Reform Our Study

#PUBLICATION NOTE

This edition of Reform Our Study 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:

• Reform Our Study, in the Selected Works of Mao Zedong, First English Edition, Vol. 3, Foreign Languages Press, Beijing, 1965.
• Reform Our Study, in Mao's Road to Power, First English Edition, Vol. 7, M.E. Sharpe, Armonk and London, 2005.

#INTRODUCTION NOTE

This is a report delivered by Comrade Mao Zedong to a meeting of high-ranking Party cadres in Yan'an, Shaanxi, China on the 19th of May, 1941. It was first published in the Jiefang Ribao (27th of March, 1942).

This report and the two articles, Rectify the Party's Style of Work and Oppose Stereotyped Party Writing, are Comrade Mao Zedong's fundamental works on the Yan'an Rectification Movement. In these he summed up, on the ideological plane, past differences in the Party over the Party line and analysed the small-bourgeois ideology and style which, masquerading as Marxism-Leninism, were prevalent in the Party, and which chiefly manifested themselves in subjectivist and sectarian tendencies, their form of expression being stereotyped Party writing. Comrade Mao Zedong called for a Patty-wide movement of Marxist-Leninist education to rectify style of work in accordance with the ideological principle of Marxism-Leninism. His call very quickly led to a great debate between proletarian and small-bourgeois ideology inside and outside the Party. This consolidated the position of proletarian ideology inside and outside the Party, enabled the broad ranks of cadres to take a great step forward ideologically, and the Party to achieve unprecedented unity.

#Workers and oppressed people of the world, unite!

#REFORM OUR STUDY

#REPORT TO A MEETING OF HIGH-RANKING PARTY CADRES IN YAN'AN

#Mao Zedong

#19th of May, 1941

#★

I propose that we should reform the method and the system of study throughout the Party. The reasons are as follows:

#1

The 20 years of the Communist Party of China have been 20 years in which the universal truth of Marxism-Leninism has become more and more integrated with the concrete practice of the Chinese revolution. If we recall how superficial and meagre our understanding of Marxism-Leninism and of the Chinese revolution was during our Party's infancy, we can see how much deeper and richer it is now. For 100 years, the finest children of the disaster-ridden Chinese nation fought and sacrificed their lives, one stepping into the breach as another fell, in quest of the truth that would save the country and the people. This moves us to song and tears. But it was only after the First World War and the November Revolution in Russia that we found Marxism-Leninism, the best of truths, the best of weapons for liberating our nation. And the Communist Party of China has been the initiator, propagandist, and organizer in the wielding of this weapon. As soon as it was linked with the concrete practice of the Chinese revolution, the universal truth of Marxism-Leninism gave an entirely new complexion to the Chinese revolution. Since the outbreak of the War of Resistance Against Japan, our Party, basing itself on the universal truth of Marxism-Leninism, has taken a further step in its study of the concrete practice of this war and in its study of China and the world today, and has also made a beginning in the study of Chinese history. These are all very good signs.

#2

However, we still have shortcomings, and very big ones, too. Unless we correct these shortcomings, we shall not, in my opinion, be able to take another step forward in our work and in our great cause of integrating the universal truth of Marxism-Leninism with the concrete practice of the Chinese revolution.

First, take the study of current conditions. We have achieved some success in our study of present domestic and international conditions, but for such a large political party as ours, the material we have collected is fragmentary and our research work unsystematic on each and every aspect of these subjects, whether it be the political, military, economic, or cultural aspect. Generally speaking, in the last 20 years, we have not done systematic and thorough work in collecting and studying material on these aspects, and we are lacking in a climate of research of objective reality. To behave like «a blindfolded person catching sparrows», or «a blind person groping for fish», to be crude and careless, to indulge in verbiage, to rest content with a smattering of knowledge — such is the extremely bad style of work that still exists among many comrades in our Party, a style utterly opposed to the fundamental spirit of Marxism-Leninism. Marx, Engels, Lenin, and Stalin have taught us that it is necessary to study conditions conscientiously and to proceed from objective reality and not from subjective wishes; but many of our comrades act in direct violation of this truth.

Second, take the study of history. Although a few Party members and sympathizers have undertaken this work, it has not been done in an organized way. Many Party members are still in a fog about Chinese history, whether of the last 100 years or of ancient times. There are many Marxist-Leninist scholars who cannot open their mouths without citing ancient Greece; they can only recite set phrases from Marx, Engels, Lenin, and Stalin, but as for their own ancestors — sorry, they have been forgotten. There is no climate of serious study either of current conditions or of past history.

Third, take the study of international revolutionary experience, the study of the universal truth of Marxism-Leninism. Many comrades seem to study Marxism-Leninism, not to meet the needs of revolutionary practice, but purely for the sake of study. Consequently, though they read, they cannot digest. They can only cite odd quotations from Marx, Engels, Lenin, and Stalin in a one-sided manner, but are unable to apply the standpoint, worldview, and methodology of Marx, Engels, Lenin, and Stalin to the concrete study of China's present conditions and its history or to the concrete analysis and solution of the problems of the Chinese revolution. Such an attitude toward Marxism-Leninism does a great deal of harm, particularly among cadres of the middle and higher ranks and among young students.

The three aspects I have just mentioned — neglect of the study of current conditions, neglect of the study of history, and neglect of the application of Marxism-Leninism — all constitute an extremely bad style of work. Its spread has harmed many of our comrades.

There are indeed many comrades in our ranks who have been led astray by this style of work. Unwilling to carry on systematic and thorough research of the specific conditions inside and outside the country, the province, county, or district, they issue orders on no other basis than their scanty knowledge and «it must be so, because it seems so to me». Does not this subjectivist style still exist among a great many comrades?

There are some who are proud, instead of ashamed, of knowing nothing or very little of our own history. What is particularly significant is that very few really know the history of the Communist Party of China and the history of China in the 100 years since the Opium War. Hardly anyone has seriously taken up the study of the economic, political, military, and cultural history of the last 100 years. Ignorant of their own country, some people can only relate tales of ancient Greece and other foreign countries, and even this knowledge is quite pathetic, consisting of odds and ends from old foreign books.

For several decades, many of the returned students from abroad have suffered from this malady. Coming home from Europe, North America, or Japan, they can only parrot things foreign. They become gramophones and forget their duty to understand and create new things. This malady has also infected the Communist Party.

Although we are studying Marxism, the way many of our people study it runs directly counter to Marxism. That is to say, they violate the fundamental principle earnestly enjoined on us by Marx, Engels, Lenin, and Stalin, the unity of theory and practice. Having violated this principle, they invent an opposite principle of their own, the separation of theory from practice. In the schools and in the education of cadres at work, teachers of philosophy do not guide students to study the logic of the Chinese revolution; teachers of economics do not guide them to study the characteristics of the Chinese economy; teachers of political science do not guide them to study the tactics of the Chinese revolution; teachers of military science do not guide them to study the strategy and tactics adapted to China's special features; and so on and so forth. Consequently, error is disseminated, doing people great harm. A person does not know how to apply in Fuxian¹ what they have learned in Yan'an. Professors of economics cannot explain the relationship between the Border Region currency and the Nationalist currency,² so naturally, the students cannot explain it either. 17- and 18-year-old children are taught to nibble on Capital and Anti-Dühring. Thus, a perverse mentality has been created among many students; instead of showing an interest in China's problems and taking the Party's directives seriously, they give all their hearts to the supposedly eternal and immutable dogmas learned from their teachers.

Of course, what I have just said refers to the worst type in our Party, and I am not saying that it is the general case. However, people of this type do exist; what is more, there are quite a few of them and they cause a great deal of harm. This matter should not be treated lightly.

#3

In order to explain this idea further, I should like to contrast two opposite attitudes.

First, there is the subjectivist attitude.

With this attitude, a person does not make a systematic and thorough study of the environment, but works by sheer subjective enthusiasm and has a blurred picture of the face of China today. With this attitude, they chop up history, know only ancient Greece, but not China, and are in a fog about the China of yesterday and the day before yesterday. With this attitude, a person studies Marxist-Leninist theory in the abstract and without any aim, without considering its relevance to the Chinese revolution. They go to Marx, Engels, Lenin, and Stalin, not to seek the standpoint, worldview, and methodology with which to solve the theoretical and tactical problems of the Chinese revolution, but to study theory purely for theory's sake, and to deal in Marxism-Leninism purely for Marxism-Leninism's sake. They do not shoot the arrow at the target, but shoot at random. Marx, Engels, Lenin, and Stalin have taught us that we should proceed from objective realities and that we should derive laws from them to serve as our guide to action. For this purpose, we should, as Marx has said, appropriate the material in detail and subject it to scientific analysis and synthesis.³ Many of our people do not act in this way but do the opposite. A good number of them are doing research work, but have no interest in studying either the China of today or the China of yesterday and confine their interest to the study of empty «theories» divorced from reality. Many others are doing practical work, but they, too, pay no attention to the study of objective conditions, often rely on sheer enthusiasm, and substitute their personal feelings for policy. Both kinds of people, relying on the subjective, ignore the existence of objective realities. When making speeches, they indulge in a long string of headings, A, B, C, D, 1, 2, 3, 4, and when writing articles, they turn out a lot of verbiage. They have no intention of seeking truth from facts, but only a desire to curry favour by claptrap. They are flashy without substance, brittle without solidity. They are always right, they are the Number One authority under Heaven, «imperial envoys» who rush everywhere. Such is the style of work of some comrades in our ranks. To govern one's own conduct by this style is to harm oneself, to teach it to others is to harm others, and to use it to direct the revolution is to harm the revolution. To sum up, this subjectivist method, which is contrary to science and Marxism-Leninism, is a formidable enemy of the Communist Party, the working class, the people, and the nation; it is a manifestation of impurity in Party spirit. A formidable enemy stands before us, and we must overthrow it. Only when subjectivism is overthrown can the truth of Marxism-Leninism prevail, can Party spirit be strengthened, can the revolution be victorious. We must assert that the absence of a scientific attitude, that is, the absence of the Marxist-Leninist approach of uniting theory and practice, means that Party spirit is either absent or deficient.

There is a couplet which portrays this type of person. It runs:

The reed growing on the wall — top-heavy, thin-stemmed, and shallow of root;

The bamboo shoot in the hills — sharp-tongued, thick-skinned, and hollow inside.

Is this not an apt description of those who do not have a scientific attitude, who can only recite words and phrases from the works of Marx, Engels, Lenin, and Stalin, who enjoy a reputation unwarranted by any real learning, and who make a mockery of Marxism-Leninism? If anyone really wishes to cure themself of their malady, I advise them to commit this couplet to memory or to show still more courage and paste it on the wall of their room. Marxism-Leninism is a science, and science means honest, solid knowledge; there is no room for playing tricks. Let us, then, be honest.

Secondly, there is the Marxist-Leninist attitude, the attitude of dialectical and historical materialism.

With this attitude, a person applies the theory and method of Marxism-Leninism to the systematic and thorough research of the environment. They do not work by enthusiasm alone, but, as Stalin says, combine revolutionary sweep with practicalness.⁴ With this attitude, they will not chop up history. It is not enough for them to know Ancient Greece, they must know China; they must know the revolutionary history, not only of foreign countries, but also of China, not only the China of today, but also the China of yesterday and of the day before yesterday. With this attitude, one studies the theory of Marxism-Leninism with a purpose, that is, to integrate Marxist-Leninist theory with the actual movement of the Chinese revolution and to seek from this theory the standpoint, worldview, and methodology with which to solve the theoretical and tactical problems of the Chinese revolution. Such an attitude is one of shooting the arrow at the target. The «target» is the Chinese revolution, the «arrow» is Marxism-Leninism. We Chinese Communists have been seeking this arrow, because we want to hit the target of the Chinese revolution and of the revolution in Asia. Otherwise, this «arrow» is nothing more than a curio to play with, without any use whatsoever. To take such an attitude is to seek truth from facts. «Facts» are all the things that exist objectively, «truth» means their internal relations, that is, the laws governing them, and «to seek» means to study. We should proceed from the actual conditions inside and outside the country, the province, county, or district, and derive from them, as our guide to action, laws which are inherent in them and not imaginary, that is, we should find the internal relations of the events occurring around us. And in order to do that, we must rely, not on subjective imagination, not on momentary enthusiasm, not on lifeless books, but on facts that exist objectively; we must appropriate the material in detail and, guided by the general principles of Marxism-Leninism, draw correct conclusions from it. Such conclusions are not mere lists of phenomena in alphabetical order or writings full of platitudes, but are scientific conclusions. Such an attitude is one of seeking truth from facts and not of currying favour by claptrap. It is the manifestation of Party spirit, the Marxist-Leninist style of uniting theory and practice. It is the attitude every Communist Party member should have at the very least. A person who adopts this attitude will be neither «top-heavy, thin-stemmed, and shallow of root» nor «sharp-tongued, thick-skinned, and hollow inside».

#4

In accordance with the above views, I would like to make the following proposals:

• We should place before the whole Party the task of making a systematic and thorough study of the situation around us. On the basis of the theory and method of Marxism-Leninism, we should conduct detailed research of developments in the economic, financial, political, military, cultural, and party activities of our enemies, our friends, and ourselves, and then draw the proper and necessary conclusions. To this end, we should direct our comrades' attention to the research of these practical matters. We should get our comrades to understand that the two-fold fundamental task of the leading bodies of the Communist Party is to know conditions and to master policy; the former means knowing the world and the latter changing the world. We should get our comrades to understand that, without investigation, there is no right to speak, and that bombastic twaddle and a mere list of phenomena in numerical order are of no use. Take propaganda work, for instance; if we do not know the situation with regard to the propaganda of our enemies, our friends and ourselves, we shall be unable to decide on a correct propaganda policy. In the work of any department, it is necessary to know the situation first, and only then can the work be well handled. The key link in changing the Party's style of work is to carry out plans for research throughout the Party.
• As for China's history in the last 100 years, we should assemble qualified persons to study it, in cooperation and with a proper division of labour, and so overcome the present disorganized state of affairs. First, it is necessary to make analytical studies in the several fields of economic history, political history, military history, and cultural history, and only then will it be possible to make synthetic studies.
• As for education for cadres, whether at work or in schools for cadres, a policy should be established of focusing such education on the study of the practical problems of the Chinese revolution and using the fundamental principles of Marxism-Leninism as the guide, and the method of studying Marxism-Leninism statically and in isolation should be discarded. Moreover, in studying Marxism-Leninism, we should use the History of the Communist Party of the Council Union (Majority), Short Course as the primary material, all other material to be secondary. It is the best synthesis and summary of the international Communist movement of the past 100 years, a model of the integration of theory and practice, and so far the only comprehensive model in the whole world. When we see how Lenin and Stalin integrated the universal truth of Marxism with the concrete practice of the Soviet revolution and thereby further developed Marxism, we shall know how we should work in China.

We have made many detours. But error is often the precursor of what is correct. I am confident that in the context of the Chinese revolution and the world revolution, which is so intensely alive and so richly varied, this reform of our study will certainly yield good results.