The political environment in Mao-era China was complex and tense. In 1976, after Chairman Mao's death, Hua Guofeng became China's supreme leader. However, compared to Deng, Hua was considered too conservative. However, in a speech at the Central Work Conference at the end of 1978, Hua Guofeng expressed his true thoughts, which made people see his good intentions.
At that time, China was facing two important problems: thoroughly criticizing and denying the "special movement" and cleaning up and correcting the mistakes of the period 1966-1976. How to deal with these historical issues has become a test of the leaders' political wisdom and courage. After Chairman Mao's death, Hua Guofeng became the supreme leader, and he was also thinking about how to solve two important problems.
On February 7, 1977, he published a version of "Two Everythings" in two newspapers and a magazine, emphasizing the maintenance of all of Chairman Mao's decisions and instructions. However, this version is too absolute, mythical of the image of Chairman Mao, and inconsistent with Mao's thought. In the historical context of the time, solving these problems was not as simple as people thought.
A quick cut through the mess will only have more serious consequences, as Khrushchev's lessons in solving the Soviet problem show. Chairman Mao was a great leader of the Chinese people, and despite his mistakes in his later years, his achievements always came first. Therefore, it became very important to maintain Chairman Mao's image.
However, under the leadership of Hua Guofeng, the content of "two whatevers" has emerged, which restricts people's thinking and violates the principle of seeking truth from facts. However, Hua Guofeng was also aware of the problem and explained and apologized for it at the Central Work Conference in December 1978.
He realized that among the senior party cadres, it was necessary to defend the great banner of Chairman Mao and not let Chairman Mao's reputation suffer too much. Hua's apology shows his tolerance and candor. He acknowledged the "two whatevers" mistake and expressed hope that others would criticize him as well. His speech also made it clear that the reference to "two things" was wrong.
However, the historical background at that time was special, and Hua Guofeng's original intention of allowing "Two Everythings" to be published and published in newspapers was good. He hopes to guide people's minds and public opinion by correcting unjust, false and unjust convictions. He waited for the opportunity and did not deliberately obstruct Deng Xiaoping's explicit objection to the "two whatevers."
In the end, Deng Xiaoping's comeback became an irreversible trend, and Hua Guofeng created conditions for this and completed his historical mission. Under the leadership of Deng Xiaoping, China entered a period of reform and opening up and achieved leapfrog development. Deng Xiaoping emphasized the principle of seeking truth from facts, which was also the core attitude of Mao Zedong Thought.
Hua Guofeng's role is that of a doer, and he understands the whole situation and creates the conditions for Deng Xiaoping's comeback. In short, Hua Guofeng achieved a good transition between Mao Zedong and Deng Xiaoping. His role is key to achieving a smooth transition. The political environment in Mao Zedong-era China was complex and tense, and resolving historical issues required careful handling. Hua Guofeng's leadership role during the transition period is necessary.
Under his leadership, China achieved a stable transition and entered a new era. So, how should we view Hua Guofeng's role in Chinese history? Hua Guofeng's leadership was not perfect, but he has made important contributions to China's stable transition. His thoughts and actions created the conditions for Deng Xiaoping's comeback and laid the foundation for China's reform and opening up.
When evaluating Hua Guofeng, we should see his historical mission and his role in a specific historical context. Finally, we need to think about how we can achieve a smooth transition and good development in today's complex and volatile social environment. In the face of difficulties and challenges, can we maintain the principle of seeking truth from facts, accept criticism frankly, and make efforts for reform and innovation?
Please leave a message to share your thoughts and opinions.