Author: Noah Greenberg (Nuò yǎ kè) 诺亚克

Dear Comrades,

I know you all haven’t heard from me for a while, but I need to update you of the impact of the Cultural Revolution. It is 1977, and the revolution has come to an end, and I am in tears that our beloved Chairman Mao has passed away. In his book, Son of the Revolution, Liang Heng discusses the changes caused from the Cultural Revolution. Although I strongly suggest everyone read this book, to quickly grasp the meaning of this revolution, I will provide you all with this single quote.

The reading describes the event when Heng’s father frantically defended himself in an argument with his son, saying: “It’s because I’m none of those things that I believe the Party and Chairman Mao. I’ve done nothing to wrong you. You can continue to participate in the Revolution. If you want to, you can break off with me. Go live at school if you like. But I’ll tell you one thing. No matter how you hate me, I’ve always been loyal to Chairman Mao. And I’ve always supported the Party and Socialism.”

It is this quote that sums up the Cultural Revolution. From an emotional standpoint, this quote outlines the feelings the revolution incited, including fear, guilt, and betrayal etc. Fear of being labeled a rightist, or a defector of the party. Guilt, as in this case the father was guilty about his past statements about the party. The son demanding answers is also guilty about a member of his family having a troubled past, and if he is a reflection of his fathers outrageous bourgeoisie actions. This also reaffirms the increase for the emotion of betrayal, in the sense of betraying the traditional family unit, and relationships. The father here, understands that his son is considering moving out, and cutting off all contact with his father. This was a period of great uncertainty, where even one’s closest people around them were not to be trusted, which led to feelings of betrayal becoming contagious.

This quote also emphasized the meaning of a revolution. Revolution stems from revolutionary, a descriptive word for producing of immense change. The immense change, was the separation from the Confucius ideas of respecting your elders, maintaining a close family unit, instead it introduced the concept that the party is always the priority, being you are a shell of the party. Individualism no longer existed, and everyone was expected and needed to be loyal to the party, and that meant commonly betraying others, living in fear, being guilty for past actions or actions of others close to you etc. Indeed, This was a true revolution.

Before we commence with this struggle session, I want to state that no one is perfect, and myself and the rest of my comrades are able to change for the better. Ever since the campaign of “Let a Hundred Flowers Bloom” a decade back in 1956-57, thought reform was at the center of our desires. Liang Hang, the son to his famously castigated mother, reminds us that this, “led the Communist Party to..launch a mass movement to suppress “rightists” inside and outside the Party in 1957-58.”  I stand here today, to affirm my allegiance to the communist party, allegiance to reforming my thoughts and beliefs, and  allegiance to helping the party shine the spotlight on any rightist and expose them for their true bourgeoisie nature. 

I have made mistakes like many of us have, but I have owned up to them, and commit to internal thought reform. I have written blogs critiquing land reform, life in Yennan, and the three years of great disasters. Specifically, in my Second Blog Post, I ignorantly wrote: “there is no room for critique in Yennan, and the peoples needs wont be prioritized.” For this damming mistake, I have been enrolled in reeducation school, and would do no such thing again. After being reeducated, I truly take accountability for my actions and equally understand it is my duty to expose any of my comrades who I suspect could benefit from reeducation immediately. 

After being reeducated, I am one of most loyal individuals in our commune, but I feel my allegiance to the party has unfortunately not spread contagiously, with many of my comrades seeming like rightists. For example, Cui Shuli, commented on my recent blog post, writing: “I can not agree with you in fear of being labeled a Rightist; however, the problems you lay out are indeed destroying our nation.” From this comment alone, Cui Shuli is sure deserving of investigation for being a rightist for being untrustworthy. Mao An Li should also be guilty as a rightist. For he has had the audacity to criticized our leader and chairman for causing the famine, instead of appropriately admitting and blaming the fault on great natural disasters. He wrote: “The Chairman’s efforts have failed miserably, resulting in one of the largest famines in history.” Another of my comrades, Ran Ang-Rui must be investigated immediately. In his biography, he admitted he was skeptical of the Revolution, and pessimistic of its sure potential, writing: “The tension in the city is palpable and I’m concerned that this talk of revolution will cause more problems than it will solve for my country.” Lastly, Liu Rui Bao bourgeoisie family history should merit immediate reeducation. In his biography he wrote, “My background largely consists of traders…taking advantage of increasing trade…my family [would]…profit through the labor of others…I stand as a consequence of my origins.” Although he is accepting of his past, that is far from enough action, and far from the actions of a true communist. Overall, I have been reeducated and reformed myself, and it is due time we all shift our attention and work to castigate to my comrades who I and other suspect of being rightists!

Dear Comrades,

I report to you, that Mao and the CCP have officially ditched their Great Leap Forward program. It is about time! Violence, death, destruction, famine etc. have all become the norm. Many of these catastrophes have clouded peoples memories to even why the program was initiated, and what it intended to do. For a refresher, It was Mao’s attempt to turn our country into an industrialized nation and away from an agrarian society. Further we had to owe the Soviet Union a large amount of grain, as a payback unit (debt), so we were tasked with producing an immense and unrealistic amount. So, what went wrong??

We thought we knew better than science. We were so desperate to increase grain production, and generally produce more, that we resorted to arrogantly thinking we can’t go wrong. Military leader, Peng Dehaui commented on this disaster in his paper: “Critique of the Great Leap Forward”. He wrote: “Because they were raised at every level, some quotas, which could only be met after…dozen years, became targets to be fulfilled in one year or even a few months. By so doing, we divorced ourselves from reality and lost the support of the masses.” These desperate measures, were specifically planting crops too close to each other, and digging 6 feet plus into the ground which essentially destroyed the crops; and was a foolish attempt by us ignoring what we have known about the basic laws of science and nature. Specifically, Mao thought this concept of planting crops very close to one another and digging deep in the soil, was the answer!  He instructed us that this concept, called (deep ploughing ) will kill off the insects, and help promote growth of crops faster. He said: Deep ploughing helps weeding. Digging up roots in turn helps elimane insects…once we can go down to the grass roots, we can increase production.” Instead, as we have seen play out, the crops needed room to grow, and digging too far down destroyed all the soil.

If things couldn’t get worse, we also interfered with nature. Mao banked on eliminating the four pests, which were rats, sparrows, flies, and mosquitos. He wrote: “The less we have of these four pests, the better for us; because these four pests harm the people and directly affect the health of the people.” We now have figured out that killing all the sparrows, enabled all the locusts to directly eat our crops. We have confirmed that our attempt to disrupt nature, directly caused this great famine.

As a result, tens of millions of people became starved, overworked, and physically ill. Because of these policies, crops could not grow properly and the forced quotas called for desperate measures taken by the people; which in turn caused chaos. It was this mass famine that created mass suffering, which created mass desperation, which then created mass violence, which coupled with everything else, created mass death. Unrealistic forced quotas for grain and crop production, the failure of the deep ploughing method, and arrogantly disrupting the flow of nature, and negligently ignoring basic laws of economics and science, allowed this disaster to happen.

Dear Readers,

I now well understand that there is indeed strength in numbers. We have seen from the CCP’s recent successes in forcing the Nationalists to Taiwan and gaining significantly more control. Although Mao was at the helm of this movement, and remains in charge, it was the millions of people backing him that also made it possible. Its because of this that we have routinely seen groups becoming more powerful than any given individual. However, if the masses are not together and unorganized around their specific mission, they are not a group, rather they merely are a mass of individuals. And that is what they have unfortunetly been. Although yes, there is general strength in numbers, but if these numbers of people are divided between each other over uniting with a common cause, then this exposes their fragility and underlining weakness. To get rid of any weakness and gain strength, we must unite with a purpose, understand the potential problems and setbacks of our specific plan, enabling us to become an impactful group instead of individuals by the masses. This should have been the way of ensuring successful land reform.

I was fortunate enough to interview Cheng Houzhi, a recent graduate of Qinghua’s Politics Department, thus argued that before land reform, peasants were bereft of political awareness and “lack organization, lack strength, and do not dare to consider landlords as enemies.” It was because of this need to organize and rally behind a agreed mission that served as the primary reason to develop this mass campaign instead of simply ordering the immediate confiscation and redistribution of land.

Another reason for our more strategical approach to accomplishing land reform, was that the peasants, specifically poor and middle peasants were unprepared. I spoke with Yang Rengeng, a Peking University professor, who said: “ I emphasize[d] that peasants are waiting for their help… the party published a flood of materials on the campaigns, ensuring that the final and largest rounds of land reform were carried out by teams well versed in the narrative of peasant emancipation through fierce class struggle.” Everyone needed to be on the same page for nearly every step! The process should have begun from the groups thoughts to communication, to strategic plan, to action, to backup plan. It is this level of ill preparedness that cost us capable of achieving great success.

Many benefits however, have emerged from this strategic decision. Our peasant groups were far more organized than previously, and nearly all were motivated and organized from the material benefits which greatly incentivized them and gave them a specific purpose. Specifically, “for liberated peasants, [it was] the first time they labor on their own land, their desire to produce increases dramatically. They work from morning till night, forgetting their pain, and create their own happy life.” In the general sense, and writing as a middle peasant member, I see there are now far less blood sucking landlords, allowing the most of the middle and lower classes to now gain the feeling of progress.

That progress was trimmed since these benefits were coupled with immense problems. A report found, “the party faced an intractable problem in regard to giving the peasant masses true economic liberation: there was not enough land and property to go around. This issue plagued the entire land reform effort.”

The negatives are summed up in this PRC study’s findings: “While “land investigation” campaigns did mobilize the masses and attack some forms of feudal power, they also “severely encroached on the interests of the middle peasants, excessively attacked landlords and rich peasants, injured a good number of cadres, and ruined agriculture production.” More specifically, women’s problems were far from solved. A study found: “Many women did not actively participate in land reform. This proved to be an enduring problem.” My heart goes out to all women and we should not lose all hope. I do also want to share that this hope has extended to my families luck. My parents have a very small amount of land that they labor themselves, and it has only been minimally damaged, and all crops and father and mother are safe. My family and I, are extremely blessed, however many other middle peasants I know are severely suffering.  Even for the lucky ones that attained more land, or protected and preserved their minimal portion of land,  I predict future problems to emerge: such as their inability to operate and manage the land. Being a peasant is much different than being a landlord, I know from being a peasant. It is from this story of land reform, that serves as a great lesson for us to unite as a group, and comprehend and solve the challenges and expected problems with the mission before going all out.

Stay safe out there!

-No Pah King

My dearest readers,

Is the grass really greener on the other side? Although this cliche can sometimes be true, in the case of mass migration to Yenan it certainly is false. Located in northern central China, Yenan, has become a hotbed for migration from all areas of the country including people from a diverse array of backgrounds. Although the rave and cry that Yenan is a mere utopia, findings show that on the ground realities overshadow any surrounding hype, that label this city, a mere utopia.

1. On paper vs. reality. On paper, yes it is true that Yenan sounds terrific. The endpoint from the Long March, as we know, the Communist’s retreat from Nationalist forces. Mao, and others called Yenan to be the birthplace of equality, and fostering of revolutionary ideas. Instead, I suggest those be skeptical of dreaming up Yenan to be a magical haven. In my interview with Ting Ling, a migrant to Yenan, she spoke on this very issue, saying: “The male leaders should talk less of meaningless theories and talk more of actual problems. Theory and practice should not be separated.”
2.  No room for critique. Essentially, women’s problems there were solved on paper, but the execution of the theories penned on paper, left significant room for problems to develop, with unfortunately no room allowed to criticize. For Ling’s verbalized criticism, she was relieved of her political duties. Ts’ai Ch’ang, a women on the committee of the Women’s Department, who was responsible for punishing her, said that her views were: “outdated, harmful to unity, and unnecessary in Yenan since full equality had already been established.” In fact this was not an isolated occurrence, and spreads beyond Ling’s story. Li Chien-Chen suddenly lost her position as director of the Women’s Department after being a strong advocate for educating people against women’s oppression.
3. Your needs will not be prioritized. Tsai Chang, wrote: “Our current slogans for work in the women’s movement are no longer freedom of marriage and equality between men and women, but rather save the children and establish a abundant and flourishing family.” In my interview with writer Kay Ann Johnson, she says: “The narrow Party policy during the Anti-Japanese War showed little concern to directly tackle women’s rights issues.” The communists were more concerned with the threat of Japan’s invasion, and also staying clear and defeating the Nationalist KMT party. Further, Kay explains that: “To justify this policy and defend its narrow focus against its feminist critics, the directive developed the notion that it was not only necessary to the war…but the only way to further women’s own liberation.” Essentially if we put all our energy towards the war effort, and we are successful in that in itself  it will pave the way for women’s freedoms. The Communists knew that Yenan was far from a utopia land that fostered equality, but rather a place where theory is placed with greater emphasis than in practice; and the culture reflected the idea that your problems are not OUR problems. – By: No Pah King.

Italian philosopher Antonio Gramsci once said: “To tell the truth is revolutionary”.

We, the Chinese people, are tired of being lied to. We should demand truth, and that the only way to achieve it is through a revolution. Before flirting with the idea of what type of revolution we need, the specific reasons for a revolution must be understood and agreed upon. Here I will propose 3 significant reasons that our people of China are crying for CHANGE.

1. The treatment of Women is abysmal. Women are our sisters, mothers, daughters, aunts, grandmothers, granddaughters etc, they will not tolerate being mens property no longer. The reading titled: Women, The Family and Peasant Revolution, author Johnson, points out that “footbinding was still practiced on many girls at the time, and nearly all other local women had bound feet.” This foot binding, forced women to be subservient to men, and literally made it impossible for them to run away, or establish any sense of freedom for themselves.  Johnson continued, saying: “Throughout their lives, women were supposed to be only slightly more than chattel, routinely bought and solid in marriage, concubinage or outright slavery.” Women do not deserve that oppression.

2. Economic Disparity. The rich get richer, and the poor get poorer. This concept was the exact truth, as it acted as the reason for the peasant rebellion. Philosopher Mao mentions: “The priveledges of the Fuedel Landlords who have enjoyed for thousands of years are being torn to be pieces.” The system deserves to be dismantled, as the poor are in a constant state of oppression.

3. Our lives are not the priority. The leadership of the Nationalist party is concerned with maintaining their outdated social and cultural values that are inherently oppressive to the commoner. Japan is on the verge of taking over our country and fighting back is their blueprint for success. Our blueprint shall be prioritizing our oppressed people!

We need to be prioritized, and change is mandatory to achieve any feat of success. If we keep going this way, failure is destined to drown out any little hope that we have left. Change is on the horizon, and we must make our economy more feasible for the poor and not only elevate the elite. Aside from demanding more economic fairness, we need fairness in our culture and values. Women and minorities shall be treated as equals, and no one is above one another like outlined in the outdated Confucisious system; (those between ruler and subject, father and son, elder brother and younger brother, husband and wife, and friend and friend.) In addition, our people are hopeless as up to 90% of our population is illiterate. We need change, and we need it now.

Op Ed by No Pah King

Hi my name is Noah, or (No Pah King). 没有巴金 I go to Hunan University, in Changsha, China. It is one of the oldest universities in the world. I love to study history, and am fascinated to see the implications of the past unfold in the present. I am worried about our situation here in China, and my other friends from here will join me in journaling our struggles, and the greater people’s struggles in China. Please read, Thank you very much, and come again. – (No Pah King)