 Hello and welcome to NewsClick. Today we are joined by Atul Bharadwaj. We've got to discuss the 19th Party Congress in China, which says that it is going to take China in a new direction. We'll make it a developed country by 2035 and chart out a new direction towards socialism. This has been seen as a major change in the Chinese party for whatever we can see from outside. They have made Xi Jinping as on par with, shall we say Mao Zedong and Deng Xiaoping, who have been major, shall we say, changing changes as far as China is concerned. Mao, of course, leading the revolution and then taking it in a new direction, what could be called by very many as reformists of different kinds, but nevertheless definitely a change or a turn from what the Maoist policies used to be. What does this turn that that Chinese party, the Chinese Communist Party, signally, how do you read this turn? The 19th Party Congress has been very huge. About 2,300 delegates have taken part in it. And the kind of media coverage that it has received worldwide, I think it is almost equivalent to what the American presidential election gets. So, if we see it in those terms, China has arrived on the global stage. If China has arrived on the global stage, it also means it will have to confront a lot of challenges. And those challenges are both coming internally as well as from external actors. So, in that respect, what this Congress indicates is a direction that Xi Jinping is going to give to his country in the next few years. And what the party is going, the direction in which the party is going. He has been alleviated to the status of Mao by incorporating in the party constitution his thoughts. And what those thoughts are basically indicating that China would continue to modernize socialism. China would continue to adhere to the principles of Marxism, Leninism, but with Chinese characteristics. So, if we actually look at that, he is indicating that unlike Trump who wants the state to wither away, he is saying China will maintain its state in and as a primary body to govern the lives of its people for a long time to come. You know, that is something of course the Chinese state was doing even earlier. So, it is not that the Chinese economy was being run autonomously. It was essentially a state led and a state run economy. Large parts of what in Indian terms would have been called the commanding heights of the economy were held by the state sector. Infrastructure, power, telecom, rail, roads, you name it. Most of them which would be the major actors in the Chinese economy were state entities. So, that was already there that in fact we can argue that the stimulus which they unveiled after the exports sort of started declining after the global crisis, 2008 crisis also shows that state was going to be leading player. So, what does in that sense, what is difference? What in that sense is different from what it was earlier? Is it canonizing these issues that the state will continue to play a leading role? Or does it indicate that what a lot of people have argued that there was a strong section in the Chinese Party and the Chinese leadership which wanted China to take a more explicit path, which wanted the economy to be opened more to global capital and a stronger integration of Chinese capital to global capital. This was inside the party and it was also the one which was held to be relatively much more corrupt in amassing, using the state, amassing a lot of wealth either through its relations, brothers, sisters, wives and so on. But this was the charge that was there and this does it signal a change from that path and does it also signal when she talks about 1.4 million party members and government officials having been charge sheeted, charged, prosecuted and so on, does it also means that the Chinese Party now is taking cognizance of what in an earlier era would have been called capitalist rotors no longer because capitalism is also part of the Chinese economy. There is an internal debate within China and that is why I said that he has reasserted the role of the state, the role of the party in running of the state. So, this is a signal both to the internal dissenters as well as to the external players. Those who internally within China, those who there are as you rightly said that there are forces which are questioning you know the role of the party itself, there are forces that are clamoring for more political reforms. So, if you see in this particular and that there are always the western journalist and western media always asking China to know to be to be a western style democracy. So, in this particular Congress he is given a very explicit message to the two people within China who are dissenting and people outside China that China is not going to follow any other path than socialism. The way they have maintained themselves for the last 70 odd years they are going to follow the same path. Of course it will be modernized, of course it will be Chinese characteristics. So, in Xi Jinping's first term if you see internally he purged the party of all the dissenters. I would say the more corrupt elements which are wanting a direct opening to the west and a transformation of China to a capitalist economy. So, those who have been asking so those who had been weakening the party as he would say and those who had been weakening China's position maybe the external world they have been purged gradually because of their corrupt their links to corruption and otherwise. So, he is strengthening the party and the party has given Xi Jinping an absolute approval to do this for the next five years. There will be more we do not know, but at the moment he has the full control over the party he has the full control over People's Liberation Army. And if you see in this Congress the Central Committee which has about 41 odd members from the People's Liberation Army PLA only seven of the old ones will be there this time. Rest all is young blood from the military that he is inducting into the party Standing Committee a Central Committee. So, in that sense if you see he is modernizing he is bringing in the new element and that shows his hold over the party and the parties trust in him to guide the destinies of the party as well as the nation till their aim is basically to declare China modern in every respect to have good welfare measures for the entire population and to be fully developed by 2035. You know that's an interesting point you talk about when you talk about equality because there is clear growth of inequality in China. It has had also a very large number of dollar billionaires who have come up in China. Part of it is of course the tech revolution in the world which has thrown up a lot of tech capitalists. This time there is a direct reference of also looking at inequalities and in various papers in China. This has been one of the themes of discussion that inequalities have grown we need to address it. So, do you think in that sense it will also this party congress is giving a direction that inequalities in Chinese society which have grown over the last 2025 years need to be addressed? The party is fully aware of it. They need to challenge inequality which can which poses a big threat to the legitimacy of the party itself. Corruption poses a threat to the legitimacy of the party. So, these two issues the party will have to tackle the path of development that they have chosen will create inequalities in the process. But how to manage those inequalities, how to reduce them, how to mitigate them is the issue that the party is tackling with. The party does not want any other elements to come in and thwart this entire process because the strength of the party is going to determine how China shapes up in the future. The party wants to prevent corruption I would say is one of the major threats that they face because they have these they have learned their historical lessons well. Chiang Kai-shek if you see in the 40s you know he had a larger presence in the globally he had a large you know presence. But this guy was removed and the Chinese people threw him out primarily because he was running up absolutely corrupt administration. So, Chinese knows that with inequalities and with corruption the party legitimacy to rule China will come under severe strain. So, that is why they have given approval to Xi Jinping to guide the party you know sing you know to have absolute power to guide the party. That is a transition they are seeking that the shall we say the kind of inequalities and corruption that it crept in as a part of the dengue reform shall we say. It was accelerated later is what they are trying to address in what you are saying. Coming to the last point they also talked about digital Leninism since you are also involved in the various issues of the sky. Do you think that really also poses a threat to the misuse of such powers in the hands of the state because essentially it looks it could look at every transaction. Every step everybody is geolocated all our activities are today mapped on the internet. So, do you think that this actually also gives could in the long term become a threat particularly in the hands of the state which necessarily may not be in the interest of the people. On this particular issue you know my position is I would consider myself a tech evangelist and I feel that the entire technology and which the Chinese are also you know using is another issue you know whom should who should control the technology. And there it is again the Chinese state which is controlling the technology. On the other hand the other model is where the technology and where my privacy has been handed over to private bodies like Google and Facebook. So, what do we need the technology you cannot stop the march of technology technology will move on but who controls that who controls the means of production technology tomorrow is going to be the means of production as it has always been. So, who controls who programs those means of production is the issue. And there again once when we are talking of Marxist-Leninist principles China as we asserted that the means of production will be in the hands of the people and not in the hands of the private bodies. Now, if we are talking in those terms if you see even in technology you know less state like India the people who matter are monitored their every activity their every article is monitored. So, you cannot say that in a world where no technology is there there is no state control. There is state control you know the state control may not extend to us a villager say in some small village in India. But the state control does extend to all those people who matter there is state which is Indian state or for that matter any other state is monitoring Facebook is monitoring Twitter. It may not have the capacity to manage every 125 crores Indians but then 125 crores Indians really don't you know matter to the state as such in terms of intelligence gathering. You know the problem that has always been there and we leave this for a further discussion is of course who educates educator who controls the controller and finally how do people assert their rights. In case the state goes into wrong hands and how do we know it has it will not go into wrong hands but we leave this tech state people democracy discussions for a later stage and we will come back to you on this. This is all the time we have for this round of discussions with Atul will come back to him with this and other issues.