On the Nature, Stages, and Driving Forces
of the Chinese Revolution
Interview with Nym Wales (Helen Foster Snow)
(July 4, 1937)
the case of the National Government enterprises, such as railways and various industries, the capital resources came also originally from imperialism. Added to
this is the fact that the Chinese customs are also restricted by the imperialists.
From the above analysis, it is clear that the capitalist economy in China, as a
whole, is under imperialist control. Likewise, the existence of a feudal form of
economy hinders the development of capitalism in China.
Looking at the economy of China as a whole, the feudal economy is in the
dominant position. Looked at from the viewpoint of capitalist development, the
colonial economy is the dominant form. This colonial economy, therefore, determines the nature of political and other relations with the imperialists and private
capital, such as in the case of control of the customs, etc.
From the above, we must conclude that Chinese society is semi-feudal and
semi-colonial.
Because these are the characteristics of Chinese society, the question of the
nature of the Chinese Revolution is very easy to answer: it is an anti-imperialist,
anti-feudal, bourgeois-democratic national revolution.
One group does not agree to this analysis: the Trotskyists. In 1927, after the
failure of the Great Revolution, they arrived at the following conclusion: that the
tasks of the bourgeois revolution in China are already completed; the independence of the customs proving that the anti-feudal, anti-imperialist stage of the
revolution was over. The Trotskyist theory developed further to the point of
declaring that the capitalist, and not the feudal, form was dominant in Chinese
economy. I noticed that recently, in a Trotskyist magazine, they have changed
their viewpoint on the problem of imperialism, i.e., they agree that China is still
under the domination of imperialism, but still affirm that the nature of [the]
Chinese economy is capitalistic. That capitalism has the leading role in China is
a very queer viewpoint to come out with suddenly, when referring to a society
which has been for so long dominated by imperialism.
In accordance with their estimation of the nature of Chinese society, the
Trotskyists conclude that the nature of the Chinese Revolution at present is not
bourgeois but proletarian. Without any hesitation we are opposed to this
viewpoint. We restate our position that the nature of Chinese society is semi-feudal and semi-colonial and that therefore the Chinese Revolution is anti-imperialist and anti-feudal.
It will require a long period of struggle by the Chinese people to achieve the
overthrow of the imperialist and feudal forces. The completion of these tasks of
the revolution means, no doubt, the clearing of the road for the development of
capitalism. But at the same time we hold that there is a possibility for the
Chinese Revolution to avoid the future of capitalism and to turn into a Socialist
revolution. Our reasons for this follow.
Now, in our discussion, we reach the third problem the nature of the driving
forces or dynamics of the Chinese Revolution. The main forces of the Chinese
Revolution are the proletariat, the peasants, and the petty bourgeoisie. Under
certain circumstances the national bourgeoisie have the possibility of joining this revolution. Under certain other circumstances they have the possibility of wavering.
The enemies of the revolution are the imperialists and the Chinese landlords. Sometimes the national bourgeoisie are enemies of the revolution and sometimes not.
The Chinese Revolution is led by the proletariat. Why, in a bourgeois revolution,
is the proletariat in the leadership instead of the bourgeoisie? Why is the Chinese
Revolution different from the bourgeois revolutions of past history? The reason is
that China is in a state of semi-colonialism. Therefore, the force of the proletariat is
relatively greater than that of the bourgeoisie. This is because the imperialists control
the big industrial enterprises in China, instead of our native bourgeoisie. The combined workers of these big imperialist industries, together with the workers of the
National Government and privately owned industries of China, are strong enough to
take hegemony of the leadership over the weaker bourgeoisie.
The working class in China numbers over two millions. Compared with the
whole population, it is small in numbers, but compared with the bourgeoisie, it is
a superior force. Under the combined pressure of the imperialists, the Chinese
capitalists, and the feudal forces, the Chinese proletariat has developed the
strongest revolutionary character. Also, the Chinese proletariat is affected by the
world revolutionary forces that is, the development of proletarian revolution in
the world as a whole. The establishment of the proletarian revolution in the
U.S.S.R., especially, gave stimulus to the proletariat of China. After the May
Fourth Movement in 1919, the Chinese proletariat rose to a politically conscious
position and also began to play a role on the political stage of China. Beginning
at that same time, the Chinese Communist Party was also created.
Summarizing the above, we may say that the proletariat and the Communist
forces together in China, though numerically very small, are the most energetic
and strongest single force.
Fortunately the Chinese proletariat has had a very strong ally in revolution:
that is, the peasantry. The peasants include over 80 percent of the population of
China, and because they are under the double oppression of both the Chinese
feudal elements and the imperialists, their revolutionary character is very strong.
Under the combined exploitation of the imperialists and the Chinese landlords,
the Chinese peasantry must bear the burden of paying from 50 percent to 80
percent for land rent, and from 30 percent to 100 percent as usury interest rates.
That is, if a peasant's land produces 100 dan, he must pay 50 percent to 80
percent to the landlord. And if he borrows money, which he must, he pays from
30 percent to 100 percent to the usurer.
The problems before the peasantry are to own the land they till and to abolish
the exploitation of imperialism. These problems cannot be solved by the bourgeois class. The peasant problem of China can only be solved by struggling
decisively against imperialism and the feudal forces, under the leadership of the
proletariat. Therefore, we say that the peasants are a strong, determined ally of
the Chinese proletariat.

The third driving force of the revolution is the city petty bourgeoisie. This
includes the broad mass of the students, the cultural intelligentsia, the small
producers, the petty merchants, and many free professionals. The majority of
these forces can stand by the side of the anti-imperialist, anti-feudal revolution.
The national bourgeoisie occupy a special position in China. They stand in a
position of being either enemies of the revolution or part of the revolution itself.
Sometimes they stand by the revolution. Sometimes they waver and stand by the
side of the imperialists and such counterrevolutionary forces. Sometimes they
stand by the side of the landlords. Sometimes they stand by the side of the petty
bourgeoisie. The reason for this is that many of the capitalists have the nature of
being compradors and semi-landlords. We do not include comprador bourgeoisie
in the class of the national bourgeoisie. The national bourgeoisie of China have
their own capital for the most part, but it has a special relation to imperialist
capital and also to the land. Those who rely chiefly on imperialist capital are to
be classified with the comprador bourgeoisie, or, on the other hand, with the
landlords. The landlords and compradors are fundamentally related with imperialism, so they become one of the main enemies of the revolution.
The nature of the present Nanjing government is an alliance of landlords,
capitalists, and comprador bourgeoisie.
Under a situation of the direct occupation of China by imperialism when the
landlords and compradors face a direct menace to their own interests by this certain
imperialism, these two have the possibility of not opposing the anti-imperialist
struggle, and in an emergency they can stand by this struggle-except, of course,
those whose interests are either not affected by this aggression or whose interests
are united with that particular aggressor.
From the above, it is clear why our anti-imperialist national United Front is
actually national that is, why it includes all Chinese except traitors. This is the
special characteristic of our national front as compared with a "people's front."
The second characteristic of our United Front is that it is initiated by the
political party of the proletariat, and in its later development it is only under the
leadership of this proletarian party that its organization can be completed and its
tasks accomplished. This is because the proletariat is the only conscious and
decisive revolutionary force in China. The bourgeoisie cannot take up responsibility for this task.
Because of the nature of the political and economic conditions of China, there
exists this possibility: that after the anti-imperialist, anti-feudal bourgeoisdemocratic national revolution succeeds in a certain degree and the democratic
revolution reaches a certain stage, this revolution will conclude its victory by
transforming into a Socialist revolution. We Communists believe that such a
possibility exists.
The first stage of the revolution is the bourgeois-democratic revolution of the proletariat, the peasantry, and the petty bourgeoisie. During its transformation it
will pass through the Democratic Dictatorship of the Peasants and Workers.
The students, intellectuals, and professionals all come from the landlord, petty
bourgeois, and bourgeois classes, but because they live in a semicolonial country
which is unable to develop industry, they are unemployed. They join the revolution, oppose imperialism, and support democracy, because their families are
daily going bankrupt, and have no future.
China's students are a very important current in the socialist revolution, but
do not play a decisive role; only the proletariat and the peasants play a leading
role in the revolution.
the percentages, but there are certainly not as many rural proletarians as there are
peasants. We call the peasants who have no land at all rural proletarians. Those
who do not have enough land to support themselves we call semi-proletarians.

Mao: The viewpoint of the Trotskyists is not a Marxist viewpoint. The peasantry
is a class between the bourgeoisie and proletariat. At times when the bourgeoisie
exercises the leadership, they can go along with them; at times when the proletariat is in a leading position, they can go along with the proletariat. The main
component of society in the U.S.S.R. is also that of the peasants, but now in the
U.S.S.R., except for the rich peasants, the peasants are all going toward Communism. So it is nonsense to say that the peasants are going over to the bourgeoisie,
or that they are going to become reactionary.
The Red Army in China is under the leadership of the proletariat, just as it is
in the Soviet Union. The Chinese Red Army upholds Communism. This is because the Red Army, the agrarian revolution, and the revolution as a whole are
under proletarian leadership, as I have already said. It cannot be under the
leadership of any other class. The bourgeoisie cannot solve the problem of the
Chinese peasants, nor can the peasants solve it themselves. This problem can be
solved only under the leadership of the proletariat.
The land problem can be solved in the bourgeois revolution, as in the case of
the French revolution. It can also be solved in the proletarian revolution, as it
was solved in the U.S.S.R. after the October Revolution. At present in Spain, this
question is being solved under the leadership of the united front of the peasants,
the bourgeoisie,11 and the petty bourgeoisie. In countries like China, including
Japan and Germany, the bourgeoisie cannot solve the land problem, although
they are tricking the peasants into believing that they can.
Wales: What is the nature of the Guomindang?
Mao: The Guomindang is an alliance of the landlords, the bourgeoisie, and part
of the upper strata of the petty bourgeoisie. So long as the Japanese imperialists
continue their aggression against China, they have the responsibility for resisting
Japan. Guomindang elements can compromise with the imperialists, but they can
also split with the imperialists. This depends on the attitude the imperialists
adopt. Before 1927 the Guomindang was an alliance of the bourgeoisie, the petty
bourgeoisie, and the proletariat, but in the main it represented the interests of the
bourgeoisie. After 1927 the Guomindang continued to have some contradictions
with the imperialists, but in the main it compromised with the imperialists.
Chiang Kaishek represents the landlords and the bourgeoisie together, including
the comprador and national bourgeoisie. 12 When the Guomindang and Communist Party cooperate in driving out Japanese imperialism, there is the possibility
that class relations in China may change. The force of the pro-Japanese clique
and the "subjugation" clique13 may decrease.
Wales: If the Guomindang and the Communists truly unite, will the landlords
then split with the Guomindang?
Mao: This depends on future developments. If Japanese aggression becomes
more serious, the Guomindang may realize the necessity of land reform, for the
sake of improving the livelihood of the people. The landlords dislike this, but
they also dislike having their land occupied by the Japanese.
When the mass movement develops and the demands of the peasants reach a
level at which compromise is impossible, such a split may take place.
Wales: As you see it, sir, what elements are likely to become Chinese traitors
during the Anti-Japanese War?14
Mao: Those landlords and compradors whose interests are most directly linked
to those of Japan may become Chinese traitors. There are also some unemployed
people, who have difficulty in making a living, and are hired by the Japanese to
carry out espionage on behalf of the Japanese army. The armies of the Chinese
traitors are indirect Chinese traitors.
Wales: What about the feudal elements? The Red Army has fought them for ten
years, have they destroyed their influence?15
Mao: There has been a change. In places under the influence of the Red Army,
feudal forces suffered a blow from the revolutionary forces. Feudal influence has
somewhat decreased.
Wales: What is the nature of the feudal forces? Wittfogel16 etc. suggest a "quadrilateral being," etc.
Mao: Yes, the landlord is four-sided he is landlord, merchant, and tax collector, but not necessarily a usurer. At times he may be linked to Chinese commercial capital.
Wales: In the light of your direct experience of the peasant problem over a long
period, what is the most vicious form of oppression in the Chinese countryside?
Mao: (1) rent; (2) high rates of interest; (3) taxes and levies; and (4) traffic in
commodities.

Wales: You, sir, are very familiar with the theory of the so-called "Asiatic Mode
of Production." Do you consider that China's feudal system is a peculiar Asiatic
form of feudalism?17
Mao: Basically China's feudal system is in no way different from that of Europe
as regards the particular point of using the land to exploit the peasantry, but
China's feudal forces have their own special characteristics.
Wales: The Red Army has carried out ten years of struggle against feudalism.
Do you consider, sir, that this struggle has achieved great successes?
Mao: It has achieved considerable successes. In those places which have been
influenced by the Red Army, the feudal forces have been battered by the forces
of revolution. The strength of feudalism has been greatly weakened.
Wales: Is imperialism destroying the feudal system in China by opening the way
to a capitalist market?
Mao: Yes, the feudal system has been partly destroyed by imperialism. That is
why China has become a semi-feudal country. The imperialist forces, the Chinese national bourgeoisie, and commercial capital have all had destructive effects on Chinese feudalism.
Wales: Do the Japanese want China to retain a semi-feudal colonial character?
Mao: It is apparent from historical experience that none of the imperialists like
to see the development of capitalism in a colony; they develop it exclusively for
their own use. If the imperialists do not support the feudal system, what would
they support? Nanjing is not only comprador-so England must support all
elements, not only bourgeois, comprador, or landlord elements. Song Ziwen and
Kong Xiangxi are of the Nanjing government. 18
Wales: Does England want a comprador policy to control China?19
Mao: The answer is above.
Wales: Does Japan want to utilize the ruling class to control China?
Mao: Possibly. Otherwise there would be no traitors. 20
Wales: In my opinion, Japanese imperialism's success in invading China can
only be limited to making use of the Chinese ruling class; Japan can absolutely
not conquer China with military might. Consequently, is Hirota's policy not their
best method?21
Mao: Militarism is a characteristic of Japanese imperialism, and in the future
Japan will be forced onto the road of military adventures. 22 The other imperialisms, however, will wait, developing along the regular path. This is because Japanese imperialism is weaker financially than any other imperialism,
and this is Japan's tragedy. Japan has already reached the stage of the concentration of capital, but just as before, it has no surplus capital.
The Manchurian expedition has already weakened Japan's domestic economy, because Japan originally had no surplus capital for operations in Manchuria, and had no new surplus at home.
After Japan seized Manchuria, it was no longer a foreign market; economically and politically Manchuria became part of Japan. In reality, this was not
advantageous for Japan. Japan could no longer carry out imperialist exploitation,
or obtain the usual high rates of return. Moreover, they also had to meet heavy
military expenditures, because economically Manchuria now belonged to Japan.
Manchuria has already ceased to be Japan's external colony, and Japan can no
longer exploit it as external colonies are exploited. Manchuria is a kind of internal market, not an external market.

---

Notes

Our primary source for this interview is the English text of Helen Foster Snow (Nym
Wales), as it appeared in Inside Red China, pp. 221-26, and My Yenan Notebooks, pp.
139-41. We are grateful to Mrs. Snow's niece, Sheril Foster Bischoff, for the authorization
to reproduce this text. The most recently published Chinese version (see Mao Zedong
zishu [Mao Zedong in His Own Words], pp. 224-35) on the whole follows the English text
fairly closely. The editors must, however, have had a Chinese transcript at their disposal,
for in some instances they have added passages which do not appear in Helen Snow's
record, or modified her text in some way. When these variations seem significant, we have
inserted them and noted the fact. Elsewhere, apart from minor modifications in punctuation and spelling to bring these details into correspondence with the usage in our series, we
have left Helen Foster Snow's English text as she published it.
set by Nym Wales and stated above in the title.
resolutions of the Communist Party." This is clearly erroneous, since the [Chinese]
Communist Party could not adopt resolutions of its own at a congress of the International.
The reference could be to the positions adopted both at the Sixth Congress of the Chinese
Communist Party held in Moscow in June-July 1928, and at the Sixth Congress of the
Communist International, held in August and September of the same year, but this seems
unlikely. The editors of Mao Zedong zishu have simply omitted the phrase cited above,
and we follow them here.
(Mimeographed and distributed by Helen F. Snow, Madison, Connecticut, 1961), pp.
139-41. According to that source, Mao had asked her in 1937 to use this part of their
discussion "only as a talk at that time," meaning presumably without quoting him directly.
In 1961, she reproduced her notes verbatim. We have identified her as Wales, rather than
as Snow, in order to avoid confusion with Edgar Snow, whose 1936 interviews with Mao
appear earlier in this volume.
in Mao Zedong zishu, the references to Song and Kong are omitted in the Chinese version.
Some other points are expressed more fully and clearly in the Chinese, and we have
modified the English accordingly.
Wales: The Trotskyists say that, because the Red Army is made up of petty bourgeois peasants, there is no assurance that they will not sell out the revolution in the
future. In your opinion, can the Red Army be relied on from beginning to end?10
with the previous paragraph. The passage which follows is much clearer and more
complete in Mao Zedong zishu, and we have modified it accordingly.
Chinese text.
Chinese text.
the case of this exchange, the differences are somewhat greater than in the preceding two.
In particular, the English text as published contains no reference to the Trotskyists.
Nym Wales was obviously thinking of his writings in the late 1920s, when he was one of
the Comintern's principal China experts. His name does not appear in the Chinese text.
Notebooks are similar to those which appear here, but we have revised them in the light of
the version in Mao Zedong zishu.
Chinese version.
--- Notes

In order to understand the nature of the Chinese Revolution, it is, of course, first
of all necessary to understand the nature of Chinese society.¹
The nature of Chinese society may be summarized in a single phrase: it is a
semi-feudal, semi-colonial society. Different economic forms exist, but the feudal petty-commercial form is dominant, based mainly on rural economy. By
petty-commercial economy I mean that stage of self-sufficient economy preceding the capitalist form and going back to the most backward stage, when goods
are produced for self-consumption and not for commodity sale.
However, China is also already in a stage of capitalist economy. To deny the
existence of capitalist economy in China is incorrect. But this capitalist economy
is made up of three parts: (1) individual capitalists, (2) the National Government,
and (3) the imperialists. These three elements combined together form the capitalist structure of Chinese economy.
This capitalist form is a new form of economy in China, and it is in conflict
with Chinese feudal economy. Its power lies in the metropolitan cities, in communications, industry, mining, etc. However, capitalism is not yet in the dominant position in Chinese economy because of imperialist oppression which
creates a condition under which the native Chinese individual and National
Government capitalism have no possibility of further development. In many
phases of production the imperialist element is greater than the Chinese. Even in

All of the above opinions are in agreement with the analysis of the nature of
the Chinese Revolution² at the Sixth Congress of the Comintern.
Wales:3 What is the character of the bankers in China?
Mao: Many are compradors or semi-compradors, but many others have no relation with imperialism. This is the case, for example, of many middle and small
bankers. (T.V. Soong [Song Ziwen] can be classed with this group.) The capital
of some of the banks is purely government capital. T.V. Soong and H.H. Kung
[Kong Xiangxi] are bankers of government capital. They have an indirect relation to imperialist capital because the government borrows money from foreign
countries, and it is invested in these banks.
The part of the landlords and compradors whose interests are most directly
allied to Japan will become the traitors. Some unemployed who are forced by the
wants of life will go for hire and join in spying work. The armies of traitors are
indirectly traitors.6
Wales: What about the petty bourgeoisie?
Wales: Are the intellectuals separate as a class??
Mao: The petty bourgeois intelligentsia and free liberal professionals are definitely not an independent class; they belong to the proletariat or to the peasantry.

Wales: What is the nature of the Communist movement in China? What is the
task of the Chinese Communist Party?8
Mao: As I explained above, because only the proletariat can lead the Chinese
revolution, the political party of the proletariat must definitely play the leading
role. The basic nature of our revolution is to struggle to carry out a Communist
revolution, but the Communist stage can be reached only after passing through
the democratic stage.
Wales: What are the nature and tasks of the Red Army??
Mao: The Chinese petty bourgeoisie and intellectuals also play an extremely
important role in revolution. This is because of the semicolonial nature of Chinese society. The imperialists created the intelligentsia in China, and then they
turned against their imperialist teachers.
Mao: Fundamentally it represents the interests of the proletariat, but at the same
time it represents the interests of the peasants, the petty bourgeoisie, and the
bourgeoisie. The main component of the Red Army is the peasantry, and it also
includes some rural and urban proletarians. We do not have statistics regarding
paragraph:
Mao ended by saying: "This is the Party's resolution in the past and also the writing of
many comrades. It is already established opinion. It is contained in the resolutions of the
party's Sixth Congress, which analyze the nature of Chinese society, etc."
This passage does not appear in the Chinese text. It is followed, in Nym Wales' account, by the
statement: "On the page following the above Mao interview, I find some further comments,
which appear to have been added by Mao Zedong, but I am not sure of this." In fact, the
passage which she then goes on to quote is similar in substance to Mao's reply to the last
question in the interview as it appears in Mao Zedong zishu and is translated below.

21. The reference is to the "Three Principles" of Japanese prime minister Hirota Kōki.

22. Three days later, on July 7, 1937, Japan did indeed embark on that road.


--- Notes

1. The whole long passage beginning here consists of Mao's comments on the topic

2. Here Helen Foster Snow's English text inserts the words "as made in the

3. The balance of this interview is taken from Nym Wales, My Yenan Notebooks

4. While the substance of this paragraph is basically the same in the English text and

5. Here My Yenan Notebooks has "with"; this is an obvious typographical error.
6. This second paragraph is omitted from the Chinese version.

7. This question is omitted in the Chinese text, and the answer to it is run together

8. This question and Mao's response have been modified to correspond to the

9. Once again, this question and answer have been revised to correspond to the

10. Again we have replaced Nym Wales' version by a translation from the Chinese. In

11. Here Nym Wales' English version has "proletariat" instead of "bourgeoisie."
12. This sentence does not appear in the Chinese text.
13. The term "subjugation clique" does not appear in the Chinese text.
14. This question and Mao's reply do not appear in My Yenan Notebooks.
15. This question and Mao's reply do not appear in the Chinese text.
16. The reference to Wittfogel may appear odd, in the light of his later history, but

17. The substance of this question and Mao's reply as they appear in My Yenan

18. The last two sentences, which appear in My Yenan Notebooks, are omitted from the

19. This question and Mao's answer are omitted from the Chinese version.

20. This response of Mao's is followed in My Yenan Notebooks by the following brief