See all those languages up there? We translate Global Voices stories to make the world's citizen media available to everyone.

Learn more about Lingua Translation  »

China: Revolution’s victims’ stories blogged, not forgotten (2/4)

Chinese blogger-journalist Ran Yunfei (冉云飞) has spent a large part of his life researching the stories of those painted, purged and persecuted as right wing elements during China's Cultural Revolution; unable to have the stories published in any official media, he's turned to his own well-known blog. Early last month Ran gave a talk in a Chengdu teahouse—hotspots for grassroots discussions in pre-Communist China—the transcript of which he then posted on his blog in four installments. Here is the second:

需要说明的是,演讲中有一部分涉及对故乡重庆文化建设的评价,我什么场合都是这样说的。重庆现在高楼频起,但没有多少文化,不加强文化建设(不是中共所谓的精神文明,不是增加GDP的恶性乱搞),不会得到人们真正的尊敬。后来看到重庆的右派接二连三地联名上书,要求中共赔偿他们的损失,重庆人的血性令我尊敬。

What needs to be pointed out is that in part of this lecture can be seen some criticism of Chongqing‘s cultural redevelopment. I bring this up in every situation. Skyscrapers keep popping up all around Chongqing, but the same can't be said of culture. By not strenghtening culture (different from the Communist Party‘s so-called spiritual civilization, different from the disgusting screwing up of increasing the GDP), you won't win people's authentic respect. But seeing a succession of rightists’ joint-signed letters coming out of Chongqing calling for the Communist Party's compensation for their losses, Chongqing citizens’ courage has won them my respect.

我可以这样讲,一九四九年六月份好象是六月二十五日《人民日报》发的陈垣先生这封“致胡适先生的公开信”的意义,是非常巨大的。很多人只是把他当成陈垣先生个人向共产党输诚,向共产党缴械投降,向共产党示好的一个方式。而我的解读是不一样的,它是用陈垣先生来进行一种变相的号召,是一种潜在的威胁。就是告诉你们,陈垣先生这样的史学大师都在致胡适先生的公开信,都在说我共产党好,你那些小爬虫就更应该明白事理,不要以为自己不得了,要明白识时务者为俊杰。甚至言外之意是,你剩下的这些人要做抵抗,那只不过是徒劳无益的抵抗而已。所以说这个现象具有很多意义,主要就是一个标志性的意义。说白了,它就是“不谓言之不预也”的一种暗示,一种潜在威胁。就是说不要说我们共产党没有告诉你,你们自己脑壳方,脑壳不灵动,就怪不得我们了。所以在五0年,大批的知识分子都积极得完全像变了个人,比如说费孝通先生就响应得非常之快。而费孝通你们知道在四九年以前,是一个很出名的社会学家,很出名的自由主义知识分子,他当时批评国民党也是很猛烈的。我手上有费孝通的《论大学》写大学的改造,要如何适应新政权,那真是判若两人,这是五0年初的事。而在五O年还有哪些人写自己的思想改变呢,当然都是些在国民党时代尚存风骨的知识分子,如陈垣、费孝通、冯友兰,潘光旦,还有李景汉等。而陈垣来参加西南土改团,他是西南土改团的团长,到大邑县来参加土改,沙河先生在大邑县见过他,而且他回去也写了赞美土改方面的文章。关于知识分子参加土改的一系列资料我收了不少。

I can say this: around the 25th of June, 1949, the People's Daily published Mr. Chen Yuan's letter ‘An Open Letter to Mr. Hu Shi,’ the significance of which was rather large. Many people saw it as Mr. Chen Yuan's individual surrender and capitulation to the Communist Party, a way to demonstrate good faith to the Communist Party. But my understanding is different. I see it only as using Mr. Chen Yuan to deliver a hidden message, a latent threat. It tells you that a great historian like Mr. Chen Yuan, in sending an open letter to Mr. Hu Shi, is also saying the Communist Party is good and ‘if you little worms know what's good for you, you won't take yourselves so seriously and listen to those who know what's really going on.’ Another implication is that those of you left over must resist, but a futile resistance it will be. That's why there is so much significance to actions like this, primarily a symbolic significance. To put it plainly, it's a ‘don't say I didn't tell you so’ kind of hint, that the Communist Party already warned you. If you happen to be too thick-skulled to get the message, don't blame us. That's why in 1950 a large group of intellectuals seemed like they had changed into completely different people. Mr. Fei Xiaotong, for example, who had a very quick response. And Fei Xiaotong, as you know, was a very famous sociologist prior to 1949, a very famous liberal intellectual. His criticisms at the time of the Kuomintang were also quite rabid. Here in my hand I have a copy of Fei Xiaotong's book “Discussing University,” which talks about changing universities to adapt to the new regime. Really just like two different people. That took place in 1950. And what about those people who in 1950 wrote about their own changes in thinking? Of course back in the Kuomingtang days they still retained some appearance of intellectuals, like Chen Yuan, Fei Xiaotong, Feng Youlan, Pan Guangdan, Li Jinghan, etc. Chen Yuan took part in the Xinan Land Labor Reform Group. He was a Xinan Land Labor Reform Group leader, taking part in reform through land labor reform in Dayi County. Mister [Liu] Shahe saw him there in Dayi Country, and when he came back went on to write essays glorifying labor reform. I've collected more than a few of the series on intellectuals who took part in reform labor.

我的意思是说实际上通过第一波的土改,就已经把大批的知识分子的尿都吓出来了。也许有少部分的身体比较好,可能还夹得紧,但是最后在一九五七年就全部被抖出来了。可以这样说,知识分子在一九五七年全部缴械投降,再也没有这种人了,连梁漱溟从五三年顶毛泽东开始,最后也沉默了。而梁漱溟是算很牛的了。最近出了本书叫《这个世界还会好吗?》,是梁漱溟和美国艾恺教授做的谈话录。梁的学问其实一般,他和毛泽东同年。早年的时候他的学问基础其实并不高,他连中国的国学典籍,就是那些经典他都没读过,他都不能背。所以我觉得梁漱溟先生的学术贡献并不高。但是梁先生在二十世纪贡献了一个做人的品格,这一点我觉得可以让大多数的知识分子汗颜。这个人顶毛泽东,这个人顶很多东西,这个人在批林批孔时也顶批林批孔。他一点也不象他的学生冯友兰,虽然冯友兰先生也值得同情,值得谅解,但是与梁先生这样的知识分子相比较,在人格上确实是要低一截。当我读了梁先生这本书时,我写了篇文章在我的博客上。梁先生有张著名的照片,那张著名的照片就是“眼睛里面充满着鄙视,嘴巴是扁起的”,那张照片我最喜欢。刚好这张照片就是他这本书封面的照片。所以我就写了篇文章叫《在一个专制国家敢长成这样是不容易的》。你仔细想,象梁漱溟这种道行,在二十世纪五十年代过后,有几个人有这样的道行?眼睛里面充满鄙视,嘴角边上露出的是不屈服。所以我的标题要这样说,在一个专制国家敢长成这样是不容易的。你还别说,要发表意见,只要你长得一副不合时宜的样子,你也就是罪过。你还长得出一副鄙夷的样子,你更是罪过。你长得一副不屑的样子,你是错上加错。所以事实上在五七年,一些知识分子仅剩的这一点提意见的勇气都没有了。

What I mean to say is that practically with the first wave of reforming through land labor, large numbers of intellectuals had already had the piss frightened out of them. A few of them might have have stronger bodies, maybe they managed to hold it, but in the end, 1957, all of them had been shaken out. It can be said thus: all intellectuals had given up by 1957, such people no longer even existed. Even Liang Shuming had opposed Mao Zedong since 1953, but in the end went silent as well. And Liang Shuming was really cool. A book came out recently, “Will This World Be Well Again?“, conversations between Liang Shuming and American professor Ai Kai. Liang's education isn't very high, he's the same age as Mao Zedong. The basic knowledge of his early education wasn't very high; he hasn't even read the China studies classics. That's why I feel Mr. Liang Shuming's academic contributions are certainly not hight. But Mr. Liang's contribution of personal moral character in the 20th century, I feel, is enough to make the majority of intellectuals blush with shame. This person opposed Mao Zedong, opposed many things. During the criticizing Lin Biao and Confucius campaign, this person opposed the criticizing of Lin Biao and Confucius. He's nothing like his student Feng Youlan. Although Mr. Feng Youlan is worth feeling sympathy for, worth forgiving. But such an intellectual, compared to Mr. Liang, scores a little low in personality. As I was reading Mr. Liang's book, I posted a review here on my blog. Mr. Liang has one famous photograph, ‘When the eyes are full of the despicable, the mouth is closed.’ That photograph is one of my favorites. Just happens this photograph is the cover photo on his book. That's why I wrote a post called ‘In an autarchy, daring to grow up into someone like this is not easy.’ If you think about it, since the 1950s, how many people exhibit moral behavior like Liang Shuling's? Don't even say you could have published your opinions. If you even had the wrong look at the wrong time, then you would have been guilty. Especially so if you had the slightest appearance of shadiness. If you came off looking disdainful, that would be a mistake on top of a mistake. That's why in fact in 1957, some intellectuals had no courage to raise their opinions left at all.

当时共产党对知识分子的改造是胡萝卜加大棒,胡萝卜就是给你一点好处,同时也罚戒一些人,就是给一些人树立标杆,告诉一些人,如果你不听话,就是这样搞你。另一方面也给一些知识分子一些实际的好处,只要你跟着我说,我就给你胡萝卜。这个策略从四九到五七年,这个胡萝卜加大棒在土改、三反、五反、肃反中都是反复应用的。我可以这样说,好多的右派,他们的父母,都是在三反、五反当中被整死了的。流沙河先生的父亲就是这样被整死了的。是被中共所枪杀了的。所以很多知识分子的父亲被枪杀之后心里肯定是痛苦的,而且这种痛苦是叫椎心刺骨,莫此为甚啦。我与沙河先生相交大概有二十年了,从来没听到他谈过这件事,你可以想见他的内心隐痛之深。我与他是很多话都可以谈的,但他不主动谈这个我决不去谈。我知道这里面有非常隐秘和隐痛的东西。在三反五反的时候,在打地主恶霸的时候,在清理所谓土匪的时候,共产党采取的手段就是早期先整肃国民党。第一是整肃国民党的军队,第二是整肃地主恶霸,还有三反、五反,公私合营,整工商业者,接着就来整以言论著称的知识分子。这一点你仔细看,它是非常有步骤的,先整军事,后整经济,然后再整知识分子,它是这样一步一步来的,决不是一时突然兴起。他的第一个五年计划,或是第二个五年计划,第一个五年计划是公私和营、私营资本主义的改造,还有抗美援朝和肃匪反霸也好,包括清理国民党的潜伏特务也好,就在这个五七年以前都搞得差不多了。五六年刚好又遇到一个匈牙利事件,还包括斯大林的去世和赫鲁晓夫的报告,这是国际形势。加上第一阶段共产党在军事上,政治上、经济上都已经稳妥地统治了这个政权。但是还有很多知识公子还夹得比较紧,最后剩的尿没有抖完,好,在五七年他就采取一个方式,把你们这些人勾引出来,这就是所谓著名的阳谋论。

The Communist Party's approach to reforming intellectuals at the time was to use a carrot and a big stick. The carrot was to give you some leeway, but at the same time a pole was set up to deter some people, showing them that if they don't do as they're told, this is how they'll get it. Another way was to give some intellectuals some practical benefits; as long as you do as I tell you, then I'll give you carrots. This carrot-and-stick tactic was used repeatedly from 1949 until 1957, through the labor reforms and other major anti-right and -counterrevolutionary campaigns. Many right wingers and their parents were killed in the ‘Three Antis’ and ‘Five Antis’ campaigns. Mr. Liu Shahe‘s parents died this way, killed by the Communist Party's guns. That's why after their parents were killed, many intellectuals definitely had pain in their hearts, the kind that pierces through your heart, the worst kind. I've known Mr. Shahe for roughly twenty years now, and I've never heard him talk about this. You can see how deep the pain runs down through his heart. I can talk about many things with him, but if he won't take the initiative to bring this up, I definitely won't. I know that inside he has extremely concealed and painful things. During the ‘Three Antis’ and ‘Five Antis”, when landlords and feudal tyrants were attacked, when the so-called land bandits were taken out, the tactics used by the Communist Party were the same ones used in the earlier purges of the Kuomintang. First was the purging of the Kuomintang, second was purging the landlords and feudal tyrants, and then the ‘Three Antis,’ the ‘Five Antis,’ public-private joint operations, rectification of the industrialists and merchants, and then came the intellectuals known most for their free speaking. This point, if you look closely, was done carefully in steps. First the military were taken care of, then the economy and then finally, the intellectuals. It all went down step-by-step, definitely did not spring up suddenly. The first Five Year Plan saw reform of public-private joint enterprises and capitalists. Whether it's the anti-Americanism in supporting Korea or attacking the ‘bandits’ and ‘tyrants,’ including taking out undercover Kuomintang spies, all this took place pretty much before 1957. Also in 1956 was the Hungarian incident, including Stalin's death and Khruschev's report, an international situation. In addition, in its first phase the Communist Party regime had already secured power over the military, in politics and over the economy. But there were still many intellectuals holding it, the last of the piss still hadn't been shaken out. Fine, in 1957 they tried a new method to draw these people out, the so-called open trap.

那么这个阳谋是什么时候开始的呢,现在所有的书都语焉不详,包括朱正先生、叶永烈先生,胡平先生等著的书都是语焉不详的。有的说是五六月份开始的,我现在也不能确定是多久开始的,但我现在手上有的资料最早的一篇批评右派的文章,(我也不能说我这个就是最早的)是谢春庭写的《斥孙海波反历史科学与反马克思列宁主义的谬论》(开封师范学院学报第一期)。因为我不知道这个师范学院的学报是单月刊还是双月刊,我查了这个资料它又没标。如果是单月刊,那就是一月份,如果是双月刊,那就是二月份,如果是季刊的话,那就是三月份。我们就把它当季刊来看,也是从三月份就开始了。就是说已经形成文字的批评了。而四月份的就很多了,有史学家白寿彝写的文章叫《历史资料的伪装》(北京师范大学社科版第二期);还有柳春藩的《揭穿李鸿哲反马克思主义的罪恶手法》(《史学集刊》第二期)还有叫聂守志的《驳斥右派分子金安泰的反动史观》(史学集刊)第二期)。大家都知道三四月份只是在号召大家敞开说,而从这里可以看出三四月份是不是就完全是敞开说呢?从我收到的资料来看,虽然还不能确定反右的具体时间,但可以知道至少在三四月份就有反右的文章出来了。那么在五月份就更不用说了,就更加多了,在我刚才拿来的这本资料中都有详细记载,朋友们可以在网上查到。五月份中有一篇是一个叫小雅的人写的《关于“特殊材料制成的”——和章乃器先生商榷》(新闻日报)。你看在这个时候毛泽东还在强调要大家一定要敞开说,欢迎知识分子提意见,有什么说什么。但在这种情况下已经有些报纸不大遵守毛泽东的纪律,提前就把他的阳谋公开了。这是很好耍的一件事情,从这个事情上面你就可以看到他实际上是漏洞百出,他实际上是想掩盖自己搞知识分子的想法。想到以后才来进行公开,其实在这个时候就已经公开了。

And when did this open trap begin? Many books now don't say clearly, like Mssrs. Zhu Zheng's, Ye Yonglie‘s, Hu Ping's, etc. Some say it started around May or June, and I can't confirm exactly when, but in my hand now I have a copy of one of the earliest article criticizing rightists (although I can't say that this is the earliest), Xie Chunting's ‘Denounce Sun Haibo's Anti-Historical Science and Marxist-Leninism-opposing Lies‘ (Kaifeng Normal University Journal, Issue 1). I don't know if this university journal is monthly or bi-monthly, let's just say it's a seasonal journal. I looked for a date but there was none. If it's monthly, then that would make it January. If bi-monthly, then it would have been February. If it's seasonal, then it would have come out in March. Let's just say it's seasonal and that the criticism started in March. In other words, the criticisms were already appearing in print. And there were a lot more in April. Like historian Bai Shouyi‘s essay ‘Historical Data's Disguise‘ (Beijing Normal University Social Sciences Edition, Issue 2). And then there was Liu Chunfan's ‘Expose Li Hongzhe's Anti-Marxism Crimes and Ploys‘ (Historiography Journal, Issue 2), as well as Nie Shouzhi's ‘Denounce and Refute Right Winger Jin Antai's Reactionary Historical Views‘ (Historiography Journal, Issue 2). Everybody knows that March and April saw a call for people to let it all out, and can't we see here that March and April were a complete letting out? Looking at the materials that I've collected, although the exact date of the start of the anti-right movement, one at least knows that by March and April there were anti-right articles appearing. No need to say what then happened in May, just that there was all the more. Within the materials I just brought are detailed records. Friends can also look it up on the internet. Mid-May came an article from one Xiao Ya called ‘On “The Making of Special Materials: Discussions with Mr. Zhang Naiqi“‘ (Daily News). One can see at this time Mao Zedong was still insisting that people must speak out openly, inviting intellectuals to give their suggestions, to say what they thought. But in this case some newspapers weren't abiding by Mao Zedong's discipline, were already exposing his covert plan. This was a very interesting turn; from this once could see the holes in his plan, that he in fact was concealing his intentions to ‘get’ the intellectuals. Thinking of the future, he started going at it openly. But by this time it was already quite in the open.

六月初,尤其是六月八日以前,在六月八号有篇著名文章嘛,就是《人民日报》的一篇文章叫《这是为什么?》,今天来的萧赛先生也写了本《为什么?》还有听说海外有个网站也叫“这是为什么?”这个网站我没看到过,可能也是涉及到右派研究。如果你研究人民日报这篇社论,那是疑问呢还是设问呢还是自问自答呢?它这个标题“这是为什么?”我告诉你它的心里面是很明白的,完全明白。他根本不需要你去给他解释,他之所以要问这是为什么,是因为他心里面完全明白。他是站在制高点上来看待这个问题,他不需要你们的回答,他要人民日报来回答。当然人民日报的回答也是毛泽东的回答,他认为他这样的回答才是正确的。他提出的这道题不需要学生,因为他这不是一道考试题,因为他有一个非常唯一的不用置疑的霸道的答案,他是已然知道的。他问个为什么,只是表明一个更加强硬的态度。他知道你聪明不过他,这样的标题在后来包括文革和许多地方用了很多。就是从这道考题以后反右就真正拉开序幕了。这就是我谈的第三点,反右的思想背景。

At the beginning of June, especially prior to June 8, when the well-known People's Daily article ‘Why is this?‘ came out. Mr. Xiao Sai, with us here today, also wrote a book entitled ‘Why?‘; as well I've heard of a website overseas also called ‘Why is this?.’ I haven't seen this website. Perhaps it also deals with researching the right wing. If you read carefully this People's Daily editorial, is it a straight question? Or a hypothetical question? Or a rhetorical question? Its headline, ‘Why is this?’, let me tell you, is very clear in its intent. Completely clear. He was never asking for you to explain. He asks why this is, because in his mind he completely understands. He poses this question from standing in a position of command. The topic he puts forward doesn't need any students, because his isn't a test question, because he has only one extremely specific undoubtable and arbitrary answer. He already knows. He asks ‘why,’ is only to indicate an especially strong attitude. He knows you're not smarter than him. This kind of headline was used very often later, including during the Cultural Revolution and in other places as well. It was with this line of questioning that the real anti-right movement went into effect. This is the third point I mentioned, the context of anti-right thinking.

第四,反右的几个过程,我认为六月八号是反右的一个分水岭。在人民日报发表《这是为什么》反右文章之前,是个酝酿过程,是个引蛇出洞的过程。但在这之前有些报纸已经在急不可耐开始批判右派了。他们搞得很快,政治嗅觉也很敏锐。毛泽东这个引蛇出洞的方式,在我们今天研究它的时候,也觉得毛有些漏洞是没有堵住的,看起来步调并不那么一致。由此你可以感觉到毛搞的这个确实是个典型的阳谋,是个典型的自问自答。他怎样叫你提问,叫你向他发难,这确实只是作个姿态。所以说这是一个分水岭。第二个阶段根据我手上的资料来看,可以说五七年整个一年都是反右的一年。事实上我可以这样讲,这个批评右派的言论,我甚至于有个这样的想法,批评右派的言论、书籍,报刊、杂志、资料,那怕是内部印的(我收的右派资料我把印数,开本,页码等都标注了的)。很多人会认为标这些没用,但我说冉云飞有时头脑也有些奇怪。我开玩笑说过把这些批评右派的各种资料包括小报和图画、连环画这些拿出来,还有批评右派的小说,这些我都收集得有。可以算出批评右派共用了多少吨纸。你会觉得很好耍,你会觉得我的思路很奇怪,但你以后会得出一个基本结论。整个反右运动从五七年开始到五九年大规模的运动他在开始收尾了。这期间大概用了多少吨纸来批评右派,这是算得出来的。由印数,由开本是算得出来用了多少吨纸来整肃知识分子。就这个话题用来做博士论文也是可以的。因为你的思路是非常奇特,你看,共产党用了N吨纸来整肃右派。这会比你说的很多话都会叫人记得清楚,对不对?我今天只是提供给大家一些思路,大家都可以去做,这是很有意思的一件事情。

Fourth, the anti-right movement's several courses. I thought June 8 was a watershed for the anti-right movement. The process leading up to the publishing of the anti-right ‘Why is this?‘ article in the People's Daily was a slow fermenting one, a process of drawing snakes out from their holes. But even before this some newspapers were already anxiously criticizing and judging the right wing. They moved quite quickly, their nose for politics was quite sensitive. As we today do research on Mao Zedong's method of drawing snakes from their holes, we see there were some holes Mao wasn't able to plug up, appears the steps weren't all in sync. From this one gets a sense that what Mao carried out was a true to form dirty trick, a classic self-questioning. However he would pose a question to you, call you rise up, this was all just a guise. That's why I saw this was a watershed. The second phase, according to the materials I have here in my hand, suggest that all of 1957 was a year of anti-right activity. In fact, I can say this: that right wing-criticizing speech, books, newspapers, magazines, pamphlets, I fear were printed by the inside (I've labelled all the right wing materials I've collected by printing numbers, format, number of pages, etc.). Many people feel these labels are useless, but I just tell them, ‘Ran Yunfei sometimes gets some strange ideas in his head.’ I joke and say that if you take all these various kinds of right wing-criticizing materials, including tabloids and drawings, illustrated storybooks and novels, all of which I've collected, you can calculate how many tons of paper in total were used in criticizing the right wing. You might think it silly, or that my line of thinking is strange, but in the end you will get a basic conclusion. The entire anti-right movement which started in 1957 had already begun winding down with the large-scale movement of 1959. How many tons of paper were used in this time to criticize the right wing can be calculated. From printing numbers, from format, the number of tons of paper used in the rectification of intellectuals can also be worked out. This topic could very easily be used for doctoral research. Because your line of though is very odd. You see, the Communist Party used x tons of paper in the rectification of intellectuals. This alone can make much more of an impression that anything you could ever say, right? Today I'm only trying to give everybody something to think about, something everyone could go and do. A very meaningful act.

上面说的第二个阶段就是五七的六月八号到五九年12月底差不多就收尾了。最凶的就是一九五七和一九五八这两年。批评得非常之狠,五七年下半年几乎每天的报纸都有,人民日报,光明日报,新华日报还有大公报、文汇报、和各地报刊,这些报纸都是连篇累牍地登载反右文章,可以达到这种程度。而在各种学术期刊上,也是非常积极非常强烈地批判右派分子。我手上收有中医药界批判右派分子,史学界批判右派分子,文学界批判右派分子,商业界批判右派分子,街道办批判右派分子,劳改农场批判右派分子,佛教界批评右派分子的各种资料。关于佛教界批评右派分子我有第一手资料,有成都佛教协诸多和尚的检讨书、认罪书、爱国公约、挑战书、大字报等,有成都市大慈寺、文殊院、石经寺、昭觉寺、宝光寺、草堂寺。。。。这些寺庙的资料。我一共收了几十上百斤,里面就有不少关于右派的东西,我这里面罗列了一部分,因为还没有整理完毕。你可以看我的博客上我写了些佛教界的右派分子。这些右派分子写的保证书,检讨书。这些和尚在里面说他要种四百斤跃进南瓜,他一个月要汇报多少次革命思想,他在最后的落款是右派分子XXX,我在博客上录有出来。从这里你可以想见共产党只要想做一个事情他是无孔不入的,没有一个地方是清静的。连所谓的佛门圣地,佛教界都没有躲得过,其中的女尼姑一样没有摆脱,一样地要弄来学习。在都江堰道观里的道士一样也要改造。所以可以这样说,普天之下,无有遗漏。

The second phase mentioned above was from June 8, 1957 until the end of December, 1959, when things pretty much came to a close. The fiercest was 1957 and 1958, these two years. The criticisms were especially cruel. During the second half of 1957 virtually everyday something could be seen in the newspaper. People's Daily, Guangming Daily [zh], Xinhua Daily [zh] as well as Ta Kung Pao [zh], Wen Wei Po [zh] and other various regional publications. These newspapers all published anti-right article after anti-right article. And in every sort of academic journal could be found extremely fierce and intense criticism of rightists. Here in my hand I have materials showing Chinese Traditional Medicine groups’ criticisms of rightists, from historiographical groups, from literature groups, business groups, street affairs groups, from labor farms and from Buddhist groups; all sorts of materials criticizing and condemning rightists. Regarding Buddhist groups’ criticisms of rightists, I have the first batch of information: many of the Chengdu Buddist Associations’ monks’ self-criticism letters, admission of guilt statements, patriotic pledges, challenge letters, big-character posters, etc. From Chengdu city's Daci Temple, Wenshu House, Shijing Temple, Zhaojue Temple, Baoguang Temple, Caotang Temple….these temples’ materials. Altogether I've collected upwards of several hundred kilograms worth, including a lot of things regarding the right wing. Here I've spread out only a part, because I haven't finished going through it all yet. You can see on my blog what I've written about rightists in the Buddhist world, the letters of guarantee and self-criticism these rightists wrote. These monks wrote inside of having to plant two hundred kilograms of leaping pumpkins and how many revolutionary thoughts they had to report each month, in the end is signed ‘XXX, rightist.’ I've put this up on my blog. From this you can see how all-out the Communist Party could be when it wanted to do something. Not a space was left untouched. Even the so-called Buddhist holy places couldn't escape it, with the nuns forced to study like everyone else. The Taoists in Dujiangyan Taoist Temple also underwent reform. So you could say, of everything on God's earth, nothing was left out.

这场运动的广度和深度都是你难以想象的,那时涉及到很多学生很多年轻人,说学生不划右派,但那时张新泉先生才十几岁吧,那时可能同他差不多的贺星寒、周克芹、袁永庆他们都被划成学生右派。现在全国最年轻的右派还不清楚,但我掌握到的资料是十五岁,也就是十五岁被打成右派。最大的我没有统计,估计也有六七十岁的老顽固,当然这是在共产党的眼中。我想如果能把这些统计出来,比如说它涉及的面,涉及的年龄,涉及的职业,涉及的各种言论,他被处理的各种方式。比如说流沙河文革前是被发配到凤凰山农场养猪;然后到我们现在住家的地方大慈寺路的种菜地守菜;其中还有两年单位对他不错,让他去守那堆带有毒素的旧书堆,也就是守文联的资料室和图书馆,这反而成就了他,让他读了很多古书。而曾伯炎就是在马边的劳改农场。说到劳改农场最著名的就是杨显惠先生写的《夹边沟纪事》,但事实上这样的劳改农场到处都有,并不只有夹边沟。在劳改农场里也有著名的高尔泰先生,曾伯炎先生,也还有很多很不著名的人士。从这些方面我们可以看到他管制的力量、他涉及的面,他整肃的时间都是非常长的。

It's hard to imagine the scope and depth this movement reached. At the time it also involved many students and youth. How could students be labelled right wing, you ask? At that time Mr. was just in his teens, as were He Xinghan, Zhou Keqin and Yuan Yongqing, all of whom were labelled student rightists. The youngest right winger at the time is still not clear, but I've come in possession of information of one fifteen year-old, cast as a right winger at just fifteen years old. The oldest I haven't checked, I imagine there were also sixty to seventy year old old fogeys. Of course, this was in the Communist Party's sights. I think if I could work some of these statistics out, like the area it covered, the age range it affected, the occupations and types of speech it targetted, and the ways they were dealth with. For example, Liu Shahe, prior to the Cultural Revolution, was sent out to Pheonix mountain to raise pigs, and then to where I live right now, Dacisi road, to watch over the vegetables growing there. Among these were two work units that were not that bad to him, letting him watch over that pile of toxic old books, as well as the Culture Union's reference room and library. This was actually a success for him and let him read many ancient books. And Zeng Boyan spent his labor reform time in [scenic] Mabian. Speaking of the most famous labor reform farm is Mr. Yang Xianhui‘s writing ‘A Record of Events at Jiabiangou,’ but in fact these kinds of labor reform farms were everywhere, not just in Jiabiangou. Doing time in labor reform farms were the well-known Mr. Gao Ertai and Mr. Zeng Boyan, as well as many other lesser-known people. From these aspects you can see Its controlling strength, the area It covered, and the how very long Its purges went on for.

而反右的第三个阶段就是五九到八O年,这之间虽然没有大规模的整肃,但是右派分子的中间有些被摘了帽,但是摘了帽也还是一种管制,只是摘了帽要好听一些,行动相对自由一点,生活上相对得到了一些补助。对这种摘帽右派依然没有得到真正自由,依然会受到怀疑。因为摘帽右派只是改变了一下名称,就说是你这顶帽子虽然没有戴起,但并不表示这帽子就不在,是放在那里的。哪一天不高兴了想给你戴上就要给你戴上。你看共产党的提法真是有些名堂,他失业不说失业,只是说下岗,但这些下岗的人可能一辈子都没有上岗的机会了。他对你还要管制,但说是摘帽右派,我给你摘帽是看到你还有点听话,有点恭顺,如果你哪天不听话了我就要重新给你戴起。这就象唐僧对孙悟空一样,随时给你戴上个紧箍咒。在一九五九到一九八O国内对右派有摘帽和不摘帽两种处理,中间还有一些最大的右派分子被整肃。比如象章乃器在六二年三月到四月还认为右派是错划,他向当届政协提出申诉。六三年民建中央通过《关于开除章乃器会籍的决定》。

And the third phase of the anti-right movement was from 1959 to 1980, during which time although there were no large-scale purges, but among the rightists a few retained that label. A better sounding label, but a form of control nonetheless. Their actions were comparatively freer, and they received a little assistance in life. Although those who remained labelled still hadn't realized real freedom, remained under suspicion. Because the labelled-rightists was only a change in name. Just because you no longer wear that ‘hat’ doesn't mean that ‘hat’ isn't still there. If they had a bad day and wanted you to put it back on, then they'd give it to you. You can see that the Communist Party's way of going about things had some really impressive results. If he was unemployed, he wouldn't say unemployed, he'd just say out of work. But those out of work might in their whole lives never have another chance to find another job. He still wants to control you, but through labels, if you're obedient, respectful and submissive. If one day you're not, then I'll just give you the hat back. Just like Tang Seng and Sun Wukong, put the hex back on you at any time. From 1959 until 1980 in China there were just the two ways of dealing with rightists: using ‘the hat’ or not. Aside from them were the biggest rightists who were still being purged like Zhang Naiqi who until March or April 1962 maintained that his being labelled a rightist was a mistake and went on to file a complaint at a Political Consultative Conference session, which led to the National Reconstruction Association's 1963 passing of the ‘Decision to Revoke Zhang Naiqi's Membership.’

五九到八O期间,在香港和港台出了一些关于研究右派资料的书,包括一些右派的回忆录。有很多右派摘帽以后获得了到港台探亲的机会,有些定居了就不回来了,去探亲的好多也不回来了。这些人在海外就回忆了自己当右派的生涯。这些资料大陆是没有的,但是我很幸运,我收集资料的功夫也是很厉害的,这些书我手上都有。比如说一九六六年香港自联出版社1966。12月初版的《鸣放回忆》(展望丛刊八),其中有这样的篇章,叫《岭南鸣放喜剧多》,《汕头市的定额鸣放》《华南工学院鸣放杂记》《广州工商界万人争鸣记》《广东省、市民主党派人士鸣放追记》《广州市水力发电设计院鸣放记》《俄语学生向国务院请愿》《中央林业科学研究所的鸣放》《陕西师范学院的鸣放运动》《记少数民族同学的鸣放》《昆明市的鸣放运动》《我戴着帽子写回忆》,就是这些文章。这些文章的价值是不可怀疑的。这些人都是从右派的境地九死一生地逃出去了。但在文革的时候早期的右派又被拖出来了,在文革中照样批判你,而且把你当年打成右派的东西全部搞出来。你看在1971年三月西藏自治区革委会、西藏军区革命大批判小组就出了个内部资料,叫《高举毛泽东思想的伟大红旗 彻底批判极右分子范明的反革命罪行》,所以从这里你可以看出,虽然大规模的批判没有了,这些零星的批判还是相当多的。我在这里也就不详细讲述了。

From 1959 until 1980, in Hong Kong and Taiwan there appeared several books researching the right wing, including several rightists’ memoirs. There were many rightists who, after having their label downgraded, gained the chance to go to Hong Kong and Taiwan to visit their families. Some settled down there and didn't come back; a lot of who went to visit their families didn't come back either. Some people, when abroad, looked back on their careers as rightists. This information can't be found on the mainland, but I must have good luck, and killer data collection kung fu, because I have all these books here. Like Hong Kong's Zilian publishing house's early December, 1966 edition of ‘[Memories of a campaign in which the Communist Party called for people to put forth their ideas of political reform, ideas for which people were then persecuted]’ (Prospect Series 8), in which there was an essay called ‘Lingnan Put Forth Mostly Comedy,’ ‘Shantou City's Rationed Putting Forth,’ ‘South China University of Technology Puts Forth a Magazine,’ ‘Memories of the Guangzhou Business Circle's Ten Thousand-person Struggle,’ ‘Guangdong Province and City Democrats’ Posthumous Putting Forth,’ ‘Shaanxi Normal University's Putting Forth Movement,’ ‘Recording Minority Classmates’ Putting Forth,’ ‘Kunming City's Putting Forth Movement,’ ‘Wearing a Hat, I Write My Memoirs,’ articles like these. The value of these articles cannot be doubted. All these people escaped from their right wing status and flew out from near death. But in the midst of the Cultural Revolution, as in the early stages, the right wing was again dragged out and criticized, and all the things from before were dug out. You see from the internal document declassified and published in March 1971 from the Tibet Autonomous Region and the Tibet Military Region Revolutionary Mass Criticism Group, ‘The Great Red Flag Raises Mao Zedong Thought: Thoroughly Criticizing Ultra-Rightist Habitual Counter-revolutionary Crimes‘ that although large-scale criticisms had stopped, a large number of these sporadic criticisms still existed. I won't get into it in too much detail here.

第四的部分就是从一九八O年到现在,七九年以后开始给右派平反了,象流沙河先生都是七九年平的反,八O年开始大规模的平反到现在。那么现在是一个什么样的情况呢,确实大多数的右派都平反了。平反后的处理有几种,第一是你等到一个平反证,我听说是有,我手上有一个证书。第二是有些人得到了一些工资补助,但这种补肋相对他们的损失来说相差岂止是十万八千里。但他们子女受到的伤害,还有家庭受到的伤害,还有社会受到的伤害,对不对?这都是无法统计出来的。我可以这样说,从一九八O年以后的右派研究,还基本上没有起步,海外的右派研究我不是太清楚,与文革相比,海外的右派研究肯定要弱得多。海外的文革我们都知道有很多人在研究,比如说王友琴、宋永毅等,这些很著名的研究,包括国内徐友渔先生的研究。还有些当年的红卫兵,包括造反司令头头的回忆录。比如重庆工人造反派李木森的一个回忆录,现已被北京一个内部杂志叫《往事》的公布出来了。公布的这个回忆录非常好,我读到了一小节,这个回忆录是重庆的文史研究者何蜀整理的。

Part of the fourth point is from 1980 until now. Prior to 1979 began the rehabilitation of the right wing, like Mr. Liu Shahe's return to normal in 1979. 1980 saw the beginning of large-scale rehabilitations straight until now. But what is the situation now? For sure, most of the rightists have been rehabilitated. There are several types of post-rehabilitation treatments. The first is awaiting a ‘rehabilitation certificate,’ which I hear exist, in fact I have one here with me. The second is some people received some wage subsidies, but these subsidies are hundreds of thousands of miles away from being able to compensate them for their losses. Their children were hurt, as were their families, as was society, right? This is all uncountable. I can say this, post-1980 right wing research still basically hasn't started, and overseas right wing research isn't very clear; compared with that of the Cultural Revolution, overseas research into the right wing is definitely much weaker. We know many people overseas are researching the Cultural Revolution, like Wang Youqin, Song Yongyi, etc, as well as those well-known researchers, including the mainland's Mr. Xu Youyu‘s. There's also those who were Red Guards at the time, including the memoirs of those who rebelled against their superiors’ orders. For example, the memoirs of Chongqing worker-rebel Li Musen, which have been published now by inner-party magazine ‘Past Events.’ The publication of these memoirs was extremely good. I read a section; this memoir was put together by Chongqing literary history researchers.

关于重庆这个城市,前几天我在写我的二月读书录当中说,我现在被划归于重庆的乡下。但是对重庆要作为我的故乡我都不大认同,我经常只说我是四川人。第一我对万恶的三峡工程深恶痛绝,而因为这个工程划出去的重庆,这样的行政区划我不承认,我很厌烦它;第二一般人说重庆人很耿直,很野道,我认为这也没有什么了不起,我说冉云飞比你们还耿直还要野道,冉云飞都没有觉得自己有好了不起。我曾经说过一座城市它应该有文化,要有文化底蕴,要有文化氛围。我曾经开玩笑一样地讲过,你重庆不要说连沙河先生这样的作家你出不来,就是连冉云飞这样的青年作家你也出不来嘛。我虽然是重庆人,但如果不到成都来,就没今天这样的文化熏陶,所以我说我是重庆人的性情,重庆人的脾气,而我的底气是成都人的文化底气。我这样说不是表明重庆没有文化的资料,没有可研究的东西。就是民国时候的重庆,我到现在为止也没有看到有什么象样的研究。陪都时候的重庆,书店、出版机构、学者、大学如此众多,本来是为重庆的文化打下了深厚的基础,但是重庆有什么象样的研究,没有。再加上码头气息比较重,闯码头的人就知道横冲直撞,一天都比较浮躁,不容易坐下来搞研究。

As for this city Chongqing, as I was in the midst of writing up my studies record for February, said that I've now been drawn back to Chongqing's countryside. But I don't quite agree that Chongqing serves as my hometown; I often say I'm just a Sichuaner. First off, I abhor the extremely evil Three Gorges Project, it's because of this project that Chongqing was drawn up. I don't recognize these kinds of administrative region-splitting; I'm sick and tired of it. Secondly, most people say Chongqing citizens are both honest and straightforward and strong-willed and overbearing. I don't think this is anything special. I once said that any city ought to have its own culture, own cultural scene. I also jokingly said that Chongqing don't tell me that not only can't you come up with a writer like Mr. Shahe, but you can't even come up with come up with a young writer like Ran Yunfei! Although I am a Chongqing native, but if I hadn't come to Chengdu, I wouldn't have the cultural mood that I do today. Because although I have the disposition of a Chongqing native, and the temper, my energy is that of a Chengduer's cultural energy. I say this not to point out that Chongqing has not cultural resources, has nothing that can be researched. Just that up until now I haven't seen anything worth looking into from Republic-era Chongqing. When Chongqing was the capitol, bookstores, publishers, scholars and universities were abound; a deep foundation for Chongqing's culture had been set, but what does Chongqing have worth researching? Nothing.

所以我转回来还是说我们做研究的还是要从基础知识搞起。可以这样说,右派研究就象重庆人对重庆研究一样,是黄瓜还没有起蒂蒂,与文革研究相比,要孱弱得多。所以我希望将来大家都更加关注。因为光是知识分子搞还不够。从四九年以后这些苦难的财富如土改、知识分子被整肃,三反五反、胡风事件、右派的反动言论,民歌运动,还有大炼钢铁、五九到六一年的大灾难大饥荒等是相当多的。就象最近出的“四川当代史实要录”,其中廖伯康(前省委副书记)公布了很多资料,四川死难的人很多。前不久著名的历史文化地理学者人口学家曹树基先生写了篇文章叫“一九五九到一九六二四川的人口研究”,在关天茶舍查得到。大家都应去看一下,自己是四川人,首先要去热爱四川,要去研究四川曾受过的灾难,你才可以更加研究中国的灾难。同样的,首先研究四川的右派,再扩而研究全国的右派。我说了整个右派的研究我们要做铺路石的工作。这一点谢泳先生说得很好,要做一些基础的工作,要给研究者提供了便宜,给他们作出判断提供很多材数料。我们不仅自己在研究当中要作出很多评价,我们更重要的是要做出比较完备的资料收集,我希望我做的这个《右派资料知见录》得到大家的帮助和关心,最后谢谢大家!(鼓掌)

That's why, coming back, I say our research must start from basic knowledge. You could say that right wing research is just like Chongqing natives’ attitude towards research on the city; like a cucumber before it sprouts, compared with its research on the Cultural Revolution, it's quite fragile. That's why I hope people start paying more attention. Because the current intellectuals are not enough. With the tough fortunes since 1949 like labor reform, intellectuals being purged, the Three Antis, the Five Antis, the Hu Feng incident, right wing reactionary speeches, the folk song movement, the steel production, the catastrophic great famine from 1959 to 1961, and many more. Just like the recent ‘Sichuan Contemporary History Must Be Recorded,’ in which former provincial deputy party secretary Liao Bokang released a lot of information, which shows how many Sichuanese victims there were. Not long ago, well-known history, culture, geography and demographics scholar Mr. Cao Shuji wrote an article called ‘1959 to 1962: Sichuan Population Research,’ which can be found at the ‘Heaven Watch Tea Hut‘ BBS. Everyone should go check it out; you're Sichuanese, above all you need to love Sichuan, need to go research Sichuan's tragedies of the past. Only then can you increase your research to all of China's tragedies. Similarly, above all go research Sichuan's right wing and increase the nation's right wing research. We need to do the work in paving the road for all future right wing research. Mr. Xie Yong said it best, doing the basic work makes research easier for other researchers, provides them with a lot of material, numbers and information. Not only do we need to do a lot of evaluation in our research, more importantly we need to do some rather thorough collecting of information. I hope my ‘Right Wing: Knowledge, Testimony and Records‘ can win everyone's help and attention. Finally, thank you everyone! (applause)

1 comment

  • LEE

    I thought you extremely extremely lose face, with does not look like a
    writer.

Join the conversation

Authors, please log in »

Guidelines

  • All comments are reviewed by a moderator. Do not submit your comment more than once or it may be identified as spam.
  • Please treat others with respect. Comments containing hate speech, obscenity, and personal attacks will not be approved.

Receive great stories from around the world directly in your inbox.

Sign up to receive the best of Global Voices
Email Frequency



No thanks, show me the site