Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T05:54:27.194Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Unity and Diversity of Russian and Chinese Industrial Wage Policies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 March 2011

Peter Schran
Get access

Extract

While Russian and Chinese wage and distribution policies in general differ from each other in terms of specific provisions and regulations, they are also generically very similar, if not identical. To provide some insight into the nature of this unity and diversity of policy, it seems best to discuss first the distributive implications of their common ideological reference, i.e. Marxist-Leninist doctrine.

Distributive Strategy and Tactics

Both the Russians and the Chinese deal with any human action as a process of material transformation, and consequently view the totality of man's actions as a chain of material transformation processes, conditioned by the distribution of ownership of the means of production as the determinant of social relations of production. Both hold that while human action is governed objectively by material and social nature and its laws, it is determined subjectively by man's technical and social awareness and thus by man's technical and social experiences. Both assert that man's increasing comprehension of nature and its laws manifests itself in increasing accumulation and in enlarged reproduction, i.e., in economic growth. Both aim for the unity of objectivity and subjectivity, i.e., for the complete reproduction of nature by man at the earliest possible moment, and both strive therefore for the most rapidly enlarging accumulation over time.

Type
Articles
Information
The Journal of Asian Studies , Volume 23 , Issue 2 , February 1964 , pp. 245 - 251
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Asian Studies, Inc. 1964

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 For a more comprehensive discussion of the Marxist-Leninist model of economic growth see Schran, Peter, “Economic Planning in Communist China,” Asian Survey, II (12 1962), 29 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

2 For two recent interpretations of the principle of “distribution according to contribution,” see Khrushchev's speech before the Supreme Soviet of the USSR on May 5, 1960, and Hsü Ti-hsin's article in Kuang-Ming Jih-Pao, 11 19, 1962, p. 4.Google Scholar

3 Note that this appraisal may reflect practical experiences of the Yenan period as well as the traditional belief in the pliability of human minds.

4 The adoption of Russian designs and methods is advocated explicitly in Central-South Wage Reform Committee, General Office, ed., Kung-tzu ch'ang-shih chiang-hua (Common Sense Talk on Wages) (Peking: Chung-nan Kung-jen Press, 1952).Google Scholar

5 See ibid. p. 54, and Galenson, Walter, “The Soviet Wage Reform,”Google Scholar (Institute of Industrial Relations, Reprint No. 172; Berkeley: University of California, 1961), p. 10.

6 See Central-South Wage Reform Committee, p. 17, and Galenson, , p. 10.Google Scholar

7 See Galenson, , p. 10.Google Scholar

8 See ibid, and Kenkyu-jo, Chugoku, ed., Chugoku Nenkan 1959 (China Yearbook 1959) (Tokyo: Iwazaki Bookstore, 1960), p. 310Google Scholar, as well as Léon Lavallée et al., Économie de la Chine socialiste, (Genève: Éditions Librairie Rousseau, 1957), p. 416.Google Scholar

9 See ibid, and Galenson, , p. 11.Google Scholar

10 See T'ung-chi Kung-tso (Statistical Work), No. 14 (11 29, 1957), p. 13.Google Scholar

11 See Galenson, , p. 11.Google Scholar

12 See Central-South Wage Reform Committee, pp. 18 ff.

13 See ibid. p. 53, and Aganbegyan, A. G. and Mayer, V. F., Zarabotnaya Plata v SSSR (Wages in the USSR) (Moscow, 1959), p. 135.Google Scholar

14 See Sotsialisticheskii Trud (Socialist Labor), No. 12 (1957), p. 30Google Scholar; Yanowitch, Murray, “Trends in Soviet Occupational Wage Differentials,” Industrial and Labor Relations Review, XIII (01 1960), 190Google Scholar; Galenson, , p. 5Google Scholar; and Chi-hua Ching-chi (Planned Economy), No. 4 (04 9, 1957), p. 15.Google Scholar

15 See Aganbegyan, and Mayer, , p. 135Google Scholar, and Kenkyu-jo, Chugoku, p. 310.Google Scholar

16 See Aganbegyan, and Mayer, , p. 135.Google Scholar

17 See Yanowitch, , pp. 189–190.Google Scholar

18 See Aganbegyan, and Mayer, , p. 135.Google Scholar

19 Sec Central-South Wage Reform Committee, p. 16.

20 Sec Kenkyu-jo, Chugoku, p. 310.Google Scholar

21 See Galenson, , p. 2Google Scholar, and Institut Truda, Voprosi Truda (Questions of Labor), II (Moscow, 1959), 76–80.Google Scholar

22 See Yanowitch, , p. 185.Google Scholar

23 See Galenson, , p. 7.Google Scholar

24 See Ching-chi Yen-chiu (Economic Research), No. 4 (04 17, 1959), p. 19.Google Scholar

25 See China News Analysis, No. 261 (01 23, 1959), p. 2.Google Scholar

26 See Ching-chi Yen-chiu, No. 4 (1959), p. 19.Google Scholar

27 See ibid., p. 20, and Ching-chi Yen-chiu, No. 2 (02 17, 1959), p. 54.Google Scholar

28 See Lao-tung (Labor), No. 9 (05 3, 1960), p. 25.Google Scholar

29 See T'ung-chi Kung-tso, No. 14 (1957), p. 13.Google Scholar