本页主题: CHIANG CH'ING: Speech at Enlarged Meeting of the Party Military Affairs Committee, 12 April 1967 打印 | 加为IE收藏 | 复制链接 | 收藏主题 | 上一主题 | 下一主题

weihong
级别: 精灵王


精华: 0
发帖: 3193
威望: 3194 点
红花: 31935 朵
贡献值: 1 点
在线时间:286(小时)
注册时间:2007-01-15
最后登录:2009-12-31

 CHIANG CH'ING: Speech at Enlarged Meeting of the Party Military Affairs Committee, 12 April 1967

CHIANG CH'ING: Speech at Enlarged Meeting of the Party Military Affairs Committee, 12 April 1967


I am just an ordinary Communist who has worked for Chairman Mao as a secretary for many years. My work principally has concerned international problems. I am a sort of roving sentry in the field of culture and education. What I have been doing is to subscribe to some magazines and newspapers, to leaf through them, and to pick out materials which I think noteworthy, including positive and negative materials. I finally submit them to Chairman Mao for reference. Generally speaking, my work has been carried out in this way for many years. I have had a little bit of additional work since last year. I am now also the secretary of the Standing Committee. As a matter of fact, the entire Central Cultural Revolution Group is nothing but a secretariat for the committee. Their work is that of sentries and staff officers. All they do is to make suggestions and to provide references for Chairman Mao, Vice Chairman Lin, Premier Chou En-lai, and members of the Standing Committee. That is all. I am not familiar with the military, and know very little about them. Today I'm only able to exchange my opinions with you, my comrades. If I am wrong, please criticize me. Our group is a comparatively democratic one, and we may sometimes even argue with one another. You are welcome to bring up whatever opinions you may have.
   Chairman Mao is very strict with me. Most of all, he is a strict teacher to me. Naturally, he does not take my hands and make them do things the way he wishes, like he does to others. But he is still very strict to me. There are many things that I don't know, perhaps you know more about Chairman Mao than I do. We live together, but he is the silent type; he does not talk much. Sometimes when he begins to talk, he talks primarily about politics, economics, culture, the international and domestic situation, whatever comes to mind. He sometimes talks about "little broadcasts" too, but not too much. If by chance the conversation turns to a certain cadre, Chairman Mao will always tell me that so and so had made great contributions and how good that person is; he never says anything bad about anybody. The Chairman has always been kind and tolerant toward his cadres. I, too, obey the Party's discipline. I don't like to listen to the "little broadcasts" either—the "little broadcasts" that have been so widespread. Thus I can be quite ignorant sometimes. To me the knowledge gained from such "little broadcasts" doesn't seem to do any good at all. It is a waste of energy to listen to them. In the past, I used to read lots of reference materials in addition to many telegrams. How could I ever find time to listen to the "little broadcasts" or things of that nature. In regards to learning, I am no better than any of my comrades. I feel I haven't learned well enough; I lack systematization in my learning. If there is anything that I am good at, that would be whenever I learn something, I stick to it and do it at once. In Yenan, when I heard Chairman Mao's speech in a literature seminar, I learned something from that speech and carried it out immediately. Of course I didn't understand the speech completely. I read it again in recent years and it remained very fresh for me. In this speech, it was stressed that literature should serve the workers, the peasants, and the soldiers; it should serve the proletariat; that much I do understand. For many years, I have been doing my very best in my own sphere according to the Chairman's instructions. I am this kind of person. In comparison to other comrades, I am just a pupil in a primary school. I have much to learn from other comrades. Historically, the comrades have made great achievements for the people during the ten-year civil war, the war of resistance against Japan, the war of liberation, and the Resist-America Aid-Korea war. Even the enemy within and without the country recognized these achievements. In view of this, I have always respected members of the Red Army. Once there was a joke when I was in Yenan, someone pinned a red star on my cap. Later I was told that I was not allowed to wear it, so after a few days the star was taken off the cap. This was indeed very embarrassing. I didn't quite understand then why that star had to be taken off. Nor did I understand that there had been some trouble because of that. I am very close to the Chinese People's Liberation Army. I still consider myself part of the military. Since I entered the city, I have wanted to retain my military status. I only worked for a very short time while in the military which was when Hu Tsung-nan invaded northern Shensi, I was working as an assistant political officer in the Red Army's Headquarters Group of the Communist government in Yenan. After entering the city, I kept requesting that they not remove my military status, that is, not discharge me. In my mind, I feel that I will always belong to the military.
   At the present moment, the comrades are making new contributions for the people in response to the call by Chairman Mao and the C.C.P. central authorities. The Chairman has told us not to live on the glory of past deeds but to make new contributions. He once told us a story at a meeting of the Central Committee. In the period of the "Warring States," in the state of Chao the queen mother who was then in power excessively doted on her youngest son, Prince Chang An. At this time, the state of Chin made fierce attacks against Chao. The situation was critical and the queen had to request the state of Chi to send troops to break the seige. But Chi replied that it would not send troops unless Chao sent their young Prince Chang An to Chi as a hostage. But the queen refused to send her beloved son to Chi in spite of the advice of many ministers. Later she became extremely angry and said that whoever dared to make a suggestion like that would be spit upon by her. An official by the name of Chu Che asked to see the queen, who awaited him very angrily. Chu had a lame leg so he walked very slowly. On this occasion, he deliberately walked even slower than usual. After arriving there he inquired about the queen's health without mentioning politics at all. Finally he told the queen that he wouldn't be able to live much longer and that he had a 15 year old son for whom he hoped that she could arrange official employment. Only in this way could he die in peace. So the queen asked him whether a man could be that indulgent about the youngest son too. He told her that it was even more so. After listening to him, the queen's anger vanished and she argued that women indulge their youngest sons much more than men do. Chu contradicted her by saying that the queen loved her daughter, the queen of Yen, much more than she did Prince Chang An. The queen asked Chu why he should think that that was so. Chu said, "when the princess left Your Majesty to marry the king of Yen, you held her in your arms and cried because it would be a long time before you could see each other again. After her marriage, you prayed for her at every sacrifice saying 'Never come back, raise children in Yen so that they may become kings for generations to come.' So you were concerned about her distant future too. This is not so with Prince Chang An." The queen of Chao disagreed with Chu, who then asked her whether the descendants of the famous heirs of Chao still retained their titles. The queen said "No." Chu asked again whether there were any descendants of famous heirs in other states who still retained titles. The queen answered there were none that she knew of. Chu said, "If there are none, why is this true? Isn't it because of the fact that they occupied high positions without making appropriate contributions, that they were paid well without accomplishing anything and yet they were highly privileged, which means in modern language that they were bestowed with power. That was why they were not allowed to retain their titles any longer. Now that you have given Prince Chang An a very high position, much fertile land, and plenty of power without requiring him to make contributions to the country, when you pass away one day, do you think Prince Chang An will be able to retain his position in Chao? You don't think about his future as you did for the queen of Yen, so you don't love him as much as you do the queen of Yen." After Chu told the queen mother all that, the latter gave immediate orders to prepare a hundred carriages for Prince Chang An to go to Chi. As a result, Chi sent troops to Chao at once. Thus the seige of Chao was raised. Chairman Mao told us that this story illustrates the redistribution of property and power of the landlord class at the initial stage when the slave system was replaced by the feudal system. This redistribution had been going on all the time, which was what was meant by the phrase "A gentleman's privileges end after five generations." We do not represent the exploiting class, we represent the proletariat and the working people. If we do not pay attention to making strict demands of our children, their characters can deteriorate and they may wish to restore the bourgeois class and thus the properties and power of the proletariat will be seized by [the] bourgeoisie. Most of the comrades who are present at this conference are probably quite powerful. Comrade Chen Po-ta often says that he is nothing but an ordinary insignificant citizen. I am even less important. But those who possess power should not abuse it. Now that the people have given us high positions, good pay, and plenty of authority, if we don't make new contributions to them, how can we excuse ourselves before them? If it goes on like that for a long time, would they still want us? Chairman Mao has told us the same story many times and to our children too. They, however, did not quite understand it. For many years, I have enjoyed this story and read it many times. Since I don't understand the literary style of writing, I had to look up the new words in the dictionary.
   Therefore my conclusion is that the People's Liberation Army must make new contributions to the people.
   Ever since Chairman Mao told us that the P.L.A. ought to participate in the local Cultural Revolution, to support the leftists, the peasants, the workers, the military control, and military training, the P.L.A. has accomplished a lot of work. Their especially outstanding accomplishments have been seen in industrial and agricultural production. Among them, the support of the leftists has been a little bit more difficult and complicated than others. It is easy to make mistakes in this respect. As long as we keep our thinking clear and correct, standing on the side of the Party Central's proletariat revolutionary line under Chairman Mao's leadership, we will then be able to handle problems fearlessly. It won't matter even if we do make some mistakes such as supporting the wrong people. We will then withdraw our support from them, making further investigations, finding the true leftists, and strengthening them. In regards to the organizations manipulated by bad people, we will isolate small groups of them, disintegrate them, and reeducate them. As a matter of fact, you are quite experienced as far as this point is concerned, and much of your experience is very good. Personally, I have been a participant on two teams fighting against such bad people. On the team in the south-central area, we have encountered some difficulties. There were some good points in the case of Comrade Huang Yung-sheng's, because he didn't kill anybody, nor did he fire a weapon, nor did he arrest many people in Canton. They had a very good experience. That is, do not expose those organizations manipulated by bad people too readily and proclaim them to be reactionary organizations; arrest those who prove to be bad instead. Allow the masses of these organizations to change their own leader. I think that is a rather good way to do it.
   Comrades, we have nothing to be ashamed of in regards to the past Cultural Revolution. Some people have mentioned that they didn't want to get involved. But according to Chairman Mao, to many units this so-called noninvolvement is an illusion, they have gotten involved already. The problem is not whether they are involved or not, it is which side they are on, whether they support the revolutionary faction or they support the conservative faction or even the right wing. In fact, some get involved from the left side, others from the right wing. Take the involvement from the left as an example. Last February, Comrade Lin Piao asked me to hold an art seminar for the troops. The main object of the seminar was to invite the "Reverent Gods" of the dictatorship of the proletariat to attack the representatives of the bourgeoisie hidden in the party. As a result, the reactionary "authorities" of the bourgeoisie were greatly frightened and disarmed. Why was the seminar so powerful and effective? Because it had the support of the military and because the bourgeoisie was afraid of the P.L.A. The above-mentioned case is what I meant by getting involved from the left. For the past few months, the entire P.L.A. has gained a lot of such good experience. According to comrades in Harbin, the military there has been involved from the left since last summer. There were also some who got involved from the right and thus made some mistakes. I think that most of the comrades who committed mistakes will eventually turn back. I will never believe that the entire world is entirely black. Some people just like to create such an impression. Maybe I am much too self-confident, and yet somehow I feel this is not so. You can see the coming summer harvest won't be bad at all and the same is true of the autumn harvest because the revolution has inspired the revolutionary passion of the people. The way in which the military has devoted so much energy to set an example for the others is something which since the liberation I have never seen in more than ten years. After entering the cities, our troops have lived in barracks and thus become somewhat separated from the people. This will not do; we have to come out from the barracks and offices to restore our old tradition of uniting ourselves with the masses. When things were done in this way, it was said in some regions that "the old Eighth Route Army has come again." It can thus be seen that we spent more time with the people than we do now. We have been somewhat separated from the people since our entry into the cities. During the Cultural Revolution, the military has done many good things; under Comrade Lin Piao's leadership the military has gotten involved from the left at the very beginning.
   Moreover, I wish to remind our comrades of the importance of the cultural and educational front. As far as this problem is concerned, our past knowledge was insufficient. We placed all the questionable and not especially capable cadres in positions of the cultural and educational front, which does not include the millions of intelligentsia we have absorbed. Consequently, there was a proliferation of bourgeois and feudal materials. We weren't quite aware of the situation then, nor were we aware of its awesome effects. Although we fought against them a few times under Chairman Mao's personal leadership, they were only individual battles, without the profound knowledge which we had this time. The influence of the cultural and educational front upon the consciousness of the people is indeed awesome. Any class, whether proletariat or bourgeois, which wants to seize political power must first exert influence upon public opinion. In the past, I didn't pay enough attention to this point. . . .From now on, I hope that the responsible comrades of the military will really seize control in this respect.
   For the past 17 years, there have been some good or comparatively good literary works which reflect the life of workers, peasants, and soldiers. Most literary works however, can be classified either as famous works, foreign works, or classics, which present a distorted image of the workers, peasants, and soldiers. In regards to education, almost all were of that kind. In addition to that, they added some views of Soviet revisionists. Thus we nurtured some youthful but old-fashioned artists in our literary and art circles. In the realm of education, we nurtured some intellectuals who had nothing to do with workers, peasants, and soldiers; who separated themselves from proletarian politics; and who displayed no concern about production. We have many more such members of the intelligentsia than we did before. Had there been no Cultural Revolution, who would be able to change the situation? We simply couldn't touch them at all.
   It has taken me a long time to become aware of this problem. When we first entered the cities, I was given a few assignments by the premier, so I encountered some things, later I resigned. In my mind, I have solved this problem only in certain respects. At that time, I was amazed by the fact that so many Hong Kong movies had been forced upon us. I tried my best to push them out, but they said that these movies belonged to the national bourgeoisie and that we should take good care of them. We were actually quite isolated then.
   In this realm of ideology, we simply couldn't afford peaceful coexistence. Once you begin to peacefully coexist, it will eat away at you. The premier can probably still recall that he told them: "The film production policy was aimed at the overseas Chinese. As long as you do not produce any anticommunist films, we will give you money." Money was what they wanted! At that time, we only knew that they wanted to make investments; nobody realized that they wanted to poison us. They were later pushed out, really and truly pushed out. During those years, I had been sick and in order to restore my health the doctor told me to participate in some cultural activities, to exercise my senses of hearing and eyesight. In this way, I comparatively systematically made contact with a portion of the problems of literature and art. I felt that this problem was really big. There were many films and dramas which contained a lot of bourgeois and feudal materials or a distorted image of workers, peasants, and soldiers. The superstructure is the reflection of the economic foundation. Conversely, it will protect or destroy the economic foundation. If that is the case, it will then destroy our socialist economic foundation. In 1962, a lot of films produced in imperialist countries such as Hong Kong, the U.S., Great Britain, France, Italy, etc., and those from revisionist countries appeared in China. There are numerous theatrical groups in this country. Take Peking opera for example. I am a devotee of the opera and yet I know it is out of date. Look at how the Chinese opera groups have taken advantage of this cultural capital of ours! Now these groups are all over the country; even in Fukien there are 19 of them. As a result, they play nothing but themes about emperors, kings, generals, prime ministers, literary geniuses, and beauties. I was born in Shantung, where, during my childhood, the local opera in Hopei was called the "Ta Hsi" (the proper drama). After my investigations in recent years, I found that the Chinese opera has now become "Ta Hsi" instead. In Shantung alone, there are 45 Chinese opera groups, not including the illegal drama groups (the black drama groups) or the amateur drama groups. Even the Shaohsing opera groups in Shanghai have scattered all over the country. What a strange thing! But they did not want to put on shows about the heroism of workers, peasants, and soldiers who have made such great contributions to the country. Nor did they want to show the bravery of "Long March," the old Red Army which had participated in the 25,000 li long march, nor did they want to describe the war of resistance against Japan. How many heroes there had been! And yet these theatrical groups neglected them. We have the same problem in the movies too. Consequently, I have gradually become aware of this problem. In 1962, I mentioned this problem to the four ministers and deputy ministers of the Central Propaganda Department and the Culture Department, but nobody wanted to listen to me. The article which fought against and extinguished the idea "thrillers with ghosts in it are harmless" was written in Shanghai with the assistance of Comrade Ko Ching-shih, who supported us. But it didn't work in Peking then. The criticism of the play "Hai Jui's Dismissal from Office" was also supported by Comrade Ko Ching-shih. Comrades Chang Chun-chiao and Yao Wen-yuan had run great risks for it and they had to keep this secret too. I had made some investigations before the combined performance of the revolutionary modern Chinese operas and participated in some art work. I felt our criticism of literature was also questionable. I had some materials which I hadn't shown to the Chairman, because I didn't want to overburden him. One day a comrade wished to show the Chairman Wu Han's "The Biography of Chu Yuan-chang." I said "No, the Chairman is very tired. All Wu wants is payment for his work and fame, so let him publish his article; it will be criticized later. I wanted to criticize his play "Hai Jui's Dismissal from Office" too. The Chairman then said, "But I want to read it and I want to protect a few historians too." Later, I found out that the idea had been suggested to the Chairman by Feng Chen, who said that I had blackened the circle of historians completely, and I had thought that there was nothing good about these historians. That was a groundless lie. I asked the Chairman, "Can I reserve my opinion?" The Chairman said, "Of course." Feng Chen was risking his life to protect Wu Han. While the Chairman was quite aware of this, he didn't want to say it openly. Because Chairman Mao had allowed me to reserve my opinion, I went ahead in preparing that article. But I kept it secret for seven to eight months and corrected it numerous times. Every time Comrade [Chang] Chun-chiao came to Peking, a counterrevolutionary would judge that it had something to do with the criticism of Wu Han. Surely it did have something to do with that, but we also made preparations for some play, we listened to tapes, and made alterations in the music. We also hid the article concerning the criticism of "Hai Jui's Dismissal from Office." We knew that once they found out about it, they would try to prevent it from being published.
   Comrades! If you had known all this, you would have been very angry. We have a dictatorship of the proletariat here and yet they would not let us publish one of our own reviews. How furious we were! When an article of our organization was published in Shanghai, it did not appear in Peking until 19 days later. Later the Chairman became angry and wanted to publish a pamphlet about it. Even when the pamphlet came out,
Peking wouldn't allow its publication. I was very much surprised. What would it matter if we did criticize Wu Han? I did not realize until I was told by the premier that once a person like Wu Han was exposed, there would be many more like him. That was where the real difficulty lay. Once they dominate the field of literature and education, they want to be our dictators too. Generals, please do not think that it is the field of literature and education only. If we don't concern ourselves about it, they will take over. Even when we want to take charge of it, they try everything humanly possible to seize control from us. Therefore, we must grasp control, genuinely grasp control. If you had realized this and genuinely seized the power, a situation like this could not have occurred. Of course, "when things are at their worst, they begin to mend"; for this reason, the Cultural Revolution was launched. They were indeed very good at pretending observance, yet they were vicious double-dealers. They didn't mind how much they harmed other people. There was a play the subject of which the Chairman wished to change into armed struggle, but they wouldn't agree. It took a very long time just to settle that problem alone. Let's think about it. Can the Chinese revolution succeed without armed struggle? Would it now be possible for us to have this conference here? I think it is out of the question. In this regard, your knowledge is probably more profound than my own. To this end, we must maintain effective control of the cultural and educational front. We must boldly assign revolutionary youth to the key positions. You see, without these youth, it would have been impossible to expose the traitorous clique, all 62 of them, who occupied leading positions in this front. What a great contribution these youth made!
   While Chairman Mao is still here, some people are already not obeying him. When we were in Shanghai, the situation in the East China Bureau and in the Shanghai Municipal Bureau was even more delicate; they didn't pay attention to what the Chairman had told them, even less to what I had to say. But there was a person whose words were like the Bible to them. At that time, I felt that this was really strange. Now when I think about it, it doesn't seem strange at all. But when I found out that a certain Red Guard, who had been appointed a leader of the ex-Municipal Party Committee, had now changed so much in his attitude, I was completely astonished. I had wholeheartedly wanted him to take as much work as possible during our conference. This, Comrade [Yeh] Chun, Comrade [Chen] Po-ta, Comrade [Chang] Chun-chiao, and Comrade [Yao] Wen-yuan all knew very well. But the Red Guard refused to yield. There was another traitor who had defected to the enemy side, but who had eventually given himself up. This matter was also exposed. The criticisms of "Hai Jui's Dismissal from Office" and the "Three-Family Village" were written by Comrade Yao Wen-yuan and his team, but there were people who claimed that these criticisms were written by them instead so that they might be able [to] claim the credit for themselves.
   By disclosing a little about how I came to know these problems, my aim is to help you to realize what has been happening in the realm of culture and education. I wish to stress the point to the comrades that in addition to seizing control of the Party, politics, military, and economy, we must also conscientiously seize control of culture. We should investigate and study the matter thoroughly. We want to learn as much as possible because each different line has its own rules and peculiarities. But this is not very difficult. As long as the proletariat is in political command, surely such a fortress can be overcome. We have overcome some of these fortresses already. Peking opera was one, the ballet which the entire world held to be magnificent was another, and the symphonies were a third. They were overcome one by one, so we know that there is not really any difficulty after all. What we have done has worldwide influence. The bourgeoisie is a dying class which manifests modern life, brazenly using rotten and decadent things to benumb and to eat away at the people. The revisionists used to pretend a little, which was disgusting. But during recent years, they also became brazen; they didn't pretend any more, they showed us what they wanted. I wonder whether it would be helpful to tell you how I became familiar with this problem and how I struggled, and I hope that it may contribute to your seizing and maintaining control over the educational and cultural system.
   We should carry out struggle, criticism, and reform of the educational system and of the contents of the curricula of all the universities and middle schools, which will be a tremendous mission. So far, we have had no experience in this field. Art and literature should be transformed too. In 1964, I told some people in art and literary circles that the peasants had provided them with food, the workers had provided them with clothes and houses, the P.L.A. and the police force had provided them with national defense, and yet they, the artists, did not even want to portray the workers, the farmers, and the soldiers. I asked them whether they still had even the slightest trace of conscience. I grasped the film Nan Cheng Pei Chan (To Fight All Over the Country). Comrade Su Yu, I remember I negotiated with you about the costumes. General Chen, do you still remember? Though there were some drawbacks in the film, it was basically good. That film was concretely grasped by me, was organized and created by you; it was corrected too. Have you forgotten? [Chen Yi said, "I remember."] Ah! so you still remember!
   Finally, I want to briefly talk about the education of our children. We should not treat our children as our private property; we must treat them as the wealth of the people, the descendants of the people. If one treasures one's own children as the treasures of heaven, he inevitably ignores children of other people, the children of the working class, and views them as if they were nothing. This is very wrong. People with such an attitude are only a minority; the majority of the people are not like that. Most of our comrades are able to correctly treat their children. Take Chen Shih-chu for example. He was able to unwaveringly punish his own son. Naturally this doesn't mean that we should overdo disciplining them; but they must be properly disciplined; they must be told to learn, to think, and to be educated. Comrade Chen Shih-chu, have you disciplined your child yet? [Chen said, "Yes."] In regards to this question, a minority of comrades has been excessive. This is what I meant by the problem of "Prince Chang An." What did that word "privileges" mean? There were many who were in high positions without merit, being well paid without accomplishment, and highly privileged. What are their privileges then? They are bicycles, cameras, radios. Some of them even drive automobiles. Most important of all is the fact that their children are conscious of the rank of their parents. Some people think that is the way to show their children, but they are doing harm to them instead. It is certainly no easy thing to educate our children to make them genuine revolutionary successors. On the one hand, this is due to our own educational background; on the other hand, it was brought about by the influence of the society. Not all of our children are that good; although they eat at the public dining hall, they, however, still think themselves special, and they are influenced by society. We must discipline them very strictly. If we are insistent, they might be better people in the future. As far as the influence of society is concerned, take our child for example. When she was studying in primary school, she told me one day that her teacher had mentioned to her a book entitled Tun Tun Ti Ching Ho. What a terrible teacher! So I told her that it was wrong, that it should be Ching Ching Ti Tun Ho (Quiet Flows the Don). I said, "Do you want to read this book?" She answered, "Yes, Mama." I told her that when she read it, she should regard it as Soviet historical material, or as the history of Soviet wars. I told her that it was not a good book because it used a traitor and counterrevolutionary as its hero. But she argued, "Mama, can you say that? Everybody else says it is good." The reason she criticized me like that was because the book was not allowed to be criticized then. I told her not to tell others about it. However, I told her that I had studied the book and that that was my personal opinion only. I don't know what she thought after that. Anyway we must shoulder a little political as well as ideological responsibility for our children. Take the French novel The Red and the Black for instance. The French revisionists have extracted the political and the economic contents of the novel and made a pornographic movie of it. We must study all materials and explain this point to the young people and the people who work with us. Although my daily work is not very great or important in comparison to that of other comrades, still my work load is very heavy, and I am not very healthy either, so I cannot spare too much time for the education of my children. But whatever I have discovered, I will study and then explain to my children. Meanwhile, I think parents should treat their children as equals. They should not treat them in the feudal way by regarding themselves as lords of the house. I think we should follow Chairman Mao's example in this respect; because it is very democratic at our home, the children are allowed to talk back to their father. Sometimes we make them talk back on purpose. When they do, we will then explain to them. But most of the time they don't because they have respect for their parents. It is good for them to argue. Let them rebel a little. I don't think it will do any harm at all. What good does it make to make them say "Yes, Papa" "Yes, Mama" all the time? I don't approve of that. Yet I feel to be strict to one's children is to love them.
   I have mentioned the above two points before and am now repeating them for your reference only. If I am wrong, please criticize me. That is all.



[To Make New Contributions for the People, translated in part in Issues and Studies (Taipei), vol. vi, no. 10 (July 1970). Transcribed for www.wengewang.org]
  
  
  

 
 
顶端 Posted: 2009-03-13 02:26 | [楼 主]
weihong
级别: 精灵王


精华: 0
发帖: 3193
威望: 3194 点
红花: 31935 朵
贡献值: 1 点
在线时间:286(小时)
注册时间:2007-01-15
最后登录:2009-12-31

 

江青在军委扩大会议上的讲话
江青
1967.04.12




我是一个普通的共产党员,多年来都是给主席作秘书,主要的是研究一点国际问题。在文教方面我算一个流动的哨兵。就是订着若干刊物报纸,这样翻着看,把凡是我认为比较值得注意的东西,包括正面的、反面的材料,送给主席参考。我多年来的工作大体上是这样做的。从去年起,我的工作算是加了一点,就是兼做常委的秘书。我们整个中央文革小组就是中央常委的一个秘书班子。也还是哨兵工作、参谋工作。就是提出意见,供主席、林副主席、周总理、中央常委参考。所作的工作就是这么一点。我对军队不熟悉,知道的东西很少,今天只能和同志们交谈一下。我的意见如果不对,请同志们批评我。我们小组是比较民主的,有时候还可以吵架。同志们有什么意见,欢迎你们提出来。

主席对我们是严格的,主席对于我首先是严师。当然喽,他不象有些人把着手那样教,但是对我非常严格。许多事情我是不知道的。主席的为人,我想同志们也许比我知道的更多一点。我们在一块生活,他这个人是很寡言的,话不多。有时候谈起来,多数都是谈政治、经济、文化,国际、国内,海阔天空。什么社会上的小广播,也谈一点,但很少。如果偶尔涉及某一干部,主席总是说什么人有大功哪!这个人怎么好啦!不怎么说人家坏话的。主席对干部爱护、宽大。我自己也是遵守党的纪律的。我也讨厌听那些社会上的小广播。这样,我有时候很无知。不过,知道那样一些小广播也没有什么好处,浪费精力。在过去,我每天要看一大堆参考资料,再加上电报还要多哩!那有时间去听那些小广播,搞那些名堂。至于学习,我不比同志们好,我自己觉得学习的不够好,特别是不够系统。如果说我有一点什么长处,那就是我学懂了那一点,我就坚持,就去做。在延安,听了主席的在文艺座谈会上的那个讲话。对那个讲话里头我领会了的东西,我就去做。当然这篇讲话,我不是全部领会了。这几年我又重新读了,对我还是那么新鲜。这篇讲话强调指出文艺为工农兵服务,为无产阶级政治服务,这个我懂。而且我多年遵照主席的教导,在我力所能及的范围内去做。我就是这么一个人。与同志们比较起来,我是个小学生,要向同志们学习。因为同志们在历史上,不管是十年内战时期,抗日战争时期,解放战争时期,抗美援朝等等这些战争时期,都为人民建立了丰功伟绩,这是连国内国外敌人都承认的。我向来是非常敬仰老红军的。在延安闹过这样一个笑话。曾经有人给我的帽子上做了一颗红星,后来说是不许戴,我才戴了几天就不许戴,为这个可闹别扭啦!当时我不太明白,为什么一定要我们把这个红星拿掉,那个时候不明白,是闹过别扭的。我对于中国人民解放军很有感情,我觉得自己现在也还是军队的。我进城以后一直要求保留我的军籍。我只在军队做过一段很短时间的工作,就是在胡宗南进攻陕北的时候,在中央直属大队当政治协理员。进城后我一直要求不要把我的军籍除掉,就是说不要开除我。我心里总是向着军队的。

目前在毛主席和中央的号召下,同志们正在为人民建立新的功勋。主席曾经说过:不要吃老本!要立新功!在说这个话的时候,在一次中央会议上,主席讲过一个故事。战国时候,赵国的赵太后执政,她非常溺爱她的小儿子长安君。这时候秦国攻击它,攻得很紧,她请齐国出兵解围,齐国说,要把你的小儿子长安君来做人质,才能出兵。她不肯,她舍不得她那小儿子,很多大臣进谏,要她派长安君去。她恼火了,说谁再来劝说,我就要唾他的脸。当时有个左师(官名),叫触蜇。(音;上下结构字,上为“龙”字,下为“言”字。──编者。)他去求见太后,赵太后盛怒等着他。他腿有病,故意走得很慢,慢慢地慢慢地走。然后,他就问寒问暖,先不讲政治,然后说,我快要死了,我有个小儿子,十五岁了,太后能不能给派个吃饭的差使,我死了也就心安了,赵太后就说,丈夫也爱少子吗?他说,甚于妇人。听了这样的话,太后的气消下去了。她说不见得,我看溺爱少子,还是女人比男人厉害。左师就驳她说,我看你爱燕后超过了爱长安君(燕后是燕国国君的妻子,是赵太后的女儿)。她问何以见得?左师说,燕后出嫁的时候,你抱着她哭,因为是远别。燕后出嫁以后,每当祭祀,你都为她祈祷说:你千万不要回来。要她的燕国生儿育女,世代为王,替她打算的是很长久的。可是你对长安君就没有这样。太后说不是。左师然后就问,咱们赵国过去有名的世袭的这些人,他的子女,他的后代,现在还有没有继续世袭的啊?太后回答说,没有了。左师又问,不但赵国,其他各国,子孙封侯的,还有没有呢?太后说,没听说还有。左师说,都没有了,那么这是什么原因呢?还不是由于“位尊而无功,俸厚而无劳,而挟重器多也 ”所造成的吗?“重器”者,指的是古代象征国家权力的宝器,翻译成现在的话,就是权力。左师说:你给长安君那么高的职位,给他许多肥沃的土地,给他的权力又很大,不及时叫他为国家立功,有朝一日你去世了,长安君能在赵国立足吗?我认为你为长安君打算的太短,你爱他不如爱燕后。左师触蜇讲了上面的话以后,赵太后立刻下了命令,准备百辆车子,送长安君到齐国去。齐国马上就出兵,解围了。主席说,这篇文章,反映了封建制代替奴隶制的初期,地主阶级内部,财产和权力的再分配。这种再分配是不断地进行的,所谓“君子之泽,五世而斩”,就是这个意思。我们不是代表剥削阶级,而是代表无产阶级和劳动人民,但如果我们不注意严格要求我们的子女,他们也会变质,可能搞资产阶级复辟,无产阶级的财产和权力就会被资产阶级夺回去。在座的同志,大概权是很多的。伯达同志经常说,他是个小小老百姓,我就更小了。但是这个权就不能轻易用。既然人民给了咱们这么高的职位,俸禄也很厚,权又很大,如果我们不立新功,对得起人民吗?久了人民能要我们吗?这个故事主席讲了很多次。对我们自己的孩子也曾讲了好多次。但他们是不怎么理解的。多年来,我一直是很欣赏这篇东西,曾多次翻阅。我不懂古文,就查字典。

所以,解放军要立新功。

自从主席说解放军要介入地方文化大革命,支左、支农、支工、军管、军训以来,已经作了大量的工作。解放军的工作成绩特别突出地表现在工农业生产上。比较困难的是支左问题,复杂一些,搞不好就容易支错,对这个问题,只要我们自己的思想明确,真正站到以毛主席为首的党中央的无产阶级革命路线方面来,就会大无畏,即使错了也不要紧,我们就可以不支持他们,再来搞调查研究,找到真正的左派。把左派壮大起来。对受坏人操纵的组织,就孤立他们中间的一小撮,分化瓦解他们,教育他们。这一点,同志们已经有了许多经验啦,其中已有许多好的经验。我参加过两个小组。象中南,就碰到一些困难,黄永胜同志他那里有一些好处,他没有杀人,没有开枪,广州市捉人大概也不是太多,他们有一个很好的经验,就是说,对受坏人操纵的组织,轻易不要宣布为反动组织,而是把它的头头,确有证据的坏人,逮捕起来,或者让那个组织的群众自己改换新的领导人,这个做法,我觉得还是好的。

同志们,对前一段文化大革命不要有什么自卑感。从前说是不介入,其实这个不介入,就许多单位说,主席早就说过:“所谓‘不介入’是假的,早已介入了。问题不是介入不介入的问题,而是站在那一边的问题,是支持革命派还是支持保守派甚至右派的问题。”事实上,有的是从左的方面介入,有的是从右的方面介入。例如,拿从左的方面介入来说,去年二月,林彪同志委托我召开部队文艺座谈会,这个文艺座谈会的纪要,是请了你们“尊神” ,无产阶级专政的“尊神”来攻他们,攻那些混进党内的资产阶级代表人物,那些资产阶级反动“权威”,才吓得他们屁滚尿流,缴了械。为什么这么有威力呢?就是因为有军队支持,他们怕人民解放军。这是从左的方面介入。几个月以来,全军有很多好经验。据哈尔滨的同志说,那里的军队,在去年夏天,就从左的方面介入了。也有的从右的方面介入的,做错了一些事。我想大多数做了错事的同志也是会回头的。我才不相信,天下就那么都一片黑了,有的人就是吹这个黑风。也许我这人自信心太强,我总觉得不会那样子的。你看,就是农业生产,夏收可能也会不错的,秋收,我看也可能不错。因为革命调动了广大人民的革命热情,军队这样子大力地去带头,起模范作用,我看这是解放以来,十几年没有过的。进城以后,我们军队住在兵营里,确实和劳动人民有些隔开了。这次不行了,要从兵营里出来,要从机关里出来,恢复咱们过去的老传统,跟群众结合在一块。这样,有的地方就说,老八路又来啦。可见,我们当年还是和群众在一块多一点,进城以后就隔离开了。在这次文化大革命期间,军队做了许多好事情,从最初开始,以林彪同志为代表,就从左的方面介入了。

此外,我还向同志们呼吁一下,要看到文教战线的重要性。对这个问题,我们过去认识不足,那些有问题的,能力不怎么强的干部,都被放到了文教战线上去,还不是说我们包下来的几百万资产阶级知识分子。这样,他们的资产阶级的、封建主义的东西就大量地泛滥。这方面的情况,我们就是不大清楚,也不知道这些东西的厉害。虽然在毛主席的亲自领导下,和他们交过几次锋,但是,都是个别的战役,没有象这一次这样认识深刻。意识形态文教战线这个东西可厉害哪!因为任何一个阶级,无产阶级也好,资产阶级也好,他要夺取政权,总是要先做舆论准备的。这一点,过去我就重视不够,希望军队的负责同志,这一次能真正认真地抓一抓。

这十七年来,文艺方面,也有好的、或者比较好的反映工农兵的作品,但是,大量的是名、洋、古的东西,或者是被歪曲了的工农兵形象。至于教育,那几乎全是他们的那一套,又增加了苏修的一套。所以我们在文学艺术界,培养出一些小“老艺人” ;在教育方面,培养出一些完全脱离工农兵,脱离无产阶级政治和脱离生产的知识分子,比过去还多了。要是没有这次文化大革命,那谁改得了?攻也攻不动啊!

我个人对这个问题的认识过程很长。进城的初期,总理给我安排过几次工作,接触了一些事情。后来,就辞职了。我自己思想上,只是就某一点说,是解决了这个问题的。那时候觉得挺奇怪,那些香港的电影,就是往我们这里塞,我用很大的力量,想推出去。他们却说什么,民族资产阶级,我们得照顾。当时我们确实是孤立的。

在这个思想领域里,就是不能和平共处;一和平共处,他就腐蚀你。大概总理还记得,那时候他们说,制片方针是对着华侨,你们只要不拍反共的电影,那么我们就给你们钱。他就是要钱嘛!那个时候,只认识到他要投资,没有认识到他要来毒化我们。后来推出去了,确确实实地推出去了。中间,有几年我害病,为了恢复健康,医生要我参加一些文化生活,锻炼听觉和视觉。这样,我就比较系统地接触了部分的文学艺术问题。哎呀,觉得这个问题就大呀!就舞台上、银幕上表现出来的东西,大量是资产阶级、封建主义的东西,或者是被歪曲了的工农兵形象,上层建筑是经济基础的反映,它反转过来,是要保护或者破坏经济基础的。如果象那个样子,它就会破坏我们社会主义的经济基础。大概在一九六二年,香港电影,美、英、法、意……等帝国主义国家的电影,修正主义国家的电影,出现了一大堆,那些剧团可是多啊!如京剧,我是一个习惯的欣赏者,但我知道它是衰落了,谁晓得它利用我们这个文化部,弄得全国到处都是,这连福建那个地方,也有十九个京剧团。结果,到处在演帝王将相、才子佳人。我那个家乡山东,我童年的时候,河北梆子叫大戏。近几年我调查的时候,京剧却成了主要的大戏了。山东有四十五个京剧团,这还不讲黑剧团、业余剧团。上海的越剧也跑向全国了。就出现这样的怪事。但是,我们的工农兵,建立了这样的丰功伟绩,他们不表现。他们也不表现我们的长征、二万五千里的老红军,也不表现抗日战争。那多少英雄啊,他们都不搞。电影也有这个问题。所以我就逐渐地对这个问题有了认识。一九六二年,我同中宣部、文化部的四位正副部长谈话,他们都不听。对于那个“有鬼无害论” ,真正解决战斗的文章,是在上海请柯庆施同志帮助组织的。他是支持我们的。当时在北京,可攻不开啊!批判《海瑞罢官》也是柯庆施同志支持的。张春桥同志、姚文元同志为了这个担了很大的风险啊,还搞了保密。我在革命现代京剧会演以前,作了调查研究,并且参与了艺术实践,感觉到文艺评论也是有问题的。我那儿有一些材料,因为怕主席太累,没有给主席看。有一天,一个同志,把吴晗写的《朱元章传》拿给主席看。我说:别,主席累得很,他不过是要稿费嘛,要名嘛,给他出版,出版以后批评。我还要批评他的《海瑞罢官》哪!当时,主席就驳我说,我就要看,而且还说要保护几个历史学家。后来我才知道这是彭真提出的,他说我把整个历史学界都看成一片黑暗,毫无是处。这真是委曲了我了。我说我能保留我的意见吗?主席说:你保留意见可以。当时彭真拼命保护吴晗,主席心里是很清楚的,但就是不明说。因为主席允许我保留意见,我才敢于去组织这篇文章,对外保密,保了七、八个月,改了不知多少次。春桥同志每来北京一次,有个反革命分子判断说,一定和批判吴晗有关。那是有点关系,但也是搞戏,听录音带,修改音乐。但是却也在暗中藏着评《海瑞罢官》这篇文章。因为一叫他们知道,他们就要扼杀这篇文章了。

同志们如果知道这些,会气愤的吧。我们这里是无产阶级专政,我们自己搞一篇评论文章,他们都不许。气愤不气愤哪!我们组织的文章在上海登了以后,北京居然可以十九天不登。后来主席生了气,说出小册子。小册子出来,北京也不给发行。当时我觉得,才怪呢,一个吴晗完全可以拿出来批嘛,有什么关系!噢,后来总理对我说,才知道,一个吴晗挖出来以后就是一堆啊!可见其难啊!人家抓住这个文教系统不放,就是专我们的政。将军们不要以为这是文教系统,我们不管他们就管。我们真管,他们还会千方百计地想管。所以我们要抓,真正的抓。如果你们都抓,那就不会出现这个局面了。当然,物极必反,所以就出现了这次文化大革命,那帮人才阳奉阴违哪 !两面三刀地尽整人啊。一个戏,主席要改成以武装斗争为主,他就是不肯。为了这个,就要斗很久啊。试问,中国革命如果没有武装斗争,能成功吗?我们现在能够坐到这儿来开会吗?我觉得那是不能设想的。在这一方面,同志们的感受大概比我还要深刻。所以,这个文教战线,今后得要很好地抓,抓在我们自己手上。要大胆地选用革命小将。你看,要是没有他们,怎能搞出那个叛徒集团来啊?有六十几个人。他们都占了重要的领导岗位。小将们的这个功勋可大啦!

主席还健在,有些人就可以不听主席的话。在上海的时候,华东局、上海市委里头,可微妙哪 。主席的话不听,我的话更不听,但是一个什么人的话,简直捧得象圣经一样的。当时我觉得这是一种奇怪的事情,现在想来,这也不奇怪。有一位旧市委领导人过去是个红小鬼,居然会变化到这样,这我完全没有想象到。上一次开会时,我是全心全意希望他抓工作的,这一点,叶群同志可以证明,伯达同志也知道,春桥和文元同志也知道。可是他死不回头。另一个是个叛徒,变节自首分子,被搞出来了。本来写评《海瑞罢官》、评“三家村”这样的文章,是姚文元同志(还有他组织的写作班子)写的嘛,有些人却贪天之功,说是他们搞的。

我想,我略微讲这么一点我的认识过程,使大家可以对文教这方面,看出一点苗头。我要着重地向同志们呼吁,除了抓党、政、军和经济之外,这个“文也得要认真抓。当然要做调查研究,还要有一番刻苦的学习。因为各行各业,都有各自规律、特点。但是,这也不是难事,只要无产阶级的政治挂帅了,那末堡垒总是可以攻克的。几个堡垒已经都攻克了嘛。一个京剧,一个全世界都认为了不起的芭蕾舞,还有个交响乐,全都初步地攻克了嘛,没有什么难事。这对全世界都是有影响的。资产阶级是垂死的阶级,它表现现代生活,赤裸裸地用腐朽的堕落的东西来麻痹人民,腐蚀人民。倒是修正主义搞一点伪装,很使人讨厌。但是这几年,它也是赤裸裸的了,不再搞什么遮羞布,而是赤膊上阵了。我想,谈我的这个认识过程和实践过程,对同志们今后大力抓文教系统,能不能有一点帮助?

大、中学校都要改革教学制度、教学内容,都要搞斗、批、改,这个任务是很艰巨的,目前我们在这方面还没有什么经验。文学艺术也得要改造。我在一九六四年,曾经对文艺界的一些人说过,你们吃了农民的饭,穿着工人织的布,住着工人盖的房子,人民解放军警卫着国防前线,你们不表现工农兵,你们艺术家的良心何在啊!电影《南征北战》,我抓过。粟裕同志,那个时候,我记得跟你交涉过,关于服装应该怎么样。陈老总,你还记得吗?那个戏虽然有缺点,但是基本上还是个好戏。那个戏,是我具体抓的,是你组织创作的,还改过。忘啦?(陈毅同志:记得。)噢,还记得。

最后,我想简单讲一点教育子女的问题。对子女,不要看作是自己的私有财产。要把他们看作是人民的财富,人民的后代。如果对自己的子女就宝贝得上天,对人家的子女,劳动人民的子女,就不在眼下,这是不对的。但这只是一部分如此,而不是大部。大多数同志是能够正确地对待自己的子女的。如陈士榘同志,就能大义灭亲。当然也不是将孩子又怎么样,而是管起他来,让他学习学习,好好想一想,受受教育。陈士榘同志,你那孩子管起来没有?(陈士榘同志:管起来了。)在这个问题上,有个别同志,少数同志,太过分了。这也就是那个“长安君”的问题。这个“重器”是什么?位尊而无功,俸厚而无劳,而挟重器多也”。他们的“重器”是什么?自行车、照像机、收音机,有的还坐小汽车,最重要的还是他父母的级别。有的人认为,这是爱儿女,实际上是害了他们。要把我们自己的子女,教育成一个真正的革命接班人,是不太容易的。因为,一方面是我们自己的教育,另一方面有社会的影响。我们家的子女也不是那么高明的,他们虽然都到大厨房吃饭,可是他们还是觉得自己了不起,总还是有社会影响的。我们要很严格地教育他们,如果抓得紧,将来他们可能会好一些。社会影响这一面,就拿我们的一个孩子来说,她在小学的时候,她说,我们有个教员讲,有一本什么《顿顿的静河》。误人子弟呵,是《静静的顿河》 。我说,你是不是要看这部书啊,她说“是呀,妈妈” 。我说这部书,你只能当作苏联的历史材料来看,当作苏联的战争史来看。这部书可不好啦,它把一个大叛徒、大反革命分子当做主角,这是不好的。她驳我说:“妈妈,你能这样说吗?大家都说好。”她就这样责问我,因为当时对这本书还不能够批判。我说,你不要出去说,妈妈是研究过的,是妈妈个人的意见。后来不知道她如何想法,反正为子女还是得从政治上、思想上服一点务。例如《红与黑》,法国的修正主义分子把这部小说抽掉了政治、经济内容,拍成了一部黄色电影。我们就得要研究,把所有的材料拿来研究,对身边青年、身边的工作人员讲一讲。我自己的工作,每天虽然比起同志们来做得不多,不重要,可是每天的工作量还是大的,身体也不太好,没有更多的时间来教育子女。但是,只要是我发现了的,我都进行了研究,并给他们做了一些思想工作。同时,父母对他们要平等。不是“我是老子” ,实行封建家长制。这一点,我觉得要向主席学习。我们家里可民主啦,孩子可以驳爸爸的。有时还故意地要他们驳。他们驳了以后,当然要给他们讲道理。但是很多时间,他们不是驳斥,对父母是尊敬的。他们驳,有好处嘛。让他们造点反,有什么坏处呀,弄得老是“是,妈妈!” “是,爸爸!”有什么好处啊,我看那不好。我觉得,对自己的子女要求严格一点,就是对他们的爱护。

我这两点意见,也曾经讲过,只是供同志参考,说得不对,请同志们批评。就这样罢。
  
  
  

 
 
顶端 Posted: 2009-03-13 02:27 | 1 楼
帖子浏览记录 版块浏览记录
中国文革研究网 » CR DOCUMENTS
 
 

Total 0.015845(s) query 4, Time now is:11-18 18:02, Gzip enabled
Powered by PHPWind v6.3.2 Certificate © http://wengewang.tk