According to Lin Yutang, the expression comes from "pīpàn" and "dòuzhēng", so the whole expression conveys the message of "inciting the spirit of judgment and fighting". Instead of saying the full phrase "pīpàn dòuzhēng", it was shortened to "pīdòu".
Origins and purpose
Struggle sessions developed from similar ideas of criticism and self-criticism in the Soviet Union from the 1920s. The term refers to class struggle; the session is held, ostensibly, to benefit the target, by eliminating all traces of counterrevolutionary, reactionary thinking. Chinese communists resisted this at first, because struggle sessions conflicted with the Chinese concept of saving face, but struggle sessions became commonplace at Communist Party meetings during the 1930s due to public popularity. Later struggle sessions were adapted to use outside the CPC as a means of consolidating its control of areas under its jurisdiction. Frederick T. C. Yu identified three categories of mass campaigns—economic, ideological, and struggle—employed by the CPC in the years before and after the establishment of the PRC. Economic campaigns sought to improve conditions, often by increasing production in particular sectors of the economy. Ideological campaigns sought to change people's thinking. Struggle campaigns were similar to ideological campaigns, but “their focus is on the elimination of the power base and/or class position of enemy classes or groups.”
Tactics in early struggle sessions
Struggle campaigns emerged as a tactic to secure the allegiance of the Chinese people during the land reform campaign. That campaign sought to mobilize the masses through intensive propaganda followed by “Speak Bitterness” sessions in which peasants were encouraged to accuse land owners. The strongest accusations were incorporated into scripted and stage-managed public mass accusation meetings. Cadres then cemented the peasants’ loyalty by inducing them to actively participate in violent acts against landowners. This process served multiple purposes. First, it demonstrated to the masses that the party was determined to subdue any opposition, by violence if necessary. Second, potential rivals were crushed. Third, those who attacked the targeted foes became complicit in the violence and hence invested in the state. All three served to consolidate the party's control, which was deemed necessary because party members constituted a small minority of China's population. Both accusation meetings and mass trials were largely propaganda tools to accomplish the party's aims. Klaus Mühlhahn, professor of China Studies at Freie Universität Berlin, wrote: Julia C. Strauss observed that public tribunals were “but the visible dénouement of a show that had been many weeks in preparation.”
Accounts
Margaret Chu, writing retrospectively for the Cardinal Mindszenty Foundation's Mindszenty Report, in November 1998, said: Anne F. Thurston, in Enemies of the People, gave a description of an infamous struggle session for the professor You Xiaoli:
Disuse after 1978
Struggle sessions were disowned in China after 1978, when the reformers led by Deng Xiaoping took power. Deng Xiaoping prohibited struggle sessions and other kinds of Mao-era violent political campaigns.
