Struggle
between Two Lines -“RED FLAG” Article on Criticism of Confucius
(from
‘CLASSSTRUGGLE’ - monthly organ of CPI(ML) CC)
( We are reproducing here an article from the journal “Red Flag”
(Organ of CPC) by Chin Chihpai on the historical experience of the
Chinese Communist Party’s struggle against opportunist lines in
connection with the criticism of Confucius, basing on some of
Chairman Mao’s related works. - Editor)
Confucius typified the ideology of the decadent slave owing class,
the first reactionary class overthrown in China’s history. His
ideas, which stood for retrogression and restoration, served the
political needs of all dying and degenerating reactionary classes.
The ring leaders of past opportunist lines in our Party, including
Liu-Shao-chi and Lin Piao, used the doctrines of Confucius and
Mencius as an ideological weapon to oppose Marxism-Leninism and
Chairman Mao’s revolutionary line.
As early as the 1919 May 4 movement, Chairman Mao sharply criticised
the Confucian shop in his revolutionary struggles against imperialism
and feudalism. From that time on, for half a century, Chairman Mao
has always linked his fight against opportunist lines in the Party
with repeated criticism of Confucius and those who revere Confucius.
Such criticism has become part of the criticism of erroneous lines. A
serious study of Chairman Mao’s works and statements criticizing
Confucius is of great significance in under standing and deepening
the present movement to criticize Lin Piao and Confucius.
Period of New Democratic Revolution
The struggle between Chairman Mao’s revolutionary line and Chen
Tu-hsiu’s right opportunist line during the first revolutionary
civil war period (1925-1927) was the first serious struggle in our
Party between the two lines. Although Chen-Tu-hsiu for a time took a
radical bourgeoisie democratic stand and shouted the revolutionary
slogan “down with the Confucian shop”, he completely rejected
this slogan and went seeking the aid of the dead souls of the
Confucian shop when he adopted right opportunism. The worker-peasant
revolutionary movement was surging throughout the country at that
time, especially the peasant movement which rose like a mighty storm,
like a hurricane, a very swift and violent force. At that point so
crucial to the progress of the revolution, Chen Tu-hsiu brazenly used
the doctrines of Confucius and Mencius to oppose the revolution and
Chairman Mao’s proletarian revolutionary line, clamouring that “we
must keep to an eclectic middle of the road line for a considerable
period of time”.
This was a right opportunist line advocating “ all alliance and no
struggle”, which meant offering leadership of the revolution to the
Kuomintang reactionaries and defending the dictatorship of the
landlord and capitalist classes. In chorus with the
counter-revolutionary clamours of the landlords and capitalists, Chen
Tuhsiu attacked the peasant movement as “being too left” and “
going too far” and vilified it as “terrible” so as to put down
this sweeping, vigorous movement. The reactionary class nature of
Chen Tu-hsiu’s line had to be exposed fully, and the
counter-revolutionary doctrines of Confucius and Mencius which it
used to deceive and intimidate the people had to be criticized in
order to carry the revolution forward.
“Report on an investigation of the peasant movement in Hunan”,
which Chairman Mao wrote in March 1927, was a battle cry for
criticism of Chen Tu-hsiu and the doctrines of Confucius and Mencius.
It exposed and criticised: Chen Tu-hsiu’s right-opportunism,
sharply denounced the counter-revolutionary slander of the peasant
movement as “going too far” penetratingly expounded the
revolutionary dialectics that “proper limits have to be exceeded in
order to right a wrong”, and sharply criticized the doctrine of the
mean. Chen Tu-hsiu and company used the doctrine of the mean, which
protected the interests of the reactionary declining classes, to
vilify the peasant movement for “going too far” and forbid the
peasants from smashing the old man-killing order of the feudal
landlord class. In sharp opposition, Chairman Mao pointed out that “a
revolution is not a dinner party, or writing an essay, or painting a
picture, or doing embroidery; it cannot be so refined, so leisurely
and gentle, so temperate, kind, courteous, restrained and
magnanimous.” “A rural revolution is a revolution by which the
peasantry overthrows the power of the feudal landlord class. Without
using the greatest force, the peasants cannot possibly over throw the
deep rooted authority of the landlords which has lasted for thousands
of years.” Therefore, “proper limits have to be exceeded in order
to right a wrong, or else the wrong cannot be righted”. These
brilliant concepts of Chairman Mao’s have become sharp weapons that
always encourage revolutionary people to dare to struggle and dare to
win.
In this article Chairman Mao cited fourteen great achievements of the
peasant movement in refuting the slanders against it by the
reactionaries and opportunists, and warmly praised the poor peasants
as “vanguards of the revolution” and described the peasant
movement as “fine”. Many of the fourteen great achievements
countered the doctrines of Confucius and Mencius. Powerful proof of
this is that the peasants tossed aside the Confucian-Mercian concepts
of the “three cardinal guides and five constant virtues”,
overthrowing the political power of the landlords, the clan authority
of the ancestral temples and clan elders, the religious authority of
the town and village gods, and the masculine authority of
husbands.“These four authorities - political, clan, religious and
masculine-are the embodiment of the whole feudal-patriarchal system
and ideology, and are the four thick ropes binding the Chinese
people, particularly the peasants”. Here, Chairman Mao very clearly
made the point that the struggle against Confucius was an important
part of the revolutionary struggle. Subsequent struggles in China’s
revolution proved to the hilt that every move forward by the
revolution and by the people demanded struggle against the doctrines
of Confucius and Mencius and other ideology of the reactionary,
moribund classes. The use of Marxism- Leninism to criticize the
doctrines of Confucius and Mencius has been a militant and protracted
task on the political and ideological front in the Chinese
revolution.
After Chen Tu-hsiu’s right capitulationist line was rectified,
three “left” opportunist lines appeared in our Party and that of
Wang Ming dominated for the longest time and most damaged the Party.
Like Chen Tu-hsiu, the “left” opportunists were all worshippers
of Confucius. They enshrined the idealism and metaphysics of the
doctrines of Confucius and Mencius and kowtowed to. Then they opposed
integrating the universal truth of Marxism-Leninism with the practice
of the Chinese revolution, and vilified and opposed Marxism-Leninism
by spreading mystical notions of “prophecy” such as disciples of
Confucius and Mencius advocated. Their various lines of “all
struggle and no alliance” were based on subjective idealism.
In order to eliminate these opportunist lines ideologically, Chairman
Mao wrote “Oppose Book Worship”, “On practice”, “On
contradiction” and other brilliant works, in which he summed up the
historical experience of the struggles against “left” and right
opportunist lines, and criticized the idealist and metaphysical
doctrines of Confucius and Mencius which they advocated, thereby
inheriting, defending and developing Marxist dialectical and
historical materialism.
Chairman Mao points out in “Oppose Book Worship”. “When we say
Marxism is correct, it is certainly not because Marx was a ‘Prophet’
but because his theory has been proved correct in our practice and in
our struggle. We need Marxism in our struggle. In our acceptance of
his theory no such formalistic or mystical notion as that of
‘prophecy’ ever enters our minds”. Confucius proclaimed himself
‘the prophet’. And his worshippers down through the ages praised
Confucius and his like as ‘Prophet’s. Their purpose was to use a
priori idealism to oppose the revolutionary practice of the masses
and oppose progressive ideas that accorded with social development.
Chairman Mao sharply criticized the thoroughly erroneous idealist
viewpoint of the “left” opportunists who regarded Marxism as
‘prophecy’, and he pointed out that revolutionary theory comes
from revolutionary practice and must be tested by it, that the
mystical notion of ‘prophecy’ is utterly incompatible with
Marxism. The subtitle of “On practice” is ‘on the relation
between knowledge and practice, between knowing and doing”. This
shows clearly that the spearhead of criticism is directed at the a
priori idealist notion held by Wang Ming and Confucius, a notion that
is contemptuous of practice and regards man’s knowledge and ability
as innate.
In a profound explanation of the dialectical materialist theory of
knowledge, as embodied in the formula “practice - theory-practice”,
Chairman Mao states explicitly: “Our conclusion is the concrete,
historical unity of the subjective and the objective, of theory and
practice, of knowing and doing, and we are opposed to all erroneous
ideologies, whether ‘left’ or right, which depart from concrete
history”.
Chairman Mao in “On contra-diction” directly criticizes Wang
Ming’s metaphysics, and exposes the reactionary nature of the
metaphysical concept “heaven changeth not, likewise the Tao
changeth not” advocated by Tung Chung-shu, chieftain of the
worshippers of Confucius of the western Han dynasty (206 B.C.-24
A.D). This reactionary philosophy attempted to prove that the social
system of oppression and exploitation dates from hoary antiquity and
would remain for ever unchanged. Aimed at countering social change
and people’s revolution, this type of metaphysical notion served
the decadent feudal ruling classes for a long time. The opportunists
picked up this worn-out ideological weapon of the doctrines of
Confucius and Mencius because they intended to maintain the
Kuomintang’s reactionary rule, sabotage the people’s revolution
and block historical advance.
During the war of resistance against Japan, Wang Ming jumped from the
ultra-left to the extreme right advocating “everything through the
united front” and “everything must be submitted to the united
front” In essence, Wang Ming returned to Chen Tu-hsiu’s right
opportunist line of “all alliance and no struggle” and handed
leadership of the anti-Japanese war over to the Kuomintang.
In advocating this erroneous line, Wang Ming fell back on the
doctrines of Confucius and Mencius. He claimed that antagonistic
classes, parties and armies should “hold each other in esteem”,
“respect and love each other” and “show courtesy and deference
to each other” under the banner of “benevolence and love”. In
fact, he was calling on the Chinese Communist Party and the Chinese
people to cast themselves at the feet of Chaingkai-shek, giving him a
free hand to suck the life-blood of the people and sell out China by
surrendering.
Wang Ming’s right opportunist line did serious damage to the
interests of the Communist Party and people of China. Chairman Mao
wrote “On New Democracy”, “The Orientation of the Youth
movement”, “Introducing the Communist”, “Oppose stereotyped
Party Writing” and “Talks at the Yenan Forum on Literature and
Art” to sum up the experience of the struggles between the two
lines from the time of the May 4 movement and pointed out that
opposition to stereotype party writing was a continuation of
opposition to the old sort of stereotype writing.
Chairman Mao personally led the Yenan movement to rectify the style
of work, thus further correcting Wang Ming’s line ideologically and
politically and criticizing the doctrines of Confucius and Mencius.
The sinister line runs through the world outlook of all reactionary
exploiting classes and opportunists is the theory of “human nature”
of the exploiting classes. These people always use this kind of
hypocrisy to deceive the people, blur the differences between
classes, benumb revolutionary will and sabotage revolutionary
struggles.
Wang Ming was such a person. He tried to cover up the essence of his
capitulationist line with the banner of “benevolence and love”.
In “Talks at the Yenan forum on literature and art”, Chairman Mao
makes the profound point: “As for the so-called love of humanity,
there has been no such all-inclusive love since humanity was divided
into classes. All the ruling classes of the past were fond of
advocating it, and so were many so-called sages and wise men, but
nobody has ever really practiced it, because it is impossible in
class society.”
The main representative of the “sages and wise men” whom
Chairman Mao is criticizing in this work is Confucius who chanted
“the benevolent man loves others”. This is a powerful exposure of
the ideological essence of Wang Ming’s capitulationist line and a
sharp criticism of the reactionary and hypocritical features of the
doctrines of Confucius and Mencius.
Exposing the class nature of the worship of Confucius by the
reactionaries at home and abroad and the ringleaders of opportunist
lines, Chairman Mao makes the point in his work “On New Democracy”
: “China also has a semi-feudal culture which reflects her
semi-feudal politics and economy, and whose exponents include all
those who advocate the worship of Confucius, the study of the
Confucian canon, the old ethical code and the old ideas in opposition
to the new culture and new ideas. Imperialist culture and semi-feudal
culture are devoted brothers and have formed a reactionary cultural
alliance against China’s new culture.
This kind of reactionary culture serves the imperialists and the
feudal class and must be swept away.” Imperialism and the feudal
landlord class, which colluded politically for their common,
reactionary goal of exploiting and oppressing the Chinese people,
inevitably formed a reactionary alliance in the field of culture. The
doctrines of Confucius and Mencius, as the restorationist and
retrogressive ideology of the declining slave-owner class, have
always in Chinese history attracted reactionary and decadent class
forces.
After the imperialists invaded China, these doctrines served the
imperialist forces of aggression and were a spiritual bulwark against
the people and the revolution. The traitors in modern and
contemporary Chinese history, ranging from Tseng Kuo-fan and Li
Hung-chang to Chiang Kai-shek and Wang Ching-wei, without exception,
played the dual tactics of lauding Confucius and spreading his canons
as well as worshipping everything foreign and betraying the nation.
Similarly, the ringleaders of the opportunist lines, as agents of
the landlord and capitalist classes within the Party, without
exception lauded Confucius and worshipped everything foreign. Some of
them became enemy collaborators and traitors.
In the period of the war of liberation, China was confronted with a
decisive battle between two futures and destinies. The Kuomintang
reactionaries and their hack writers once again unfurled the sinister
Confucian ensign in an effort to maintain their bloody rule. The
renegade, hidden traitor and scab Liu Shao-chi became their agent in
our Party. Liu Shao-chi had long been a fanatic worshipper of
Confucius.
As early as 1925, he was arrested by the reactionaries and turned
traitor. Upon release from enemy prison, he brought home a volume of
“the four books”, a present given by a reactionary warlord, and
sneaked back into the revolutionary ranks. He first put out in 1939
his sinister book on “Self-cultivation” which lauded the
doctrines of Confucius and Mencius. In the period of the liberation
war, he dished up the reactionary programme of a “new stage of
peace and democracy” to oppose the People’s Liberation War, and
followed this up by preaching that “it is necessary to show
forbearance like Confucius” in an attempt to prevent our Party from
leading the people in winning nation-wide victory. Whether to carry
the revolution through to the end or abandon it halfway was a
cardinal issue concerning China’s future and destiny.
Chairman Mao wrote the article “Carry the revolution through to the
end” severely criticizing the so- called forbearance of Confucius
and Mencius. He made the penetrating point : “the Chinese people
will never take pity on snake-like scoundrels, and they honestly
believe that no one is their true friend who guilefully says that
pity should be shown these scoundrels and says that anything else
would be out of keeping with China’s traditions, fall short of
greatness, etc.,” “If the revolution is to be carried through to
the end, we must use the revolutionary method to wipe out all the
forces of reaction resolutely, thoroughly, wholly and completely.”
Under the guidance of Chairman Mao’s revolutionary line, the
Chinese people swept aside all obstacles with a mighty force. The
hour had come for the downfall of the Chiang family dynasty and the
birth of a new China of the dictatorship of the proletariat.
At this key juncture of the revolution, the reactionary forces not
reconciled to defeat, continued their desperate struggle. They came
out with what Confucius and Mencius called “benevolence,
righteousness and morality” in viciously attacking the
revolutionary political power as “not benevolent”.
Chairman Mao wrote “On the People’s Democratic Dictatorship”
and other articles to give incisive criticism of the preachings of
Confucius and Mencius on “rule by benevolence”, and sharply,
refuted the attacks mounted by the reactionaries and Liu Shao-chi and
company on the dictatorship of the proletariat.
Giving tit for tat. Chairman Mao wrote “you are not benevolent
exclamation’ quite so. We definitely do not apply a policy of
benevolence to the reactionary classes”. The state apparatus has
always been an instrument of violence for class oppression; it is
never “benevolent”. Supra-classes “rule by benevolence”
simply does not exist.
There is only dictatorship by which one class oppresses another. “All
the experience the Chinese people have accumulated through several
decades teaches us to enforce the People’s Democratic
Dictatorship”. If the revolutionary people do not master this
method of ruling over the Counter-revolutionary classes, they will
not be able to maintain their state power, domestic and foreign
reaction will overthrow that power and restore its own rule over
China, and disaster will befall the revolutionary people”.
Chairman Mao profoundly expounded the essence of the Marxist theory
of the state, and formulated the great programme for the
establishment and consolidation of the dictatorship of the
proletariat in China.
The criticism of the “rule by benevolence” is at the same time a
declaration of the bankruptcy of the plots of the domestic and
foreign reactionaries and the opportunists within the Party to
obstruct the advance of the Chinese revolution by using the doctrines
of Confucius and Mencius.
Period of Socialist Revolution
With the founding of the People’s Republic, of China our country
entered the period of socialist revolution and the contradiction
between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie became the principal one
at time. There were repeated and vigorous struggles by Chairman Mao’s
proletarian revolutionary line against the revisionist lines of Liu
Shao-chi and Lin piao and others.
The focus was on whether to take the socialist rood or the capitalist
road that is, on whether to consolidate the dictatorship of the
proletariat and propel the revolution forward or restore capitalism
and turn history backward. The essence of the doctrines of Confucius
and Mencius was restoration and retrogression and under the
conditions of socialism, the opportunist ring leaders are without
exception wadded to these doctrines so as to restore capitalism, and
the specter of the reactionary doctrines of Confucius and Mencius in
turn took possession of the counter-revolutionary revisionists.
Hence, the struggles between the two classes and the two lines in
this period are closely connected with the struggle between opposing
and worshipping Confucius.
A faithful lackey of the landlord and capitalist classes, Liu
Shao-chi had at an early date begun his activities against socialist
revolution in new China. By blatantly preaching “exploitation has
its merits” and clamouring for “consolidating the new democratic
order” and “ensuring the protection of private property”, he
wanted in fact to give up socialism for capitalism.
In conformity with this reactionary political line, Liu Shao-chi and
his agents in art and literature brought out the reactionary film
“the life of Wu sun” which encouraged the worship of Confucius
and opposed the people’s revolution. Wu Hsun, who is eulogized in
the film, was a diehard defender of feudalism and an utterly
despicable worshipper of Confucius.In lauding Wu Hsun, Lu Shao-chi
and company were praising Confucius and preaching the doctrines of
Confucius and Mencius.
Chairman Mao personally led the criticism of “the life of Wu Hsun”
as a struggle in ideological and political line and penetratingly
exposed the ugly features of Liu Shao-chi and other worshippers of
Confucius. Chairman Mao pointed out: “In the view of many writers,
history has developed not by the replacement of the old by the new,
but by the exertion of every effort to preserve the old from
extinction, not by class struggle to overthrow the reactionary feudal
rulers who had to be overthrown, but by the negation of the class
struggle of the oppressed and their submission to these rulers, in
the manner of Wu Hsun.” Chairman Mao’s statement dealt a mortal
blow to the revisionists and all worshippers of Confucius, and hit
hard at the doctrines of Confucius and Mencius.
A high tide of socialist transformation in China began in the second
half of 1955. Several hundred million peasants joyously took the
broad road of co-operation. Liu Shao-chi and company came out again
with the threadbare doctrine of the mean to slander the co-operative
movement as “too fast” and “too sweeping”, and slashed back
the co-operatives right and left.
Chairman Mao at once published “On the Question of Agricultural
Co-operation” and other articles, and edited the book “The
Socialist Upsurge in China’s Countryside” to counter attack their
disruptive activities.
In an introductory note to one article in the book, Chairman Mao
criticized Liu Shao-chi for having gone on a pilgrimage to Chufu to
worship Confucius and restore the ancients.
Chairman Mao noted: “a socialist co-operative has been started by
the people living in the birth place of Confucius. The people there
remained impoverished for two thousand years or more, but their
economic and cultural life began to change in three years of
co-operation. This demonstrates that our socialism today is without
precedent.
Socialism is infinitely superior to the Confucian ‘classics’. To
those who are interested in visiting the temple of Confucius and the
groves there, my advice is that they might do well to take a look at
this co- operative on their way.” This profound class analysis
makes the clear point that the doctrines of Confucius and Mencius are
worthless to the working people and that only socialism can save
China and benefit the people. Under the leadership of the party, the
Chinese people achieved socialist transformation of the ownership of
the means of production in a fairly short time.
Under the guidance of the Party’s general line of “going all out,
aiming high and achieving greater, faster, better and more economical
results in building socialism” the Chinese people showed daring in
thinking, dared to speak out and act and launched the great leap
forward in 1958.
When the Chinese people made their first tractor by relying on their
own resources, Chairman Mao warm-heartedly wrote the inscription:
“the lowly are most intelligent; the elite are most ignorant.”
This scientific thesis criticized the reactionary view of history
which the disciples of Confucius and Mencius had insisted upon for
2,000 years, namely, “the highest are the wise and the lowest are
the stupid,” and greatly inspired the several hundred million
revolutionary people throughout the country.
China’s rapid advances in socialist revolution and construction
struck fear and hatred in the hearts of the bourgeoisie and its
agents in the Party – Liu Shao-chi, Lin Piao, PengTeh-huai and
their like.
At the eighth plenary session of the eighth central committee of the
Party in 1959, PengTeh-huai came out and viciously attacked: the
Party’s general line, opposed the great leap forward and the
people’s commune as well as the revolutionary mass movement. His
aim was to usurp Party leadership, seize power and subvert the
dictatorship of the proletariat.
Chairman Mao led the whole Party in smashing Pang Teh-huai’s right
opportunist line in good time and, in the coarse of the struggle,
exposed PengTeh-huai’s reactionary world out look to its very root.
Peng The-huai had never been a Marxist.
In the war of resistance against Japanese aggression, he preached
“liberty, equality, fraternity” and the doctrines of Confucius
and Mencius such as “do not do unto others what you do not want
others to do unto you” Chairman Mao pinpointed these as anti-
Marxist bourgeois views intended to hoodwink the people. Preaching
“do not do unto others what you do not want others to do unto you”
before the victory of the revolution was be practice class
conciliation and oppose the overthrow of the enemy by war and
political means. It meant to liquidate the revolution.
Preaching “do not do unto others what you do not want others to do
unto you” after the victory of the revolution meant to make bitter
complaints on behalf of the over thrown landlords, rich peasants,
counter revolutionaries, bad elements and rightists, liquidate the
dictatorship of the proletariat and restore capitalism. Herein was
the essence of PengTeh-huai’s right opportunism.
Chairman Mao’s criticism of this reactionary view is very important
to us in upholding the Marxist theory of classes and classes struggle
and the dictatorship of the proletariat As long as classes and class
struggle still exist, it can only be “do unto others what you do
not want others to do unto you” and firmly grasp the dictatorship
of the proletariat, resolutely attack the enemy and protect the
interests of the proletariat and the people.
After PengTeh-huai’s right opportunist line was smashed, Liu
Shao-chi joined in the anti-China, anti- Communist and
counter-revolutionary trend crated by imperialists, revisionists and
reactionaries abroad, and stirred up an evil storm for
counter-revolutionary restoration. He had his sinister book on “self-
cultivation” issued for the third time in 1962.
Imbued with the poison of the doctrines of Confucius and Mencius,
the book made no reference whatever to the dictatorship of the
proletariat and the struggle between bourgeois restoration and
proletarian counter -restoration. It advertised “self-cultivation”
behind closed doors, isolated from the three great revolutionary
movements of class struggle, the struggle for production and
scientific experiment, and called on communists to learn from
Confucius and Mencius such doctrines as “loyalty and forbearance”
“return good for evil” “make concessions to achieve one’s
purpose” and “swallow humiliation and bear a heavy load.”
Furthermore, Liu Shao - chi supported the holding of a meeting to
eulogize Confucius. What he wanted was to achieve “peaceful
evolution” through the doctrines of Confucius and Mencius, push his
counter-revolutionary revisionist line, subvert the dictatorship of
the proletariat and restore capitalism.
Countering the restorationist conspiracy of Liu Shao-chi and
company, Chairman Mao at the tenth plenary session of the Party’s
eighth central committee issued the great call “never forget
classes and class struggle” and set forth more comprehensively the
Party’s basic line for the whole historical period of socialism.
In 1963, Chairman Mao wrote his well-known treatise “Where Do
Correct Ideas come from?”. It criticized the idealist theory of
knowledge based on the doctrines of Confucius and Mencius which Liu
Shao-chi peddled, and repudiated his preaching of “self-cultivation”
directed against the proletarian revolution and the dictatorship of
the proletariat.
The Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution initiated and led by
Chairman Mao is an overall settling of accounts with Liu Shao-chi’s
counter-revolutionary revisionist line as well as a profound movement
to criticize Confucius. In the programmatic document of the great
proletarian cultural revolution -the circular of the central
committee of the Chinese Communist Party (May 16, 1966) – Chairman
Mao wrote a paragraph to refute the absurdity preached by Liu
Shao-chi and company that “everyone is equal before the truth”
and criticize the doctrines of Confucius and Mencius on the so-called
relation- ship of “benevolence, righteous- ness and morality”.
Chairman Mao pointed out very clearly: “Those representatives of
the bourgeoisie who have sneaked into the party, the government, the
army and various spheres of culture are a bunch of counter-
revolutionary revisionists” : “they are faithful lackeys of the
bourgeoisie and imperialists, they cling to the bourgeois ideology of
oppression and exploitation of the proletariat and to the capitalist
system, and they oppose Marxist-Leninist ideology and the socialist
system.
They are a bunch of counter revolutionaries opposing the Communist
Party and the people. Their struggle against us is one of life and
death, and there is no question of equality. Therefore, our struggle
against them, too, can be nothing but a life-and-death struggle, and
our relationship with them can in no way be one of equality. On the
contrary, it is a relationship in which one class oppresses another,
that is, the dictatorship of the proletariat over the bourgeoisie.
There can be no other type of relationship, such as a so-called,
relationship of equality or of peaceful coexistence between
exploiting and exploited classes, or of kindness or magnanimity.”
This indicated the correct orientation for this great revolution,
i.e., the criticism of revisionism, of the doctrines of Confucius and
Mencius and of the ideology of all reactionary, moribund classes. It
expounded the nature of this great revolution, namely, a great
political revolution for consolidating the dictatorship of the
proletariat end preventing a capitalist restoration.
After smashing the bourgeois headquarters which had Liu Shao-chi as
its ringleader, our Party followed up by smashing the bourgeois
headquarters of which Lin Piao was the ringleader. Lin Piao was an
out-and-out disciple of Confucius. He made a hodge-podge of the
doctrines of Confucius and Mencius, which were meant to maintain and
restore slavery, and revisionist absurdities to form the ideological
basis for his counter-revolutionary revisionist line. He took over
the Confucian programme to restore slavery of “restraining oneself
and returning to the rites” as the most important of all things. To
realize his dream of “returning to the rites”, namely, restoring
capitalism and subverting the dictatorship of the proletariat, he
rushed out a political programme that insisted on having a chairman
of the state and a theoretical programme based on the idealist
“theory of innate genius.”
Seeing through the plot of Lin Piao and his cohorts to usurp power
and restore capitalism, Chairman Mao gave instructions on several
occasions on not having a Chairman of the state. Countering the anti
- Party theoretical programme preached by Lin Piao and chen Po-ta,
Chairman Mao in particular criticized the “theory of innate genius”
and made the penetrating point : on the questions of whether history
is made by heroes or slaves, whether knowledge (talent also belongs
to this category) is inborn or acquired, whether idealist a briorism
or the materialist theory of reflection should be applied, we can
take only the Marxist-Leninist stand and must not associate ourselves
with Chen Po- ta’srumours and sophistry.
Chairman Mao’s penetrating criticism of a priori idealism unmasked
the renegade and traitor Lin Piao, who proclaimed himself a “genius”
“endowed by heaven”, “the noblest of men”, a “superman”
and “heavenly horse”, as no more than a dolt acting against the
trend of history.
On the one hand, Lin Piao invoked the dead soul of Confucius and
praised the doctrines of Confucius and Mencius to the skies; on the
other hand, he wildly slandered Chin Shin huang (first emperor of the
Chin dynasty, 221B.C.-207 BC.) as “cruel and tyrannical” and
vilified the legalist school as the “school of punishment”. This
was his way to oppose the dictatorship of the proletariat.
Chairman Mao had earlier sharply criticized this reactionary view of
Lin Piao’s. At the second meeting of the Party’s 8th national
congress in 1958, when Lin Piao maliciously attacked Chin Shin huang
for “burning books and burying Confucian scholars alive”,
Chairman Mao refuted him then and there. Chairman Mao fully approved
Chin Shin huang’s revolutionary action in resolutely suppressing
reactionary Confucian scholars, expounded the progressive role of
revolutionary violence and exposed the reactionary essence of Lin
Piao’s attacks on Chin Shin huang as attacks on revolutionary
violence and the dictatorship of the proletariat.
Important Historical Experience
It is not fortuitous that all the ringleaders of past opportunists
line in China revered Confucius and lauded the doctrines of Confucius
and Mencius. These persons were representatives of the exploiting
classes who had sneaked into the Communist Party. The decadent and
moribund nature of exploiting classes leads to inevitable opposition
to revolution and progress and advocacy of restoration and
retrogression. Confucius was their venerable master who beat the
drums for restoration and retrogression. The Confucian ideology,
which was inherited and developed by reactionaries of subsequent
generations, became a perfect guideline to defend reactionary rule.
It suits the political needs of all decadent and moribund
reactionaries. Therefore, it is naturally used by the ring leaders of
opportunist lines in the Party as an ideological weapon to oppose the
proletarian revolution and the dictatorship of the proletariat.
Confucius had a reactionary political line for the restoration of the
slave-owning system as well as a corresponding reactionary
ideological line that is idealism and metaphysics. In order to
justify the right of the reactionary slave-owning class to oppress
and exploit the slaves and to defend the outrages of the decadent
slave-owning aristocrats, Confucius spread the idealist view of a
“mandate from heaven” and the priori concept that some are “born
with knowledge”.
Opportunist lines in the party “are all characterized by the breach
between the subjective and the objective by the separation of
knowledge from practice”. They all follow the reactionary
ideological line of “from subjective to objective”, and one of
the sources of this reactionary ideological line is the a priori
idealism of Confucius.
Since the reactionary political line and ideological line of
Confucius were advocated and enforced by all reactionary ruling
classes, the reactionary ideological system of Confucius became the
dominant ideology of declining feudal and semi-feudal, semi-colonial
society in China.
Chairman Mao says: “In those days, the ruling classes indoctrinated
students with Confucian teachings and compelled the people; to
venerate all the trapping of Confucianism as religious dogma.” He
goes on to point out that for the people of the whole country to be
free from the shackles of the doctrines of Confucius and Mencius
would need “a very great effort – a huge job work on the road of
revolutionary remoulding”.
The struggles of the past decades prove the complete correctness of
this thesis of Chairman Mao’s. The doctrines of Confucius and
Mencius still influence various spheres of society. Therefore, those
who carry out opportunist lines in China as a matter of course use
the doctrines of Confucius and Mencius and their traditional
influence to paddle their wares. This is the historical reason why
the ring leaders of all opportunist lines in China have venerated
Confucius.
Pinpointing this specific feature of the opportunist lines within the
Chinese Communist Party by tracing back their class and ideological
roots, Chairman Mao always combines criticism of opportunist lines
with criticism of the doctrines of Confucius and Mencius, and adheres
to Marxism, to the proletarian revolution and the dictatorship of the
proletariat. This is an important historical experience of our Party
in waging two-line struggles.
During the period of the new democratic revolution, the fundamental
task of the Communist Party and the revolutionary people of China was
the seizure of state power. The ring leaders of opportunist lines
preached the doctrines of Confucius and Mencius precisely to maintain
the reactionary rule of imperialism, feudalism and
bureaucratic-capitalism in China, therefore, the struggle between the
two lines and the struggle between opposing and worshipping Confucius
in that period centred mainly on the fundamental question of whether
or not to make revolution and carry it through to the end, how to
arrive at a correct under-standing of the law of the new democratic
revolution with the proletarian seizure of state power, the struggle
between the two lines and the struggle between opposing and
worshipping Confucius focused on the fundamental question of whether
or not to consolidate the dictatorship of the proletariat and
continue the revolution under this dictatorship, and whether to take
the socialist or the capitalist road.
In the two-line struggles in various historical periods, through
criticism of Confucius and by tracing the relation between the
opportunist lines and the doctrines of Confucius and Mencius,
Chairman Mao penetratingly exposed their common reactionary essence.
With the socialist revolution going over deeper, the struggle to
criticize revisionism and the doctrines of Confucius and Mencius is
bound to reach in all fields and the various spheres of ideology and
culture, and touch people’s world outlook.
Criticism such as this will steadily eliminate the traditional
influence of the doctrines of Confucius and Mencius and all other
ideologies of declining reactionary classes. This is of great
importance to opposing and preventing revisionism, consolidating the
dictatorship of the proletariat and preventing the restoration of
capitalism.
The struggle to criticize Lin Piao and Confucius, which is at present
developing vigorously all over China, is a political and ideological
struggle in the superstructure through which Marxism triumphs over
revisionism and the proletariat over the bourgeoisie.
In order to deepen the struggle and win new victories, we must
conscientiously study the historical experience of Chairman Mao’s
leading the entire Party in penetratingly criticizing Confucius in
the various struggles between the two lines, study works by Marx,
Engels, Lenin and Stalin and Chairman Mao’s works, and study
Chairman Mao’s instructions and the documents of the Party Central
Committee on the criticism of Lin Piao and Confucius master our
ideological weapon. We must, at the same time, apply the Marxist
viewpoint in studying and summing up the history of the two-line
struggle between the Confucian and legalist schools and the history
of class struggle as a whole, and draw upon the historical experience
of class struggle in promoting the growth of the struggle to
criticize Lin Piao and Confucius in a deep-going, popular and
sustained way.
************************************************************************************************************************************************************
