Recently studying “Outline of Marxist Philosophy,” I briefly criticized Yang Xianzhen’s “unification” theory in the preface of the fourth part, and then linked it to the reflection of political reaction in philosophical reaction. So I collected some historical materials about Yang Xianzhen and found that this person is extremely reactionary, obstructing the study of Mao Zedong’s works at the Central Party School of the CPC, and even loudly shouting “Some people just like to say Mao Zedong developed Marxism-Leninism, can it add new principles? Marxist philosophy is just a few principles, how can it develop?” and also slandering Mao Zedong’s philosophical works as plagiarized from other philosophers. This person viciously attacks the three red banners: the general line, the Great Leap Forward, and the People’s Commune, and even slanders the vigorous Great Leap Forward movement as exaggerated spiritual strength. He is exactly the same as the revisionist old-generation economic faction. He also relies on usurped power to place landlords and spies who slaughter people into party organs as leaders, and colludes with the capitalist-roaders Peng Dehuai and the Soviet revisionists.
He advocates the “unification” theory, which essentially denies the antagonistic struggle between opposing sides, exaggerates the aspect of coexistence within the unity of contradictions (the unity of contradictions refers to the opposing sides coexisting within a unity, and under certain conditions, their primary and secondary positions can change), and falsely claims: learning dialectics is “to learn how to connect two opposing ideas.” This philosophical thought does not appear out of thin air, but is with extremely malicious intent. The “unification” theory denies the contradiction between new and old things, denies the inevitable victory of new things and the inevitable demise of old things. Economically, he denies the qualitative difference and sharp contradiction between capitalist economy and socialist economy, advocates the “comprehensive economic basis” theory that coexists private and public economies, and cheers for capitalist restoration.
Central Committee’s Report on the Issue of Yang Xianzhen
To the Central Bureau, provincial, municipal, and autonomous region party committees, various ministries of the CPC Central Committee, all party committees (groups) of state organs, and the General Political Department:
Herewith, the “Report on Yang Xianzhen” from the Central Party School’s Party Committee and three attachments are sent for your review. From these materials, you can see how a senior cadre, after turning against the Party, conducts anti-Party activities, and it will also help in overcoming bureaucratism and political insensitivity among leaders. The Central Committee agrees to revoke Yang Xianzhen’s positions as Vice President and member of the Party Committee of the Central Party School, and reassign him to other work.
This report from the Party Committee of the Central Party School can be circulated among relevant party schools, military academies, and some party members engaged in theoretical work, within the scope you decide.
Report and Opinions on the Issue of Yang Xianzhen
Central, Chairman:
Enclosed are the “Report on Yang Xianzhen” and three attachments.
The Party Committee held a meeting on April 5, 1965, to explain the contents of the report to Yang Xianzhen and solicit their opinions. After three weeks, Yang Xianzhen sent a written “explanation” (which we have annotated), now enclosed.
From July to October 1964, under the direct leadership of the Central, we mobilized all students and staff of the school to expose and criticize Yang Xianzhen’s errors. Over the past year, we held multiple discussions and individual talks with him, patiently helping him recognize his mistakes and consciously revolutionize. However, his attitude has remained very bad, with no remorse.
Yang Xianzhen’s errors are serious, and he has not turned back to the correct path to this day. Considering all aspects, we believe he is no longer suitable to continue in a leadership position at the Central Party School. Therefore, it is proposed that the Central Committee revoke his positions as Vice President and member of the Party Committee of the Central Party School.
Please advise whether our report and proposal are appropriate.
Report on the Issue of Yang Xianzhen
Central:
Since July 1964, all students and staff of our school have conducted in-depth exposure and serious criticism of Yang Xianzhen’s errors, with a total of 1,700 participants.
Now, Yang Xianzhen’s political stance and mental state are basically clarified. He is a spokesperson for the bourgeoisie within the Party, a member of Peng Dehuai’s group, and a small Khrushchev. He turned the Central Party School into an independent kingdom and committed many bad deeds.
Yang Xianzhen’s problems, after repeated struggles, have not been resolved for a long time. In spring 1963, the Central reorganized the leadership of the Party School. Since autumn of the same year, we began implementing the correct school-running policies approved by the Central, reforming the content and methods of teaching at the Party School, organizing everyone to seriously study Mao Zedong’s works, the Central’s “Decision on Several Issues in Rural Work” (draft), and other important documents and anti-revisionist materials like the “Twenty-Five Articles.” During the study, we repeatedly inspired everyone to think about why to run the Party School and how to do it, preparing to solve longstanding problems in the school through progress. Therefore, this discussion and criticism, under the direct leadership of the Central, was conducted in a well-prepared and step-by-step manner.
On May 29, 1964, Yang Xianzhen publicly announced his “unification” theory through others’ newspapers. We promptly seized this issue, following the Central’s instructions, mobilized the masses to first discuss academically, turning bad into good.
On July 17, according to the Central’s decision, Yang Xianzhen’s name was published in the “People’s Daily.” This decision greatly mobilized the masses, prompting teachers and students to expose and criticize Yang Xianzhen’s issues.
Discussions and criticisms of Yang Xianzhen’s issues, besides several introductory and discussion meetings, mainly took place in small group and branch meetings. As comrades’ understanding of Yang Xianzhen’s issues gradually deepened, we systematically distributed various materials about him. They compared and analyzed Mao Zedong’s works, central documents, anti-revisionist articles, and Yang Xianzhen’s own writings and actions. By presenting facts and reasoning, comrades’ understanding was gradually improved, and Yang Xianzhen’s serious errors in theory, politics, and organization were progressively exposed and criticized.
In mid-October, all branches of students and staff wrote opinions criticizing Yang Xianzhen’s errors. The discussion and criticism basically concluded. According to the Central’s decision, the trainees in the rotation class graduated, the theoretical class students and most staff participated in the Rural Four Clean-up Campaign. A few staff members remained at the school to continue investigating Yang Xianzhen’s issues.
Yang Xianzhen’s main errors are as follows:
1. Opposing Mao Zedong Thought
Yang Xianzhen’s stance against Mao Zedong Thought is extremely stubborn. He refuses to recognize that Marxism-Leninism is developing, let alone that Mao Zedong developed Marxism-Leninism, and refuses to acknowledge Mao’s works as classics. He says: “Some people just like to say Mao developed Marxism-Leninism, can it add new principles? Marxist philosophy is just a few principles, how can it develop?” He even slanders Mao’s philosophical works as plagiarized from other books.
He opposes studying Mao Zedong’s writings and contrasts it with studying the original works of Marx, Engels, and Lenin. He makes various excuses and uses various methods to resist studying Mao’s works. He says: “Mao Zedong Thought is for workers and peasants, those engaged in theory should study Marxist-Leninist classics.” “Our study of Mao’s works is not less but more.” He also claims that studying Mao’s Thought will “narrow everyone’s thinking.” In curriculum arrangements, he emphasizes reading classical works other than Mao’s and “first-hand” materials as a pretext to avoid reading Mao’s works. Under Yang Xianzhen’s control, the Party School has long lacked Mao’s works as the main teaching material. If the Party School does not use Mao’s works as the main textbook, then studying Marxism-Leninism becomes just an empty phrase.
The Central repeatedly criticized Yang Xianzhen for his dismissive attitude toward Mao’s works, but he persisted in not changing. After criticizing him in 1959, the Party Committee tried to establish a clear guideline guided by Mao Zedong Thought, emphasizing studying Mao’s works. In 1961, he, along with Hou Weiyu, quoted the “Sixteen-character Policy” he had previously denied at a 1958 Party School work symposium, brazenly opposing the guideline guided by Mao Zedong Thought and opposing studying Mao’s works. He even slandered the Central for “only allowing reading Mao’s works, not the classics of Marxism-Leninism,” claiming this was “abolishing Marxism-Leninism and coming from the left.”
Yang Xianzhen’s opposition to Mao Zedong Thought developed into direct insults against Mao himself. He attacks Mao for “not being democratic,” claiming “no one dares to speak” before Mao. He says: “Our Party’s handling of the livelihood issues of over 600 million people is not based on the laws of historical, social, and economic development, but on whoever speaks, it counts.” This is pure idealism, treating national destiny issues as child’s play. When reading the “Report on the Discussion of the 1962 Adjustment Plan” at the cadre training class, he ranted: “Damn, with this kind of situation, who is Marxist-Leninist and who is pseudo-Marxist-Leninist?!” He even said: “No generation has been as bad as Mao’s generation!”
Opposition to Mao Zedong Thought is the fundamental root of Yang Xianzhen’s errors. Opposing Mao’s Thought is opposing Marxism-Leninism and its development. He committed this fundamental mistake and, repeatedly taught wrong, could not help but make a series of increasingly serious errors.
2. Fabricating Anti-Socialist “Theories”
Yang Xianzhen created many revisionist “theories,” some of which are relatively systematic and widely spread, including the following fallacies:
At the end of 1952, when the Party proposed the general line for the transitional period, Yang Xianzhen put forward the “comprehensive economic basis” theory, opposing socialist transformation of the national economy. He believed that the economic basis during the transition period in our country was a “comprehensive” inclusion of five economic components, including capitalist economy and individual economy, negating the life-and-death struggle between socialist and capitalist economies, and demanded that the superstructure of socialism “also serve the bourgeoisie.”
In 1958, when the Party proposed the general line of striving to build socialism with great effort, rapid progress, and high quality, Yang Xianzhen opposed it by claiming that the idea of the unity of thinking and existence was the “flaw” of the 1958 shortcomings, and that “recognizing the same nature of thinking and existence is the basis of the ‘Five Winds’.” He refused to accept that matter and spirit could transform into each other, i.e., matter can become spirit and vice versa, and that understanding the world requires practical repeated practice. Therefore, under the guidance of the general line of building socialism with great effort, rapid progress, and high quality, he believed that the practice of the masses was “to develop subjective initiative to voluntarism.”
In recent years, the Central Committee and Mao Zedong repeatedly emphasized the dialectical view of “two points,” emphasizing class struggle as the steel to carry out the three major revolutionary movements, raising the revolutionary banner of anti-imperialism and anti-revisionism. At this time, Yang Xianzhen launched a planned and organized attack on the Party, proposing to abolish revolution, fundamentally deny class struggle, deny the struggle between socialism and imperialism, and deny the struggle between Marxism-Leninism and revisionism, with the “unification” theory, providing a philosophical summary for the modern revisionist “Three and Two” line, and creating a “theory” of “peaceful evolution” for domestic capitalist forces.
Many of Yang Xianzhen’s “theories” repeatedly reflect the active thoughts of bourgeoisie and revisionists opposing the road of socialism. These errors are not momentary misunderstandings but consistent political errors, opposing socialism, Marxism-Leninism, Mao Zedong Thought, and the Party’s line and policies.
3. Attacking the General Line of Socialist Construction, the Great Leap Forward, and the People’s Commune
In 1959, Yang Xianzhen launched extremely vicious attacks on the general line of socialist construction, the Great Leap Forward, and the People’s Commune. In winter 1959, following the Central’s instructions, the Party Committee criticized him. He made a false self-criticism and deceived the Party. By 1961, especially in 1962, he reemerged, launching even more vicious attacks on the three red banners than in 1959.
He claimed that the Party’s general line for socialist construction “has not yet been formed,” that the Party’s methods of implementing the line are “completely wrong,” and “subjectivist methods.”
He slandered the Great Leap Forward as “fantasy, nonsense, and reckless,” creating chaos. He said the Party “created many laws, and if more are created, even corn flour may become unavailable.” He also spread rumors that the masses “haven’t had a satisfying meal since the Great Leap Forward.”
He attacked the People’s Commune, saying: “The theory of the People’s Commune was insufficiently prepared, and ideas were confused,” calling it “beggar communism,” “poorer than beggars because beggars still have a dog stick.”
He attacked the Party for “guiding with idealist thinking,” “creating history arbitrarily,” calling it “99% romanticism and 1% realism.”
He treated the revolutionary mass movement with aristocratic disdain, slandering cadres for treating the masses “like slave owners treating slaves,” “more brutal than the Japanese.” He also mocked workers and peasants studying philosophy arbitrarily.
Yang Xianzhen’s attacks on the three red banners surpass those of all reactionaries at home and abroad. Modern revisionists now criticize many of our words, but he said them long ago, some more vicious than theirs.
4. Advocating Capitalist Restoration and Promoting the Spirit of Individual Effort
Yang Xianzhen exaggerated domestic economic difficulties, describing the situation as extremely bleak. He said in 1960, “exceeding the famine of Guangxu’s third year, it was a year of cannibalism.” In 1961, he claimed people “had passed the ghost gate.” In June 1962, he openly criticized the Central, saying “the Central’s plenary session (work conference) didn’t discuss our economic situation clearly enough, some were too optimistic,” and “the current economic situation is very bad.”
He everywhere promoted household contract responsibility and expanding private plots. He said: “Many materials reflect farmers’ loss of confidence in collective production, demanding household contract responsibility, land leasing, and expanding private plots.” “In difficult areas, only implementing household responsibility and land leasing can better motivate farmers.”
He insisted on inviting Deng Zihui to the Party School to give a report promoting individual effort. He said: “Old Deng gave a report at the Military Academy, criticizing sharply, and we also invited him to speak.” When Deng Zihui gave the report, he led the applause at the rostrum. After the report, he issued a “bulletin” saying: “Listening to such a report truly solves problems.” He also said: “In the past, criticizing Old Deng was perhaps inappropriate, but if Deng manages agriculture, it won’t turn out like this.”
He defended those engaged in speculation and capitalism. When others said there was speculation in the free market, he immediately rebuked: “What speculation? Earning a few hundred yuan, what’s that? China won’t have capitalist restoration.”
He slandered our Party for “fearing the people getting rich,” claiming this idea comes from “fear of capitalism.” “In recent years, we have also feared developing capitalism and bourgeois liberalism, afraid to do anything, and we have suffered great losses.”
Many of Yang Xianzhen’s remarks during the wave of individual effort from 1961 to 1962 once again confirmed that his attacks on the three red banners in 1959 were entirely from bourgeois positions, and again proved he is a person committed to walking the capitalist road.
5. Attacking Past Political Movements and Causing Reversal of Cases
Yang Xianzhen slandered past political movements as “like all dynasties in Chinese history, where you persecute me and I persecute you”; he said, “There have been many loyal and good people harmed in history, and this problem also exists in socialist society.” He slandered that these years “are not about fighting against something, but about fighting because of something,” calling it “ineffective labor and harmful labor.” He said: “The 1952 ‘Three-Antis’ campaign was a typical case of not being pragmatic and realistic”; the 1957 anti-rightist campaign was when the Central broadened the scope of the rightists, and he “tried several times to stop it but couldn’t”; the 1959 anti-Right Opportunism was “subjectivism and idealism.”
From 1961 to 1962, Yang Xianzhen was everywhere shouting, telling people that from 1959 to 1960, “the criticism was imposed from above.” “I still speak, at most I will wear the bourgeois intellectual hat forever, and won’t kneel to seek unity.” He was afraid to be called “tyrant” and “dogmatist” by critics, claiming to be a “true Marxist-Leninist.” Hou Weiyu also said: “In these years, fake Marxism criticized real Marxism,” and “Criticizing Yang Xianzhen was based on Central instructions and was a mistake.”
In the first half of 1962, during a period of intense class struggle at home and abroad, Yang Xianzhen and Hou Weiyu, according to their long-planned scheme, launched a reversal campaign. Their activities in the Party Committee received full support from then-Party School President and First Secretary Wang Congwu, and only a few Party Committee members opposed and resisted. As a result, Yang Xianzhen went mad, and Hou Weiyu, also out of his long rest, energetically directed the reversal activities.
Yang Xianzhen and Hou Weiyu gathered all dissidents, individuals with serious political issues, rightists, and those with personal ambitions, and directed attacks in various directions. Yang Xianzhen even personally took a car into the city to bring in a person with serious political suspicion to the Party School to reverse a far-right element. Under their support, 27 out of 34 rightists among the staff proposed to reverse cases.
During the Seventh Plenary Session of the Party, the meeting criticized the Central Party School by name. Yang Xianzhen overnight altered the materials of the second rotation class, filling two books with vicious anti-Party and anti-Central remarks, deleting more than half. Hou Weiyu organized people to work overtime to write false reports to oppose the Central’s criticism.
Anti-Party elements vigorously obstructed the implementation of the spirit of the Seventh Plenary, and Comrade Ai Sichi, at the staff and student assembly, delivered a report on implementing the spirit of the Seventh Plenary. Hao Peilin openly attacked this report as “poisonous weed,” and with Sun Dingguo, incited the masses to oppose. After their anti-Party activities were exposed, Yang Xianzhen instructed Hao Peilin to continue “preparing for battle.” Hou Weiyu then complained to Hao Peilin: “Originally, we planned to resolve Ai’s report issue, but your disturbance was a miscalculation. Future struggles need some strategy.” Feeling guilty and hypocritical, he also told Hao Peilin: “If we mess up, our group, led by Yang, will become an anti-Party clique.”
Yang Xianzhen and Hou Weiyu not only aimed to reverse cases for certain individuals but also to overturn the records of past political movements, opposing the socialist revolution on the political and ideological fronts.
6. Collaborating with Peng Dehuai to Oppose the Party
Yang Xianzhen’s relationship with Peng Dehuai has been very close for a long time.
In 1959, especially around the Lushan Conference, Yang Xianzhen and Peng Dehuai coordinated, attacking the three red banners. Their anti-Party actions were in sync, even using identical language.
At the Lushan Conference, Yang Xianzhen adopted a two-faced approach, covering up his and Peng Dehuai’s anti-Party words and deeds. In fact, he was very dissatisfied with criticizing Peng Dehuai. On the first day in Beijing, he made anti-Party remarks, and the next day at Lushan, during the Eighth Plenary Session of the Eighth Central Committee, he “criticized” Peng Dehuai. After returning from Lushan, he deliberately told people: “There are really strange things in the world, a general like Peng is anti-Party!” and “This time, Peng Dehuai’s struggle was fierce; the Central people surrounded him and scolded him to his face. This is the first time I saw such a criticism meeting!”
In 1961, he and Peng Dehuai, under the guise of “investigation,” respectively went to the Northwest and Hunan to conduct anti-Party activities. When Peng Dehuai left Beijing, Yang Xianzhen saw him off at the station, and they had a secret talk in the carriage.
In 1962, Yang Xianzhen and Peng Dehuai jointly launched a reversal. Peng Dehuai issued the “80,000-character Letter” against the Party, and Yang Xianzhen caused chaos at the Party School, reversing cases. Yang Xianzhen defended his own reversal and also Peng Dehuai’s. He said: “Peng Dehuai’s problem can be handled in a small scope; there’s no need to do it throughout the Party. Now, identifying and correcting errors is good enough!”
Yang Xianzhen is an unreformed old scholar, Peng Dehuai is an unreformed old soldier; they joined forces, opposed the Party, and reversed cases together—they are a gang.
7. Standing on Khrushchev’s Side
After Khrushchev came to power, Yang Xianzhen actively sought relations with the Soviet Union. From October to December 1954, during his visit to the USSR, he established “direct contacts” with the higher Party schools of the CPSU, requesting “regular guidance” and sending people to “directly guide our work.” After returning to China, he vigorously promoted a set of ideas from the CPSU Party School and, at the request of the Soviets, repeatedly proposed sending cadres to study in the USSR and sending larger delegations for visits. He almost wanted to turn our Central Party School into a branch of the CPSU higher Party school.
During his visit to the USSR, he repeatedly contacted Sergei Sherbakov, director of the Chinese department of the Soviet Central Committee’s liaison office. He also kept in contact with Zeng Xiu, a Chinese working in the Soviet Ministry of Internal Affairs. After returning, through Zeng Xiu, he maintained frequent contact with the USSR. Without approval from the Central, he secretly sent the philosophical teaching summaries of the Marxism-Leninism Institute to the Soviet Academy of Social Sciences and the CPSU higher Party school via Zeng Xiu. In October 1956, he received a letter from Georgi Mammerkin of the Soviet Academy of Social Sciences, asking him to gather materials related to China-India economic relations from 1950 to 1956. The letter specified: “Materials can be sent to Zeng Xiu’s address.”
He repeatedly provided our Party’s secrets to the Soviets. In 1956, he told Sergei Mikhailovich, head of the Chinese section of the Soviet Central Committee’s liaison office, about the Party’s history of anti-rightist campaigns and rectification issues. In June 1958, he and Hou Weiyu wrote to Soviet experts Zotov and others, reporting on the Party School’s rectification and anti-rightist campaigns; in July, they sent materials such as the speeches of rightists among the staff and students, the anti-rightist work summaries of student branches, and the Party Committee’s summaries, to the Soviet experts.
He was very interested in Khrushchev’s so-called “anti-personal cult,” which he actively promoted in many occasions. Even after the 1959 Lushan Conference, he continued to promote the so-called “anti-personal cult.”
Before and after the 22nd Congress of the CPSU, he continued to flatter Khrushchev. He said: “Hru-shov didn’t sell the machinery to the collective farms, and it won’t develop into capitalism because of that.” He claimed that revisionists’ betrayal of the proletariat was just “misunderstanding and practice detachment.” In 1962, he widely distributed his anti-Party “Wenlian Speech,” which still included quotes from Khrushchev attacking our Party.
Yang Xianzhen is on Khrushchev’s side.
8. Covering Up and Placing Reactionary Landlords and Counter-Revolutionaries
Since the liberation of the country, Yang Xianzhen has tried to place many reactionary landlords, spies, traitors, and their relatives into Party and state organs, with at least eighteen known cases. Among them are traitors from the Chinese United Front Work Department responsible for over seventy murders, and landlords who killed more than twenty underground Party members, revolutionary cadres, and land-reclaiming peasants.
For example, his sworn brother, the notorious landlord Xiong Haiyan, murdered fifteen soldiers, peasants, and village heads. After liberation, when Bao Fan fled abroad, he threatened: “After I leave, anyone who fights me, I, Bao, will come back and kill all within forty miles, leaving no one alive!” In 1949, Bao Fan fled to Beijing, and Yang Xianzhen actually placed him in the Party School, often drinking and chatting with him, treating him like family. When the Hubei provincial public security department twice sent people to arrest him at the Party School, they only caught him after the second attempt. Yang Xianzhen was extremely dissatisfied with this.
Yang Xianzhen repeatedly protected and placed anti-revolutionaries, showing that these actions are not occasional mistakes but are driven by his original class instincts.
9. Turning the Central Party School into an Independent Kingdom and Engaging in Sectarian Activities
Yang Xianzhen turned the Central Party School into an independent kingdom and engaged in sectarian activities.Zhen, Hou Weiyu have always opposed following the Party’s policies in running the Party school. They act arbitrarily and resist the central leadership. Since 1956, the Central Political Bureau, the Secretariat, the Central Propaganda Department, and even the Second Plenary Session of the Eighth Party Congress have repeatedly criticized the Party school for not paying enough attention to studying Chairman Mao’s works. Yang Xianzhen and Hou Weiyu resisted the criticism from the central authorities, attacking the central “blind command” and claiming “seeking truth from facts is not enough.” Yang Xianzhen also cursed loudly: “Why does the Propaganda Department specifically oppose me!” “Is it because I haven’t established a good relationship with the Central Propaganda Department?”
Yang Xianzhen said: “Over the years, it’s been very clear that anyone opposing me will eventually be unable to stand firm.” He also instructed his confidants to write in the Party school documents that he was “the representative of the correct line.” Sun Dingguo and others praised him as “one of the top Marxist-Leninist authorities,” “saint,” and so on.
Yang Xianzhen implemented a parentalist rule at the Party school. Whatever he decided, others could not have any objections. He did not allow the Party school to implement the policy of “a hundred schools contending.” If teachers did not explain according to Yang Xianzhen’s views, they were labeled as “counter-leadership.” Anyone who studied issues according to the central’s views but not according to Yang Xianzhen’s was accused of “acting on the boss’s orders.” When Yang Xianzhen appointed the counter-revolutionary Bao Haiming at the Party school, others raised objections, but he even said: “What! I still need his approval for using personal connections!”
Yang Xianzhen and Hou Weiyu carried out factional cadre policies, colluding and cultivating personal influence. They placed individuals with serious political and historical issues, people who hated the Party, those with serious revisionist ideas, and those with extreme bad character and personal ambitions into important positions at key units, causing serious organizational impurity at the senior Party school and fostering corruption and evil tendencies. The Party Central Committee’s policies and principles were resisted, the atmosphere of the Party’s principles was thin, and liberalism ran rampant.
In 1962, Yang Xianzhen and Hou Weiyu, in order to overturn their cases, colluded with some people to carry out factional activities. Among them were Sun Dingguo, former deputy director of the Philosophy Teaching and Research Office; Yuan You, former deputy director of the Political Economy Teaching and Research Office; Hao Peilin, former director of the General Affairs Management Office; Wang Jieshan, former deputy director of the Party Committee Office; and Cao Haibo, a research class student. (Cao Haibo had been at the Party school for seven years, refused to accept assignments from the Central Organization Department twice, and declared himself “wanting to stay at the Party school,” aiming to become an official. He actively participated in many activities organized by Yang Xianzhen both inside and outside the school, tirelessly working for him.) Under the command of Yang Xianzhen and Hou Weiyu, these anti-Party elements ran rampant, brazenly attacking the Central Committee and Chairman Mao, opposing Mao Zedong Thought, opposing the Three Red Banners, criticizing political movements, causing chaos with overturning cases and individualism. At that time, revisionist rhetoric was widespread, and all kinds of evil spirits and monsters appeared.
Yang Xianzhen and Hou Weiyu, by establishing independent kingdoms above and conducting factional activities within, long turned the Party school into a “forbidden land” outside our Party.
10. Attempting to seize leadership of the national Party schools and extending their reach in many areas
Yang Xianzhen attempted to seize the leadership of the national Party schools. After returning from his visit to the USSR in 1954, he repeatedly said: “The CPSU Central Committee relies on the high-level Party school as a base to lead all Party schools,” and demanded that the central authorities adopt this “experience.” Subsequently, he sent大量 of his speeches, teaching materials, and teaching plans to Party schools across the country to expand his influence. He gathered a few people in the academic circles, kept behind the scenes, and directed them to write articles in newspapers according to his intentions, brazenly opposing Mao Zedong’s philosophy.
In 1961, Yang Xianzhen traveled throughout Xinjiang, spreading anti-Party rhetoric extensively, inciting those who had been criticized and were dissatisfied with the Party to overturn their cases, fueling the reactionary arrogance of local nationalist elements.
Yang Xianzhen’s ambition was great; he aimed to seize the leadership of the national Party schools and extend his hands into many areas, engaging in conspiracies and doing evil.
In recent months, Yang Xianzhen also participated in several discussion meetings but remained silent and showed no attitude. At the end of October, he submitted a “written self-criticism.” In this “self-criticism,” he admitted, on one hand, that he “opposed the Three Red Banners, opposed the Party, opposed the central authorities, opposed Chairman Mao,” that he was “revisionist politically,” that his “ideological consciousness was bourgeois absolute individualism,” and that he was “an unrepentant bourgeois intellectual”; on the other hand, when examining specific errors and behaviors, he almost denied and argued against each issue, using double standards, insisting on his mistakes, and avoiding discussing some of the most important political and organizational problems exposed, even spreading rumors and lies, and even attacking the Party indirectly.
This exposure and criticism of Yang Xianzhen eliminated a sore spot for the Party and cleared an obstacle for propagating Mao Zedong Thought. Everyone believed that “this is a major victory for the Party school work.”
The months-long discussion and criticism of Yang Xianzhen thoroughly revealed what kind of person he truly was. He falsely claimed to be a Communist Party member but engaged in anti-Party activities, cloaked himself in Marxism-Leninism to spread revisionist ideas, and from an ideological standpoint, eroded our Party and opposed socialism. Yang Xianzhen committed intolerable errors politically, ideologically, and organizationally. In the past, he used his Party position to adopt double-dealing tactics, confusing many comrades; some regarded him as a “hardworking and frugal old revolutionary” and a “philosophical authority.” Now, it is clear that he is an anti-Party, anti-Central, anti-Mao Zedong Thought revisionist, a complete hypocrite, double-dealer, and ambitious man.
Since the liberation of the whole country, Yang Xianzhen’s status and power increased, but with the deepening of the socialist revolution, his bourgeois ideas exposed and further developed, becoming an absolute individualist. He used his Party positions and “prestige” to engage in conspiracy and anti-Party activities, becoming a leader of anti-Party forces in the theoretical circle. Everyone deeply feels that we must take Yang Xianzhen as a warning, overcome our bourgeois ideas, and strengthen Party spirit training.
Most of those influenced by Yang Xianzhen’s思想 are blindly following him; only a very few intentionally conspired with him against the Party. These individuals have been exposed and subjected to serious criticism. Now, except for a few elements, they have basically admitted and examined their anti-Party words and deeds, some even faced Yang Xianzhen in face-to-face struggles. For these people, we adopt a “watch and help” attitude, wholeheartedly helping them recognize their mistakes, welcoming their correction. Many comrades have expressed that this critique was profound and saved comrades; although they made mistakes, the organization did not discipline them and still gave them the opportunity to continue the “Four Cleanups” campaign, urging them to reform well and strive to become qualified revolutionaries. For these comrades who made mistakes, we plan to generally not impose organizational sanctions as long as they are willing to correct their mistakes, strictly implementing the policy of solving problems from the ideological level, to clarify right and wrong and to unite comrades.
In the past, many leadership positions were seized by anti-Party elements; some had already undergone reorganization before the movement, some began reorganizing during the movement, gradually establishing a new leadership core.
Through this discussion and criticism, the political consciousness of trainees and staff has been greatly improved. Everyone has gained further understanding of the long-term, complex, and acute nature of class struggle during the socialist period, especially in the ideological field.
During the discussion and criticism, trainees and staff learned Mao Zedong Thought more profoundly. Everyone, from the current international communist movement and from our country’s socialist revolution and construction, recognized the greatness and importance of Mao Zedong Thought. This struggle, using Mao’s works as weapons to criticize Yang Xianzhen’s revisionist ideas, is a vigorous practice of learning and applying Mao Zedong Thought. Everyone deeply realizes that to be a true proletarian revolutionary fighter, one must truly learn Mao Zedong Thought.
Yang Xianzhen’s opposition to Mao Zedong Thought, opposition to socialism, and opposition to class struggle created a bad atmosphere of isolated and static theoretical research at the Party school; it caused the Party school to drift away from the proletariat’s political struggle, leading to revisionism. Therefore, everyone has come to a conclusion that the Party school must seriously follow Mao Zedong Thought.
Regarding the lessons learned from Yang Xianzhen’s case, we are preparing to summarize from all aspects, strive for new construction work in all areas, especially ideological construction. We firmly believe that as long as we conscientiously implement the policy of running Party schools under Mao Zedong Thought, combine the practice of class struggle to study Marxism-Leninism, the Party school will surely usher in new prospects.
Please approve whether this report is appropriate.
