📝 Three-anti
Target: Party members and government officials. Charge: corruption, waste and bureaucracy. Date: late 1951.
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) took power on 1 October 1949. Winning the civil war was only the start. The Party also wanted to control how people thought and to remove anyone who might challenge it. In 1951 and 1952 it launched a run of campaigns to do exactly that.
Key terms:
Sign up to access the complete lesson and track your progress!
Unlock This CourseAfter 1949 the CCP controlled the government, the army, the courts and the newspapers. A few small parties were allowed to exist, but they had to accept that the CCP was in charge. Nobody could set up a real rival. The Party knew that many people, such as teachers, officials who had worked for the old Guomindang government, and rich business owners, were not communists. It did not trust them, and it also wanted loyal helpers who would carry out its plans.
China was also at war. In October 1950 Chinese troops entered the Korean War. The Party said that in a time of danger everyone had to be loyal and honest. This helped it to justify tough action at home.
From 1951 the Party began Thought Reform. Its main targets were intellectuals: university lecturers, teachers, writers and students. Many had studied Western ideas or had worked under the old government. The Party wanted them to give up those ideas and accept communism and the leadership of Mao.
The methods were:
The aim was not just to punish people but to change what they believed. Most people played safe and said what the Party wanted to hear. Thought Reform made educated people nervous and careful about what they said, and it made it hard to disagree with the Party in public.
The Three-anti Campaign started in late 1951. It was aimed at Party members and government officials. The "three antis" were against corruption (taking bribes or using a post to get rich), waste and bureaucracy (officials who were slow, careless and out of touch). The Party said that the Korean War made such behaviour even worse, because the country could not afford waste. It was also worried that some of its own officials were being tempted by money in the cities and by the habits of the old government.
Officials were questioned in meetings. They were encouraged to confess, and others were encouraged to report them. Those found guilty could be dismissed, sent for labour or imprisoned, and a few senior officials were executed as a warning to others. The campaign tightened discipline inside the Party.
In early 1952 the attack widened to business owners in the cities. The "five antis" were against bribery of officials, tax evasion, theft of state property, cheating on government contracts and stealing economic information. The Party claimed that many capitalists had bribed officials and cheated the state. Officials took the bribes and business owners paid them, so the two campaigns went hand in hand.
Work teams were sent into firms. Workers and shop assistants were urged to report their bosses, and accounts were inspected. Business owners were called to mass meetings, accused in front of crowds and told to confess. Many were fined heavily and had to pay back money. The pressure was great, and some people took their own lives. The campaign was strongest in big commercial cities such as Shanghai.
Target: Party members and government officials. Charge: corruption, waste and bureaucracy. Date: late 1951.
Target: owners of private businesses. Charge: bribery, tax evasion and cheating the state. Date: early 1952.
All the campaigns used mass meetings and denunciations. Ordinary people were drawn in as accusers, so that the Party seemed to have the people on its side, and nobody could easily refuse to join in. The effects were large:
Explain two ways in which the Three-anti and Five-anti Campaigns (1951-52) were similar to the land reform campaign in the countryside (1950-52). [6 marks]
Remember: under land reform in the countryside, work teams sent to villages gave people class labels, held "speaking bitterness" meetings and put landlords on public trial. Each way must say something about both sides of the comparison.
One way they were similar is the methods used. In land reform, villagers were gathered in mass meetings to speak bitterness and landlords were put on public trial. In the Five-anti Campaign, business owners were also called to mass meetings, accused in front of crowds and told to confess, while workers were urged to report their bosses. Both campaigns used public denunciation to turn ordinary people into accusers.
A second way is that both targeted a group the Party saw as an enemy of the new China, in order to break its power. Land reform took land and local influence from landlords. The Five-anti Campaign fined business owners heavily and took away their independence. In both cases the group lost wealth and status and the CCP's control grew stronger.
What lifts this to the top level: each way gives a precise fact about both land reform and the 1951-52 campaigns.
Use "similarly" or "in the same way" and give a fact for each side in the same paragraph, so the examiner sees an explicit comparison.