Encyclopedia of Anti-Revisionism On-Line

Report of the Central Committee of the M.L.O.B.

On the Situation in the People’s Republic of China


This formulation aroused the strong opposition of leading Marxist-Leninists and when, at the September and October meetings of the Central Committee , Mao Tse-tung proposed an attack upon the leading Marxist-Leninist Wu Han, writer and deputy Mayor of Peking, the Central Committee refused.

Between September and October 1965, Chairman Mao suggested that Wu Han who opposes the Party and socialism should be criticised and repudiated. But the handful of top Party persons in authority taking the capitalist road refused to carry this out and used every means to counter it. (“Two Diametrically Opposed Documents”, editorial in “Hongqi” (Red Flag), No. 9, 1967; in: “Peking Review”, No. 23, 1967; p.22).

Mao Tse-tung accordingly went in October 1965 to Shanghai, where members of his counter-revolutionary faction held leading positions in the Party apparatus. On November 10th, 1965 the first shot was fired at the Peking Marxist-Leninists in an article published in the Shanghai press by Yao Wen-yuan:

The proletarian revolutionaries in Shanghai resolutely implemented Chairman Mao’s instruction. Under the direct guidance of Comrade Chiang Ching (Mao’s wife – Ed.), Comrade Yao Wen-yuan wrote ’On the New Historical Drama “Hai Jui Dismissed from Office’, and the publication of this article began in the ideological sphere the criticism and repudiation of Wu Han and other anti-Party, anti-socialist representatives of the bourgeoisie. (“Two Diametrically Opposed Documents”; op. cit.; p.22).

’Hai Jul Dismissed from Office’ was a play set in the 16th century written by Wu Han and first published in 1961. In December 1965 Mao Tse-tung made it clear why the counter-revolutionaries found the play so objectionable.

On December 21, 1965 Chairman Mao once again pointed out explicitly that ’THE CRUX OF “HAI JUI DISMISSED FROM OFFICE” WAS THE QUESTION OF DISMISSAL FROM OFFICE. ... IN 1959 WE DISMISSED PENG TEH-HUAI FROM OFFICE. AND PENG TEH-HUAI IS ’HAI JUI’. (“Two Diametrically Opposed Documents”; op. cit.; p.22).

The Marxist-Leninists in Peking resisted the attack upon Wu Han.

The Peng Chen counter-revolutionary revisionist clique, under the connivance of and shielded by the top Party person in authority taking the capitalist road (i.e., Liu Shao-chi – Ed.), abused its powers, forbade the Peking press to reprint the article by Comrade Yao Wen-yuan, and ... did all in their power to prevent Chairman Mao’s directive on the crux of ’Hai Jui Dismissed from Office’ from being known. They flagrantly resisted the directive. (“Two Diametrically Opposed Documents”; op. cit.; p.22).

Having failed to break into the national Party press or into the Peking press with their attack upon the Peking party leadership, the counter-revolutionaries began, from April 1966, to use the newspaper of the army “Jiefangjun Bao” (Liberation Army Daily) as their national organ.

On April 18th, 1966 this paper published an editorial entitled: “Hold High the Great Red Banner of Mao Tse-tung’s Thinking; Actively Participate in the Great Socialist Cultural Revolution”. This said:

There exists in our literary and art circles an anti-Party, anti-socialist black line running counter to Mao Tse-tung’s thinking. ... We must ... take an active part in the great socialist revolution on the cultural front, thoroughly eradicate this black line and completely liquidate its influence. We must not mind being blamed for ’brandishing the stick’ ... We must carry out Chairman Mao’s instruction and ... take an active part in the socialist cultural revolution, unswervingly carrying it through to the end. (Editorial in “Jiefangjun Bao” {Liberation Army Daily ) in “Peking Review”, No. 18, 1966; p.6,9,10).

On May 10th, 1966, Yao Wen-yuan wrote another article in the “Jiefang Ribao” (Shanghai Daily) entitled “On ’Three Family Village’”. This extended the attacks on the Peking Party to include two other leading members Teng To and Liao Mo-sha, who, along with Wu Han, were described as running a “gangster inn” which had made the three journals controlled by the Peking Party – “Beijing Ribao” (Peking Daily), “Beijing Wanbao” (Peking Evening News) and the fortnightly “Quianxian” (Front Line) into “instruments for opposing the Party and socialism”. (Yao Wen-yuan: “On ’Three-Family Village’” in “Jiefang Ribao (Shanghai Daily), May 10th, 1966, in: “Peking Review”, No. 22, 1966; p.5).