Introduction
By way of introduction to this page, some years ago I wrote a blog called “Stalin’s Moustache.” As all things do, the blog’s time came to a natural end and I have no desire to reinstate it. Instead, this page is named “Scientific Socialism.” Why? As the mainstream of Marxism has come to agree: Marxist theory includes three main aspects: Marxist philosophy, political economy, and scientific socialism. The three are distinct and yet closely related.
Thus, this page contains reflections on scientific socialism, the occasional travel story with a point, and so on. Sometimes, the reflections arise from a conservation with a friend that triggers further thoughts. Sometimes, I include pieces published in a newspaper or magazine. The entries appear from the most recent to the earliest.
招沙甲畲族乡 Zhaoshajia, a She Minority Village (2026.08.31)
The following was published as: Roland Boer, “Inside China: Zhaoshajia, a She Minority Village.” The Guardian Workers’ Weekly 2204 (31 August 2026): 9.
In early May of 2026, I camped overnight at a small village in northern Fujian province. As is my wont, I like to ride to a quiet place, pitch my tent, and camp for the night. But I was to find that this is no ordinary village.
Through the grapevine I had heard that Zhaoshajia (招沙甲) village was worth a visit. About 30 km from my home at the time in Dabu village, Songxi county, I packed my camping gear on the fold-up bicycle and was off on country roads, through townships and villages, until I rolled into Zhaoshajia. First impressions were of a well-ordered village with relatively new and solid buildings. In the midst of the village was a dammed stream forming an elongated lake full of fish, lotus plants, walkways, and platforms.
As dusk was looming, I asked a villager whether I could could pitch my tent. Of course, was the reply, if you can find a spot. My camping place for the night turned out to be a sheltered wooden platform on the lake. I was surrounded by water, the sound of frogs and water life, and an extraordinary view of both sides of the village.
Before proceeding, an observation on camping in the countryside in China. These days, there are more and more camping areas – Chinese-style. These are usually quite elaborate, with many facilities, options for relaxing, and so on. However, you can also camp pretty much anywhere. I always ask and mostly the answer is in the affirmative. Further, thus far I have not paid a cent for camping. Why? Since village land is commonly owned and since I bring my own lodgings, the assumption is that I do not need to pay for use of the land or for lodgings. Washing is done in a public toilet and one becomes quite adept at a full wash in the evening with a tap and washbasin. My gear includes the obligatory tent, sleep mat, sleeping bag, as well as gas stove and cooking implements. And of course my fold-up bicycle, a Brompton.
The next morning, I was to find out much more about Zhaoshajia village. This is a She (畲族) minority nationality area, with its own distinctive features. A little background: of China’s 55 minority nationalities, the She number about 750,000 and live mostly in the mountainous areas of northern Fujian (about 90 percent), as well as in southern Zhejiang, and in Guangdong, Jiangxi, and Anhui. Although they have their own distinctive dialect that is closely related to Kejia, they use the common script. They often call themselves “Shanha” (山哈), which means guests of the mountains. This has led some scholars to propose that they moved many generations ago from Guangdong province to escape exploitation by feudal landlords. This history meant that they became enthusiastic about the revolutionary process in the 1920s and 1930s, with many a She area being a revolutionary base.
Zhaoshajia village lies in the fold of a stream that has been dammed to provide water for agriculture and river fish. The people like to drink tea, as most do in Fujian, the men smoke, as most do still in the countryside, and they like to sing. Family traditions are strong, with ancestral lines emphasised, respect and honour given to those who have gone before, and a reputation for hard work and ability to survive.
After waking with first light, I found a place for my morning ablutions in a nice new toilet block adjacent to a new cultural centre. Coffee brewed, breakfast cooked, I set off to explore. Around the lake I walked, across the covered bridge, through lanes and alleys. I was struck by how well-ordered, clean, and relatively new the village buildings are, albeit with a distinctive traditional mountain style. The villagers were friendly and helpful when I approached, curious and happy to talk with a foreigner.
Like more and more villages hereabouts, the story of Zhaoshajia is written on walls and noticeboards. Part of a policy to showcase local histories and folk customs, this information is based on papers by scholars and reports by journalists. What did I find out?
I was struck by a more recent story. In late March of 2013, a freak hailstorm swept through the area and Zhaoshajia village was hit particularly hard. Only one brick-and-tile building was left standing; the rest, made of the plentiful timber hereabouts, were left in ruins. Looking at pictures taken at the time, the village was a miserable site, with people sheltering in what was left.
What was to be done? The news made its way from the local Party branch and committees to the provincial leadership. By July of 2013 and in the midst of a busy schedule, You Quan, the secretary and governor of the whole of Fujian province, made a personal visit to this small village, called on all the villagers one by one to offer his concern and instructed the local Party organisations – from the village through to Nanping city’s administrative area of the whole of northern Fujian – to begin as soon as possible the process of restoring and rebuilding the village. The key here was to involve the villagers in the process so that it arose from their own engagement and insight. By 2015 work began after much discussion and consultation: 56 houses were completely rebuilt and 42 traditional buildings restored.
This was not all. Zhaoshajia was one of the many parts of China (832 counties in all) that was still dealing with absolute poverty. Thus, the restoration and rebuilding took a whole step further in order to enable the village and the She minority district to eradicate absolute poverty and move on to rural revitalisation. Given the pristine natural environment with its hills, rivers, and lakes, the whole area was developed as an environmental area, with more and more activities established to encourage people to visit from outside. An eatery, camping area, eco-buggies, cabins, walking trails, and much more were constructed. By 2023, thousands of people had come to the area for its peace and tranquility, bringing in tens of thousands of Renminbi for the local economy. These figures were confirmed by a young man with whom I spoke on the evening of arrival: although coming from a small base, more and more visitors are coming to this beautiful area.
A question arises: a visitor to the area may ask, “why bother with the restoration and rebuilding? The village is so remote and the population small. Isn’t this simply a waste of money?” Here we come to an important principle: the She people are a smaller minority nationality. Given China’s long and constantly updated preferential policies relating to minority nationalities, it was out of the question to leave the village and area languishing. Resources had to be found; livelihoods developed over centuries and even millennia had to be preserved. Even more, the natural attributes of area would be leveraged to enable the villagers to throw off absolute poverty and set out on the road of rural revitalisation.
Finally, throughout this experience of disaster, recovery, and building anew, the Party was deeply involved. From comforting villagers, through consulting about rebuilding, to finding ways to improve livelihoods, the Party branch and committees were inseparable to the whole process. My early morning visit to the village’s Party building reinforced this reality. I found the following: even today, the practical reality is that in case of need a branch member will be at the home of a farmer in 5 minutes and district committee member will be in the village in 20 minutes. Think about this for a minute: as a Party member, this means dropping what you are doing immediately and attending to the person or home in question as one’s top priority. This is the practical reality of a “people centred” approach, especially for minority nationalities. As they say in Zhaoshajia: all minority nationalities are united as one close family.
Party Self-Reform and Breakthroughs in Marxist Theory (2026.08.17)
The following was published as: Roland Boer, “Party Self-Reform and Marxist Theory.” The Guardian Workers’ Weekly 2202 (17 August 2026): 8.
Around the first of July, 2026, I was invited to participate in more than half a dozen television interviews and panels. The topic: the CPC’s 105th anniversary. Why all the activity on such an anniversary? The underlying reason is that the Party has been undergoing almost fifteen years of thoroughgoing rectification and reform, or what is today known literally as “self-revolution,” but which is perhaps better rendered in English as “self-reform.” This has also been a period of significant developments in Marxist theory.
The two are closely related: major theoretical developments and breakthroughs take place during periods of more focused and intense self-reform. True, a Communist Party must always self-correct, rectify erroneous tendencies, identify once again the original inspiration and mission, which is of course communism. However, at certain times a more thoroughgoing process of self-reform needs to take place. This is precisely what has happened with the CPC since late 2012, after the eighteenth Party congress of that year. More of that process in a moment, but first let us consider some history.
Back in the first half of the 1940s, we saw the “Rectification Movement” (整风运动). This was the culmination of an earlier period of study, lectures, and research in the later 1930s, the work of the Yan’an New Philosophy Association, and the preparations for a new phase of revolutionary and anti-colonial struggle. By the early 1940s, it was clear that rectification and reform of the Party needed to happen. During this important period, we find an emphasis on correcting work styles, methods of investigation and study, the functioning of Party branches and committees, a deeper understanding of Marxist theory and practice, and much more. What was the result? In 1945 Mao Zedong Thought was officially recognised as the leading theoretical framework for the Party. The theoretical breakthrough was as profound as it was straightforward: the integration of the basic principles of Marxism with China’s concrete realities. In our time, this has come to be known as the “first integration.”
This historical example provides an analogy for what has happened with the CPC since 2012. Not long after the Eighteenth Congress in early November of that year, the “Eight-Point Regulation” was promulgated and it may be summarised as follows: improving the quality of investigation and research, streamlining meetings and activities, simplifying documents and briefings, regulating travel and visits, minimising security protocols so as to cause minimal disruption, improving news reporting, strictly regulating the publication of documents, and practising diligence and thrift. Simple and yet profound, these regulations marked the beginning of one of the most comprehensive processes of self-reform in the Party’s history. The aim has been a thorough improvement of the work-style of Party members, from grassroots branches and organisations to the highest level. With one set of regulations after another, fostering new talent, focusing on strict rules and promoting diligent work-style, and re-integrating the Party with all levels of society, governance, and economic activity, the result at the time of writing is notable. I can attest from first-hand experience and a significant amount of research how grassroots Party secretaries, branches, and committees are trusted by the locals, how they live simple lives at no higher standard than those with whom they work, and focus on the tasks at hand with full accountability.
All of this brings us back to the theoretical breakthroughs in Marxism. A little before the first of July in 2026, the first two volumes of Selected Works of Xi Jinping on Party Building were published. This collection embodies what is known as Xi Jinping Thought on Party Building. These works may be added to thought on socialism with Chinese characteristics for a new era, on culture, on political economy, on governance, and so on. Together, these works congeal a significant theoretical advance in the practice of Marxism so as to provide a valuable reference point for the future.Self-revolution, self-reform, rectification – the terms may vary, the times differ, but the principle remains: periods of profound self-reform of the Party are also periods of significant breakthroughs in Marxist theory. How may we summarise the theoretical achievements of the last 15 years? Perhaps we can put it this way: the integration of the basic principles of Marxism with China’s concrete realities and with the best of China’s traditional culture. The shorthand is the “two integrations.”
Is It Possible to Understand Another Culture? On the Question of Cultural Dialogue and Mutual Learning (2026.07.10)
In a recent conversation in the village where was living, my interlocutor argued that it is very difficult to understand (很难理解) Chinese culture and thus China itself. In other words, she felt that foreigners ultimately cannot understand China. Although there is a constant emphasis at an international level on cultural dialogue and mutual learning (I have lost count of the meetings and conferences emphasising this), it is not uncommon to encounter the other perspective: foreigners ultimately cannot understand China and Chinese culture.
The are a number of aspects to this question:
1) Many a foreigner has indeed misunderstood and continues to misunderstand China. It seems to me that when my Chinese friends and comrades encounter such material, they throw up their hands and resign themselves to this fact. To be added here, I have noticed from time to a time an implicit competition between so-called 中国通 Zhongguotong, foreign China hands or China experts, as to who (mis)understands China better than the others.
2) Thus, it should be no surprise that given the profound cultural and philosophical differences between China and many other parts of the world, some in China feel that foreigners will never grasp such a distinctive culture. For example, there is no need in Chinese culture for ontological transcendence, since 天人合一 tianren-heyi, heaven and human beings are as one, or nature and human beings are one. Or 和而不同 he’er-butong, harmony without sameness, harmony through diversity; 相反相成 xiangfan-xiangcheng, things that oppose one another also complement one another. This collection of sayings could on almost endlessly, but the point made is that foreigners cannot fully grasp such concepts and assumptions.
3) That said, for historical reasons the tendency is to contrast Chinese culture with “Western” culture – the few countries of the world that make up less than fifteen percent of the world’s population. Less attention is given to the different parts of Africa, Muslim-majority and Arab countries, Pacific Island countries, Latin America, and so on. As I write, however, this situation is changing.
4) Of course, all of this may be no more than saying “you are wrong”; or “I disagree with you.” One might say in China, “my understanding is a little different from yours,” or “maybe we can talk about this later,” or – pertinent here – “it is very difficult to understand China.”
By way of reply to my conversation partner, along with subsequent reflections after the conversation, I made and would like to make the following points.
To begin with the question of history, or more specifically, the history of cultural exchange. This happened especially along the ancient Silk Road, with the Dunhuang Grottoes (dating from 366 CE) in what is now Gansu Province a telling example of influences from all along the Silk Road. It happened also with Marco Polo, who brought back with him noodles (which became pasta) and flat breads (which became pizza). As a historian put it, perhaps he should have brought back tea and chopsticks, since these hygienic inventions would have saved Europe from much disease and misery. Further, the European Enlightenment of the 17th and 18th centuries would not have happened without Chinese influence. Voltaire and Leibniz, for example, were notable Sinophiles. And of course there is Marxism, which came to China from Western Europe, via the Soviet Union (and translations from Japanese), and became a type of Chinese Enlightenment that has brought one of the poorest countries in the world a century ago to where it is today. In other words, cultures would not be what they are without constant process of dialogue and mutual learning.
Further, there is a short Chinese poem that I like to quote from time to time. It is by the northern Song Dynasty poet, Su Shi (苏轼 1037-1101 CE):
横看成岭侧成峰
远近高低各不同
不识庐山真面目
只缘身在此山中
We may translate as follows, with the caveat that translating poetry is almost impossible:
From the front it seems like a ridge, from the side like a peak,
Far and near, high and low, the perspectives are not the same.
You cannot discern the true face of Lu Mountain,
If you happen to be within the mountain.
Exegesis of this poem need only be minimal. The point is that if you are within, if you are part of system, if you inherit the cultural assumptions and live according to these values, you cannot discern completely the nature of this culture and its values. In other words, while you may instinctively know your own culture, you need the perspective of an outsider to point out what is distinctive about your own culture so as to understand it more fully. What I am not saying is that outsiders know it better; instead, it is simply that outsiders see aspects that those “within the mountain” assume as normal, as part of the furniture.
Finally, if you emphasise too much the uniqueness and distinctness of each cultural tradition and civilisation, you end up putting an end to any dialogue, exchange, or mutual learning. History tells us that the reality is otherwise.
On the Mistake of “State-Directed Socialism” (2026.07.06)
In a recent discussion in Chongqing with a friend from Peru, we talked about the tendency among some international Marxist thinkers to see China’s model and Chinese-style development as a type of “state-led” or “politically-led” development. While an understandable perception and perhaps even tactical move in an international environment, this position is ultimately misleading.
There are a number of variations on this proposal, but they boil down to the assumption that a system is determined by its political structure, by the political party or leaders in power. As for the variations, they may be listed as follows:
1) China incorporates a range of capitalist economic relations but these are directed and controlled by the political system, especially the CPC, in a socialist direction. (Related is the notion that China is still in the long transition from capitalism to socialism, but this mistaken perception is the topic for another piece.)
2) China follows a “state-led” and “socialist-oriented” approach, which is on the path to socialism but not yet socialism (assuming one knows what “socialism” entails).
3) The system in China is socialist because the CPC is in charge. It follows that if the CPC was not leading, China would not be socialist.
These main variations – and there are some others minor variations – are understandable in an international context, but ultimately mistaken and misleading. Let me explain why.
To begin with, there is a strong influence of Western assumptions that a “system” means a “political system” that determines the whole. For example, the imperialist interventions of Western countries such as the USA have been based for some time now on changing the political leadership, the political party in power, or even the system of governance. The thinking is that if they can “regime change” a country into a more favourable political leadership or even “Western-style” governance then Western imperialist interests will be served. This approach goes so far as to train and foster new generations of political and intellectual leaders in designated countries so that they may take control in the future. Clearly, it will not do for Marxists in other parts of the world to assume that the form of the state or the “political system” determines everything.
Further and at a deeper level, this assumption at best has the Marxist method “standing on its head.” How so? If we take the base-superstructure metaphor – and note that it is a metaphor – in which the various components are semi-autonomous but ultimately determined by the economic base (as Engels explained clearly), then the political system is part of the superstructure that ultimately relies on the economic base. In this light, it is a category mistake to turn a component of the superstructure – no matter how important – into the determinant of the whole.
Further still, what is required is systems-thinking (系统思维 as they say in China) or a comprehensive approach. Thus, the key question is the structure of the whole system in which each component finds its place. Thus, in a Chinese situation it is empirically and methodologically verifiable that the overall system is a constantly developing socialist system: economically this is clear, with the innovative and dialectical integration of planning and market components in a socialist economy, but it also applies to the constantly developing political structure, society, culture, philosophy, and so on.
It follows that the form of socialist governance led by the CPC is one that is both appropriate to the economic base and to the overall system in question. Obviously, it would be a disaster to take a political structure developed in very different conditions and try to insert it within such an overall system.
Finally, the model of governance in China – socialist democracy or whole-process people’s democracy – has arisen and developed both in light of socialist principles and experiences of governance (as I have shown in my 2023 book Socialism in Power) and in light of China’s long historical experience of governing a large country with a large population. We may say that this is an instance of the “second” integration in the sense of the integration of the basic principles of socialist governance with the best of traditional Chinese governance.
To conclude, a correct approach would be as follows. While the political structure is very important, especially as led by the CPC, it is one that suits China’s socialist system and that is influenced by the distinctive millennia-long tradition of governance. The task of governance, then, is to study and understand the objective facts of economic, social, and cultural development and design appropriate policies – especially long-term plans – in light of this concrete reality. It is these policies and plans that can guide one on and even transform the path ahead.
Roland Theodore Boer 薄国强 