The Zunyi conference did not solve the political line issue Yunnan channel people’s network www.b aidu.com

The Zunyi conference did not solve the political line issue? Yunnan Channel – people.com.cn Zunyi conference is a turning point China Communist Party A a life-and-death matter, in extreme danger to save the party and saved the Red Army, save the China revolution. But the specific evaluation meeting in Zunyi role in the common expression is that the Zunyi conference changed the leadership of the CPC Central Committee especially military leadership, solved the most urgent problem of organization and military issues faced by the party. The general understanding of the political line is that the Zunyi conference did not propose and solve the political line issue. But to think that the above statement will have two problems: one is that political and organizational issues, military issues have a very close relationship, is hard to solve the organizational issues and military issues and political line without relevance, because the political line is the core of a variety of issues, and organization and military issues. Two, there is a very important comment on the Zunyi conference, which is the end of the rule of "left" dogmatism in the central government". If the political line has not changed, after the Zunyi conference is still a continuation of the past political line, how can you say "the end of the" left "dogmatism error rule" in the center? "Because of the" left "dogmatism error in the central rule", in many ways, such as politics, military organization, and for the first time and focus on the performance in the political, military and other aspects of the organization, the error is closely related to the political line, and is determined by the political line. In fact, this question raises the question of how to understand the role of the Zunyi conference, especially the relationship between the Zunyi conference and the political line. This is an important issue concerning how to recognize and evaluate the role of the Zunyi conference. It is necessary to discuss and clarify. A serious setback against the fifth "encirclement and suppression" failure and early March, declared the "left" dogmatism erroneous line of bankruptcy, it is difficult to continue. The Zunyi Conference on criticism of "left" dogmatism in the military line process, actually rejected its entire route, including its political line, this is a great achievement for the Zunyi meeting, is also an important factor in the success of the meeting. Needs to be emphasized is that the resolution of the Zunyi Conference on "criticism left dogmatism in the military line, finally attributed to the criticism from the political angle and height. The resolution pointed out: "the Political Bureau will expand to oppose the military line of pure defence struggle, is opposed to the specific right opportunism in the whole party struggle, the struggle should be carried out and go." The mistake of being "opportunism" and the route of causing serious failure in reality, will it continue after the Zunyi conference? Therefore, it is inevitable to abolish it. Because after Zunyi abandoned the mistakes of the past route, so Mao Zedong later pointed out: "the Zunyi meeting, actually change a political line. The past route, after the Zunyi conference, has no effect on politics, military and organization". "The past" line "can play", which created the conditions for the party to explore and develop new political line, but also the reality needs of Zunyi after a meeting in the Communist Party of China)

遵义会议未解决政治路线问题?–云南频道–人民网   遵义会议是中国共产党一个生死攸关的转折点,在极端危急的关头挽救了党、挽救了红军、挽救了中国革命。但在遵义会议作用的具体评价中,普遍的表述是说,遵义会议改变了中共中央领导特别是军事领导,解决了党内所面临的最迫切的组织问题和军事问题。而关于政治路线问题,一般的认识是:遵义会议没有提出和解决政治路线问题。   但是仔细推究,上述说法会产生两个问题:一是,政治路线和组织问题、军事问题有着非常密切的关系,很难说解决组织问题和军事问题与政治路线无关联,因为政治路线是各种问题的核心,统领组织、军事等问题。二是,关于遵义会议,人们还有非常重要的一句评价,就是“结束了‘左’倾教条主义错误在中央的统治”。如果说政治路线没有改变,遵义会议后仍然延续过去的政治路线,那怎么能说“结束了‘左’倾教条主义错误在中央的统治”呢?因为“‘左’倾教条主义错误在中央的统治”,表现在政治、组织、军事等许多方面,而首先和集中的表现就在政治方面,组织、军事等方面的错误是和政治路线紧密相关的,甚至是由政治路线决定的。   出现如此疑问,实际上就提出了一个如何认识遵义会议作用,特别是遵义会议与政治路线转变关系的问题。这是一个涉及如何认识和评价遵义会议作用的重要问题,有着值得讨论和澄清的必要性。   第五次反“围剿”的失败和长征初期的严重挫折,宣告了“左”倾教条主义错误路线的破产,它已经难以为继了。遵义会议在集中批评“左”倾教条主义军事路线的过程中,实际上否决了其整个路线,包括其政治路线,这是遵义会议的一个重大成果,也是会议取得成功的重要因素。   需要强调的是,遵义会议决议对“左”倾教条主义军事路线的集中批评,最后归结到了从政治路线角度批评的高度。决议指出:“政治局扩大会认为反对军事上的单纯防御路线的斗争,是反对党内具体的右倾机会主义的斗争,这种斗争在全党内应该开展与深入下去。”被定性为“机会主义”的错误,现实中造成严重失败的路线,遵义会议后还会继续执行吗?所以,它的废止是一种必然。   正因为遵义会议后废弃了过去的错误路线,因此毛泽东后来指出:“遵义会议,实际上变更了一条政治路线。过去的路线在遵义会议后,在政治上、军事上、组织上都不能起作用了”。而“过去的路线”“都不能起作用了”,这既为党探索和制定新的政治路线创造了条件,也是现实需要对遵义会议后的中共中央提出的必然要求。废止过去的路线,就必然要实行与之不同的新的路线(虽然新路线不可能一蹴而就,有个形成的过程),这是事物演变的基本规律。   遵义会议改变了过去的政治路线,是确定无疑的。那么就需要解答一个问题:为什么遵义会议没有否定“左”倾教条主义的政治路线?遵义会议决议写道:“一年半反对‘围剿’的困苦斗争,证明了党中央的政治路线无疑义的是正确的。”所谓遵义会议没有提出和解决政治路线问题的看法,就来自于此。   目前关于此说的原因,大致有三种观点。一说是“时间紧急论”,在紧急的战争形势下,党内没有时间在遵义会议上展开对“左”倾教条主义的政治路线的批评;二说是“毛泽东的策略论”,为了集中力量、减少阻力,解决军事领导权的问题,毛泽东有意不批评“左”倾教条主义的政治路线;三说是“多数人认识未到位”,与会的多数人没有深刻认识到“左”倾领导人的政治路线的错误本质,因此毛泽东等在遵义会议上对其提出的全面怀疑和批评不能实现。三说都有一定的道理,我认为,根本之点恐怕还是与会者认识不到位的问题。   军事路线的错误因为导致失败和损失而暴露无遗,易于被发觉和认识,而政治路线的是与非,容易被别的问题掩盖,不易被马上发觉,认识它需要一个过程。遵义会议上,与会者对军事路线错误的认识非常清楚,因此集中予以批评;而大多数人对政治路线是否错误,认识得不甚清楚(中央领导层对此有明确认识是在1941年中央政治局的“九月会议”),所以,遵义会议决议就对“左”倾教条主义的政治路线,一方面(在总体上)肯定是正确的,一方面(在具体分析中)又批评说博古、李德是“机会主义”的错误。   毛泽东应该是认识到了“左”倾教条主义的政治路线是错误的,在1936年9月的中央政治局会议上,他指出:“遵义会议只纠正了博古的其他错误,没有指出其宗派主义、冒险主义的问题是路线上的错误,这是不够的。”同年12月,在《中国革命战争的战略问题》中指出:在第五次反“围剿”中,“左”倾教条主义“全部的理论和实际都是错了的。这是主观主义……这是鲁莽家和门外汉的理论和实际,是丝毫也没有马克思主义气味的东西,是反马克思主义的东西。”但是,毛泽东对此的清晰认识,是在1940年下半年对《六大以来》的资料审核过程中。通过对六大以来的历史文献的审核,毛泽东深切地感受到了第三次“左”倾教条主义路线对党的严重危害,认识到这是一条比以往各次“左”倾错误路线更完备的新的“左”倾路线。由于在遵义会议上,认识也不是非常清晰,加之军情紧急、大家认识不清等原因,所以毛泽东也不可能明确地予以指出和展开批评。   张闻天1936年9月15日在中央政治局会议上论及过去党的历史时,认为四中全会“领导的总路线是正确的”,但过去在“革命战争的持久性”问题上的错误,以及“进攻时的冒险主义”、“防御时的保守主义”都是“原则上的错误”。“当时毛泽东同志的意见是对的,中央是错的”,“过去对党的领导我是负责的”。这仍然是遵义会议时期的认识。   但是,在现实斗争中,错误的路线必须改变,于是就出现了遵义会议决议没有明确否定以前的政治路线,而在会后实际工作中改变了政治路线的状况。而恰是政治路线的转变,和转变了的军事路线、组织路线协同发力,使遵义会议在关键时刻发挥了其特别的作用,成为彪炳史册的一页。(李东朗 作者为中央党校教授)    (责编:木胜玉、徐前)相关的主题文章: