Property rights protect the rice pot and the rule of law goes to hang the sword Two fundamental

Mondo Finance Updated on 2024-01-31

(Published by Chang Xiuze, a specially invited expert of Tiandao Industry Research Institute).

1. Two outstanding problems: have they been solved?

Why do I say "again"?Because, in the discussion of "private economic development" organized by "Zhejiang**" this year, I once proposed: "Like the feet of a man and the wings of a bird, I believe that the development of China's private economy has two fundamental supports: property rights and the rule of law. Abbreviated as the "Two Fundamental Support Theory".

China's private enterprises now have the problem of expectation and confidence, that is, the "unstable expectations and lack of confidence" mentioned in the relevant documents. How to resolve the contradiction between expectations and confidence?As far as I know from my actual investigation, there have been two outstanding problems that have not been completely solved:

One is that property rights have not been effectively protected. For example, the "Zhang Wenzhong Incident" and the "Gu Xiaojun Incident" are two typical cases. Zhang Wenzhong, chairman of Beijing Wumart Group, was imprisoned for many years and was later rehabilitated.

And now this kind of phenomenon has not been completely eliminated, especially after some private enterprises "pots" have been smashed, they have not been made up. For example, the "pot" that Gu Xiaojun was smashed - Greencore's assets have not been solved to this day. The relevant agencies say, whoever smashes your pot you go to. Gu wrote letters to the secretaries of several provinces to complain, but the issue of property rights has not been resolved.

The second is that the rule of law in relation to the private economy is not yet perfect. Private entrepreneurs have reported that they have a "sword" hanging over their heads -- the elimination of private ownership, which lingers and will fall anytime and anywhere, and their hearts are not steady. How can we properly use the rule of law to remove this "sword"?Also worth looking into.

In short, one property right, one rule of law, and the two fundamental supports of the private economy need to be continued.

Second, the property rights protection "rice pot".

The issue of property rights, that is, the issue of protecting the "rice pot" as I said. In May this year, in an academic interview with the "Love Thought Study Club" in Beijing, I further expounded on the "three-type economic theory" (development emphasizes the prosperity of the people, reform is important, and opening up and system) put forward last year. Comrades in Beijing uploaded this to Douyin and Station B, entitled "Don't Eat the Rice of the Private Economy, But Smash the Pot of the Private Economy". The time of the post is June 20, and it will not be new if you say this on July 20, because 31 articles of the private economy have been introduced on July 19.

After talking about the issue of "eating and smashing the pot", I went deep into the mountainous areas of Northeast China to continue to meditate and realize the "Tao": What to realize?After Wu Jianzheng, when will we emphasize "eating the food of the private economy"?When will you "smash the pot of the private economy"?

First of all, when to emphasize "eating the food of the private economy".

In the first period, in the early days of the government, the "Common Program" formulated by the leaders put forward the "Theory of Five Economic Components". Among them, the three "main forms" (sic) of "cooperative economy, private capitalist economy, and individual economy" are all private economies. In those years, I ate the food of the private economy and ate very well.

The second period, from 1960 to 1962, was the so-called "three-year period of natural disasters". I am from Shandong, and at that time, people in my hometown were starving to death. One of the volumes of the published "Zhong** History" recorded: "In 1960, 10 million people died of unnatural causes." In this case, the first two proposed "three self and one package", that is, free market, self-reserved land, self-responsibility for profits and losses, and production to households. At this time, he emphasized "eating the food of the private economy", and it was the development of the private economy that enabled China to overcome this economic crisis.

The third period was the period before 1978 when the "Cultural Revolution" led to the "verge of collapse of the national economy". After the Third Plenary Session of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China in 1978, the reform and opening up was proposed, and then a series of policies such as "allowing the existence and development of the individual economy" were specifically proposed, and the economy recovered and developed rapidly.

It can be seen that when the country is "hungry" and the people are "hungry", they think of developing the private economy and encouraging private enterprises, and only by relying on the common development of the private economy and the state-owned economy can the country tide over the difficulties, and the private economy has played a role as a new force.

Let's see, when they "smashed the pot of the private economy" again. The situation is quite complicated and can only be mentioned briefly.

Obviously, in 1958, the so-called "running into communism" not only smashed the pot of the private economic system, but also smashed the iron pot of the common people;More seriously, the "Ten-Year Cultural Revolution" that began in 1966 regarded the private economy as the so-called "tail of capitalism", and smashed the pot of the private economy under the slogan of "cutting the tail".Another time, from 1990 to 1991, that is, before the southern tour in 1992, some people put forward remarks such as "calling township entrepreneurs bankrupt".

Studying China's 74 years of ups and downs, I realized that when I am "hungry", I should "eat";When the head is swollen when he is full of "support", he goes to "smash the pot" (this is precisely the period of "left-leaning urban and rural economic policies" mentioned in the "Resolution on Several Historical Issues of the Party since the Founding of the People's Republic of China"). I really want to write a "History of China's Private Economy "Eating - Smashing the Pot", but it is not mature to think about it now, and I have not yet found out the cyclical rate or regularity.

In fact, over the years, there has been a debate about the "rice pot" of property rights protection. In the past ten years, I have experienced several debates. In 2013, I published a book entitled "Theory of Inclusive Reform", which proposes that the state-owned and private sectors together constitute the economic foundation of our country, referred to as the "Theory of Common Economic Foundation".Figuratively said that "both state-owned and private enterprises are the pro-sons of the republic", but as a result, they were criticized: "How can 'illegitimate children' pretend to be the 'pro-sons' of the republic?".I won't talk about it here.

On August 25, 2016, I submitted an internal research report on "Protecting Property Rights" to the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) ("Improving the Property Rights Protection System is the Cornerstone of Social Development"). The "protection of property rights" mentioned here focuses on the "rice pot" of the private economy, and I emphasize that the "protection of property rights" here is in a broad sense, including not only the property rights of property rights, equity, creditor's rights, and other property rights, but also the property rights of human elements such as knowledge, technology, management, and labor rightsAt the same time, it is necessary to run through the whole process of defining property rights, allocating property rights, trading property rights, and protecting property rights. On November 27 of the same year, after Xinhua News Agency was authorized to publish the "Opinions on Improving the Property Rights Protection System and Protecting Property Rights in Accordance with Law" document of the Communist Party of China, Xinhua News Agency's "Economic Information Daily" published the "interview record" of the internal report on December 8.

Today, we are still faced with the historical issue of "protecting property rights", which is one: the "rice pot" of property rights protection.

Third, the rule of law to "hang the sword".

According to my investigation and understanding, there are still some negative voices against the private economy in society, such as "eliminating private ownership". Some private entrepreneurs have reported that they still have a "sword" hanging over their heads, that is, this "elimination of private ownership," and this "sword" lingers, causing uncertainty, unstable expectations, and lack of confidence. I believe that this problem should be faced squarely and try to solve it.

On October 19, 2017, the report of the 19th National Congress of the Communist Party of China clearly stated that the "original intention" of the Communist Party of China was "two schemes" ("seeking rejuvenation for the nation and happiness for the people"), but just over two months later, someone published a 10,000-word article with a large-character title "Elimination of Private Ownership", quoting the words of the "Communist Manifesto" out of context, causing confusion in social thought.

What Marx and Engels said in the "Communist Manifesto" is a complete and rigorous sentence: "In this sense, communists can summarize their theory in one sentence: the abolition of private property." This sentence is intrinsically linked and should not be separated. The previous sentence, "in this sense", is a very important limiting word. It is extremely inaccurate to castrate it now, to take it out of context, and to say only one sentence "to abolish private property", so why not say "in that sense"?

According to my own study and understanding, "in this sense", what is the "meaning"?There are three points that must be clarified: First, it must be made clear that the "this" that it wants to "eliminate" is "what kind of private ownership"?What do you mean?Second, what is "this meaning" aimed at?Third, what social stage is it talking about?

We look at the original text of Marne's Communist Manifesto here: "Modern bourgeois private property is the final and most complete expression of the production and appropriation of products based on class antagonisms, on the exploitation of some by others."

It is clear from the internal logic of the original text;First, the "private ownership" he said to be eliminated specifically refers to the "modern bourgeois private ownership" (which is pointed out straight to the point), and it is not an unlimited "general reference", let alone China's contemporary private economySecond, it is aimed at class antagonism and class exploitation in capitalist societyThird, the target "society" refers to the communist society (i.e., the "lofty goal"), not to the entire historical period of the socialist society, still less to the initial stage of socialism.

Of course, this is only a personal understanding and may not be accurate. However, it is not advisable to discard the context and premise, and to preach and mislead the masses by picking out half of the sentence "eliminating private ownership."

More importantly, how long was the "entire historical period of socialist society" before communist society?"* Anthology" has spoken of "several generations, more than a dozen generations, or even dozens of generations". Now, this is no longer his personal will, but the consensus of the whole party meeting. The report to the 17th National Congress of the Communist Party of China clearly pointed out: "Consolidating and developing the socialist system requires the unremitting efforts of several generations, more than a dozen generations, or even dozens of generations."

Based on this, I suggest that the rule of law should be further perfected, and in the entire socialist society, in addition to continuing to "encourage, support, and guide" the private economy in terms of policy, there should be relevant regulations for those who maliciously advocate the "two annihilations" and cause a bad impact, so as to truly implement the "protection of the people's personal rights, property rights, and personality rights" proposed in the report of the 19th National Congress of the Communist Party of China.

Related Pages