We in the organs tend to be aloof and high-handed, making us prone to bureaucratism. Once bureaucratism takes hold, it inevitably breeds separatism at higher levels. The “Yuejin” incident, for example, only came to light after we intervened. Down below, localism also runs rampant; at root, both stem from bureaucratism. Two years ago, when so many powers were devolved—on my own initiative—we ended up fostering fragmentation. Some urged resistance, but they could not prevail. Ultimately, the problem remains bureaucratism itself.

Bureaucratism is a legacy of the exploiting classes. Our non-Party ministers are with us on this issue and would like to rely on your persuasive influence as well.

In terms of ideology, bureaucratism manifests as a combination of individualism, fragmentation, sectionalism, liberalism, commandism, formalism, and factionalism within the organization—all forms of liberalism. Consequently, bureaucratism is inextricably linked to these other tendencies. In short, we must resolutely combat the ideological and stylistic habits of the exploiting classes. On March 1, the Central Committee’s Five-Anti Directive stated: “Bureaucratism is on the rise.” I believe this trend is widespread.

I have identified twenty specific manifestations of bureaucratism:

First, an air of lofty detachment coupled with narrow-mindedness and ignorance. Such officials lack understanding of conditions at the grassroots level, fail to conduct investigations or engage in research, thereby becoming divorced from reality and from proper leadership. They neglect political and ideological work and do not implement concrete policies. As a result, they are out of touch both above and below; once they issue orders, disaster is sure to follow. This is bureaucratism characterized by estrangement from leadership and from the masses.

Second, arrogance and self-satisfaction, empty rhetoric about policy without attention to practical work, subjective one-sidedness, refusal to listen to others, high-handed authoritarianism, coercive commands, disregard for actual conditions, and blind direction. This is coercive, commandist bureaucratism.

Third, busyness from morning till night, toiling year in and year out, yet without any investigation before acting or assessment of personnel, speaking without preparation, and working without a plan. This is mindless, directionless bureaucratism.

Fourth, an overwhelming officialdom aura, an exclusive sense of superiority, making one unapproachable and intimidating; such officials give orders to subordinates in a coarse, overbearing manner and frequently resort to verbal abuse. This is the “official-baron” style of bureaucratism.

Fifth, ignorance combined with a refusal to learn, shame at asking questions, exaggeration and false reporting, falsification, deception of superiors while concealing the truth from subordinates, covering up faults and attributing merit to oneself. This is dishonest bureaucratism.

Sixth, a lack of political study and professional expertise, shirking responsibility whenever trouble arises, procrastination, prolonged indecision, haggling over every detail in work, and political apathy. This is irresponsible bureaucratism.

Seventh, perfunctory handling of matters, going through the motions, engaging in power struggles, cultivating a cynical, worldly attitude, flattering superiors while undermining subordinates, playing both sides, and striving for universal approval. This is bureaucratism motivated purely by personal gain.

Eighth, failure to master politics or delve into professional matters, simply echoing others without conviction, bland and uninspiring speech, occupying a post without contributing—leadership lacking, mere token presence. This is incompetent, preening bureaucratism.

Ninth, muddleheadedness and confusion, following the crowd, settling for mediocrity, spending all day eating and doing nothing meaningful. This is useless, obtuse bureaucratism.

Tenth, signing documents without reading them, refusing to admit mistakes when wrong, listening passively as others read to him while he falls asleep, having no clear grasp of issues, avoiding consultation, passing the buck without taking responsibility, pretending to understand when dealing with those below, pontificating and interfering, maintaining only superficial harmony with peers while harboring conflicting intentions. This is lazy, negligent bureaucratism.

Eleventh, bloated institutions with convoluted staffing structures, overlapping layers of bureaucracy, wasteful use of resources, excessive personnel leading to chaos, endless circular deliberations, diversion from core tasks, and low efficiency. This is bureaucratic practice typical of government offices.

Twelfth, an excess of directives ignored, reports left unsigned, meetings held without dissemination of decisions, piles of reports never used, and frequent exchanges that amount to little more than empty talk. This is what might be called “the five excesses” of bureaucratism.

Thirteenth, a penchant for comfort and privilege, reliance on back channels, aversion to hardship, where one person’s advancement brings benefits to everyone in the family, and public and private spheres are blurred through feasting and gift-giving. This is bureaucratism marked by special privileges.

Fourteenth, as one rises in rank, temper worsens, residences grow larger, furnishings become more luxurious, living standards escalate, supplies increase, allocations multiply, and prices seem ever lower. This is bureaucratism driven by a desire to flaunt status.

Fifteenth, selfishness and self-interest, using public office for private gain, misappropriating public funds, knowingly breaking the law, grabbing as much as possible and refusing to return what was taken. This is self-serving bureaucratism.

Sixteenth, vying for fame and fortune, constantly demanding favors from the Party, nitpicking over treatment, being picky about assignments, engaging in factional maneuvering among colleagues, and showing indifference toward the masses. This is bureaucratism fueled by ambition and power struggles.

Seventeenth, multiple leaderships operating independently, lack of unity, divergent directives, disorganized work, isolation between upper and lower levels, mutual exclusion—neither centralized nor democratic. This is bureaucratism born of disunity.

Eighteenth, contempt for organizational discipline, favoritism in appointments, collusion and protection among factions, placing personal and group interests above the common good, sacrificing the greater good for petty private gains. This is factional, divisive bureaucratism.

Nineteenth, a decline in revolutionary will, a deterioration of political life, relying on seniority for sustenance, indulging in official pomp, preferring ease to hard work, wandering aimlessly, neither thinking critically nor taking action, and losing concern for the interests of the nation and the people. This is degenerate bureaucratism.

Twentieth, condoning and encouraging unhealthy trends, tolerating wrongdoing, retaliating against critics, suppressing democracy, oppressing the masses, shielding wrongdoers, blurring the line between friend and foe, and even facilitating criminal activity. This is bureaucratism that fosters corruption and moral decay.

In sum, bureaucratism alienates cadres from reality and from the masses, disregards the interests of the people, and undermines the Party’s lines and policies. It prevents cadres from sharing the hardships and joys of ordinary workers, leads to empty political rhetoric, dishonesty, irresponsibility, incompetence, preoccupation with trivial matters, the pursuit of special privileges, selfishness, disunity, and factionalism. Ultimately, it results in degeneration and moral decline.

The ideological, class-based, and historical roots of bureaucratism lie in the ideological and stylistic habits of the exploiting classes—embracing both bourgeois individualism and pragmatism, as well as feudal patriarchal norms. (Consider the Four Great Families in Dream of the Red Chamber: forty serf owners, two-thirds of whom were bureaucrats.)

Classically, the sources include the new bourgeoisie, the old bourgeoisie, and feudal forces in both urban and rural areas. Internationally, we face encirclement by capitalism, with imperialism and revisionism now allied.

Historically, our revolution shattered the old state apparatus and established a new one. However, remnants of the old ruling forces, traditional influences, and former personnel were absorbed into the new system. Although the policies themselves were correct, they carried unintended consequences. The Three-Anti Campaign of 1951 focused primarily on combating corruption, while the Anti-Rightist Campaign of 1957 targeted rightists. Last year, the main focus was on criticizing fragmentation. Over the years, therefore, bureaucratism has never been treated as a central priority. Today, the soil in which bureaucratism thrives is fertile—indeed, it is also the breeding ground for revisionism and dogmatism.