Central Commentary on the East China Bureau’s Report Regarding the Experience of the Second Phase of the Five-Anti Campaign in Shanghai (April 18, 1952) This document [1] is very good; it is hereby circulated to all Central Bureaus, Sub-bureaus, and provincial, municipal, and district Party committees for emulation. Printed by the Central Committee on April 18 based on Mao Zedong’s manuscript. Notes [1] Refers to the East China Bureau of the CPC Central Committee, whose circular dated April 15, 1952, concerning the experience of the second phase of the Five-Anti Campaign in Shanghai was addressed to its subordinate organizations and submitted to the Central Committee. The circular stated that the Five-Anti Movement in Shanghai could resolve issues involving 60 percent of all industrial and commercial households—whose employees accounted for 80 percent of the total workforce—within just forty days. Among the experiences worthy of attention nationwide were the following: (1) Focus on both extremes to resolve the majority. First, emphasis was placed on 12,000 key and large enterprises, whose employees constituted 70 percent of the total workforce and which played a dominant role in production and tax collection, thus holding great economic and political significance. At the same time, small-scale family businesses and independent handicraftsmen with minor violations were also targeted. In this way, 60 percent of Shanghai’s industrial and commercial households could be dealt with in a short period. (2) “Arrive before the city gates and win without fighting”; “Capture the majority while inspecting only a few”; “Advance to persuade surrender”; “Boldly utilize captured elements”—these were crucial principles for swiftly resolving the issue. (3) In terms of methodology, mutual-assistance and mutual-inspection group meetings allowing capitalists to confront one another face-to-face were combined with mass meetings where workers voiced accusations and reports against employers while engaging in back-to-back struggles. This approach successfully mobilized the masses to expose capitalist wrongdoing without provoking severe antagonism or animosity between labor and management. After the capitalists had fully confessed and yielded, they were then required to make self-criticism before the workers and pass the workers’ scrutiny. This not only maintained the workers’ active role but also greatly facilitated continued production following the Five-Anti Campaign. (4) Timely announcement of lenient treatment for seventy-four industrial and commercial households found guilty of serious or complete violations—specifically, exempting them from punishment and criminal prosecution—set an important policy example. (5) Strict control over all aspects of the Five-Anti Movement ensured that it remained orderly. Control was exercised over media reporting, creating a situation characterized by outward relaxation yet inner rigor, which played a significant role in stabilizing the market and reassuring the public. Furthermore, issues arising from the Three-Anti Campaign that might have been entangled with the Five-Anti were carefully managed, keeping the campaign’s procedures well-organized and preventing any dilution of the standards set by the Three-Anti; adjustments were made only in terms of timing to align with the Five-Anti schedule.

Commentary on the Brief Report Concerning the Three-Anti Campaign in Beijing’s Higher Education Institutions (April 21, 1952)