Workers Repudiate China’s Khrushchov: We Don’t Permit Our Socialist Enterprises to Be Led on to The Capitalist Path


In all parts of the country, a mass movement to criticize and repudiate China’s Khrushchov is gaining momentum. A strategic task of China’s great proletarian cultural revolution at the present stage, this mass criticism on an unprecedented scale is spearheaded chiefly against the handful of top Parly persons in authority taking the capitalist road. Its aim is to completely overthrow and discredit them politically, ideologically and theoretically.

This revolutionary mass criticism began in April this year. In the initial stage, the criticism was centred on that pernicious book on “self-cultivation” by China’s Khrushchov, a book which negates the dictatorship of the proletariat and attempts to corrode the ranks of the proletariat by means of idealist self-cultivation, bourgeois individualism and slave mentality.
This campaign was later extended to all spheres — political, military, economical, educational- literary and art, etc.

Workers, peasants and Liberation Army men make up the main force in this mass movement. Using the invincible thought of Mao Tse-tung as their weapon, they refute all kinds of revisionist absurdities put forth by China’s Khrushchov at their discussion meetings and mass rallies, in big-character posters, and in articles published in newspapers and periodicals.

Following are excerpts of speeches made at one discussion meeting of Shanghai workers. They were originally published in the latest issue of “Hongqi.” The accompanying “Hongqi” Editor’s Note reads:

“The top Party person in authority taking the capitalist road pushed an out-and-out counter-revolutionary revisionist line in industry. He did his utmost to preach the ‘dying out of class struggle,’ put profit in command and advocate material incentives and the ‘management of factories by experts.’ He was against the socialist revolution, against giving prominence to proletarian politics, and against Party leadership and the mass line of the Party. His counter-revolutionary revisionist line was a replica of the line laid down by Tito, Khrushchov and their like. By enforcing this line, he tried to transform China’s socialist enterprises peacefully into capitalist enterprises and to restore capitalism in China.” — P.R. Ed. .

The ”Dying Out of Class Struggle”—A Smokescreen Covering Up the Bourgeoisie’s Attacks

Chien Chin-lung (Shanghai Tools Works): In February 1957, our great leader Chairman Mao clearly pointed out: “There arc still remnants of the overthrown landlord and comprador classes, there is still a bourgeoisie, and the remoulding of the petty bourgeoisie has only just started. The class struggle is by no means over.”
Two months later, the Khrushchov of China arrived in Shanghai. He openly opposed Chairman Mao. He said: “The domestic enemies have in the main been wiped out. The landlord class was wiped out long ago. The bourgeoisie is basically wiped out. This can be said, too, of the counter-revolutionaries.” He added: “We say that the main class struggle at home is basically over.”

This was sheer deception. Take our plant for example. Even in recent years, the capitalists had continued misappropriating large amounts of state funds and undermining the building of the socialist economy. They kept photostats of certificates showing “their” ownership of buildings and had inventories of “their”‘ machines and equipment.
All the facts show that the bourgeoisie was by no means reconciled to losing its paradise, but was ready to make a come-back and restore capitalism at the first opportunity.
By peddling the notion of the dying out of class struggle, the top Party person in authority taking the capitalist road was trying to bemuse the working class and provide a smokescreen for the bourgeoisie’s attacks.

Wang Yu-Iung (Shanghai Switches Factory): China’s Khrushchov asserted that “the agents of the capitalists, as well as the capitalists themselves, have given up their property. They are no longer capitalists.” He declared they could be “promoted” to leading posts.
As a result of his sinister instructions, two capitalists were made deputy directors of our plant, and eight became section chiefs or heads of workshops.

These two deputy directors were exactly the persons who had smuggled out large quantities of equipment to Taiwan on the eve of liberation. And later they ruthlessly sabotaged the socialist economy. During the period of the socialist transformation of capitalist industry and commerce, they pretended to hand over their property but secretly took their capital out and sold equipment. They tried in every possible way to corrupt and win over our cadres.

The bourgeoisie always tries to subvert socialism and restore capitalism. The No. 1 capitalist roader in the Party, who favoured “promotion” of capitalists to loading posts, in fact wanted to reinstate the overthrown bourgeoisie, enable them to take power away from us and exercise dictatorship against us, and turn the socialist enterprises into capitalist ones. He is the behind-the-scenes overall boss of the bourgeoisie in their efforts to restore capitalism.

Jung Lu-yun (Shanghai No. 7 Radio Works); Classes and class struggle continue to exist in socialist society. Our purpose is to wipe out the bourgeoisie through class struggle and thus carry socialist society forward to communist society. Class struggle is the fundamental motive force in the development of society and in the advance of socialism to communism.
However, China’s Khrushchov brought forth the revisionist fallacy that “millions of toilers are following the lead of advanced workers in the struggle to eliminate backwardness and this is the motive force that propels the continuous advance of socialist society.”
By emphasizing the struggle for production in this one-sided way, he was covering up the acute and complex class struggle that was going on. He was hoping we would pay exclusive attention to production and abandon the class struggle. This would leave the bourgeoisie free to attack us and push society backwards. He was day-dreaming!

Profit in Command and Material Incentives Are the Poison Producing “Peaceful Evolution” Towards Capitalism

Chen Chun-lin (Shanghai No. 3 Plastic Goods Factory): Our great leader Chairman Mao teaches: “The general policy guiding our economic and financial work is to develop the economy and ensure supplies.”
The top capitalist roader in the Party opposed Chairman Mao, He wanted to make profit the sole aim of an enterprise. He said: “It is justified for a factory to make profit. Otherwise why should there be factories? This applies to the state-owned factories as well as to the privately owned ones.”
The Party people in authority taking the capitalist road in our factory faithfully followed this malicious line. They went in for making luxury items which brought big profits and obstructed the production of goods required by agriculture and industry.
In advocating putting profit in command, Chinas Khrushchov opposed the principle of production in the service of the workers, peasants and soldiers and of socialist construction. The principle he tried to introduce was the capitalist one of: “big profit, big production; less profit, less production; no profit, no production.”

Chou Chin-ken (Shanghai Ai-min Confectionery Works): Chairman Mao teaches that politics is the supreme commander, the very soul, and that “political work is the life-blood of all economic work.”
What this means is that we must give first place to revolution and put production under the command of the revolution. In developing socialist production, we rely neither on compulsion nor on material incentives but on Mao Tse-tung’s thought, on political-ideological work, on the revolutionization of people’s thinking. When Mao Tse-tung’s thought is grasped by the masses, it becomes a tremendous material force that enables production to develop by leaps and bounds.
But the top capitalist roader in the Party was absolutely opposed to all this. He sang the praises of material incentives and said these were “in the interests of production and conform to the principle of ‘to each according to his work’.”
All this talk of material incentives is sheer revisionism. Material incentives are sugar-coaled bullets directed against the working class. They are the poison that produces “peaceful evolution” towards capitalism.
We of the working class know what we are working for. We work hard not for some filthy money but for our socialist motherland and for the liberation of all mankind. China’s Khrushchov wanted to bind us with the shackles of money and make us follow him docilely and slavishly along the road to capitalism. All this is poisonous!

Wang Chen-pi (Vangshupu Power Plant): As a veteran worker of our plant has aptly put it, “Material incentives operate like an upas tree that kills without drawing blood.”
By loudly extolling material incentives, China’s Khrushchov tried to confine our attention to welfare and social amenities and thus get us to abandon the fundamental interests of the proletariat, forget the sharp class struggle and make way for him to restore capitalism. In fact, he tried to kill us without letting us know how we were being killed.
We workers are armed with Mao Tse-tung’s thought, and will never fall into his trap.

Liu Hsiang-lien (Shanghai No. 12 Cotton Mill): The top capitalist roader in the Party alleged that workers would become “more keen about work” only when they were given “higher wages,” otherwise they would “remain passive and slow down.” This was a big insult to the working class. We of the working class are masters of the country. We work conscientiously and creatively. We stand beside our machines, with the entire world in mind. Our common aspiration is to ensure the early realization of communism in China and the world.
Lenin said that you pay out money to get money back — such arc the ethics of the capitalist world. The Khrushchov of China is trying to peddle exactly this kind of capitalist rubbish.

Jung Lu-yun (Shanghai No. 7 Radio Works): Experience at car plant shows that only by grasping the revolution and the class struggle can we give maximum scope in production to the enthusiasm of the worker masses.
Our plant was formerly an enterprise which vigorously pushed the policy of material incentives, the putting of banknotes in command. However, it still failed to fulfil the production tasks assigned to it by the state.
During the great proletarian cultural revolution, we rebelled against the handful of Party people in authority taking the capitalist road, against material incentives and against unreasonable rules and regulations.
This served to give full play to the initiative of the workers and we overfulfilled the production tasks for the first half of this year. Without any additional equipment, we produced three times as many transistors as in the same period last year.
These facts are a powerful refutation of the shameful slander spread by China’s Khrushchov.

“Management of Factories by Experts”— Dictatorship Of the Bourgeoisie

Wu Chin-lin (Shanghai Compressor Machinery Plant): “Management of factories by experts” is a reactionary line pushed by the top capitalist roader in the Party in opposition to the Party’s mass line. It was responsible for a great deal of damage in our factory.
Our plant was formed by merging more than 50 small factories and workshops. It had no heavy machinery and was rather poorly equipped. During the big leap forward of 1958, we launched a large-scale technical revolution in accordance with Chairman Mao’s teaching on self-reliance, arduous struggle, the breaking down of conventions and the liberation of our own minds. We invented more than 100 machine-tools, made over 200 technical innovations and succeeded in the trial production of many new products. But the handful of Party people in authority taking the capitalist road ganged up with the reactionary bourgeois technical “authorities” and did their utmost to strangle this revolution.

Using the subterfuge of “rigorous technical control” and “civilized production,” they killed many technical innovations and put aside equipment invented by the workers. They invoked numerous rules and regulations which had been copied from the Soviet revisionists for the purpose of tying the hands of the workers. In their eyes, the workers are not the masters, but the appendages of machines.

In this way the revisionist line of “management of factories by experts” oppressed the workers, stifled their initiative, suppressed their ingenuity and undermined our socialist construction.

Wang Yueh-hsien (Shanghai No. 5 Cotton Mill):
The handful of top Party people in authority taking the capitalist road pushed the counter-revolutionary revisionist line in order to turn the socialist enterprises, in which the workers are masters, into capitalist enterprises under the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie. They wanted to bind us hand and foot and turn us into “living machines.” They thought they could lead us by the nose along the road of capitalism and allow the bureaucrats and capitalists to ride on our backs and oppress us again. We will not allow them to succeed in this plot. Definitely not!
We will follow Chairman Mao’s teachings, hold the great red banner of Mao Tse-tung’s thought still higher, topple and discredit the top capitalist roader in the Party, root out his pernicious influence and turn our factories into great red schools of Mao Tse-tung’s thought.
Peking Review, No. 40, September 29, 1967

This entry was posted in Editor's desk, resistance, strategy and tactics and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.