Comments on the Report on the Situation of the Three-Anti Movement in the Chinese Academy of Sciences
(January 13, 1952)

Comrades Yibo and Fuchun:
Both of these letters and Fuchun’s letter of January 13 have been received. I agree with your opinions.

Mao Zedong
January 13

[1] Refers to Li Fuchun’s report of January 11, 1952, on the situation of the Three-Anti Movement in the Chinese Academy of Sciences, addressed to Bo Yibo and forwarded to Mao Zedong, and Bo Yibo’s letter of January 12 forwarding Li Fuchun’s report to Mao Zedong. Li Fuchun’s report states: The situation of the Three-Anti Movement in the Academy of Sciences is not bad and holds educational significance for scientific personnel. Regarding the arrangements for the next steps, first, the principle that scientific personnel must be protected and not harmed is to be established. Those who have already conducted self-criticisms but cannot pass the test should be helped to pass; those who have not yet conducted self-criticisms (such as institute directors) need not be named and required to do so. On issues such as the housing, automobiles, and heating of certain renowned scientists, it should first be explained among Party and League members that these were approved by the government, are not wasteful, and even less constitute embezzlement, and then explained to the masses at an appropriate time. Second, it is decided that the guidelines for conducting the Three-Anti Movement in the Academy of Sciences must be integrated with the specific conditions of the Academy, primarily to enable scientists to understand the harmfulness and origins of the errors of embezzlement, waste, and bureaucracy, namely that such problems also exist in the Academy of Sciences.

In the Three-Anti Movement in the Academy of Sciences, the main focus among scientists is the integration of ideological enlightenment with ideological reform. The continued development of the movement is divided into two steps: The first step is to carry out ideological self-reflection and focused inspections. In ideological self-reflection, Party and League members should be organized to take the lead in exposing bourgeois ideology, so as to enlighten everyone; non-Party individuals should not be forced to conduct self-reflection. Focused inspections mainly involve examining whether the purchase of instruments and the use of scientific undertaking funds were appropriate, clarifying the facts without pursuing individual responsibility or scrutinizing personal lives. The second step is to launch a rationalization proposal movement, discuss how to improve future work, formulate work plans for the Academy and its various institutes for this year, and conclude the Three-Anti Movement. Bo Yibo’s letter discusses two issues in the development of the Three-Anti Movement: (1) In various industrial, transportation, and financial and economic departments, the Three-Anti Movement has developed to the point of examining the bourgeois viewpoints of scientists and old specialists. We consider this very good and intend to promote it. (2) On the basis of the in-depth development of the Three-Anti Movement, most organs, in conjunction with opposing the bourgeoisie’s attacks on us, have naturally proceeded to examine their own thinking, that is, distinguishing between proletarian and bourgeois ideology. We still advocate letting everyone continue to deepen the Three-Anti Movement, but if the Three-Anti Movement has been thoroughly completed and naturally transitions to distinguishing between proletarian and bourgeois ideology, it should be well guided.