Wake up（142）

 

Chapter 27

 

142

 

Nan Shanyun invited his friend Li Si to take a walk by the small river in the forest. He wanted to continue discussing rectification and anti-rightist issues with Li Si.

Li Si, known as Little Kong Ming, said to Nanshan Yun: When people talk about these past events, they often talk about how many people were persecuted, how cruel this movement was, or how much political disaster it brought to China. In my opinion, in order to understand this period of history, we have to do some research from the theoretical roots. It should be said that there are deeper theoretical roots in the catastrophe that led to the anti-rightist movement.

Li Si said to Nan Shanyun: The theoretical root cause of the serious crime of anti-rightism is the so-called "two types of contradiction theory."

For a long time, this theory invented by Mao Zedong was exalted as a major development of Marxism-Leninism. It is true that for a long time people only knew that there were class contradictions and struggles between the enemy and ourselves, and they mistakenly believed that this contradiction and struggle became more and more acute in socialist society. Stalin once said: "The deeper socialism is, the sharper the class struggle will be." He did not admit the existence of contradictions among the people. Against such a historical background, emphasizing that the internal contradictions among the people should be given priority in the future, and the correct handling of this contradiction should be the theme of the country’s political life. This can be said to be a positive theoretical achievement of Mao Zedong. If it can be implemented in accordance with the line determined by the Eighth National Congress of the Communist Party of China and the understanding of the main contradiction, the appearance of Chinese society will also be greatly changed.

When studying and discussing Mao Zedong’s original speech on the two types of contradictions at the Tsinghua Party Committee, Guo Daohui, editor-in-chief of "New Tsinghua", once pointed out that "since the founding of New China, the successful completion of the three major movements of land reform, suppression of counter-rebellion, and resistance to U.S. aggression and aid to Korea, it should be said that it is based on the people's internal Contradictions dominate." The reason is that the revolutionary war has basically ended, the remnants of the reactionary class have also been basically wiped out, and the remaining national bourgeoisie belonged to one of the "four friends" (that is, the four red stars on the national flag) in the early days of liberation (by the time of the socialist transformation in 1956 The national bourgeoisie has also been "eliminated" as a class). As for the inside of the university, "After liberation, we replaced the Kuomintang government and took over the school. It is already a university for the people. The rulers of the school are the people's government and the Communist Party. Most of the teachers, students and staff are intellectuals. Or historical counter-revolution, it is impossible to be dominant. Therefore, Tsinghua University should focus on the contradictions among the people."

However, when anti-rightists criticized Guo Daohui, they said that this point of view showed that Guo Daohui was "deeply eroded by revisionist ideas in recent years." At the party branch meeting that passed the decision to expel him, the first deputy secretary of the party committee said: "Guo Daohui often boasts that he can think independently and is active in thinking, but he has no class analysis point of view. It is the contradiction between the leadership and the masses', thinking that since the liberation of the school, there are only contradictions among the people, and denying class struggle; after being criticized, they still insist on their own wrong views. ... If you don't listen to the party, you have to wrestle.".

However, what is puzzling is why the most serious "anti-rightist movement" in the history of New China that confuses and reverses the two types of contradictions occurred within three months after I just said that it is necessary to correctly distinguish between the two types of contradictions. In this incident, the contradictions among the people were treated as contradictions between ourselves and the enemy, and the 550,000 or several million intellectuals were treated as dissidents, enemies, and reactionaries?

Li Si said: Some commentators mostly attribute this to the rapid "change" of the domestic and foreign situation, and the overestimation of the seriousness of this situation. This is certainly an important factor; but is the theory of "two types of contradictions" itself Is there a misunderstanding that led to the major mistake of treating the contradictions among the people as contradictions between ourselves and the enemy? People seldom think about it this way.

Guo Daohui recalled that the article stated very clearly: social contradictions are diverse and complex, and with the victory of the revolution and the consolidation of the people's power, class struggle took a backseat, and the contradictions among the people not only became more prominent, but also became more diversified and complicated. The theory of "two types of contradictions" is only a rough political division of social contradictions, and cannot fully cover the situation of multiple social contradictions. Between the enemy and ourselves, there is always a third party "friend" or neutral person. There is also a vast gray space between the enemy and the enemy. Maybe they don't believe in Marxism, or even support socialism, but if they love the motherland and support the reunification of the motherland, they cannot be classified as "enemies". From the perspective of the rule of law, the division of the two types of contradictions in politics cannot reflect or replace the distinction between different subjects and behaviors in law. Some contradictions in social life are neither of the nature of the enemy nor us, nor can they be summed up simply as "contradictions among the people". For example, human rights and civil legal relations among citizens are indiscriminate. Just because one of the parties is an "enemy" should not deprive them of their human rights, civil rights and litigation rights. Even criminals cannot be handled simply by using the "two types of contradictions" to distinguish whether they are "counter-revolutionary rapists" or "rapists among the people". Although some murderers are motivated by politics, they are more likely to kill for money or for love or vendetta. The latter cannot be classified as "enemy and self" contradiction; A murderer among the people". Legal "contradiction" is only the distinction between legal and illegal, crime and innocence, felony and misdemeanor, and so on. Whether the so-called "rightists" should be subject to administrative punishment or criminal punishment for their remarks cannot be measured by the six "political standards" that are extremely flexible and have vague boundaries added to the article "Zhengli" after the anti-rightist movement. Based on the Constitution and laws. The division of the two types of contradictions, as a kind of political philosophy, has its theoretical value for making an overall assessment of the political struggle situation; it is difficult to avoid deviations and "expand" when it is used to specifically delineate "rightists" and convict them accordingly. "of. As for the stage of "handling the rightists" in early 1958, there was still the so-called "contradictions between the enemy and ourselves should be handled according to the contradictions among the people", the so-called "push and push and it will pass; pull and pull and it will come." Is it not child's play to decide on the principle of "push and pull" by the ruling party? It can be seen that the label of "rightist" can be allowed to come in and out of crimes by those in charge.

The so-called handling of conflicts among the people means that some rightists are only given administrative punishments such as demotion, salary cuts, and labor education. In name, they are not deprived of their political rights such as voting rights. The so-called giving votes and meal tickets; From now on, they will never be able to stand up again, their political rights will be deprived in fact, many people will be exiled to labor camps, and many people will die unjustly in prison or starve to death in the wilderness. Even if the rightist hat is removed. Still known as the "rightist who took off his hat", he was again subjected to more brutal abuse during the Cultural Revolution. This situation did not change until the period of reform and opening up 20 years later.

Guo Daohui recalled that the article also said: In addition to oversimplifying and absolutizing the division of the nature of social contradictions, the theory of "two types of contradictions" also simplifies the method of dealing with contradictions, that is, emphasizing that the method of dictatorship is used to deal with the enemy; It can only be a "democratic method of persuasion, not a method of coercion." (Selected Works of Mao, Volume 5, Page 371) This is also an ignorance of the characteristics of the legal system and its methods. From the perspective of the rule of law, "dictatorship" over the enemy is of course mandatory; for internal conflicts among the people, except for ideological conflicts, as long as they involve civil and administrative disputes, let alone criminal crimes, the final judicial disposal methods are legally mandatory. . Instead of relying on democratic "persuasion" and ideological education, the solution is to impose personal or property sanctions. Even if it is a so-called "contradiction among the people", some crimes can be punished by death.

Perhaps it is precisely because the democratic method of persuasion is mistakenly regarded as a sign of dealing with contradictions among the people; therefore, conversely, those that require compulsory sanctions, or those that intensify conflicts and take the form of confrontation, are classified as contradictions between ourselves and the enemy. As a result, for a long time, people who have different opinions or radical thoughts and behaviors, as well as all criminals, have been regarded as "enemies." Until the Third Plenary Session of the Eleventh Central Committee marked by ordering order out of chaos, it still only proposed that "people are equal before their own laws", not that all citizens are equal before the law.

Li Si said to Nan Shanyun: In peacetime, the boundary between the enemy and ourselves is indistinguishable, and there is no inherent enemy, such as the historical counter-revolutionaries left over from the early days of liberation; no one can be identified as a criminal unless he is tried by a court. Not to mention whether it is an enemy. The simplification of social contradictions into two political categories of "one or the other" between the enemy and ourselves, with no law to follow or no law to follow, is the theoretical root cause of the infinite and absolute "expansion" of the anti-rightist movement.

Li Si said to Nanshan Yun: You can look up Guo Daohui's reminiscence article, and the answer can be found in his article.