新译文章《中国的国家性质》的部分（待全部译玩后校对整理）

The character of the Chinese state
Socialism Today’s China debate continues with a reply by LYNN WALSH to’s article, China’s Capitalist Counter-Revolution (Socialism Today No.114). In that article, Vincent argues that, to all intents and purposes, China is now a fully-fledged capitalist economy. Is it that clear cut?
中国的国家性质
当今社会主义关于中国性质的争论通过林恩•沃尔什（LYNN WALSH）对文森特•卡洛（Vincent Kolo）的文章《中国的资本主义反革命（114号当今社会主义）》的答辩继续着。在那篇文章中，文森特认为，从所有意图和目的看，中国现在是一个完全成熟的资本主义经济。这确定无疑吗？
DEVELOPMENTS IN CHINA are of crucial importance to socialists everywhere. The Chinese economy is now a major component of the global economy. With its increased economic and strategic weight, China is now a key player in relations between the major world powers. And political developments in China – the fate of the regime and struggles of the massive Chinese working class and poor peasantry – are of enormous significance internationally. At the same time, there has, not surprisingly, been a debate about the complex transition from a Maoist-Stalinist planned economy and the current character of the Chinese state.

对各处的社会主义者而言，中国的演变是至关重要的。中国经济现在是全球经济的一个重要组成部分。随着它的经济和战略性力量的增长，中国现在在世界主要大国关系之间扮演着一个关键的角色。中国的政治演变-政权的命运和中国工人阶级和贫困农民的大规模斗争-在国际上具有重大意义。与此同时，对于从毛泽东斯大林主义的计划经济到具有当前的特色的中国的复杂转变的争论也并不奇怪了。
In his article (www.socialismtoday.org/114/china), Vincent argued, in essence, that China is now a fully capitalist state. “The top echelons of the Chinese state… are now fully integrated into the global capitalist system”. In our view – the view of the leadership of the CWI – Vincent’s characterization is too categorical. The direction of travel of the Chinese state is clear enough, from the former Maoist-Stalinist planned economy, based on nationalised property, towards a capitalist economy. But, however powerful the locomotive, the train has not yet arrived at its destination. It is premature to declare: “Capitalism, of a peculiar Chinese type, has been restored”.
在他的文章（ www.socialismtoday.org/114/china ）中 ，文森特说，在本质上，中国现在是一个完全的资本主义国家。 “中国现在的高层已完全融入全球的资本主义制度中” 。在我们看来-工人国际委员会（CWI）的领导们的观点-文森特的描述是过于绝对。中国国家的走向是很清晰的，由基于国有所有制上的前毛派斯大林主义计划经济体制转向资本主义经济。但是，无论火车头有多么强大，火车还没有到达目的地。宣布：“中国特色的资本主义已经复辟” 是有些太早了 。
Although there are powerful and rapidly growing capitalist forces in China, the Chinese state is still a hybrid, combining remaining state-owned industries with ‘state capitalist’ enterprises (state-owned companies run on a more or less market basis) and with new elements of private capitalism (ranging from millions of individual businesses to giant Chinese and foreign corporations). The transition is not, in our view, complete and may not develop in a straight line. There can be significant twists and turns in the situation. It cannot be ruled out that, in the coming period of world economic crisis, the state will once again take over privately-owned corporations and some previously privatised companies threatened with collapse.
虽然在中国有强大的和迅速发展的资本主义势力，中国这个国家仍然是一个混合物，混合着具有“国家资本主义”企业（在或多或少的市场的基础上运行的国有企业）性质的剩余的国有工业和私人资本主义（从数以百万计的私营企业到大型的中国和外国公司）性质的新成分。在我们看来，转型还没有完成，也不会直线地发展演变。可能会出现曲折的局势。不能排除，在世界经济危机的今后一段时期里，国家将再次接管私人拥有的公司和一些濒临崩溃的曾经私有化的公司。
We believe that this debate is important and we welcome Vincent Kolo’s contribution. But, it may be asked, if both Vincent and ourselves agree that there is no longer a state-planned economy and that China is heading in a capitalist direction, is there a real difference? We believe there are important issues involved in this debate.

我们认为这场辩论是重要的，我们欢迎文森特投稿。但是，可能会问文森特和我们自己双方是否会同意在中国不可能重新出现国家计划经济，中国正在走向资本主义，这里有一个真正的区别吗？我们认为在本次辩论中有一些重要的问题。
First, there is the issue of method. Marxists should strive to analyse social phenomena (in this case, the changing Chinese state) in a rounded-out, scientific manner, not attempting to fit new developments into old stereotypes.
首先是方法的问题。马克思主义者应该努力以科学方式全面地分析社会现象（在这里是，中国国家的改变）而不是试图把新的发展状况纳入陈旧观念中。

A second issue, related to method, is the autonomous role that can be played under certain conditions by a powerful Bonapartist state (particularly an ex-Maoist-Stalinist state) in directing a social transformation from above.
第二个问题，与方法有关，是在一个强有力的波拿巴国家（特别是前毛派斯大林主义国家）的特定条件下在自上而下地领导社会变革中发挥作用的独立的角色的问题。
Third, there are issues of perspectives. It would be a mistake, in our view, to base ourselves on a single perspective that China will develop on purely capitalist lines, uninterrupted by turns in the direction of the regime. The advanced layers of the Chinese workers, in our view, have to be politically prepared for several different perspectives. In particular, they need to be prepared for the possibility that, faced with a deep economic crisis and a mass upsurge which threatens its survival, the regime will revert to much greater intervention in the economy, including taking over failing companies, in an attempt to defuse a potentially revolutionary situation.
第三，是一些展望的问题。在我们看来，立足于单一的角度认为中国将确立纯粹的资本主义路线而不会被其政权的转向而干扰将是错误的。在我们看来，中国工人的先进阶层，在政治上必须为几种不同的发展可能性做好准备。他们特别需要为如下可能性做好准备，面临着一个深刻的经济危机和威胁该政权生存的大规模斗争的升级，该政权将转向更大的对经济的干预，包括接管经营失败的公司来化解潜在的革命形势。