On the Origin of Machine-Guns and Mortars

#PUBLICATION NOTE

This edition of On the Origin of Machine-Guns and Mortars has been prepared and revised for digital publication by the Institute of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism under the Central Committee of the Communist Party in Switzerland on the basis of the following editions:

• The Origin of Machine Guns and Mortars, Etc., in Chinese Law and Government, Vol. 1, No. 4 (Winter 1968-69).
• Quotation in From the Defeat of Peng Teh-huai to the Bankruptcy of China's Khrushchov, in the Beijing Review, Vol. 10, No. 34 (18th of August, 1967).

#INTRODUCTION NOTE

This is an article written by Comrade Mao Zedong at Mount Lu, Jiujiang, Jiangxi, China on the 16th of August, 1959 in refutation of the anti-Party Peng Dehuai clique during the First Mount Lu Meeting.

The First Mount Lu Meeting refers to the Enlarged Meeting of the Political Bureau of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China, held at Mount Lu, Jiujiang, Jiangxi, China between the 2nd of July and 1st of August, 1959, and to the subsequent Eighth Plenary Session of the Eighth Central Committee of the Communist Party of China, held in the same place between the 2nd and 16th of August, 1959.

#Workers and oppressed people of the world, unite!

#ON THE ORIGIN OF MACHINE-GUNS AND MORTARS

#Mao Zedong

#16th of August, 1959

#★

Writing yesterday morning about the collection, The Correct Attitude Marxists Should Take Toward the Revolutionary Mass Movement, I wrote:

I don't know which academic comrade compiled it. It would seem that this comrade has found some machine-guns and mortars to shoot a stream of bullets at our Right-wing friends at the Mount Lu Meeting.¹

I cleared up this riddle last night. It was not compiled by an academic comrade at Mount Lu, but by a comrade from Beijing and his two assistants, with great resolve and exuberance. The struggle at Mount Lu is a class struggle, a continuation of the life-and-death struggle between the two major antagonistic classes — the bourgeoisie and the proletariat — which has gone on all through the socialist revolution in the last ten years. This kind of struggle, it seems, will continue in China and in our Party for at least 20 years and possibly half a century. In short, the struggle will cease only when classes die out completely. With the cessation of the old social struggle, new social struggle will arise. In short, in accordance with materialist dialectics, contradiction and struggle are perpetual; otherwise, the world would cease to exist. Bourgeois politicians say that the philosophy of the Communist Party is the philosophy of struggle. This is true. But the form of struggle varies with the times. In the present case, although the socio-economic system has changed, the reactionary ideology left over from the old times remains in the minds of a large number of people. This includes the ideology of the bourgeoisie, as well as the ideology of the upper stratum of the small bourgeoisie, and this cannot be changed all at once. It may take time to change, and a rather long period of time at that. This is the class struggle in society, and the inner-Party struggle is merely a reflection of the class struggle in society. This shouldn't surprise anyone. Indeed, it would be inconceivable not to have such struggle. I haven't spoken about this question in the past, and so, any comrades still cannot comprehend it. Once problems cropped up, such as the problem of Gao Gang and Rao Shushi in 1954 and the present problem of Peng Dehuai, Huang Kecheng, Zhang Wentian, and Zhou Xiaozhou, many people were surprised. This kind of surprise is understandable, because social contradictions are often concealed before they become sharp. One's understanding of the class struggle in the period of socialism can only be deepened through one's struggle and practice. This is especially true for some inner-Party struggles, such as the struggle against Gao Gang and Rao Shushi, and against Peng Dehuai and Huang Kecheng, which were complex and deceptive. Why is it that only yesterday, they were people of great merit, but today, they have become arch-criminals? Have we made a mistake somewhere? People are ignorant about their historical changes, about the complexities and deceptions in their history. Isn't this very natural then? We should explain this characteristic of complexity and deception to the comrades. Moreover, in handling such incidents, one cannot apply a simplified method, or regard them as a contradiction between the enemy and ourselves. They must be handled as a contradiction among the people. It is necessary to adopt the principles of «Unity-Criticism-Unity», «learning from past mistakes to avoid future ones», «curing the sickness to save the patient», «sharp criticism, but lenient punishment», and «observing first and helping second». It is not only necessary to keep them in the Party, but also to keep them in the provincial Party committees and the Party's Central Committee, while certain comrades should even be kept in the Political Bureau of the Party's Central Committee. Is there any danger in this? There can be, but it is avoidable if we adopt a correct policy. With respect to their errors, there are two possibilities: first, they may change; second, they may be incorrigible. There are ample conditions for their changing. First, they have a dual character: on the one hand, they are revolutionaries; on the other, they are counter-revolutionaries. Up until now, they are different from renegades, such as Chen Duxiu, Luo Zhanglong, Zhang Guotao, and Gao Gang, in that their contradiction with us is a contradiction among the people, whereas the renegades' contradiction with us was a contradiction between the enemy and ourselves. A contradiction among the people may be transformed into a contradiction between the enemy and ourselves if the attitudes and methods adopted by both sides are inappropriate. However, it may also never change into a contradiction between the enemy and ourselves, but remain permanently as a contradiction among the people. It can be resolved thoroughly if we give it timely attention. The following prerequisites are important to implement supervision by the entire Party and people. The political level of the majority of cadres at the central and local levels has been enhanced tremendously as compared with the time of the Gao-Rao incident in 1953, and they are now much more experienced. Is not the successful struggle at the Mount Lu Meeting clear evidence of this progress? Moreover, our attitude and policy toward them must be in keeping with the Marxist attitude and policy we have already espoused. There is also the possibility that they will turn out to be incorrigible and continue to make trouble and seek their own destruction. This is by no means a formidable danger. What harm can it do to our great political party and our great nation if a few more Party members were to be added to the ranks of Chen Duxiu, Luo Zhanglong, Zhang Guotao, and Gao Gang? However, we are confident that all comrades who have erred, with the exceptions of Chen Duxiu, Luo Zhanglong, Zhang Guotao, and Gao Gang, who constitute an extremely small minority, will be able to transform under specific circumstances, given the time. We must heighten our confidence in this point. The 38-year history of our Party has provided us with ample proof that is known to all of us. To help the erring comrades correct their errors, we must continue to regard them as comrades and siblings, give them enthusiastic help, and give them time to rectify their errors, as well as the outlet to engage in revolutionary work. It is necessary to have some leeway, to have warmth and a springtime, instead of keeping them always in the winter. I consider these words of mine to be extremely important.