China’s Socio-Economic Form, Class
Relationships, and the People’s Democratic
Revolution1
(February 15, 1948)
Chapter One: China’s Socio-Economic Form
To live, people must produce a means of livelihood, such as grain, clothing, housing, fuel, and utensils. To produce a means of livelihood, people must have a
means of production, such as land, raw materials, livestock, tools, and workshops.
The combination of being a producer and having a means of production is the
productive capacity of society.
To carry out production, people must establish a certain reciprocal relationship with one another in the production process; otherwise, they will be unable to
carry out production. This is because people’s production has always been social
production, which cannot be carried out in isolation. This reciprocal relationship
of people in the social production process is the production relationship of society
and the ownership relationship between the people and the means of production
(simply stated, the ownership relationship in this document refers to the possession relationship). This type of production relationship is legally manifested as a
property ownership relationship.
The combination of social productive forces and social production relationships is the social mode of production. The social mode of production is the foundation of all social and political systems as well as of spiritual life.
At a certain stage in the historical development of the social productive forces,
the possession relationship of people to the means of production as well as the
people’s productive relationship began to develop from a relationship of common possession by all people in society into a relationship of partially private
possession. The minority of people possessed a large amount of the means of
Our source for this text is Mao Zedong wenji, Vol. 5, pp. 55–63.
production, and the majority of people lost or possessed only a small part of the
means of production. Most of the latter group were therefore forced to work for
the former group, giving the results of their own labor to the former group and
obtaining small remuneration from the former for their own source of livelihood.
That is to say, the latter group was exploited by the former, and the former group
relied on greatly exploiting the latter for its own source of livelihood. The livelihood of part of the latter group came from doing its own work because it possessed
enough means of production to support itself, but it still could not escape from
being exploited by the former group to a certain extent. People therefore divided
into different classes. They divided into the exploiting class and the exploited
class. Because of the development of the productive forces, this was primarily
because of the development of production tools, such as the development of stone
tools into simple metal hand tools, then development into finer metal hand tools,
and then into complex mechanized tools. The ownership relationship of people
regarding the means of production as well as the people’s production relationships therefore changed. As the productive forces and the production relationships experienced changes, so too did the methods by which the exploiting class
exploited the exploited class change.
Society is divided into many classes. This kind of society is called a class society. This kind of class society is not only different from the primitive communist
society before humans historically divided into classes; it is also different from the
new communist society after classes have been eliminated. The latter type of society already exists now and it is developing in the Soviet Union. All human societies in the world are now advancing along the road taken by the Soviet Union, and
the history of class society will soon come to an end. Class society in the history
of mankind can more or less be divided into the three stages of slave society,
feudal society, and capitalist society. The same is true for the history of China’s
social development. It is only due to external and internal reasons that China did
not or could not develop into a fully capitalist society.
More than one hundred years ago (in 1840, during the Sino-British Opium
War period), the socio-economic form of China began to change gradually from
an ancient, independent, feudal socio-economic form into a semi-colonial, semifeudal socio-economic form, or a semi-independent, semi-capitalist socio-economic form. In China’s current social economy, there exists, on the one hand, a
foreign imperialist economy, a native feudalist economy, a bureaucratic capitalist
economy, and a free capitalist economy. These are the socio-economic forms of
the old China. On the other hand, there exists a new state economy, an economy
of the liberated peasants and small producers, and a private capitalist economy
under the direction of the new democratic state. These are the socio-economic
forms of the new China. Regarding production technology, there are large-scale
machinery manufacturing companies, medium and small-scale machinery manufacturing companies, and various household small manufacturing companies that
make handmade simple tools for manufacturing. The semi-colonial, semi-feudal
economic form of the old China has long occupied the dominant position since

the Opium War. This dominant position is now rapidly being replaced by the new
democratic economic form of the new China.
Marx said: “In the social production of their existence, men inevitably enter
into definite relations, which are independent of their will, namely relations of
production appropriate to a given stage in the development of their material
forces of production. The totality of these relations of production constitutes
the economic structure of society, the real foundation, on which arises a legal
and political superstructure and to which correspond definite forms of social
consciousness. The mode of production of material life conditions the general
process of social, political, and intellectual life. It is not the consciousness of
men that determines their existence, but their social existence that determines
their consciousness. At a certain stage of development, the material productive
forces of society come into conflict with the existing relations of production
or – this merely expresses the same thing in legal terms – with the property
relations within the framework of which they have operated hitherto. From
forms of development of the productive forces these relations turn into their
fetters. Then begins an era of social revolution. The changes in the economic
foundation lead sooner or later to the transformation of the whole immense
superstructure.”2
The task of the people’s democratic revolution at China’s present stage is
to change the old socio-economic form, the old production relationships, and
all the old social, political, and spiritual structures that arise from it, and to
build a new socio-economic form, new production relationships, and all the
new social, political, and spiritual structures that arise from it. This is our fundamental task.
Chapter Two: Current Class Relations in China
and the People’s Democratic Revolution
Section One: The main classes in China at present are as follows:
	 1.	 The proletariat class. For example, workers in the new democratic state
enterprises, and workers hired in machinery, handicraft, agricultural, and
commercial businesses run by capitalists and who do not possess private
means of production. Workers in the new democratic state enterprises are
proletarian according to their original circumstances. According to their current circumstances, however, they have moved to the new democratic state
jointly governed by themselves and other workers and they are already in
collective possession of the productive forces of the state enterprises. That
is to say, there has already been a basic change from their original circumstances. Workers in the new democratic state enterprises are no longer
exploited, and the surplus value portion of what they produce is used for
expanding production and for the interests of all the people. They cannot be
considered exploited. The hired workers of the capitalists are exploited by
the capitalists.
	 2.	 Peasants. Peasants all possess a small amount of the means of production,
either tilling the land of the landlord or tilling their own land. Prior to the
reform of China’s land system, most peasants tilled the land of the landlords;
after completion of China’s land-system reform, all peasants will till their
own land. Those among the peasants who do not possess sufficient means
of production to support themselves and therefore must sell part of their
labor are called poor peasants. Poor peasants are the semi-proletariat class
in rural villages. Those among the peasants who possess sufficient means
of production to support themselves and therefore do not need to sell their
labor are called middle peasants. Prior to China’s land-system reform, poor
peasants were the majority of peasants; after completion of China’s landsystem reform, middle peasants will constitute the majority of peasants.
Prior to China’s land-system reform, peasants were all directly or indirectly
exploited by landlords and other exploiting classes; only after the land-system reforms are brought about by the new democratic state can this exploitation be prevented.
	 3.	 Independent laborers other than peasants. For example, handicraft-industry
workers, professionals, and small shopkeepers all possess a small amount
of the means of production and live by their independent labor. They are
directly or indirectly exploited by imperialists, landlords, bureaucratic capitalists, and other exploiting classes.
	 4.	 Free bourgeoisie. These are the national capitalists and the new type of rich
peasants. They possess more means of production and exploit hired laborers using free capitalist methods. Under reactionary state rule, they were
oppressed, harmed, and restricted by imperialists, landlords, and bureaucratic capitalists.
	 5.	 The landlord class, bureaucratic capitalist class, and old-style rich peasants. They possess most of the means of production and directly or indirectly exploit the working people, along with the imperialists, using feudal,
comprador, and monopolistic methods. In addition, they oppress, harm, or
restrict the free bourgeoisie.
Section Two: The proletariat class, peasants, and independent laborers, as well as
all people who are exploited, comprise about 90 percent of the country’s entire
population, of which peasants comprise 70 to 80 percent of the country’s entire
population. In addition to being economically exploited, all these working people are politically oppressed under reactionary national rule. They are the main
body of the Chinese nation, and they are the fundamental force of the Chinese
people’s democratic revolution. Of these, the proletariat and the semi-proletariat
(poor peasants) are the leading classes in the people’s democratic revolution and

the new democratic state power, and the proletariat is the main leading class.3
The task of the proletariat, peasants, and other working people is to unite with the
free bourgeoisie to overthrow imperialist, feudalist, and bureaucratic capitalist
exploitation and oppression using people’s democratic revolution methods, and to
build the People’s Republic of China. The Chinese proletariat, peasants, and other
working people have long experience with revolutionary struggle. The focus of
this experience with revolutionary struggle is manifested in the great leadership
ability of the Chinese Communist Party in the revolution and in the building of
the new country.
Section Three: The free bourgeoisie are a weak and wavering class. However,
because they are oppressed, harmed, and restricted (this oppression, harm, and
restriction is far less than that of the workers) by imperialists, feudalists, and
bureaucratic capitalists, they can take part in this revolution or maintain neutrality
in opposing imperialism, feudalism, and bureaucratic capitalism during the period
of the people’s democratic revolution. During economic construction after the
revolution has been victorious, they can also take part in the construction. They
can advance forward with the proletariat class and the working people as long as
China has not yet entered a socialist society. In the state regime of the People’s
Republic of China, therefore, the free bourgeoisie class and its political groups
should be allowed to send their representatives to take part in the work. A small
minority among them, however, are free bourgeoisie class right-wing elements
attached to the imperialists, feudalists, and bureaucratic capitalists and they are
opposed to the people’s democratic revolution. The Chinese people must watch
for and expose their reactionary behavior. This political watchfulness and exposure must, however, be strictly distinguished from economic annihilation. What
the Chinese people’s democratic revolution should and must destroy is imperialism, feudalism, and bureaucratic capitalism, not free capitalism.
Section Four: The number of people in the landlord class, the bureaucratic
capitalist class, and the old-style rich peasant class is very few, but they possess
the greatest portion of the country’s means of production. Although the number of
landlords and old-style rich peasants varies in each area, they generally constitute
only about 10 percent of the population and about 8 percent of the households in
the rural villages, while the land they possess constitutes 70 percent to 80 percent
of all arable land. The number of people in the bureaucratic capitalist class, or
China’s big capitalist class led by Chiang Kaishek, T. V. Soong, H. H. Kung,
and Chen Lifu, is even fewer, but the means of production they possess is so vast
3.  The Central Committee later revised the statement that the semi-proletariat are also
a leading class of the Chinese Revolution. The “Corrected Directive on the Issue of Leading Classes in the Chinese Revolution,” issued by the Central Committee on December 23,
1951, states: “Regarding the leadership of the Chinese Revolution, whether in the past or
from this day forward, we agree that the only leaders are the working class (through their
advance guard, the Chinese Communist Party) and that we should not include the semiworking class in that group.”

that they have monopolized the entire country’s economic lifeline. The wealth
that the four clans of Chiang, Soong, Kung, and Chen possess is worth over 10 to
20 billion U.S. dollars. All these feudal and comprador reactionary classes have
built the reactionary and corrupt country with Chiang Kaishek as the head, and
they represent the reactionary and corrupt government of this country. This reactionary government has sold the interests of the nation to foreigners and signed all
types of reactionary treaties with imperialists, especially the American imperialists, that are bad for the Chinese nation and the Chinese people’s government and
economy. This has enabled the imperialists, especially the American imperialists, to obtain political and economic privileges in China, turning the government
into the running dog of the imperialists, especially the American imperialists.
Internally, the government oppresses the people and is waging a counterrevolutionary war to wipe out the people’s democratic strength. All the country’s productive power, except for in the areas that have already been liberated, is under
the constraints of the reactionary, regressive, and backward production relationships controlled by these reactionary classes, and they are declining with each day
and cannot develop. The need of the productive power is to eliminate the old constraints of the production relationships using revolutionary methods, overthrow
the old production relationships, establish new production relationships, and
establish a new democratic production relationship, thereby enabling all of the
positive productive forces throughout the country to have the potential to develop
forward and to prepare the conditions for a future socialist society in which the
productive forces can develop more progressively and more freely. The content
of this production transformation is to abolish all privileges forcefully obtained in
China by the imperialists, abolish the feudal landownership of the landlord class
and the old-type rich peasants, and abolish the private monopolistic capital ownership of the bureaucratic capitalist class.
In a class society, however, all the production relationships are protected by the
state power of the classes. Any type of production relationship will be protected
by the state power of that class. Moreover, so-called state power is primarily
military might. If people want to overthrow the old production relationships and
establish new production relationships, then they must sooner or later overthrow
the old state power and establish a new state power. If the Chinese people want
to wipe out imperialist, feudal, and comprador production relationships, complete
national independence, carry out land reform, confiscate bureaucratic capital, and
establish new democratic production relationships so as to develop China’s production relationships, then they must overthrow the reactionary and corrupt state
power that is a combination of the foreign imperialists, the native landlord class,
the bureaucratic capital class, and the old-type rich peasants, they first must wipe
out all reactionary military forces. The great, sacred, and just revolutionary war
now being carried by the Chinese people, the Chinese Communist Party, and the
Chinese People’s Liberation Army is for this very purpose, and this revolutionary
war is daily now nearing national victory.

--- Notes

1.  These are the first two sections of the draft of the “Central Committee Regulations
for the Division and Treatment of Different Social Classes during Land Reform,” which
were written by Mao Zedong. The draft regulations had a total of twenty-five sections.
These regulations were first drafted in winter of 1947 and completed following Mao’s
revisions on February 15, 1947. On that day, they were distributed to the Party’s highest
leadership organs but not to the lower levels.
DOI:  10.4324/9781315719436-84


2.  See Marx’s preface to A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy.