Talk:Yan'an Rectification Movement

Cheng Feng
This article appears to be a cut-and-paste of the identical article at Cheng Feng. I don't know the rules for Chinese transliteration well enough to know where this article should be, but one of these *must* be made a redirect to the other. Which should be the final article? --Dvyost 06:39, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
 * redirected to Zheng Feng--Confuzion 16:09, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Cleanup
This article needs some grammar and stylistic changes. -- Миборовский U 23:59, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

POV and poor referencing
This articile needs some serious re-working in language and content. It almost reads as a KMT puff piece honestly. No referencing and calling Mao's articles the "Holy Bible of the CPC" and literally linking to the Holy Bible is just nonsense. I am going to go massive re-editing to this page.Riot Fred 09:50, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Honestly I can't find anything of this page that isn't POV, it is mostly based on one or two books which are perhaps the most sectarian of books to find...literally drawing from Wang Ming himself for most of this...and then calling it "new findings."Riot Fred 10:00, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Rename this article
First, Zheng feng is incorrect pinyin, it should be zhengfeng. Second, this article should be renamed to an English name, like Rectification campaign (China).--Amban 14:56, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Took this part out
" Yanan was covered by darkness and fear. The victims were so mass that even the senior leaders such as Tao Zhu (陶铸 in Chinese， who became the No 4 figure of CPC in the Cultural Revolution later) and Ke Qingshi (柯庆施 in Chinese who later was the party secretary of CPC Shanghai Division and almost replaced Zhou Enlai as Premier of PRC, had he not died in a heart attack in the early of 1960’s) were kept in custody and tortured by Kang’s pawns. Except for Mao and his close ally, everyone was under great stress. The fury and dissatisfaction piled at the same time. Senior leaders such as Zhou and Ren Bishi, even Gao Gang, close ally of Mao, expressed their concern and disagreement of this movement to Mao. Furthermore, when Stalin knew this mass purge in Yanan, he worried about this could wreak havoc on the anti-Japanese United Front set up by KMT and CPC after Xian Incident, which would put China in danger and Soviet Union would be hurt too if China lost the anti-Japanese war. On Dec 22nd 1943 Stalin sent his message by a telegram sent to Mao from Georgi Dimitrov,who used to be head of Comintern and lived in Moscow after the dissolution of Comintern in May 1943. In this telegram, Dimitrov expressed his concern and worry over the purge, and pointed out this would cause great damage to CPC and would isolate the CPC from people although he mentioned the movement was provoked by KMT’s plot. Mao did fully understand the weight of this criticism. As the Red Army won the Battle of Stalingrad, the situation turned favorable to the Soviet Union. Mao knew his future still need supports and aids from Moscow, thus he could not turn his back upon this telegram.

As a result, in the Central Secretariat Meeting of CPC of the same day, when discussing the report on anti-spy given by Kang, Ren Bishi said that the opinion of labeling most of the intellectuals as spies was wrong, most of which were good party members instead and now it was time the party discriminate those members and carry out rehabilitation. Mao made use of this opportunity to give brake to Salvation Stage and turn it into Discrimination Stage.

The process of discrimination of 15,000 members labeled as spies were slow and inefficient, because Mao and his allies were reluctant to admit their abusing of power and being hysteric. Mao only showed slight degree of apology by taking off his cap for several times during public meetings and said some words such as this movement had gone a little too far. Kang did not show any repentance. Only when the Chinese Civil War broke out in 1945, did the process of discrimination speed up for CPC in great need of party members and cadres to fight against KMT."
 * The people who wrote the above need some serious references for this section. It is far from the available materials on the subject, and quite challenge-able. Benjwong 07:11, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Unacceptable
The opening paragraph blatantly calls the Rectification Movement the first deceptive ideology movement. This implies – without evidence – that it was (a) deceptive; and (b) one of two or more such movement. Next, it gets a bit contradictory: The end result declared the need for a Communist party through intimidation tactics. This implies that there was no communist party before the end result found a need for one. Finally, forced the parties legitimacy onto its people implies that there was no legitimacy without force.

Campaign based on new findings cites no sources, and appears to be translated from Chinese.

Phase I Opening sentence seems to be directly copied from somewhere else: as later described in the book. Which book? There are also sentence fragments that seem to be bad translations from something else: Mao was unrecognizable in Comintern.

More: Mao had paved his way to power using political tricks to take the daily run of military command from Zhou and Wang. More sentence fragments: Mao succeeded in keeping Wang, who had spent most of the years studyin abroad and had no power base in military at all.DOR (HK) (talk) 07:47, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Campaign based on new findings
Aside from not being discussed here before being added, this section is solely based on one source that is not (apparently) available on-line. While I am a great fan of off-line sources, such a major section like this needs several sources. I suggest it be deleted. DOR (HK) (talk) 05:21, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

This is a very thorough source that everyone who wants to comment here should at least read, if not accept and cite: http://www.indiana.edu/~easc/resources/working_paper/noframe_7a_names.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by DOR (HK) (talk • contribs) 05:36, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

I noticed there was a complaint about the article. How can it be fixed? --Homunculus (strange tales) 00:29, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

I have some background and scholarly articles in the field of Chinese political movements like this one. Pleased to assist. I will write some messages to people who have previously commented. --Homunculus (strange tales) 00:59, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Here are the author and article names for the pieces of scholarship I have, which I can summarise, parse, paraphrase, etc. into the page:

Wakeman, Frederick Jr. Rebellion and Revolution The Study of Popular Movements in Chinese History

Teiwes, Frederick. Mao and His Lieutenants

Weighelin-Schwiedrzik, Susanne. In search of a Master Narrative

Teiwes, Frederick W. Politics at the 'Core'; the political circumstances of Mao Zedong, Deng Xiaoping and Jiang Zemin

Keating, Pauline. The Yan'an Way of Co-Operativization (not to be confused with the Australian Prime Minister Paul Keating!)

Schram, Stuart. Mao Zedong a Hundred Years On The Legacy of a Ruler

Hung, Chang-Tai. Reeducating a Blind Storyteller Han Qixiang and the Chinese Communist Storytelling

Cheek, Timothy. The New Number One Counter-Revolutionary inside the Party Academic Biography as Mass Criticism

Hung, Chang-Tai. The Politics of Songs; Myths and Symbols in the Chinese Communist War Music

Wang, Jianglong et al. 'Ideological Work' as Conflict Management

There are many more. There must be a more eye-pleasing way of breaking those up on this page? They display poorly --Homunculus (strange tales) 01:51, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

I don't understand why the article is broken into two parts, each offering a different narrative. The latter account appears to be more in line with later and current scholarship, whereas the first is perhaps closer to the official version of events. I have read the policies of neutral point of view and reliable sourcing; I think that based on what they say, the article should be combined better, with the official version noted alongside that of later scholarship. Homunculus (strange tales) 12:19, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Neutrality Issues
Some parts of the article read as if intentionally or unintentionally trying to judge Mao and/or the movement as original opinion, rather than sourced.

Some examples:
 * "The only way for them to be released from this persecution was to make confession of crimes they never committed and then turn others in." Unsourced
 * "Mao turned the government of Yan'an into his own dictatorship." Unsourced
 * "Those who had produced self-criticisms were later persecuted according to their own confessions. " Unsourced

its extrememly biased and the Amigao used is vandalizing it constantly RJS001 (talk) 11:42, 29 April 2022 (UTC)