Absolutely. Applying Ian Parker’s concept of discursive complex to Chinese Communist Party (CCP) ideology helps us understand not only how CCP discourse functions ideologically, but also how it interpellates subjects (à la Althusser) and becomes psychically invested—that is, how it becomes something people believe, fear, desire, and internalize.
1. What is the CCP ideology discursively?
CCP ideology is not a monolith, but it coheres around some dominant discursive threads:
• Historical materialism with “Chinese characteristics”
• Party leadership as the historical Subject
• Struggle and unity as the dialectic of progress
• National rejuvenation and the people’s will
• Continuity through rupture (e.g. Mao → Deng → Xi)
It is a regime of truth, constantly reaffirmed through state media, education, cultural production, and ritual (e.g. Party Congresses, national holidays). It doesn’t just explain history—it constructs reality.
2. CCP Ideology as a Discursive Complex
Let’s break it down according to Parker’s framework:
(a) Discourse: Language + Social Practice
The CCP produces a tightly controlled discourse that:
• Positions the Party as the embodiment of the People
• Frames all dissent as anti-historical or hostile foreign influence
• Uses familiar key terms: struggle, harmony, core values, socialism with Chinese characteristics, etc.
This discourse is institutionalized, ritualized, and repetitive, functioning like a Lacanian master-signifier—a knot around which other meanings organize.
(b) Psychic Investment: Desire, Fear, Fantasy
This is where Parker’s psychoanalytic angle is crucial. CCP ideology is not just believed—it is cathected, saturated with psychic energy.
Fantasy:
• Fantasy of Unity: The people and the Party are one.
• Fantasy of Siege: China is always under threat from foreign enemies, making loyalty a survival imperative.
• Fantasy of Redemption: The Party “saved” China from humiliation and will bring national rejuvenation.
These fantasies:
• Provide subjective coherence in a confusing, rapidly changing world.
• Structure jouissance—the mix of pleasure and pain in sacrificing for the nation, in watching enemies fall, in belonging to greatness.
Identification:
The subject identifies with the Party in the imaginary, symbolic, and real registers:
• Imaginary: I am one with the nation.
• Symbolic: I follow the Party line and speak its language.
• Real: I am split—I repress doubts, feel anxiety, but continue the performance.
(c) Ideology and Power
Parker insists that discursive complexes are tied to power relations. CCP ideology:
• Legitimizes the rule of a Leninist elite
• Naturalizes surveillance, censorship, and control
• Discredits alternative narratives (liberal democracy, Taiwan independence, Uyghur self-determination, etc.)
• Neutralizes trauma (e.g. Cultural Revolution, Tiananmen) by folding rupture into continuity
The discursive complex works not because it is logically consistent, but because it feels true—it satisfies emotional and symbolic needs, especially after trauma or under threat.
3. Subjectivity Organized by CCP Ideology
The CCP discursive complex produces a certain kind of subject:
The Loyal but Split Subject:
• Outwardly: patriotic, grateful, “harmonious”
• Inwardly: anxious, repressed, constantly monitoring speech and thought
• This is not pure false consciousness—it’s structured misrecognition. The subject enjoys being recognized by the Big Other (the Party), even as that Other is inconsistent and threatening.
The Paranoid Subject:
• Constantly aware of enemies: foreign powers, “color revolutions,” “hostile forces”
• Feels vindicated by state propaganda
• Interpellated by trauma narratives (e.g., Opium War, Nanjing Massacre)
The Redemptive Subject:
• Sees the Party as savior
• Believes history bends toward rejuvenation
• Accepts suffering as meaningful sacrifice (à la Maoist asceticism)
4. CCP Ideology as a Discursive Complex (in summary)
|
Parker’s Element |
CCP Ideology Example |
|
Discourse |
“Socialism with Chinese characteristics”; “harmonious society”; “struggle” |
|
Psychic Investment |
Desire for belonging, fear of chaos, fantasy of national greatness |
|
Ideological Power |
Justification of repression, construction of enemies, legitimation of elite rule |
|
Subjectivity |
The loyal-but-split subject; paranoid but redemptive; performing belief while managing doubt |
Would you like a comparative application—say, between CCP ideology and May Fourth discourse, or Xi Jinping Thought vs. Cultural Revolution discourse? Or would you like this turned into a theoretical essay draft?
