I've always heard that Mr. Liu Qing's "History of Entrepreneurship" is a work that has stood the test of history, so I have always wanted to see it. One day, I happened to look through some anecdotes about Chen Zhongzhong, and I realized that he was greatly influenced by "History of Entrepreneurship", so I admired him even more. So, I put reading "History of Entrepreneurship" on the agenda.

A story from the early fifties of the twentieth century that intrigued me in a way I never dared to imagine. What I didn't dare to believe was that because of this book, I had changed my long-standing view of contemporary Chinese history.

In the past, I have always stubbornly believed that the development of contemporary Chinese history is from two aspects: low to high. Where is the low? From the founding of the People's Republic of China to the reform and opening up, it was low; After the reform and opening up, it is high. Yes, this thought is unshakable in my consciousness. But "The History of Entrepreneurship" made my face red and swollen.

I realized that the agricultural society I thought of was not so unbearable, and it should not be simply denied. The principles and policies of our party at that time could not be called wrong. Practice brings true knowledge, then the people's commune has gone through practice. From mutual aid groups to agricultural societies, the development of this period can be called science. But why did it fail in the end? The textbook answer is that because the relations of production do not match the development of the productive forces; The high-level production relations of the people's communes did not match the backward productive forces of New China at that time. That's true, but it's the root cause. So it's easy to make false associations, so shouldn't we also discuss the main reasons for its failure?

At the time of the founding of the People's Republic of China, the power of the old landlord class in China was still stubborn. Although the landlords were deprived of the means of production after three major transformations, the rich peasant forces in China still stubbornly existed. The kulaks and middle peasants occupied the vast majority of the means of production in the rural areas of New China at that time, but they lacked labor. So there was a movement for mutual aid and cooperation, which was excellent. On the one hand, it is possible to enable the poor peasants, who make up the majority of the labor force, to obtain the means of production and animal power for production, and it is also possible to unite the middle peasants with a view to expanding production and smoothly consolidating class rule. However, we could not have imagined that the remnants of feudal ideology in rural China were so powerful. Not only did the rich peasants and middle peasants want to be landlords to exploit the peasants, but even the exploited poor peasants wanted to one day turn themselves over and become landlords in order to exploit others. However, when a vigorous socialist movement comes, but the people's thinking is extremely inconsistent with the socialist ideology, then the movement will inevitably fail. Among them, the most vocal opposition is the rich peasants, who wants to see the poor in the past now turn over and become masters, and kick their noses in the face of their former masters? Originally, these rich peasants were the stratum closest to the landlord class, and their identification with New China was not high from the beginning. The central government adopted a policy of isolating the kulaks, which further exacerbated the dissatisfaction of the kulak strata with the new government. On the one hand, the middle peasants are greedy for their abundant means of production and sufficient labor, so they are unwilling to participate in cooperation; On the other hand, the poor peasants have never been able to shake off the shackles of feudal ideology and keep up with the trend of socialism, and the contradictions between the radicals and the conservatives within themselves still cannot be effectively resolved. As a result, the three strata of the countryside are not satisfied with mutual aid and cooperatives and agricultural cooperatives. However, when it came time to set up the people's commune, because it was compulsory to join, everyone was dissatisfied, and everyone's enthusiasm for production was very low. Therefore, the People's Commune could not succeed.

As I said above, this stage is not as unbearable as it seems. But why should I give the example of failure at this stage? This will pave the way for the later Cultural Revolution. The Cultural Revolution cannot be completely denied for two reasons. First, through various criticisms and struggles, it basically eradicated the enemies with the nature of the bourgeois and landlord classes, thus unifying the classes, and this laid the foundation for the accumulation and development of reform and opening up in the future. Second, through the ideological baptism during the Cultural Revolution, everyone strengthened their understanding and identification with socialism, which provided mass support for the future reform and opening up. With the right time, place and people, reform and opening up will achieve such great success.

After reading "The History of Entrepreneurship", I can't help but call it a blessing for me to read, but also a blessing for my view of history. It not only provided me with another perspective on the world in my life, but also made an indelible contribution to the formation of my view of history. I think that what we are influenced by "The History of Entrepreneurship" is not only our understanding, but also the philosophy of life.

Postscript:

After reading "The History of Entrepreneurship", I looked up its relevant information on the Internet. It was discovered that not only Mr. Chen Zhongzhong, but also many famous Chinese writers of the 20th century were influenced by this work. In addition, this work was not finished, and it was originally planned to write four parts, but Mr. Liu Qing passed away when he finished writing the second part. It's a pity, it's a pity!