Notes and Comments on MA Thesis

Deckwitz, Sanne. “Gulag Vs. Laogai: The Function of Forced Labour Camps in the Soviet Union and China.” International Relations in Historical Perspective, Utrecht University. January 2012.

Research Topic and Purpose

“[A] systematic comparison between the function of the gulag and the laogai in the Soviet and Chinese Communist systems is still missing. The purpose of this study is therefore to carry out such a comparison on a political, economical, and psychological level. The research question is: how does the laogai differ from the gulag in the political, economical, and psychological functions it fulfills within the Communist system?”

“This study…puts more emphasis on the laogai than on the gulag… The aim of this study is…to contribute to our understanding of the laogai.”

Research Scope and Methodology

“Even though in China all statistics related to the laogai are regarded as state secrets, there are some provinces where essential information on the laogai is overtly available. Moreover, although outsiders are not allowed to directly observe the circumstances in the laogai, it is perfectly possible to visit areas in China that abound in prisons and prison enterprises, and each province is supposed to maintain a model prison to display to foreigners.”

- Interview with Harry Wu, American human rights activist, labor camp detainee for 19 years, founder of the Laogai Research Foundation

- Works by Harry Wu, Jean-Luc Domenach, James D. Seymour, and Richard Anderson.

- NGO reports, documents, and articles

Research is based on existing literature.

Findings

“The political function of the gulag and the laogai was to isolate the enemies of the people, and, in doing so, to protect and strengthen the Communist regimes.” The definition of the enemy was based on Marxist-Leninist and Maoist thought. The external enemy was all classes opposed to the proletariat/peasantry; the internal enemy were members of the proletariat/peasantry. Laogai thus achieved classicide and fratricide respectively.

“Both the Soviet Union and China used prison labour in the development and construction of public works and infrastructure. The economical goal of the gulag and the laogai was therefore the same.” Laogai is a source of economic revenue that was in line with Marxist-Leninist and Maoist thought; Laogai aimed to accelerate industrialization. Though the camp system was better organized in China than in the Soviet Union, there is no indication that Laogai fulfilled its economic goal; Laogai prisoners was also less efficient than the non-prisoner workers.

“The main difference between the gulag and the laogai finds its existence in the psychological function of the forced labour camps… Mao went a step beyond Engels and Marx in that he asserted that labour was not merely able to change the objective world, but also the labourer’s subjective worldview.” This resulted in the Chinese “thought reform” program, also facilitated by the better organization of the camps in China and traditional Chinese culture. The program consists of confession and re-education. Long-term approaches include interrogations, study groups, and peer supervision and pressure; short-term approaches include public confessions and staged executions. Laogai enforced political loyalty among non-prisoners by serving as a deterrent.

“The economic function of Laogai and the psychological function of the post-Mao Era Laogai needs more research. There should exist currently unaccessible primary sources in regard to these areas.”

“The ad hoc and arbitrary nature of the Soviet Union and Chinese legal system……Some articles could be interpreted so broadly that almost anyone could be punished by them.” (p.70)

“The main difference…… shaped by traditional Chinese culture ” (p.75)

“entirely dependent upon a small body of English Literature.”(p.75)

Useful Scholars and Sources

Amnesty International. China: Punishment Without Crime: Administrative Detention. August 31, 1991.

Amnesty International. Political Imprisonment in the People’s Republic of China. 1978.

Amnesty International. “The Massacre of June 1989 and Its Aftermath.” September 17, 1990.

Bauer, R.A. “Brainwashing: Psychology or Demonology?” Journal of Social Issues, 13 (1957), pp. 41-7.

China.org.cn. “Criminal Law of the People’s Republic of China.” March 14, 1997.

Dikötter, F. Crime, Punishment, and the Prison in Modern China. New York, 2002.

Fyfield, J.A. Re-educating Chinese Anti-Communists. London, 1982.

Human Rights Watch. “Where Darkness Knows No Limits”: Incarceration, Ill-treatment, and Forced Labor as Drug Rehabilitation in China. January 2010.

Kinkley, J.C. “Labor-camp Fiction as Conversion Literature: Zhang Xianliang and Ooka Shōhei,” in: Williams, P.F., & Wu, Y. (eds.), Remolding and Resistance Among Writers of the Chinese Prison Camp: Disciplined and Published, pp. 189-97. New York, 2006.

Laogai Research Foundation. “About us.”

Mao Zedong. “On the Correct Handling of Contradictions Among the People,” in: Selected Works of Mao Tse-Tung, transl. 5 vols. Vol. 5, pp. 384-421. Beijing, 1961-1965.

Mao Zedong. “On Practice: On the Relation Between Knowledge and Practice, Between Knowing and Doing,” in: Selected Works of Mao Tse-Tung, transl. 5 vols. Vol. 1, pp, 295-309. Beijing, 1961-1965.

Mosher, S.W. “Chinese Prison Labor.” Society, 29 (1991), pp. 108-139.

United States, Chinese Prison System, “Laogai”: Hearing Before the Subcommittee on International Operations and Human Rights of the Committee on International Relations, House of Representatives, One Hundred and Fourth Congress, first session, April 3, 1995 (Washington 1995).

Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Laogai Research Foundation databases. Harry Wu