On the occasion of the twenty-second anniversary of the Soviet Revolution in 1939, the Sino-Soviet Cultural Association asked me to write an article. I would like to use my observations to explain several questions about the Soviet Union that are related to China. Because these questions are being discussed among the broad masses of the Chinese people, and especially among the various anti-Japanese parties, anti-Japanese soldiers, young students, journalists, and cultural circles, and it seems that no definite conclusions have been reached. I would like to take this opportunity to offer some opinions on these issues to those who are concerned about Sino-Soviet relations during the European war, as a reference, or perhaps not without benefit.

The first question is the Soviet Union's role in preventing the First World Imperialist War. Some people say that the Soviet Union benefits from the outbreak of a world war and does not seek world peace, and that the outbreak of this continued war was caused by the Soviet Union's signing of a non-aggression treaty with Germany instead of a mutual assistance treaty with Britain and France. I think this view is incorrect. Because for a long period in the past, the Soviet Union's foreign policy has been a consistent policy of peace, and this policy of peace is linked to the interests of the Soviet Union and the interests of the majority of mankind in the world. In the past, the Soviet Union not only needed peace for its own socialist construction, needed to consolidate peaceful relations between the Soviet Union and various countries in the world, and prevent anti-Soviet wars, but also needed to stop the aggression of various fascist countries, stop the war-provoking behavior of the so-called democratic countries, and needed to delay the outbreak of a world imperialist war as much as possible, in order to strive for peace on a global scale. For many years, the Soviet Union has made great efforts for the cause of world peace. For example, it joined the League of Nations, signed mutual assistance agreements with France and Czechoslovakia, and tried its best to sign treaties guaranteeing security with Britain and all countries willing to have peace, which is clear evidence. When Germany and Italy jointly invaded Spain, and Britain, the United States, and France adopted a policy of nominal non-intervention, but in reality, did not prevent Germany and Italy from invading, the Soviet Union not only signed a non-aggression treaty with China, but also actively assisted China's resistance to Japan. When Britain and France sacrificed Austria and Czechoslovakia and condoned Hitler's aggression, the Soviet Union tried its best to expose the inside story of the Munich policy and proposed to Britain and France to stop the further development of aggression. When the Polish question became tense this spring and summer and a world war was about to break out, regardless of Chamberlain and Daladier's lack of sincerity, the Soviet Union still conducted more than four months of negotiations with Britain and France, attempting to sign a British-French-Soviet mutual assistance treaty to prevent the outbreak of war. But all of this was obstructed by the British and French governments' imperialist policies of condoning war, provoking war, and expanding war, and the cause of world peace suffered a final setback, and the imperialist world war finally broke out. The governments of Britain, the United States, and France were not sincere in preventing the outbreak of war; on the contrary, they promoted the outbreak of war. Because they refused to compromise with the Soviet Union and refused to sign a truly effective mutual assistance treaty with the Soviet Union on the basis of equality and mutual benefit, this proves that they only wanted war and did not want peace. Everyone knows that in this world today, rejecting the Soviet Union is rejecting peace. This point is also known to Lloyd George of Britain, this representative of the bourgeoisie. In this state, at this time, Germany was willing to abandon its anti-Soviet stance, abandon the Anti-Comintern Pact, and recognize the inviolability of the Soviet Union's borders, so the Soviet-German Non-Aggression Treaty was signed. Britain, the United States, and France were wholeheartedly pushing Germany to attack the Soviet Union, so that they could sit on the mountain and watch the tigers fight, and after the Soviet Union and Germany were exhausted, they would come out to clean up the mess. This kind of conspiracy was shattered by the Soviet-German Non-Aggression Treaty. If the Chinese people do not pay attention to this kind of conspiracy, do not pay attention to the British imperialist conspiracy of condoning war, provoking war, and promoting the outbreak of a world war, they are really being fooled by these conspirators' sweet propaganda. These conspirators, on the Spanish question, on the Chinese question, and on the Austrian question, not only had no intention of stopping aggression, but on the contrary, condoned aggression, provoked war, and made others fight like snipes and clams, while they themselves acted as fishermen, calling it "non-intervention" in name, but in reality, they were "sitting on the mountain and watching the tigers fight." How many people in the world were deceived by Chamberlain and his partners' sweet speeches, and did not know the terrible nature of their smiles hiding daggers, and did not know that it was only after Chamberlain and Daladier decided to reject the Soviet Union and decided to wage an imperialist war that the Soviet-German Non-Aggression Treaty was signed. Now they should wake up. The Soviet Union not only needs peace for itself, but also needs world peace, not only needs to stop fascist countries from invading itself and invading weak nations, but also needs to stop the outbreak of a world war, stop the war-provoking behavior of various so-called democratic countries, or at least delay the time of the outbreak of war. The unfortunate outbreak of war is entirely the result of the imperialist countries' rejection and sabotage of the Soviet Union and the common efforts of the people of the world to maintain peace. The Soviet Union's maintenance of world peace until the last moment is a manifestation of the mutual consistency between the interests of the Soviet Union and the interests of the majority of mankind. This is the first question I want to talk about.

The second question is what attitude the Soviet Union will take towards the First World Imperialist War. Some people say that since the First World Imperialist War has broken out, the Soviet Union may join one side of the war, that is, the Soviet Red Army seems to be about to join the German imperialist front. I think this view is incorrect. The war that has now broken out, whether on the British and French side or on the German side, is an unjust, plundering, imperialist war. The communist parties of all countries in the world, the people of all countries in the world, should rise up to oppose this war, should expose the imperialist nature of both sides of the war, which is only harmful to the people of the world and not beneficial to the people of the world at all, and expose the criminal behavior of the social democratic parties in various countries who support the imperialist war and betray the interests of the proletariat. The Soviet Union is a socialist country, a country ruled by the Communist Party, and its attitude towards war must be two distinct attitudes: (1) resolutely not participating in unjust, plundering, and imperialist wars, and maintaining neutrality towards both sides of the war; therefore, the Soviet Red Army will never participate in the imperialist front without principle. (2) Actively assisting just, non-plundering, and liberating wars. For example, thirteen years ago, it assisted China's Northern Expedition; one year ago, it assisted Spain in resisting Germany and Italy; for two years, it has assisted China in resisting Japan; for several months, it has assisted Outer Mongolia in resisting Japan; and it will certainly assist people's liberation wars and national liberation wars that may occur among other countries and other nations in the future, and it will certainly assist wars that are conducive to defending the Soviet Union. Regarding this point, the past twenty-two years of Soviet history have proven it, and future history seems to continue to prove it. Some people regard the Soviet Union's doing business with Germany based on the Soviet-German trade agreement as an action of the Soviet Union participating in the German front. This view is also incorrect. This is because they confuse trade with participation in the war. Not only should trade not be confused with participation in the war, but trade should not be confused with assistance. For example, in the Spanish war, the Soviet Union traded with Germany and Italy, but the world did not say that the Soviet Union assisted Germany and Italy in invading Spain, but said that the Soviet Union assisted Spain in resisting the invasion of Germany and Italy, because the Soviet Union did indeed assist Spain. For example, in the Sino-Japanese war, the Soviet Union also traded with Japan, and the world did not say that the Soviet Union assisted Japan in invading China, but said that it assisted China in resisting Japan, because the Soviet Union did indeed assist China. Now both sides of the world war have trade relations with the Soviet Union. This fact cannot be said to be assistance to either side, let alone participation in the war. Unless the nature of the war changes, and the war of a certain country or several countries, after a certain necessary change, is beneficial to the Soviet Union and the people of the world, then there is the possibility of assistance or participation in the war; otherwise, there is no such possibility. As for the fact that the Soviet Union's trade with the warring countries varies in quantity and generosity depending on whether their attitude towards the Soviet Union is pro-Soviet or anti-Soviet, this is a matter of the warring countries' own attitude, not a matter of the Soviet Union. Even if a certain country or certain countries adopt an anti-Soviet attitude, as long as they are willing to maintain diplomatic relations, sign trade treaties, and do not declare war on the Soviet Union, such as Germany before August 23, the Soviet Union will not sever trade relations with them. This kind of trade relationship is not assistance, let alone participation in the war. This should be clearly understood. Of course, every clear-headed person should estimate a possible fact, that is, the current world situation is changing, and Chamberlain is trying to organize a world reactionary united front that will first defeat Germany and then attack the Soviet Union, or even attack at the same time. If this reactionary front is truly organized and takes the Soviet Union as its enemy, then the Soviet Union and Germany will have common interests, and the nature of the German war will become a war beneficial to socialist countries. At that time, the Soviet Union will have the possibility of standing on the same front as Germany, and the question of the Soviet Union sending troops to assist or participate in the war will arise. But until that time, this question cannot be raised. This is also in the interests of the Soviet Union.

The third question is the Soviet Union's entry into Poland. Many people in the country are confused about this complex question. Due to the complexity of the question, people's thinking is confused. The Polish question should be divided into several aspects: the German side, the British and French side, the Polish government side, the Polish people side, and the Soviet side. On the German side, it is waging war in order to plunder the Polish people and to break through one wing of the British and French imperialist front. The nature of this war is imperialist, cannot be sympathized with, and should be opposed. This is the first point. On the British and French side, they are using Poland as one of the objects of plunder by British and French financial capital, and are using Poland in order to reject German imperialism's redistribution of their loot on a global scale. They are treating Poland as one wing of their own imperialist front. Therefore, the war of Britain and France is an imperialist war, and the so-called assistance to Poland is nothing more than competing with Germany for the right to rule Poland. It is equally impossible to sympathize with and should be opposed. This is the second point. On the Polish government side, it is a fascist government, a reactionary government of the Polish landlords and bourgeoisie. It cruelly exploits the workers and peasants and oppresses the Polish democrats. It is also a Greater Poland chauvinist, because it implements cruel national oppression among the many ethnic minorities in Poland other than the Polish nation, that is, among the more than ten million non-Polish people, including Ukrainians, Belarusians, Jews, Germans, and Lithuanians. It is itself an imperialist country. In this war, the Polish reactionary government is willing to lead the Polish people as cannon fodder for British and French financial capital, and is willing to serve as a component of the international financial capital reactionary front. For many years, the Polish government has consistently opposed the Soviet Union, and in the British-French-Soviet negotiations, it firmly rejected the assistance of the Soviet army. And this government is also a very incompetent government. In just two weeks, it buried Poland under the iron hooves of German imperialism, causing the Polish people to suffer the trampling of German imperialism. All of this is the Polish government's heinous crime. If we sympathize with such a government, that is wrong. On the Polish people's side, they are the victims. They should rise up to oppose the oppression of German fascism, oppose their own reactionary bourgeoisie, and establish an independent and free Polish democratic country. There is no doubt that our sympathy should be placed on the Polish people's side. On the Soviet side, it is a completely just action. The following two questions are placed before the Soviet Union. The first question is: should the entire Poland be placed under the rule of German imperialism, or should the ethnic minorities in eastern Poland be liberated? On this question, the Soviet Union chose the second path. That large piece of land inhabited by the Belarusian and Ukrainian nations was forcibly taken from the young Soviet Union by the then German imperialism during the "Treaty of Brest-Litovsk" in 1918, and was later forcibly placed under the rule of the Polish reactionary government by the Treaty of Versailles. The Soviet Union is now only taking back the land it lost in the past, liberating the oppressed Belarusian and Ukrainian nations, and preventing them from being oppressed by Germany. The news in the past few days indicates how these ethnic minorities are welcoming the Red Army with food and drink, and regard the Red Army as their savior. And in the western Polish areas occupied by the German army and the western German areas occupied by the French army, there is no such news at all. This shows that the Soviet Union's war is a just, non-plundering, and liberating war, a war to assist the liberation of weak nations and assist the liberation of the people. And the war of Germany and the war of Britain and France are all unjust, plundering, and imperialist wars, wars to oppress other nations and oppress the people of other countries. In addition to this, the Soviet Union also faces another question, which is that Chamberlain is trying to continue his old policy. That is, on the one hand, he is launching a large-scale blockade of the western side of Germany, oppressing the western part of Germany; on the other hand, he is trying to unite the United States, buy off Italy, buy off Japan, and buy off the Nordic countries, so that they stand on his side, in order to isolate Germany; and on the other hand, he is taking Poland, and even preparing to take Hungary and Romania, as gifts to lure Germany. In short, he is using all kinds of methods of coercion and inducement to push Germany to abandon the Soviet-German Non-Aggression Treaty, so that it will turn its guns around and attack the Soviet Union. This kind of conspiracy not only exists now, but will continue in the future. The Soviet army's entry into eastern Poland is a concrete step to recover its own territory, liberate weak nations, and at the same time consolidate the Soviet-German Non-Aggression Treaty and break Chamberlain's conspiracy. Judging from the news in the past few days, the Soviet Union's policy has been extremely successful. This is a concrete manifestation of the mutual consistency between the interests of the Soviet Union and the interests of the majority of mankind in the world, and the interests of the oppressed people under the reactionary rule of Poland. This is the third question I want to talk about.

The fourth question is the Soviet Union's assistance to China. After the signing of the Soviet-German Non-Aggression Treaty, it greatly hit Japan, assisted China, strengthened the position of the anti-Japanese faction in China, and hit the capitulationist faction. It is very correct for the Chinese people to welcome this agreement. But after the signing of the Nomonhan Armistice Agreement, British news agencies spread the news that a Japanese-Soviet Non-Aggression Treaty was about to be signed, and a kind of worry arose among the Chinese people. Some people thought that the Soviet Union would no longer assist China. I think this observation is incorrect. The nature of the Nomonhan Armistice Agreement is the same as the Zhanggufeng Armistice Agreement in the past, that is, under Japan's capitulation, the Japanese warlords recognized the inviolability of the Soviet-Mongolian border. This kind of armistice agreement will increase the possibility of the Soviet Union's assistance to China, rather than reduce its assistance. As for the so-called Japanese-Soviet Non-Aggression Treaty, the Soviet Union wanted to sign it with Japan many years ago, but Japan always refused. Now a faction within the Japanese ruling class is asking the Soviet Union to sign this kind of treaty, and whether the Soviet Union is willing to sign it depends on whether this treaty is in line with the interests of the Soviet Union and the interests of the majority of mankind, based on this basic principle. Specifically, it depends on whether this treaty conflicts with the interests of China's national liberation war. According to my view, based on Stalin's report at the Eighteenth Congress of the Soviet Communist Party this March 10 and Molotov's speech at the Soviet Supreme Soviet this May 31, the Soviet Union will not change this basic principle. Even if there is a possibility of signing a Japanese-Soviet Non-Aggression Treaty, the Soviet Union will never restrict its actions to assist China in the treaty. The interests of the Soviet Union and the interests of China's national liberation will never conflict, but will be permanently consistent. I think there is absolutely no doubt about this. Those who have anti-Soviet prejudices are taking advantage of the signing of the Nomonhan Armistice Agreement and the rumors of a Japanese-Soviet Non-Aggression Treaty to stir up trouble and provoke the feelings between the two great nations of China and the Soviet Union. This situation exists among the conspirators of Britain, the United States, and France, and among the capitulationists in China. This is a serious danger and should be thoroughly exposed. China's foreign policy, very obviously, should be an anti-Japanese policy. This policy is based on self-reliance, and at the same time, it does not abandon all possible foreign aid that can be won. And the so-called foreign aid, in the situation of the outbreak of a world imperialist war, is mainly in the following three aspects: (1) the socialist Soviet Union; (2) the people within the capitalist countries of the world; (3) the oppressed nations in the colonies and semi-colonies of the world. Only these are reliable helpers. The so-called foreign aid other than these, even if it is still possible, can only be regarded as partial and temporary. Of course, these partial and temporary foreign aid should also be strived for, but should never be overly relied on and not regarded as reliable assistance. Towards the warring countries of the imperialist war, China should strictly maintain neutrality and not participate in any side. The opinion that China should participate in the British and French imperialist front is the opinion of the capitulationists, which is not conducive to the anti-Japanese war and not conducive to the Chinese nation. It is a good phenomenon that the people of the country pay attention to the study of international issues, pay attention to the relationship between the anti-Japanese war and the world imperialist war, and pay attention to the relationship between the Soviet Union and China, and that their purpose is for the victory of China's anti-Japanese war. I am now putting forward my basic views on the above questions. Whether they are appropriate or not, I hope that readers will not hesitate to give their advice.

September 18

The Central Committee had planned to publish a party journal a long time ago, and now it has been realized. In order to build a Bolshevik Chinese Communist Party that is nationwide, broadly mass-based, and completely consolidated ideologically, politically, and organizationally, such a journal is necessary. In the current situation, this necessity is even more obvious. The characteristics of the current situation are: on the one hand, the danger of capitulation, the danger of division, and the danger of retrogression in the anti-Japanese national united front are developing day by day; on the other hand, our party has already stepped out of its narrow circle and become a nationwide major party. And the party's task is to mobilize the masses to overcome the danger of capitulation, the danger of division, and the danger of retrogression, and to prepare for possible sudden incidents, and in possible sudden incidents, to prevent the party and the revolution from suffering unexpected losses. In this situation, the publication of such a party journal is really very necessary. This party journal is named "The Communist." What is its task? What will it write about? What are the differences between it and other party newspapers? Its task is: to help build a Bolshevik Chinese Communist Party that is nationwide, broadly mass-based, and completely consolidated ideologically, politically, and organizationally. For the victory of the Chinese revolution, it is urgently necessary to build such a party, and the subjective and objective conditions for building such a party are already largely available, and this great project is being created. For this great cause, ordinary party newspapers cannot be competent, and there must be a specialized party newspaper. This is the reason for the publication of "The Communist." To a certain extent, our party is already a nationwide party, and it is already a mass-based party, and in terms of its leading backbone, in terms of certain components of its members, in terms of its general line, and in terms of its revolutionary work, it is already a party that is consolidated ideologically, politically, and organizationally, and a Bolshevik party. Then, what is the reason for putting forward new tasks now? The reason is: we now have a large number of new party members and many new organizations, and it cannot be said that they are broadly mass-based, that they are consolidated ideologically, politically, and organizationally, and that they are Bolshevikized. At the same time, for the old party members and old organizations, there is also the question of raising their level, and the question of further consolidating and further Bolshevikizing them ideologically, politically, and organizationally. The environment in which the party is located and the tasks that the party bears are very different from the internal strife period in the past. The current environment is much more complex, and the current tasks are much more arduous. Now is the period of the national united front, and we have established a united front with the bourgeoisie. Now is the period of the anti-Japanese war, and our party's armed forces are cooperating with friendly forces on the front line to conduct a cruel war against the enemy. Now is the period when our party has developed into a nationwide party, and it is no longer what it used to be. If we look at these situations in connection, we will understand what a glorious and serious task it is for us to put forward "building a Bolshevik Chinese Communist Party that is nationwide, broadly mass-based, and completely consolidated ideologically, politically, and organizationally." Now that we want to build such a party, how should we proceed?

Our party's history, from the time of the First National Congress in 1921 to the present, has been exactly eighteen years. In these eighteen years, the party has experienced many great struggles. Party members, party cadres, and party organizations have tempered themselves in these great struggles. We have experienced great revolutionary victories, and we have also experienced serious revolutionary failures. We have established a national united front with the bourgeoisie, and we have also experienced the division of this united front and engaged in serious armed struggles with the bourgeoisie and its allies. In the past three years, we have been in a period of establishing a national united front with the bourgeoisie again. The development path of the Chinese revolution and the Chinese Communist Party has been traversed in such a complex relationship with the Chinese bourgeoisie. This is a historical characteristic, a characteristic of the revolutionary process in colonies and semi-colonies, which is not found in the revolutionary history of any capitalist country. Furthermore, because China is a semi-colonial and semi-feudal country, a country with unbalanced development in politics, economy, and culture, and a country with a dominant semi-feudal economy and a vast territory, this not only stipulates that the nature of the Chinese revolution at this stage is the nature of a bourgeois democratic revolution, that the main targets of the revolution are imperialism and feudal forces, and that the basic driving forces of the revolution are the proletariat, the peasant class, and the urban petty bourgeoisie, and that in a certain period, to a certain extent, there is also the national bourgeoisie, etc., but also stipulates that the main form of revolutionary struggle in China is armed struggle. The history of our party can be said to be the history of armed struggle. Comrade Stalin said: "The characteristic of the Chinese revolution is that the armed people oppose the armed counter-revolution." This is very correct. This characteristic, this characteristic of semi-colonial China, is also not found or different in the communist parties of various capitalist countries. In this way, (1) establishing or being forced to split the revolutionary national united front with the bourgeoisie, and (2) the main form of revolution being armed struggle, have become two basic characteristics in the process of the Chinese bourgeois democratic revolution. Here, we have not regarded the party's relationship with the peasant class and the party's relationship with the urban petty bourgeoisie as basic characteristics, because, first, this kind of relationship is in principle the same for the communist parties of all countries in the world; second, in China, as long as armed struggle is mentioned, it is essentially a peasant war, and the close relationship between the party and the peasant war is the party's relationship with the peasants. Due to these two basic characteristics, precisely due to these basic characteristics, the process of our party's construction and the process of our party's Bolshevikization are in a special situation. Its failures and victories, its retreats and advances, its shrinking and expansion, and its development and consolidation cannot but be linked to the party's relationship with the bourgeoisie and the party's relationship with armed struggle. When our party's political line is to correctly handle the establishment of a united front with the bourgeoisie or being forced to split the united front, our party's development, consolidation, and Bolshevikization will move forward one step; and if it is not correct in handling the relationship with the bourgeoisie, our party's development, consolidation, and Bolshevikization will retreat one step. Similarly, when our party correctly handles the issue of revolutionary armed struggle, our party's development, consolidation, and Bolshevikization will move forward one step; and if it is not correct in handling this issue, then our party's development, consolidation, and Bolshevikization will also retreat one step. For eighteen years, the process of party construction and the process of Bolshevikization have been closely linked to the party's political line, and have been closely linked to the party's correct or incorrect handling of the united front issue and the armed struggle issue. This conclusion, very obviously, has been proven by the eighteen years of the party's history. Conversely, the more the party tends towards Bolshevikization, the more the party can and will correctly handle the party's political line, and the more correctly it will handle the united front issue and the armed struggle issue. This conclusion is very obviously proven by the eighteen years of the party's history. Therefore, the united front issue, the armed struggle issue, and the party construction issue are the three basic issues of our party in the Chinese revolution. Correctly understanding these three issues and their interrelationships is equivalent to correctly leading the entire Chinese revolution. And in the eighteen years of the party's history, relying on our rich experience, the profound and rich experience of failure and success, retreat and advance, shrinking and development, we have been able to draw correct conclusions. That is to say, we have been able to correctly handle the united front issue, and correctly handle the armed struggle issue, and correctly handle the party construction issue. In other words, eighteen years of experience have made us understand that the united front, armed struggle, and party construction are the three magic weapons, the three main magic weapons, for the Chinese Communist Party to defeat the enemy in the Chinese revolution. This is a great achievement of the Chinese Communist Party, and it is also a great achievement of the Chinese revolution. Here, let us briefly talk about these three magic weapons, these three issues, separately.

In eighteen years, the united front of the Chinese proletariat with the Chinese bourgeoisie and other classes has developed in three different situations and three different stages, which are the stage of the First Great Revolution, the stage of the Ten Years' Civil War, and the stage of the current Anti-Japanese War. The three stages have proven the following laws: (1) Because the greatest oppression in China is national oppression, in a certain period, to a certain extent, the Chinese national bourgeoisie is able to participate in the struggle against imperialism and feudal warlords. Therefore, the proletariat should establish a united front with the national bourgeoisie in this certain period and maintain it as much as possible. (2) Also, because of the economic and political weakness of the Chinese national bourgeoisie, it will waver and betray in another historical environment. Therefore, the content of the Chinese revolutionary united front cannot always be consistent, but must change. In some periods, the bourgeoisie participates, while in other periods, the bourgeoisie does not participate. Due to the wavering nature of the bourgeoisie, even when the bourgeoisie (especially the big bourgeoisie) participates in the united front and fights the common enemy together with the proletariat, it still restricts the ideological, political, and organizational development of the proletariat and its party, and adopts destructive policies such as deception, temptation, dissolution, and attack, and uses this as a preparation for its surrender to the enemy and splitting the united front. (3) The proletariat's firm ally is the peasantry. (4) The urban petty bourgeoisie is also a reliable ally. These laws have not only been proven in the First Great Revolution and the Ten Years' Civil War, but are also being proven in the three years of the Anti-Japanese War. Therefore, the proletariat's party must implement a resolute and serious two-line struggle on the issue of organizing a united front with the bourgeoisie (especially the big bourgeoisie). On the one hand, it opposes ignoring the revolutionary possibility of the bourgeoisie in a certain period and to a certain extent, treating the Chinese bourgeoisie as the same as the bourgeoisie in capitalist countries, and thus ignoring the policy of establishing a united front with the bourgeoisie and maintaining this united front as much as possible. This is "left" leaning closed-doorism. On the other hand, it is necessary to oppose treating the proletariat's and the bourgeoisie's programs, policies, thoughts, and practices as the same thing, ignoring the principled differences between them, and ignoring that the bourgeoisie is not only trying its best to influence the petty bourgeoisie and the peasantry, but is also trying its best to influence the proletariat and the Communist Party, striving to eliminate the ideological, political, and organizational independence of the proletariat and the Communist Party, and turning the proletariat and the Communist Party into the tail of the bourgeoisie and its party, striving to make the fruits of the revolution belong to a group or a party of the bourgeoisie, and when the revolution conflicts with the private interests of their group or party, they will betray the revolution. If we ignore this aspect, this is right-leaning opportunism. The characteristic of Chen Duxiu's leadership in the past was to guide the proletariat to suit the private interests of a group or a party of the bourgeoisie. He was the subjective reason for the failure of the First Great Revolution. The dual nature of the Chinese bourgeoisie in the bourgeois democratic revolution has a very great influence on the Chinese Communist Party's political line and party construction. Without understanding this dual nature of the Chinese bourgeoisie, it is impossible to understand the Chinese Communist Party's political line and party construction. An important part of the Chinese Communist Party's political line is the political line of uniting with the bourgeoisie and fighting it at the same time. An important part of the Chinese Communist Party's party construction is the development and tempering in the process of uniting with the bourgeoisie and fighting it at the same time. The so-called uniting here is the united front. The so-called struggle is, when uniting, the "peaceful" and "bloodless" struggle ideologically, politically, and organizationally, and when forced to split with the bourgeoisie, it turns into armed struggle. If our party does not know how to unite with the bourgeoisie in a certain period, the party cannot advance and the revolution cannot develop. If our party does not know how to conduct a resolute and serious "peaceful" struggle with the bourgeoisie while uniting with the bourgeoisie, the party will disintegrate ideologically, politically, and organizationally, and the revolution will fail. And if our party does not conduct a resolute and serious armed struggle with the bourgeoisie when forced to split with the bourgeoisie, the party will also disintegrate and the revolution will fail. All of this has been proven in the past eighteen years of history.

The Chinese Communist Party's armed struggle is a peasant war under the leadership of the proletariat. Its history can also be divided into three stages. The first stage is participating in the bourgeoisie's Northern Expedition. At this time, although our party had begun to understand the importance of armed struggle, it had not yet thoroughly understood its importance, and had not yet understood that armed struggle is the main form of struggle in the Chinese revolution. The second stage is the Ten Years' Civil War. We had already established independent armed forces, had already learned the art of independent warfare, had already established people's power and base areas, and had already been able to directly or indirectly coordinate this main form of armed struggle with many other necessary forms of struggle, that is, the struggle of the workers, the struggle of the peasants (this is the main one), the struggle of the youth, the women, and all the people, the struggle for power, the struggle on the economic front, the struggle on the anti-espionage front, the struggle on the ideological front, and so on, coordinating these forms of struggle directly or indirectly on a nationwide scale. And this kind of armed struggle is a peasant land revolution under the leadership of the proletariat. The third stage is the current stage of the Anti-Japanese War. In this stage, we are able to use the experience of armed struggle in the past two revolutionary stages, especially in the second stage, and are able to use the experience of coordinating the form of armed struggle with various other necessary forms of struggle. The general concept of this kind of struggle is guerrilla warfare. What is guerrilla warfare? It is the inevitable and therefore the best form of struggle in backward countries, in large semi-colonial countries, and over a long period of time, for the people's armed forces to fight armed enemies and create their own positions. For eighteen years, our party's political line and party construction have been closely linked to this form of struggle. Without armed struggle, without guerrilla warfare, there would be no party construction. Without the importance and richness of our political line, there would be no position for the proletariat, no position for the people, no position for the Communist Party, and no victory for the revolution. For eighteen years, our party's development, consolidation, and Bolshevikization have been carried out in revolutionary war. The experience bought with blood in armed struggle should not be forgotten by all comrades in the party.

The process of party construction, the process of party development, consolidation, and Bolshevikization, also has the characteristics of three stages. The first stage is the party in its infancy. In the early and middle stages of this stage, the party's line was correct, and the revolutionary enthusiasm of the party members, the masses, and the party cadres was very high, so the victory of the First Great Revolution was obtained. However, the party at this time was still a party in its infancy after all, a party that had no experience in the three basic issues of the united front, armed struggle, and party construction, and a party that did not have a complete and unified understanding of the characteristics of the Chinese revolution, the laws of the Chinese revolution, and the theory of Marxism-Leninism and the practice of the Chinese revolution. Therefore, the component that occupied the dominant position in the party's leading organs, at the end of this stage, at the critical juncture of this stage, was not able to lead the entire party to consolidate the victory of the revolution, and was deceived by the bourgeoisie, causing the revolution to suffer failure. In this stage, the party's organization developed, but it was not consolidated, and it was not able to consolidate the party members, the party cadres, and the party organizations ideologically, politically, and organizationally. There were very many new party members, but they were not given the necessary Marxist-Leninist education. There was also a lot of work experience, but it could not be well summarized. A large number of opportunists mixed into the party, but they were not purged. The enemy and the allies were conspiring to harm our party, but there was no vigilance. Many activists emerged in the party, but there was no time to create the backbone of the party. The party had a batch of revolutionary armed forces in its hands, but it could not grasp them. All of these situations were due to a lack of experience, a lack of deep revolutionary understanding, and a lack of a unified understanding of the theory of Marxism-Leninism and the practice of the Chinese revolution. This is the first stage of party construction. The second stage is the stage of the Ten Years' Civil War. Due to the experience of the first stage, due to a further understanding of the characteristics of the Chinese revolution, the laws of the Chinese revolution, and the theory of Marxism-Leninism and the practice of the Chinese revolution, our party was able to carry out the victorious ten years of Soviet struggle. Although the bourgeoisie betrayed, the party was able to rely closely on the peasants. The party's organization not only redeveloped, but also became consolidated. Although the enemy was harming our party every day, the party expelled the harmful elements. Not only did a large number of cadres re-emerge in the party, but they also became the central backbone of the party. The party opened up the path of people's power, and therefore also learned