Additions and Comments on the Draft Directive Concerning Opposition to the Reactionary Schemes of the Liu Hangchen Type[1]

(October 27, 1947)

Politically we must isolate the liberal bourgeoisie (especially its right wing) while economically we must protect them; these two aspects seem contradictory, but in fact they are not. After Chiang Kai-shek is overthrown, because the political tendency of the liberal bourgeoisie, particularly its right wing, is to oppose us, we must strike at them politically and isolate them from the masses, that is, liberate the masses from the influence of the liberal bourgeoisie. But this does not mean we should immediately overthrow them in the same way as we do the landlord class and the big bourgeoisie; at that time, their representatives will still participate in the government, so that through experience the masses may recognize their reactionary nature, especially that of the right wing, and gradually cast them aside. Economically, they will be allowed to exist for a long period, and their economy will be permitted a certain degree of development within the bounds permitted by government laws and decrees, in order to facilitate economic recovery and development. The same applies to the new rich peasants who emerge after the equal distribution of land. On this question, excessive leftism and impatience are mistaken.

[1] The first part is a passage added by Mao Zedong when revising a draft directive written by Zhou Enlai for the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China concerning opposition to the reactionary schemes of the Liu Hangchen type. The second part is a letter to Zhou Enlai regarding the revision and issuance of this directive. Liu Hangchen, then a member of the National Economic Council of the Kuomintang government, proposed organizing a Grand Alliance for Peaceful Unification as a stalling tactic for the United States and Chiang Kai-shek.

Additions and Comments on the Draft Directive Concerning Opposition to the Reactionary Schemes of the Liu Hangchen Type

The directive telegram is very good and highly necessary. However, one additional article must be added as Article Five, to completely clarify the policy question regarding the liberal bourgeoisie and to prevent the occurrence of a leftist deviation. This deviation has occurred historically. This telegram should be issued as a general directive to all localities.