Chapter 15 The second section strives for the complete redress of the "Tiananmen Incident"

Regarding the nature of the "Tiananmen Incident" in April 1976 and its great significance, the general public and grassroots cadres have always had a very clear and firm understanding.Cadres and academics with certain responsibilities in leading organs also spoke highly of it. After the "Gang of Four" was smashed, the Party Central Committee changed its views on the decision made by the Political Bureau of the Central Committee on April 7, 1976 and the propaganda on the "Tiananmen Incident" in the editorial of the "People's Daily" on the same day.

At the Central Work Conference in March 1977, Hua Guofeng said the following about the "Tiananmen Incident": "About the Tiananmen Square incident in April 1976. It is reasonable for the masses to express their condolences to Premier Zhou at Tiananmen Square on Ching Ming Festival when the 'Gang of Four' persecuted the beloved Premier Zhou and suppressed the masses to carry out mourning activities At this time, a small number of counter-revolutionaries pointed their finger at the great leader Chairman Mao, took the opportunity to carry out counter-revolutionary activities, and created the counter-revolutionary incident in Tiananmen Square. But it should be confirmed that the vast majority of people who went to Tiananmen Square at that time were good, and they were mourning Premier Zhou Yes, many of them are dissatisfied with and opposed to the 'Gang of Four'. They, including those arrested for purely opposing the 'Gang of Four', cannot be said to have participated in the counter-revolutionary incident in Tiananmen Square. After smashing the 'Gang of Four' The central government issued a notice on December 5, 1976: "Anyone who is purely opposed to the "Gang of Four" should be released if he has been arrested; , cancel the sentence and release them; those who are given party membership and group membership sanctions should be revoked.' It should be said that the practical problems in this regard have been resolved."

That is to say, although he has changed the conclusions announced by the Party Central Committee and the People's Daily in 1976, there must still be a "counter-revolutionary event in Tiananmen Square."The general public and cadres are very dissatisfied with this statement about the nature of the "Tiananmen Incident".In particular, this speech also condemned someone who put up big-character posters and gave speeches in 1977, naming and attacking comrades in charge of the central government, and reminding people to be wary of "counter-revolutionary plots" (at that time, a young man who wrote big-character posters criticizing Wu De was charged with "vicious attacking crimes"). " was sent to prison).Under such circumstances, Hua Guofeng asked "to stop arguing on issues like the 'Tiananmen Incident'".Of course, people could not agree, so after this speech in March 1977, the masses and cadres demanded to rehabilitate the "Tiananmen incident" and did not stop.

Until the few months before the Central Work Conference in 1978, the broad masses were very active in creating public opinion for the "Tiananmen incident" to be rehabilitated.There are big-character posters calling for the "Tiananmen incident" to be rehabilitated on the street.Tong Huaizhou of Beijing International Studies University (this is a collective signature, which means "we miss Premier Zhou together") edited and published a poem praising the Tiananmen Square movement; "The Silent Place"; many people who were persecuted because of the "Tiananmen Incident" reported on their struggle experiences and encounters on various occasions; People's Daily edited a special page on "Tiananmen Incident", but the comrades in charge of propaganda at that time were not allowed to post on this page. On June 8, 1978, Comrade Yu Huanchun, the editor of this newspaper, gave a speech at the meeting of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference. He said that this case has not been completely overturned (Yu Huanchun wrote an article on the redress of the nature of the "Tiananmen Incident" in the second issue of "Hundred Years Tide" in 1998, introducing many things he knew).However, until shortly before the Central Work Conference, the activities demanding the redress of the "Tiananmen incident" still did not receive support.

After smashing the "Gang of Four", Wang Dongxing and others dared to go against the will of the broad masses and cadres, and obstructed the "foundation" for the redress of the nature of the "Tiananmen Incident", that is, "with Chairman Mao's instructions, no one can reverse this case." At this time, the Central Work Conference was held. Regarding this issue of general concern within the Party and the society, when the transfer issue was discussed at the meeting, everyone spoke enthusiastically.The first person to speak about the "Tiananmen Incident" I saw in the briefing was Chen Zaidao from the East China Group.He said that "practice is the only criterion for testing truth". "Practice" is already there, and "truth" is also there, but they dare not "test"—dare not tell the truth.For example, the "Tiananmen Incident", mourning Premier Zhou, proved to be a revolutionary action against the "Gang of Four".If there is a counter-revolutionary in the "Tiananmen Incident", this counter-revolutionary is the "Gang of Four".Explain this issue clearly to the people of the whole country, and the people of the whole country will be convinced.

Then—what I saw in the briefing at the time—Comrade Chen Yun's speech at the Northeast Group, the fifth of the six questions he spoke was "About the Tiananmen Incident".He said: "Now someone in Beijing has brought it up again, and the drama "In the Silent Place" has also been released, and the radio station has also broadcast revolutionary poems from Tiananmen Square. This is how millions of people in Beijing commemorate Premier Zhou, oppose the 'Gang of Four', and do not agree to criticize Comrade Deng Xiaoping’s great mass movement, and there are similar movements in many big cities across the country. The central government should affirm this movement.”

Chen Yun, a revolutionary senior with high prestige, raised the question so early, which played a leading and encouraging role for the comrades in the various groups of the Central Working Conference. Li Chang explained the "Tiananmen incident" very thoroughly in the North China group.He said: "The Tiananmen mass mourning for Premier Zhou is a great revolutionary movement. The 'May 4th' movement was an enlightenment movement during the New Democratic Revolution. It can also be said that the mass mourning activities in Tiananmen Square were the Marxist enlightenment movement during the socialist revolution. Since then, the trend of scientific thought of seeking truth from facts and the trend of socialist democracy of people's democracy have been greatly developed, which should be further fully affirmed and vigorously supported. Now "In the Silent Place" is being performed, and the Beijing Municipal Party Committee is requested to strongly support the May 4th Movement."

Lu Zhengcao also took the lead in speaking on this issue in the East China group.He also said: "If there was the 'May Fourth' Movement during the democratic revolution, then the 'Tiananmen Incident' was the 'Fourth Five' Movement during the socialist revolution." "It was the great glory of the Chinese people nurtured by Mao Zedong Thought. After the 'Tiananmen Incident', Beijing also held a celebration meeting for tens of thousands of people. At the meeting, a bad person talked about how to go to the Politburo to criticize Comrade Deng Xiaoping. Everything he said was a personal attack. This is a strange thing that has never happened in the party. Phenomenon. Why did Comrade Wu De, who presided over the meeting at that time, allow such a speech?"

On November 13, Yu Guangyuan, Wang Huide, and Yang Xiguang pointed out in a joint speech of the Northwest Group that it is necessary to fully promote democracy in our country.In a joint statement we said: "In order to realize the four modernizations, production relations and superstructure must be changed accordingly. Lenin said, 'If the victorious socialism does not implement full democracy, it will not be able to maintain its victories and lead mankind Towards the elimination of the country'. Here is a viewpoint that should be clarified within the party, that is, after our party becomes the ruling party, it should still stand among the people and lead the people to fight for democracy. Therefore, the struggle for democracy, It should continue. Democracy should not be bestowed. Democracy bestowed is not reliable. Only when the people themselves rise up to fight for democracy can it be consolidated. And the struggle of the people for democracy can only be won under the correct leadership of the party. Otherwise, it is impossible. Starting from the revolutionary standpoint of leading the masses to fight for democracy, the party should make a clear statement on the 'Tiananmen Incident'."

We point out: "The Tiananmen incident is a great revolutionary event, and it should be highly appraised and fully affirmed by our party." Then we also say: "The ruling Communist Party must, on the one hand, stand among the masses and continue to lead the masses in their struggle for democracy; At the very beginning of the Central Working Conference, some people from various groups proposed to vindicate the nature of the "Tiananmen Incident". When we made a joint speech on the morning of November 13, we did not know that the Beijing Municipal Committee was holding an enlarged meeting of its Standing Committee.

On the third day of the speech, on November 15, the "Beijing Daily" had a long report on the enlarged meeting of the Standing Committee of the Beijing Municipal Party Committee, which said the following passage about the "Tiananmen Incident": "On the Ching Ming Festival in 1976, the general public went to Tiananmen Square to mourn our beloved Premier Zhou. It was entirely out of infinite love, infinite memory and deep condolences for Premier Zhou, and it was entirely out of deep sympathy for the heinous crimes of the 'Gang of Four' that ruined the country and the people. It reflects the wish of hundreds of millions of people across the country, and it is a completely revolutionary action, and all comrades who have been persecuted for this reason must be rehabilitated and their reputations restored." Compared with Hua Guofeng's speech at the Central Work Conference in March 1977, the passage reported in the "Beijing Daily" has several improvements: First, the evaluation of the significance of the masses going to Tiananmen Square has improved. The speech in March 1977 only said that it was understandable for the masses (not the masses) to mourn Premier Zhou at Tiananmen Square on Ching Ming Festival, but the report said that the masses went to Tiananmen Square to mourn Premier Zhou and oppose the "Gang of Four" was a great revolution What is more important is that in the speech in March 1977, the previous sentence was added: "A small number of counter-revolutionaries took the opportunity to create the Tiananmen counter-revolutionary incident." Although the meaning was not denied, it was not mentioned again. This paragraph was published in the newspaper on November 15. I still don't know when and how such words were included in the report. This short paragraph in the "Beijing Daily" was inserted in the report of three or four thousand words long, and it was not marked in the title. It did not attract the attention of those who were meeting at the Jingxi Hotel that day.However, three comrades in the press: Zeng Tao, president of Xinhua News Agency, Hu Jiwei, editor-in-chief of "People's Daily", and Yang Xiguang, editor-in-chief of "Guangming Daily", noticed it sensitively and took an important action.They extracted this paragraph from the full text of the "Beijing Daily" report and published a special news article, adding a headline "The Beijing Municipal Committee of the Communist Party of China Announces the "Tiananmen Incident" Is a Completely Revolutionary Action", which originally only talked about the masses going to Tiananmen Square The content of mourning Premier Zhou and denouncing the "Gang of Four" has been "exaggerated". After Xinhua News Agency issued a telegram on November 15, People's Daily and Guangming Daily published this Xinhua News Agency telegram on the front page on November 16.The comrades who participated in the work meeting that morning were elated when they saw the news.When Xinhua News Agency released this news, it did not send it to the Political Bureau of the Central Committee for approval, nor did it report to any member of the Standing Committee.According to Yu Huanchun's recollection, Hu Yaobang told Hu Jiwei afterwards that he didn't say hello to such an important event.At that time, Zeng Tao and others considered that it was better not to ask for instructions on this matter, and Xinhua News Agency itself was responsible.Regarding the fact that this matter has not been discussed by the Politburo, Ji Dengkui said in the meeting room of the Northwest Group before the group meeting that it is not good for such a matter to not be discussed by the Politburo.Everyone told him that this matter is very clear and there is no need to discuss it. The comrades I came into contact with all appreciated Comrade Zeng Tao's courage and decisive behavior.Of course Hua Guofeng understood this.This incident only happened during the Central Work Conference, and it was not a matter within the conference, but it had an impact on the conference.Because after Xinhua News Agency published this news, after three days of deliberation, on November 18 Hua Guofeng wrote the title of "Tiananmen Poems" that Tong Huaizhou sent to People's Literature Publishing House for publication.Hua Guofeng used such a method to express his support for the actions of Zeng Tao and other comrades. The news from Xinhua News Agency also reported that all those sentenced in the "Tiananmen Incident" were declared innocent.However, some people at the Central Work Conference hoped that the central government would make a clear statement on the issue of the "Tiananmen incident" rehabilitated, and believed that after Hua Guofeng wrote the title of the book on the 18th, the nature of the "Tiananmen incident" should in fact be said. It is completely resolved, and the only thing left to do is to ask the central government to issue another document and make a clear statement.Hua Nan from the Northeast Group recalled: On November 25, Hua Guofeng made a speech on the "Tiananmen Incident" at the Central Working Conference: "Shortly after crushing the 'Gang of Four', the Central Committee began to solve the problems of the revolutionary masses involved in the 'Tiananmen Incident' and similar incidents." The problem of being persecuted. With the deepening of the movement to expose and criticize the 'Gang of Four', most of the problems in this area have been solved one after another. However, the problem has not been solved completely, and the nature of the 'Tiananmen Incident' has not been rehabilitated. The Central Committee believes that 'Tiananmen The event' is completely a revolutionary mass movement, and the 'Tiananmen Incident' should be publicly and thoroughly rehabilitated." Hua Guofeng said this passage very wisely, defending himself to some extent, and admitting that the "Tiananmen Incident" was not the cause of the "Tiananmen Incident". The reality of rehabilitating the nature of the "Tiananmen Incident" was finally stated to accept the opinions at the meeting, representing the central government to rehabilitate the nature of the "Tiananmen Incident".This part of his speech, I think, should be welcomed. The redress of the nature of the "Tiananmen Incident" is indeed time to be resolved. The actions of Zeng Tao and other comrades only made this redress come a little faster. It was too fast to wait for the end of the Central Work Conference or the Third Plenary Session of the Central Committee to resolve it in advance. Yes, this is the only major issue raised by everyone at the Central Work Conference that was resolved before the conference ended. Hua Guofeng went on to talk about the conclusions announced by the Beijing Municipal Committee on November 14. The content of the Beijing Municipal Committee's announcement he described was in line with the report of the "Beijing Daily".But there are some details here that I haven't figured out, that is, when the meeting of the Beijing Municipal Party Committee was held.This kind of situation should usually be reported publicly, but the report of "Beijing Daily" did not include this aspect.This is a very strange thing.As for when Hua Guofeng approved the "Tiananmen Incident" statement, did Hua Guofeng refer to the Standing Committee of the Central Committee in his speech referring to Hua Guofeng himself, or to him and Wang Dongxing, or to add For others, they don't even know.Deng Xiaoping was definitely not there when it was approved, because Deng Xiaoping returned to Beijing after his visit to Singapore on the evening of November 14, and he was still warmly sent off in Singapore on the morning of November 14, so it is impossible for him to participate in the "approval".The date of approval could not be November 14th as Hua Guofeng said in his speech. It must be wrong to say that, because the "Beijing Daily" containing this passage had already been published on the streets of Beijing in the early morning of November 14th.But these are really irrelevant details. Regarding the fact that the Beijing Municipal Party Committee made a decision to rehabilitate the "Tiananmen Incident" in 1978, I published an article titled "The Truth About "The Beijing Municipal Committee Rehabilitated the Tiananmen Incident" in 1978" in the third issue of "Centennial Tide" in 1998. The article introduced in detail my "personal experience" at that time, and did some "documentary research" and "some dialectics". On November 15, 1978, Xinhua News Agency issued a press release, which was published on the front page of People's Daily and Guangming Daily the next day.The title of this press release is mainly "The Beijing Municipal Committee of the Communist Party of China declares that the 'Tiananmen Incident' is a completely revolutionary action."After the "Gang of Four" was smashed, many comrades made great efforts to get the "Tiananmen Incident" rehabilitated.From October 1976 to 1978, the realization of this goal was a two-year process.The release of the above-mentioned news is only one link in this process—but it is a very important link.Because this marks the realization of the goal that people strive for, and it is well known at home and abroad. The release of this news was agreed and operated by Zeng Tao, the then president of Xinhua News Agency, Hu Jiwei, editor-in-chief of "People's Daily", and Yang Xiguang, editor-in-chief of "Guangming Daily".I just voted up and am one of the few people with knowledge on this matter.Since the real story of this incident is still unclear in the society, and the records I have seen in relevant documents do not fully match the actual situation I know, so on the eve of the 20th anniversary of the Third Plenary Session of the Eleventh Central Committee, I think that we should do our best. It is the responsibility of historical witnesses to write down the facts and truths that they know, and hope to receive supplementary corrections from other insiders. In November 1978, I participated in the Central Working Conference at the Jingxi Hotel. Zeng Tao, Hu Jiwei, and Yang Xiguang were also participants in the conference. At noon on the 15th, I went back to my room to take a nap, when I received a call from Hu Jiwei, saying "I have something important to discuss," asking me to go upstairs to Yang Xiguang's room immediately.After entering, I saw Hu, Yang, and Zeng Tao. They told me that after reading the news about the closing of the enlarged meeting of the Standing Committee of the Municipal Party Committee published in the "Beijing Daily" that day, they wanted to extract the section about the "Tiananmen Incident" and publish it separately. A piece of news, and already had a phone call with Lin Hujia, the first secretary of the Municipal Party Committee, Lin agreed.They have now drafted a press release, the matter is very important, and they want to hear my opinion. I first read the press release they drafted, and then looked at the "Beijing Daily" on the table, and especially carefully read the lines about the "Tiananmen Incident" that they had drawn in detail.My first reaction was that the title of the press release did not quite match the words from the Beijing Municipal Party Committee meeting.The headline reads "The Beijing Municipal Committee of the Communist Party of China declares that the 'Tiananmen Incident' is a completely revolutionary action", but the report of the Municipal Committee Meeting does not include the word "Tiananmen Incident" at all.But I changed my mind: the words of the Municipal Party Committee meeting about the "Tiananmen Incident" are a great improvement compared with what I remember clearly in March 1977, what Hua Guofeng said at the Central Work Conference come over.Although the few words of the Municipal Party Committee did not specify the nature of the "Tiananmen Incident", they were in essence to vindicate the incident.It's just because the central government didn't express its position, so it didn't dare to write it clearly.Now that the Xinhua News Agency has issued a news item, together with the headline they have proposed, to clarify the essence of a few words of the municipal party committee, it may be possible to promote a complete solution to this problem.I reflected for a while, I have always had a nerdy temper, but this time I didn't want to stick to the fact that there was no word "Tiananmen incident" in the report of the municipal party committee meeting, and decided to vote for their approach.That's how things settled down. On November 16, "People's Daily" and "Guangming Daily" published this news on the front page headlines. The headline used by "People's Daily" is: "The Beijing Municipal Committee of the Communist Party of China Announces/The 'Tiananmen Incident' is a completely revolutionary action/All comrades who were persecuted during the Ching Ming Festival in 1976 for mourning Premier Zhou and opposing the 'Gang of Four' will be rehabilitated, Restoration of reputation." The newspaper was in the hands of those who attended the Central Work Conference at the Jingxi Hotel, and everyone was very happy to read it.At eight o'clock in the morning, I went to the meeting room of the Northwest Group. During the time waiting for the formal meeting, everyone was in high spirits and said that this matter was great.At this time, Ji Dengkui sat on the sofa without saying a word.Later, I probably couldn't bear it anymore, and said, "For such a big matter, it should be discussed in the Politburo."He is a member of the Politburo, which means that he knew nothing about it beforehand.The people present at that time said almost simultaneously: "What's wrong with doing this?" "It's great that Xinhua News Agency released this news!" Ji Dengkui stopped speaking. Zeng Tao is the main person in charge of sending out this news, and he took a certain risk in doing so.Of course, the risk is not great, because it will definitely get the support of many comrades.Especially in the first three days, that is, on November 12, when Chen Yun spoke in the Northeast Group, he explained clearly, sharply and forcefully that the nature of the "Tiananmen incident" must be rehabilitated.After Zeng Tao released this news, it was widely welcomed by the comrades who held a meeting in Jingxi Hotel.I've heard compliments on the road and in the elevator.This day, I sat at the same table with Zeng Tao for both lunch and dinner.The tablemates—I remember Bai Dongcai from Jiangxi and Wang Feng from Xinjiang once said to Zeng Tao, if you can't stay in Xinhua News Agency because of this, you are welcome to come to our place. On the evening of the 16th, Lin Hujia's secretary Gao Zhilan (he is one of the authors of the "Textbook of Political Economy" I edited) came to my room and told me that after reading the newspaper, Lin Hujia thought that Xinhua News Agency had issued such an article If there is any "background" in the news, call Zeng Tao.When he learned that there was no "background", he called Hua Guofeng to report, saying that Xinhua News Agency had added the headline itself, without discussing it with the Municipal Party Committee in advance.Hua did not say much in Lin's report. Regarding the matter of Lin Hujia calling Zeng Tao, when I asked Zeng Tao about it, he told me that when Lin asked him how he added the title, he did not answer directly but asked instead: "This Is there any discrepancy between what the news reported about the Beijing Municipal Party Committee meeting and the facts?" Lin said "No", and he said: "It is our Xinhua News Agency's practice to add titles and publish articles. We are responsible for this matter, and you don't have to worry about it." Throughout November 17, I continued to care about Hua Guofeng's reaction. At noon on the 18th, Zeng Tao told me that Hua had an activity that had nothing to do with the "Tiananmen Incident", and it would be better if he said a few words. This is a good sign.That night, Zeng Tao called me again and said, "It's all right now, Hua Guofeng has changed, and today he wrote the title of Tong Huaizhou's "Tiananmen Poetry Copy." I congratulated him on the phone, Said: "This time you landed safely!" The two laughed for a while on the phone. On November 19, the news that "Chairman Hua Inscribed the Title of the Book of Tiananmen Poems" and Hua's handwriting were published on the top right of the front page of "People's Daily".Below this news, there was also a "Xinhua News Agency Telegraph" that "none of the 388 people arrested in the Tiananmen Square incident were counter-revolutionaries, and all of them were completely rehabilitated and their reputations restored." I have personally experienced the facts about "the Beijing Municipal Party Committee announced the rehabilitation of the Tiananmen incident", these are what I can remember and what I can write now. Xinhua News Agency published this news, "People's Daily" and "Guangming Daily" immediately published this matter. From my personal experience, I can confirm that Zeng Tao and the other three made up their minds without asking the central government for instructions. action taken.The actions of the three of them were successful and were later officially approved by the Party Central Committee. Later, I did some literature research on this matter. On November 15, 1978, the "Beijing Daily" published the closing message of the municipal party committee meeting about the "Tiananmen Incident": "On Qingming Festival in 1976, the masses went to Tiananmen Square to mourn our beloved Premier Zhou. The Prime Minister's boundless love, boundless nostalgia, and deep condolences are all out of deep hatred for the heinous crimes of the "Gang of Four" that have ruined the country and the people. It reflects the wishes of the people of the whole country and is completely a revolutionary action. Rehabilitate, restore honor." This passage from the Beijing Municipal Party Committee meeting was written 20 months after Hua Guofeng spoke at the Central Work Conference on March 14, 1977.A passage in Hua's speech directly related to the "Tiananmen Incident" is: "When the 'Gang of Four' persecuted the beloved Premier Zhou and suppressed the masses to carry out mourning activities, the masses went to Tiananmen Square to express their condolences to Premier Zhou on Qingming Festival. It is reasonable. At this time, there were indeed a small number of counter-revolutionaries who pointed their finger at the great leader Chairman Mao, took the opportunity to carry out counter-revolutionary activities, and created the Tiananmen Square counter-revolutionary incident. However, it should be affirmed that the vast majority of the masses who went to Tiananmen Square at that time were good. It is to commemorate Premier Zhou, and many of them are dissatisfied with and opposed to the 'Gang of Four'. They, including those who were arrested for purely opposing the 'Gang of Four', cannot be said to have participated in the Tiananmen Square counter-revolutionary incident. After smashing After the 'Gang of Four', the central government issued a notice on December 5, 1976: 'Anyone who is purely opposed to the 'Gang of Four' has been arrested and should be released; if the case has been filed, it should be dismissed; if it is under review, the review should be lifted ; those who have been sentenced, the sentence shall be canceled and released; those who have been given party membership and group membership sanctions shall be revoked.' It should be said that the practical problems in this regard have been resolved." Compare the statement from the Beijing Municipal Party Committee in November 1978 with this statement from Hua Guofeng in March 1977: (1) [Nianhua in 1977] still affirmed that there was a "counter-revolutionary incident in Tiananmen Square" in April 1976; [the Beijing Municipal Party Committee in 1978] no longer said it was a counter-revolutionary incident. (2) [Nianhua in 1977] clearly stated that "there are indeed a very small number of counter-revolutionaries... who created the counter-revolutionary incident in Tiananmen Square"; (3) [Hua 1977] The crowds in Tiananmen Square opposed Chairman Mao’s decision in 1975 to “criticize Deng and strike back against the Rightist style of overturning verdicts” in 1976, put on the hat of “pointing the finger at the great leader”, and regarded it as an opportunity to carry out A kind of counter-revolutionary activity; [the Beijing Municipal Party Committee in 1978] no longer talked about it, that is, they did not agree with this point of view. (4) [Nianhua in 1977] said that the masses went to Tiananmen Square on Qingming Festival to express their condolences to Premier Zhou, which is reasonable; It is believed that going to Tiananmen Square to mourn Premier Zhou and opposing the "Gang of Four" is "a completely revolutionary action." (5) [1977 Nianhua], in addition to the passage quoted above, also said that "the Central Committee firmly stood on the fundamental point of safeguarding the great banner of Chairman Mao in solving the problems of Comrade Deng Xiaoping and the 'Tiananmen Incident' Above all, we have adhered to Chairman Mao's line and policy, and if we do not do so, there will be problems that will damage our banner."He also said: "Criticizing Deng and countering the Rightist style of overturning verdicts was decided by the great leader Chairman Mao. Criticism is necessary." (The same speech also said "Let Deng Xiaoping come out to work at an appropriate time." One of the main contents of the protest at Tiananmen Square was to oppose Mao Zedong’s decision to “criticize Deng and fight back against the Rightist trend of overturning verdicts.”) [Beijing Municipal Party Committee in 1978] did not speak, that is, they did not agree with this point of view. (6) [In 1977, Hua] believed that the people who should be Zhaoxue were limited to "those who were purely opposed to the 'Gang of Four'", that is, those who were considered to be "pointing at the great leader Chairman Mao" were not included; [in 1978, the Beijing Municipal Party Committee] no longer established He set such restrictions and announced that "comrades who have been persecuted will be rehabilitated and their reputations restored." After comparing the two documents in this way, we can see that although Hua Guofeng's speech in March 1977 was after the smashing of the "Gang of Four", it cannot completely repeat the April 1976 speech by the Party Central Committee, the Beijing Municipal Committee, and the " People's Daily, but still reiterated that the nature of the mass action in Tiananmen Square was a counter-revolutionary event.The decision of the Beijing Municipal Party Committee disclosed in the "Beijing Daily" on November 15, 1978, essentially denied that the actions of the masses in Tiananmen Square in April 1976 were counter-revolutionary incidents, but at that time the central government did not dare to make a decision The former clearly opposed the formulation in Hua Guofeng's speech in 1977, but followed the direction of Hua's speech saying that it was "reasonable" for the masses to go to Tiananmen Square to mourn Premier Zhou, and determined that the actions of the masses were completely Revolutionary action.Therefore, it is appropriate to say that it is essentially rehabilitating the nature of the "Tiananmen Incident".It is estimated that the Beijing Municipal Committee did this with Hua's consent. It can also be said that Hua had agreed to rehabilitate the "Tiananmen Incident" at that time, changing its position in March 1977. However, the enlarged meeting of the Standing Committee of the Beijing Municipal Party Committee reported by the "Beijing Daily" in November 1978 did not clarify this fact. Not even three words.It was the press release of Xinhua News Agency on November 15 and the "People's Daily" on January 16 that revealed the essence of this, which played a role of "extending" and clarifying. Regarding Zeng Tao, Hu Jiwei, and Yang Xiguang's efforts to rehabilitate the "Tiananmen Incident", I didn't intend to write any memoir articles, and I put it behind me once the incident was over.The reason why I paid attention to this matter was that in 1993, Chao Feng, the president of Shanghai Dictionary Publishing House, gave me the "Dictionary of the Cultural Revolution" edited by him and published by Hong Kong Dragon Press.In the appendix of this book, "Cultural Revolution" Memorabilia, I saw this article: "On November 14, 1978, with the approval of the Standing Committee of the Political Bureau of the CPC Central Committee, the Beijing Municipal Committee of the Communist Party of China announced that on the Qingming Festival in 1976, the masses went to Tiananmen Square to mourn Zhou Enlai, Denouncing the 'Gang of Four' is a completely revolutionary action. All comrades persecuted for this reason will be rehabilitated and their reputations restored" (see pages 478-479 of the book).This got me thinking. My personal experience made me not believe that the Standing Committee of the Political Bureau of the Central Committee approved the rehabilitation of the "Tiananmen Incident".I told Chaofeng my opinion.Chao Feng hoped that I would write a material for him so that he could find someone to check it, so I wrote a little bit by hand.Thinking about it again, this matter should be done by Zeng Tao and Hu Jiwei (after Yang Xiguang's death, there are only two of them involved).I made suggestions to them, but they never wrote.Later, I suggested that the comrades in the Party History Research Office go to interview Zeng and Hu. They said that this suggestion is very good and they are going to do it.But they were also busy, and before they had time to interview Zeng Tao, unfortunately Zeng passed away suddenly due to illness.During this period of time, I asked someone to help me check the newspapers at that time and do some literature analysis.Recently, it was discovered that not only the "Cultural Revolution" Dictionary, but also the "Historical Events of the Communist Party of China" published in 1991 before this book was published had almost the same records.This text, edited by the Central Party History Research Office and published by People's Publishing House, is compared with the text published by Dragonair Publishing House, except for the last sentence "This decision has been enthusiastically supported by the masses" which was deleted from the dictionary, "Dear and respect "Premier Zhou" was changed to "Zhou Enlai", and the rest are exactly the same.Obviously, the Chronicle of Events is the basis for the Dictionary. In 1994, "Major Decisions Since the Third Plenary Session of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China" compiled by the Comprehensive Research Group of the Central Literature Research Office and the editorial team of "Party Literature" and published by the Central Literature Publishing House also contained such a passage: "The Political Bureau of the Central Committee accepted Chen Yun et al. Comrade’s opinion. On November 14th, with the approval of the Standing Committee of the Political Bureau of the Central Committee, the Beijing Municipal Committee announced that it would rehabilitate the so-called 'Tiananmen incident' on Qingming Festival in 1976" (see page 44 of the book).Also in 1994, the fourth volume of "Records of the People's Republic of China" published by Jilin People's Publishing House quoted the text of "Memorabilia in the History of the Communist Party of China" verbatim (see page 165 of the book). When I wrote these books, I wondered, did I "know something" about what happened at the time, or did they "know something"?I finally noticed that all these records came from Hua Guofeng’s second speech at the Central Work Conference on November 25, 1978.This speech addresses eight questions.The first one is "about the Tiananmen Incident".He said: "Shortly after smashing the 'Gang of Four', the central government started to solve the problem of the persecution of the revolutionary masses in the 'Tiananmen Incident' and similar incidents. As the movement to expose and criticize the 'Gang of Four' deepened, most of the problems in this area were gradually resolved. However, the problem has not been completely resolved, and the nature of the "Tiananmen Incident" has not been rehabilitated. The Central Committee believes that the "Tiananmen Incident" is completely a revolutionary mass movement, and the "Tiananmen Incident" should be publicly and completely rehabilitated. On November 14 this year, The Standing Committee of the Political Bureau of the Central Committee approved the announcement of the Beijing Municipal Party Committee: On Qingming Festival in 1976, the masses went to Tiananmen Square to mourn the beloved Premier Zhou and angrily denounced the 'Gang of Four'. Comrades who have been persecuted must be rehabilitated and their reputations restored.” After reading this text, I think there are various possibilities, and it is also possible that the Beijing Municipal Committee had reported to him before making a decision, and he agreed with the formulations of the municipal party committee.But what is certain is that he did not make any clear statement on the "nature of the Tiananmen Incident", otherwise the "Beijing Daily" would not have avoided the words "Tiananmen Incident" in the report.That story had a seven-line column headline: "The Beijing Municipal Committee of the Communist Party of China convened an enlarged meeting of the Standing Committee / The people of the city mobilized nervously to expose and criticize Lin Biao and the 'Gang of Four' / Make greater contributions to speeding up the socialist modernization of the capital / The meeting focused on the implementation of Chairman Hua and the Party Central Committee's Important instructions of Beijing Municipality / Comrade Lin Hujia, the first secretary of the municipal party committee, presided over the meeting and gave an important speech. In 2017, Chairman Mao's revolutionary line has always been dominant, the work of the Beijing Municipal Party Committee, the achievements are the main thing, and the vast majority of cadres in Beijing are good or relatively good." In this title, there is not even the word "Tiananmen". "Beijing Daily"—that is, the unusually cautious attitude of the Beijing Municipal Party Committee, I think it can only be explained by the fact that the central government has not yet had a very clear attitude towards the "Tiananmen Incident".The action to clearly rehabilitate the "Tiananmen incident" was taken by Zeng Tao and other comrades in the press release on November 15 and on the pages of "People's Daily" and "Guangming Daily" on November 16. 我还有一个问题想提出来，那就是邓小平11月5日至14日访问泰国、马来西亚和新加坡三国，14日晚才回国，因此，中央工作会议前几天(11月10日到14日)，邓不在北京，没有参加会议。华国锋在12月13日中央工作会议闭幕那天，在讲有关真理标准问题的讨论时说，“由于我想等常委都在家的时候开会解决问题，因小平同志出访，在这次中央工作会议前这个会没有来得及开”。既然真理标准问题要等小平回国后开会解决，那么“天安门事件”性质平反问题也应该等小平回国来讨论吧。因此，对“11月14日政治局常委批准”的说法我有怀疑。 事情究竟如何，希望党史研究部门进一步研究清楚。 我认为这篇文章所讲的事情并不是特别重要，但是历史务必说得很清楚才好。现在能讲清这件事的人还有好几位健在。我希望对胡绩伟、林乎加、华国锋等同志和其他我点不出名字的知情人做一点访问。也还可以查一查文献档案，做一番分析。我这一篇也可以算是对完全弄清楚这个问题提供的一个资料。 于光远同志写了一篇很好的文章，把1978年宣布为“天安门事件”平反的真实情况揭示出来，很有意义。光远同志不仅如实地反映出来当时的实际情况，而且还提供了很多可靠的材料来加以仔细的比较分析，做了切实的证明。作为一个权威的科学家，光远同志表现了他十分严肃的科学精神，实在令人钦佩。 光远同志还慎重地告诉《百年潮》杂志的编者，一定把他的文章交给我看一下，征求我的意见，因为我是当时三位当事人之一，是仍然留在世上的唯一的当事人，其他两人——曾涛和杨西光同志都先后驾鹤西去了。 《百年潮》编委韩钢把光远的文章送给了我，还希望我约一个时间由他来采访，听取我对这一事件的回忆。看了光远的文章和韩钢送来的材料，又翻阅了一些有关的资料，我想，这是一件很严肃的事情，要把我所经过的真实情况以及当时的背景讲清楚，不如自己动手一一写出来，这比由记者来转述更为准确一些。 光远同志这篇文章的主题，是说明北京市委当时在市委常委扩大会议上所宣布的内容，只是说：“1976年清明节，广大群众到天安门广场悼念我们敬爱的周总理……完全是革命的行动。对于因此而受到迫害的同志要一律平反，恢复名誉。”就是说，第一，并没有宣布《人民日报》新闻标题所说的“天安门事件完全是革命行动”；第二，也没有如以后很多文件记载所写的，北京市委这一宣布是“经中央政治局常委批准”的；第三，报纸登出这一消息以后，很多同志都问报社“有什么来头”，即是不是经过中央批准的。当时，我们并没有请示中央就发表了这一重大新闻，中央是在新闻发表以后才批准的。 我们为什么那样果断地发布这样一个新闻呢？当时的情况是这样的。 自从真理标准讨论以来，曾涛、杨西光和我经常在一起交流情况，议论宣传工作。1978年11月15日中饭以后，曾涛拉我到杨的房里，他说今天《北京日报》发表了市委扩大会议的新闻，新闻写得很长，把“天安门事件”这样重要的问题淹没在这个长新闻里，标题也没有标出来。他那锐敏的“新闻鼻子”一下就“嗅”出来了。他打算把这点抓出来，突出地发一个单独的消息。西光和我当时都没有看《北京日报》的这条长新闻，我们很快看了一下，对于他用铅笔画出来的那一段关于“天安门事件”的内容反复看了两遍。我们都觉得十分重要，应该摘出来专门发一个大消息，可以推动“天安门事件”的平反。 曾涛很快就写出来了，不到300字。看了这个消息，我们都很兴奋，认为是一条能引起轰动的头条新闻。我们说应该标一个鲜明醒目的标题。但是要标明“1976年清明节广大群众到天安门悼念周总理完全是革命行动”，文字太长，不能成标题。我想了一想，说不如索性标为“天安门事件完全是革命行动”，是会激动人心的。因为两年多来，中央一直说“天安门事件”的性质是“反革命事件”，这个标题就是为“天安门事件”翻案。 我把这个标题写在新闻的上面，大家又斟酌了一番：北京市委只宣布广大群众去悼念是革命行动，并没有宣布整个“天安门事件”是革命行动，这样的标题是不是题文不符？我们讨论后一致认为，北京市委这次讲话，比过去中央“口径”有很重要的进步。过去说到“天安门事件”，虽然肯定广大群众对总理的哀悼“是合乎情理的”，但总要说“确有少数反革命分子乘机进行反革命活动，制造了天安门广场反革命事件”，而这次北京市委不仅没有说是“反革命事件”，连“确有少数反革命分子”也不提，这当然是说明整个“天安门事件”是革命行动了。 我们定下来以后，还想请于光远参谋一下。他住在我们楼下，我打电话请他上来，经过一番推敲，认为标题的根据可靠，即使有人提出不同意见，我们也站得住脚。 当时我们也议论了整个形势。虽然主管宣传工作的中央领导人一再认定：“邓小平的错误是严重的，一直发展到天安门事件。”“天安门事件到底怎么看？反革命搞进去，这是肯定的，是反革命暴乱嘛！”“四人帮”在北京市的“大批判组”——洪广思写的文章，还硬说邓小平是“天安门反革命事件的总后台”，是“中国的纳吉”；但是，这是违背民心，天理不容的。全国人民甚至全世界人民心里这杆秤是公平的，党的高中级干部也一致要求赶快为“天安门事件”平反。就在前三天，11月12日，陈云同志在大组会上还明确提出应该为“天安门事件”平反，得到强烈的赞同。我们说，小平同志早在一年前就已经恢复工作，而且被选为党的副主席和政协主席，扣在他头上的“天安门反革命事件的总后台”这顶黑帽子早就应该摘掉了。 就这样，我们四人齐下决心，这条加上标题的大新闻，就由新华总社发到全国，发到全世界了。 当然，我们也考虑到这有很大的风险。我们笑着说，北京市委这次传达华主席的讲话，就有“思想再解放一点，胆子再大一点，办法再多一点，步子再快一点”，我们这正是响应华主席的号召。事实上，自从这年五月发表《实践是检验真理的唯一标准》以来，我们新闻界思想确实相当解放，胆子相当大；我们同坚持“两个凡是”的主管宣传的领导人已经进行过一系列的交锋，真可说是节节胜利。我们新闻界为“天安门事件”平反已经进行了很多努力，发这个新闻就是又一次有力的冲刺。这不仅仅是为了给“天安门事件”平反，而且是为了洗雪整个“文化大革命”给我们国家造成的耻辱，为革新我们整个工作(当然包括新闻工作)开创一个新局面。我们的勇气和胆识就是在这种背景下迸发出来的。