A Review of the Research on "A Brief Course on the History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (Bolsheviks)" in my country since the 1980s
In September 1938, after the publication of the "Short Course in the History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (Bolsheviks)" (hereinafter referred to as the "Short Course"), it was introduced into China from the Soviet Union. The study, publicity and research of the "Short Course" roughly experienced two periods of high tides of study, publicity and research, namely the Yan'an Rectification Movement and the early years of the founding of the People's Republic of China to the late 1950s to learn from the Soviet Union's socialist construction experience. Due to the influence of the Stalin model, the characteristics of these two periods were that they paid more attention to the theoretical study and publicity of the "Short Course", and lacked academic research. After the 1980s, China carried out reform and opening up. While reforming the traditional socialist model, it also began to criticize and reflect on the theoretical summary of the Stalin model - the "Short Course". From the late 1980s to the early 1990s until 2005, due to the influence of the dramatic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, my country's research on the "Short Course" entered a 15-year cold period. In July 2004, the Russian Ministry of Education reprinted and issued the "Short Course in the History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (Bolsheviks)" and distributed it to various Russian colleges and universities as a reference book for history teaching. This event attracted the attention of the Chinese academic community to the "Short Course" again. From the end of 2005 to the beginning of 2006, the Journal of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, Red Flag Manuscript, Century Tide, Chinese Soul and World Socialism Tracking Report: 2005 successively published articles introducing the book. This once again set off a wave of research on the Short Course. In a brief review of the more than 30 years from the early 1980s to the present, Chinese scholars' research on the Short Course mainly focused on the following aspects:
1. Research on the Origin of the Compilation of the Concise Course and Its Translation and Publication in China
1. Why did you write the Concise-Short Tutorial?
The traditional view is that it was created by Stalin in order to establish his personal theoretical authority. However, some scholars have suggested that the analysis and summary of the origin of its compilation cannot be simply summarized from one aspect, but must be examined from the perspective of the various "needs" of the CPSU, such as leader criticism, historical tradition, experience education, unified theory, interpretation of practice, and establishment of authority. The compilation of "A Brief Course in the History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (Bolsheviks)" is the result of the interweaving of various factors such as nation and country, history and reality, theory and practice, political party and leader, rather than based on a single purpose and need. It is precisely because of the complexity of the origin of its creation that people have an ambiguous understanding of the content, style, and function of this compilation. [1]
Some scholars have analyzed the reasons for compiling the Concise Course from the perspective of the historical background and writing motivation of On Dialectical and Historical Materialism. They have said that “on the one hand, it was first and foremost to clarify that dialectical materialism and historical materialism are the theoretical basis of proletarian revolution and proletarian party, to follow the wishes of Marx, Engels and Lenin, and to summarize the history of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and the historical experience of the Soviet socialist revolution from a philosophical perspective. On the other hand, it was also to adapt to the change in the party’s political line, to consolidate and improve the Stalinist socialist model, and to solve academic problems and establish Stalin’s personal theoretical authority.” [2]
2. About the translation and publication of the Concise Course in China
Some scholars have proposed the "three versions theory". Zhang Jingru and Tang Manzhen pointed out that in November 1938, just two months after the book was published, the seventh chapter and the conclusion were translated into Chinese and published in the Yan'an publication "Liberation" Weekly. Soon, three Chinese translations became popular. The Chongqing translation is divided into two volumes, and is mostly popular in the provinces in the rear area; the Shanghai translation is mostly popular in Shanghai and the New Fourth Army's activity areas; the translation published by the Moscow Foreign Workers Publishing House is of better quality among the three translations, and is mostly popular in the anti-Japanese base areas in North China and the Shaanxi-Gansu-Ningxia Border Region; this translation is also often seen in the rear areas and various places in central China. There are also a large number of reprinted copies in some anti-Japanese base areas in North China. According to rough statistics, by March 1941, "History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union" had sold 100,000 copies in China. [3]
Some scholars have also proposed four versions of the "Brief Course" during the New Democratic Period. Zhu Baoqiang pointed out that the "Brief Course" was introduced to China from the Soviet Union in early 1939, and four influential Chinese translations appeared in China that year: the first was the Chinese translation of the "Course" published by the Soviet Foreign Language Bureau, which was popular in the Shaanxi-Gansu-Ningxia Border Region and the anti-Japanese bases in North China, and was also common in the rear areas and various places in Central China; the second was the three different Chinese versions of the "Brief Course" represented by the Chongqing China Publishing House version, the Yan'an Liberation Society version, and the Shanghai Qiming Society version during the Anti-Japanese War and the War of Liberation, and pointed out the different characteristics of these versions. It is believed that the Moscow version, the China Publishing House version, and the Liberation Society version of the "Brief Course" are "authentic" translations by "official" organizations, reflecting the party consciousness and value demands of the Soviet Communist Party and the Chinese Communist Party, and have also received strong support from organized forces and strong promotion by the party's propaganda agencies. Therefore, these three translations have a great influence inside and outside the party and are widely distributed. The Chinese translation of the Shanghai Qiming Press Concise Course was translated by Wu Qingyou, a famous scholar in the Republic of China who had considerable research achievements in Soviet political history. It reflects the author’s research level on Soviet party history and is not official. Therefore, it is different from the above three translations in terms of title, format, language, etc. [4]
Zhu Baoqiang also pointed out that after the founding of the People's Republic of China, four different versions of the "Brief Course" appeared in China: the People's Publishing House version, the large-print version, the Central Compilation and Translation Bureau version, and the minority language version. He introduced the translation, publication, and dissemination of these four versions. Among them, the People's Publishing House version has the largest circulation, the widest dissemination, and the greatest influence in the country after the founding of the People's Republic of China. In 1980, the Nationalities Publishing House published the Kazakh and Tibetan versions of the "Brief Course", which are the two minority language versions that have been published, and are of great significance. [5]
II. Research on the influence of the Concise Course on the disciplines of CCP history and Soviet history
Since the Concise Course was named as a party history textbook, it had a profound historical impact on the history of the Communist Party of China. Therefore, since the 1980s, domestic scholars have mainly paid attention to the Concise Course from the perspective of party history.
In October 1988, the National Central Party History Research Association and six other institutions jointly held a symposium on "The Impact of the History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union on the Study of the History of the Chinese Communist Party". Scholars acknowledged that the concise course played an important role in promoting the study and teaching of the history of the Chinese Communist Party in my country. However, scholars unanimously believed that the concise course had a greater negative impact on the history of the Chinese Communist Party.
First, it has a profound impact on the writing of the history of the Communist Party of China. During the Cultural Revolution, the history of the Communist Party of China was written as a history of 10 line struggles, which is a prominent example. Another example is the impact on the compilation of party history textbooks in colleges and universities. The "Lecture Notes on the History of the Communist Party of China" compiled and published by the Beijing University Cooperation Group in 1961 was based on it. The book inappropriately exaggerates the role of individual leaders in history and highlights Mao Zedong's activities. Therefore, in order to reform the teaching of party history and improve the level of research on the history of the Communist Party of China, it is necessary to negate the system of the history of the Communist Party of China based on the "Concise Course" and compile high-quality works on the history of the Communist Party of China in accordance with the requirements of the history discipline. [6]
Wang Yu believes that the greatest negative impact of the Concise Course on China was that for a long time we regarded it as the most complete example of integrating theory with practice, and we had a dogmatic attitude towards it, mistakenly regarding the Soviet Union’s experience, even at a certain time, as the universal truth of Marxism, and thus copied the Soviet Union’s experience, especially on issues related to socialist revolution and construction. [7]
Liao Gailong believes that the evaluation of the "Brief Course" and its influence on the history of the Communist Party of China should adopt an analytical attitude. This book has been widely circulated and praised not only in China but also in the world. This is because it has some advantages from form to content, and some things that are attractive and beneficial to people. In terms of language and narrative methods, it is very concise and fluent, the narrative is vivid, and most of it is a combination of history and theory, which makes it easy for people to understand and accept, and leaves a deep impression on people; at the same time, it also affirms the good influence of this book on the research and teaching of the history of the Communist Party of China. For example, the universal principles of Marxism are combined with the specific practice of the Chinese revolution, thus forming the theory of the Communist Party of China (Mao Zedong Thought) as the main clue to study and teach the history of the Communist Party of China. After the Third Plenary Session of the Eleventh Central Committee, the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China still followed this fundamental ideological principle. At the same time, it was also pointed out that the Concise Course, in general, contained serious errors, distorted history, deified Lenin, and especially Stalin; the theory of the expansion of class struggle had led to the serious error of expanding the anti-counterrevolutionary campaigns in various Soviet areas of China and killing a large number of innocent cadres and the masses; it also had a significant direct impact on Mao Zedong’s “leftist” error of expanding the class struggle in socialist society in his later years. [8]
Zhang Jingru pointed out that in the early stages of the establishment of the CCP’s party history, the study of the CCP’s party history had already begun to be influenced by this book, which was mainly due to the over-emphasis on theoretical and critical content, and the emphasis on political significance, while using historical facts as a foil. The influence of the “Brief Course” on the teaching and research of the CCP’s party history is multifaceted, but the most fundamental is that it wrote the history of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union according to the requirements of theoretical disciplines rather than historical disciplines, and got the nature of the discipline and the research object wrong. The long-term misunderstanding of the nature of the discipline and the research object is an internal factor that hinders the normal development of the CCP’s party history. [9]
Gong Yuzhi analyzed the impact of the History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union on the review model of the CCP’s party history textbooks. He asked, “How are party history textbooks reviewed? In the past, there was a model, which was the model of the 1938 “A Brief Course in the History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (Bolsheviks)”. This model showed its great authority by publicly announcing that the book was “reviewed by the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (Bolsheviks)” on the cover. It was also included in almost all of Stalin’s “Complete Works of Stalin”. [10] , and the review of the CCP's party history textbooks was deeply influenced by this model, but it was not entirely the Soviet model. Gong Yuzhi believes that the review of the CCP's party history textbooks has gone through several models: the first is the Yan'an model. In the form of the "Resolution on Certain Historical Issues" passed by the Central Committee, but there was no compilation and publication of party history textbooks approved by the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China like the Soviet Union. The second is the model of Hu Qiaomu's "Thirty Years of the Communist Party of China" in the early days of the founding of the People's Republic of China. This model was reviewed and approved by the party's top leader Mao Zedong, and published in the "People's Daily" under the name of Hu Qiaomu, an authoritative theorist in the party, and then published in a single volume for large-scale distribution; the third is the "History of the Communist Party of China (Volume 1)" and "Seventy Years of the Communist Party of China" published in 1991, which were approved by the Central Party History Leading Group and published in the name of "Central Party History Research Office" and authoritative theorists.
Shortly after the 1988 symposium on "The Influence of the History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union on the Study of the History of the CPC", Zhang Jingru and Tang Manzhen further analyzed the influence of the Concise Course on the study of the history of the CPC in the book History of the Study of the History of the CPC History, and believed that its positive influence was mainly reflected in: "In terms of theme, this book discusses the development of Marxism by Leninism, and more clearly reveals the process of the continuous combination of the basic principles of Marxism with the conscious activities of the Russian Revolution. It also tells people through historical facts that to be proficient in Marxist theory is not to be familiar with its formulas and conclusions, but to learn to apply and develop these theories in the practice of the revolution in one's own country. This theme is very important for overcoming the difficulties in the study of party history. It has important enlightenment significance for the study of the party's ideology and theory and the unification of the whole party's understanding. The study of party history must adhere to the general direction of directly serving the formulation of the party's correct strategy, tactics and ideological line, and be able to elevate the rich practice of the whole party into theory, and continuously produce articles that scientifically analyze and evaluate the development of the party's theory from a historical perspective. [11] Its negative impact is mainly manifested in the following aspects: the historical flavor of the "Brief Course" is not strong, and the phenomenon of using theory to guide history is very prominent, so it lacks persuasiveness and is difficult for people to accept. In addition, it over-exaggerates the cruelty of the struggle within the party and exaggerates the personal role of Lenin and Stalin, which has a bad influence on the study of the history of the Communist Party of China in its early days. [12]
In addition to discussing the impact of the "Short Course" on the discipline of CCP party history, many historians have also paid attention to the impact of the "Short Course" on the development of Soviet historiography, but most of the discussions are mainly negative. "The publication of the "Short Course" became an important source of ideas in Soviet historiography that replaced history with theory and formalized and simplified history." "The "Short Course" contains certain principles of attitude towards history, that is, there are methodological viewpoints. These methodological viewpoints have been integrated into Soviet historical science and have had a huge impact on the research of several generations of historians." "The "Course" almost determined all the contents of the subsequent historical concept system. It not only dominated Soviet historical research in the 1940s to 1960s, but also continued to influence historical research after the 20th Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union." [13] The Soviet Union "established the "Course" as the "only correct" model, and it itself only defended the victors. This not only imprisoned Marxism, but also imprisoned historical science." [14]
III. On the study of the Concise Course and the popularization of Marxism
1. On whether the Concise Course is a Marxist-Leninist work
Maslov, a former Soviet historian, believed that the Short Course was a product of Stalinism. It completely violated Marxism-Leninism. The whole book was a worship of the individual. It was an encyclopedia of Stalin’s personality cult. It also arbitrarily tampered with the history of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. Therefore, it should be completely denied. [15] Influenced by this view, some domestic scholars have a negative attitude towards the Short Course, believing that the Short Course was a symbol of the final establishment of Stalin’s ideological model. Before the 1950s, it had been the highest example of Stalin’s ideological theory and the exposition of Stalin’s socialist model and ideological model, and it was spreading to all socialist countries at that time. It embodied the entire personality cult of Stalin. The course also solidified dogmatism, left-wing radicalism and utopianism. [16]
Most scholars who study the history of the Chinese Communist Party believe that although the Concise Course is not a rigorous historical work, as a "classic" book that promotes Marxist-Leninist theory, it has played an important role in spreading Marxism-Leninism. "It has spread the basic knowledge of Marxism-Leninism among two generations, and this should not be erased." For example, in the 1980s, Liao Gailong, based on his own learning experience, praised the Concise Course for its help in studying Lenin's works. At the same time, he also pointed out that the book contains quite a number of erroneous non-Marxist theoretical viewpoints that cannot stand the test of history. [17]
Scholars who study the history of Marxist philosophy have proposed, through their study of the second section of Chapter 4 of the Concise Course, “Dialectical Materialism and Historical Materialism,” that Stalin used more than 20,000 words to describe the principles of Marxist dialectical materialism and historical materialism in three major parts: “Marxist dialectics,” “Marxist philosophical dialectical materialism,” and “historical materialism.” Although it is not completely clear, and some even contain serious theoretical errors, as a product of a specific era, it has both value and limitations. It is not that “each principle is a guiding light for a special masterpiece,” nor is the entire work meaningless. [18]
2. Analysis of the reasons why the Concise Course has become popular in China
Some scholars have analyzed the Party’s theoretical needs for Marxism-Leninism and the textual characteristics of the “Short Course”. Su Shuangbi pointed out that the Chinese Communist Party learned and mastered Marxism, which was basically acquired from Marxist works imported from Russia. Although the Chinese Revolution had many original creations, such as the “encircling the cities from the countryside”, it was difficult for its theoretical system to completely break away from the influence of the Soviet Union. From the Agrarian Revolution to the Anti-Japanese War, the situation of the Chinese Revolution developed rapidly, and the Communists urgently needed to arm themselves with Marxism-Leninism. At that time, firstly, it was impossible for people to systematically read so many Marxist works during the war years; secondly, there was a lack of classic works in the liberated areas, and it was difficult to find reading materials suitable for cadres to study. The publication of the Chinese translation of the “Short Course” provided a ready-made textbook for the vast number of cadres to study Marxism. It was also pointed out that the “Short Course” had a good ability to summarize and a good level of writing, and it systematically and concisely introduced Lenin’s major works, with relatively clear views, making it easy to understand and easy to master. Therefore, it became a must-read textbook for our Party cadres to study Marxism. [9]
Some scholars have analyzed the situation from the perspective of the practical need to combat dogmatism. Huang Zhigao used the study of the "Brief Course" as a case study to study the Marxist learning movement during the Yan'an period, and proposed that the practical need to combat dogmatism directly determined the content selection of the CPC when studying the "Brief Course". The "Brief Course in the History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (Bolsheviks)" is an important document for the CPC to study Marxism during the democratic revolution period. It not only met the CPC's need to strengthen its study of Marxist theory, but also provided theoretical weapons for correcting dogmatic errors and rectifying the style of Marxist learning. He also summarized Mao Zedong's view on the study of Marxism from a series of his statements on the study of the "Brief Course": First, learning Marxism must be refined; second, learning Marxism must focus on learning ideological methods; third, learning Marxism must focus on studying the actual problems of the Chinese revolution. [20]
Some scholars analyze it from the perspective of the leader’s personal charisma and preferences. Zhu Baoqiang believes that the fact that the “Brief Course” could be so widely and persistently spread within the CPC is inseparable from Mao Zedong’s consistent advocacy and promotion. Mao Zedong’s personal consistent advocacy and promotion was one of the driving forces behind the spread and popularization of the “Brief Course” within the CPC. His personal charisma and ideological preferences played an irreplaceable and important role in promoting the “Brief Course” to play a persistent and widespread role in political dissemination within the CPC. [21]
Other scholars have stressed that the analysis should be conducted from multiple perspectives, including social history, the needs of the times, and personal preferences. Lou Shenghua pointed out that the reason why the Concise Course had such a huge impact in China was inseparable from many factors, including the social and historical conditions at the time. The analysis included the quality of the recipients, the publishing conditions of Marxist-Leninist works at the time, the objective needs of the Chinese Communist Party to explore and solve the contemporary issues of revolution and construction, the admiration of the leaders, and the vigorous organization and propaganda of the Party and the state. [22]
3. On the historical process of popularization of the Concise Course
Some scholars have explored the popularization process of the "Brief Course" in China from the perspective of communication. Lou Shenghua examined the historical process of the dissemination and influence of the "Brief Course" in China over the past half century, compared the different characteristics of the content and form of the "Brief Course"'s influence on China in different historical periods, and focused on the comparative relationship between the Soviet and Chinese revolutions and construction practices. He studied the outstanding influence of the "Brief Course" in popularizing basic knowledge of Marxism-Leninism, improving the theoretical level of Marxism-Leninism among party members and cadres, guiding intra-party struggles, and conducting research on the history of the Communist Party of China. He objectively and comprehensively evaluated the positive role and negative significance of the "Brief Course", analyzed the social and historical conditions and other factors that led to the "Brief Course" having a huge historical impact in modern and contemporary China, and abstracted the necessary historical reflections and lessons to be learned from it. [23]
Other scholars have explored the popularization of the Short Course in the Soviet Union and the international community from the perspective of the world communist movement. Wen Yi explored why the Short Course became a must-read textbook for communist parties around the world and the "only party history textbook", pointing out that "The Short Course finally became the only textbook on the history of the Bolshevik Party in the Soviet Union and the only encyclopedia of Marxism-Leninism. This process was intertwined with the process of Stalin's personal prestige being mythologized and worshipped", and it was Stalin and the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (Bolsheviks) who took very tough measures to ensure the realization of this goal. [24] Wen Yi also examined the relationship between the Communist International and the study of the Short Course, and briefly mentioned the study of the Short Course in the Communist Parties of Germany, the United States and other countries. [25]
4. On the influence and role of the Concise Course on the popularization of Marxism
Some scholars believe that the fatal flaws of the Concise Course made it the main negative factor in the popularization of Marxism. “This book is dogmatic in thought and metaphysical in theory. While instilling ready-made theoretical creeds into people, it blocked the path for them to accept and assimilate new knowledge and new ideas. The result was only the training of a large number of ideological propaganda cadres, but the stifling of the ability of all party cadres to think independently.” [26]
But in general, most scholars believe that the "Brief Course" should be analyzed in a dialectical way, neither negating its role in promoting the popularization and sinicization of Marxism, nor avoiding the mistakes made by the "Brief Course". For a long time in China, the "Brief Course" was listed as one of the required textbooks for party schools, cadre schools, and colleges and universities. This book did play a positive role in learning and understanding the experience of the Soviet Union's revolution and construction, and learning and mastering the basic principles of Marxism-Leninism. The "Brief Course" played a positive historical role in the theoretical propaganda work and cadre education of the Communist Party of China. It spread the basic knowledge of Marxism-Leninism among two generations, which should not be negated. However, the book contains quite a number of erroneous theoretical viewpoints and false historical narratives that cannot stand the test of history, which have also had a serious adverse impact and caused many mistakes in our party's theoretical propaganda work. [27]
Other scholars have conducted research from the perspective of the significant impact of the History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union on the propaganda work of the Communist Party of China. Ouyang Junxi pointed out that the History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (Bolsheviks) had a great impact on the propaganda work of the Communist Party of China. This impact was mainly manifested in three aspects: first, it improved the Communist Party of China's awareness of the importance of propaganda work and promoted the development of cadre education; second, it changed the party's practice of separating Marxism from Leninism and separating Marxism-Leninism education from party history education in propaganda work, and combined Marxism with Leninism and Marxism-Leninism education with party history education; third, it strengthened the integration of the party's propaganda work with the actual situation of the War of Resistance. All of this played a positive role in the Communist Party of China's ideological unity during the War of Resistance. [28]
In short, the "Short Course" is a book that has had a profound historical impact on the history of the international communist movement. Domestic scholars' study, publicity and research on it have gone through a rational research stage from hot to cold, from comprehensive affirmation to negation and then to dialectical analysis, along with the ups and downs of the international communist movement. The research perspective has also gradually expanded from the relatively single party history in the past to multiple disciplines, including history, communication, political science, and literature. The mixed historical evaluation of the "Short Course" can show that the research on it needs to be further deepened.
References:
[1] Xu Chong and Meng Lingrong, “History and Conflict: An Analysis of the Origin of the Compilation of the Short Course in the History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (Bolsheviks)”, Journal of Russian Studies, No. 4, 2012.
[2] Xie Juan, “On Dialectical Materialism and Historical Materialism: The Historical Background and Political Motivation”, Journal of Inner Mongolia Agricultural University (Social Science Edition), No. 3, 2011.
[3] Zhang Jingru and Tang Manzhen, History of CCP Historiography, China Renmin University Press, 1990, p. 63.
[4] Zhu Baoqiang, “The Translation, Publication and Dissemination of a Short Course in the History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (Bolsheviks)” in China, Party History Research and Teaching, No. 4, 2012.
[5] Zhu Baoqiang, “The Translation, Publication and Dissemination of a Short Course in the History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (Bolsheviks)” in China, Party History Research and Teaching, No. 4, 2012.
[6][7][8][9] The influence of “A Brief Course on the History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (Bolsheviks)” on the teaching and research of the history of the Chinese Communist Party (excerpts from the symposium), Chinese Communist Party History Studies, No. 1, 1989.
[10] Gong Yuzhi, Notes on Party History, Zhejiang People’s Publishing House, 2002, p. 88.
[11] Zhang Jingru and Tang Manzhen, History of CCP Historiography, China Renmin University Press, 1990, p. 6.
[12] Zhang Jingru and Tang Manzhen, History of CCP Historiography, China Renmin University Press, 1990, p. 65.
[13] Qi Shande, “A Preliminary Study on Historiography during the Soviet Period” (doctoral dissertation of Jilin University in 2010), p. 19.
[14] Liu Zhi: A Brief Course on the History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (Bolsheviks) Turns Marxism into a Closed System, originally published in Shulin, No. 2, 1988, and included in Century-wide Practice, Anhui University Press, 2005.
[15] Maslov, A Short Course in the History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (Bolsheviks): An Encyclopedia of the Cult of Stalin’s Personality, translated by Ma Guifan, Chinese Communist Party History Studies, No. 2, 1989.
[16] Li Zongyu et al., Research on the Stalin Model, Central Compilation and Translation Press, 1999, pp. 331-332.
[17] The influence of “A Brief Course on the History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (Bolsheviks)” on the teaching and research of the history of the Communist Party of China (excerpts from the symposium), Chinese Communist Party History Studies, No. 1, 1989.
[18] Huang Nansen et al., History of Marxist Philosophy, Volume 5, Beijing Publishing House, 1996, p. 415.
[19] The influence of “A Brief Course on the History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (Bolsheviks)” on the teaching and research of the history of the Communist Party of China (excerpts from the symposium), Chinese Communist Party History Studies, No. 1, 1989.
[20] Huang Zhigao, “A Brief Course in the History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (Bolsheviks)” and the Marxist Learning Movement in the Yan’an Period, Fujian Party History Monthly, No. 18, 2011.
[21] Zhu Baoqiang, “Mao Zedong and the dissemination of the Short Course on the History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (Bolsheviks)” within the CPC, Chinese and Foreign Entrepreneurs, No. 1, 2012.
[22] Lou Shenghua, On the influence of “A Short Course in the History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (Bolsheviks)” in China, Nanjing Social Sciences, No. 6, 1997.
[23] Lou Shenghua, On the influence of “A Short Course in the History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (Bolsheviks)” in China, Nanjing Social Sciences, No. 6, 1997.
[24] Wen Yi: Why did the “Brief Course of the History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (Bolsheviks)” become the “only textbook on party history”? (Part 1 and 2), Study Times, December 4 and 18, 2006.
[25] Wen Yi: Why did the History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union become a must-read textbook for communist parties in various countries? (Part 1 and 2), Study Times, January 1 and 15, 2007.
[26] Zhang Guangming, The Evolution of Socialism from the West to the East, Yunnan People’s Publishing House, 2004, p. 171.
[27] The influence of “A Brief Course on the History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (Bolsheviks)” on the teaching and research of the history of the Communist Party of China (excerpts from the symposium), Chinese Communist Party History Studies, No. 1, 1989.
[28] Ouyang Junxi, On the dissemination of the “Brief Course of the History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (Bolsheviks)” in China during the War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression and its influence on the propaganda work of the Communist Party of China, Party History Research and Teaching, No. 2, 2008.
(Tang Zhihua, Vice Dean of the School of Politics and Administration of Guangxi Normal University, Professor, Doctoral Supervisor, Visiting Scholar of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, UK, Research direction: Theory and Practice of the Sinicization of Marxism)
.jpg)
No comments