional worldview, which prepared the perception of various forms of socialism. In the semi-colonial Tsinian monarchy, in a society far behind the level of educational development, interest arose not only in scientific socialism but also in the teachings of K. Marx. As L. Borokh notes, at the early stage of familiarization with various currents of world social thought, the ideas of Western socialism were adapted to Chinese soil, based on a synthesis with the national utopian tradition. Understanding these ideas, the researcher believes, led to the formation of own Chinese utopian-socialist theories and concepts, which were essentially reformist and anti-socialist. These processes were preceded by the events of the beginning of the 20th century, when for the first time in the social and political thought of China, "controversies about socialism" began, which became the background of broad discussions that continued in the 20s (Borokh, 1984).

In general, L. Boroh notes, the origins of the Chinese revolution were laid in the fall of 1895 in the south of China in Guangdong, when the Qin police uncovered an antigovernment conspiracy prepared by the political organization "Union for the Revival of China" ("Xinzhonghoi"). They tried to carry out an armed coup d'etat, overthrow the ruling Manchu dynasty and establish a new government in the country, and devised a program for the reconstruction of China, borrowing Western experience and relying on the achievements of centuries-old Chinese civilization, with the help of which the country could restore its power, become wealthy and independent. The "Union for the Revival of China" became the first political center from which the Chinese Kuomintang originated. It was a time of understanding not only the social and political teachings of the West but also the ideas of Chinese reformers, the slogans of the spontaneous anti-Manchurian movement, and the Chinese classical tradition. "The slogan of the expulsion of the Man- chus is combined with the provision on the radical Europeanization of China, the call for the creation of a democratic government stands alongside the traditional requirement to encourage talent, the advice to develop machine production is supplemented by recommendations to adhere to one of the canons of antiquity: agriculture is the basis of the prosperity of the Celestial Empire" (Borokh, 1971: 4- 5).

It should be noted that in Soviet Oriental studies, methodological principles were actively developed, which were necessary for understanding the interaction of different types of social structures and societies with different levels of formational development. Soviet sinologists noted that the general features that were characteristic of the history of the countries of the East in the 19th and 20th centuries were preceded by the rapid spread in their social structures of the results of the elements of the material, political and spiritual culture of developed capitalism transferred from the West, thanks to which the future acceleration was laid in the colonial countries social development. Therefore, the significant interest of Chinese society in socialism was not caused by the current needs of the opposition movement directed against the ruling Qing dynasty nor by the internal logic of the development of revolutionary thought. By that time, the empire had already approached the world capitalist system and, in its way, experienced the transition to a new era in the evolution of humanity - the era of imperialism and proletarian revolution. As L. Boroh points out, it was the penetration of the ideas of Western socialism into China that became a prerequisite for this historical process (Boroh, 1984).

Interest in socialism arose in the country of the oldest civilization, in which a developed system of ethical, political, and philosophical teachings was formed and functioned for two millennia. From the end of the 19th - the beginning of the 20th century. Chinese thought was looking for ways to preserve sovereignty and create a rich and powerful state. Chinese figures - Kang Yuwei (1858-1927), Liang Tsing-Chao (1873-1929), and Sun Yat-sen (18661925) joined this search. They turned to the new Western teaching - socialism. Stimulated their interest in socialist ideas - nationalism, which in the program of the Chinese revolutionary democracy of the beginning of the 20th century was inseparable from socialism. Supporters of Sun Yat-sen's ideas saw the prospect of national revival in socialism, understanding it not scientifically but as an ideal of equality and justice (Borokh, 1984).

For an extended period, interest in the problem of the history of the penetration of socialist ideas into China was not relevant. Scientists explained this lack of interest in this problem to the influence of Mao Zedong's concept of the spread of socialism in China, according to which the perception of Marxism was presented as a one-time act carried out during the "May 4th movement" in 1919. It is believed that from this moment, history began familiarizing Chinese society with the socialist thought of the West. As a result, the spread of Marxism, which began in China under the influence of the October Revolution, began to be considered in isolation from the previous history of the national liberation struggle. In general, the interest of Chinese activists in Marxism and the assimilation of scientific socialism did not have the necessary theoretical, philosophical, or political-economic training. This was why at the beginning of the 20th century in China, special historical conditions for the transition from utopia to science were not formed (Borokh, 1984: 232-233).

It should be noted that a significant amount of research in the Soviet period was devoted to the study of the history of the struggle of the Chinese Communist Party (CPC) for the triumph of Marxist-Leninist ideology. So, the Soviet Chinese scholar, and historian of philosophy, Chinese by origin - Yan Hinshun, who was a researcher at the Institute of Philosophy of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, covers the history of the ideological struggle of the Communist Party in his publications. He emphasizes three directions: the struggle against various currents of reactionary ideology outside the party; the struggle against opportunistic views within the party; the creative application and development of Marxism-Leninism in developing the strategy and tactics of the Communist Party at various stages of the Chinese revolution. Yang Hinshun noted that Marxism-Leninism entered China after the socialist revolution in Russia. Reactionary ideologies of the most various stripes immediately rose against him - from the pragmatist Hu Shi to the philosophizer of Sun Yatsenism - Dai Zitao. Their common goal is to "disprove" Marxism-Leninism, to prove that there are no objective laws in history and that searching for ways to save the country with the help of Marxism- Leninism is futile. However, the Chinese Communists began to promote Marxist-Leninist ideas widely and applied these teachings to the practice of the mass labor movement, creating the CPC, which led to the revolutionary struggle of the Chinese people. Even though the Chinese Revolution of 1924-1927 was defeated, the Chinese Communists continued to follow Marxism-Leninism, showing the correct path of further struggle to the working class. However, supporters of Chiang Kai-shek tried to contrast Marxism-Leninism with false Sun Yat-senism, throwing out of Sun Yat-sen's teachings three political guidelines - alliance with the USSR, alliance with the Communists, and support for peasants and workers. Since then, Yang Hinshun points out that false Sun Yat-senism has become the official ideology and banner of the Kuomintang reaction. The Chinese communists, at all stages of the revolution, tried to expose the reactionary essence of Kuomintang ideology. After 1935, the revolutionary Marxist-Leninist core in the CCP was represented by party leader Mao Zedong. It was his Marxist-Leninist course that led the party to the right path of struggle. Mao Zedong's party carried out "Lenin's instruction - "concrete analysis of a concrete situation" based on the principles of materialist dialectics, fighting against subjective idealism, dogmatism, and revisionism". The application and development of Marxism-Leninism in China were successfully implemented in an extensive program of socialist construction, which was reliably supported by the brotherly friendship of the countries of the socialist camp and the friendship between the Chinese and Soviet peoples (Yang Hinshun, 1957).

It should be noted that such praise of Mao Zedong, his policies, and the friendship between the Soviet and Chinese peoples in scientific publications did not happen for a long time. Gradually, Mao Zedong's actions began to cause dissatisfaction on the part of the USSR, with which relations were severed in 1959. Against the background of the aggravation of these relations with the USSR, Mao Zedong was getting closer to the United States, which also caused dissatisfaction among party leaders. In Soviet scientific literature, the reforms carried out under the leadership of Mao Zedong began to be actively criticized. For example, the Great Leap Forward was a failure and led to starvation and the death of millions of Chinese. The "Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution" initiated by Mao led to repression against the party opposition, and active persecution of the intelligentsia began. The scientific activity of Soviet scientists was directed precisely at the criticism of this revolution and the policy of Maoism. As noted by Russian scientists O. Bovin and L. Delyusin, the "Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution" led the country to a state of chaos and turmoil, disorganized the national economy, destroyed the everyday life of hundreds of millions of Chinese citizens, struck at the revolutionary conquests of the Chinese people, slowed down their movement on the way social, cultural and economic progress. The adventurous course of Mao Zedong's group led to a sharp weakening of the position of the CPC, the working class of China, and led to the rampant petty-bourgeois, anarchist element, which became a severe threat to socialist conquests in China. In general, the "cultural revolution" slowed down science, literature, and art development in China. If the ideas of Mao Zedong were not glorified in any work of national and world culture, such work was declared reactionary, revisionist, and bourgeois. The ideas of freedom, equality, fraternity, and humanism were declared reactionary and bourgeois. Mao Zedong's statements were declared the highest cultural achievement (Bovin, Delyusyn, 1968).

O. Bovin and L. Delyusin noted that supporters of Mao Zedong's ideas took the wrong path. After all, the nature and methods of the "great proletarian cultural revolution" fundamentally contradicted scientific ideas about socialism and the principles of the party leadership of social processes. "The Chinese events showed with a special force that one cannot forget not only the variety but also the general laws of the movement towards socialism, the general concepts of scientific socialism, the general principles of socialist strategy and tactics. Moreover, if they are rejected, then the principles of scientific communism are discredited" (Bovin, Delyusyn, 1968: 178). Therefore, Russian researchers point out that the attempts of Mao Zedong and his group to force the movement towards socialism, relying mainly on political-administrative levers, precisely created the political prerequisites for an equally intense understandable movement, a movement from scientific socialism to an ugly caricature of it.

Another Russian researcher of the Soviet era, F. Burlatsky, highlighted the reasons that led to the events called the "cultural revolution" in China. He analyzes the main features of the ideology and politics of the Maoists and proves the damage caused by the actions of Mao Zedong's group to the cause of socialist construction in China. According to F. Burlatskyi, Mao Zedong tried to hide his self-interested goals with an ideological camouflage, declaring them a "great revolutionary cause" and calling his opponents supporters of the "capitalist path" of China's development. The Maoists are trying to speculate on the popularity of the ideals of revolution and socialism among the masses. Later, such expressions as "socialist education of the working people" and "new proletarian culture" were rejected, and they began to openly say that the "great proletarian cultural revolution" had entered the stage of the struggle for the total seizure of power with "radical changes of the existing system". In order to carry out the "seizure of power", party committees, Komsomol bodies, and trade unions were dispersed, and the management of central and local press bodies was seized. In fact, the Maoists carried out a counter-revolutionary coup in the party and the state, forcibly removing from the leadership people who were elected by the existing norms of the country's political life (Burlatsky, 1968). F. Burlatsky characterizes

China's "cultural revolution" and points out the reasons for its implementation, calling it an "unprecedented political campaign" led and directed by Mao Zedong. Mao's supporters explained that the "cultural revolution" aimed to take power away from people who had joined the party but followed the capitalist path to prevent revision of the current political course of the leadership of the CCP in the future (Burlatsky, 1967).

F. Burlatsky not only criticizes Mao Zedong's policy, but he also calls the ideology of the Maoists petty-bourgeois and gives a general description of Maoism. Thus, in the field of social development in China, the installation was carried out to jump through the historically necessary stages of the economic and social process based on the widespread use of methods of violence, coercion, the militarization of labor, rejection of socialist methods of economic management, and the principles of scientific socialism. In the field of political life, there was a complete rejection of socialist democracy and the establishment of a military- bureaucratic dictatorship regime. In relations with socialist countries and communist parties, the intention was to split the socialist commonwealth and the world communist movement, nationalism was planted, and the principles of internationalism were rejected. In the field of foreign policy. As F. Burlatskyi noted, the moism nationalism, which was turned against the countries of socialism and the entire world communist movement, is a particular danger. "Undoubtedly, there can be no question that Mao Zedong and his entourage created some finished philosophical and political movement. However, the experience of the past has shown that even eclectic, non-scientific theories are capable of exerting a significant influence on the masses in different periods" (Burlatsky, 1968: 135-136).

The Chinese revolutionary Wang Ming, whose activities in the 1930s of the 20th century were supported by the leadership of the USSR, criticized Mao Zedong's policy. He was a member of the central leadership of the CPC during all the years of the party's struggle against the reactionary Kuomintang regime and supported the struggle of the Chinese people for socialism. In 1937, when he was appointed head of the Secretariat of the CPC Central Committee and secretary of the Changjiang Bureau of the CPC Central Committee, the confrontation between Wang Ming and Mao Zedong intensified. These events caused Wang Ming to move to live in the USSR in 1956. While in the USSR, he published a small pamphlet "On Events in China" (1969), which describes the fierce struggle in China between the path of Marxism-Leninism and proletarian internationalism and the path of anti-Marxist Mao Zedongism and bourgeois nationalism, between the path of socialist development of the PRC and the path of anti-socialist development of China (Van Ming, 1969: 4). Wang Ming names ten significant crimes that were committed by Mao Zedong domestically. "1. Mao Zedong tried to erase Marxism-Leninism from the consciousness of the communists and workers of China and replace Marxism-Leninism with his anti-Marxist and anti-Leninist ideas" (Wang Ming, 1969: 8). Mao Zedong banned and burned progressive Marxist-Leninist literature and called Marxism-Leninism "revisionism" and "dogmatism". "2. He is crushing the Chinese Communist Party and preparing to replace it with an anti-communist party in substance and a 'communist' party in the name" (Wang Ming, 1969: 9). As Yang Ming explained, this was a signal for the defeat of the CCP. Most of the members and candidates of the Central Committee of the CPC were subjected to repressions and were brutally persecuted on false accusations. "3. Mao Zedong destroyed the state organs of the people's democratic dictatorship and replaced them with the apparatus of his personal reactionary military dictatorship. 4. He harms the People's Liberation Army, splits its ranks, and uses it as an anti-communist and anti-people blind weapon for personal use. 5. He destroys the young generation, dissolves the Communist Youth League of China, and replaces it with the reactionary Hongweibin organization. 6. He attacks the working class, splits its ranks, and dissolves the All-China Federation of Trade Unions. 7. He persecutes the working peasants and destroys the socialist construction in the countryside" (Wang Ming, 1969: 13-22). In the course of the "cultural revolution", repression against cadre workers and members of rural people's communes intensified, arrests, murders were carried out, party, Komsomol and administrative organizations of people's communes were crushed. "8. Mao Zedong destroys culture and education, cultural heritage, persecutes and destroys the intelligentsia" (Wang Ming, 1969: 23). In order to protect his absolute authority and ideas, Mao Zedong destroyed the precious domestic heritage that had been accumulated and preserved in China for thousands of years, as well as the heritage of advanced foreign culture. "9. Mao Zedong pursues a barbaric policy of Great Khan chauvinism towards national minorities, destroys their revolutionary leaders and cadre workers". 10. He protects the national bourgeoisie in every possible way; he cooperates with the internal and external reaction" (Wang Ming, 1969: 27-28). According to Mao Zedong's "new democracy" theory, the bourgeoisie is a class that exercises dictatorship together with the workers, peasants and petty bourgeoisie, so it gives particular importance and privileges to the national bourgeoisie in the fields of politics, economy, and social situation.

As Wang Ming points out, these ten crimes prove that the goal of Mao Zedong and his group and his "cultural revolution" is not to "protect the dictatorship of the proletariat", but, on the contrary, to eliminate people's power in China; not to "protect the socialist order", but on the contrary, to undermine the basis for building socialism in China. Mao Zedong called his actions the "campaign to regulate the style", which began in February 1942. Formally, this campaign was called the "campaign to regulate the three styles": the party style, the style in education, and the literary style. It became the campaign of the "four antis": anti-Leninist, anti- Comintern, anti-Soviet, and anti-party. So why did Mao Zedong need this campaign? He has repeatedly said that by conducting this campaign, he wants to achieve three goals: "1) to replace Leninism with Mao Zedongism; 2) write the history of the CCP as the history of Mao Zedong alone; 3) to raise the personality of Mao Zedong above the Central Committee and the entire party" (Wang Ming, 1969: 37). Mao Zedong believed that this would allow him to seize the central leadership positions in the party leadership and take all the power in the party into his hands.

Wang Ming noted that Mao Zedong did not limit himself to the above crimes. He also committed them to international affairs. The first of which was Mao Zedong's speech against the Soviet Union and other socialist countries; the second was a statement against the Marxist-Leninist communist and workers' parties of all countries; thirdly, he tried to split and undermine the national liberation movement in Asia, Africa, and Latin America, to pursue a policy of open pressure on developing countries; the fourth was the intention to provoke an American-Soviet and world war (in 1957, at the Moscow International Conference, Mao Zedong openly campaigned for an atomic war, which would destroy from one third to half of humanity). Mao Zedong's fifth crime was in the field of economics, in which he broke with the world system of socialism and moved to the camp of capitalism. Therefore, concludes Wang Ming, "whatever Mao Zedong invented and did for self-aggrandizement, self-aggrandizement, self-deception, and self-consolation, historical facts prove that he has only one fate - inevitable collapse" (Wang Ming, 1969: 46-62).

However, over the years, China has changed. Currently, in modern China, there is a ban on criticizing the head of state, and the Communist Party of China is recognized as the leading and leading party of the PRC. It is enshrined in the country's Constitution. At the same time, all parties in China are represented in the legislative body - the National People's Congress- but the CPC and its leader have the decisive vote in China. As noted by modern scientist O. Sevastyanov, four decades ago, the leadership of the Chinese Communist Party chose a new path for the country, a country that has experienced two unsuccessful attempts to make an economic and political breakthrough at a rapid pace in the last 20 years. It took years of fundamental reforms and eliminating the consequences of Mao Zedong's policies to rehabilitate Chinese society. "Chinese leaders were forced to admit that attempts to quickly "rebuild" China at a forced pace - economically or politically - failed. After all, neither the "Great Leap Forward" of 19581960 nor the "Cultural Revolution" of 1965-1976 made China stronger either economically or in a new political capacity" (Sevastyanov, 2018).

Conclusions

Summing up, it should be noted that the period of the 60s-80s of the 20th century was a scientific and ideological period, and the theoretical basis of the study of China in the USSR was the Marxist-Leninist methodology. During this period, most of the works of Soviet scientists highlighted the issue of the influence of the Soviet factor on the process of development and expansion of the sphere of influence of the Communist Party of China in the Chinese revolutions, attention was paid to defining the general nature and driving forces of the Chinese revolution, the role of the working class and the international communist movement in China. In some places, the dual and parallel policy of the Soviet Union in relation to the political forces of the Chinese revolution was shown - sometimes it openly supported the CCP and the Kuomintang, and then criticized the policy of the same Kuomintang. Also, Soviet sinologists sharply criticized the majority of Mao Zedong's views, noted the anti-Marxist nature of his ideas, and emphasized that in relation to philosophical problems, Mao Zedong's philosophy was hostile to Marxism-Leninism. As we can see, the subject of scientific research in the Soviet period was not distinguished by its diversity, because the main task was the promotion of the Soviet system, the praise of the leading role of Marxism, the definition and dissemination of its influence on Chinese ideology with the subsequent Chineseization of Marxism, which most scientists recognized as the theory that was responsible for planning and the ideological justification of reforms through a practical combination of China's modernization and Marxism.

References

Bovin A., Delyusyn L. (1968). Political crisis in China. Events and reasons. - Moscow: Politizdat.

Berger Y.M. (1959). China economic and geographical essay. - Moscow: State Publishing House of Geographical Literature.

Boroch L.N. (1971). China Revival Union. - Moscow: "Nauka" publishing house. Main editorial office of eastern literature.

Burlatsky F. (1968). Maoism - a threat to socialism in China. - Moscow: Politizdat.

Burlatsky F. (1967). Maoism or Marxism? - Moscow: Politizdat.

Boroch L.N. (1984). Public thought of China and socialism (beginning of the 20th century). - Moscow: Nauka Publishing House. Main editorial office of eastern literature.

Wang Ming (1969). About the events in China. - Moscow: Politizdat.

Yang Hing-shun. (1957). From the history of the struggle for the victory of Marxism-Leninism in China. - Moscow: Gospolitizdat.

Rudenko S., Liashenko I. (2020). Chinese Studies in Ukrainian Philosophy of the Soviet Period. Study Warmihskie. 57, 85-101. Available online: https://czasopisma.uwm.edu.pl/index.php/sw/article/view/6007/4687

Sevastyanov O. (2018). 40 years of reform in China: the path of a nation that has learned to admit mistakes. Available online: https://www.ukrinform.ua/ rubric-world/2604213-40ricca-reform-v-kitai-slah-nacii-aka-navcilas-viznavati- pomilki.html.

Размещено на Allbest.ru