Selected Works of Mao Tse-tung
January 1940
A lively atmosphere has prevailed throughout the country ever since the Warof Resistance began, there is a general feeling that a way out of the impassehas been found, and people no longer knit their brows in despair. Of late,however, the dust and din of compromise and anti-communism have once againfilled the air, and once again the people are thrown into bewilderment. Mostsusceptible, and the first to be affected, are the intellectuals and theyoung students. The question once again arises: What is to be done? WhitherChina? On the occasion of the publication ofChineseCulture,[1] it may therefore beprofitable to clarify the political and cultural trends in the country. Iam a layman in matters of culture; I would like to study them, but have onlyjust begun to do so. Fortunately, there are many comrades in Yenan who havewritten at length in this field, so that my rough and ready words may servethe same purpose as the beating of the gongs before a theatrical performance.Our observations may contain a grain of truth for the nation's advanced culturalworkers and may serve as a modest spur to induce them to come forward withvaluable contributions of their own, and we hope that they will join in thediscussion to reach correct conclusions which will meet our national needs.To "seek truth from facts" is the scientific approach, and presumptuouslyto claim infallibility and lecture people will never settle anything. Thetroubles that have befallen our nation are extremely serious, and only ascientific approach and a spirit of responsibility can lead it on to theroad of liberation. There is but one truth, and the question of whether ornot one has arrived at it depends not on subjective boasting but on objectivepractice. The only yardstick of truth is the revolutionary practice of millionsof people. This, I think, can be regarded as the attitude ofChineseCulture.
For many years we Communists have struggled for a cultural revolution aswell as for a political and economic revolution, and our aim is to builda new society and a new state for the Chinese nation. That new society andnew state will have not only a new politics and a new economy but a new culture.In other words, not only do we want to change a China that is politicallyoppressed and economically exploited into a China that is politically freeand economically prosperous, we also want to change the China which is beingkept ignorant and backward under the sway of the old culture into an enlightenedand progressive China under the sway of a new culture. In short, we wantto build a new China. Our aim in the cultural sphere is to build a new Chinesenational culture.
We want to build a new national culture, but what kind of culture shouldit be?
Any given culture (as an ideological form) is a reflection of the politicsand economics of a given society, and the former in turn has a tremendousinfluence and effect upon the latter; economics is the base and politicsthe concentrated expression of economics.[2] Thisis our fundamental view of the relation of culture to politics and economicsand of the relation of politics to economics. It follows that the form ofculture is first determined by the political and economic form, and onlythen does it operate on and influence the given political and economic form.Marx says, "It is not the consciousness of men that determines their being,but, on the contrary, their social being that determines theirconsciousness."[3] He also says, "The philosophershave onlyinterpretedthe world, in various ways; the point, however,is tochangeit."[4] For the first timein human history, these scientific formulations correctly solved the problemof the relationship between consciousness and existence, and they are thebasic concepts underlying the dynamic revolutionary theory of knowledge asthe reflection of reality which was later elaborated so profoundly by Lenin.These basic concepts must be kept in mind in our discussion of China's culturalproblems.
Thus it is quite clear that the reactionary elements of the old nationalculture we want to eliminate are inseparable from the old national politicsand economics, while the new national culture which we want to build up isinseparable from the new national politics and economics. The old politicsand economics of the Chinese nation form the basis of its old culture, justas its new politics and economics will form the basis of its new culture.
What are China's old politics and economics? And what is her old culture?
From the Chou and Chin Dynasties onwards, Chinese society was feudal, aswere its politics and its economy. And the dominant culture, reflecting thepolitics and economy, was feudal culture.
Since the invasion of foreign capitalism and the gradual growth of capitalistelements in Chinese society, the country has changed by degrees into a colonial,semi-colonial and semi-feudal society. China today is colonial in theJapanese-occupied areas and basically semi-colonial in the Kuomintang areas,and it is predominantly feudal or semi-feudal in both. Such, then, is thecharacter of present-day Chinese society and the state of affairs in ourcountry. The politics and the economy of this society are predominantly colonial,semi-colonial and semi-feudal, and the predominant culture, reflecting thepolitics and economy, is also colonial, semi-colonial and semi-feudal.
It is precisely against these predominant political, economic and culturalforms that our revolution is directed. What we want to get rid of is theold colonial, semi-colonial and semi-feudal politics and economy and theold culture in their service. And what we want to build up is their directopposite,i.e.,the new politics, the new economy and the new cultureof the Chinese nation.
What, then, are the new politics and the new economy of the Chinese nation,and what is its new culture?
In the course of its history the Chinese revolution must go through two stages,first, the democratic revolution, and second, the socialist revolution, andby their very nature they are two different revolutionary processes. Heredemocracy does not belong to the old category-- it is not the old democracy,but belongs to the new category--it is New Democracy.
It can thus be affirmed that China's new politics are the politics of NewDemocracy, that China's new economy is the economy of New Democracy and thatChina's new culture is the culture of New Democracy.
Such are the historical characteristics of the Chinese revolution at thepresent time. Any political party, group or person taking part in the Chineserevolution that fails to understand this will not be able to direct therevolution and lead it to victory, but will be cast aside by the people andleft to grieve out in the cold.
The historical characteristic of the Chinese revolution lies in its divisioninto the two stages, democracy and socialism, the first being no longer democracyin general, but democracy of the Chinese type, a new and special type, namely,New Democracy. How, then, has this historical characteristic come into being?Has it been in existence for the past hundred years, or is it of recent origin?
A brief study of the historical development of China and of the world showsthat this characteristic did not emerge immediately after the Opium War,but took shape later, after the first imperialist world war and the OctoberRevolution in Russia. Let us now examine the process of its formation.
Clearly, it follows from the colonial, semi-colonial and semi-feudal characterof present-day Chinese society that the Chinese revolution must be dividedinto two stages. The first step is to change the colonial, semi-colonialand semi-feudal form of society into an independent, democratic society.The second is to carry the revolution forward and build a socialist society.At present the Chinese revolution is taking the first step.
The preparatory period for the first step began with the opium War in 1840,i.e., when China's feudal society started changing into a semi-colonialand semi-feudal one. Then came the Movement of the Taiping Heavenly Kingdom,the Sino-French War, the Sino-Japanese war, the Reform Movement of 1898,the Revolution of 1911, the May 4th Movement, the Northern Expedition, theWar of the Agrarian Revolution and the present War of Resistance AgainstJapan. Together these have taken up a whole century and in a sense they representthat first step, being struggles waged by the Chinese people, on differentoccasions and in varying degrees, against imperialism and the feudal forcesin order to build up an independent, democratic society and complete thefirst revolution. The Revolution of 1911 was in a fuller sense the beginningof that revolution. In its social character, this revolution is abourgeois-democratic and not a proletarian-socialist revolution. It is stillunfinished and still demands great efforts, because to this day its enemiesare still very strong. When Dr. Sun Yat-sen said, "The revolution is notyet completed, all my comrades must struggle on", he was referring to thebourgeois-democratic revolution.
A change, however, occurred in China's bourgeois-democratic revolution afterthe outbreak of the first imperialist world war in 1914 and the foundingof a socialist state on one-sixth of the globe as a result of the RussianOctober Revolution of 1917.
Before these events, the Chinese bourgeois-democratic revolution came withinthe old category of the bourgeois-democratic world revolution, of which itwas a part.
Since these events, the Chinese bourgeois-democratic revolution has changed,it has come within the new category of bourgeois-democratic revolutions and,as far as the alignment of revolutionary forces is concerned, forms partof the proletarian-socialist world revolution.
Why? Because the first imperialist world war and the first victorious socialistrevolution, the October Revolution, have changed the whole course of worldhistory and ushered in a new era.
It is an era in which the world capitalist front has collapsed in one partof the globe (one-sixth of the world) and has fully revealed its decadenceeverywhere else, in which the remaining capitalist parts cannot survive withoutrelying more than ever on the colonies and Semi-colonies, in which a socialiststate has been established and has proclaimed its readiness to give activesupport to the liberation movement of all colonies and semi-colonies, andin which the proletariat of the capitalist countries is steadily freeingitself from the social-imperialist influence of the social-democratic partiesand has proclaimed its support for the liberation movement in the coloniesand semi-colonies. In this era, any revolution in a colony or semi-colonythat is directed against imperialism,i.e.,against the internationalbourgeoisie or international capitalism, no longer comes within the old categoryof the bourgeois-democratic world revolution, but within the new category.It is no longer part of the old bourgeois, or capitalist, world revolution,but is part of the new world revolution, the proletarian-socialist worldrevolution. Such revolutionary colonies and semi-colonies can no longer beregarded as allies of the counter revolutionary front of world capitalism;they have become allies of the revolutionary front of world socialism.
Although such a revolution in a colonial and semi-colonial country is stillfundamentally bourgeois-democratic in its social character during its firststage or first step, and although its objective mission is to clear the pathfor the development of capitalism, it is no longer a revolution of the oldtype led by the bourgeoisie with the aim of establishing a capitalist societyand a state under bourgeois dictatorship. It belongs to the new type ofrevolution led by the proletariat with the aim, in the first stage, ofestablishing a new-democratic society and a state under the joint dictatorshipof all the revolutionary classes. Thus this revolution actually serves thepurpose of clearing a still wider path for the development of socialism.In the course of its progress, there may be a number of further sub-stages,because of changes on the enemy's side and within the ranks of our allies,but the fundamental character of the revolution remains unchanged.
Such a revolution attacks imperialism at its very roots, and is thereforenot tolerated but opposed by imperialism. However, it is favoured by socialismand supported by the land of socialism and the socialist internationalproletariat.
Therefore, such a revolution inevitably becomes part of the proletarian-socialistworld revolution.
The correct thesis that "the Chinese revolution is part of the world revolution"was put forward as early as 1924-27 during the period of China's First GreatRevolution. It was put forward by the Chinese Communists and endorsed byall those taking part in the anti-imperialist and anti-feudal struggle ofthe time. However, the significance of this thesis was not fully expoundedin those days, and consequently it was only vaguely understood.
The "world revolution" no longer refers to the old world revolution, forthe old bourgeois world revolution has long been a thing of the past, itrefers to the new world revolution, the socialist world revolution. Similarly,to form "part of" means to form part not of the old bourgeois but of thenew socialist revolution. This is a tremendous change unparalleled in thehistory of China and of the world.
This correct thesis advanced by the Chinese Communists is based on Stalin'stheory.
As early as 1918, in an article commemorating the first anniversary of theOctober Revolution, Stalin wrote:
The great world-wide significance of the October Revolution chiefly consists in the fact that:
1) It has widened the scope of the national question and converted it from the particular question of combating national oppression in Europe into the general question of emancipating the oppressed peoples, colonies and semi-colonies from imperialism;
2) It has opened up wide possibilities for their emancipation and the right paths towards it, has thereby greatly facilitated the cause of the emancipation of the oppressed peoples of the West and the East, and has drawn them into the common current of the victorious struggle against imperialism;
3) It has thereby erected a bridge between the socialist West and the enslaved East,having created a new front of revolutionsagainstworld imperialism, extending from the proletarians of the West, through the Russian Revolution, to the oppressed peoples of the East.[5]
Since writing this article, Stalin has again and again expounded the theorythat revolutions in the colonies and semi-colonies have broken away fromthe old category and become part of the proletarian-socialist revolution.The clearest and most precise explanation is given in an article publishedon June3o,1925, in which Stalin carried on a controversy withthe Yugoslav nationalists of the time. Entitled "The National Question OnceAgain", it is included in a book translated by Chang Chung-shih and publishedunder the titleStalin on the National Question.It contains thefollowing passage:
Semich refers to a passage in Stalin's pamphletMarxism and the National Question,written at the end of 1912. There it says that "the national struggle under the conditions ofrisingcapitalism is a struggle of the bourgeois classes among themselves". Evidently, by this Semich is trying to suggest that his formula defining the social significance of the national movement under the present historical conditions is correct. But Stalin's pamphlet was written before the imperialist war, when the national question was not yet regarded by Marxists as a question of world significance, when the Marxists' fundamental demand for the right to self-determination was regarded not as part of the proletarian revolution, but as part of the bourgeois-democratic revolution. It would be ridiculous not to see that since then the international situation has radically changed, that the war, on the one hand, and the October Revolution in Russia, on the other, transformed the national question from a part of the bourgeois-democratic revolution into a part of the proletarian-socialist revolution. As far back as October 1916, in his article, "The Discussion on Self-Determination Summed Up", Lenin said that the main point of the national question, the right to self-determination, had ceased to be a part of the general democratic movement, that it had already become a component part of the general proletarian, socialist revolution. I do not even mention subsequent works on the national question by Lenin and by other representatives of Russian communism. After all this, what significance can Semich's reference to the passage in Stalin's pamphlet, written in the period of thebourgeois-democratic revolution in Russia, have at the present time, when, as a consequence of the new historical situation, we have entered a new epoch, the epoch ofproletarianrevolution? It can only signify that Semich quotes outside of space and time, without reference to the living historical situation, and thereby violates the most elementary requirements of dialectics, and ignores the fact that what is right for one historical situation may prove to be wrong in another historical situation.[6]
From this it can be seen that there are two kinds of world revolution, thefirst belonging to the bourgeois or capitalist category. The era of thiskind of world revolution is long past, having come to an end as far backas 1914 when the first imperialist world war broke out, and more particularlyin 1917 when the October Revolution took place. The second kind, namely,the proletarian-socialist world revolution, thereupon began. This revolutionhas the proletariat of the capitalist countries as its main force and theoppressed peoples of the colonies and semi-colonies as its allies. No matterwhat classes, parties or individuals in an oppressed nation join the revolution,and no matter whether they themselves are conscious of the point orunderstand it, so long as they oppose imperialism, their revolution becomespart of the proletarian-socialist world revolution and they become its allies.
Today, the Chinese revolution has taken on still greater significance. Thisis a time when the economic and political crises of capitalism are draggingthe world more and more deeply into the Second World War, when the SovietUnion has reached the period of transition from socialism to communism andis capable of leading and helping the proletariat and oppressed nations ofthe whole world in their fight against imperialist war and capitalist reaction,when the proletariat of the capitalist countries is preparing to overthrowcapitalism and establish socialism, and when the proletariat, the peasantry,the intelligentsia and other sections of the petty bourgeoisie in China havebecome a mighty independent political force under the leadership of the ChineseCommunist Party. Situated as we are in this day and age, should we not makethe appraisal that the Chinese revolution has taken on still greater worldsignificance? I think we should. The Chinese revolution has become a veryimportant part of the world revolution.
Although the Chinese revolution in this first stage (with its many sub-stages)is a new type of bourgeois-democratic revolution and is not yet itself aproletarian-socialist revolution in its social character, it has long becomea part of the proletarian-socialist world revolution and is now even a veryimportant part and a great ally of this world revolution. The first stepor stage in our revolution is definitely not, and cannot be, the establishmentof a capitalist society under the dictatorship of the Chinese bourgeoisie,but will result in the establishment of a new-democratic society under thejoint dictatorship of all the revolutionary classes of China headed by theChinese proletariat The revolution will then be carried forward to the secondstage, in which a socialist society will be established in China.
This is the fundamental characteristic of the Chinese revolution of today,of the new revolutionary process of the past twenty years (counting fromthe May 4th Movement of 1919), and its concrete living essence.
The new historical characteristic of the Chinese revolution is its divisioninto two stages, the first being the new-democratic revolution. How doesthis manifest itself concretely in internal political and economic relations?Let us consider the question.
Before the May 4th Movement of 1919 (which occurred after the first imperialistworld war of 1914 the Russian October Revolution of 1917), the petty bourgeoisieand the bourgeoisie (through their intellectuals) were the political leadersof the bourgeois-democratic revolution. The Chinese proletariat had not yetappeared on the political scene as an awakened and independent class force,but participated in the revolution only as a follower of the petty bourgeoisieand the bourgeoisie. Such was the case with the proletariat at the time ofthe Revolution of 1911.
After the May 4th Movement, the political leader of China's bourgeois-democraticrevolution was no longer the bourgeoisie but the proletariat, although thenational bourgeoisie continued to take part in the revolution. The Chineseproletariat rapidly became an awakened and independent political force asa result of its maturing and of the influence of the Russian Revolution.It was the Chinese Communist Party that put forward the slogan "Down withimperialism" and the thoroughgoing programme for the whole bourgeois-democraticrevolution, and it was the Chinese Communist Party alone that carried outthe Agrarian Revolution.
Being a bourgeoisie in a colonial and semi-colonial country and oppressedby imperialism, the Chinese national bourgeoisie retains a certain revolutionaryquality at certain periods and to a certain degree--even in the era ofimperialism--in its opposition to the foreign imperialists and the domesticgovernments of bureaucrats and warlords (instances of opposition to the lattercan be found in the periods of the Revolution of 1911 and the NorthernExpedition), and it may ally itself with the proletariat and the pettybourgeoisie against such enemies as it is ready to oppose. In this respectthe Chinese bourgeoisie differs from the bourgeoisie of old tsarist Russia.Since tsarist Russia was a military-feudal imperialism which carried onaggression against other countries, the Russian bourgeoisie was entirelylacking in revolutionary quality. There, the task of the proletariat wasto oppose the bourgeoisie, not to unite with it. But China's national bourgeoisiehas a revolutionary quality at certain periods and to a certain degree, becauseChina is a colonial and semi-colonial country which is a victim of aggression.Here, the task of the proletariat is to form a united front with the nationalbourgeoisie against imperialism and the bureaucrat and warlord governmentswithout overlooking its revolutionary quality.
At the same time, however, being a bourgeois class in a colonial andsemi-colonial country and so being extremely flabby economically and politically,the Chinese national bourgeoisie also has another quality, namely, a pronenessto conciliation with the enemies of the revolution. Even when it takes partin the revolution, it is unwilling to break with imperialism completely and,moreover, it is closely associated with the exploitation of the rural areasthrough land rent; thus it is neither willing nor able to overthrow imperialism,and much less the feudal forces, in a thorough way. So neither of the twobasic problems or tasks of China's bourgeois-democratic revolution can besolved or accomplished by the national bourgeoisie. As for China's bigbourgeoisie, which is represented by the Kuomintang, all through the longperiod from 1927 to 1937 it nestled in the arms of the imperialists and formedan alliance with the feudal forces against the revolutionary people. In 1927and for some time afterwards, the Chinese national bourgeoisie also followedthe counter-revolution. During the present anti-Japanese war, the sectionof the big bourgeoisie represented by Wang Ching-wei has capitulated to theenemy, which constitutes a fresh betrayal on the part of the big bourgeoisie.In this respect, then, the bourgeoisie in China differs from the earlierbourgeoisie of the European and American countries, and especially of France.When the bourgeoisie in those countries, and especially in France, was stillin its revolutionary era, the bourgeois revolution was comparatively thorough,whereas the bourgeoisie in China lacks even this degree of thoroughness.
Possible participation in the revolution on the one hand and proneness toconciliation with the enemies of the revolution on the other-- such is thedual character of the Chinese bourgeoisie, it faces both ways Even thebourgeoisie in European and American history had shared this dual character.When confronted by a formidable enemy, they united with the workers and peasantsagainst him, but when the workers and peasants awakened, they turned roundto unite with the enemy against the workers and peasants. This is a generalrule applicable to the bourgeoisie everywhere in the world, but the traitis more pronounced in the Chinese bourgeoisie.
In China, it is perfectly clear that whoever can lead the people in overthrowingimperialism and the forces of feudalism can win the people's confidence,because these two, and especially imperialism, are the mortal enemies ofthe people. Today, whoever can lead the people in driving out Japaneseimperialism and introducing democratic government will be the saviours ofthe people. History has proved that the Chinese bourgeoisie cannot fulfilthis responsibility, which inevitably falls upon the shoulders of theproletariat.
Therefore, the proletariat, the peasantry, the intelligentsia and the othersections of the petty bourgeoisie undoubtedly constitute the basic forcesdetermining China's fate. These classes, some already awakened and othersin the process of awakening, will necessarily become the basic componentsof the state and governmental structure in the democratic republic of China,with the proletariat as the leading force. The Chinese democratic republicwhich we desire to establish now must be a democratic republic under thejoint dictatorship of all anti-imperialist and anti-feudal people led bythe proletariat, that is, a new-democratic republic, a republic of the genuinelyrevolutionary new Three People's Principles with their Three Great Policies.
This new-democratic republic will be different from the old European-Americanform of capitalist republic under bourgeois dictatorship, which is the olddemocratic form and already out of date. On the other hand, it will alsobe different from the socialist republic of the Soviet type under thedictatorship of the proletariat which is already flourishing in the U.S.S.R.,and which, moreover, will be established in all the capitalist countriesand will undoubtedly become the dominant form of state and governmental structurein all the industrially advanced countries. However, for a certain historicalperiod, this form is not suitable for the revolutions in the colonial andsemi-colonial countries. During this period, therefore, a third form of statemust be adopted in the revolutions of all colonial and semi-colonial countries,namely, the new-democratic republic. This form suits a certain historicalperiod and is therefore transitional; nevertheless, it is a form which isnecessary and cannot be dispensed with.
Thus the numerous types of state system in the world can be reduced to threebasic kinds according to the class character of their political power: (1)republics under bourgeois dictatorship; (2) republics under the dictatorshipof the proletariat; and (3) republics under the joint dictatorship of severalrevolutionary classes.
The first kind comprises the old democratic states. Today, after the outbreakof the second imperialist war, there is hardly a trace of democracy in manyof the capitalist countries, which have come or are coming under the bloodymilitarist dictatorship of the bourgeoisie. Certain countries under the jointdictatorship of the landlords and the bourgeoisie can be grouped with thiskind.
The second kind exists in the Soviet Union, and the conditions for its birthare ripening in capitalist countries. In the future, it will be the dominantform throughout the world for a certain period.
The third kind is the transitional form of state to be adopted in the revolutionsof the colonial and semi-colonial countries. Each of these revolutions willnecessarily have specific characteristics of its own, but these will be minorvariations on a general theme. So long as they are revolutions in colonialor semi-colonial countries, their state and governmental structure will ofnecessity be basically the same,i.e., a new-democratic state underthe joint dictatorship of several anti-imperialist classes. In present-dayChina, the anti-Japanese united front represents the new-democratic formof state. It is anti-Japanese and anti-imperialist; it is also a united front,an alliance of several revolutionary classes. But unfortunately, despitethe fact that the war has been going on for so long, the work of introducingdemocracy has hardly started in most of the country outside the democraticanti-Japanese base areas under the leadership of the Communist Party, andthe Japanese imperialists have exploited this fundamental weakness to strideinto our country. If nothing is done about it, our national future will begravely imperilled.
The question under discussion here is that of the "state system". After severaldecades of wrangling since the last years of the Ching Dynasty, it has stillnot been cleared up. Actually it is simply a question of the status of thevarious social classes within the state. The bourgeoisie, as a rule, concealsthe problem of class status and carries out its one-class dictatorship underthe "national" label. Such concealment is of no advantage to the revolutionarypeople and the matter should be clearly explained to them. The term "national"is all right, but it must not include counter-revolutionaries and traitors.The kind of state we need today is a dictatorship of all the revolutionaryclasses over the counter-revolutionaries and traitors.
The so-called democratic system in modern states is usually monopolized bythe bourgeoisie and has become simply an instrument for oppressing the commonpeople. On the other hand, the Kuomintang's Principle of Democracy meansa democratic system shared by all the common people and not privately ownedby the few.
Such was the solemn declaration made in the Manifesto of the First NationalCongress of the Kuomintang, held in 1924 during the period ofKuomintang-Communist co-operation. For sixteen years the Kuomintang has violatedthis declaration and as a result it has created the present grave nationalcrisis. This is a gross blunder, which we hope the Kuomintang will correctin the cleansing flames of the anti-Japanese war.
As for the question of "the system of government", this is a matter of howpolitical power is organized, the form in which one social class oranother chooses to arrange its apparatus of political power to opposeits enemies and protect itself. There is no state which does not have anappropriate apparatus of political power to represent it. China may now adopta system of people's congresses, from the national people's congress downto the provincial, county, district and township people's congresses, withall levels electing their respective governmental bodies. But if there isto be a proper representation for each revolutionary class according to itsstatus in the state, a proper expression of the people's will, a proper directionfor revolutionary struggles and a proper manifestation of the spirit of NewDemocracy, then a system of really universal and equal suffrage, irrespectiveof sex, creed, property or education, must be introduced. Such is the systemof democratic centralism. Only a government based on democratic centralismcan fully express the will of all the revolutionary people and fight theenemies of the revolution most effectively. There must be a spirit ofrefusal to be "privately owned by the few" in the government and thearmy; without a genuinely democratic system this cannot be attained and thesystem of government and the state system will be out of harmony.
The state system, a joint dictatorship of all the revolutionary classes andthe system of government, democratic centralism--these constitute the politicsof New Democracy, the republic of New Democracy, the republic of theanti-Japanese united front, the republic of the new Three People's Principleswith their Three Great Policies' the Republic of China in reality as wellas in name. Today we have a Republic of China in name but not in reality,and our present task is to create the reality that will fit the name.
Such are the internal political relations which a revolutionary China, aChina fighting Japanese aggression, should and must establish without fail;such is the orientation, the only correct orientation, for our present workof national reconstruction.
If such a republic is to be established in China, it must be new-democraticnot only in its politics but also in its economy.
It will own the big banks and the big industrial and commercial enterprises.
Enterprises, such as banks, railways and airlines, whether Chinese-ownedor foreign-owned, which are either monopolistic in character or too big forprivate management, shall be operated and administered by the state, so thatprivate capital cannot dominate the livelihood of the people: this is themain principle of the regulation of capital.
This is another solemn declaration in the Manifesto of the Kuomintang's FirstNational Congress held during the period of Kuomintang-Communist co-operation,and it is the correct policy for the economic structure of the new-democraticrepublic. In the new-democratic republic under the leadership of the proletariat,the state enterprises will be of a socialist character and will constitutethe leading force in the whole national economy, but the republic will neitherconfiscate capitalist private property in general nor forbid the developmentof such capitalist production as does not "dominate the livelihood of thepeople", for China's economy is still very backward.
The republic will take certain necessary steps to confiscate the land ofthe landlords and distribute it to those peasants having little or no land,carry out Dr. Sun Yat-sen's slogan of "land to the tiller", abolish feudalrelations in the rural areas, and turn the land over to the private ownershipof the peasants. A rich peasant economy will be allowed in the rural areas.Such is the policy of "equalization of landownership". "Land to the tiller"is the correct slogan for this policy. In general, socialist agriculturewill not be established at this stage, though various types of co-operativeenterprises developed on the basis of "land to the tiller" will contain elementsof socialism.
China's economy must develop along the path of the "regulation of capital"and the "equalization of landownership", and must never be "privately ownedby the few"; we must never permit the few capitalists and landlords to "dominatethe livelihood of the people"; we must never establish a capitalist societyof the European-American type or allow the old semi-feudal society to survive.Whoever dares to go counter to this line of advance will certainly not succeedbut will run into a brick wall.
Such are the internal economic relations which a revolutionary China, a Chinafighting Japanese aggression, must and necessarily will establish.
Such is the economy of New Democracy.
And the politics of New Democracy are the concentrated expression of theeconomy of New Democracy.
More than 90 per cent of the people are in favour of a republic of this kindwith its new-democratic politics and new-democratic economy; there is noalternative road.
What about the road to a capitalist society under bourgeois dictatorship?To be sure, that was the old road taken by the European and American bourgeoisie,but whether one likes it or not, neither the international nor the domesticsituation allows China to do the same.
Judging by the international situation, that road is blocked. In itsfundamentals, the present international situation is one of a struggle betweencapitalism and socialism, in which capitalism is on the downgrade and socialismon the upgrade. In the first place international capitalism, or imperialism,will not permit the establishment in China of a capitalist society underbourgeois dictatorship. Indeed the history of modern China is a history ofimperialist aggression, of imperialist opposition to China's independenceand to her development of capitalism. Earlier revolutions failed in Chinabecause imperialism strangled them, and innumerable revolutionary martyrsdied, bitterly lamenting the non-fulfilment of their mission. Today a powerfulJapanese imperialism is forcing its way into China and wants to reduce herto a colony; it is not China that is developing Chinese capitalism but Japanthat is developing Japanese capitalism in our country; and it is not theChinese bourgeoisie but the Japanese bourgeoisie that is exercising dictatorshipin our country. True enough, this is the period of the final struggle ofdying imperialism--imperialism is "moribundcapitalism".[7] But just because it is dying, itis all the more dependent on colonies and semi-colonies for survival andwill certainly not allow any colony or semi-colony to establish anythinglike a capitalist society under the dictatorship of its own bourgeoisie.Just because Japanese imperialism is bogged down in serious economic andpolitical crises, just because it is dying, it must invade China and reduceher to a colony, thereby blocking the road to bourgeois dictatorship andnational capitalism in China.
In the second place, socialism will not permit it. All the imperialist powersin the world are our enemies, and China cannot possibly gain her independencewithout the assistance of the land of socialism and the internationalproletariat. That is, she cannot do so without the help of the Soviet Unionand the help which the proletariat of Japan, Britain, the United States,France, Germany, Italy and other countries provide through their strugglesagainst capitalism. Although no one can say that the victory of the Chineserevolution must wait upon the victory of the revolution in all of thesecountries, or in one or two of them, there is no doubt that we cannot winwithout the added strength of their proletariat. In particular, Soviet assistanceis absolutely indispensable for China's final victory in the War of Resistance.Refuse Soviet assistance, and the revolution will fail. Don't the anti-Sovietcampaigns from 1927 onwards[8] provide anextraordinarily clear lesson? The world today is in a new era of wars andrevolutions, an era in which capitalism is unquestionably dying and socialismis unquestionably prospering. In these circumstances, would it not be sheerfantasy to desire the establishment in China of a capitalist society underbourgeois dictatorship after the defeat of imperialism and feudalism?
Even though the petty Kemalist dictatorship of the bourgeoisie[9] did emerge in Turkey after the first imperialistworld war and the October Revolution owing to certain specific conditions(the bourgeoisie's success in repelling Greek aggression and the weaknessof the proletariat), there can be no second Turkey, much less a "Turkey"with a population of 450 million, after World War II and the accomplishmentof socialist construction in the Soviet Union. In the specific conditionsof China (the flabbiness of the bourgeoisie with its proneness to conciliationand the strength of the proletariat with its revolutionary thoroughness),things just never work out so easily as in Turkey. Did not some members ofthe Chinese bourgeoisie clamour for Kemalism after the First Great Revolutionfailed in 1927? But where is China's Kemal? And where are China's bourgeoisdictatorship and capitalist society? Besides, even Kemalist Turkey eventuallyhad to throw herself into the arms of Anglo-French imperialism, becomingmore and more of a semi-colony and part of the reactionary imperialist world.In the international situation of today, the "heroes"' in the colonies andsemi-colonies either line up on the imperialist front and become part ofthe forces of world counter-revolution, or they line up on the anti-imperialistfront and become part of the forces of world revolution. They must do oneor the other, for there is no third choice.
Judging by the domestic situation, too, the Chinese bourgeoisie should havelearned its lesson by now. No sooner had the strength of the proletariatand of the peasant and other petty bourgeois masses brought the revolutionof 1927 to victory than the capitalist class, headed by the big bourgeoisie,kicked the masses aside, seized the fruits of the revolution, formed acounter-revolutionary alliance with imperialism and the feudal forces, andstrained themselves to the limit in a war of "Communist suppression" forten years. But what was the upshot? Today, when a powerful enemy has penetrateddeep into our territory and the anti-Japanese war has been going on for twoyears, is it possible that there are still people who want to copy the obsoleterecipes of the European and American bourgeoisie? A decade was spent on"suppressing the Communists" out of existence, but no capitalist societyunder bourgeois dictatorship was "suppressed" into existence. Is it possiblethat there are still people who want to have another try? True, a "one-partydictatorship" was "suppressed" into existence through the decade of "Communistsuppression", but it is a semi-colonial and semi-feudal dictatorship. Whatis more, at the end of four years of "Communist suppression" (from 1927 tothe Incident of September 18, 1931), "Manchukuo" was "suppressed" into existenceand in 1937, after another six years of such "suppression", the Japaneseimperialists made their way into China south of the Great Wall. Today ifanyone wants to carry on "suppression" for another decade, it would meana new type of "Communist suppression", somewhat different from the old. Butis there not one fleet-footed person who has already outstripped everyoneelse and boldly undertaken this new enterprise of "Communist suppression"?Yes, Wang Ching-wei, who has become the new-style anti-Communist celebrity.Anyone who wishes to join his gang can please himself; but wouldn't thatturn out to be an added embarrassment when talking big about bourgeoisdictatorship, capitalist society, Kemalism, a modern state, a one-partydictatorship, "one doctrine", and so on and so forth? And if, instead ofjoining the Wang Ching-wei gang, someone wants to come into the "fight Japan"camp of the people but imagines that once the war is won he will be ableto kick aside the people fighting Japan, seize the fruits of the victoryof the fight against Japan and establish a "perpetual one-party dictatorship",isn't he just daydreaming? "Fight Japan!" "Fight Japan!" But who is doingthe fighting? Without the workers and the peasants and other sections ofthe petty bourgeoisie, you cannot move a step. Anyone who still dares totry and kick them aside will himself be crushed. Hasn't this, too, becomea matter of common sense? But the die-hards among the Chinese bourgeoisie(I am referring solely to the die-hards) seem to have learned nothing inthe past twenty years. Aren't they still shouting: "Restrict communism","Corrode communism" and "Combat communism"? Haven't we seen "Measures forRestricting the Activities of Alien Parties" followed by "Measures for Dealingwith the Alien Party Problem" and still later by "Directives for Dealingwith the Alien Party Problem"? Heavens! With all this "restricting" and "dealingwith" going on, one wonders what kind of future they are preparing for ournation and for themselves! We earnestly and sincerely advise these gentlemen:Open your eyes, take a good look at China and the world, see how things standinside as well as outside the country, and do not repeat your mistakes. Ifyou persist in your mistakes, the future of our nation will of course bedisastrous, but I am sure things will not go well with you either. This isabsolutely true, absolutely certain. Unless the die-hards among the Chinesebourgeoisie wake up, their future will be far from bright--they will onlybring about their own destruction. Therefore we hope that China's anti-Japaneseunited front will be maintained and that, with the cooperation of all insteadof the monopoly of a single clique, the anti-Japanese cause will be broughtto victory; it is the only good policy-- any other policy is bad. This isthe sincere advice we Communists are giving, and do not blame us for nothaving forewarned you.
"If there is food, let everyone share it." This old Chinese saying containsmuch truth. Since we all share in fighting the enemy, we should all sharein eating, we should all share in the work to be done, and we should allshare access to education. Such attitudes as "I and I alone will take everything"and "no one dare harm me" are nothing but the old tricks of feudal lordswhich simply will not work in the Nineteen Forties.
We Communists will never push aside anyone who is revolutionary; we shallpersevere in the united front and practice long-term co-operation with allthose classes, strata, political parties and groups and individuals thatare willing to fight Japan to the end. But it will not do if certain peoplewant to push aside the Communist Party. it will not do if they want to splitthe united front. China must keep on fighting Japan, uniting and moving forward,and we cannot tolerate anyone who tries to capitulate, cause splits or movebackward.
If the capitalist road of bourgeois dictatorship is out of the question,then is it possible to take the socialist road of proletarian dictatorship?
No, that is not possible either.
Without a doubt, the present revolution is the first step, which will developinto the second step, that of socialism, at a later date. And China willattain true happiness only when she enters the socialist era. But today isnot yet the time to introduce socialism. The present task of the revolutionin China is to fight imperialism and feudalism, and socialism is out of thequestion until this task is completed. The Chinese revolution cannot avoidtaking the two steps, first of New Democracy and then of socialism. Moreover,the first step will need quite a long time and cannot be accomplished overnight.We are not utopians and cannot divorce ourselves from the actual conditionsconfronting us.
Certain malicious propagandists, deliberately confusing these two distinctrevolutionary stages, advocate the so-called theory of a single revolutionin order to prove that the Three People's Principles apply to all kinds ofrevolutions and that communism therefore loses itsraison d'être.Utilizing this "theory", they frantically oppose communism and the CommunistParty, the Eighth Route and New Fourth Armies, and the Shensi-Kansu-NingsiaBorder Region. Their real purpose is to root out all revolution, to opposea thoroughgoing bourgeois-democratic revolution and thoroughgoing resistanceto Japan and to prepare public opinion for their capitulation to the Japaneseaggressors. This is deliberately being fostered by the Japanese imperialists.Since their occupation of Wuhan, they have come to realize that militaryforce alone cannot subjugate China and have therefore resorted to politicaloffensives and economic blandishments. Their political offensives consistin tempting wavering elements in the anti-Japanese camp, splitting the unitedfront and undermining Kuomintang-Communist co-operation. Their economicblandishments take the form of the so-called joint industrial enterprises.In central and southern China the Japanese aggressors are allowing Chinesecapitalists to invest 51 per cent of the capital in such enterprises, withJapanese capital making up the other 49 per cent; in northern China theyare allowing Chinese capitalists to invest 49 per cent of the capital, withJapanese capital making up the other 51 per cent. The Japanese invaders havealso promised to restore the former assets of the Chinese capitalists tothem in the form of capital shares in the investment. At the prospect ofprofits, some conscienceless capitalists forget all moral principles anditch to have a go. One section, represented by Wang Ching-wei, has alreadycapitulated. Another section lurking in the anti-Japanese camp would alsolike to cross over. But, with the cowardice of thieves, they fear that theCommunists will block their exit and, what is more, that the common peoplewill brand them as traitors. So they have put their heads together and decidedto prepare the ground in cultural circles and through the press. Havingdetermined on their policy, they have lost no time in hiring some"metaphysics-mongers"[10] plus a few Trotskyiteswho, brandishing their pens like lances, are tilting in all directions andcreating bedlam. Hence the whole bag of tricks for deceiving those who donot know what is going on in the world around them--the "theory of a singlerevolution", the tales that communism does not suit the national conditionsof China, that there is no need for a Communist Party in China, that theEighth Route and the New Fourth Armies are sabotaging the anti-Japanese warand are merely moving about without fighting, that the Shensi-Kansu-NingsiaBorder Region is a feudal separatist regime, that the Communist Party isdisobedient, dissident, intriguing and disruptive--and all for the purposeof providing the capitalists with good grounds for getting their 49 or 51per cent and selling out the nation's interests to the enemy at the opportunemoment. This is "stealing the beams and pillars and replacing them with rottentimbers",--preparing the public mind for their projected capitulation. Thus,these gentlemen who, in all apparent seriousness, are pushing the "theoryof a single revolution" to oppose communism and the Communist Party are outfor nothing but their 49 or 51 per cent. How they must have cudgelled theirbrains ! The "theory of a single revolution" is simply a theory of no revolutionat all, and that is the heart of the matter.
But there are other people, apparently with no evil intentions, who are misledby the "theory of a single revolution" and the fanciful notion of "accomplishingboth the political revolution and the social revolution at one stroke"; theydo not understand that our revolution is divided into stages, that we canonly proceed to the next stage of revolution after accomplishing the first,and that there is no such thing as "accomplishing both at one stroke". Theirapproach is likewise very harmful because it confuses the steps to be takenin the revolution and weakens the effort directed towards the current task.It is correct and in accord with the Marxist theory of revolutionary developmentto say of the two revolutionary stages that the first provides the conditionsfor the second and that the two must be consecutive, without allowing anyintervening stage of bourgeois dictatorship. However, it is a utopian viewrejected by true revolutionaries to say that the democratic revolution doesnot have a specific task and period of its own but can be merged and accomplishedsimultaneously with another task,i.e., the socialist task (whichcan only be carried out in another period), and this is what they call"accomplishing both at one stroke".
The bourgeois die-hards in their turn come forward and say: "Well, you Communistshave postponed the socialist system to a later stage and have declared, 'TheThree People's Principles being what China needs today, our Party is readyto fight for their complete realization.'[11]All right then, fold up your communism for the time being." A fearful hullabaloohas recently been raised with this sort of argument in the form of the "onedoctrine" theory. In essence it is the howl of the die-hards for bourgeoisdespotism. Out of courtesy, however, we may simply describe it as totallylacking in common sense.
Communism is at once a complete system of proletarian ideology and a newsocial system. It is different from any other ideology or social system,and is the most complete, progressive, revolutionary and rational systemin human history. The ideological and social system of feudalism has a placeonly in the museum of history. The ideological and social system of capitalismhas also become a museum piece in one part of the world (in the Soviet Union),while in other countries it resembles "a dying person who is sinking fast,like the sun setting beyond the western hills", and will soon be relegatedto the museum. The communist ideological and social system alone is fullof youth and vitality, sweeping the world with the momentum of an avalancheand the force of a thunderbolt. The introduction of scientific communisminto China has opened new vistas for people and has changed the face of theChinese revolution. Without communism to guide it, China's democratic revolutioncannot possibly succeed, let alone move on to the next stage. This is thereason why the bourgeois die-hards are so loudly demanding that communismbe "folded up". But it must not be "folded up", for once communism is "foldedup", China will be doomed. The whole world today depends on communism forits salvation, and China is no exception.
Everybody knows that the Communist Party has an immediate and a future programme,a minimum and a maximum programme, with regard to the social system it advocates.For the present period, New Democracy, and for the future, socialism; theseare two parts of an organic whole, guided by one and the same communist ideology.Is it not, therefore, in the highest degree absurd to clamour for communismto be "folded up" on the ground that the Communist Party's minimum programmeis in basic agreement with the political tenets of the Three People's Principles?It is precisely because of this basic agreement between the two that weCommunists find it possible to recognize "the Three People's Principles asthe political basis for the anti-Japanese united front" and to acknowledgethat "the Three People's Principles being what China needs today, our Partyis ready to fight for their complete realization"; otherwise no such possibilitywould exist. Here we have a united front between communism and the ThreePeople's Principles in the stage of the democratic revolution, the kind ofunited front Dr. Sun Yat-sen had in mind when he said: "communism is thegood friend of the Three People'sPrinciples."[12] To reject communism is in factto reject the united front. The die-hards have concocted absurd argumentsfor the rejection of communism. Just because they want to reject the unitedfront and practice their one-party doctrine.
Moreover, the "one doctrine" theory is an absurdity. So long as classes exist,there will be as many doctrines as there are classes, and even various groupsin the same class may have their different doctrines. Since the feudal classhas a feudal doctrine, the bourgeoisie a capitalist doctrine, the BuddhistsBuddhism, the Christians Christianity and the peasants polytheism, and sincein recent years, some people have also advocated Kemalism, fascism,vitalism,[13] the "doctrine of distribution accordingto labour",[14] and what not, why then cannotthe proletariat have its communism? Since there are countless "isms", whyshould the cry of "Fold it up !" be raised at the sight of communism alone?Frankly, "folding it up" will not work. Let us rather have a contest. Ifcommunism is beaten, we Communists will admit defeat in good grace. But ifnot, then let all that stuff about "one doctrine", which violates the Principleof Democracy, be "folded up" as soon as possible.
To avoid misunderstanding and for the edification of the die-hards, it isnecessary to show clearly where the Three People's Principles and communismdo coincide and where they do not.
Comparison of the two reveals both similarities and differences.
First for the similarities. They are to be found in the basic political programmeof both doctrines during the stage of the bourgeois-democratic revolutionin China. The three political tenets of the revolutionary Three People'sPrinciples of Nationalism, Democracy and the People's Livelihood as reinterpretedby Dr. Sun Yat-sen in 1924 are basically similar to the communist politicalprogramme for the stage of the democratic revolution in China. Because ofthese similarities and because of the carrying out of the Three People'sPrinciples, the united front of the two doctrines and the two parties cameinto existence. It is wrong to ignore this aspect.
Next for the differences. (1) There is a difference in part of the programmefor the stage of the democratic revolution. The communist programme for thewhole course of the democratic revolution includes full rights for the people,the eight-hour working day and a thorough agrarian revolution, whereas theThree People's Principles do not. Unless these points are added to the ThreePeople's Principles and there is the readiness to carry them out, the twodemocratic programmes are only basically the same and cannot be describedas altogether the same. (2) Another difference is that one includes the stageof the socialist revolution, and the other does not. Communism envisagesthe stage of the socialist revolution beyond the stage of the democraticrevolution, and hence, beyond its minimum programme it has a maximum programme,i.e.,the programme for the attainment of socialism and communism.The Three People's Principles which envisage only the stage of the democraticrevolution and not the stage of the socialist revolution have only a minimumprogramme and not a maximum programme,i.e.,they have no programmefor the establishment of socialism and communism. (3) There is the differencein world outlook. The world outlook of communism is dialectical and historicalmaterialism, while the Three People's Principles explain history in termsof the people's livelihood, which in essence is a dualist or idealist outlook;the two world outlooks are opposed to each other .(4) There is the differencein revolutionary thoroughness. With communists, theory and practice go together,i.e.;communists possess revolutionary thoroughness. With the followersof the Three People's Principles, except for those completely loyal to therevolution and to truth, theory and practice do not go together and theirdeeds contradict their words,i.e.,they lack revolutionarythoroughness. The above are the differences between the two. They distinguishcommunists from the followers of the Three People's Principles. It is undoubtedlyvery wrong to ignore this distinction and see only the aspect of unity andnot of contradiction.
Once all this is understood, it is easy to see what the bourgeois die-hardshave in mind when they demand that communism be "folded up". If it does notmean bourgeois despotism, then there is no sense to it at all.
The bourgeois die-hards have no understanding whatsoever of historical change;their knowledge is so poor that it is practically nonexistent. They do notknow the difference either between communism and the Three People's Principlesor between the new Three People's principles and the old.
We Communists recognize "the Three People's Principles as the political basisfor the Anti-Japanese National United Front", we acknowledge that "the ThreePeople's Principles being what China needs today, our Party is ready to fightfor their complete realization" and we admit the basic agreement betweenthe communist minimum programme and the political tenets of the Three People'sPrinciples. But which kind of Three People's Principles? The Three People'sPrinciples as reinterpreted by Dr. Sun Yat-sen in the Manifesto of the FirstNational Congress of the Kuomintang, and no other. I wish the die-hard gentlemenwould spare a moment from the work of "restricting communism", "corrodingcommunism" and "combating communism", in which they are so gleefully engaged,to glance through this manifesto. In the manifesto Dr. Sun Yat-sen said:"Here is the true interpretation of the Kuomintang's Three People's Principles."Hence these are the only genuine Three People's Principles and all othersare spurious. The only "true interpretation" of the Three People's Principlesis the one contained in the Manifesto of the First National Congress of theKuomintang, and all other interpretations are false. Presumably this is noCommunist fabrication, for many Kuomintang members and I myself personallywitnessed the adoption of the manifesto.
The manifesto marks off the two epochs in the history of the Three People'sPrinciples. Before it, they belonged to the old category; they were the ThreePeople's Principles of the old bourgeois-democratic revolution in a semi-colony,the Three People's Principles of old democracy, the old Three People'sPrinciples.
After it, they came within the new category; they became the Three People'sPrinciples of the new bourgeois-democratic revolution in a semi-colony, theThree People's Principles of New Democracy, the new Three People's Principles.These and these alone are the revolutionary Three People's Principles ofthe new period.
The revolutionary Three People's Principles of the new period, the new orgenuine Three People's Principles, embody the Three Great Policies of alliancewith Russia, co-operation with the Communist Party and assistance to thepeasants and workers. Without each and every one of these Three Great Policies,the Three People's Principles become either false or incomplete in the newperiod.
In the first place, the revolutionary, new or genuine Three People's Principlesmust include alliance with Russia. As things are today, it is perfectly clearthat unless there is the policy of alliance with Russia, with the land ofsocialism, there will inevitably be a policy of alliance with imperialism,with the imperialist powers. Is this not exactly what happened after 1927?Once the conflict between the socialist Soviet Union and the imperialistpowers grows sharper, China will have to take her stand on one side or theother. This is an inevitable trend. Is it possible to avoid leaning to eitherside? No, that is an illusion The whole world will be swept into one or theother of these two fronts, and "neutrality" will then be merely a deceptiveterm. Especially is this true of China which, fighting an imperialist powerthat has penetrated deep into her territory, cannot conceive of ultimatevictory without the assistance of the Soviet Union. If alliance with Russiais sacrificed for the sake of alliance with imperialism, the word "revolutionary"will have to be expunged from the Three People's Principles, which will thenbecome reactionary. In the last analysis, there can be no "neutral" ThreePeople's Principles; they can only be either revolutionary orcounter-revolutionary. Would it not be more heroic to "fight against attacksfrom both sides"[15] as Wang Ching-wei once remarked,and to have the kind of Three People's Principles that serves this "fight"?Unfortunately, even its inventor Wang Chingwei himself has abandoned (or"folded up") this kind of Three People's Principles, for he has adopted theThree People's Principles of alliance with imperialism. If it is argued thatthere is a difference between Eastern and Western imperialism, and that,unlike Wang Ching-wei who has allied himself with Eastern imperialism, oneshould ally oneself with some of the Western imperialists to march eastwardand attack, then would not such conduct be quite revolutionary? However,whether you like it or not, the Western imperialists are determined to opposethe Soviet Union and communism, and if you ally yourself with them, theywill ask you to march northward and attack, and your revolution will cometo nothing. All these circumstances make it essential for the revolutionary,new and genuine Three People's Principles to include alliance with Russia,and under no circumstances alliance with imperialism against Russia.
In the second place, the revolutionary, new and genuine Three People's Principlesmust include co-operation with the Communist Party. Either you co-operatewith the Communist Party or you oppose it. Opposition to communism is thepolicy of the Japanese imperialists and Wang Ching-wei, and if that is whatyou want, very well, they will invite you to join their Anti-Communist Company.But wouldn't that look suspiciously like turning traitor? You may say, "Iam not following Japan, but some other country." That is just ridiculous.No matter whom you follow, the moment you oppose the Communist Party youbecome a traitor, because you can no longer resist Japan. If you say, "Iam going to oppose the Communist Party independently", that is arrant nonsense.How can the "heroes" in a colony or semi-colony tackle a counter-revolutionaryjob of this magnitude without depending on the strength of imperialism? Forten long years, virtually all the imperialist forces in the world were enlistedagainst the Communist Party, but in vain. How can you suddenly oppose it"independently"? Some people outside the Border Region, we are told, arenow saying "Opposing the Communist Party is good, but you can never succeedin it." This remark, if it is not simply hearsay, is only half wrong, forwhat "good" is there in opposing the Communist Party? But the other halfis true, you certainly can "never succeed in it". Basically, the reason liesnot with the Communists but with the common people, who like the CommunistParty and do not like "opposing" it. If you oppose the Communist Party ata juncture when our national enemy is penetrating deep into our territory,the people will be after your hide; they will certainly show you no mercy.This much is certain, whoever wants to oppose the Communist Party must beprepared to be ground to dust. If you are not keen on being ground to dust,you had certainly better drop this opposition. This is our sincere adviceto all the anti-Communist "heroes". Thus it is as clear as can be that theThree People's Principles of today must include co-operation with the CommunistParty, or otherwise those Principles will perish. It is a question of lifeand death for the Three People's Principles. Co-operating with the CommunistParty, they will survive; opposing the Communist Party, they will perish.Can anyone prove the contrary?
In the third place, the revolutionary, new and genuine Three People's Principlesmust include the policy of assisting the peasants and workers. Rejectionof this policy, failure whole-heartedly to assist the peasants and workersor failure to carry out the behest in Dr. Sun Yat-sen's Testament to "arousethe masses of the people", amounts to preparing the way for the defeat ofthe revolution, and one's own defeat into the bargain. Stalin has said that"in essence,the national question is a peasantquestion".[16]This means that the Chinese revolutionis essentially a peasant revolution and that the resistance to Japan nowgoing on is essentially peasant resistance. Essentially, the politics ofNew Democracy means giving the peasants their rights. The new and genuineThree People's Principles are essentially the principles of a peasant revolution.Essentially, mass culture means raising the cultural level of the peasants.The anti-Japanese war is essentially a peasant war. We are now living ina time when the "principle of going up into the hills"[17] applies; meetings, work, classes, newspaperpublication, the writing of books, theatrical performances--everything isdone up in the hills, and all essentially for the sake of the peasants. Andessentially it is the peasants who provide everything that sustains theresistance to Japan and keeps us going. By "essentially" we mean basically,not ignoring the other sections of the people, as Stalin himself has explained.As every schoolboy knows, 80 per cent of China's population are peasants.So the peasant problem becomes the basic problem of the Chinese revolutionand the strength of the peasants is the main strength of the Chinese revolution.In the Chinese population the workers rank second to the peasants in number.There are several million industrial workers in China and several tens ofmillions of handicraft workers and agricultural labourers. China cannot livewithout her workers in the various industries, because they are the producersin the industrial sector of the economy. And the revolution cannot succeedwithout the modern industrial working class, because it is the leader ofthe Chinese revolution and is the most revolutionary class. In thesecircumstances, the revolutionary, new and genuine Three People's Principlesmust include the policy of assisting the peasants and workers. Any otherkind of Three People's Principles which lack this policy, do not give thepeasants and workers whole-hearted assistance or do not carry out the behestto "arouse the masses of the people"; will certainly perish.
Thus it is clear that there is no future for any Three People's Principleswhich depart from the Three Great Policies of alliance with Russia, co-operationwith the Communist Party and assistance to the peasants and workers. Everyconscientious follower of the Three People's Principles must seriously considerthis point.
The Three People's Principles comprising the Three Great Policies --in otherwords, the revolutionary, new and genuine Three People's Principles--arethe Three People's Principles of New Democracy, a development of the oldThree People's Principles, a great contribution of Dr. Sun Yat-sen's anda product of the era in which the Chinese revolution has become part of theworld socialist revolution. It is only these Three People's Principles whichthe Chinese Communist Party regards as "being what China needs today" andfor whose "complete realization" it declares itself pledged "to fight". Theseare the only Three People's Principles which are in basic agreement withthe Communist Party's political programme for the stage of democratic revolutionnamely, with its minimum programme.
As for the old Three People's Principles, they were a product of the oldperiod of the Chinese revolution. Russia was then an imperialist power, andnaturally there could be no policy of alliance with her; there was then noCommunist Party in existence in our country, and naturally there could beno policy of co-operation with it; the movement of the workers and peasantshad not yet revealed its full political significance and aroused people'sattention, and naturally there could be no policy of alliance with them.Hence the Three Peoples Principles of the period before the reorganizationof the Kuomintang in 1924 belonged to the old category, and they became obsolete.The Kuomintang could not have gone forward unless it had developed them intothe new Three People's Principles. Dr. Sun Yat-sen in his wisdom saw thispoint, secured the help of the Soviet Union and the Chinese Communist Partyand reinterpreted the Three People's Principles so as to endow them withnew characteristics suited to the times; as a result, a united front wasformed between the Three People's Principles and communism, Kuomintang-Communistcooperation was established for the first time, the sympathy of the peopleof the whole country was won, and the revolution of 1924-27 was launched.
The old Three People's Principles were revolutionary in the old period andreflected its historical features. But if the old stuff is repeated in thenew period after the new Three People's Principles have been established,or alliance with Russia is opposed after the socialist state has beenestablished, or co-operation with the Communist Party is opposed after theCommunist Party has come into existence, or the policy of assisting the peasantsand workers is opposed after they have awakened and demonstrated their politicalstrength, then that is reactionary and shows ignorance of the times. Theperiod of reaction after 1927 was the result of such ignorance. The old proverbsays, "Whosoever understands the signs of the times is a great man." I hopethe followers of the Three People's Principles today will bear this in mind.
Were the Three People's Principles to fall within the old category, thenthey would have nothing basically in common with the communist minimum programme,because they would belong to the past and be obsolete. Any sort of ThreePeople's Principles that oppose Russia, the Communist Party or the peasantsand workers are definitely reactionary; they not only have absolutely nothingin common with the communist minimum programme but are the enemy of communism,and there is no common ground at all. This, too, the followers of the ThreePeople's Principles should carefully consider.
In any case, people with a conscience will never forsake the new Three People'sPrinciples until the task of opposing imperialism and feudalism is basicallyaccomplished. The only ones who do are people like Wang Ching-wei. No matterhow energetically they push their spurious Three People's Principles whichoppose Russia, the Communist Party and the peasants and workers, there willsurely be no lack of people with a conscience and sense of justice who willcontinue to support Sun Yat-sen's genuine Three People's Principles. Manyfollowers of the genuine Three People's Principles continued the strugglefor the Chinese revolution even after the reaction of 1927, and their numberswill undoubtedly swell to tens upon tens of thousands now that the nationalenemy has penetrated deep into our territory. We Communists will always perseverein long-term co-operation with all the true followers of the Three People'sPrinciples and, while rejecting the traitors and the sworn enemies of communism,will never forsake any of our friends.
In the foregoing we have explained the historical characteristics of Chinesepolitics in the new period and the question of the new-democratic republic.We can now proceed to the question of culture.
A given culture is the ideological reflection of the politics and economicsof a given society. There is in China an imperialist culture which is areflection of imperialist rule, or partial rule, in the political and economicfields. This culture is fostered not only by the cultural organizations rundirectly by the imperialists in China but by a number of Chinese who havelost all sense of shame. Into this category falls all culture embodying aslave ideology. China also has a semi-feudal culture which reflects hersemi-feudal politics and economy, and whose exponents include all those whoadvocate the worship of Confucius, the study of the Confucian canon, theold ethical code and the old ideas in opposition to the new culture and newideas. Imperialist culture and semi-feudal culture are devoted brothers andhave formed a reactionary cultural alliance against China's new culture.This kind of reactionary culture serves the imperialists and the feudal classand must be swept away. Unless it is swept away, no new culture of any kindcan be built up. There is no construction without destruction, no flowingwithout damming and no motion without rest; the two are locked in alife-and-death struggle.
As for the new culture, it is the ideological reflection of the new politicsand the new economy which it sets out to serve.
As we have already stated in Section 3, Chinese society has gradually changedin character since the emergence of a capitalist economy in China; it isno longer an entirely feudal but a semi-feudal society, although the feudaleconomy still predominates. Compared with the feudal economy, this capitalisteconomy is a new one. The political forces of the bourgeoisie, the pettybourgeoisie and the proletariat are the new political forces which have emergedand grown simultaneously with this new capitalist economy. And the new culturereflects these new economic and political forces in the field of ideologyand serves them. Without the capitalist economy, without the bourgeoisie,the petty bourgeoisie and the proletariat, and without the political forcesof these classes, the new ideology or new culture could not have emerged.
These new political, economic and cultural forces are all revolutionary forceswhich are opposed to the old politics, the old economy and the old culture.The old is composed of two parts, one being China's own semi-feudal politics,economy and culture, and the other the politics, economy and culture ofimperialism, with the latter heading the alliance. Both are bad and shouldbe completely destroyed. The struggle between the new and the old in Chinesesociety is a struggle between the new forces of the people (the variousrevolutionary classes) and the old forces of imperialism and the feudal class.It is a struggle between revolution and counter-revolution. This strugglehas lasted a full hundred years if dated from the Opium War, and nearly thirtyyears if dated from the Revolution of 1911.
But as already indicated, revolutions too can be classified into old andnew, and what is new in one historical period becomes old in another. Thecentury of China's bourgeois-democratic revolution can be divided into twomain stages, a first stage of eighty years and a second of twenty years.Each has its basic historical characteristics: China's bourgeois-democraticrevolution in the first eighty years belongs to the old category, while inthe last twenty years, owing to the change in the international and domesticpolitical situation, it belongs to the new category. Old democracy is thecharacteristic of the first eighty years. New Democracy is the characteristicof the last twenty. This distinction holds good in culture as well as inpolitics.
How does it manifest itself in the field of culture? We shall explain thisnext.
On the cultural or ideological front, the two periods preceding and followingthe May 4th Movement form two distinct historical periods.
Before the May 4th Movement, the struggle on China's cultural front was onebetween the new culture of the bourgeoisie and the old culture of the feudalclass. The struggles between the modern school system and the imperialexamination system,[18] between the new learningand the old learning, and between Western learning and Chinese learning,were all of this nature. The so-called modern schools or new learning orWestern learning of that time concentrated mainly (we say mainly, becausein part pernicious vestiges of Chinese feudalism still remained) on the naturalsciences and bourgeois social and political theories, which were needed bythe representatives of the bourgeoisie. At the time, the ideology of thenew learning played a revolutionary role in fighting the Chinese feudal ideology,and it served the bourgeois-democratic revolution of the old period. However,because the Chinese bourgeoisie lacked strength and the world had alreadyentered the era of imperialism, this bourgeois ideology was only able tolast out a few rounds and was beaten back by the reactionary alliance ofthe enslaving ideology of foreign imperialism and the "back to the ancients"ideology of Chinese feudalism; as soon as this reactionary ideological alliancestarted a minor counter-offensive, the so-called new learning lowered itsbanners, muffled its drums and beat a retreat, retaining its outer form butlosing its soul. The old bourgeois-democratic culture became enervated anddecayed in the era of imperialism, and its failure was inevitable.
But since the May 4th Movement things have been different. A brand-new culturalforce came into being in China, that is, the communist culture and ideologyguided by the Chinese Communists, or the communist world outlook and theoryof social revolution. The May 4th Movement occurred in 1919, and in 1921came the founding of the Chinese Communist Party and the real beginning ofChina's labour movement--all in the wake of the First World War and the OctoberRevolution,i.e., at a time when the national problem and the colonialrevolutionary movements of the world underwent a change, and the connectionbetween the Chinese revolution and the world revolution became quite obvious.The new political force of the proletariat and the Communist Party enteredthe Chinese political arena, and as a result, the new cultural force, innew uniform and with new weapons, mustering all possible allies and deployingits ranks in battle array, launched heroic attacks on imperialist cultureand feudal culture. This new force has made great strides in the domain ofthe social sciences and of the arts and letters, whether of philosophy,economics, political science, military science, history, literature or art(including the theatre, the cinema, music, sculpture and painting). For thelast twenty years, wherever this new cultural force has directed its attack,a great revolution has taken place both in ideological content and in form(for example, in the written language). Its influence has been so great andits impact so powerful that it is invincible wherever it goes. The numbersit has rallied behind it have no parallel in Chinese history. Lu Hsun wasthe greatest and the most courageous standard-bearer of this new culturalforce. The chief commander of China's cultural revolution, he was not onlya great man of letters but a great thinker and revolutionary. Lu Hsun wasa man of unyielding integrity, free from all sycophancy or obsequiousness;this quality is invaluable among colonial and semi-colonial peoples. Representingthe great majority of the nation, Lu Hsun breached and stormed the enemycitadel; on the cultural front he was the bravest and most correct, the firmest,the most loyal and the most ardent national hero, a hero without parallelin our history. The road he took was the very road of China's new nationalculture.
Prior to the May 4th Movement, China's new culture was a culture of theold-democratic kind and part of the capitalist cultural revolution of theworld bourgeoisie. Since the May 4th Movement, it has become new-democraticand part of the socialist cultural revolution of the world proletariat.
Prior to the May 4th Movement, China's new cultural movement, her culturalrevolution, was led by the bourgeoisie, which still had a leading role toplay. After the May 4th Movement, its culture and ideology became even morebackward than its politics and were incapable of playing any leading role;at most, they could serve to a certain extent as an ally during revolutionaryperiods, while inevitably the responsibility for leading the alliance restedon proletarian culture and ideology. This is an undeniable fact.
The new-democratic culture is the anti-imperialist and anti-feudal cultureof the broad masses; today it is the culture of the anti-Japanese unitedfront. This culture can be led only by the culture and ideology of theproletariat, by the ideology of communism, and not by the culture and ideologyof any other class. In a word, new-democratic culture is the proletarian-led,anti-imperialist and anti-feudal culture of the broad masses.
A cultural revolution is the ideological reflection of the political andeconomic revolution and is in their service. In China there is a united frontin the cultural as in the political revolution.
The history of the united front in the cultural revolution during the lasttwenty years can be divided into four periods. The first covers the two yearsfrom 1919 to 1921, the second the six years from 1921 to 1927, the thirdthe ten years from 1927 to 1937, and the fourth the three years from 1937to the present.
The first period extended from the May 4th Movement of 1919 to the foundingof the Chinese Communist Party in 1921. The May 4th Movement was its chieflandmark.
The May 4th Movement was an anti-imperialist as well as an anti-feudal movement.Its outstanding historical significance is to be seen in a feature whichwas absent from the Revolution of 1911, namely, its thorough and uncompromisingopposition to imperialism as well as to feudalism. The May 4th Movement possessedthis quality because capitalism had developed a step further in China andbecause new hopes had arisen for the liberation of the Chinese nation asChina's revolutionary intellectuals saw the collapse of three great imperialistpowers, Russia, Germany and Austria-Hungary, and the weakening of two others,Britain and France, while the Russian proletariat had established a socialiststate and the German, Hungarian and Italian proletariat had risen in revolution.The May 4th Movement came into being at the call of the world revolution,of the Russian Revolution and of Lenin. It was part of the world proletarianrevolution of the time. Although the Communist Party had not yet come intoexistence, there were already large numbers of intellectuals who approvedof the Russian Revolution and had the rudiments of Communist ideology. Inthe beginning the May 4th Movement was the revolutionary movement of a unitedfront of three sections of people--communist intellectuals, revolutionarypetty-bourgeois intellectuals and bourgeois intellectuals (the last formingthe right wing of the movement). Its shortcoming was that it was confinedto the intellectuals and that the workers and peasants did not join in. Butas soon as it developed into the June 3rd Movement,[19] not only the intellectuals but the mass of theproletariat, the petty bourgeoisie and the bourgeoisie joined in, and itbecame a nation-wide revolutionary movement. The cultural revolution usheredin by the May 4th Movement was uncompromising in its opposition to feudalculture; there had never been such a great and thoroughgoing cultural revolutionsince the dawn of Chinese history. Raising aloft the two great banners ofthe day, "Down with the old ethics and up with the new!" and "Down with theold literature and up with the new!", the cultural revolution had greatachievements to its credit. At that time it was not yet possible for thiscultural movement to become widely diffused among the workers and peasants.The slogan of "Literature for the common people" was advanced, but in factthe "common people" then could only refer to the petty-bourgeois and bourgeoisintellectuals in the cities, that is, the urban intelligentsia. Both in ideologyand in the matter of cadres, the May 4th Movement paved the way for the foundingof the Chinese Communist Party in 1921 and for the May 30th Movement in 1925and the Northern Expedition. The bourgeois intellectuals, who constitutedthe right wing of the May 4th Movement, mostly compromised with the enemyin the second period and went over to the side of reaction.
In the second period, whose landmarks were the founding of the Chinese CommunistParty, the May 30th Movement and the Northern Expedition, the united frontof the three classes formed in the May 4th Movement was continued and expanded,the peasantry was drawn into it and a political united front of all theseclasses, the first instance of Kuomintang-Communist co-operation, wasestablished. Dr. Sun Yat-sen was a great man not only because he led thegreat Revolution of 1911 (although it was only a democratic revolution ofthe old period), but also because, "adapting himself to the trends of theworld and meeting the needs of the masses", he had the capacity to bringforward the revolutionary Three Great Policies of alliance with Russia,co-operation with the Communist Party and assistance to the peasants andworkers, give new meaning to the Three People's Principles and thus institutethe new Three People's Principles with their Three Great Policies. Previously,the Three People's Principles had exerted little influence on the educationaland academic world or with the youth, because they had not raised the issuesof opposition to imperialism or to the feudal social system and feudal cultureand ideology. They were the old Three People's Principles which people regardedas the time-serving banner of a group of men bent on seizing power, in otherwords, on securing official positions, a banner used purely for politicalmaneuvering. Then came the new Three People's Principles with their ThreeGreat Policies. The co-operation between the Kuomintang and the CommunistParty and the joint efforts of the revolutionary members of the two partiesspread the new Three People's Principles all over China, extending to a sectionof the educational and academic world and the mass of student youth. Thiswas entirely due to the fact that the original Three People's Principleshad developed into the anti-imperialist, anti-feudal and new-democratic ThreePeople's Principles with their Three Great Policies. Without this developmentit would have been impossible to disseminate the ideas of the Three People'sPrinciples.
During this period, the revolutionary Three People's Principles became thepolitical basis of the united front of the Kuomintang and the Communist Partyand of all the revolutionary classes, and since "communism is the good friendof the Three People's Principles", a united front was formed between thetwo of them. In terms of social classes, it was a united front of theproletariat, the peasantry, the urban petty bourgeoisie and the bourgeoisie.Using the CommunistWeekly Guide,the Kuomintang'sRepublicanDaily Newsof Shanghai and other newspapers in various localities astheir bases of operations, the two parties jointly advocated anti-imperialism,jointly combated feudal education based upon the worship of Confucius andupon the study of the Confucian canon and jointly opposed feudal literatureand the classical language and promoted the new literature and the vernacularstyle of writing with an anti-imperialist and anti-feudal content. Duringthe wars in Kwangtung and during the Northern Expedition, they reformed China'sarmed forces by the inculcation of anti-imperialist and anti-feudal ideas.The slogans, "Down with the Corrupt officials" and "Down with the local tyrantsand evil gentry", were raised among the peasant millions, and great peasantrevolutionary struggles were aroused. Thanks to all this and to the assistanceof the Soviet Union, the Northern Expedition was victorious. But no soonerdid the big bourgeoisie climb to power than it put an end to this revolution,thus creating an entirely new political situation
The third period was the new revolutionary period of 1927-37. As a changehad taken place within the revolutionary camp towards the end of the secondperiod, with the big bourgeoisie going over to the counter-revolutionarycamp of the imperialist and feudal forces and the national bourgeoisie trailingafter it, only three of the four classes formerly within the revolutionarycamp remained,i.e., the proletariat, the peasantry and the othersections of the petty bourgeoisie (including the revolutionary intellectuals),and consequently the Chinese revolution inevitably entered a new period inwhich the Chinese Communist Party alone gave leadership to the masses. Thisperiod was one of counter-revolutionary campaigns of "encirclement andsuppression", on the one hand, and of the deepening of the revolution, onthe other. There were two kinds of counter-revolutionary campaigns of"encirclement and suppression", the military and the cultural. The deepeningof the revolution was of two kinds; both the agrarian and the culturalrevolutions were deepened. At the instigation of the imperialists, thecounter-revolutionary forces of the whole country and of the whole worldwere mobilized for both kinds of campaigns of "encirclement and suppression",which lasted no less than ten years and were unparalleled in their ruthlessness;hundreds of thousands of Communists and young students were slaughtered andmillions of workers and peasants suffered cruel persecution. The peopleresponsible for all this apparently had no doubt that communism and the CommunistParty could be "exterminated once and for all". However, the outcome wasdifferent; both kinds of "encirclement and suppression" campaigns failedmiserably. The military campaign resulted in the northern march of the RedArmy to resist the Japanese, and the cultural campaign resulted in the outbreakof the December 8th Movement of the revolutionary youth in 1935. And thecommon result of both was the awakening of the people of the whole country.These were three positive results. The most amazing thing of all was thatthe Kuomintang's cultural "encirclement and suppression" campaign failedcompletely in the Kuomintang areas as well, although the Communist Partywas in an utterly defenceless position in all the cultural and educationalinstitutions there. Why did this happen? Does it not give food for prolongedand deep thought? It was in the very midst of such campaigns of "encirclementand suppression" that Lu Hsun, who believed in communism, became the giantof China's cultural revolution
The negative result of the counter-revolutionary campaigns of "encirclementand suppression" was the invasion of our country by Japanese imperialism.This is the chief reason why to this very day the people of the whole countrystill bitterly detest those ten years of anti-communism.
In the struggles of this period, the revolutionary side firmly upheld thepeople's anti-imperialist and anti-feudal New Democracy and their new ThreePeople's Principles, while the counter-revolutionary side under the directionof imperialism, imposed the despotic regime of the coalition of the landlordclass and the big bourgeoisie. That despotic regime butchered Dr. Sun Yat-sen'sThree Great Policies and his new Three People's Principles both politicallyand culturally, with catastrophic consequences to the Chinese nation.
The fourth period is that of the present anti-Japanese war. Pursuing itszigzag course, the Chinese revolution has again arrived at a united frontof the four classes; but the scope of the united front is now muchbroader because its upper stratum includes many members of the ruling classes,its middle stratum includes the national bourgeoisie and the petty bourgeoisie,and its lower stratum includes the entire proletariat, so that the variousclasses and strata of the nation have become members of the alliance resolutelyresisting Japanese imperialism. The first stage of this period lasted untilthe fall of Wuhan. During that stage, there was a lively atmosphere in thecountry in every field politically there was a trend towards democracy andculturally there was fairly widespread activity. With the fall of Wuhan thesecond stage began, during which the political situation has undergone manychanges, with one section of the big bourgeoisie capitulating to the enemyand another desiring an early end to the War of Resistance. In the culturalsphere, this situation has been reflected in the reactionary activities ofYeh Ching,[20] Chang Chun-mai and others, andin the suppression of freedom of speech and of the press.
To overcome this crisis, a firm struggle is necessary against all ideas opposedto resistance, unity and progress, and unless these reactionary ideas arecrushed, there will be no hope of victory. How will this struggle turn out?This is the big question in the minds of the people of the whole country.Judging by the domestic and international situation, the Chinese people arebound to win, however numerous the obstacles on the path of resistance. Theprogress achieved during the twenty years since the May 4th Movement exceedsnot only that of the preceding eighty years but virtually surpasses thatachieved in the thousands of years of Chinese history. Can we not visualizewhat further progress China will make in another twenty years? The unbridledviolence of all the forces of darkness, whether domestic or foreign, hasbrought disaster to our nation; but this very violence indicates that whilethe forces of darkness still have some strength left, they are already intheir death throes, and that the people are gradually approaching victory.This is true of China, of the whole East and of the entire world.
Everything new comes from the forge of hard and bitter struggle. This isalso true of the new culture which has followed a zigzag course in the pasttwenty years, during which both the good and the bad were tested and provedin struggle.
The bourgeois die-hards are as hopelessly wrong on the question of cultureas on that of political power. They neither understand the historicalcharacteristics of this new period in China, nor recognize the new-democraticculture of the masses. Their starting point is bourgeois despotism, whichin culture becomes the cultural despotism of the bourgeoisie. It seems thata section (and I refer only to a section) of educated people from the so-calledEuropean-American school [21] who in fact supportedthe Kuomintang government's "Communist suppression" campaign on the culturalfront in the past are now supporting its policy of "restricting" and "corroding"the Communist Party. They do not want the workers and the peasants to holdup their heads politically or culturally. This bourgeois die-hard road ofcultural despotism leads nowhere; as in the case of political despotism,the domestic and international pre-conditions are lacking. Therefore thiscultural despotism, too, had better be "folded up".
So far as the orientation of our national culture is concerned, communistideology plays the guiding role, and we should work hard both to disseminatesocialism and communism throughout the working class and to educate the peasantryand other sections of the people in socialism properly and step by step.However, our national culture as a whole is not yet socialist.
Because of the leadership of the proletariat, the politics, the economy andthe culture of New Democracy all contain an element of socialism, and byno means a mere casual element but one with a decisive role. However, takenas a whole, the political, economic and cultural situation so far isnew-democratic and not socialist. For the Chinese revolution in its presentstage is not yet a socialist revolution for the overthrow of capitalism buta bourgeois-democratic revolution, its central task being mainly that ofcombating foreign imperialism and domestic feudalism. In the sphere of nationalculture, it is wrong to assume that the existing national culture is, orshould be, socialist in its entirety. That would amount to confusing thedissemination of communist ideology with the carrying out of an immediateprogramme of action, and to confusing the application of the communist standpointand method in investigating problems, undertaking research, handling workand training cadres with the general policy for national education and nationalculture in the democratic stage of the Chinese revolution. A national culturewith a socialist content will necessarily be the reflection of a socialistpolitics and a socialist economy. There are socialist elements in our politicsand our economy, and hence these socialist elements are reflected in ournational culture; but taking our society as a whole, we do not have a socialistpolitics and a socialist economy yet, so that there cannot be a wholly socialistnational culture. Since the present Chinese revolution is part of the worldproletarian-socialist revolution, the new culture of China today is partof the world proletarian-socialist new culture and is its great ally. Whilethis part contains vital elements of socialist culture, the national cultureas a whole joins the stream of the world proletarian-socialist new culturenot entirely as a socialist culture, but as the anti-imperialist and anti-feudalnew-democratic culture of the broad masses. And since the Chinese revolutiontoday cannot do without proletarian leadership, China's new culture cannotdo without the leadership of proletarian culture and ideology, of communistideology. At the present stage, however, this kind of leadership means leadingthe masses of the people in an anti-imperialist and anti-feudal politicaland cultural revolution, and therefore, taken as a whole, the content ofChina's new national culture is still not socialist but new-democratic.
Beyond all doubt, now is the time to spread communist ideas more widely andput more energy into the study of Marxism-Leninism, or otherwise we shallnot only be unable to lead the Chinese revolution forward to the future stageof socialism, but shall also be unable to guide the present democratic revolutionto victory. However, we must keep the spreading of communist ideas and propagandaabout the Communist social system distinct from the practical applicationof the new-democratic programme of action; we must also keep the communisttheory and method of investigating problems, undertaking research, handlingwork and training cadres distinct from the new democratic line for nationalculture as a whole. It is undoubtedly inappropriate to mix the two up.
It can thus be seen that the content of China's new national culture at thepresent stage is neither the cultural despotism of the bourgeoisie nor thesocialism of the proletariat, but the anti-imperialist and anti-feudal NewDemocracy of the masses, under the leadership of proletarian-socialist cultureand ideology.
New-democratic culture is national. It opposes imperialist oppression andupholds the dignity and independence of the Chinese nation. It belongs toour own nation and bears our own national characteristics. It links up withthe socialist and new-democratic cultures of all other nations and they arerelated in such a way that they can absorb something from each other andhelp each other to develop, together forming a new world culture; but asa revolutionary national culture it can never link up with any reactionaryimperialist culture of whatever nation. To nourish her own culture Chinaneeds to assimilate a good deal of foreign progressive culture, not enoughof which was done in the past. We should assimilate whatever is useful tous today not only from the present-day socialist and new-democratic culturesbut also from the earlier cultures of other nations, for example, from theculture of the various capitalist countries in the Age of Enlightenment.However, we should not gulp any of this foreign material down uncritically,but must treat it as we do our food--first chewing it, then submitting itto the working of the stomach and intestines with their juices and secretions,and separating it into nutriment to be absorbed and waste matter to bediscarded--before it can nourish us. To advocate "wholesale westernization"[22] is wrong. China has suffered a great deal fromthe mechanical absorption of foreign material. Similarly, in applying Marxismto China, Chinese communists must fully and properly integrate the universaltruth of Marxism with the concrete practice of the Chinese revolution, orin other words, the universal truth of Marxism must be combined with specificnational characteristics and acquire a definite national form if it is tobe useful, and in no circumstances can it be applied subjectively as a mereformula. Marxists who make a fetish of formulas are simply playing the foolwith Marxism and the Chinese revolution, and there is no room for them inthe ranks of the Chinese revolution. Chinese culture should have its ownform, its own national form. National in form and new-democratic in content--suchis our new culture today.
New-democratic culture is scientific. Opposed as it is to all feudal andsuperstitious ideas, it stands for seeking truth from facts, for objectivetruth and for the unity of theory and practice. On this point, the possibilityexists of a united front against imperialism, feudalism and superstitionbetween the scientific thought of the Chinese proletariat and those Chinesebourgeois materialists and natural scientists who are progressive, but inno case is there a possibility of a united front with any reactionary idealism.In the field of political action Communists may form an anti-imperialistand anti-feudal united front with some idealists and even religious people,but we can never approve of their idealism or religious doctrines. A splendidold culture was created during the long period of Chinese feudal society.To study the development of this old culture, to reject its feudal drossand assimilate its democratic essence is a necessary condition for developingour new national culture and increasing our national self-confidence, butwe should never swallow anything and everything uncritically. It s imperativeto separate the fine old culture of the people which had a more or lessdemocratic and revolutionary character from all the decadence of the oldfeudal ruling class. China's present new politics and new economy have developedout of her old politics and old economy, and her present new culture, too,has developed out of her old culture; therefore, we must respect our ownhistory and must not lop it off. However, respect for history means givingit its proper place as a science, respecting its dialectical development,and not eulogizing the past at the expense of the present or praising everydrop of feudal poison. As far as the masses and the young students are concerned,the essential thing is to guide them to look forward and not backward.
New-democratic culture belongs to the broad masses and is therefore democratic.It should serve the toiling masses of workers and peasants who make up morethan 90 per cent of the nation's population d should gradually become theirvery own. There is a difference of degree, as well as a close link, betweenthe knowledge imparted to the revolutionary cadres and the knowledge impartedto the revolutionary masses, between the raising of cultural standards andpopularization. Revolutionary culture is a powerful revolutionary weaponfor the broad masses of the people. It prepares the ground ideologicallybefore the revolution comes and is an important, indeed essential, fightingfront in the general revolutionary front during the revolution. People engagedin revolutionary cultural work are the commanders at various levels on thiscultural front. "Without revolutionary theory there can be no revolutionarymovement";[23] one can thus see how importantthe cultural movement is for the practical revolutionary movement. Both thecultural and practical movements must be of the masses. Therefore all progressivecultural workers in the anti-Japanese war must have their own culturalbattalions, that is, the broad masses. A revolutionary cultural worker whois not close to the people is a commander without an army, whose fire-powercannot bring the enemy down. To attain this objective, written Chinese mustbe reformed, given the requisite conditions, and our spoken language broughtcloser to that of the people, for the people, it must be stressed, are theinexhaustible source of our revolutionary culture.
A national, scientific and mass culture--such is the anti-imperialist andanti-feudal culture of the people, the culture of New Democracy, the newculture of the Chinese nation.
Combine the politics, the economy and the culture of New Democracy, and youhave the new-democratic republic, the Republic of China both in name andin reality, the new China we want to create.
Behold, New China is within sight. Let us all hail her!
Her masts have already risen above the horizon. Let us all cheer inwelcome!
Raise both your hands. New China is ours!
1. Chinese Culturewas a magazine founded in January1940 in Yenan; the present article appeared in the first number.
2. See V. I. Lenin, "Once Again on the Trade Unions, thePresent Situation and the Mistakes of Trotsky and Bukharin",SelectedWorks,Eng. ed., International Publishers, New York, 1943, Vol. IX,p. 54.
3. Karl Marx, "Preface to AContribution to the Critiqueof Political Economy", Selected Works of Marx and Engels,Eng. ed.,FLPH, Moscow, 1958, Vol. I, p. 363
4. Karl Marx, "Theses on Feuerbach",Selected Worksof Marx and Engels,Eng. ed., FLPH, Moscow, 1958, Vol. II, p. 405.
5. J. V. Stalin, "The October Revolution and the NationalQuestion",Works,Eng. ed., FLPH, Moscow, 1953, Vol. IV, pp. 169-70.
6. J. V. Stalin, "The National Question Once Again",Works,Eng. ed., FLPH Moscow, 1954, Vol. VII, pp. 225- 27.
7. V. I. Lenin, "Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism",Selected WorksEng. ed., FLPH, Moscow, 1950, Vol. I, Part 2, p.566.
8. These anti-Soviet campaigns were instigated by theKuomintang government following Chiang Kai-shek's betrayal of the revolution.On December 13, 1927, the Kuomintang murdered the Soviet vice-consul in Cantonand on the next day its government in Nanking issued a decree breaking offrelations with Russia, withdrawing official recognition from Soviet consulsin the provinces and ordering Soviet commercial establishments to cease activity.In August 1929 Chiang Kai-shek, under the instigation of the imperialists,organized acts of provocation in the Northeast against the Soviet Union,which resulted in armed clashes.
9. After World War I the British imperialists instigatedtheir vassal Greece to commit aggression against Turkey, but the Turkishpeople, with the help of the Soviet Union, defeated the Greek troops in 1922.In 1923, Kemal was elected President of Turkey. Stalin said:
A Kemalist revolution is a revolution of the top stratum, a revolution ofthe national merchant bourgeoisie, arising in a struggle against the foreignimperialists, and whose subsequent development is essentially directed againstthe peasants and workers, against the very possibility of an agrarian revolution.("Talk with Students of the Sun Yat-sen University",Works,Eng.ed., FLPH Moscow, 1954, Vol. IX, p. 261.)
10. The "metaphysics-mongers" were Chang Chun-mai andhis group. After the May 4th movement, Chang openly opposed science and advocatedmetaphysics, or what he called "spiritual culture", and thus came to be knownas a "metaphysics-monger". In order to support Chiang Kai-shek andthe Japanese aggressors, he published an "Open Letter to Mr. Mao Tse-tung"in December 1938 at Chiang Kai-shek's bidding, wildly demanding the abolitionof the Eighth Route Army, the New Fourth Army and the Shensi-Kansu-NingsiaBorder Region.
11. See the manifesto of the Central Committee of theChinese Communist Party on the establishment of Kuomintang-Communistco-operation, issued in September 1937.
12. See Dr. Sun Yat-sen,Lectures on the Principleof People's Livelihood,1924, Lecture II.
13.Vitalismwas an exposition of Kuomintangfascism, a hotchpotch ghostwritten by a number of reactionary hacks for ChenLi-fu, one of the notorious chiefs of Chiang Kai-shek's secret service.
14. The "doctrine of distribution according to labour"was a high-sounding slogan shamelessly put forward by Yen Hsi-shan, warlordand representative of the big landlords and big compradors in Shansi Province.
15. "Fight Against Attacks from Both Sides" was the titleof an article written by Wang Ching-wei after his betrayal of the revolutionin 1927.
16. J V. Stalin, "Concerning the National Question inYugoslavia", a speech delivered in the Yugoslav Commission of the E.C.C.I.,March 30, 1925. Stalin said:
... the peasantry constitutes the main army of the national movement, . .. there is no powerful national movement without the peasant army, nor canthere be. That is what is meant when it is said that,in essence,thenational question is a peasant question. (Works, Eng. ed., FLPH,Moscow, 1954, Vol. VII, pp. 71-72 )
17. The "principle of going up into the hills" was a dogmatistgibe against Comrade Mao Tse-tung for his emphasis on rural revolutionarybases. He makes use of the expression to explain the importance of the roleplayed by the rural revolutionary bases.
18. The modern school system was the educational systemmodelled on that of capitalist countries in Europe and America. The imperialexamination system was the old examination system in feudal China. Towardsthe end of the 19th century, enlightened Chinese intellectualsurged the abolition of the old competitive examination system and theestablishment of modern schools.
19. The June 3rd Movement marked a new stage in the patrioticmovement of May 4. On June 3, 1919, students in Peking held public meetingsand made speeches in defiance of persecution and repression by the army andpolice. They went on strike and the strike spread to the workers and merchantsin Shanghai, Nanking, Tientsin, Hangchow, Wuhan and Kiukiang and in the provincesof Shantung and Anhwei. Thus the May 4th Movement grew into a broad massmovement in which the proletariat, the urban petty bourgeoisie and the nationalbourgeoisie all participated.
20. Yeh Ching was a renegade Communist who became a hiredhack in the Kuomintang secret service.
21. The spokesman of the so-called European-American schoolwas the counterrevolutionary Hu Shih.
22. Wholesale westernization was the view held by a numberof westernized Chinese bourgeois intellectuals who unconditionally praisedthe outmoded individualist bourgeois culture of the West and advocated theservile imitation of capitalist Europe and America.
23. V. I. Lenin, "What Is to Be Done?",CollectedWorks,Eng. ed., FLPH, Moscow, 1961, Vol. V, p. 369.
Transcription by the Maoist Documentation Project.
HTML revised 2004 by Marxists.org
Selected Works of Mao Tse-tung