DECISION ON TWO DOCUMENTS OF 1933
Adopted by the CCP Central Committee on 25 May 1948

[Text] Two documents of 1933, "How To Differentiate the Classes" and
"Decision on Some Problems Concerning Land Struggle," were issued by the
democratic central government in that year to correct certain standpoints
in land reform work and to correctly resolve the land problem. These two
documents were distributed to various levels of party committees in the
Liberated Areas in December 1947 as reference documents. Now we have decided to use these two documents as formal documents and have redistributed
them to various levels of party committees. Only a small part of these
two documents is now inapplicable and has been deleted, while the rest is
basically applicable in the present land reform work. In some places
minor revisions have been made or "CCP Central Committee Note" has been
added. Regarding problems not mentioned in these two documents and the
dividing line between rich peasants and middle peasants, other documents
issued by the Central Committee should be consulted, and the text of
Comrade Jen Pi-shih's [0117 1732 2514] speech, "Several Problems in Land
Reform," delivered on 12 January 1948, should be used as the standard.
How to Differentiate the Classes
(1) Landlords
Those who occupy land, do not work themselves or only do some incidental
work, and depend on exploitation for their living are called landlords.
At the same time they may also lend money, hire workers, or engage in
industrial or commercial enterprises. However, to exploit rental from
peasants is the main form of exploitation of the landlords. Management of
land and property of shrines and temples and the collection of tuition also
fall within the category of rental exploitation.

Some landlords are already bankrupt, but they still do not work, relying on
cheating, plundering, or assistance from relatives or friends for their
living. Their living conditions are better than those of the average
middle peasant. These people are still regarded as landlords.

Warlords, bureaucrats, local tyrants, and evil gentry are also the most
ruthless members of that class (there are also some small local tyrants
and evil gentry among the rich peasants).

Those who help landlords collect rent and manage property, who rely on the
exploitation of peasants as their main source of living, and whose living
conditions are better than those of middle peasants should be treated the
same as landlords.

Those who rely on lending money at high interest rates as their main source
of living and whose living conditions are better than those of ordinary
middle peasants are called usurpers and should be regarded as landlords.

(2) Rich Peasants

Rich peasants generally occupy land. Some rich peasants occupy the land
they own and rent more land from others; other rich peasants do not have
any land of their own at all, and their land is entirely rented (cases of
this are rare). Generally, rich peasants have better means of production
and liquid capital. They are engaged in labor, but they always rely upon
exploitation as a part, or a major part, of their source of living. Their
main form of exploitation is exploitation of the labor of hired help (longterm help). They may also rent a part of their land for rental, or lend
money, or engage in industrial or commercial enterprises. Most rich
peasants manage communal property. Rich peasants in China usually do
the farming themselves without hiring help. They regularly exploit peasants
through rentals and interest on loans, and in most cases it represents their
[main source of income].

(3) Middle Peasants

Many middle peasants own land. Some middle peasants own part of their land
and rent the rest. Other middle peasants own no land of their own and rent
all their land. (These cases are few.) All middle peasants have a fair
amount of tools. They rely solely or mostly on their own labor as the source
of their living. Middle peasants generally do not exploit others. Many of
them are exploited in the form of small payments in land rents and interest
on loans. However, middle peasants generally do not sell their labor.
Some middle peasants (well-to-do middle peasants) exploit others to a slight
extent, but such exploitation is only occasional and not their main source
of income. These are middle peasants.

(4) Poor Peasants

Some poor peasants do own land and have a few tools. Other poor peasants
do not have any land at all and only a few tools. Generally, the land they
work is rented, and they are exploited by paying rent and interest. A
small number of them are exploited as they work as hired helpers. All
these are poor peasants.

Middle peasants generally do not have to sell their labor, but poor peasants
generally do. This is the main criterion differentiating a middle and a
poor peasant.

(5) Workers

Workers (including hired peasants) generally own no land or tools. Some
workers have very little land and very few tools. They make their living
entirely or mainly by selling their labor. These are workers.

Decisions Concerning Some Problems in the Land Struggle

During the struggle for land distribution and land investigation there
were many problems. These problems caused mistakes in the execution of
the struggle due to the lack of regulations in existing documents, or
ambiguity in the regulations, or incorrect interpretation of the regulations by government workers. To correctly develop the land struggle and
correct and prevent mistakes regarding these problems, the People's Committee, aside from approving "How To Differentiate the Classes" (concerning
the principles in differentiating landlords, rich peasants, middle peasants
and workers), makes the following decisions:

(1) Labor and Incidental Labor

Under ordinary conditions a family is considered to be engaged in labor if
there is one member of the family who devotes one-third of his time in a
year to essential labor. A family is considered to be engaged in incidental
labor if there is one member of the family who devotes less than one-third
of his time in a year to essential labor, or one-third of his time on a year
to nonessential labor.

(Explanation) The following should be noted: (1) Rich peasants are engaged
in labor, while landlords are not, or are only engaged in incidental labor.
Therefore, labor is the main criterion to distinguish a rich peasant and a
landlord.

(2) The number of persons used in determining whether a family is a laboring family is one. If a family has several members, and one of them is
engaged in labor, then the family is regarded as engaged in labor. Some
people think that a family cannot be considered a laboring family unless
there are two persons engaged in labor, or all members of the family
engage in labor. This is wrong.

(3) The standard length of time used to determine the type of labor is
one-third of a year, or 4 months. That is to say, if one is engaged in
essential labor more than 4 months out of the year, one is considered to
be engaged in labor; if one is engaged in essential labor less than
4 months a year, one is considered to be engaged in incidental labor (also
the dividing line between rich peasants and landlords). Some people have
classified those who devoted 6 months a year to essential labor as being
engaged in incidental labor. This is wrong.

(4) So-called essential labor indicates labor in essential parts of production, such as plowing, cultivating, harvesting and other important labor
in production, and is not limited to agricultural production. Cutting firewood, carrying loads, transportation, weaving, medical service, teaching
and other labor are also important.

(5) So-called nonessential labor means various types of incidental labor
which are secondary in importance during the process of production, such
as weeding, vegetable planting and tending livestock.

(6) Since labor is used as the main criterion for determining who is a rich
peasant and who is a landlord, those who hire long-term helpers for farm
work only without collecting rent or interest, and who direct production
without participating in essential labor themselves, are to be treated as
landlords.

(7) A period of 3 years is used as a standard criterion to determine who
has the elements of a landlord. One is considered to have elements of a
landlord if he had lived continuously for 3 years as a landlord immediately
prior to the establishment of the revolutionary regime.

Many mistakes were made during the land distribution and land investigation
movement regarding the problem of labor and incidental labor. Sometimes
the labor of a peasant is regarded as incidental labor, and the peasant is
subsequently judged to be a landlord. At other times the incidental labor
of a landlord is regarded as labor, and the landlord is subsequently judged
to be a rich peasant. All these mistakes were caused by the lack of clear
standards to make a distinction between landlords and rich peasants. These
mistakes can be avoided by using the above regulations.

However, the above regulations are applicable under "ordinary conditions."
Under special conditions different dispositions should be made. Here there
are two conditions: First, there are members of the family of big landlords
who engage in labor. For example, some families collect more than 100 tan
of grain as rent or dispense more than 1,000 yuan in loans. The size of
the family is small and their expenditures are low. Although there are
members of the family engaged in essential labor for more than 4 months a
year, this kind of family is still regarded as a family of landlords,
not rich peasants. However, if the family is big and its expenditures
are high, although this family collects more than 100 tan of grain as rent
and lends 1,000 yuan, this family is not to be regarded as a landlord's
family but as a rich peasant's family as long as there is someone in the
family engaged in essential labor. Second, some people are landlords if
exploitation is used as a criterion, but they cannot be treated as landlords
if their living conditions are used as a criterion. For example, some
people were formerly rich or middle peasants, but a few years before the
revolution they were forced to rent the land out or to hire helpers to
work on the farm due to a sudden loss of labor force in the family, such
as deaths or sickness. As a result, the whole family lives like landlords.
If we treat these people as landlords, it is inappropriate. Instead, they

should be treated according to their present conditions. For another example,
some people are landlords in name only, and their land ownership has been
passed to others. Their income from exploitation is very small, and their
living conditions are worse than those of ordinary peasants. They are
engaged in incidental labor. These people may be treated as peasants.

The above situations were overlooked during the land distribution and land
investigation movement. This was wrong.

(In a large family of more than 15 persons, the family cannot be considered
as engaged in labor unless one-third of the members of the family spend
one-third of their time during the year in essential labor--CCP Central
Committee Note.)

(2) Well-to-do Middle Peasants

Well-to-do middle peasants are a part of the middle peasants, but their
living conditions are better than those of ordinary middle peasants. They
generally exploit others to a small extent, but their income from exploitation does not exceed 15 percent of the family's total annual income.

Under certain conditions the family's income from exploitation exceeds
15 percent but does not exceed 30 percent of the family's total annual
income. These peasants should still be regarded as well-to-do peasants
if there is no objection from the masses.

Under the democratic regime, the interests of well-to-do middle peasants
should be protected in the same way as those of middle peasants.

(Explanation) It should be noted here: (1) Well-to-do middle peasants
are a part of the middle peasants. The difference between the well-to-do
middle peasant and the middle peasant is that the former is better off
than the latter. Well-to-do middle peasants generally exploit others
slightly, while other middle peasants generally do not exploit others
at all.

(2) The difference between the well-to-do middle peasant and the rich
peasant is that a well-to-do middle peasant's income from exploitation
does not exceed 15 percent of the total annual income of the family,
while a rich peasant's income from exploitation exceeds 15 percent. The
establishment of this limit is necessary to determine the class elements
of peasants.

(3) The so-called slight exploitation by well-to-do middle peasants
indicates that they hire shepherds, temporary helpers, or monthly helpers;
or they lend a small amount of money; or they collect a small amount of
mortgage interest, a small amount of interest on tuition loans, or a small
amount on land rent. The total income from these exploitations does not
constitute a significant part of the entire family's total annual income.
The main source of income of the entire family depends upon their own labor.

(4) Just prior to the establishment of the revolutionary government, some
of the well-to-do middle peasants had received income from exploitation
comparable to that of rich peasants. However, if such exploitation did
not occur for more than 2 years, they are still regarded as well-to-do
middle peasants.
(5) Under certain conditions, if their income from exploitation exceeded
15 percent but was less than 30 percent of the family's total annual income,
they may still be regarded as well-to-do middle peasants if there is no
objection from the masses. The so-called "certain conditions" indicate
that although their income from exploitation exceeded 15 percent, the size
of the family is large, its labor force is small, its living conditions
are poor, and it encounters difficulties due to flood, drought, famine,
sickness or death in the family. Under these conditions, if their income
from exploitation does not exceed 30 percent of the family's total annual
income, they should not be regarded as rich peasants and ought to be
regarded as middle peasants. In the absence of these conditions, if their
income from exploitation exceeds 15 percent of their total annual income,
they are regarded as rich peasants, not as well-to-do middle peasants.
A correct judgment of these conditions depends upon the consensus of the
local masses.

Well-to-do middle peasants constitute a considerably large part of the
population in villages. During the land distribution and land investigation
movement, many well-to-do middle peasants were regarded as rich peasants.
This was wrong. In many places where the middle peasant was wronged, the
offenses were mostly against this kind of well-to-do middle peasant.
should be corrected immediately.

(Example) (1) Two members of a family of six are engaged in labor. The
family owns a piece of 50-tan farmland (actually harvesting 35 tan of grain
a year). At the market price of 4 yuan a tan, the value of the annual
harvest is 140 yuan. Farming is done entirely by family members. The family
also owns a five-room house and an ox. It has a pond which yields 12 yuan
worth of fish. Other food crop production and hog raising bring the family
approximately 100 yuan a year. For 4 years the family lent 3 tan of grain
each year at an annual interest rate of 50 percent and collected 1 1/2 tan
of grain a year valued at 6 yuan. For 5 years the family lent 100 yuan
each year at an annual interest rate of 25 percent, which brings an annual
income of 25 yuan. Judgment: This family relies on its own labor for its
main source of living. The income from its own production is 250 yuan a
year, while the income from exploitation is only 31 yuan, which is less
than 15 percent of the family's total annual income. The family has some
savings after expenditures. Its living conditions are fairly good. Since
its income from exploitation is not high, this family is therefore regarded
as a family of well-to-do middle peasants, not rich peasants.

(2) In a family of five, one and one-half persons are engaged in labor.
The family has a 25-tan farmland with an actual harvest of 17 tan of grain
per year. The family rents from others a 75-tan piece of farmland which

has an actual yield of 42 tan of grain a year, and it pays rent of 25 tan
of grain per year. The family has been paying rent for 10 years. Various
food crops and hog raising bring the family 50 yuan a year. The family
hires a shepherd and collects 18 yuan a year as interest on a loan of
60 yuan. The interest rate was 30 percent per annum. The family has been
lending money for 4 years. It has a five-room house and an ox. It also
owns an orchard yielding 30 tan of peaches a year. Judgment: This family
lives on its own labor. The income from exploitation is very small, about
20 yuan (including the value of surplus labor resulting from the hiring
of a shepherd and interest on loans), but the family is exploited by others
because it pays as much as 25 tan of grain a year. There is little money
left after expenditures. Therefore, this family can only be classified as
a family of middle peasants, not even as well-to-do middle peasants.

(The distinction between well-to-do middle peasants and rich peasants stated
in this article, according to Comrade Jen Pi-shih's "Several Problems in
Land Reform," should be changed to read: "Those who slightly exploit others
and whose income from exploitation does not exceed 25 percent of their total
income are still regarded as middle peasants or well-to-do middle peasants."
--CCP Central Committee Note)

(3) Duration of Exploitation and Income From Exploitation of Rich Peasants

For 3 consecutive years prior to the establishment of the new political
regime, those who, aside from participating in labor, depended upon exploitation as a part of a large part of the source of their living and whose
income from such exploitation exceeded 15 percent of their total annual
income are called rich peasants. Under certain conditions, although their
income from exploitation exceeded 15 percent but did not exceed 30 percent,
they are still not rich peasants but well-to-do middle peasants if there
is no objection from the masses.

(Explanation) It should be noted: (1) The date of establishment of the
revolutionary regime should be used as the starting point to count back the
number of years of exploitation. Some people used exploitation that occurred
many years ago, or exploitation that did not occur in consecutive years,
as the basis for determining the class element of a peasant. This is wrong.

(2) Three consecutive years of exploitation should be used as the standard
that determines a peasant to be a rich peasant. If the duration of exploitation is 3 years but not 3 consecutive years, the peasant is still regarded
as a well-to-do middle peasant although his income from exploitation is
equal to that of a rich peasant during the same period of time.

(3) A family's income from exploitation must exceed 15 percent of its total
annual income before it can be classified as a family of rich peasants. If
its income from exploitation is less than 15 percent of its total annual
income, the family is still regarded as a family of well-to-do peasants
even though the duration of exploitation is 3 consecutive years or more
than 3 consecutive years.

(4) The so-called total income of a family indicates the total income from
production and the income from exploitation. For example, a family's
income from production is 400 yuan, and its income from exploitation is
100 yuan. The total income of the family is 500 yuan. Since the portion
of income from exploitation is 20 percent of the total income, this family
is regarded as a family of rich peasants.

(5) "Certain conditions" indicate that the size of the family is large and
its labor force is small. The living conditions of the family are poor.
Due to natural disaster and other family disasters, the family encounters
difficulties. Under these conditions, although the income from exploitation
exceeds 15 percent of the family's total income (but does not exceed
30 percent), this family is regarded as a well-to-do middle peasant family,
if there is no objection from the masses. Here the opinion of the masses
is very important. We must give careful consideration to this situation.
If we wrongly classify well-to-do middle peasants as rich peasants, we
will arouse the dissatisfaction of the middle peasant masses. At the
same time, we should not classify rich peasants as well-to-do middle peasants,
because we may arouse the dissatisfaction of the poor peasants. Therefore,
we must think carefully and seek the consent of the masses. During the
land distribution and land investigation movement, many disputes arose
concerning the problem of duration and percentage of exploitation. This
was due to the lack of a clear standard to make a distinction between
rich peasants and well-to-do middle peasants. Sometimes well-to-do middle
peasants were treated as rich peasants. At other times rich peasants were
treated as well-to-do middle peasants. Mistakes occurred frequently.
Now that the distinction between the two is defined, mistakes can be avoided.

(Example) (1) A family has 11 members, and only 2 are engaged in labor.
The family has a 160-tan farm which yields 120 tan of grain valued at
480 yuan. It has two tea plots which bring an annual income of 30 yuan.
It also has a pond which brings in 15 yuan a year. Other food crops and
hog raising bring approximately 150 yuan a year. The family hired a longterm helper for 7 years until the revolution. The surplus labor exploited
from this helper is estimated at approximately 60 yuan a year. The family
lent 250 yuan at an annual interest rate of 30 percent, receiving 75 yuan
annually. The family lent money for 5 years until the revolution. Judgment:
This family is engaged in labor, but it also hires a long-term helper. Its
income from exploitation exceeds 15 percent of its total annual income.
Although the family is large, it has a relatively large amount of money
left over after expenditures. Therefore, this family is a family of
rich peasants.

(2) In a family of three, one person is engaged in essential labor for
4 months out of the year. It has a 60-tan farm. The family used half the
land and harvested 18 tan of grain a year. The other half was rented.
The family collected 12 tan of grain a year as rent for 5 years. It usually
hired short-term helpers 20 days a year.
2 tan of grain a year for lending the ox.
The family has an ox and collected
It lent 120 yuan at an interest

rate of 30 percent per annum. The income from the loan was 36 yuan a year.
The family had lent money for 5 years before the revolution. Judgment:
This family's income from exploitation exceeds its income from its own
production. Since there is one person engaged in essential labor 4 months
out of the year, this family is considered to be a family of rich peasants.

(The line of distinction between rich peasants and well-to-do middle peasants
should be based on what was announced in Comrade Jen Pi-shih's "Several
Problems in Land Reform." It should be changed to read: "Those who exploit
slightly and whose income from exploitation does not exceed 25 percent of
their total income are considered to be middle peasants or well-to-do middle
peasants."--CCP Central Committee Note)

(4) Reactionary Rich Peasants

Those rich peasants who were engaged in serious counterrevolutionary activities before the revolution, and especially after the revolution, are called
reactionary rich peasants. Their land and property, and the land and
property of the members of their family who participated in such counterrevolutionary activities, should be confiscated.

The above principle is applicable to reactionary capitalists.

(Explanation) It should be noted here: (1) Only those rich peasants who
were engaged in "serious counterrevolutionary activities" are called
reactionary rich peasants. For example, during the revolution they led
civilian groups in slaughtering workers and peasants, put up stubborn
resistance to the revolutionary government, led others in organizing
counterrevolutionary organizations after the revolution, or conducted
serious counterrevolutionary activities individually, such as assassination,
spying for the enemy, voluntarily serving as guides for White troops,
escaping to White areas to help the Kuomintang, and actively and resolutely
sabotaging the land distribution and land investigation movement and
economic construction. The land and property of those rich peasants who
did not provide leadership for or engage in important counterrevolutionary
activities should not be confiscated, even though they engaged in some
counterrevolutionary activities.

(2) Only the land and property of those members of rich peasant families
who participated in serious counterrevolutionary activities should be confiscated, while the land and property of other members of the family should
not be confiscated.

(3) Those who went to White areas for the purpose of making a living are
not reactionary rich peasants and should not be treated as reactionary
rich peasants.

(4) The above regulations are applicable to defining and treating reactionary capitalists.

In the past, the land and property of rich peasants who did not engage in
serious counterrevolutionary activities were confiscated, and the land and
property of members of the family of rich peasants who did not participate
in counterrevolutionary activities were also confiscated. This is wrong.
The reason for this mistake can be traced to Article 3 of the "Regulations
for Land Confiscation and Distribution" used in Kiangsi: "All the land
belonging to the family of rich peasants who participate in counterrevolutionary organizations should be confiscated." In this article, no
distinction is made as to whether the rich peasant is a leader or a
follower, or whether an individual member of the family has joined such
organizations or not. The second half of this article pointed out:
"Land may be returned to family members who did not participate in counterrevolutionary organizations, did not engage in counterrevolutionary
activities, and severed relations with family members who were counterrevolutionaries, if there is objection from the masses." However, the
first half of the article provided for confiscation of all the land of the
family, while the second half provided for partial return of the land
confiscated. This is not the proper way. Therefore, this article should
be amended according to the present regulation. In the past, the definition
of reactionary capitalists was broadened. Some stores which should not
have been confiscated were confiscated. This is also wrong.

(Example) In a family of nine, one person is engaged in labor and another
person is engaged in incidental labor. The family owns a 160-tan farm.
It works a piece of 80-tan farmland which yields 56 tan of grain each year.
The other 80-tan area is rented, and the family collects an annual rent
of 30 tan of grain a year for 10 years. It also owns 5 plots of mountain
land which yield an income of 70 yuan a year. Normally the family hires
a long-term helper. The family owes 425 yuan, paying interest at 25 percent
per annum. The family has been borrowing for 3 years. The family has also
been lending money for 3 years. It lends 380 yuan, collecting 30 percent
interest. One of the family members has been a company leader in the
Kuomintang militia [Pacification Guards] for 2 years. He fought the Red
Army in five battles. Another member of the family has been a member of
the AB Corps, but he is an insignificant member and was not active in it.
Other members of the family have no obvious reactionary activities,
Judgment: This family is a family of rich peasants. One of the family
members has engaged in serious counterrevolutionary work. This particular
person is a reactionary rich peasant, and his property should be confiscated,
but the property of other family members should not be confiscated.
Although another member of the family joined the AB Corps, he was not active
in it. Therefore, his property should not be confiscated.

(This article applies to landlords and other criminals among the people.--
CCP Central Committee Note).

(5) Land, Houses, Cattle and Farm Implements Belong to Rich Peasants
Under government law and regulations, land, houses, cattle and farm implements, once definitely ruled to be the property of rich peasants, should
be freely available to the rich peasants without any interference by others.

(Explanation) (1) Recently, in some places, workers, peasants and poor
people exchanged their land, houses, cattle and farm implements for those
belonging to rich peasants. Some of them even exchanged their clothing
and fertilizer. This is wrong.

(2) After the land problem has been correctly resolved, nobody should
exchange their land for the share of land distributed to and subsequently
improved by the rich peasants. The cattle, farm implements and houses
added by the rich peasants should not be confiscated or exchanged, even if
such property is more than the rich peasants need.

(This article is also applicable to landlords.--CCP Central Committee Note)

(6) Bankrupt Landlords

Before the revolution some landlords had already lost their means of exploitation--land and property--either partially or entirely. Those landlords
who are still not engaged in production and depend upon cheating, seizure,
or support from relatives as their main source of living and whose living
conditions are better than those of ordinary middle peasants are called
bankrupt landlords. Bankrupt landlords belong to the landlord class.

Those landlords who, after bankruptcy, depend on their own labor as a
partial source of livelihood, or depend on their labor for one-third of
their total living expenditure, may be treated as rich peasants.

(Explanation) (1) Some people treated partially bankrupt landlords as
bankrupt landlords. This is wrong, because these landlords still possess
part of their property for exploitation. The only difference is that the
amount of income from exploitation is changed.

(2) Some people regarded those landlords who, after bankruptcy, engaged
in essential labor for a full year as bankrupt landlords. This is even
worse, because these landlords, after bankruptcy and after having engaged
in essential labor for a full year (prior to the revolution), have
changed from landlords to workers, poor people or peasants.

(3) Some people still treated as landlords those who, after bankruptcy, are
partly engaged in labor. This is wrong, because if their income from
labor has reached one-third of their total annual living expenditures for
the entire family, they should be treated as rich peasants.

(7) Poor People
Aside from workers and peasants, all those who rely wholly or largely on
their own labor for a living, or rely on a small amount of capital for a
business to earn their living, are called poor people if their living
conditions are poor. Unemployed village or small town poor people should
be given some land.

(Explanation) (1) Poor people constitute a great percentage of the population in cities. There are also some poor people in villages and small towns.
The jobs of poor people are quite diversified. Some of their jobs are
seasonal. Poor people have hardships in their living. Their income is
insufficient to meet their expenditures.

(2) Aside from workers and peasants, independent producers, professional
workers, peddlers, store proprietors without employees, and all other
laborers belong to the category of poor people if their living conditions
are poor. The so-called independent producers are small, industrial producers who sell as well as produce their products. They sometimes hire
helpers, but they rely mainly on their own labor. The so-called professional
workers are the medical doctors, teachers, lawyers, newspaper reporters,
writers and artists. They sometimes hire assistants or household helpers,
but this kind of hiring is not regarded as exploitation.

(8) Intellectuals
Intellectuals should not be regarded as a class. Their class is determined
by their family background. Basically, a person's class is determined by
the way he earns his essential income for living.

All intellectuals from landlord or bourgeois classes should be fully used
to serve the democratic government if they obey the law of the democratic
government. At the same time, they should be educated to overcome the wrong
thinking of the landlord, bourgeois and petit bourgeois classes.

When the intellectuals are working as teachers, editors, newspaper reporters,
clerks, writers and artists without exploiting others, they are laborers
using their brain. These mental laborers should be protected by the law
of the democratic government.

(Explanation) (1) Recently, in some places, intellectuals have been discriminated against. This is wrong. To absorb intellectuals from the
landlord or bourgeois class who are willing to participate in the work of
the democratic government is beneficial to the people's revolution. While
they work for the democratic government they should be helped to solve
their livelihood problems.

(2) The class of intellectuals is determined by the class elements of their
families. For example, an intellectual has a landlord background if his