p Having taken the attitude of subjectivism and refusing to consider the real, objective processes of social development, Mao and his followers pushed the country into serious economic difficulties which had a grave effect on the life of hundreds of millions of people. By the end of 1960, Mao’s idea of rapidly building communism in China was already a shambles. Industrial output had been halved and agriculture was in decline. The economic difficulties were compounded by heavy natural calamities which hit the country in 1959 and 1960. Millions of people died in the ensuing famine. The economic difficulties arising from the experiments in the period of the “Great Leap Forward" reduced living standards among almost every section of the Chinese population, and this, for its part, naturally caused extensive and strong discontent throughout the country over the CPC’s domestic policy, evidence of which came from the numerous disorders in many parts of China from 1958 to 1960.  [184•1 

p However, the fatal consequences of the Left-adventurist line for China did not induce Mao and his followers to take the path followed by other socialist countries. What is more, Mao’s followers gradually lost faith in the possibility of building socialism in China within the foreseeable future. In 1958, during the “Great Leap Forward”, the Chinese press asserted that for the Chinese people communism was a matter of the immediate future, whereas following the failure of the “Great Leap Forward" socialist construction was regarded as a remote and totally dim prospect. An editorial article carried by Jenmin jihpao and Hungchih on June 14, 1964, said: “It is impossible to achieve the final triumph of socialism within the lifetime of one or two generations. It can be fully achieved in five-ten generations or even after a much longer period of time."  [185•1  In accordance with this theoretical conclusion, the Maoists took the line of curtailing socialist construction in the country in the early 1960s.

p Simultaneously, they began artificially to put heat into the political situation in the country. The line Mao has been conducting since 1960-1961 is aimed not at strengthening and developing in Chinese society relations of co-operation, and of alliance between the various labouring classes and groups of Chinese society, not at completing the class struggle against the remnants of the national bourgeoisie and other exploiting classes. It is geared to diametrically opposite aims: artificial fanning of social contradictions, the ranging and incitement of classes and social groups against each other: peasants against workers, workers and peasants against the intelligentsia, students and schoolchildren against Party and government cadres, etc.

p Mao’s theoretical propositions on class relations in China have further evolved. Whereas in 1958 and 1959 his accent was on the possibility of rapidly overcoming all the contradictions and antagonisms between classes and even on the possibility of their peaceful resolution, the accent was now switched to an apology of the class struggle. In their domestic policy, the Maoists laid their main stress not on the development of production or improvement of the new relations of production, not on raising the people’s living standards, but on ferreting out more and more class enemies. The Chinese press broadly circulated this postulate formulated by Mao: “The class struggle, the production struggle and scientific experimentation are the three great revolutionary movements in the construction of a socialist power.” Let us note that the class struggle is ranked first and is seen as a “lever of these three great revolutionary movements”. “The class struggle is the substance of all questions.” “From start to finish, the epoch of socialism is an epoch of class struggle."  [186•1 

p The idea that the class struggle is to continue until communist society has been built was first officially formulated in a communique issued by the 10th Plenary Meeting of the CPC Central Committee in September 1962, which said: “The 10th Plenary Meeting of the 8th Central Committee declares that throughout the whole historical period of the proletarian revolution and the proletarian dictatorship, throughout the whole historical period of transition from capitalism to communism (this period covers decades and an even longer period of time) a class struggle takes place between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie, a struggle between the socialist and the capitalist ways."  [186•2  The 10th Plenary Meeting of the CPC Central Committee proclaimed a line of sharpening the class struggle within the country, and one journal explained this as follows: “During the period of socialism, classes and the class struggle not only continue to exist but the difficulties and complexities are far greater than those of earlier periods, and do not bear comparison with any other revolutionary period."  [186•3 

p In a speech at this plenary meeting, Mao issued a call on the whole Party and the whole people “never to forget about classes and the class struggle."  [187•1  Later he said: “Throughout the whole stage of socialism, the class struggle between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie in the political, economic, ideological and cultural-educational spheres cannot cease. This is a long and intricate struggle; it runs a zigzag path and is repeated again and again. Like the wave, this struggle rises and falls; now it diminishes somewhat, now it is sharply aggravated. This struggle determines the future of socialism. On this protracted struggle depends the way socialist society takes: towards communism or towards a restoration of capitalism."  [187•2 

p Let us stress that this presentation of the class struggle in the form of a wave that rises and falls, regardless of the concrete political, economic and social changes in a society building socialism smacks of anarchism and demagogy, for it reduces the class struggle to the level of a tantrum thrown by the elemental forces of nature, while the possibility of making conscious use of the laws of social development discovered by Marx and Lenin is rejected. The Communist Parties, having mastered these laws, are in a position to say when the class struggle will become sharper and when it will subside.

p It was declared at the 9th Congress of the CPC that Mao’s thesis concerning the existence of the class struggle within the socialist society enriched Marxism and was a contribution to Marxist theory. The report said: “Chairman Mao Tsetung especially emphasised that . . . ’the class struggle between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie, the class struggle between the various political forces, the class struggle between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie in the sphere of ideology remains protracted, develops in zigzags and now and again even assumes a highly bitter character’. Consequently, it was Chairman Mao Tse-tung who for the first time in the theory and practice of the international revolutionary movement gave a clear-cut statement of the doctrine that following the completion in the main of the socialist 188 transformation of the property in the means of production classes and the class struggle still exist, and that the proletariat must continue to carry on the revolution.”

p The assertion about Mao’s “development” of the theory of class struggle as applied to socialist society is at variance with the generally known historical facts. No Marxist has ever said that the class struggle disappears of itself once the expropriators are expropriated. For a long time, the overthrown exploiting classes continue to have a sense of rabid hatred for the new social system and jump at any opportunity to restore their old domination. This was repeatedly pointed out by Lenin, who required that the Communists should be vigilant in face of the machinations by the class enemy. The experience of socialist construction in the Soviet Union and the other socialist countries, including China herself, has borne out the truth of what Lenin said. This was most visually demonstrated by such recent events as the counter-revolutionary putsch in Hungary in 1956 and the counter-revolutionary action in Czechoslovakia in 1968. It was said at the International Meeting of Communist and Workers’ Parties in 1969 that “the enemies of socialism are keeping up their attempts to undermine the foundations of the socialist state power, thwart the socialist transformation of society and restore their own rule".  [188•1 

p Mao has never taken the historical approach to the analysis of social phenomena. He has refused to make any distinction between the initial stage of socialist construction and the stage of mature and developed socialism, between the laws of the period of transition from capitalism to socialism and the laws of socialist society. He has identified the class contradictions between antagonistic classes and class contradictions and relations between friendly nonantagonistic classes in socialist society. That is why he has essentially proposed similar methods for resolving these contradictions. Finally, Mao has refused to consider the fact that in the course of socialist construction the bitterness of the class struggle is moderated, and that gradually the edge of the class struggle is increasingly directed outwardly, because the remnants of the exploiting classes are left with 189 less and less opportunities for restoring their erstwhile domination without direct armed support on the part of imperialism.

p According to Mao, it turns out that the economic domination, political rule and ideological pressure of the bourgeoisie remain not only in the period of transition from capitalism to socialism but also in full-scale socialist society. This question then suggests itself: what kind of full-fledged and mature socialist society is that?

p Mao says that the elimination of the bourgeoisie, the landowners and other exploiters, as social classes, depends only on the overcoming of the bourgeois-feudal ideology among the citizens of the socialist society. The Maoists argue roughly on these lines: since bourgeois ideology exists, the bourgeoisie exists as well, and consequently there is need for the class struggle.

p Here are some extracts from the Chinese press. “Some people believe that once the socialist transformations are in the main completed, the capitalist economy, as the basis of the bourgeoisie, is in the main already eliminated, the bourgeoisie no longer holds the means of production and consequently already ceases to exist.” “By destroying the reactionary state machine men can eliminate it, but reactionary political views and ideology cannot be destroyed, these can be eliminated only as a result of re-education over a protracted period of time. That is why, although the crucial thing in eliminating a class is to deprive that class of its economic basis and the main conditions for its economic existence, this does not in any sense mean its immediate destruction. So long as the members of this class have not been re-educated, so long as the ideological and political influence of this class remains, it cannot be said to have been finally eliminated."  [189•1  Here is another extract: “The solution of the question of property in the means of production is undoubtedly the first step which is of decisive importance in the elimination of classes, but it would be wrong to reduce the task of eliminating classes to this proposition alone. It would be wrong to assume that once the question of property is settled, there follows an instant disappearance of classes and the historical task of eliminating classes is fulfilled. Even after the exploiting classes have 190 been overthrown in economic terms they continue to exist as classes. Their political views, ideology, world outlook and all kinds of activity exist and operate as the marks of their class. This is an important objective source for the protracted existence of classes, class contradictions and the class struggle in the transition period."  [190•1  And again: “It is inconceivable that once the means of production are transferred, the exploiting classes are at once transformed into working people, and that in the sphere of ideology bourgeois world outlooks are likewise instantly transformed into proletarian outlooks. Following the establishment of the socialist system of property the struggle between the two ways continues to exist, the class struggle continues to be the main motive force behind the development of production."  [190•2 

p These texts contain some correct propositions, borrowed from Marxist theory, and there is nothing wrong with them. What we have in mind is, for instance, that “by destroying the reactionary state machine men can eliminate it, but reactionary political views and ideology cannot be destroyed, these can be eliminated only as a result of re-education over a protracted period of time”. And again: “It is inconceivable that once the means of production are transferred, the exploiting classes are at once transformed into working people, and that in the sphere of ideology bourgeois world outlooks are likewise instantly transformed into proletarian outlooks”.

p But these correct Marxist propositions are being used to substantiate an incorrect, anti-Marxist thesis about ideological re-education, instead of the expropriation of the property of the exploiting classes being the crucial condition for their elimination. The fact that a capitalist has been deprived of his private property, that he no longer receives surplus value, that he is made by his labour to earn the means of subsistence—all that turns out to be less than the basic condition for eliminating the capitalists as representatives of the exploiting classes. In other words, in defining the social structure and class relations in Chinese society, Mao and his followers do not start from objective criteria but mainly from subjective criteria relating to the sphere of ideology and politics.

p Real revolutionaries have never discounted subjective criteria in analysing the class structure of socialist society, especially in the initial period of its construction. They have been fully aware that the expropriation of the expropriators, while signifying their elimination in social and class terms, and marking an end of their economic domination and political power, does not at all signify the total disappearance of bourgeois ideology. The proposition that social consciousness tends to lag behind social being is a Marxist axiom. That is why the revolutionary parties directing socialist construction are in no doubt about the fact that the struggle against the influence exerted by bourgeois ideology requires a considerable period of time, especially in view of the steady pressure exerted on the socialist countries by imperialist propaganda. However, none of these facts nullifies the fundamental Marxist-Leninist proposition that the expropriation of private capitalist property is the crucial condition for the elimination of the exploiting classes. This proposition holds true whatever the conditions of the class struggle.

p Let us stress that Mao also takes a distorted view of the struggle against bourgeois ideology itself: he refers to the class struggle any discussion and any debate on political and ideological problems, and ranks among the class enemies Party functionaries who express differing views.

p But Mao has gone beyond distortions of the Marxist theory of classes and the class struggle, and has been stubbornly putting them into practice. He has used these mainly artificially to build up an atmosphere of bitter class struggle in the country and then used this atmosphere to establish police control over the behaviour of every section of the Chinese population. Under the pretext of “socialist re-education" the Maoists have carried out intensified purges in the cities among Party functionaries, government officials and the intelligentsia in trapping and suppressing those who do not accept their policy.

p One of the refined measures used in “re-educating” such people, especially among the cadres and intellectuals, is to transport them to the countryside for “tempering” and “ reeducation in labour”. The Maoists have made wide use of this method to put down the discontented whom it is impossible to charge with any criminal offence. Jenmin 192 jihpao and other newspapers have described this “tempering through labour" in the countryside as the “most important and radical measure" for the socialist system, which helps to overcome bureaucratic practices and to avert revisionism. The papers have been calling for resolute implementation of Mao’s instructions, concerning the “tempering through labour" as one of the ways of “preventing the restoration of capitalism”. Refusal by functionaries to fulfil the directives concerning the “tempering through labour" and to leave for the countryside is qualified as bourgeois degeneration.

p The policy pursued by Mao and his followers in the countryside is also aimed at building up clashes between social classes.

p During the completion of the co-operative drive (1956-1957) Chinese peasants were divided into the class sections of the poor, the middle peasants and the kulaks chiefly in accordance with the means of production they had in their possession. The distinction between the well-off middle peasants and the kulaks consisted in the fact that the earnings from exploitation obtained by the well-off middle peasant were not in excess of 25 per cent of his whole family’s total annual income, whereas for the kulak family it was in excess of 25 per cent of the total annual income. Through the establishment of co-operatives, the main means of production held by the peasants (including the kulaks) were socialised. The landowners (the petty landowners, because the big landowners had been suppressed during the agrarian reform) had also been admitted into the cooperatives on definite terms.

p Of course, the end of the co-operative campaign did not mean the instant disappearance of class distinctions in the Chinese countryside, but the main source of class differentiation among the peasants—private property in the means of production—was no longer there. Now, with the class struggle being artificially sharpened, Mao and his followers have once again fallen back on the idea of the class distinction among the peasants based not on their relation to property but on their relation to the “thought of Mao Tsetung”. Mao’s supporters rank among the hostile classes in the countryside not only the former landowners and kulaks, but virtually all well-off middle peasants.

The Maoists’ artificial aggravation of the class struggle 193 in the Chinese countryside and their reliance on the poor and the economically weak middle peasants is due to the following reasons: the establishment of the people’s communes led to a break-up of collective farms which had not yet been firmly established. The peasantry, especially its middle section, discontented with the existing state of affairs, has been seeking to improve its living conditions. In accordance with Mao’s conceptions, the urge on the part of the Chinese peasants to improve their living conditions (by various means, including the sale in the open market of the farm produce they grow by their own labours) is branded by the official press as “spontaneous capitalistic tendencies”. Mao’s class line in the countryside is designed above all to distract the peasantry’s attention from its vital interests, to switch its efforts to the struggle against the “class enemies”, thereby damping down peasant discontent by means of an artificial state of tension.