Newly Identified Works by Mao Zedong*
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
STUDIES MAO IN MUFTI: NEWLY IDENTIFIED WORKS BY MAO ZEDONG* 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 Taiwan Straits.As the relevantfiles in the archivesof both the GMD and the CommunistParty of China (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.He 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 Chen 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 bo 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