Hello, intellectuals. I am currently living in one of the many small villages undergoing land reform, reporting on the Communist Party’s strategies for redistributing land more equitably. The simple and fast approach of taking and redistributing the land by force seems appealing. However, I believe the Communist Party has decided to implement land reform as a mass campaign for significant long-term benefits. The involvement of peasants in land reform mobilizes the peasants and fosters a revolutionary spirit and cohesion among rural populations. This involvement aligns with the Communist Party’s goal of obtaining the widespread support of the people.
After arriving at the village, the work team would organize and explain the land reform campaign, instilling communist ideas about class, oppression, and the proletariat and bourgeoisie among the villagers. To establish a connection with the villagers, the members of these work teams would try to cultivate relationships with villagers, encouraging them to “speak bitterness”. A key part of the Communist Party’s land reform strategy is giving historically oppressed peasants a way to express their anger and frustrations. These stories exposed the landlords’ abuses and built solidarity among the peasants suffering under the landlord. Small group meetings are organized to mobilize villagers to voice their issues with their powerful landlords who are afraid to do so publicly. After categorizing the people of the village into classes, struggle sessions would be held against those deemed as the ruling class. Led by community members oppressed by the landlords, struggle sessions teach peasants that they were not born to be oppressed and they can stand up against their oppressors. By centering land reform around the poor peasants, who now have been given power for the first time, the Communist Party is sending a powerful message that they will listen to those oppressed.
The mass land reform campaign has revealed serious dangers. Violence, brutality, and sexual assault are rampant. Land investigation campaigns were often violent. Justice seems nonexistent, overrun by the peasant mob. In some regions, land equalization led to brutal retaliation by Nationalists, thus creating a cycle of violence where Nationalists and the Communist Party would retaliate against the village, seeking to obtain authority and removing perceived threats. This unrelenting violence and chaos during land reform will leave deep wounds of instability. Mao’s broad and strict characterization of landlords as universally oppressive failed to capture the nuanced reality. This oversimplification results in the suffering of the innocent.
Work teams also face many challenges. Tensions and confusion fill the air during meetings, hindering progress. Language barriers impede communication, and resistance from villages, including poor peasants, created an atmosphere of mistrust and division. Cadres’ corruption further complicated the situation, eroding the goodwill of the people they aimed to liberate. As class labels were introduced, anxiety spread, weakening the bonds that held communities together. Conflicting views within the party on how to treat rich and middle peasants added to the confusion, the constant changing of policy left many unsure of the right path forward.
The legacy of land reform will be mixed, marked by the successful redistribution of land along with the deep wounds of violence, injustice, and the continued peasant poverty. Proving the difficulty of widespread social change.
You pointed out how this land reform, which might seem fascinating to peasants, had severe risks. Although this reform can stimulate them to attend revolutionary politics more actively, many factors can harm their lifestyle, as you mentioned.
I agree that this campaign has certainly created violence and a sense of “me verse them” mentality. In my opinion, this land reform campaign is not worth the amount of divisiveness it has created.
From a social aspect, you hit on all of the important points of the tensions in the country. Having brought up the cadres and the violence that they present plays a major role in land reform. I agree with how you described the struggling peasants and even though they thought they were going to get freedom, they are still struggling for justice.
You bring up good points about the land reform process being intended for peasant empowerment and community building, yet not succeeding that as the commonly urban and educated work team members cannot relate well to the rural masses. I wonder if the party will implement new campaigns to bridge this gap in the future, perhaps sending those in cities and universities to live and work in the countryside.