The Exploration Of The Ruling Way Of The Communist Party Of China(1949-1976)

After the founding of new China, the communist party of China became the ruling party and its political status changed fundamentally. The change in the historical position endowed the communist party of China a new historical mission: under the background of new era, lead the national people forward towards a new ruling way. According to the development logic of the history of the Communist Party of China, taking the period from 949 to 1976 as the research range, mainly using the method of historical analysis, the paper is intended to present the exploration course and lessons learned in the process. According to the periods of historical development, the main content includes three sections as follows:The first section: the exploration in the early years(1949-1956).In this period, our party had just completed the transition from the revolutionary party to ruling party and there were still unfinished tasks in the new-democratic revolution, so our party had not fully transfered the perspective to how to reign. However, our party had accumulated some governing ideas, actively started to explore in practice and achieved relatively good governing performance under such difficult background.The second section: exploration in the period of all-round socialist construction(1956-1966).The exploration was based on the socialist system established nationally. the Eighth Congress of Chinese Communist Party established right governing ideas and strategies. Influenced by complicated international and domestic environment, since the expanding of 1957 anti-rightist struggle,the ruling way presented twists and turns.The third section: the exploration in the cultural revolution(1966-1976). Because of the further development of the previous errors and the influence of socialist power relations in the international communist movement,the exploration suffered comprehensive turnover, which deeply affected China’s social economic development, political stability and cultural heritage, led to coexistence of the excessive concentration and dispersion of state power and also coexistence of abnormal highlight of personal authority along with loss of the party’s legitimacy resources.