The Chinese Communists have not hesitated to alter their Party documents—in effect rewriting history—when such changes have seemed desirable for political purposes. It is well known, for example, that the texts of various documents in Mao Tse-tung's Selected Works differ significantly from the originals. In this article we offer evidence suggesting that a fundamentally important Party document—On Contradiction (Mao-tun Lun)—was not written in the summer of 1937, as Party history asserts. Rather, it was composed at a much later date, copying the theses of Stalin and Zhdanov. By thus falsifying the date of composition, the Chinese Communists could bolster their covert assertion of Mao Tse-tung's primacy as a Marxist theoretician.

For the past year (especially since last March), the Chinese Communist leadership has attempted to revive the “Hundred Flowers” campaign which, Party statements notwithstanding, ended in June of 1957. Yet this revival, and the “blooming and contending” which has issued from it, is basically different from the fierce, unabashed criticism heard briefly four years ago. In 1961, the Party is seeking what it had expected in 1957: academic contention and the gratitude of non-Party intellectuals for a small, measured relaxation—not political criticism. Party leaders have long been aware of the need to secure the co-operation of China's disenchanted intellectuals if industrialisation is to go forward at a rapid pace. However, current overtures are more studied and conservative than was the case in 1957 and, as such, reflect a more realistic Party assessment of its popular support. The differences between the 1957 “Hundred Flowers” and the revival are further shown by: 1. Party emphasis on ground-rules for the present campaign; 2. The strict separation of academic discussion from political discussion and ideological contention; 3. The response of the intellectuals.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract