Semantic Exactitude I: Communists

AsiaPundit favorably reviewed my previous post, but had a small quibble with my referring to Taiwan's adversaries on the other side of the Strait as "communists".  In truth, I'm not entirely happy with this description myself.  AsiaPundit is right to point out that they ceased to be real communists the day they abandoned the economic model calling for state ownership of the means of production.  One could refer simply to "Beijing" or "the Chinese leadership", but that glosses over the moral nature of the regime.  So what word then, better designates their beliefs and policies?

"Fascist" seems too harsh, because the government in Beijing is not interested in the rigid state control over the economy that the fascists were enamored with.  On the other hand, "authoritarian" is too mild, because the Chinese authorities work very hard to suppress the organizations of civil society (ie: religions) that many authoritarians are content to leave unmolested *.

What's left?  Demi-fascists?  Para-authoritarians?  Neo-communists?  Maybe the poli-sci folks have a word for them in their arsenal, but it's bound to be complicated and inelegant.

Which is why I've decided to stick to calling the rulers of China "communists".  First of all, it's what they call themselves, which counts for something **.  Secondly, they still maintain some of the old dogmas, and worship the same gods (ie: Mao), so it's not entirely inaccurate.  Third, since the mainstream press still uses the term, it's less confusing for the average reader when I proceed to follow suit.

Finally, it should be recognized that Chinese communism is not alone in being a political ideology that has evolved over time without shedding its original name.  Conservative parties in Europe no longer champion the cause of the nobility, but are still called "conservative".  Liberalism, at least in America, morphed into its current form from what we now call libertarianism, yet no one objects when Thomas Jefferson and Ted Kennedy are both referred to as "liberals".

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

*  Content to leave unmolested, provided that the organizations in question do not challenge the authority of the political leadership.

**  Blacks have not been called "negroes" for a long time, precisely because blacks now prefer "black" or "African-American".  Still, this line of argument can be taken too far, and few would indulge the Butchers of Beijing if they began calling themselves "democrats".

Comments

[myrick]

It's less a problem that you refer to the CCP as communist than it is that you label the KMT 'pro-communist.' The CCP do keep that discarded ideology as part of their moniker, but the KMT are far from being communist. While I question the recent warm relations between the KMT and CCP, I don't think the former deserve to be stuck with that term (no more than the Roh Moo-hyun administration should be called 'pro-Stalinist' for maintaining the Sunshine Policy.

[The Foreigner]

I was going to write another post about this, so I'll just quickly sum up my thoughts:

1) "Communist-accommodationalists" might be more appropriate, but is a bit of a mouthful.

2) The "pro-communist" appellation isn't meant to describe the KMT's economic policies. I call them "pro-communist" because they are friendly to the communists of Beijing, and more importantly, their "creeping unification" policies are favorable to them as well.

I don't know much about the "Sunshine Policy", but I'm pretty sure it consists of conciliatory gestures that won't leave S. Korea at a grave disadvantage. KMT policies appear to me to place Taiwan at the economic, political and military mercies of a hostile adversary with a population 50 times greater than Taiwan's.

3) There's a certain mischievious element that appeals to me as well. For decades, the KMT remorselessly imprisoned democracy advocates, falsely claiming they were communists. Now the KMT toadies up to Beijing - and aren't being sent to Green Island for it.

But it's entirely fitting for them to be reminded of their own betrayal of their former anti-communism. Chiang Kai-Shek must be rolling in his grave right now.