Mao Zedong
Selected Works, Vol 1

Comments on the national bourgeoisie

"We are exponents of the theory of the transition of the revolution,
and not the Trotskyite theory of 'permanent revolution.' We are for  the
attainment of socialism by going through all the necessary  stages of
the democratic republic. We are opposed to tailism, but we  are also
opposed to adventurism and impetuosity.

"To reject the participation of the bourgeoisie in the revolution
on  the ground that it can only be temporary and to describe the
alliance with anti-Japanese sections of the bourgeoisie (in a semi-
colonial country) as capitulation is a Trotskyite approach, with  which
we cannot agree. Today such an alliance is in fact a necessary  bridge
on the way to socialism." (Selected Works, vol. 1, "Win the  Masses in
Their Millions..." pp. 290-1) "Confronted with Japanese imperialism,
the bourgeoisie and the  Kuomintang are temporarily forced to seek
an ally in the  proletariat, just as we are seeking an ally in
the bourgeoisie. We  should take this as our point of departure in
considering the  question. Internationally, for a similar reason, the
French  government has changed from hostility towards the Soviet Union
to  alliance with it." (p. 287)

Selected Works, Vol 2

"The comprador big bourgeoisie is a class  which directly serves
the capitalists of the imperialist countries  and is nurtured by
them; countless ties link it closely with the  feudal forces in the
countryside. Therefore, it is a target of the  Chinese revolution and
never in the history of the revolution has it  been a motive force.

"However, different sections of the comprador big bourgeoisie owe
allegiance to different imperialist powers. . . . It becomes possible
for the sections of the comprador class which serve other  imperialist
groupings to join the current anti-imperialist front to a  certain
extent and for a certain period. But they will turn against  the Chinese
revolution the moment their masters do." (Vol. 2, 1975,  p. 320)

"The national bourgeoisie in  China, which is mainly the middle
bourgeoisie, has never really  held political power but has been
restricted by the reactionary  policies of the big landlord class and
big bourgeoisie which are in  power." (p. 321)

"Is it correct to  object to our view on the ground that China's
national bourgeoisie is politically and economically flabby, and to
argue that it cannot  possibly change its attitude in spite of the
new circumstances? I  think not. If weakness is the reason for its
inability to change its  attitude, why did the national bourgeoisie
behave differently in  1924-7 when it did not merely vacillate towards
the revolution but  actually joined it? Can one say that the weakness of
the national  bourgeoisie is a new disease, and not one that accompanies
it from  the very womb? Can one say that the national bourgeoisie is
weak  today, but was not weak in 1924-7? One of the chief political and
economic characteristics of a semi-colonial country is the weakness  of
its national bourgeoisie, That is exactly why the imperialists  dare
to bully them, and it follows that one of their characteristics  is
dislike of imperialism. Of course, so far from denying it, we  fully
recognize that it is the very weakness of the national  bourgeoisie
that may make it easy for the imperialists, landlords  and compradors
to entice them with the bait of some temporary  advantage; hence their
lack of revolutionary thoroughness.  Nevertheless, it cannot be said
that in the present circumstances  there is no difference between the
national bourgeoisie and the  landlord and comprador classes." (p. 157)

"The  national bourgeoisie is less feudal than the landlord class and not
so comprador as the comprador class. The section having more ties  with
foreign capital and the Chinese landed interests form the  right-wing of
the national bourgeoisie; and we shall not, for the  moment, consider
whether it can change or not. The problem lies  with those sections
which have few or no such ties. . . . On the one  hand they dislike
imperialism, and on the other they far thorough  revolution, and they
vacillate between the two." (p. 155)