Question
‘The Communists changed their attitude to land reform to suit their political
ends’. Discuss with reference to years from 1949 to 1965.
Begin with an analysis of land reform – how it was a major part of Communist strategy. Examine how
the Communists changed their tactic to land reform depending on the situation – in the early years they
did not want to alienate people and so did not enforce the confiscation of land from landlords. Then look
at how they gradually introduced land reform after seizing power but were careful not to push the
peasants into collective farming. Look at all factors behind the Communists' land reform process.
Land reform was a huge part of the Communist strategy to gain power, Mao’s especially. From the
beginning, Mao’s own idea and sect of Communism was to focus on and gain the support of the
peasants, and one huge way he did this was through promises of land reform. Land reform was a very
important issue for rural countryside peasants, and it swayed many to support the Communist cause
during the Civil War and beyond. Initially, Mao’s idea of land reform was to forcefully take the land from
landlords/wealthy peasants and equally redistribute it to the poorer peasants. But once the United
Front was agreed with the Guomindang against Japan, they did not want to jeopardize the already shaky
alliance in order to preserve national unity neither did they want to anger landlords yet, which meant
they had to adjust the radical form of land reform currently in place. Instead of taking the land by force,
they established a tax on the landlords for them to sell the land to poorer peasants. This non-violent
approach slightly minimized the anger created amongst these landlords and created a more moderate
image of the CCP instead of a radical violent one, perhaps convincing some to join the cause.
Once the United Front was broken by the Guomindang and the Civil War erupted, the land reform policy
once again took a drastic U-turn. The violent circumstances of war called for more radical policies across
the board, and land reform was no exception. Violence was once again employed against landlords and
wealthy peasants to depose them of their land, and the local CCP organized village meetings where
these landlords were subject to humiliation and physical abuse. The increasingly violent nature of the
policy around this time may have been reactionary; when GMD forces took a formerly Communist city
they had assistance from landlord troops, and once it was secure the landlords sought revenge on the
peasantry that was involved in local land reform, often killing them. This led to many peasants
supporting the CCP from fear of the GMD and landlords, and the mistreatment of their peasants by
landlord forces likely led Mao/the CCP to believe fatal methods of punishment to be justified. In this
case, the changing of the policy may not be that politically inclined, more so situationally inclined and
brought about by the brutality of war. Having said that there was definitely an element of political
opportunism; Mao could have also changed the policy in order to appeal to the peasants abused by the
landlord armies and the GMD, as the Guomindang were notoriously harsh to captured Communist cities,
abusing citizens and other crimes.
During the Civil War, this land reform policy obviously only affected the rural areas in which the
Communists controlled. But after the Communists gained government control in 1949, the brutalities
toward the landlord class extended to the entire country. Given Mao’s hyperfixation on giving peasants
more control, he did exactly that related to land reform and gave the peasants power to make decisions.
This included pointing out the landlords who had exploited them and deciding on their punishments. As
a result, hundreds of thousands of landlords were killed in the 1950’s alone, with some estimates even
‘The Communists changed their attitude to land reform to suit their political
ends’. Discuss with reference to years from 1949 to 1965.
Begin with an analysis of land reform – how it was a major part of Communist strategy. Examine how
the Communists changed their tactic to land reform depending on the situation – in the early years they
did not want to alienate people and so did not enforce the confiscation of land from landlords. Then look
at how they gradually introduced land reform after seizing power but were careful not to push the
peasants into collective farming. Look at all factors behind the Communists' land reform process.
Land reform was a huge part of the Communist strategy to gain power, Mao’s especially. From the
beginning, Mao’s own idea and sect of Communism was to focus on and gain the support of the
peasants, and one huge way he did this was through promises of land reform. Land reform was a very
important issue for rural countryside peasants, and it swayed many to support the Communist cause
during the Civil War and beyond. Initially, Mao’s idea of land reform was to forcefully take the land from
landlords/wealthy peasants and equally redistribute it to the poorer peasants. But once the United
Front was agreed with the Guomindang against Japan, they did not want to jeopardize the already shaky
alliance in order to preserve national unity neither did they want to anger landlords yet, which meant
they had to adjust the radical form of land reform currently in place. Instead of taking the land by force,
they established a tax on the landlords for them to sell the land to poorer peasants. This non-violent
approach slightly minimized the anger created amongst these landlords and created a more moderate
image of the CCP instead of a radical violent one, perhaps convincing some to join the cause.
Once the United Front was broken by the Guomindang and the Civil War erupted, the land reform policy
once again took a drastic U-turn. The violent circumstances of war called for more radical policies across
the board, and land reform was no exception. Violence was once again employed against landlords and
wealthy peasants to depose them of their land, and the local CCP organized village meetings where
these landlords were subject to humiliation and physical abuse. The increasingly violent nature of the
policy around this time may have been reactionary; when GMD forces took a formerly Communist city
they had assistance from landlord troops, and once it was secure the landlords sought revenge on the
peasantry that was involved in local land reform, often killing them. This led to many peasants
supporting the CCP from fear of the GMD and landlords, and the mistreatment of their peasants by
landlord forces likely led Mao/the CCP to believe fatal methods of punishment to be justified. In this
case, the changing of the policy may not be that politically inclined, more so situationally inclined and
brought about by the brutality of war. Having said that there was definitely an element of political
opportunism; Mao could have also changed the policy in order to appeal to the peasants abused by the
landlord armies and the GMD, as the Guomindang were notoriously harsh to captured Communist cities,
abusing citizens and other crimes.
During the Civil War, this land reform policy obviously only affected the rural areas in which the
Communists controlled. But after the Communists gained government control in 1949, the brutalities
toward the landlord class extended to the entire country. Given Mao’s hyperfixation on giving peasants
more control, he did exactly that related to land reform and gave the peasants power to make decisions.
This included pointing out the landlords who had exploited them and deciding on their punishments. As
a result, hundreds of thousands of landlords were killed in the 1950’s alone, with some estimates even
