January 19, 1966, Peng Zhen defends Luo Ruiqing and the People’s Daily publishes essays evaluating Wu Han.

On the morning of January 19, Mayor Peng Zhen attended a meeting of the central party’s public security bureau, and said “while Luo Ruiqing served as minister of the bureau, he was still implementing the policies of the center and of the chairman, and that this was the real source of individual problems. This can serve as the basic estimation. Your public security bureau documents not only were handled by me, many were altered by the chairman’s own pen,  and many were seen by the chairman.

Also on January 19, the People’s Daily published two essays criticizing Wu Han, as well as five letters. Of these 7 documents, 4 criticized Wu Han, and 3 supported him. Those 3 which supported him were titled, “Doesn’t ‘Hai Rui Dismissed from Office’ have significant merit,” “Hai Rui Dismissed from Office has a revolutionary character,” and “‘Hai Rui Dismissed from Office’ is not a poisonous weed.” However, the essay that attracted the most attention was “The turning upside-down of history within ‘Hai Rui Dismissed from Office’”

Source: 出处:《彭真传》编写组,《彭真传》第3卷,中央文献出版社,2012年. Cited in http://50nianqian.blogspot.ca/2016/01/1966119.html

At Play at the time:

General Luo Ruiqing was part of Peng Zhen’s political circle. His criticism the previous month by Mao was attributed by some as a necessary move to prevent a rush into overt intervention in Vietnam by conservative generals, provoking a war response similar to the Korean War which would have stalled internal debate over the future of Chinese socialism. Peng’s attempt to intervene on his behalf at the time reflects the teetering of the Beijing power elite following increased pressure to expand the criticism of vice-mayor Wu Han. 

penganddeng
Deng Xiaping and Peng Zhen share a happy moment

January 17, 1966: Criticism of Wu Han gets “out of hand,” and Beijing academics attempt to keep things civil

 

On January 17, 1966, Peng Zhen in meetings with the editorial departments of the Beijing Daily, the Beijing Evening News, Beijing Arts and Literature and Front Line repeatedly emphasized that the Wu Han problem was purely an academic matter.
On the afternoon of January 17, the assistant head of the central government’s propaganda department Xu Liqun met with the respective personnel of 6 editorial departments, described the problem at hand, summed it up, and put forth Peng Zhen’s instruction, ordering that the 3 papers and 3 journals stop their criticism, for now letting Hongqi alone. He emphasized Peng Zhen’s “let things go” policy, saying that the leadership had created a chaotic scuffle. Xu Liqun held meetings on the scope of the struggle allowed to arise from Wu Han’s criticism, and also review criticisms that essays related to Wu Han were “too hard” for the masses to understand, and that many cadres simply only read the title of such articles. Other reports stated that there were not enough “quality” articles on the subject. Meetings were held as well to discuss how to respond to Chairman Mao’s instruction that Wu Han’s play be criticized around the point of “dismissal of officials” (referring to Peng Dehuai).
At stake at the time:
The criticism of Wu Han’s play clearly was making ripples throughout the ideological level, splitting the intelligensia about how to respond. Peng Zhen’s attempt to “control” the debate by ceasing criticism in the many Beijing papers, while insisting on quality shows the danger perceived in leading quarters about a discussion which they simultaneously insisted was merely an “academic” matter. The questions of quality can be seen as related to Mao’s writings on revolutionary upsurges.
Source
龚育之,《龚育之回忆——“阎王殿”旧事》,天津人民出版社,2008年;李筠,《我和“三家村”》,《炎黄春秋》2010年第12期 via: http://50nianqian.blogspot.ca/2016/01/1966117.html

People’s Daily Criticizes Wu Han again, and Guizhou Province Plans to Unite Factories and Cooperatives January 13, 1966

“Meeting Comrade Wu Han’s Challenge” Peking Daily: January 13, 1966:
Wang Ruoshui used the pen-name “Thought Form” and published an essay “Meeting Comrade Wu Han’s Challenge” in the People’s Daily today. He later stated he used the pen-name because he was instructed to write the essay on behest of People’s Daily editor Wu Lengxi.
The essay put forward that the crucial problem in Wu Han’s Play “Hai Rui Dismissed from Office” was the word “dismissed from office,” and that the play was connected to the criticism of Peng Dehuai at the 1959 Lushan Conference.
The essay says, “Although Comrade Wu Han has mentioned the Lushan Conference and argued against the flag of right opportunism, we need to accept his challenge, and analyze the trend in 1959, and research the spirit of the Lushan Conference, and hence take another look what Wu Han did during the time of the conference.”
“Two months before the Lushan Conference (June 16, 1959), Wu Han published his first essay about Hai Rui, called “Hai Rui curses the emperor.” It stated, “People think that cursing the emperor is inconceivable, and that to criticize through the theatre results in some relief, and is a good thing.”  These words can serve as an annotation of the importation of this “cursing” to the stage…
“Wu Han’s standpoint was exposed within the text of “Hai Rui dismissed from office.” Everybody knows, that when the attack of right opportunism against the party was defeated, some people were forced to resign from their positions, and this is what is “dismissed” from “office.” It was just at this time, not long after the Lushan Conference, that Wu Han began to write “Hai Rui Dismissed from Office.” Was writing this play an attack against right opportunism through the use of Hai Rui? Not at all. The right opportunists were dismissed from office, and Comrade Wu Han hence wrote that Hai Rui lost his office in this matter. Can this possibly be a coincidence?”
“The problem is hence thus. Wu Han’s self criticism has not touched upon the heart of the matter… This is not “history for the sake of history” but is in fact a case of “using the past to mock the present,” it is not “writing for the sake of writing” but is a play written for a political purpose, it is not a case of “forgetting about class struggle” but represents an act of struggle by the  capitalist class and feudalist classes against the proletariat.”
“Comrade Wu Han in his self-criticism seeks to hide his political problems, and to attribute all his mistakes to problems of an academic nature… But, political problems cannot be hidden. I am not saying that everything that Wu Han has written about Hai Rui is a political mistake, but “Hai Rui Dismissed from Office” certainly not only has academic problems, but moreover it has problems of a political nature.”
From January 13 to January 17, Guan Jian and Lin Jie’s Essay “The Reactionary Quality of ‘Hai Rui Dismissed from Office’ and ‘Hai Rui Curses the Emperor’ were submitted to the party’s central propaganda department for approval, but the assistant head of the office, Xu Lijun and Yao Qinna did not approve the essays…. Later they were submitted to Beijing mayor Peng Zhen, who instructed his secretary to respond that he was busy with work, had recently gone down to the countryside, and had no time to see the essay. Later he instructed that the essays must be edited, and that they could not touch upon any mention of the Lushan Conference.”
The previous day, the Beijing Daily had printed a self-criticism from Wu Han in which he admitted to errors around the question of morality stating:
 “At the heart of the matter, regardless of the central thesis of one of my essays or lectures, at the root of my problem was that although I believed that the bourgeois class under feudalism could be criticized, I believed that some of its aspects were attributes which became the morality of the proletarian class. This was an extremely mistaken conclusion. It not only did not adhere to the actual situation of the historical development of class struggle in society, but also opposed the theory of class struggle, and was opposed to Marxism-Leninism and opposed to science.”
At Play at the Time:
We can assume that Wu Han’s self-criticism for focussing positive aspects of feudal morality is what the article below criticized for deflecting the actual political stakes embedded in his play “Hai Rui dismissed from office.” This namely was tacit support for Peng Dehuai in opposition to Mao Zedong and in opposition to collectivization. Interestingly enough however, the initial salvo of the Cultural Revolution was Yao Wenyuan’s polemic against the play the previous November, which one could say focussed on just the sort of “academic questions” which Wu Han was  starting to address. We can surmise however that the awareness of the political stakes had risen by this point, so a more open discussion over political ramifications and connections to the contemporary politics now required that the discussion come more directly into “the present movement.” Importantly, Mao Zedong, in 1959 stepped down as state chairman of the People’s Republic, and was replaced by Liu Shaoqi, whose politics favored de-collectivization. The plethora of articles in the press at the time of the publication of the above articles, including discussion of collectivization in Guizhou and repeated mention of Daqing and Dazhai policies can be seen as an offensive towards a reemphasis on collectivization by those on the left to go along with the critiques of Wu Han.

 

January 11 1966: How to Organize Agricultural Collectives on a National Scale: Wuhan University Professors Discuss: January 11, 1966

大寨
“To Study Dazhai, One Must Pay Close Attention to Class Struggle”

“Labor should not only be amassed before carrying out the modernization of agriculture, it must also be amassed during the process of carrying out modernization, especially in the early stage of carrying out modernization.”

Recently, a discussion was held by a group of professors from Wuhan University’s Economics Department to discuss the the issue of amassing labor in a collective economy…
At Stake at the Time:
Many critiques of the shortages during the Great Leap Forward period (1959-1961) argued to emphasize de-collectivization and private plots. However, those on the left argued that while the GLF mistakes must be acknowledged, the drive towards collectivization itself should not be repudiated. Subsequent models, such as Dazhai put an emphasis on self-reliance, local agricultural conditions, and the gradual scaling up of labor pools towards larger size communes to realize productive gains. In contrast general Great Leap Forward plans had ofte put an emphasis on rapid industrialization and labor accumilation. The discussion below points to some of the key areas of inquiry along the new “Dazhai” way of thinking.
  1. The scale of amassing labor, speed, and development
One opinion believes that the research of labor amassing and scale, speed, and quality, is about how to satisfactorily use the labor resources in a collectivized society, how to properly divide labor power between production and basic construction in order to ensure the premise that basic construction does not impair the relative fast development of production.  The scale and speed of amassing labor is obtained by both objective needs and by subjective possibilities. The objective needs refer to the conditions within a unit or team. Different productive conditions within a unit or team result in different labor massing requirements. Subjective potential refers to that amount of surplus labor available after satisfying the present productive needs. In particular, the ratio between labor used for productive works and labor used for basic construction determines the scale of amassing labor, as well is the key to its speed.
Another opinion put forward is that one should not superficially say that units and teams with worse off conditions for production hence have an ever greater need for amassing labor. As long as one sees the present amount of amassed labor, this will will determine the future needed amount of amassing labor going ahead. It should be seen that man’s ability to transform nature is limitless, and the requirement to transform the backward appearance of out country’s agriculture is not accomplished in one day. Labor should not only be amassed before carrying out the modernization of agriculture, it must also be amassed during the process of carrying out modernization, especially in the early stage of carrying out modernization. The many aspects of transforming natural conditions have many tasks, and all still must be accomplished through  the accumulation of labor.
There is yet another opinion, which puts forward that with the gradual achievement of agricultural modernization, agricultural labor productivity will gradually increase, and and the productive use of labor possibly will decrease, and hence there will be an increase on the use of labor for basic construction. As a result, the trend for the development of labor accumulation will possibly be that its absolute quantity will not decrease.
  1. The relationship between amassing labor and amassing resources
One opinion believes, that if present productive conditions are poor, units and teams with great productive potential can first put forth labor accumulation, in order to boost their accumulated funds. In contrast, where present productive conditions are good, units and teams without good productive potential should consider their accumulated funds, and gradually implement agricultural modernization while not accumulating as much labor.
Yet another opinion believes that although areas with different conditions can have many differences in the scale of labor accumulation, from the perspective of the general situation at present, every unit and team should increase its amassing of labor.  The transformation of nature and of productive conditions can be accomplished, by increasing the amount of labor accumulation, and increase productivity of agricultural labor. And through increasing the amount of agricultural products, there will be a gain in the amount of accumulated funds.

Reflections from a worker at Daqing: Socialist construction is like a chessboard, and the individual is like a chess piece People’s Daily, January 9, 1966

I am a professional soldier. After experiencing war for several years, I worked as a shoe repairer, watchman, potter, and now feed horses.

 Several people have asked me “Huang, you are a capable solider, how can you now busy yourself with feeding horses?” On the spot I responded to them saying: “feeding horses is also part of making revolution. If capable soldiers don’t feed horses, who will go feed them? As long as it benefits revolution, then whatever one does is ok.” Chairman Mao has taught us, regardless of the scale of an individual’s abilities, as long as he or she use their whole hard and conviction for the spirit of serving the people, then this is a person which has benefit for the people

(Huang describes attentiveness to detail in his present working, including visiting vet station because of his lack of understanding of horses, and supplementing the horses’ diet with his own porridge (zhou) when they are sick.)

What I do is ordinary work, and normally it wouldn’t seem worthwhile, but I have a bit of understanding: as long as one’s own work can be combined with revolution, than it will not be trivial, whatever there is to do one will want to do, and one will want to do it well and improve it. 

From Daqing Oilfield’s shoe repairman Huang Youshu

At Play at the Time

Editorials elsewhere in the paper advocate taking the model of Daqing’s spirit to new contexts. In cases, before the Cultural Revolution (and afterwards) the promotion of worker roles as “in service of socialist construction” often powered a conservative politics, endorsing the idea of “obedient workers staying in their places” and hence the reproduction of capitalist relations. The question hinges on worker Huang’s depiction of work under socialism as a chess board, in which contributions need to be strategic given the continuation of class struggle under socialism. This is in contradiction to the revisionist view put forward in the Soviet Union that class struggle ceases under socialism, implying that all work hence serves socialist construction, i.e. there is no chess board. 

On Daqing, see also:

https://wordpress.com/post/dailycr.wordpress.com/423

https://wordpress.com/post/dailycr.wordpress.com/164

wangjinxi
Wang Jinxi, known as the “iron man” from Daqing was also shown in several photographs below from the day’s People’s Daily, in an article entitled “Where does one begin to study from Daqing?: A red line of class struggle extends throughout the process of Daqing’s growth.”

Also today in China:

 frompekingreview

Also today elsewhere:

  • The Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) became the first African-American civil rights organization to publicly oppose the Vietnam War, stating: “We are in sympathy with, and support, the men in this country who are unwilling to respond to a military draft which would compel them to contribute their lives to United States aggression in Vietnam in the name of the ‘freedom’ we find so false in this country,” the SNCC statement read in part. “We take note of the fact that 16 percent of the draftees from this country are Negroes called on to stifle the liberation of Vietnam, to preserve a ‘democracy’ which does not exist for them at home. We ask, where is the draft for the freedom fight in the United States?” [25]

Work-Study Schools: Peking Review, January 7, 1966

At Play at the Time:

Work study schools had started during the eve of the Cultural Revolution, and received a new boost in 1964, shortly after collectivist experiments in Daqing (called Taqing in the text below) and Dazhai were established, challenging technocratic norms and stressed self-reliance. During the last months of the Cultural Revolution, the schools were featured in the movie Breaking With Old Ideas, which advanced the ideas in this article with the addition of grater emphasis on a two-line struggle over the relationship of such schools to political struggles. Key to the premise is that education and knowledge has a class context, as well as the importance of combining knowledge with production.

A Significant Development in China’s Educational Revolution

by Liang Nien

 

[This article is reprinted from Peking Review, #2, Jan. 7, 1966, pp. 9-12.]from: http://www.massline.org/PekingReview/PR1966/PR1966-02d.htm

 

The introduction of the work-study educational system in China is fully in keeping with the wishes of the broad masses of the people and with the needs for the development of industrial and agricultural production. It will exercise a far-reaching influence on the training of a new generation of revolutionaries who are both “red and expert” and can work with both hand and brain. It is a fundamental measure for the consolidation of the dictatorship of the proletariat and for the prevention of the restoration of capitalism.

 

THE establishment of a new system of work-study education which combines classroom study with work in the factories and on the farms is a development of far-reaching importance in China’s cultural revolution.

Though experiments are still being made in order to best solve the common and specific problems of its many different kinds of schools, the new system has already brought universal education nearer and is showing its value in bringing up a new generation of revolutionaries who are accustomed to both mental and physical labour and who are both “red and expert,” i.e., who are both politically conscious and professionally competent.

 

Suited to Objective Needs

Work-study schools were first tried out in 1958 in accordance with the principle that education should serve proletarian politics and be combined with productive labour. In 1964, the Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party directed that, side by side with the existing full-time schools, part-work and part-study education should be gradually introduced throughout the country. Since then, there has been a vigorous development in this system of schooling, both in the urban and rural areas. In the cities, work-study specialized middle schools and work-study schools equivalent to junior middle schooling have been established; in the countryside, there are work-study primary schools, work-study agricultural middle schools, and work-study technical middle schools. The new system is also being tried out in higher education. It can be expected that on the basis of the experience now being gained, it will make still greater advances in the future.

Socialist China is a vast country with a huge population, and in the past economic and cultural development was so uneven that today levels still differ greatly from one place to another. Under these circumstances, it is just not realistic to expect to make education universal in China through full-time schooling only. This poses the task of setting up schools to suit all conditions in order to meet the needs of the broad masses, and of the workers and peasants in particular. This is where the work-study educational system comes in.

 

Schools of Many Kinds

In the countryside today, besides full-time primary schools, there are work-study primary schools of many kinds. These schools operate on flexible lines, so that youngsters who have work to do in the family or field can attend classes. There are half-day schools, and schools with special morning, noon or evening classes. If these are not practical, classes without fixed hours are held, and school begins when the students come. Mobile schools make their rounds to bring lessons to children who live in scattered mountain villages and on the grasslands.

In a word, the schools are set up for the convenience and benefit of pupils, especially those from working families. Great care is taken to keep all expenses down to a minimum and to ensure that what is taught is of practical use.

As a result, enrolment of children from former poor and lower-middle peasant families has risen sharply. There are now 17 million children studying in work-study primary schools, 80 per cent above the 1964 enrolment in these schools. The rapid development of the new schools is also stimulating reforms in the full-time rural schools. Many of the latter have changed from the usual two terms each of five months a year to three shorter terms and now close during the busy periods of harvesting and sowing. Some have set up additional classes for pupils who cannot attend full time. All this has helped to bring about an increase of 14 per cent in total primary school enrolment compared with 1964. This is a big step forward in making primary education universal.

 


Students of the work-study Agro-Technical School run by
Peking’s Evergreen People’s Commune attending a course
on the cultivation of hothouse vegetables

 

The spread of secondary education has been likewise improved. In the cities primary education is already universal and the majority of primary school graduates can go on to full-time junior middle school. For those who cannot, work-study schools and classes in a variety of forms, as well as other forms of schooling such as the Television School in Taiyuan, Shansi Province, and the Home for Youngsters in Mutankiang, Heilungkiang Province, are being set up by factories and mines, government organizations and enterprises, and neighbourhood organizations. In the villages, work-study agricultural middle schools are being developed. State farms specializing in agriculture, forestry or animal husbandry have set up a number of technical middle schools based on the new system, and in big cities like Shanghai, Peking and Tientsin, enterprises and organizations are running similar schools of their own. Enrolment in these work-study middle schools in 1965 was 87 per cent more than in 1964.

The new system has also been extended to higher education. Work-study institutes, technological universities and teachers’ training colleges have been set up by a number of big state farms and factories. Many full-time higher educational institutions are actively experimenting with the new system. More than half of the agricultural institutes of higher learning have introduced the work-study system and 70 per cent of the agro-technical middle schools are also trying it out. Under an overall plan, conditions are being created for the existing full-time specialized middle schools to be transformed into work-study schools step by step.

 


Kazakh youngsters from a people’s commune on their
way to a work-study primary school on the grasslands
of Sinkiang’s Altai County

 

From the above, it is clear that the new system is not only contributing greatly to the universalization of primary education in China. It has also opened up ways for the gradual universalization of secondary and even higher education in the future. This is in marked contrast to the position in capitalist countries. In order to safeguard the interests of the bourgeoisie and to maintain the differences between mental and manual labour, the bourgeois educational system can only universalize primary or general secondary education at the most. It definitely cannot, nor is it willing to universalize higher and specialized secondary education. The socialist countries, in order to render immediate service to the socialist revolution and socialist construction and to diminish gradually the differences between mental and manual labour, besides universalizing primary and general secondary education step by step, must go further and universalize higher and specialized secondary education also.

 

Developing a Technical Force

The gradual modernization and development of industrial and agricultural production has created a pressing need for a huge technical force both in the cities and the countryside. This is where the new schools fulfil an increasingly important function. Work-study schools set up by factories can produce in a relatively short period large numbers of workers of a new type—workers who are good with their hands and have specialized skills and an adequate level of general education. The Tientsin Electronic Instruments Plant solved its shortage of skilled workers and cadres by setting up a technical middle school on a work-study basis. The plant now has 405 graduates from this school in its workshops and other departments and they form the nucleus of its technical and administrative force.

Since 1958, Tientsin has set up a number of work-study technical middle schools on a trial basis. In the last two years this city has made considerable advances in work-study education. Today there are altogether 119 work-study schools and classes, mostly middle schools and some institutions of higher learning, with a total enrolment of over 24,000 students. Investigations made by the city among some 2,000 of its graduates from work-study technical middle schools showed that the majority of them are now factory workers. Some have become technicians or administrative cadres. Collectively these people are an important technical force in Tientsin’s factories.

In the countryside, the situation is the same. Many graduates from work-study agricultural middle schools have become leaders,of production teams, book-keepers, storemen, tractor drivers, irrigation and drainage equipment operators, technicians, health workers, electricians, veterinarians and livestock breeders. Excellent results have also been obtained from the special short courses run by these schools to meet the need for agro-technicians, veterinarians, accountants and other technical personnel. An equally important role is played by the work-study technical middle schools in supplying skilled personnel needed by state farms specializing in agriculture, forestry or livestock breeding, fishing enterprises, hydroelectric and farm machinery stations and other production units.

The graduates are well equipped for the jobs that lie ahead of them as they have already done practical work. While studying, they are an effective productive force, too. Students of some agricultural middle schools, for example, have turned low-yielding land into high-yielding land by scientific farming. Some have raised improved strains of seeds. Some have assisted production teams in disease and pest control and prevention, and in this way they have helped to ensure high yields over large areas of farmland.

In cities some work-study schools divide their day equally into two, others study and work on alternate days or weeks. After a very short time their students have shown that they are at home in the workshops, able both to operate machines and to solve technical problems. They are already worker-technicians in the making.

 

Stress on Industry and Thrift

These new schools implement in an improved way the established policy of building up the country through industry and thrift. Through work, the students not only gain knowledge but also create wealth to cover part or the whole of their expenses and those of the school. This of course lightens greatly the burden on the state and parents and makes it much easier to set up large numbers of schools in all parts of the country.

Most of the work-study schools in the countryside in fact grew out of practically nothing. They were set up on the principle of making the fullest use of what is available on the spot and keeping expenses and equipment down to the barest minimum. Old buildings are repaired and new ones put up by the teachers and students who use local materials. Equipment and furniture, too, are usually made in the same way.

The Taching Oilfield provides an outstanding example of industry and thrift in education. In the spirit of hard work and self-reliance, men and women of Taching who succeeded in building a huge oilfield in three years, have in the last six years set up 130 schools and classes in diverse forms. These include full-time schools and different kinds of work-study schools and short-term courses. In Taching today, primary education is already universal; junior middle school education is practically universal. A basic educational network covering primary, secondary and higher education has been set up throughout the oilfield. In establishing these schools, the Taching people met with all sorts of difficulties. They were in want of almost everything at the start—buildings, equipment, teachers, and teaching experience. … They solved their accommodation problem by making use of dining-rooms, store-rooms, and stables, and by putting up simple, crude buildings themselves. They piled up sun-dried bricks to make tables, and made wooden benches out of waste material from the construction sites. They sought their teachers from among cadres, workers and housewives, bearing in mind an old Chinese saying “the capable ones are the teachers.” They gained experience through “learning to do by doing” and “making improvements as you go along.” It is with such a revolutionary spirit and such revolutionary measures that the Taching people, guided by Mao Tse-tung’s thinking, have managed to turn the many unfavourable conditions for their life and work to good account—making every difficulty contribute to the education and steeling of the younger generation.

 

Working People of a New Type

Most important of all, the students in these schools are closely linked to production, to reality and to the working people. They are at the same time students and farmers or students and workers. Their theoretical studies and experiments tie in closely with production. What they study in books is tested and assimilated through practice. This stimulates and holds the students’ interest and helps them to learn and master what is taught. The teachers, too, are out in the fields or factories when they are not teaching and this links their classroom work more closely with life. Facts prove that there is no lowering of standards. As schools of this type can better implement the policy of putting education at the service of proletarian politics and linking it with productive labour, they are better capable of bringing up working people of a new type, people with an all-round development, moral, intellectual and physical.

Although it is not long since these schools first came into being, they have proved their worth and their graduates are warmly welcomed by rural people’s communes and industrial enterprises alike. There is a consensus of opinion that youth thus educated are in general conscientious in work, progressive in outlook, and technically competent. Because of this they have played a praiseworthy role in the three great revolutionary movements—the class struggle, the struggle for production, and scientific experiment. Since 1958, more than 4,000 people have graduated from work-study schools of higher learning, some 10,000 from work-study agro-technical middle schools. These young people, who have received training in both theory and practice, are capable of doing both mental and manual labour. They make themselves very useful wherever they may be, are quite at home with the masses, and are not pretentious or snobbish. They are socialist-minded, cultured working people of a new type.

The most recent development in the work-study schools is the emphasis placed on graduates going back to their home communes. Some agricultural institutes, agro-technical middle schools, and specialized middle schools training public health workers last summer recruited new students directly from rural communes with the understanding that they would return home after graduation. Urban work-study schools have also undertaken to train personnel for the rural areas from among young people in the cities.

The introduction of the work-study educational system is fully in keeping with the wishes of the broad masses of the people and with the needs for the development of industrial and agricultural production. It embodies on the educational front the general line of getting greater, faster, better and more economical results in building socialism. In the long-term view, this will create the conditions for the gradual diminution of the differences between mental and manual labour; and it is one of the basic measures for the training of a new generation of proletarian revolutionaries and for guarding against any restoration of capitalism in our country.

The work-study system of schooling at the present time is still in the initial stages and we lack experience with it. There will inevitably be difficulties on our way ahead. But introduction of the system is definitely not a measure of expediency. It will remain and advance in step with the forward movement of our socialist revolution. Travelling along this road, we shall gradually build up a complete educational system of our own, which brings up people who can work with both hand and brain.

January 5 1966: Learning from Daqing

 

Ma’An Shan Steel Company in southern Anhui is said to have suffered from poor management practices which focussed on blaming various parties for production problems. Politics were said not to have been put in command, and Mao Zedong Thought was not put into command.

Starting in 1963 however the plant began to learn from the example of Daqing, the region in China where oil was discovered, and which lead to collectivized experiments in economic development and community planning. Ma’an Shan cadres and workers are reported to have used Daqing as a model, and have transformed relations and work procedures in the plant.
In Ma’an Steel in particular, Mao’s essays of on Practice, and on Contradiction, in addition to Serve the People, In Memory of Norman Bethune, the Old Fool Who Moved the Mountain, and Combat Liberalism  were studied, and the theory of class struggle were applied to understand problems. These essays are said to constitute the most valuable food for workers and cadres. Rooms were set up in every factory and mine for the study of political works. Large increases in the quality and appearance of the area have been realized since. Problems have been attacked with the concept of one dividing into two.
Another essay in the paper by a Ma’an furnace worker is titled “Dare to Be a Fool in Front of a Master”
He explains many workers are afraid to take the lead in experimenting with new methods, thinking that if even engineers and technicians are afraid to act, how could they possible move forward? He states that to dare to make revolution is to dare to be a fool. With a revolutionary spirit and scientific approach, anything can be accomplished, he says.
At Play at the Time
The images and articles in this issue speak the importance of precedents in defining the emerging political movement. In later years, struggles occurred over the relative importance of models such as Dazhai and Daqing in the aftermath of new political achievements during the Cultural Revolution. To some they represented a more piecemeal attempt at revolutionary advance, while for  others they continued to represent a foundational core for the movement. The three images above are representative of the three prototypes of the revolution (workers, peasants, and soldiers) which often appeared in Cultural Revolution posters.

Trying to Escape the Gordian Knot: Statement on US attack on Cambodia: January 3rd, 1965

At Play at the Time

Policy towards US attacks on Vietnam reveal a struggle between revolutionary forces in China which advocated a militant guerrilla response to US encroachment, and Soviet policy, which saw the incursion in more traditional military realpolitik, and the Chinese military establishment, many of whom lean towards Soviet type thinking. Distinguishing Chinese policy from Soviet policy was complicated at this time by joint Chinese-Soviet action, including the shipment of Soviet arms through China (see second article below, an interview with Vice-Premier Chen Yi reprinted from the previous week published in the same Peking Review article).  Adjacent countries in southeast Asia, Cambodia, Laos, and Thailand in particular, were key areas to attempt to promote foreign policy more aligned to Chinese revolutionary visions. Cambodian Prince Sihanouk was courted extensively by Chinese leaders, Zhou Enlai in particular, to advocate an anti-imperiliast stance, despite his often conflicted position in the political struggles of the time. At this time, both he and Pol Pot were in China. See: https://cross-currents.berkeley.edu/sites/default/files/e-journal/articles/jeldres_1.pdf

see also: https://dailycr.wordpress.com/2015/12/24/december-24-1965-storm-clouds-at-home-and-abroad-peng-zhen-presides-over-the-peoples-daily-the-u-s-incites-war-in-cambodia/

cambodia

soviet1soviet2

From the Peking Review,  http://massline.org/PekingReview/

Business as Normal For the New Year, Calm Before the Storm

At Stake at the Time:

The New Year’s editorial talks about the third sequence of five-year plans, conveying that things are progressing “according to plan” and without interruption. The Cultural Revolution is relegated to the sphere of study and culture, maintaining the insistence of Peng Zhen and others in  Beijing that critiques of Beijing intellectuals be considered an “academic” rather than “political” matter. This is in diametric contrast to the editorial in Hongqi printed the day before. During this time, the People’s Daily remained under the control of Peng Zhen and his network.

At Stake at the Present:

After the twists and the turns of the Cultural Revolution, to this day there are segments of the masses in China who insist that the Cultural Revolution was always supposed to be about “culture,” i.e.  non-violent, and without a reflection in political struggle. However this can be seen  in contrast to the Marxist understanding that revolutions are never peaceful matters, and also the understanding derived over the course of the Chinese Revolution and synthesized by Mao that class contradictions  often come to a head at the ideological level of society, which at certain points in history can become central to defining the political stakes and positions of a movement.

Welcoming 1966 — The First Year of China’s Third Five-Year Plan

— New Year’s Day Message — 

[This article is reprinted from Peking Review, #1, Jan. 1, 1966, pp. 5-9.]

From: http://www.massline.org/PekingReview/PR1966/PR1966-01a.htm

 

NINETEEN SIXTY-SIX, the first year of China’s great Third Five-Year Plan, has arrived. Full of boundless joy, the Chinese people of all nationalities are determined to make still greater achievements in the socialist revolution and socialist construction in the new year, to make the new Five-Year Plan a success from the very start.

 

The Third-Five Year Plan

The Third Five-Year Plan is a magnificent plan of the Chinese people to develop their national economy. During the period of the Third Five-Year Plan, we must hold aloft the great red banner of Mao Tse-tung’s thinking, continue to carry out, in a deep-going way, the three great revolutionary movements of class struggle, the struggle for production, and scientific experiment. We will carry out the socialist education movement in the countryside and cities on a still wider scale. We will strive to increase agricultural production year by year, and implement still more effectively the National Programme for Agricultural Development. While bringing into full play the latent capacities of present industrial enterprises and transport and communications services on the basis of constant technical innovations and a constant rise in labour productivity, great efforts will be made to build a number of new enterprises, strengthen national defence, strengthen basic industries, communications and transport, and further improve the distribution of industry in the country; corresponding efforts will be made to expand light industry and improve the people’s livelihood step by step on the basis of the development of production—to do all this in order to build up an independent, fairly comprehensive industrial system and national economy. We will make strenuous efforts in order to catch up with and surpass advanced world levels in science and technology and build China into a strong socialist country with modern agriculture, modern industry, modern national defence and modern science and technology within twenty to thirty years.

 

Most Favourable Conditions

Since liberation, there have never been such favourable conditions for the national economy as now, when China’s Third Five-Year Plan is being launched.

Since liberation, China has gone through a period of two Five-Year Plans, after the period of the rehabilitation of the national economy. The First Five-Year Plan was overfulfilled by 1957. The Second Five-Year Plan, which was launched in 1958, was basically fulfilled in 1960, two years ahead of schedule. In the five years from then to the present, we made an overall readjustment of the national economy in the first three years and, in the following two years, we organized a new upsurge in the national economy, creating in every respect sound and adequate foundations for implementing the Third Five-Year Plan. From 1959 to 1961, China was hit by three successive years of natural calamities and there were some shortcomings and mistakes in our work; moreover, the Khrushchov revisionist clique perfidiously and suddenly attacked China by tearing up several hundred agreements and contracts, cutting off the supply of important items of equipment and technical data and withdrawing all Soviet experts working in China, thus adding to our economic difficulties. But all these serious difficulties did not overwhelm us. Through the efforts of the whole Party and the whole people, these big difficulties were turned into very good things.

In the past several years, under the brilliant leadership of the Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party and Comrade Mao Tse-tung, we have made progress in learning how to apply Marxism-Leninism and Mao Tse-tung’s thinking in understanding things, analysing situations and grasping and solving problems. We found in good time ways of overcoming difficulties and ways of bringing about a great leap forward in a certain historical period. We have learnt methods of implementing the mass line more effectively. By relying on and bringing into play the strength of the masses, not only did we overcome our difficulties but we have brought about an all-round upsurge in the national economy. The Khrushchov revisionist clique’s betrayal strengthened our determination to exert greater efforts to implement the policy of self-reliance and to break down the notion of relying on others and having blind faith in them. This has greatly increased the material forces for building the country by our own efforts, and enabled us to find the correct road and a whole set of concrete measures for carrying out the socialist revolution and socialist construction in conformity with objective laws and the specific conditions of China. We have seriously summed up the experience and lessons of our work and learnt how to more comprehensively implement the general line of going all out, aiming high and achieving greater, faster, better and more economical results in building socialism. Facts have fully confirmed that our experience has become richer and our strength greater.

 

Socialist Education Movement

Class Struggle. It should be particularly pointed out that based on Comrade Mao Tse-tung’s teaching that classes and class struggle should always be borne in mind, we have taken class struggle in the past few years as the key to all our work, unfolded the socialist education movement in the countryside and the cities, and re-educated Communist Party members, cadres and the masses with the spirit of uninterrupted and thoroughgoing revolution, of carrying the socialist revolution through to the end. We have consolidated and expanded the position of socialism in the political, economic, ideological and organizational spheres and dealt a heavy blow to the noxious influences of capitalism. This greatly invigorated the outlook of the people throughout the country and their revolutionary enthusiasm is rising higher and higher. The struggle against Khrushchov revisionism has greatly raised the Marxist-Leninist ideological level and proletarian internationalism of the cadres and the masses. This is of far-reaching historic significance in preventing the restoration of capitalism and in promoting the advance of socialism in China and of world revolution.

Cultural Revolution. The cultural revolution has been developed in depth; a series of great debates and reforms have been carried out in philosophy, history, literature, art and education, spreading Marxism-Leninism and Mao Tse-tung’s thinking, repudiating revisionism, upholding proletarian thinking and uprooting the ideas of the bourgeoisie and the landlord class. Many of those working in the social science field have gained a deeper understanding of Marxism-Leninism and Mao Tse-tung’s thinking. Many writers and artists have more clearly recognized their direction of serving proletarian politics, serving the workers, peasants and soldiers and serving the economic base of socialism. While continuing to reform the full-time schools, educational workers started to put the system of part-farming, part-study and part-work, part-study into practice experimentally. The intellectuals have gone to rural areas, factories and army units to integrate themselves with the workers, peasants and soldiers; this has helped them to remould their thinking and greatly heighten their socialist consciousness.

Mass Movement to Study Mao Tse-tung’s Thinking. The study of Mao Tse-tung’s thinking by people all over the country has developed on an unprecedented mass scale. A vast number of people and cadres have creatively studied and used Mao Tse-tung’s works and their socialist consciousness has been raised to an all-time high. Reading Chairman Mao Tse-tung’s books, following his teachings and working in accordance with his guidance have become conscious acts of the masses of people. Mao Tse-tung’s teaching has become a powerful ideological weapon which is being used by tens of millions of people with increasing consciousness, and a great motivating force for progress in all fields of work. Learning from the People’s Liberation Army, from the Tachai Production Brigade and from the Taching Oilfield has become a nationwide campaign. The revolutionary spirit of self-reliance and hard struggle is taking root, blossoming and bearing fruit in different trades and occupations. Learning from Lei Feng and Wang Chieh and from all advanced people has grown into a movement of self-education for the broad masses. The revolutionary style of doing everything in the interest of others, disregarding one’s own interests, fearlessness in the face of trials or death and wholehearted devotion to the revolution have become new lofty moral trends in our society. All this encourages the masses of people to make greater contributions to the socialist revolution and construction, since the spirit it engenders is transformed into a material force.

 

Most Powerful Material and Technical Basis Ever

The material and technical basis of our country has never been so powerful as now, when we are embarking on the great Third Five-Year Plan.

In the past few years, under the guidance and inspiration of the general line for building socialism, we have had great success in carrying out the general policy of developing the national economy with agriculture as the foundation and industry as the leading factor.

Agricultural Production. Agricultural production has made tremendous advances and remarkable results have been achieved in steadily increasing output. The system of rural people’s communes has been further consolidated and its superiority has been brought into fuller play.

The work of building water conservancy projects and improving farmland has been very fruitful. In agriculture, the Tachai Production Brigade has come forward as a brilliant pace-setter. Rural areas all over the country made great efforts to learn from Tachai. Many outstanding farming units have emerged in the style of Tachai. In 1965, there were good harvests for the fourth year running. Grain, cotton, sugar-bearing crops and tobacco output rose considerably.

Industrial Production. There was new progress in industrial production, with a new leap forward in the increased number of varieties and improved quality. Many weak links in industry were greatly strengthened. Many gaps were filled in. The petroleum industry in particular made an important breakthrough and has made China virtually self-sufficient. Communications and transport also made great advances. The Taching Oilfield rose up as an illustrious pace-setter on the industrial, communications and transport front. Various places in the country are making great efforts to learn from Taching. As a result, many outstanding industrial enterprises have emerged in the style of the Taching Oilfield. Industrial production last year registered considerable increases, with higher labour productivity and lower costs. Many construction projects made fairly rapid progress; the quality of construction work improved, and investments yielded rather substantial results.

The supply of commodities on the market increased steadily, in line with the development of industrial and agricultural production. In 1965, there was a big increase in the supply of pork, edible oil, sugar and cotton cloth; commodity prices remained stable and the market was brisk.

A Country That Owes No Foreign Debt. In the past few years state revenue and expenditures were balanced and the foreign trade plan was well fulfilled. All foreign debts were repaid and China has become a country that owes no debt to any country. The capital and interest on government bonds have been repaid on time, and in two or three years China will be a country without any domestic debt.

In the past few years, great achievements have been made in culture, education, public health and physical culture work; research in science and technology in particular advanced by leaps and bounds. All departments in the national economy made significant gains in the use of new designs, new techniques, new technological processes, new materials and new equipment. The successful explosion of two atomic bombs showed in a concentrated way that China has made a big leap forward in its efforts to catch up with and surpass the world’s advanced scientific and technical levels.

China’s National Defence Strength Has Become Unprecedentedly Great. It is especially noteworthy that in the past few years the Chinese People’s Liberation Army, public security forces and the militia, troops who are the sons and brothers of our people, have creatively studied and used Mao Tse-tung’s thinking, given prominence to politics, persisted in carrying out the “four firsts”1 and “three-eight” working style.2 They have made great strides in their advance to revolutionization and modernization and have won important victories in the defence of our territorial air and waters and our border areas and in strengthening public security. China’s national defence strength has become unprecedentedly great.

All this has provided a solid ideological base and a powerful material basis for our country to carry out the Third Five-Year Plan. Our people have never been so high in spirit and so strong in morale as at present. Our country has never before been so prosperous.

 

1966—A Good Beginning

Nineteen sixty-six is the first year of the Third Five-Year Plan. We must fight the battle of the first year well so as to make a good start in bringing about the smooth realization of this grand plan.

Central Task for 1966. In the coming year, we shall continue the socialist education movement thoroughly and effectively, carrying it out by stages and by groups. We shall continue to implement in an all-round way the Party’s General Line of going all out, aiming high and achieving greater, faster, better and more economical results in building socialism. We shall launch a solid nationwide movement to increase production and practise economy. We shall put great effort into the development of agriculture. All Communist Party committees at provincial, regional, county and people’s commune levels should place agriculture first. They should increase grain and cotton production, develop a diversified economy and work energetically to resist and take precautions against natural calamities. We shall carry forward the movement for technical innovations and the technological revolution so as to give full play to the existing potentialities in the fields of industry and communications and transport; at the same time we shall have to speed the construction of new projects by way of “waging a war of annihilation with concentrated forces” in order to enable them to go into early operation. We shall redouble our effort to increase the production of raw materials and other materials, fuels, electricity and major machinery and electrical equipment. We shall give agriculture vigorous support by turning out more products suited to the needs of the countryside. We shall organize the circulation of commodities rationally and raise the standard of the trading services so as to better serve production and the people. We shall take further steps in directing our work towards the rural areas in the fields of culture, education and health in order to push forward the cultural revolution. We must also work hard to strengthen national defence, the People’s Liberation Army and the militia.

The Viewpoint of One Dividing Into Two. We should always bear in mind Mao Tse-tung’s teaching that we should apply the viewpoint of one dividing into two in dealing with our work. The more successful our work and the greater our achievements, the more attention we must devote to the difficulties that will arise along the road of advance as well as to the shortcomings and mistakes that exist in our work. For example, our agriculture is still not strong enough to withstand the natural calamities which always affect some parts of the country every year. There are still quite a number of weak links in our industry, communications and capital construction. And quite a number of our departments still have a considerable gap to bridge before they reach advanced world scientific and technical levels.

Comrade Mao Tse-tung taught us: “Even if we have achieved extremely great successes, there is no reason whatever to be conceited or complacent. Modesty helps a person to make progress whereas conceit makes him lag behind. This is a truth we must always bear in mind.” All areas, departments and units must, in accordance with the teachings of the Party’s Central Committee and Comrade Mao Tse-tung, constantly sum up their experience, improve their work, make discoveries and inventions, and keep on creating and advancing.

Politics in Command. Politics is the supreme commander, the very soul of our work. It is necessary to put ideological and political work above all other work. The key in striving to accomplish and overfulfil the tasks for 1966 is to strengthen the Party’s leadership, give prominence to politics, put Mao Tse-tung’s thinking in command, and accelerate the revolutionization of man’s ideology. Practice has proved that the more prominence we give to politics and the higher we hold the red banner of Mao Tse-tung’s thinking, the more fully does the superiority of the socialist system show itself and the more assured is the victory of the cause of revolution and construction. In order to achieve still greater successes, we must follow the road of engaging energetically in revolution so as to promote production and construction.

In the new year, we must do still better in leading and organizing the cadres and the masses in studying Chairman Mao Tse-tung’s works, and in particular do our best to apply his thinking to practice. In all fields of work, we should carry out the mass line still better and bring the initiative of all people into fuller play. We should persist in effectively combining revolutionary spirit with scientific approach, work with great vigour and advance in steady steps, and do things in a careful and thoroughgoing manner. We should be proficient at summing up and popularizing the experience of the people and units that have become pace-setters. We should be good at discovering, supporting and fostering the new things that continually appear. We must go further in learning from the People’s Liberation Army, the Tachai Production Brigade and the Taching Oilfield by developing the mass movement to “compare with, learn from, catch up with and surpass the advanced and help the less advanced.” We should carry forward and develop the fine tradition of self-reliance, working assiduously and with vigour to make China strong, and building the country by thrift and diligence. In this way, we shall certainly be able to accomplish and overfulfil the great tasks for 1966.

 

Never Forget the International Class Struggle

Be Prepared for Early and Large-Scale War by U.S. Imperialism. While we carry out socialist revolution and socialist construction, we must never for a moment forget the international class struggle. U.S. imperialism regards as the biggest obstacle to carrying out its policies of aggression and war the increasingly powerful China which holds aloft the banner of Marxism-Leninism, the banner of Mao Tse-tung’s thinking and the banner of proletarian internationalism, and which resolutely supports the revolutionary struggles of all countries. U.S. imperialism constantly carries out all kinds of wild provocations against China and wants to have another trial of strength with it. Many facts show that the focus of the counter-revolutionary global strategy of the United States is being shifted from Europe to Asia. U.S. imperialism is extending its war of aggression against Vietnam and plotting to impose war upon the Chinese people. We must maintain sharp vigilance and arrange all our work on the basis of coping with the eventuality that U.S. imperialism will launch an early and large-scale war. If the U.S. aggressors should dare to invade our country, we shall wipe them out resolutely, thoroughly, wholly and completely.

Resolute Support for Revolutionary Struggles of the Peoples of the World. U.S. Imperialism is the common enemy of the people of the whole world. The people of all countries support each other in the struggle against U.S. imperialism. We must never confine our view to China only, but should see the world as a whole. We are engaging in production and construction not only for the Chinese revolution and in the service of the Chinese people but also for the world revolution and in the service of the people of the whole world. Comrade Mao Tse-tung told us: “The people who have triumphed in their revolution should help the struggle of those who are still struggling for liberation. This is our internationalist duty.” In order to fulfil this great duty, we must spare no effort in resolutely supporting the Vietnamese people, who are in the forefront of the anti-U.S. struggle, and the people of Asia, Africa, Latin America and the rest of the world in their struggles to overthrow U.S. imperialism and its lackeys.

Combat Khrushchov Revisionism to the End. The Khrushchov revisionists are following a line, diametrically opposed to ours. They betray Marxism-Leninism and proletarian internationalism, regard U.S. imperialism as their closest friend, dream of world domination through U.S.-Soviet collaboration, and work in every conceivable way to sell out the revolutionary interests of the people of all countries. We must carry through the struggle against Khrushchov revisionism to the very end. More than 90 per cent of the people of the world want revolution. We stand firmly on their side, and we shall never be isolated. The ones who are isolated are the handful of imperialists, revisionists and reactionaries who are hostile to the masses, and these are bound to become more and more isolated as time goes on. For 16 years the U.S. imperialists have been pursuing their policy of isolating China, and for a number of years the Khrushchov revisionists have done the same. But the result in both cases is that they have lifted a rock only to crush their own feet. China’s prestige is rising higher and higher and its revolutionary influence is growing greater and greater. We have friends all over the world.

International United Front. We shall unite still more firmly with the people of the countries in the socialist camp, with the people in Asia, Africa and Latin America, with the people of all countries in the world, including the American people, and with all peace-loving countries and all forces opposed to U.S. imperialism, to form a broad international united front and struggle to the very end for the defeat of U.S. imperialism and its lackeys.

In the new year let us hold still higher the great red banner of Mao Tse-tung’s thinking, have the country in our hearts and a world view in our minds, and forge ahead to win new, great victories.

 

_______________

1   The “four firsts” are: First place must be given to man in handling the relationship between man and weapons; to political work in handling the relationship between political and other work; to ideological work in relation to the other aspects of political work; and to living ideas in ideological work.

2   The “three-eight” working style (which in Chinese is written in three phrases and eight additional characters) means firm and correct political orientation; a plain, hard-working style; flexibility in strategy and tactics; and unity, alertness, earnestness and liveliness.

Editorial Repudiates Appeals to Unity by the Soviet Union as an Excuse for Collaboration with U.S. Imperialism: December 30, 1965, People’s Daily Editorial

At Stake at the Time

By printing the Soviet Union’s attacks on China’s political direction in full, today’s edition of the People’s Daily and the following editorial attempts to expose the false banner of unity which party members there, and others at home in China, were calling for. Then Cultural Revolution had overlapping national and international dimensions. Previously this month, Mao critiqued general Luo Ruiqing, in an effort to weaken military pressure for overt war in Vietnam led by a China-Soviet coalition with the logic that such a move would silence internal struggle in China about the direction of the socialist revolution. This editorial’s advocacy for the primacy of people’s struggle in Vietnam, rather than international diplomatic maneuvers on behalf of the Vietnamese people, follows a tenet of the movement that international revolutionary armed struggles are a necessary part of the road towards communism. The path of negotiation under the guidance of the Soviet Union is critiqued here as in effect a form of collaborating with the aims of U.S. imperialism. The CIA’s report from the previous May indicated that a victory of the Vietnamese forces over the U.S. would be a vindication of Chinese political line a repudiation of the Soviet one, and a blow to the global trust is US ability to counter guerrilla insurgency

 (see: https://dailycr.wordpress.com/2015/12/24/december-24-1965-storm-clouds-at-home-and-abroad-peng-zhen-presides-over-the-peoples-daily-the-u-s-incites-war-in-cambodia/ ),The editorials in Pravda this month condemning this “break from unity” are symptomatic of these differences coming to a head.

At Stake at the Present

Some today argue that a broad united front is the best the left can hope for given its comparatively weak status. However, the politics of this editorial advocate that principled unity is the only alliance capable of revolutionary aspirations.

The Leaders of the C.P.S.U. are Betrayers 
of the Declaration and the Statement:

by the Editorial Department of “Renmin Ribao”

On December 30, 1965, the day the following article was published, Renmin Ribao reprinted in full the December 12 anti-Chinese article by the editorial department of Pravda, entitled “Line Confirmed by Life Itself.” It also reprinted extracts from the following six anti-Chinese articles appearing recently in the Soviet press…

ON the fifth anniversary of the issuance of the Statement of 1960, the new leaders of the C.P.S.U. staged a short anti-Chinese farce by publishing a batch of articles.

The revolutionary principles of the Declaration of 1957 and the Statement of 1960 are as diametrically opposed to Khrushchov revisionism as is fire to water. In trying to confuse people by flaunting the banner of the Declaration and the Statement the faithful followers of Khrushchov revisionism only help to reveal their own ugly features still further.

During the drafting of the Declaration and the Statement, the Marxist-Leninists waged intense struggles against the Khrushchov revisionists.

The revisionist line advanced by Khrushchov at the 20th Congress of the C.P.S.U. is the opposite of the revolutionary principles of the Declaration of 1957. The 20th Congress of the C.P.S.U. created grave confusion in the international communist movement. Together with other fraternal Parties, the Communist Party of China conducted a principled struggle against Khrushchov’s revisionist line at the Moscow Meeting.

It was again at Khrushchov revisionism that the revolutionary principles of the Statement of 1960 were directed. By that time, Khrushchov had completely transposed enemies and friends, was openly collaborating with U.S. imperialism, had thoroughly undermined the principles guiding relations among fraternal Parties and countries and was creating a split in the international communist movement. Together with other Marxist-Leninist Parties, the Communist Party of China waged a tit-for-tat struggle against the Khrushchov revisionist clique and safeguarded the purity of Marxism-Leninism.

Of course, the formulation of certain questions in the Declaration and the Statement is not altogether clear and there are even weaknesses and errors. As the leaders of the C.P.S.U. repeatedly requested that allowances should be made for their need to connect this formulation with the formulation of the 20th Congress of the C.P.S.U., we made certain concessions at that time in order to reach agreement. On more than one occasion, we have expressed our readiness to accept any criticism of us on this point. Despite all this, the Declaration and the Statement set forth a series of revolutionary principles which all Marxist-Leninist Parties should abide by.

In the eyes of the Khrushchov revisionists, however, both the Declaration and the Statement were mere scraps of paper. They tore up these documents on the very day they signed them. The Khrushchov revisionists had made up their minds to sing a tune opposite to that of Marxism-Leninism and the Declaration and the Statement. By the time of the 22nd Congress of the C.P.S.U. they produced the revisionist Programme of the C.P.S.U., casting to the four winds all the basic theses of Marxism-Leninism and all the revolutionary principles of the Declaration and the Statement.

Let us contrast the revolutionary principles of the Declaration and the Statement with the line laid down at the 20th and 22nd Congresses and in the Programme of the C.P.S.U., which is being followed tenaciously by its new leaders.

The Declaration and the Statement lay down a revolutionary line. But the Khrushchov revisionists are pressing forward with their anti-revolutionary line of “peaceful coexistence,” “peaceful competition” and “peaceful transition.” They themselves do not want revolution and forbid others to make revolution. They themselves oppose the armed revolutionary struggles of the oppressed nations and forbid others to support armed revolutionary struggles.

The Declaration and the Statement point out that U.S. imperialism is the common enemy of the people of the world and that the people throughout the world must form the broadest united front against the U.S. imperialist policies of aggression and war. But the Khrushchov revisionists are uniting with U.S. imperialism against the people of the world and carrying out the policy of U.S.-Soviet collaboration for world domination.

The Declaration and the Statement point out that socialist countries must maintain the dictatorship of the proletariat and carry out socialist revolution and socialist construction. But the Khrushchov revisionists advance the fallacies of the “state of the whole people” and the “party of the entire people,” abolishing the dictatorship of the proletariat in the Soviet Union and changing the character of the C.P.S.U. as the vanguard of the proletariat. They are enforcing the dictatorship of the privileged bourgeois stratum in the Soviet Union and have embarked on the road of capitalist restoration.

The Declaration and the Statement point out that unity among all the Communist Parties and socialist countries must be based on Marxism-Leninism and proletarian internationalism and that in their relations with each other fraternal Parties and countries must follow the principles of independence, complete equality, mutual support and the attainment of unanimity through consultation. But the Khrushchov revisionists practise big-power chauvinism, national egoism and splittism, waving their baton everywhere, wilfully interfering in the affairs of fraternal Parties and countries, trying hard to control them and carrying out disruptive and subversive activities against them, and splitting the international communist movement and the socialist camp.

The Declaration and the Statement point out that all Communist Parties must wage struggles against revisionism and dogmatism, and particularly against revisionism, which is the main danger in the international communist movement at present, and the Statement, moreover, explicitly denounces the Yugoslav Tito clique as renegades. But the Khrushchov revisionists join the Tito clique in a passionate embrace and publicly try to reverse the verdict an this gang of traitors. They gather around themselves revisionists of all descriptions to oppose the Marxist-Leninists and revolutionary people throughout the world.

The great debate in the international communist movement over the last few years represents a great struggle over whether to uphold or to betray Marxism-Leninism and whether to safeguard or to discard the revolutionary principles of the Declaration and the Statement.

The “Proposal Concerning the General Line of the International Communist Movement” which the Communist Party of China put forward on June 14, 1963, sums up the revolutionary principles of the Declaration and the Statement, upholds the Marxist-Leninist position and refutes Khrushchov revisionism on a series of fundamental questions relating to the revolution in our times.

Preliminary but important results have already been achieved in the Marxist-Leninists’ fight against the Khrushchov revisionists. The new leaders of the C.P.S.U. love to talk of the “line confirmed by life itself,” don’t they? Please open your eyes and have a look. The results “confirmed by life itself” are quite clear. In the face of resolute struggle by all the Marxist-Leninists and revolutionary people, the great people of the Soviet Union included, Khrushchov revisionism has been discredited and its founder driven off the stage of history. This is a great victory in the struggle to defend Marxism-Leninism. It is a great victory in the struggle to defend the revolutionary principles of the Declaration and the Statement.

In an article in Pravda, the new leadership of the C.P.S.U. said, “The C.P.S.U. has been and will continue to be loyal to the general line of the international communist movement.” Well, let us now examine what the new leaders of the C.P.S.U. have been and will continue to be.

What were they in the past? They were Khrushchov’s close comrades-in-arms. They were loyal to the general line of Khrushchov revisionism. They had to relegate to limbo the illustrious Khrushchov, the founder of their faith and the maestro who “creatively developed Marxism-Leninism,” simply because Khrushchov was too disreputable and too stupid to muddle on any longer, and because Khrushchov himself had become an obstacle to the carrying out of Khrushchov revisionism. The only way the Khrushchov revisionist clique could maintain its rule was to swop horses.

What are they now? They are the old cast of the Khrushchov revisionist leading group. They remain loyal to the general line of Khrushchov revisionism. They never weary of swearing that the general line worked out at the 20th and 22nd Congresses of the C.P.S.U. under Khrushchov’s sponsorship is their “only, immutable, line in the entire home and foreign policy.” At times they give the appearance of opposing the United States, but all their policies boil down to one of U.S.-Soviet collaboration for the domination of the world. They have reaffirmed time and again “the immutability of the policy of the U.S.S.R. aimed at establishing all-round co-operation with the United States.” While proclaiming that they are building “communism” in the Soviet Union, they are speeding up the restoration of capitalism. Amidst the dust and din of their “united action,” they called the divisive March Moscow meeting, stepping up their divisive activities, and they are now hatching a big plot for a general attack on China and a general split in the international communist movement and the socialist camp. They are going farther and farther along the road of Khrushchov revisionism.

And what will they continue to be? Whether or not they can return to the path of Marxism-Leninism and whether or not they can return to the path of the revolutionary principles of the Declaration and the Statement, depend mainly on whether or not they themselves can repudiate the revisionist general line laid down at the 20th and 22nd Congresses and in the Programme of the C.P.S.U. Unless they utterly repudiate this line, whatever tricks they play and whatever patching they do can only prove that they are still practising Khrushchov revisionism without Khrushchov. All Marxist-leninists, the great Soviet people and the revolutionary people everywhere have no alternative but to continue to expose them and fight them to the end.

The new leaders of the C.P.S.U. are shouting themselves hoarse for “united action.” Above all, they are clamouring for “united action” on the question of Vietnam. But it is precisely on this question, which is the focus of the present international struggle, that their anti-revolutionary position is revealed in its most concentrated form. Far from believing that the Vietnamese people can win in a people’s war against U.S. imperialist aggression, they are afraid that this will bring “troubles” and hamper their collaboration with U.S. imperialism. Whatever pretences they put up, in the final analysis all their activities are aimed at united action with U.S. imperialism to bring the question of Vietnam into the orbit of Soviet-U.S. collaboration, help U.S. imperialism to realize the plot of “peaceful negotiations” and extinguish the raging flames of the Vietnamese people’s revolution. The slogan of “united action” has now become a poisoned weapon in the hands of the Khrushchov revisionists for sowing dissension. In co-ordination with U.S. imperialism, they are vainly trying to use this slogan to undermine the fighting friendship between the Chinese and Vietnamese peoples and the Vietnamese people’s unity against U.S. aggression. The Vietnamese people are waging a victorious struggle against U.S. imperialism and for national salvation. It is the duty of the Marxist-Leninists and revolutionary people to give their staunch support to the just revolutionary struggle of the Vietnamese people and firmly expose the plot of “united action” hatched by the new leaders of the C.P.S.U.

The new leaders of the C.P.S.U. assert that anyone who does not take “united action” with them is “encouraging the imperialists to launch their ventures.” This is turning things upside down. Is it not the very policies of appeasement and capitulationism of the revisionist leading group of the C.P.S.U. and its line of Soviet-U.S. collaboration for world domination that are helping to inflate the aggressive arrogance of U.S. imperialism? It should be pointed out that it is the new leaders of the C.P.S.U. themselves who are actually “encouraging the imperialists to launch their ventures.”

What the new leaders of the C.P.S.U. fear most is that the Marxist-Leninists will draw a line of demarcation between themselves and these leaders. But, as Lenin said,

The great work of uniting and consolidating the fighting army of the revolutionary proletariat cannot be carried out unless a line of demarcation is drawn and a ruthless struggle is waged against those who serve to spread bourgeois influence among the proletariat.1

By clinging to their revisionism and splittism the new leaders of the C.P.S.U. have placed themselves in direct antagonism to Marxism-Leninism. In such circumstances, can the Marxist-Leninists be expected to fall to draw a line of demarcation, both politically and organizationally, between themselves and the new leaders of the C.P.S.U.?

If we failed to draw a clear line of demarcation, both politically and organizationally, between ourselves and the Khrushchov revisionists:

Wouldn’t we be joining them in betraying Marxism-Leninism and the revolutionary principles of the Declaration and the Statement and become revisionists ourselves?

Wouldn’t we be joining them in entering into the service of U.S. imperialism and acting as its accomplices?

Wouldn’t we be joining them in undermining the revolution of the fraternal Vietnamese people and rendering service to the U.S. imperialist policy of aggression against Vietnam and of war expansion?

Wouldn’t we be accepting them as the “patriarchal father Party” and serving as an instrument under their baton, recognizing their big-power privileged status and serving as their appendage?

Wouldn’t we be following them in restoring capitalism at home and once again reducing the broad masses of labouring people to a position in which they are oppressed and exploited?

Wouldn’t we be following them in putting ourselves in antagonism to the people of our own country and the whole world and heading for a miserable end without being able to escape the punishment of history?

As a serious Marxist-Leninist Party, the Communist Party of China can only give the categorical answer that we will do none of these things either now or in the future.

The Chinese Communist Party has consistently upheld the unity of the international communist movement and of the socialist camp. The only genuine unity is unity based on Marxism-Leninism and proletarian internationalism and on the revolutionary principles of the Declaration and the Statement. What the new leaders of the C.P.S.U. call “unity” is sham unity. They have betrayed Marxism-Leninism, proletarian internationalism and the revolutionary principles of the Declaration and the Statement, and their betrayal can only lead to a split. We want genuine unity and resolutely oppose sham unity. It is for the sake of achieving genuine international proletarian unity that we are waging struggles against Khrushchov revisionism.

Together with all the other Marxist-Leninists and revolutionary people of the world, the Chinese Communists will continue, as always, to hold aloft the banner of Marxism-Leninism and proletarian internationalism, abide by the revolutionary principles of the Declaration and the Statement and carry the struggle against Khrushchov revisionism through to the end.

The world is on the march. It is our strong conviction that the struggle of the people of the world against imperialism, reaction and modern revisionism and the cause of world peace, national liberation, people’s democracy and socialism are bound to keep on winning new great victories.

_______________

1 V.I. Lenin, “Resolution Adopted by the Second Paris Group of the R.S.D.L.P. on the State of Affairs in the Party,” Collected Works, Eng. ed., Foreign Languages Publishing House, Moscow, 1963, Vol. XVII, p. 223.

 

Renmin Ribao, on December 29, 1965, devoted nearly three pages to the full text of the following three articles marking the 5th anniversary of the publication of the Moscow Statement:

1, The December 6 editorial of the Korean paper Rodong Shinmoon, “Unite All Revolutionary Forces and Wage a More Powerful Anti-Imperialist Struggle.”

2, The December 10 article of the editorial department of the Albanian paper Zeri i Popullit, “The Khrushchov Revisionists Are Facing Serious Difficulties, Setbacks and Contradictions.”

3, The December 7 editorial of the Japanese Communist Party organ Akahata, “Struggle Against Modern Revisionism, Strengthen the International Fight Against U.S. Imperialism.”

On the same day, Renmin Ribao also reprinted extracts from an article in the December issue (No. 17) of the Australian Communist, the theoretical journal of the Australian Communist Party (Marxist-leninist). The article condemned the Khrushchov revisionists for entering into an alliance with the U.S. imperialists and the Indian reactionaries to oppose China and oppose revolution. —P.R. Editor.

Peking Review’s translation of the editorial from: http://www.massline.org/PekingReview/#1966