Studying the classics of Marxism–Leninism, researching the internal contradictions of China’s socialist economic system, and exploring general laws for the transition from socialism to communism, I have increasingly come to understand that labor power, like the means of production, is a thing borne by social relations of production. And then there is also the matter of labor power’s form of ownership, with its private ownership having a historical, provisional, and transitional character. Socialist revolution has settled the matter of ownership over the means of production, but it has maintained the private ownership of labor power. Only by combining the private self-ownership of labor power with the socialist, public ownership of the means of production can we comprise the base of the socialist mode of production. And the contradiction between these two forms of ownership constitutes the primary contradiction within the socialist mode of production. I find that the socialist principle of distribution according to labor is rooted exclusively in the private self-ownership of labor power. In addition, there is an essential relation between the private self-ownership of labor power and the commodity character of socialism. Finally, I believe that, just as the core question for socialist revolution is the change from private to public ownership of the means of production, the central question in the transition from socialism to communism is the transformation from private to common ownership of labor power. My views may include elements of bias or even fallacy, but I believe that, for our socialist country, relations of production in which privately owned labor power continues to exist will determine many aspects of people’s economic life. For this reason, I hope this article will draw more comrades to consider, study, and discuss this matter.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Harlan David Chambers (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: