STUDIES

MAO IN MUFTI: NEWLY IDENTIFIED WORKS BY *

JohnFitzgerald

Zirenas an Alias of Mao Zedong Mao Zedong was a prominentGuomindang (GMD) officialin Guangdong for about a year betweenSeptember 1925 and mid-1926,but littlehas been revealed about his activitiesduring this period because his associationwith ChiangKai-shek has remaineda source of some embarrassmentto historians on both sides of the Straits.As the relevantfiles in the archivesof both the GMD and the CommunistParty of (CPC) are closed to researchers,progress in mappingMao's earlyyears has inevitablytaken the formof discoveriesof his speechesand writingsin places readilyaccessible, but hithertooverlooked.1 It is well knownthat during his stayin Guangdong Mao edited the GMD magazineZhengzhi zhoubao (PoliticalWeekly), from which a numberof articleshave been culled for inclusionin compendiaof his collected works.2I shall argue that Mao's most importantcontributions to this magazinehave, however,been overlookedto date throughfailure to recognisethat five additional articlespublished in this magazineunder the nameZiren ( 1f) werealso writtenby Mao Zedong. My attentionwas firstdrawn to the possibilityof Ziren beingan alias of Mao Zedong while leafing through the earliest issues of the GMD Propaganda Bureau's Zhengzhizhoubao and noticingthat the back cover publication details listed the responsibile person at the magazine's Guangzhouhead officeas Mao Ziren.The magazine'sGuangzhou editor was in fact Mao Zedong. Could theirshared surnamehave been mere coinci- dence? In pursuingthis question a numberof other coincidencescame to light.In orderto demonstratethat there was but one Mao in the Guangzhou office,I shall interweavethe known factsabout Zirenwith relevant data on Mao-Zedong, and assessthe significanceof thesecoincidences.

* I wish to thankProfessor Stuart Schramfor his help and encouragement.

THE AUSTRALIAN JOURNAL OF CHINESE AFFAIRS NO.9

This content downloaded from 136.186.72.15 on Tue, 23 Apr 2013 01:11:00 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 2 THE AUSTRALIAN JOURNAL OF CHINESE AFFAIRS

The second coincidenceto emergewas that,although two Ziren articles were publishedin Zhengzhizhoubao, Issue 4 (10 January1926), Zirenwas in fact listed as the responsibleperson for Issues 1, 2 and 3 (5, 13 and 20 December 1925) only, of the fourteenissues published. Mao Zedong's generallyacknowledged contributions to the magazine,both underhis given name and underhis style,Run, also ceased withthe thirdissue. (The appear- ance of a piece by Mao Zedong in Issue 6/7may be discounted,as it was not writtenin his capacityas editorbut as a reprintof his speechto the Second National GMD Congresspublished alongside many other such speeches in an issue devotedexclusively to thatcongress.) Hence, beforethe fourthissue went to press,both Mao Zedong and Ziren had left the officesof Zhengzhi zhoubao. The thirdpoint of coincidenceis thatMao Ziren,like Mao Zedong, was no mereletter-opening functionary in the magazine'shead office.The name Ziren is attached to five substantialarticles over the firstfour issues, in a magazine otherwisedevoted almost entirelyto reprintsof variousspeeches and partyreports and to briefeditorials by Mao Zedong underanother alias. Furthermore,Mao Ziren's equivalentin the Shanghaibranch office of the magazine,as listed in the publicationdetails, was the prominentGMD and CPC activist,Yun Daiying.It would appearthat Mao Zirenand Yun Daiying held similarrank. As it happens,Yun was to the propagandaof the GMD ShanghaiExecutive Branch as Mao Zedong was to the propagandaof the GMD CentralExecutive Committee: each was at one timenominally second in commandto WangJingwei in hisrespective GMD propagandabureau, and each in factran the show. The fourthand subsequent points of coincidence emerge in textual comparisonof articlesby Ziren and contemporaryworks by Mao Zedong. In the firstplace, four of the fivepieces by Ziren are concernedprimarily with the split withinthe GMD between the GuangzhouCentral Executive Committeeand the WesternHills Faction - that is to say, betweenthe left and rightwings of the party. (The exception is the text listed below as Ziren 2.) This topical concentrationis significant,for if we exclude the articlespreviously attributed to Mao, then of the twenty-eighttitles appear- ing in the firstfour issues only seven broach the topic in any substantial way: Ziren's four account for over half of this seven,although his articles make up less than one-fifthof the twenty-eightin question. Lest these figuresappear to cloud ratherthan clarifythe issue,let me say thatthey are meant simply to demonstratethat Mao Ziren showed a characteristic partialityfor writing about the splitin the GMD. Thereis no doubt thatMao Zedong did likewise.On the whole, the briefeditorials published under his style,Run, eitherdeal with specificaspects or personalitiesof the split,or approach it indirectlyby defendingthe presenceof CPC memberswithin the GMD. It appears that Mao Zedong, like Mao Ziren,saw his role in the

This content downloaded from 136.186.72.15 on Tue, 23 Apr 2013 01:11:00 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions MAO IN MUFTI 3

GMD as defenderof the two-partyalliance againstattack fromthe GMD rightwing. The fifthpoint of coincidenceis Zirenand Zedong's sharedconcern about the deviant behaviour of the GMD Shanghai newspaper,Minguo ribao (Republican Daily). This paper's publicityon behalf of the WesternHills Faction was quite properlythe concernof Mao Zedong,who as actinghead of the GMD Propaganda Bureau was empowered to censure wayward publications. did in fact delivera reporton the paper to the Second National Congressof the GMD, and is said to have been personallyinvolved in a short-livedventure to establisha newspaperentitled the Guomin ribao (Republicans' Daily) to challenge the Minguo ribao in Shanghai.3 As it happens, the rightistdeviations of Minguo ribao formthe titleand subject of one of Ziren'sfive articles, listed below as Ziren 3. The sixthpoint of coincidencelies in the roughlysimultaneous attempts by Zirenand Zedong to fitthe receivedcategories of Chineseurban and rural groups into a classical Marxistframework. Each publishedhis attemptin Januaryor February 1926, Ziren with the article 'The reasonsunderlying the secessionof the GMD rightistfaction and itsramifications for the future of the revolution'(Ziren 5) in Zhengzhizhoubao, and Zedong in his two justifiablycelebrated articles, 'An analysis of the various classes of the Chinese peasantryand theirattitudes towards revolution' (Zedong 1), and 'Analysisof all classes in Chinese society' (Zedong 2), which appeared in Issues 1 and 2 of Zhongguonongmin (Chinese Peasant).4 These threearticles are similarnot only in theirgeneral aims, but also in theirspecific detail, both Ziren and Zedong makinguse of the fivequasi-Marxist categories of 'big bourgeoisie', 'bourgeoisie', 'petite bourgeoisie', 'semi-proletariat'and 'proletariat'to classify some fifteento twenty differentChinese socio- economic groupings.Despite minorvariations in theirclassification, notably the addition of 'small merchants'and 'lower intellectuals'to the petit- bourgeoisclass in Zedong 2, each chose to divideChina's agreed population of 400 million between the five categoriesin exactly the same way (see table). If Ziren and Zedong deserveto share the creditfor attemptingsuch an analysis,then they mustalso sharethe blame for its shortcomings.Mao Zedong's two articleshave been thoughtto show that his graspof Marxist theory at this time was highlydeficient, and Ziren reveals preciselythe same deficiencies.5 The seventhpoint of coincidencecentres on the stressplaced by Ziren and Zedong, in the same threearticles, upon the politicalpostures of each of the classes under analysis and upon the practical implicationsof these posturesfor revolutionaryaction. It has been arguedelsewhere that it was Mao Zedong's concern with the practical implicationsof particularclass attitudeswhich distinguishedhis analysisof Chineserural society from that of his contemporaries,most notably from earlierclass analyses by

This content downloaded from 136.186.72.15 on Tue, 23 Apr 2013 01:11:00 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions I-.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-

4-4-

C - 4 t .~Cl - c.4 - 0 - V 4J 4-J 0 uJ V 0 t o "o -~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~0:

U, 4-i 4-i U

U0 j4 4CJ u

0, Z 0 C cw 0~~0 0 0 0 Z 9~~~~~~~~- l s00 "0 c ~~ S ~ 0 ~~ 0 ~~

C/)~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-

o ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0C

0 4)~~~~~04~ 4-J

o ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 0~ ~~~~~~~~C

0 0~~0~

- ..04 '-4 04 w

U, U, ,

4-J 4-J 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~4'~- 4"0 co 0 4t 0~~~~~~~~

0 - -~C 0 0 4i0 Q 0 VC -J:~~~~--4 w 7 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

U,Q 0 0 0 0 0 ~ ~ * ~~C u~~~nzU3JT'7 ~~~r4 7~~~2uotp3z

This content downloaded from 136.186.72.15 on Tue, 23 Apr 2013 01:11:00 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions MAO IN MUFTI 5

Duxiu.6 Ziren demonstratesan identicalconcern when he assignseach class underanalysis a specificattitude towards revolution, mirroring Zedong even to the point of sharinghis obsession with the role of the vacillating intermediate class in revolution. The small-landlordelement of the 'bourgeoisie'is typifiedby Mao Zedong and Ziren alike as caughtbetween the forces of revolutionand those of counter-revolution,yet obliged by circumstancesto come down on one side or the other;there was, as both insist,no middleway. The eighthpoint of coincidencerelates Ziren 5 to sketchyreports of a speech deliveredby Mao Zedong to the FirstGuangdong Provincial Congress of the GMD in October 1925. Ziren ended his analysis of the vacillating intermediateclass with a call forthose wavering in the path of revolutionto come over to the side of therevolution. In the termsof Ziren'sexplanation, the GMD rightfaction represented the bourgeoisiewhich, since the founding of the Republic, had hinderedthe progressof the revolutionby tryingto pursuean impossiblemiddle way. Ziren arguedthat with the linesof battle betweenthe forcesof revolutionand counter-revolutionnow clearlydrawn, therecould be no option forrepresentatives of the intermediateclass but to join the partyof revolution,or breakaway fromit. The generalframework of this argumentforeshadows that of Zedong 1 and 2, but its specific applicationto the historyof the Chineserevolution and the evolutionof the GMD rightfaction appears to have no parallelin Mao Zedong's writtenwork. Mao was, however,an orator as well as a pamphleteer,and the outlinein contemporarynewspaper reports of his speech to the GMD Provincial Congressindicates that he was concerned,like Ziren,with the indecisiveness of the 'middle-roaders'in the GMD. The centraltheme of Mao Zedong's speech to the congresswas that the middlefaction would have to make up its mind to move to the leftor to the right,for under present circumstances it could no longerremain a middle faction.7 It is thus clear that Ziren 5 drew its central theme froma speech by Mao Zedong, and borrowedits analyticalframework from articles Mao Zedong was draftingat the time. The recurrenceof key phrasesand passagesin Ziren 5 and Zedong 1 and 2 seals the case for theiridentity. Such recurrencesare best illustratedby the passage in all three articles which explains the dilemma confrontingthe intermediateclass at the currentstage of the revolution.The argument, simplyput, is thatthe bourgeoisieneeds a revolutionbecause its ambitionto attain the statusof big bourgeoisieis frustratedby a counter-revolutionary alliance of imperialists,militarists and the big bourgeoisie itself. Yet althoughit needs a revolution,the bourgeoisieis terrifiedof one occurring because the main forceslining up on the side of revolutionare the national and internationalproletariat. Herein lies its dilemma. The similarityof argumentand choiceof wordsin therelevant passages of Ziren 5 and Zedong 1 and 2 suggestthat theymust have been writtenby the one hand (see texts overleaf).

This content downloaded from 136.186.72.15 on Tue, 23 Apr 2013 01:11:00 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 6 THE AUSTRALIAN JOURNAL OF CHINESE AFFAIRS

TEXTUAL COMPARISON OF ZIREN 5 AND ZEDONG 1 AND 2

Ziren 5, fromZhengzhi zhoubao, 4 (10 January1926), 12.

X?sSX~~~~~~~~I*/K@ R J9 ,2X4ikl

ai &s Sit 2%IJT /j7tPz k1a;k f 11 IRAatm 4 /*T ti'r MAXN aA A:t'tb W

Zedong 1, fromTakeuchi Minoru (ed.), Mao Zedong ji [Collected Writings of Mao Zedong] (Tokyo, 1970-), vol. I, p.153.

INn2, fm Take u tM . cit.,vol. I, p.14.

Zedong 2, fromTakeuchi Minoru, op. cit.,vol. I, p.l164. ~# .

~ 1 AP'-F xT /T 8 t *lRA t Tt 4 X t' +tit JBtI5 *' fr Pto 0 X p9 f4

9 149-z

This content downloaded from 136.186.72.15 on Tue, 23 Apr 2013 01:11:00 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions MAO IN MUFTI 7 Significanceof the Discovery What little is known of Mao's activitiesin Guangdonghas leftan over- ridingimpression of Mao as a peasantmovement theorist and advocate. He became actinghead of the GMD CentralPropaganda Bureau, and edited its Zhengzhizhoubao, but he is thoughtto have spentmost of his time in the Peasant Bureau across the corridor,teaching the fifthclass of its Peasant MovementTraining Institute, taking charge of its sixth class, joining its Peasant MovementCommittee, and publishinghis two seminalworks of class analysis,Zedong 1 and 2, in the Januaryand February1926 issuesof the PeasantBureau's journal, Zhongguo nongmin. This one-dimensionalportrait of Mao as a peasant movementactivist is fairlyfaithful, but not quite complete.Professor Stuart Schram has added a second dimensionto the portraitby emphasisingMao's simultaneouspre- occupation withproblems of organisationand disciplinewithin the GMD.9 Nor, in the samevein, should Mao's role as GMD propagandistbe overlooked in the searchfor the roots of his thinkingon peasantrevolution. Mao served the longestperiod of continuoustenure of any head or actinghead of the GMD PropagandaBureau over the criticalperiod fromits inceptionto the startof the NorthernExpedition. He took chargeof the PropagandaBureau in the firstweek of October 1925, by decree of the 111th sessionof the GMD Central Executive Committee,and effectivelyran the Bureau until the last week of May 1926, a period of eight months in all.10 The Propaganda Bureau had never known such continuity,having staggered throughsix briefspells of directorshipover the twentymonths leading up to Mao's appointment,under Sumin (two months), Jitao (three months), Luyin (one and a half months), Jingwei (two months), Chen Yangxuan (six months), and again under WangJingwei (five and a half months). Such continuity, co-ordination and discipline as the PropagandaBureau managed to achieve all fell withinthe period of Mao's directorship.' 1 Ziren is the name Mao chose to go by when wearingthe hat of GMD propagandist.Thus the five Ziren pieces help to delineate the featuresof Mao the propagandist,haranguing the GMD rightwing, summoning support from its left, and offeringan explanation of the course of the Chinese revolutionin termsof class compositionand conflict.As GMD propagandist, Mao was obliged to broach subjects which had little bearing on the Guangdongpeasant movementand, in particular,to address the emerging splitwithin the ranks of the GMD. At the same time, as we assemble the mosaic of Mao the GMD propagandist,we findthat some pieces fitjust as neatlyinto the portraitsof Mao the party organiserand peasant movementactivist. In Ziren 5, for example, he ascribes left and right divisions within the GMD to class

This content downloaded from 136.186.72.15 on Tue, 23 Apr 2013 01:11:00 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 8 THE AUSTRALIAN JOURNAL OF CHINESE AFFAIRS differencesbetween a rural'big bourgeoisie'and vacillating'bourgeoisie', on the one side,and 'petitebourgeoisie/semi-proletariat/proletariat' on the other,in a frameworkall but identicalto his concurrentwritings on the peasantmovement (Zedong 1 and 2). The realsignificance of thefind may lie not in how farthe writings of Zirenthe propagandist differ from those of Mao Zedongthe peasantmovement activist, but ratherin how closely theyresemble one another.The textof Ziren 5, althoughpublished in 1926, in fact dates from1925, as indicatedby Ziren'sreference to the 1924 FirstNational Congress of theGMD as havingtaken place 'last year'. Ziren 5 may in fact have been based upon Mao's speechof October1925. It is identicalin theme,it is similarto a speechin itshighly repetitive format, and it endswith a terseslogan ('Revolutionary factions of theentire country, unite!')very similar to the one withwhich Mao is said to haveended his speech (' live the unityof the revolutionaryfaction!'). Having been writtenin 1925, it is quitelikely that Ziren 5 predatesZedong 1 and 2, and if it is indeedbased upon thetext of Mao's October speech then it precedes themby quite some time. This in itselfis significant,for it followsthat Ziren 5 is Mao Zedong'sfirst comprehensive attempt at a Marxistanalysis of all the classescomprising Chinese society. For thisreason a completetransla- tionis appendedbelow. The fiveZiren pieces show that the similaritieswere greater than the differencesbetween Mao the peasantmovement activist, Mao the party bureaucratand Mao the GMD propagandist.Their discovery adds a third dimensionto thecustomary portrait of Mao, butrather than alter its basic featuresbrings them a littlecloser to life.

The ZirenTexts in ZhengzhiZhoubao Ziren1 'GMD partymembers of therevolutionary faction arise en masse to oppose the meetingof the rightistfaction in Beijing',2 (13 December1925), 5-11. Synopsis:A briefintroduction to numerouscommunications from the 'revolutionaryfaction', all of whichsupport the GuangzhouGMD head- quartersin condemningthe defecting rightists.

Ziren2 'The GMD selectsstudents for Moscow Yat-senUniversity', 2 (13 December1925), 14-16. Synopsis:Lenin and Sun Yat-senshared a warmadmiration for one another and an intensedistaste for imperialism. Soviet respect for Sun liveson in the new universityset up in his honourto trainleaders for the Chinese revolution.(Includes lists of courses,students and teachers at theuniversity, a summaryof a speechby WangJingwei and the textof a speechby the Sovietadviser, Borodin.)

This content downloaded from 136.186.72.15 on Tue, 23 Apr 2013 01:11:00 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions MAO IN MUFTI 9

Ziren3 'The reasons underlyingthe reactionof the ShanghaiRepublican Daily, and the punitivemeasures adopted againstit by the GMD CentralExecutive Committee', 3 (20 December 1925), 4-5. Synopsis:At this criticaljuncture in the nationalrevolution, the Republican Daily has fallenvictim to its own historicalties and class affiliations,and has defectedto the side of reaction. Ziren4 'Opponents of the meeting of the rightistfaction are spread throughoutthe entirecountry', 4 (10 January1926), 19-29. Synopsis: In this second introduction to numerous telegrams from opponentsof the rightistfaction (see Ziren 1), Ziren arguesthat the leftists have the numberson theirside.

Ziren 5 'The reasonsunderlying the secessionof the GMD rightistfaction and its ramificationsfor the futureof the revolution',4 (10 January1926), 10-12 (unabridgedtranslation). Some people say that a rightistfaction has once again broken away fromthe GMD throughthe machinationsof the leftistfaction, and that this is unfortunatefor the GMD and for the nationalrevolution. This opinion is incorrect.Such a splitshould occur at thistime in a political party of national revolution within semi-colonialChina. It is an inevitablephenomenon and, although no cause for rejoicing,it is certainlyno cause forregret. If you wantto know why,then you need only take a look at the currentsituation and at thehistory of the GMD since the days of the Revive China Society and you will fully understand. The late eighteenth to early nineteenth century democratic revolutionsin Europe, America and Japan, in which the bourgeoisie overthrewthe feudal aristocracy,are completelydifferent from the late nineteenthto early twentiethcentury colonial and semi-colonial national revolutionsin which the petite bourgeoisie,semi-proletariat and proletariat co-operate in resistingthe imperialistsand their lackeys in the bureaucrat,militarist, compradore and landlordclasses. What is more, the was not the same as the current one. The earlier bourgeois revolutionsin Britain,France, Germany, America and Japan were revolutionsof the bourgeoisiealone, their opponentsbeing the nationalfeudal aristocracy and theiraim beingto set up nationaliststates governedsolely by the bourgeoisie.Talk of liberty,equality and fraternitywas a ruseon the partof the bourgeoisie for deceivingand takingadvantage of the petite bourgeoisieand the proletariat.The immediateresult was the attainmentof theiraims and establishmentof nationaliststates, and the ultimateoutcome was the developmentof colonies and semi-coloniesthroughout the world and the creationof internationalcapitalist imperialism.

This content downloaded from 136.186.72.15 on Tue, 23 Apr 2013 01:11:00 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 10 THE AUSTRALIAN JOURNAL OF CHINESE AFFAIRS

Modern colonial and semi-colonialrevolutions are co-operative revolutionsof the petite bourgeoisie,semi-proletariat and proletariat, in whichthe big bourgeoisieassociated with imperialismmakes up the force of counter-revolution,the bourgeoisie wavers uncertainly between revolutionand counter-revolution,and the real force for revolutionis made up of a revolutionaryalliance formedby the three classes of petite bourgeoisie, semi-proletariatand proletariat. Its opponentis internationalimperialism and its aim is to establisha state governedby the revolutionarymasses in co-operation.Its slogans of 'people's rights'and 'people's livelihood' are not ruses wherebyone class deceivesand takesadvantage of another,but arejoint politicaland economic demands of all revolutionaryclasses laid down in the platformof theirpolitical partyby theirrepresentative Sun Yat-sen. The immediate result will be to establish states governed by the revolutionarymasses, and the ultimateoutcome will be the elimination of imperialismthroughout the world and the establishmentof a genuinelyfree and equal world alliance, of the kind Sun Yat-sen proposedin the words'human equality and worldharmony'. Let us look now at the differencesbetween the 1911 Revolution and the presentone. Althoughthe 1911 Revolutionshould have been directedessentially against international imperialism, the majorityof partymembers failed to realisethis at the time.Rightist leaders such as Xing, Binglin, Jiaorenand so on, recognisedonly one enemy,the nationalManchu aristocracy, and so theirrevolutionary sloganswere confinedto the simplistic'Out withthe Manchus!'. The organisationand make-upof the partywas extremelyelementary and its fightingranks extremely thin, because therewere as yet no organised workerand peasant masses.Within China therewas at the timeno CPC to representthe interestsof the proletariatand, beyond China, no internationalassistance for the revolution because there was no proletariancountry, only capitalist countries,and no revolutionary alliance of oppressed classes, only an anti-revolutionaryalliance of oppressiveclasses, in a worldtotally dominated by a fewmajor powers. The situationtoday is the reverseof 1911: the targetof revolutionhas already switched to international capitalist imperialism; party organisationhas been graduallytightened with the additionof elements fromthe workerand peasant classes whichhave themselvesbecome a force to be reckonedwith in society;there is now a CPC, and on the internationalfront there have arisen a proletariancountry in Soviet Russia and a revolutionaryalliance of oppressedclasses in the formof the Third Internationalto providepowerful support for the Chinese revolution from behind the lines. For these reasons, only a few revolutionaryparty members from among those who took part in the

This content downloaded from 136.186.72.15 on Tue, 23 Apr 2013 01:11:00 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions MAO IN MUFTI 11

1911 Revolutionstill forcefully advocate revolution, the greatmajority having either abandoned the revolutionaryenterprise for fear of the currentrevolution, or defectedto the ranks of counter-revolutionto do battle with the GMD in its presentform. Hence, as the revolution has developed and the GMD has progressed,the old and the new rightistfactions have split off one by one like bamboo shoots from theirstem. if we want to understandfully the reasons for this split,we must also take a look at the social class affiliationsof GMD memberssince the days of the Revive China Society. We know thatthe sourceof Sun Yat-sen's earliestthinking on revolutionwas Hong Xiuquan, who led the rural proletariat in a peasant revolution against the Manchu aristocracyand the landlordclass. In termsof organisation,the Revive China Society was a secret society which drew exclusivelyupon the proletarianelements declasses. The AllianceSociety was made up partly of overseas Chinese workers,partly of secret societies in China, and partly of overseas students of small-landlordbackground, and local studentsof small-landlordand owner-cultivatorbackground. In all, the compositionof the Alliance Society was a collectionof fourclasses - the proletariat (secret societies), semi-proletariat(overseas Chinese workers), petite bourgeoisie (one section of local students), and bourgeoisie(overseas students and the other sectionof local students). At that time, leading the class of largelandowners was the Emperor- ProtectionParty of Youwei's faction,standing in oppositionto the Alliance Society of Sun Yat-sen's factionwhich led the Chinese proletariat,semi-proletariat, petite bourgeoisie and bourgeoisie. Following the initial success of the 1911 Revolution,one faction withinthe Alliance Society, representingsmall landlords,disapproved of the implementationof Sun Yat-sen's proposals for equitable distributionof land titles and for restrictionsupon capital, and in consequence disbandedthe revolutionaryAlliance Society,reorganised it into an unrevolutionaryNationalist Party, and broughttogether many political groups which representedthe interestsof the small- landlord class, therebyenabling the small-landlordclass to forman absolute majorityamong NationalistParty supporters. It had virtually no revolutionarycharacter, even though it occupied a position in oppositionto the representativeof the large-landlordclass, the Progress Party(the ProgressParty grew out of the late Qing imperialprovincial assemblies,which were organsof the largelandlords in each provincein exactlythe same way that theRepublican provincial assemblies are the organs of large landlordsin everyprovince today). Sun Yat-sen was furious on this account, and decided to organise the Chinese RevolutionaryParty. He courageouslyadopted the word 'revolutionary'

This content downloaded from 136.186.72.15 on Tue, 23 Apr 2013 01:11:00 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 12 THE AUSTRALIAN JOURNAL OF CHINESE AFFAIRS

for the title of his party,and withoutany regretsbroke away fromthe leader of the small-landlordclass, Huang Xing, in order to preserve the integrityof the revolution.After decliningto join the Chinese RevolutionaryParty for fear of revolution,and thus breakingwith Sun Yat-sen,Huang Xing and the otherleaders of the small landlords set up anotherorganisation - the Society for the Study of European Affairs.In time, with the recruitmentof many large and small land- lords,this expanded into the Political Study Society.We need only note that virtuallyevery single person in the Political Study Society is a memberof the landlordclass in orderto understandwhy it is thatthey inevitablysevered relations with Sun Yat-sen;why theyhave abandon- ed revolution;why they have graduallycome to regardas theirchief rival the Research Clique, which has evolved fromthe ProgressParty and representsthe large-landlordclass; why theyhave finallycome to formthe FederationFaction (an as yet unformedpolitical party which the landlordclass in all southernprovinces has been tryingto organise for the past four years); why they support Hengti, ,Tang Jiyao and Kewu in wieldingpower over the southernprovinces and in using the provincialand countyassemblies and the armedmight of the popular militiaoffices as tools forplacing the ruralowner cultivators, tenant farmers and farmlabourers and the urban workers,peasants and small merchantsunder extremeoppres- sion; and whythey thus stand wholly on the side of counter-revolution. When the Chinese RevolutionaryParty was transformedinto the GMD, a non-revolutionaryfaction of the bourgeoisieagain enteredthe party,together with elements representing the compradoreclass. These occupied the managerialpositions in the party,with the result that Sun and the minorityrevolutionary faction were stillunable to carry out revolution.Then, in Januarylast year, [Sun] boldly convenedthe party'sFirst National Congress,which decided in no uncertainterms to uphold the interestsof the workerand peasant classes,to expand the organisationof the GMD by drawingupon the workerand peasant masses,and to allow communistelements to enterthe party.When Mao Zuquan raised a note of dissensionand opposed the admissionof CPC elementsat the receptionfor First National Congressdelegates held at the ChangtiAsia Restaurantin Guangzhou in Januaryof last year, Sun Yat-senrose and delivereda long speechin whichhe said:

Overthe past twentyyears party members have consistently prevented me fromcarrying out revolutionand have consistentlycast aside the principleof 'people'slivelihood'. There are manywho followme, but they alwayswant to make theirown decisions;there would not be morethan twenty people who,like Wang Jingwei, genuinely follow me to carryon the revolution.Now today,you also wantto preventme acceptingrevolutionary youth!

This content downloaded from 136.186.72.15 on Tue, 23 Apr 2013 01:11:00 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions MAO IN MUFTI 13

Everyone who attended the First National Congressheard what Sun had to say. The firstto be offendedby this action were the leaders of those representingthe comradoreclass, Feng Ziyou and , who were also firstto team up with the imperialistsand militarists,leave the GMD and set up anotherorganisation - the Comrades' Club. Through the workof the GMD leftfaction in Guangdongover the past two years we have offended the imperialistcompradore class by supporting workerunity and strikes,have offendedthe landlordclass by support- ing peasant unityand rentreductions, and have offendedsuch tools of imperialismand representativesof the compradoreand landlordclasses as Wei Bangping,Chen Jiongmingand Xiong Kewu by usingforceful measures to respond to the reactionary clique and defend the revolutionarybase. Hence we have activated a new rightistclique, which has alreadyheld a gatheringin Beijingand whichplans to break away fromthe GMD led by the left faction,in orderto set up another GMD of the rightfaction. We have heard that duringthe meetingin Beijing the views of the factionrepresenting the small-landlordclass and nativeindustrial and commercialbourgeoisie clashed with those of the factionrepresenting the compradoreclass, withthe formerpropos- ing to leave Beijing for the south beforethe meetinghad drawnto a close. We believethis phenomenon to have been inevitableas well. China has already reached the time of fixingbayonets for close combat: standingto one side is a counter-revolutionaryunited front made up of the big bourgeoisie of compradores,great landlords, bureaucratsand militarists,all under imperialistleadership; and on the other side a revolutionaryunited front consisting of the petite bourgeoisie (owner cultivators,small merchants,handicraft industry proprietors), the semi-proletariat(part-owner cultivators, tenant farmers,handicraft workers, shop assistants,small pedlars) and the proletariat (industrial workers, coolies, farm labourers, proletarian elements declasse's). Those bourgeois classes standingin the middle (small landlords,small bankersand money-lenders,dealers in Chinese goods, and nativeindustrialists) basically just want to attain the status of the big bourgeoisie, but are unable to develop because of the oppression of the imperialist compradore class, large landlords, bureaucratsand ,and so need a revolution.Yet as the current revolutionenjoys the forcefulparticipation of the national proletariat at home and the active assistance of the internationalproletariat abroad, they cannot help growingafraid and harbouringsuspicions about a revolutionin whichmany classes co-operate. The Chinese bourgeoisie (excluding its left wing, that is, those members of the bourgeoisie who by virtue of special historicalor

This content downloaded from 136.186.72.15 on Tue, 23 Apr 2013 01:11:00 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 14 THE AUSTRALIAN JOURNAL OF CHINESE AFFAIRS environmentalcircumstances are able to co-operatein revolutionwith otherclasses; they are very few in number)is stilldreaming to thisvery day of an old-styleWestern democratic revolution, still dreaming of practisingnationalism, still dreaming of an 'independent'revolution achievedunder the leadership of thebourgeoisie alone, without assist- ance fromabroad and throughcheating the workersand peasants, still dreamingof being able to developitself after this successful revolutioninto a very big bourgeoisieand of settingup a state governedby one class alone. Theirstarting point for revolutionis completelydifferent from the other classes' startingpoint for revolution:they want revolution in orderto growrich, while other classes want revolutionin order to relieve distress;they want revolutionin orderto preparethe way for a newoppressive class, while otherclasses want revolution in orderto obtaintheir own liberation andto ensurethat never again will anyone oppress them. Membersof thisbourgeois 'independent' revolutionary faction (most of themchildren of smalllandlords) are stillmasquerading in Sun Yat-sen'sname, claimingthat his 'principles'and 'doctrines'do in fact represent theirown faction.Was Sun Yat-sen really like this? Sun's principlesand doctrines are definitelyfor 'relievingdistress', and certainlynot for 'growingrich'; definitelyfor liberatingpeople from oppressiveclasses, and certainlynot for preparingthe way for a new oppressiveclass. No matterhow Sun's principlesand doctrinesmay be misconstrued,this point will neverchange. They believe that situated betweenthe revolutionaryand counter-revolutionaryfactions they can achievean independentrevolution, but in fact this is impossible.They are jealous of the rise of the workerand peasant classes and jealous of the assistanceoffered by the political partiesof the national and internationalproletariat. They have cast aside the masses and cast aside those helpingthem, and so have no hope of achievingrevolution in a twentiethcentury semi-colonial China weighed down by mighty forcesfrom within and without. To speak in terms of population figures,the compradores,large landlords,bureaucrats and warlords comprisingthe big bourgeoisie make up at the mostone personin fourhundred (one fourhundredth), totalling one million, while the small landlords and native-goods producersand merchantscomprising the bourgeoisiemake up about one person per hundred (1 percent), or four million. The number remaining covers all other classes: the owner cultivators,small merchants and handicraft proprietors comprising the petite bourgeoisiemake up about 150 million; the part-ownercultivators, tenant farmers,handicraft workers, shop assistantsand small pedlars comprisingthe semi-proletariatmake up the largesttally of around 200

This content downloaded from 136.186.72.15 on Tue, 23 Apr 2013 01:11:00 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions MAO IN MUFTI 15 million;the industrialworkers, urban coolies, rurallabourers and elementsdeclasses comprisingthe proletariatnumber about 45 million.By this reckoning,how numnerousis the massof people in Chinawho wantrevolution in orderto relievedistress and seekself- liberation?- 395 million,or 98.75 percent.How manyenemies have they? - one million,or 00.25 percent.How numerousis the intermediatefaction? - fourmillion, or 1 percent. Underthese circumstancec we mav concludewithout the slightest doubtthat the split of theGMD rightistfaction, which represents the bourgeoisie,will certainlynot sufficeto impedethe developmentof theGMD, norsuffice to haltChina's national revolution. Their split is rootedin theirclass nature and in theparticular circumstances of the presentwhich have leftthem no option but to breakaway, and is certainlynot due to anymachinations on thepart of theleft faction. The machinationsof the so-called left faction (which refers to theGMD leftfaction and not to theCPC: CPC membersin theGMD makeup the communistfaction, not the GMD left faction)consist of such revolutionarywork as pacifyingYang and Liu, pacifyingZeng Mou, pacifyingthe East River,the SouthernRoute and theNorth River and givingChen Jiongming, Benyingand Xiong Kewu a thorough hiding,and of upholdingthe Guangdong-HongKong strikeand so givingthe Britishimperialists a thoroughhiding. These actionsare similarlyrooted in the classnature of therevolutionary faction and in the particularcircumstances of thepresent, such that this faction has no optionbut to struggleand to makerevolution. It is not a question of whetheror not thereare machinations,for struggle and revolution arethe only way out. In timesas urgentas these,not onlyis thereno hope in delay,but it is also certainthat this urgency will not subside. We can predict that in the nearfuture the intermediatefaction will have but two routes betweenwhich to choose: eitherto step right,into the counter- revolutionaryfaction, or to step left into the revolutionaryfaction (whichremains possible for its leftwing). There is no thirdroute. Shouldthey remain in theGMD now,they would indeed be a 'phoney revolutionaryfaction', as WangJingwei has put it, not onlyfailing to benefitus, but actuallyharming our cause. On account of their departureand on account of theirreactions to the revolutionary faction(left faction)and theirattacks upon it, the revolutionary factionwill be able to achievea greatermeasure of unity.Hence, whereverwe go, theslogans we hearat themoment almost all takethe form:'Revolutionary factions of theentire country, unite!'.

This content downloaded from 136.186.72.15 on Tue, 23 Apr 2013 01:11:00 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 16 THE AUSTRALIAN JOURNAL OF CHINESE AFFAIRS

NOTES

AngusMcDonald, for example,uncovered several lost worksof Mao Zedongwhile undertakingresearch in Japan.Ronin, 14 (December1973), 37-47. 2 Takeuchi Minoru (ed.), Mao Zedong ji [Collected Writingsof Mao Zedong] (Hokubosha,Tokyo, 1970-), vol.1,pp.109-51. 3 WangZhong, 'Diyiciguonei gemingzhanzheng shiqi zhongyaode gemingbaozhi qikan' [Importantrevolutionary newspapers and magazinesof the First RevolutionaryCivil War], in Xinxia and Wei Hongyun(eds), Diyici guonei gemingzhanzheng shilun ji [CollectedHistorical Essays on the FirstRevolutionary CivilWar] (Hubei Renmin Chubanshe, Wuhan, 1957), pp.47-51. 4 For Englishversions of the two works,see StuartR. Schram,The Political Thought of Mao Tse-tung(rev. edn, Praeger, London, 1969), pp.241-46,210-14; the Chinese versionsare reprinted in TakeuchiMinoru, op.cit., vol.1, pp.153-59, 161-73. 5 Schram,The Political Thought of Mao Tse-tung,p.47. 6 Philip C.C. Huang,'Mao Tse-tungand the middlepeasants, 1925-1928', Modern China,1:3 (July1975), 271-96,280. 7 Guangzhouminguo ribao [GuangzhouRepublican Daily], 28 October1925. 8 PhilipC.C. Huang,op.cit., 276. 9 StuartSchram, Mao Tse-tung(Penguin, Harmondsworth, 1966), p.86. 10 Guangzhouminguo ribao, 14 October1925. The backgroundto Mao's resignation is givenin Yunhan,Cong ronggong dao qingdang[From the CommunistAdmis- sionto theParty Purification] (Taibei, 1966), pp.507,512. See my forthcomingPh.D. dissertation,Kongyan [hollow words]: propagandaand the developmentof the GMD massmovement, 1919-26, Department of Far Eastern History,Australian National University.

This content downloaded from 136.186.72.15 on Tue, 23 Apr 2013 01:11:00 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions