- Overview
Since Xi Jinping, the head of the Chinese revisionist government, emphasized at the Third Plenary Session of the 20th Central Committee that the “Fengqiao Spirit” of the new era must be upheld and developed, the “Fengqiao Experience” has been a popular topic in grassroots governance. In just over a month, local governments in various provinces have rushed to establish “Social Conflict Dispute Mediation Centers” in communities and street offices, publicizing their achievements on official websites, WeChat public accounts, and other social media, with overwhelming publicity. If you search directly online for “Fengqiao Experience,” you will find that these revisionist mouthpieces invariably mention that Chairman Mao issued instructions “to imitate, pilot, and promote.”
“Comments on Chairman Mao Zedong’s speech at the Fourth Session of the Second National People’s Congress” (November 20, 1963)
Comrades Fu Zhi and Peng Zhen:
I have read this document; it is very good. After the speech, please consider whether it can be sent to the county-level party committees and public security bureaus, with a few introductory words written by the central authorities, as educational material for cadres. It should mention the good example of Zhuji, to be imitated, piloted, and promoted in various regions.
Mao Zedong
November 20
However, this instruction was issued from materials after the counterrevolutionary restoration (“Selected Works of Mao Zedong Since the Founding of the People’s Republic of China,” Central Literature Publishing House, 1996, p. 416). During socialist China, the People’s Daily never published editorials about the “Fengqiao Experience,” especially since it was once halted during the proletarian Cultural Revolution, only being reintroduced in some areas in 1971 under Zhou Enlai’s instructions. It is highly likely that this is a fabrication by the Chinese revisionists. In fact, the “Fengqiao Experience” was a product of the 1960s counterrevolutionaries’ effort to oppose socialist China under Chairman Mao’s “Ten Points,” conducting a comprehensive socialist education campaign, and implementing a reactionary line that denied class struggle and proletarian dictatorship, sheltering rightist counterrevolutionaries.
The content of the “Fengqiao Experience” has evolved from the early 1960s’ principle of “mobilizing and relying on the masses, resolving contradictions locally without escalation” to today’s “small issues do not leave the village, big issues do not leave the town, contradictions do not escalate.” Although the main theme remains “no escalation of contradictions,” its core has adapted to the needs of different periods. Now, the revisionists even fabricate Mao’s instructions to hype the “Fengqiao Experience,” ostensibly under the guise of “mass line,” but actually to strengthen the suppression of the working people and to prepare reactionary measures.
-
The Origin of the “Fengqiao Experience”
-
Social and Historical Background of the “Fengqiao Experience”
The proletariat, although holding power, still faces remnants of the exploiting class—“people are still here, but their hearts are not dead.” Those rightists who are forced by revolutionary circumstances to undergo socialist transformation always attempt to restore the old regime. Mao Zedong pointed out the importance of criticizing bourgeois rightists in “The Situation in Summer 1957.” “Revolutionary socialism on the economic front (ownership of means of production) alone is insufficient and unstable. There must also be thorough socialist revolutions on the political and ideological fronts.” (May 4, 1966, Liberation Army Daily). To elevate the struggle to the level of politics and ideology, it is necessary to mobilize the masses, carry out rectification campaigns and socialist education through criticism and self-criticism, facts, and reasoning, improve their ideological level, and on the basis of uniting the broad masses and isolating and dividing bourgeois rightists and all anti-socialist elements, eliminate those infiltrating the party.
Between August and October 1962, Mao convened the Beidaihe Meeting and the Tenth Plenary Session of the Eighth Central Committee, calling for “Never forget class struggle” and “Carry out socialist education.” Under Mao’s directives on class, situation, and contradiction issues, the entire party launched the socialist education movement across urban and rural areas. At the Central Committee work conference in Hangzhou on May 20, 1963, Mao personally drafted the “Decision on Several Issues Concerning Rural Work” (draft), known as the “Ten Points.” It outlined ten major issues, including: the situation, whether class and class struggle still exist in socialist society, the serious sharp class struggle emerging in China, the understanding of the enemy situation by comrades, reliance on whom, policies and methods for correct socialist education in rural areas, organizing revolutionary class forces, the “Four Cleanups” problem, cadre participation in collective labor, investigation and research using Marxist scientific methods.
The “Ten Points” systematically formulated the correct line, principles, and policies for the socialist education movement, emphasizing that class, class contradictions, and class struggle persist throughout the entire socialist stage, influenced by bourgeois rights and ideas, and that the struggle between socialism and capitalism continues, with the danger of capitalist restoration still present. It also defined the nature and tasks of the social education movement: “This socialist education movement is a great revolutionary movement, not only involving class struggle but also cadre participation in labor, and working with a strict scientific attitude, through experimentation, to solve a batch of problems in enterprises and institutions.” -
The Proposal of the “Fengqiao Experience” and Its Reactionary Impact
In 1963, seven communes in our district, under the leadership of the Zhejiang Provincial Party Committee work team and local county committees, carried out the first socialist education campaigns. Following Mao’s teaching that “Never forget class struggle,” they mobilized the masses, distinguished enemies from friends, and exposed various sabotage activities of the four types of counterrevolutionaries. Some grassroots cadres and activists, driven by revolutionary indignation, demanded the arrest of all four types of saboteurs. To address this, we organized cadres and masses to study Mao’s policies on enemy struggle. Through detailed ideological and political work, large-scale debates, and education, cadres and the masses improved their consciousness, realizing they could rely on their own strength to defeat and transform enemies, overcoming reliance solely on government legal action and crude methods. They classified enemies, educated, reviewed, and debated with them, and supervised and reformed them locally with the help of the masses. As a result, most enemies were subdued without arrests—“Upholding Mao’s Fengqiao Red Flag, Relying on the Masses to Strengthen the Dictatorship” (People’s Daily, December 21, 1977).
The then Secretary of the Zhejiang Provincial Party Committee and Minister of Propaganda, Lin Hujia, was a hidden rightist within the party (persecuted during the Cultural Revolution in 1967… appointed Secretary of the Shanghai Municipal Party Committee in January 1977 [Wikipedia]). In the early stages of the socialist education movement in 1963, he personally led a work team to Fengqiao District, Zhuji County, Zhejiang Province, conducting “pilot work” in seven communes. Local party members and revolutionary masses responded actively to Mao’s call. Seeing the revolutionary situation so high, Lin Hujia, fearing for his own safety, began to use reactionary tactics.
In “The Situation in Summer 1957,” it was mentioned that dealing with bourgeois rightists, social hooligans, and criminals should be “crack down on all反, kill fewer, but do not abolish the death penalty,” but some who should have been arrested were not. It also emphasized that in recent “light crimes with heavy sentences” and “serious crimes with light sentences,” the latter was more dangerous. In “On the Ten Major Relationships,” regarding the relationship between revolution and counterrevolution, it was pointed out that although some die-hard counterrevolutionaries would not change, others could transform through reform. For a few social reactionaries causing public outrage, they could be directly killed. Counterrevolutionaries within organs, schools, and organizations must be thoroughly investigated; their contradictions with the people are no longer internal contradictions but enemy–comrade contradictions. As for handling these counterrevolutionaries, the principle of “not killing most, not arresting many” should be maintained, because the existence of counterrevolutionary路线反动路线. If they are killed, it leaves no “living” evidence, and the death is unprovable, which is harmful to revolution. Also, it leaves no opportunity for remorse and reform, and may tarnish the reputation of “killing prisoners.” Therefore, lenient measures can be taken, treating them as examples for the masses, thoroughly criticizing their errors, and using them as negative教材. Mao once said, “A great and solidified country, keeping such a small number of people, will not be harmful after the masses understand their mistakes” (“The Direction of Bourgeoisie in the Wen Hui Bao”). However, Lin Hujia and others, taking advantage of the socialist education movement just beginning among the masses, lacked understanding of revisionism, and when dealing with counterrevolutionaries who committed arson and murder, they urged the masses not to report, not to fight with weapons, but to debate with words—completely undermining the enthusiasm of the masses and plotting to restore the reactionary forces in Zhejiang.
In these revolutionary Fengqiao masses’ efforts to consolidate the proletarian regime and strengthen the dictatorship of the proletariat, they demanded the arrest and punishment of those sabotaging socialist construction and engaging in conspiracy—some wrote reactionary poetry, others reclaimed land and houses, some threatened to kill, and even after the work team entered the village, they openly beat poor farmers. Many used alcohol, sex, and wealth to corrupt village secretaries, team leaders, accountants, and security chiefs, employing superstitious activities and religious connections to divide and weaken the ranks of poor and lower-middle peasants, inciting land redistribution and destruction of forests, trying to collapse the collective economy. During this period, Lin Hujia, taking the opportunity to criticize some群众的“过激行为,” convened a large discussion on whether “military struggle or literary struggle” was better, and proposed that “military struggle is flesh and blood, outside is scorched; literary struggle uses facts and reasoning, persuading with理, and only then can the enemy be defeated, and members’ eyes be brightened.” He deliberately opposed the correct approach, advocating not to arrest or send labor reform “back to the mountains,” which was a painstaking effort to appease rightist elements. These rightists quickly understood and cooperated fully during mass criticism meetings, with attitudes turning 180 degrees.Chen Yinlin of Fengqiao West District was a landlord with over 1,400 acres of land, who had always refused to work. He wrote a reactionary poetry collection called “Rongxi Zhai,” and had been beaten over 20 times, using methods like forced kneeling and “fake execution,” but failed to subdue him. The masses called him “Rubber Fortress.” During the review, without a mass struggle, Chen Yinlin confessed to spreading rumors, falsifying accounts, and writing reactionary poetry… He said, “This review has been very helpful to me; I am convinced.”
Some of the four types of enemies, before participating in the review, prepared “knee pads” for punishment. When they saw that no beating or kneeling was required, and those with good performance were encouraged, they openly admitted their illegal activities and thoughts. Some said the review was “a clear mirror, distinguishing good from bad,” and expressed their intention to “turn back and start anew.”
Such reasoning satisfied even the families of the “four types” of enemies. Gu Tang’s rich peasant Chen Shanxin, who was repeatedly criticized at meetings and did bad deeds year after year, said, “I’m just a magician, a monkey doing tricks, it doesn’t matter if I fight on stage.”
During the struggle meetings, Chen Shanxin still played various tricks, defending himself 38 times. But the more he defended, the more群众 saw through his reactionary face… After the struggle, at home, his wife served him hot wine, five eggs, and comforted him. But this time, his wife and children ignored him, and instead criticized him for doing bad things. He claimed to have been through six struggles, and this was the most painful; even his wife and children joined the struggle. He said he would reform and start anew.
As a result, these bourgeois rightists “surrendered” one after another, admitting their crimes. An odd situation emerged: 7 communes with 67 enemies of the four types, none arrested, all persuaded. This “few arrests, good public order” was used as a典型, discussed and studied by the Ministry of State Security and Public Security Department (probably with official arrangements), and ultimately approved in November 1963 by the Zhejiang Provincial Party Committee work team and the Zhuji County Party Committee as the “Experience of the Socialist Education Movement in Zhuji County Fengqiao District,” known as the “Fengqiao Experience.”The method of “literary struggle” to subdue enemies was learned, and confidence in transforming enemies grew. At this point, many cadres truly solved the problem of whether fewer arrests were better than more. Those who originally advocated “handing over” now also said “reform in production teams is better than reform in labor camps.” They believed this had four benefits: first, members knew the enemies’ details best and could monitor them closely; second, regular review kept everyone alert; third, managing them as labor force benefited the collective and their families’ education; fourth, it reduced state expenses. Through practice and总结, the work team cadres were greatly educated. A county party secretary involved in the pilot told the police chief: “In the past, when I heard about enemy reports and demands for arrests, I criticized your crackdown. Now I see it was one-sided; I will pay attention in the future.” (This is truly奇谈怪论)
- Development of the “Fengqiao Experience” after the Restoration
“Any regime overthrow must first create public opinion and do ideological work.” The Chinese revisionists revived the “Fengqiao Experience” and fabricated Mao Zedong’s speech at the Fourth Session of the Second National People’s Congress, allegedly drafted by the Ministry of Public Security (“Relying on the broad masses, strengthening the people’s democratic dictatorship, and transforming the majority of reactionaries into new people”) and Mao’s reply (“Comments on Mao Zedong’s speech at the Fourth Session of the Second National People’s Congress”)—all to continue hyping the “Fengqiao Experience.”
In fact, the “Fengqiao Experience” has its reactionary theoretical basis, dating back to the 1950s when Liu Shaoqi and Yang Xianzhen promoted the theory of “unity of thought and existence,” openly advocating that “the unity of thought and existence is the method of understanding and transforming the world.” This is identical to the logic of “conflict resolution” in the “Fengqiao Experience,” and such denial of contradictions and rejection of struggle are political反对无产阶级革命和无产阶级专政. Today, fabricating the illusion that the revisionist government “solves民忧” is actually the government fearing that群众斗争 will surge into a flood, attempting to “solve at the source” while covering up the fundamental contradictions of capitalism to maintain its reactionary rule. In reality, the “Fengqiao Experience” is another form of brutal repression of the laboring masses—this is the true face of the revisionist regime.
In 1978, the Chinese revisionist traitor group “State Council” held the third national urban work conference, proposing to implement urban construction management and supervision systems. In 1996, the Eighth National People’s Congress passed the “Administrative Penalty Law,” which invented a “special” law allowing administrative agencies to interpret and enforce laws without courts or prosecutors, and without the “illegal” party’s appeal process. From then on, the revisionist group could act arbitrarily, oppressing and plundering the working people. They recruited thugs from among hooligans, organized so-called “urban construction supervision brigades,” and, under the guise of “rectifying urban appearance” and “standardizing city construction,” harassed, fined, and even physically assaulted ordinary workers, street vendors, and small farmers. — “Dawn,” Issue 2
In the 1990s, as social contradictions intensified, the revisionists proposed the so-called “Four Pre” work method: “Organizational work ahead of prediction, prediction ahead of prevention, prevention ahead of mediation, and mediation ahead of escalation.” Regarding family disputes, they explained: “Use reasoning, education, and persuasion to evoke emotional bonds and kinship, mend emotional gaps, and transform potential conflicts into normal family friction, so that contradictions are not escalated and disputes are resolved at home.” In today’s Chinese capitalist society, women are marginalized by industrial production, and family labor is unrecognized. Most women, deprived of economic independence and livelihood, can only survive as domestic slaves and sexual tools. “In the family, the husband is the asset owner, and the wife is the proletariat.” Additionally, women are subjected to bourgeois reactionary ideology, such as “Three Obediences and Four Virtues” and “Obey your husband and educate your children,” rooted in Confucianism. Incidents of domestic violence and rape are frequent, with many seeking help through community, street, and district reports, but to no avail. The “cooling-off” period for divorce already reveals the reactionary stance of the revisionists. Even in media exposure, cases like “Xiao Xie’s Domestic Violence” remain unpunished. What is the purpose of the so-called grassroots governance and “conflict resolution”? It is nothing but to make women accept their奴隶 status, endure silently, and prevent resistance. Now, Xiao Xie, bought by the revisionists, is forced to admit her奴隶身份 and whitewash marriage under capitalism—an embarrassing situation. “In any society, the degree of women’s liberation is the natural measure of universal liberation,” but the so-called “family dispute resolution” cannot conceal the revisionists’ attempt to uphold their reactionary capitalist patriarchy.
Recently, the Yindu District People’s Court efficiently mediated 17 cases of labor disputes involving migrant workers’ wages, resolving conflicts at the source, protecting the vital interests of migrant workers, and maintaining social harmony and stability.
After accepting the cases, to fully safeguard the legal rights of the 17 migrant workers, the Yindu District People’s Court opened a green channel for wage cases, prioritized filing and mediation, and applied small-amount procedures lawfully. The four judges handling the cases quickly analyzed evidence, facts, and responsibilities after understanding the basic situation, and based on clear facts and responsibilities, contacted both parties for mediation. Although opinions varied among the 17 workers, and the mediation was initially deadlocked, the judges’ persistent legal reasoning and patient persuasion led to a settlement after four hours of negotiation. The defendant deeply realized the difficulties caused by unpaid wages, and the main contractor agreed to advance payment, paying 15% of the wages by the end of February, with the rest to be paid by subcontractors and contractors as soon as possible, and fully settled by the end of May. As a result, all 17 labor dispute cases were successfully and efficiently resolved within two days, demonstrating a new speed of民事司法 for the people in Yindu District.
In the ongoing labor-capital disputes, “conflict resolution” is commonplace. Almost every wage arrears or wage claim incident must go through a “labor dispute mediation” process before arbitration. This so-called mediation often involves workers giving up part of their rightful benefits in exchange for capitalists settling part of their wages. In the cases above, workers could only get partial payment in installments, and “raising funds quickly” involves many uncertainties, so workers’ rights are not truly protected.
The comprehensive management center strengthens personnel allocation, adapts measures locally, and equips street comprehensive management centers with more than three full-time staff members. Each community establishes nine grassroots mediation organizations, involving community committees, village work teams, police and auxiliary police, legal consultants, and “Five Old” personnel, forming an integrated conflict mediation room with official signage. They hold training sessions for community mediators to improve their skills, rely on the new era文明实践站 platform, and organize street-level peace volunteer service teams, including joint police patrols and four “Tongle Volunteer Police Teams” in the east, south, west, and north, patrolling densely populated areas and traffic arteries daily.
In Yunnan Province, where barbaric fascist dictatorship is established at the grassroots level, this move is purely to strengthen control over the masses. The so-called mediators are merely a reactionary force capable of responding to群众活动 and controlling them if necessary, under the guise of “mediation.” Today, in the sharpening class struggle, labor masses across the country are engaged in spontaneous struggles daily, challenging the腐朽的中修 government, such as the Pucheng mass protests; recent large-scale strikes by workers at BYD Wuxi and Chengdu to extend working hours and oppose performance wages; and a notable case where, on April 2, 2025, Dongguan Senhe Paper Co., Ltd. and its subsidiaries filed for bankruptcy, leaving over 500 workers unpaid for months, sparking protests. The brave workers attempted to seize the factory, block gates, intercept trucks, and organize自主维权行动, resisting asset sales and even organizing production and sales themselves. To prevent large-scale群众运动 and ease the burden of military expenses and stability costs caused by expanding fiscal deficits, the revisionists once again resort to the “Fengqiao Experience,” establishing “reactionary squads” down to townships to intensify supervision and control over the people.
The Fengqiao Police Station also pioneered a new model: establishing a direct contact line from the police station to the households, dividing Fengqiao Town into three police stations (with 12 police officers in total), and setting up 28 police points in villages (managed by elected安全专管员). With the cooperation of these officers and mediators, quickly resolving mass incidents without deploying large police forces. The “Fengqiao Experience” has become an important example of social management innovation.
Above is a general overview of the current understanding of the “Fengqiao Experience.” Due to limited energy and theoretical level, many shortcomings remain. Further research and analysis are needed, including articles on “Fengqiao Experience” and “grassroots governance” from CNKI and online sources.
