China’s Capitalist Turn: Has Socialism Been Abandoned?

By Paulus Strother

Since 1978, the People’s Republic of China has undergone sweeping economic reforms that many view as a departure from core socialist principles. Deng Xiaoping’s policies marked a sharp shift away from Marxism-Leninism and the revolutionary ideals of Mao Zedong, steering the country toward market-driven capitalism. Under Deng’s leadership, private ownership was reintroduced and Western capitalist enterprises were actively encouraged to invest—moves that Maoist critics regard as capitulations to bourgeois interests. The introduction of capitalist elements—such as private property, special economic zones, and openness to foreign capital—does not serve the people. Instead, it has paved the way for the emergence of a new bourgeois class within China. True socialism is built upon the dictatorship of the proletariat, the elimination of exploitation, and the foundation of collective ownership. Deng’s economic course has produced increasing social inequality, sharpened class divisions, and signaled a drift away from the revolutionary spirit that founded the People’s Republic. In the present day, China continues to follow the path of “Socialism with Chinese Characteristics.” For that reason, it is no longer appropriate to refer to China as a socialist state. Notably, more than 80 billionaires currently sit in the Chinese Parliament—a stark indication of how far the country has moved from its original proletarian roots. Some Dengists claim that Mao himself would have been revisionist for permitting the existence of a national bourgeoisie. But this comparison fails. The national bourgeoisie under Mao existed only briefly, during a time when the peasantry played a central role in developing industry and agriculture. Once their historical function was fulfilled, they were no longer necessary. Deng and the leaders who followed him, on the other hand, legitimized a class that continues to dominate and exploit to this day.

The Importance of Maoism in Germany: Spread Maoism towards the German working class!

By Paulus Strother

Germany—a nation with parties that call themselves “socialist,” yet none that truly oppose revisionism. In today's political landscape, finding committed Maoists is a rarity, as most factions have succumbed to revisionist trends.

There was once a time when this was not the case, and Maoism was widely known among left-minded people. In the 1960s and 1970s, the majority of socialist movements were Maoist—such as the KPD/ML, active from 1968 until 1978, when they fell into the Hoxhaite “trap.”

Today, there is no popular anti-revisionist movement, and it's time to change that. We, the Maoist Students Collective, are an international organization of writers from different countries, seeking to influence the working masses by promoting the study of Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin, and Mao, and by fighting against revisionism.

Before the Maoist Students Collective existed, we were the KPD/ML Internationale—an organization of students aiming to raise awareness about revisionism and capitalism.

The fight against revisionism in Germany is an important one and must be carried on for years to come. Maoists in western Germany are rare, so we plan to spread the socialist idea among the working masses.

When the Maoist Students Collective was still the KPD/ML Internationale, we wrote a short essay about revisionism in Germany. Here it is:

---

As we know, in Germany there is the party “Die Linke” (in English: The Left), which proclaims itself to be a democratic “socialist” party. But should we really consider them socialist? No, we shouldn’t.

After taking a closer look at Die Linke, the members of the KPD/ML Internationale revealed the truth behind the party:

Upon further investigation, we showed that Die Linke is not socialist, but more likely state-capitalist. The people within Die Linke are anti-Stalin and more social-democratic than genuinely socialist. Die Linke rejects Marxism-Leninism and seeks its own form of socialism.

Here is a transcription from a video of a speech by Gregor Gysi, discussing capitalism vs. “socialism”:

“In addition, there must be a maximum of democracy and freedom, otherwise it is not socialism for me. In this sense, I would like to reform capitalism towards democratic socialism, if you like, because I say that we must adopt what capitalism can do and overcome what it cannot. It can produce a highly efficient economy, it can also produce top science and research, and it can be structured in a reasonably liberal democratic way—but it doesn't have to be. It cannot secure peace because too much is earned from wars, it cannot create social justice, it always ensures that some become filthy rich and others poor. We can work together to overcome these aspects of capitalism, then it will become much more bearable. I call it democratic socialism; you can call it whatever you like. That is part of the freedom of the individual.”

There are many other speeches from Die Linke that seem to “glorify” capitalism. From a Marxist-Leninist perspective, what Gysi described would not be considered socialism.

So, should we still consider Die Linke a socialist party? Not really. They aim to implement something similar to Deng Xiaoping’s reforms: capitalism for the economy and “socialism” for governance.

Additionally, Gysi claimed that modern-day China is “socialist”—but is that true?

We, the KPD/ML Internationale, do not consider China genuinely socialist. Here’s why:

“The modern-day People’s Republic of China does not follow Marxism-Leninism, but rather what we call ‘liberal socialism.’ Why? In 1978, when Deng Xiaoping came to power, he introduced capitalist reforms in China—much like Khrushchev did in 1956 and afterward. Deng allowed privatization, invited Western companies into China, and permitted the bourgeoisie to exist and exploit. Today, 85% of all companies in China are state-owned, but not entirely. Dengists also falsely claim that Deng continued Mao’s vision, but this is misleading and makes no sense. What Deng did was transform Mao’s revolutionary leadership into capitalist governance.”

Friedrich Merz: the exploiter of the German working class.

As of May 6, 2025, Friedrich Merz (CDU) holds the office of Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany. During his current rule, the people in Germany view Chancellor Merz as a "warlord," wanting to provoke Russia into attacking Germany by aiding the Ukrainian military with the so-called "Taurus rockets" that can reach Moscow and trigger a war in Europe.

Friedrich Merz himself has said many quotes against peace, such as: "Frieden gibt's auf jedem Friedhof" (meaning "Peace exists in every graveyard"). People in Germany have seen how the German military wants to rearm itself in case a war breaks out in Europe. The people are scared and know a war might break out soon. Coming to the topic of why he is exploiting the German working class: In a speech, Chancellor Friedrich Merz demanded an increase in the working time of the average German worker from the 8-hour-per-day "tradition." He demands an increase from 8 hours to around 10 to 12 hours, as different news outlets have reported. Now what does this mean for the German worker? It means that they will be required to work even more, while the minimum wage has not increased during the rule of Friedrich Merz. The German working class is currently being exploited, and this exploitation has been happening since the monarchist times of Germany. The current situation proves how people are living under a capitalist rule, facing threats of war and a minimum wage of around €12.82 per hour. The poverty rate is rising—around 11.6 percent of the population in Germany lives in poverty. The numbers are rising, and are capitalists doing something about it? No, they only want workers to work more and more so that the capital of the bourgeoisie rises, while the German worker receives the minimum for what they work.

Strikes and many other events have occurred during the rule of Friedrich Merz and under capitalist governance in general. The unemployment rate is rising, and even more problems might occur in the future. We should establish the dictatorship of the proletariat and let the proletarians rule in the factories and workplaces. The only solution is strike, strike and strike!