Hundred Flowers Campaign
This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these template messages)
|
Hundred Flowers Campaign | |
---|---|
Hanyu Pinyin | Bǎihuā Qífàng |
Wade–Giles | Pai3-hua1 Ch'i2-fang4 |
History of the People's Republic of China |
---|
History of |
China portal |
The Hundred Flowers Campaign, also termed the Hundred Flowers Movement (
During the campaign, differing views and solutions to national policy were encouraged based on the famous expression by Mao Zedong: "The policy of letting a hundred flowers bloom and a hundred schools of thought contend is designed to promote the flourishing of the arts and the progress of science."[3] The movement was in part a response to the demoralization of intellectuals, who felt estranged from the Communist Party.[4] After this brief period of liberalization, the crackdown continued through 1957 and 1959 as an Anti-Rightist Campaign against those who were critical of the regime and its ideology. Citizens were rounded up in waves by the hundreds of thousands, publicly criticized, and condemned to prison camps for re-education through labor, or even execution.[5] The ideological crackdown re-imposed Maoist orthodoxy in public expression, and catalyzed the Anti-Rightist Movement.
The campaign
Naming
The name of the movement originated in a poem:
百花齊放,百家爭鳴 |
Let a hundred flowers bloom; let a hundred schools of thought contend. |
The slogan was first used by Mao Zedong on May 2nd, 1956, and was later elaborated on by Lu Dingyi on May 26th 1956, with no immediate response. The name was used to arouse the interest of China's intellectuals, referring to the Warring States period when numerous schools of thought competed for ideological, not military, supremacy. Historically, Confucianism, Chinese Mahayana Buddhism and Taoism had gained prominence, and socialism would now face its test. At the time, the movement was opposed by even some of Mao's most devout followers.[6][7]
Launch (late 1956–early 1957)
The beginning of the Hundred Flowers Movement was marked by a speech titled
In the opening stage of the movement, during March and April, issues discussed were relatively minor and unimportant in the grand scheme. Emphasis was placed on a distinction being drawn between "friend and foe".
The idea was to have intellectuals discuss the country's problems to promote new forms of
In a revised version of the speech, published June 19th, 1957, Mao Zedong clarified the distinction between "beautiful flowers" and "poisonous weeds";
- Whether they would help to unite the people of various nationalities.
- Whether they were beneficial or harmful to socialism.
- Whether they would consolidate or weaken the people’s democratic dictatorship.
- Whether they would consolidate democratic centralism.
- Whether they would strengthen or weaken the leadership of the Communist Party of China.
- Whether they would strengthen our “international socialist solidarity”. Later in this version of the speech, "international socialist solidarity" was defined as “To strengthen our solidarity with the Soviet Union, to strengthen our solidarity with all socialist countries - this is our fundamental policy, herein lies our basic interest.” [9]
Spring (1957)
By the spring of 1957, Mao had announced that criticism was "preferred" and had begun to mount pressure on those who did not turn in healthy criticism on policy to the Central Government. The reception was immediate with intellectuals, who began voicing concerns without any taboo. In the period from 1 May to 7 June that year, millions of letters were pouring into the Premier's Office and other authorities.
From May to June 1957, newspapers published a huge range of critical articles.[10] The majority of these critiques argued that the Party had become less revolutionary and more bureaucratic.[10] Nonetheless, most of the commentary was premised on complete acceptance of socialism and the legitimacy of the Communist Party and focused on making the existing socialist system work better.[10]
People spoke out by putting up posters around campuses, rallying in the streets, holding meetings for CPC members, and publishing magazine articles. For example, students at Peking University created a "Democratic Wall" on which they criticized the CPC with posters and letters.[11]
They protested CPC control over intellectuals, the harshness of previous mass campaigns such as that against counter-revolutionaries, the slavish following of Soviet models, the low standards of living in China, the proscription of foreign literature, economic corruption among party cadres, and the fact that 'Party members [enjoyed] many privileges which make them a race apart'.[11]
Effects of the campaign
In July 1957, Mao ordered a halt to the campaign. Unexpected demands for power sharing led to the abrupt change of policy.
The campaign made a lasting impact on Mao's ideological perception. Mao, who is known historically to be more ideological and theoretical, less pragmatic and practical, continued to attempt to solidify socialist ideals in future movements, and in the case of the Cultural Revolution, employed more violent means. Another consequence of the Hundred Flowers Campaign was that it discouraged dissent and made intellectuals reluctant to criticize Mao and his party in the future. The Anti-Rightist Movement that shortly followed, and was possibly caused by the Hundred Flowers Campaign, resulted in the persecution of intellectuals, officials, students, artists, and dissidents labeled "rightists."[13] The campaign led to a loss of individual rights, especially for any Chinese intellectuals educated in Western centers of learning.
The Hundred Flowers Movement was the first of its kind in the
Another important issue of the campaign was the tension that surfaced between the political center and national minorities. With criticism allowed, some of the minorities' activists made public their protest against "Han chauvinism" which they saw the informal approach of party officials toward the local specifics.[14]
Debated intention of the campaign
Historians debate whether Mao's motivations for launching the campaign were genuine. Some find it possible that Mao originally had pure intentions, but later decided to utilize the opportunity to destroy criticism. Historian
Authors
In Mao: The Unknown Story by Jung Chang and Jon Halliday, Chang asserts that "Mao was setting a trap, and...was inviting people to speak out so that he could use what they said as an excuse to victimise them."[16] Prominent critic Harry Wu, who as a teenager was a victim, later wrote that he "could only assume that Mao never meant what he said, that he was setting a trap for millions."[17]
Mao's personal physician, Li Zhisui, suggested that:[18]
[The campaign was] a gamble, based on a calculation that genuine counterrevolutionaries were few, that rebels like Hu Feng had been permanently intimidated into silence, and that other intellectuals would follow Mao's lead, speaking out only against the people and practices Mao himself most wanted to subject to reform.
Professor Lin Chun characterizes as a "conspiracy theory" the depiction of the Hundred Flowers campaign as a calculated trap. In her analysis, this depiction is disputed by empirical research from archival sources and oral histories. She writes that many interpretations of the Hundred Flowers campaign "underestimate the fear on the part of Mao and party leadership over an escalating atmosphere of anticommunism within the communist world in the aftermath of the East European uprisings."[12]
See also
References
- ^ MacFarquhar, Roderick. 1960. The Hundred Flowers. pp. 3
- ^ "Hundred Flowers Campaign." Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved 24 July 2020.
- ^ "Definition of Hundred Flowers". Oxford Dictionaries. Retrieved 2012-05-17.[dead link]
- ^ "Double-Hundred Policy (1956-1957)". chineseposters.net. Archived from the original on 2017-02-12. Retrieved 2017-02-11.
- ISBN 978-0-8050-6638-8.
- ^ ISBN 0-08-023861-0.
- ^ Priestley, K.E. (July 1962). China's Men of Letters. Hong Kong: Dragonfly Books. pp. 73–100.
- ^ a b On the Correct Handling of the Contradictions Among the People
- ^ Roderick MacFarguahar, The Origins of the Cultural Revolution, vol. 1, Contradictions Among the People, 1956-57 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1974), pp.261-269
- ^ OCLC 503828045.
- ^ W.W. Norton Company. pp. 539–43.
- ^ OCLC 63178961.
- ^ Link, Perry. 23 July 2007. "Legacy of a Maoist Injustice Archived 2021-11-09 at the Wayback Machine." The Washington Post. p. A19.
- ^ Teiwes, cited in MacFarquhar, ed. The Politics of China, 1949-1989, p. 53.
- ISBN 9780393934519. pp. 508–13.
- ^ Jung Chang; Jon Halliday. Mao: The Unknown Story. Jonathan Cape. p. 435.
- ISBN 978-0-9704029-9-8. Archivedfrom the original on 2014-07-22. Retrieved 2016-09-20.
- ISBN 978-0679764434. Retrieved 4 June 2012.
Works cited
- Hsi-en Chen, Theodore. Chinese Education Since 1949: Academic and Revolutionary Models. Pergamon Policy Studies. Pergamon Press Inc. 1981. Print.
- The Congress for Cultural Freedom.
- Priestley, K. E., and Shou-jung Chʻên. China’s Men of Letters, Yesterday and Today. Hong Kong: Dragonfly Books, 1962. Print.
- 1973. The Origins of the Cultural Revolution: Contradictions Among the People, 1956-1957. Columbia University Press.
- Spence, Jonathan D. 2013. The Search for Modern China. New York: Norton. ISBN 9780393934519.
- Meisner, Maurice. 1986. Mao's China and After: A History of the People's Republic. New York: Macmillan. pp. 177–80.
- Zheng, Zhu. 1998. 1957 nian de xiaji: Cong bai jia zhengming dao liang jia zhengming. Zhengzhou: Henan renmin chubanshe.