On Dealing with Well-Intentioned Criticism Correctly
(June 12, 1957)

Source: RMRB (June 14, 1957), 1. Other Chinese Text: Shengping ziliao, p. 365
(excerpt).

APRIL — JUNE 1957 / 581

This RMRB editorial was not published under Mao’s signature but has been attributed to
Mao by a number of scholars.

Our Party has always educated its members to pay constant attention to the
criticism coming from the masses. In the most recent period, our Party, in order to
carry out the rectification campaign, has especially sought the criticism of people
outside the Party on a broad scale.¹ From the Center to
municipalities, Party organizations of the various organs and in all colleges and
universities have convened forums or adopted other measures so as to listen to the
criticisms and suggestions of people outside the Party and the broad masses of the
working personnel [within the Party]. Therefore, the criticisms of the people
outside the Party for the Party itself and that of the general working personnel for
the leaders [in the Party] are actively launched throughout the country.
Our Party is a party that serves the interests of the people. Our Party does not
have—nor should it have—any private ulterior interests other than the interest of
the broad masses of the people. Any shortcoming that we may have, or any mistake
we may commit can produce results that are detrimental to the people; therefore,
we must resolutely eliminate and erase [such shortcomings and mistakes]. As we
all know, the reason that the broad masses of the people do not waver in the least
in their confidence in our Party is simply that we are able constantly to erase our
own shortcomings and mistakes and thereby make progress. The opinions that
[people in] all aspects [of society] outside the Party have with regard to our Party’s
work are an indispensable mirror for us; therein we can often see reflected many
things which we ourselves are at times unable to see; [such reflections] make it
easier for us to improve our work. The more modest we are in listening to the
opinions of the masses outside the Party, and if we strive to correct our own
mistakes, the more consolidated the unity between the Party and the masses will
become. It is precisely on such grounds that our Party has decided, as it launches
its own rectification, to give a free hand to activating the masses to carry out the
criticism of the Party.
The evidence shows that the Party was entirely correct in doing so. The
overwhelming majority of the masses trust and love the Party, and they have
suggested many pointed criticisms and positive constructive proposals with regard
to the Party. From the perspective of the present situation, the criticisms that have
been suggested by the various sectors with regard to the Party organizations and
Party members have been, for the overwhelmingly great part, good, accurate, and
beneficial to the Party. Indeed, under the guise of helping the Party rectify itself,
certain opinions have appeared that are malicious and destructive, and that indicate
hostility for socialism and for the Communist Party. A small number of Rightist
elements are trying to lead the criticism of the masses onto a deviant path and to
use the criticism campaign to achieve their aims of weakening the cause of
socialism, weakening the people’s democratic dictatorship² and the leadership of
the Party. Therefore, we must deal the opinions of the Rightists a resolute counterattack so that the criticism of the masses may continue to develop healthily.
Nonetheless, there cannot be any doubt that we must not give up on giving all


well-intentioned criticisms encouragement and support simply because certain
incorrect opinions of the Rightists have emerged or because we have dealt such
incorrect opinions a counterblow. We must never obfuscate the fundamental
difference between the well-intentioned criticisms on the part of the broad masses
and the antisocialist criticisms on the part of a small number of Rightists. In
particular, we must not, cannot, allow certain Party members who have a low level
of awareness and a poor work style to take counterattacking the Rightists as an
excuse for ignoring the masses' criticisms or even to carry out attacks or retaliation
against those who criticize. On the contrary, we must take all necessary steps to
continue to encourage and support the broad masses in their criticism, to continue
earnestly to erase any misunderstanding or worry that they may have, and to rely
resolutely on the supervision and the assistance of the broad masses to correct [our]
mistakes and improve [our] work.3 On this matter we must not have the slightest
wavering. Otherwise, we will have confused right for wrong, and will cause the
rectification campaign to fail before it has run its course, and that, indeed, will
precisely be to achieve the goal that the Rightist elements hope to achieve.

What do we mean by well-intentioned criticism? Is it criticism that is entirely
correct? Of course not. Even if the person who brought forth the criticism did not
bring forth an entirely correct opinion because he or she did not have a full or correct
understanding of the circumstances, such a criticism is still at least beneficial for
the elimination of the barrier between [ourselves] and that person, as long as he or
she raised that opinion for the positive purpose of improving [our] work. We must
strictly differentiate between criticism of this sort and the Rightist elements'
antisocialist criticism. Although criticism of this sort may not be entirely correct,
we must still pay attention to those aspects in which they are reasonable and those
parts in which they are accurate, and not wipe them out entirely simply because
they are in some ways incorrect. Nevertheless, because such criticisms do have
areas in which they are incorrect, we should indeed, at the opportune moment and
by the proper means, carry out the necessary explanation to the criticizing individual, or criticize him or her, so that he or she may come to understand the truth of
the matter and the full complexion of the facts.

The criticism of the masses has taken on a very pointed form. Is this good or
bad? There is nothing bad about that. We should be good at analyzing such pointed
criticisms calmly and must not throw a tantrum because they are pointed. The
question is with substance and not form. Pointed criticism can be entirely accurate;
mild criticism, on the other hand, can be entirely incorrect. Naturally, there are
some critics who pursue the pointedness [of their criticisms] in a one-sided way,
and inevitably their criticism becomes one-sided. Nevertheless, as long as such
criticism is still, fundamentally, well-intentioned criticism, then we still should
affirm those parts in it that are accurate, and calmly carry out discussions with the
critic; in this way we are bound to arrive at mutual understanding, and we will be
able gradually to help the critic to overcome his or her one-sidedness.

As mentioned earlier, because even well-intentioned criticism may not be
always entirely correct, and because such critics may, owing to a weakness of
stance or incompleteness of their understanding, even at times over a short period

APRIL – JUNE 1957 / 583
agree with the opinions of the Rightists, it is sometimes difficult for people to
differentiate instantly between well-intentioned criticism and the malicious criticism of the Rightists. Therefore, to differentiate between these two types of
criticisms, we must adopt an attitude of caution and carry out comprehensive
analysis. We must not only learn to do this type of differentiation well ourselves,
but we must also help all well-intentioned critics learn to draw the line between
[themselves and] the Rightists.
We have said that among the criticisms of the broad masses the overwhelming majority are accurate ones or at least partially accurate ones. These criticisms have helped us expose many shortcomings and mistakes in our work. We
should be bold in accepting all accurate criticism. Whoever, for the sake of face
or arrogance, refuses to accept accurate criticism cannot be a true Communist.
We should, without a moment’s hesitation, admit to those shortcomings and
mistakes that have been accurately pointed out by the masses, and should take
quick action to use practical measures to realize all those reasonable demands
and suggestions that they have raised. Wherever there are mistakes that can be
corrected immediately we should correct them immediately; wherever there are
problems that can be resolved instantly we should correct them instantly. Party
organizations at all levels, on the basis of the principle of “correct as you go along
in your rectification” suggested by the Center’s directive on the rectification
[campaign], have already accepted certain criticisms from outside the Party and
begun to resolve some of the problems.4 Nevertheless, on the whole, the effort in
this area has not yet been enough. As soon as we have begun to carry out a
counterattack against the Rightist elements’ antisocialist opinions, therefore, we
should free at least one hand to resolve, in earnest, all problems that need to be and
can be immediately resolved. Naturally, there will be some criticisms and suggestions whose accuracy may not be easily clarified at once, or cases where there are
relatively complicated questions, or problems that involve a broader area. For such
matters we should not make a hasty decision. On all such matters it is entirely
possible to discuss things clearly with the masses and gain their understanding.
However, the accuracy of many criticisms and suggestions is obvious. There
should not be any difficulty in accepting these criticisms and realizing these
suggestions. With regard to problems of this sort we must take action immediately,
and resolve them or at least begin to resolve them. We must not procrastinate or
put them off, and allow the shortcomings or mistakes to continue or even develop
any further, and thus hurt the valuable enthusiasm of the masses for helping the
Party to carry out rectification.
Even though the small number of Rightist elements intend to use their destructive opinions to interfere with our rectification campaign, our rectification campaign must be carried through to the end. The task of absorbing the masses outside
our Party into the effort of helping us carry out rectification must also be carried
through to the end. The more we are capable of accepting all well-intentioned and
accurate criticism and the more we are capable of correcting our mistakes and
improving our work rapidly, the more consolidated the unity between the Party and
the broad masses will become, and the more isolated the Rightist elements will be.


To oppose and isolate the small handful of Rightist elements and, at the same time,
to become closely united with the broad masses and with all personages outside
the Party who have raised well-intentioned criticisms of our Party so as to struggle,
hand in hand, for the improvement of the Party’s work and the reinforcement of
the socialist cause—this is a necessary condition for guaranteeing the healthy
development of our rectification campaign.

Notes

1. See text June 8, 1957(3), note 3.
2. See text Feb. 27, 1957, note 13.
3. This appears to be partly a reference to the idea of “long-term coexistence and mutual
supervision” between the CPC and the democratic parties (see text Feb. 27, 1957, section 8,
last paragraph), except that semantically here, the democratic parties are “bypassed,” and
the idea seems to be suggested that the CPC would go directly to the “broad masses” for
“mutual supervision.”
4. The reference here is to the instruction, included in Section 5 of the “Directive on
the Rectification Campaign” issued by the Central Committee of the CPC on April 27,
1957, where it says: “The plans for rectification should observe the principle that
rectification and [routine] work should not interfere with one another; we must also
allow the carrying out of rectification to be integrated with the correcting [of mistakes]
and improvements in [our] work and with the concrete resolving of contradictions
among the people. We must prevent ourselves from rectifying [the Party] behind closed
doors, [which will surely] affect our work [detrimentally].” (See RMSC [1958], p. 30.)
The specific term used by RMRB here, bian zheng bian gai, however, is not in the
“directive.”