Speech at the Seventh National Congress of the Communist Party of China, 1945. I will speak on three issues: (1) The situation and the line; (2) Several questions concerning policy; (3) Several questions concerning the Party.
I. The Situation and the Line
The Seventh Congress should decide on a basic line. Our political line is to boldly mobilize the masses, strengthen the people's forces, and under our leadership, defeat the Japanese aggressors, liberate the entire Chinese people, and establish a new-democratic new China. The former is to organize the ranks, the latter is the objective, that is, to establish an independent, free, democratic, unified, and prosperous new China. Hasn't this line always existed in our Party? Yes, it has always existed. After the October Revolution, the nature of the Chinese revolution changed from old-democratism to new-democratism. From the Great Revolution to the Civil War to the War of Resistance, our line, our program, in a word, is that our revolution is a revolution of the popular masses against imperialism and feudalism led by the proletariat; our program is this very line. For a number of years, the entire Party and the people of the whole country have been struggling and uniting for this program. Our army is an army of the popular masses against imperialism and feudalism led by the proletariat; our politics is the politics of the popular masses against imperialism and feudalism led by the proletariat; our economy is the economy of the popular masses against imperialism and feudalism led by the proletariat; our culture is the culture of the popular masses against imperialism and feudalism led by the proletariat. In short, all current revolutionary tasks are of this nature. In this, there are the ranks, the enemy, and the commander (the guide). The ranks are the popular masses, the enemy is the imperialist and feudal forces, and the leader and commander of the ranks is the proletariat. It is said that our program is extensive and hard to remember, but it is not that complicated, just these few words, which should be memorable. But these few words, this program, are often forgotten by comrades. Anti-imperialism is remembered more firmly, anti-feudalism is often easily forgotten. Why is it forgotten? Because among the popular masses there are peasants, and also landlords. The so-called popular masses, the main part is the peasants. For a period, the peasants were forgotten; in 1927, they were forgotten. When the peasants stretched out their hands to ask for things, the communists forgot the peasants. A similar mistake was made in the early period of the War of Resistance.
On what do we rely to defeat Japan and build a new China? The so-called popular masses, the most important part is the peasants, followed by the petty bourgeoisie, and then other democratic elements. Forgetting the peasants means having nothing, no democratic revolution, and no socialist revolution. If you forget the peasants, even if you do a million things, it will be of no use. Because there is no strength, relying only on a few petty bourgeoisie, liberal bourgeoisie, is not enough! No strength! The popular masses are mainly the peasants; without the peasants, there is nothing. Without the peasants, who will give you food to eat? Who will serve as soldiers for you? Without food, without soldiers, there is nothing.

A part of the proletariat forms the Communist Party; the Communist Party is the conscious vanguard of the proletariat. Of course, people from other parts also join, such as peasants, petty bourgeoisie, intellectuals, liberal bourgeoisie, landlords, and so on. But this is their class origin. Class origin and joining the Party are different; once they join the Party, they become proletarians. For the Party to make revolution, it must organize the ranks, it must have the peasants. Once the ranks are organized, there must be a commander. In China, it is either the proletariat, or the big landlords and big bourgeoisie, whose main representatives are the Communist Party and the Kuomintang. Chinese society is small at both ends and large in the middle. Both ends are small, but both are strong; the middle is large, but politically weak. The two strong ends are the Kuomintang and the Communist Party. The liberal bourgeoisie contends with us for leadership. Do not think that the liberal bourgeoisie is incredibly progressive, almost like the Communist Party; they have their independent program and actions. For instance, the statement issued by Zhang Lan, chairman of the Democratic League (which also includes the petty bourgeoisie), represents their independent political views. The recent statement by Zuo Yinsheng is the same. They also approve of a coalition government; they are also united with us on the issue of a coalition government, so we must still unite with them at present. But they have their independent propositions; they are open on both the left and the right. On the one hand, they are dissatisfied with the Kuomintang's one-party dictatorship, and on the other hand, they do not completely agree with the Communist Party; they stand between the Kuomintang and the Communist Party. This defines their own nature, the so-called middle-of-the-roaders.

We made mistakes during the period of the Great Revolution. From 1921 to 1926, our Party was Marxist. In the latter period, there was very little Marxism or no Marxism at all. Before the Great Revolution, we organized over ten million peasants. What is Marxism? The proletariat leading the peasants to rise up in revolution is Marxism. That is to say, Marxism already existed then. In 1927, the Party, headed by Chen Duxiu, forgot the popular masses, forgot the peasants, forgot the leadership of the proletariat; then there was no Marxism. He did not want proletarian leadership, and at times he did not want the peasants. When the peasants stretched out their hands to ask for things, he threw cold water on them. The Communist Party, influenced by him, threw cold water on the peasants, did not want the peasants. What anti-feudalism was there then? What anti-imperialism was there? Imperialism wants to come to China to squeeze us, and four-fifths of the Chinese people are peasants, which is to say, four out of five people in China are peasants. For example, it's formidable to use five fingers to strike the enemy, but if you cut off four, you are left with one little finger (one-fifth of the urban population). This isolates the proletariat. The proletarian commander-in-chief, without the peasants, becomes an "air force commander." The peasants don't come, the petty bourgeoisie also doesn't come, they desert. You can't blame the petty bourgeoisie. The petty bourgeoisie is sometimes very arrogant, "I am number one under heaven," and sometimes he wets his pants in fear. When you are left with one little finger, you ask him, "Comrade, are you coming or not?" He doesn't come. He says he has something to do, his old mother is sick at home. You can't blame the petty bourgeoisie, only that our commander-in-chief has no soldiers under him, no strength. As long as our commander-in-chief recruits soldiers and buys horses, gathers provisions and fodder, and we have four fingers, that is, four-fifths of the peasants, and other classes, and have strength, then he will come. You call him, he originally had something to do, he will say he doesn't anymore, his old mother is not sick anymore. In the past, we made mistakes, forgot the leadership, that is, if you want to lead, there must be someone to be led. In the later period of the Great Revolution, the peasants didn't come, the petty bourgeoisie also didn't come, so the landlords concentrated their forces and struck, and friends also struck, a slap of revolution, knocking us to the ground. Later, we got up, became more clear-headed, and engaged in the land revolution. Engaging in the land revolution was right, but then came an acute disease. The acute disease was also not wanting the peasants; they only wanted the workers, wanting to expand the cities, the peasants were incidental. Living in the countryside but not understanding the peasants, viewing the flowers from horseback instead of dismounting to view the flowers and conduct investigation and research. Walked twenty-five thousand li, did not see the flowers (the peasants). What is a middle peasant, a rich peasant? Sorry, don't know. The petty bourgeoisie and other democratic elements were also not wanted, so we again became an "air force commander." Our Party was once large and then became small twice. The first time, fifty thousand members, later less than ten thousand were left; the second time, three hundred thousand, later twenty-five thousand were left. Now it has grown large again, it cannot be made small again. Like a woman's feet, now is the time to unbind them, don't bind them small again. Before the War of Resistance, we were prepared, calling for boldly mobilizing the masses and strengthening the people's forces. The Central Committee has always said that only through people's war can the enemy be defeated. In the one hundred and two years since the existence of Marxism, not a single genuine Marxist in the entire world has ever said that people's war is not needed. The so-called people's war is a war in which the peasants can defeat the enemy. It has never been said that the enemy can be defeated without people's war. (There are various kinds of struggle: political struggle, ideological struggle, economic struggle; the highest form of political struggle is military struggle.) But many comrades, because they do not have much Marxism-Leninism, can forget the peasants at any time, do not want people's struggle. Such people, even if they issue a declaration saying they are Marxists-Leninists, are self-proclaimed, they are sham Marxists. Some people think that by relying on the Kuomintang, Japan can be defeated; this shows a lack of Marxism. There are quite a few such people in the Party. The Party Congress in May 1937, the Luochuan Meeting in August, and the meeting of activists in November all approved the political line of the Central Committee, and affirmed such a political line, which is to boldly mobilize the masses. The Central Committee not believing that the people can defeat Japan and liberate China is, at the very least, a temporary loss of Marxism. To believe is not to lose Marxism. A temporary loss of Marxism can still be "recalled," this spot (Marxism-Leninism) can be recalled. Not believing that Japan can be defeated without the broad masses of the people, to pose the question this way is not to lower the proletariat to the level of the bourgeoisie, but to raise the bourgeoisie to the level of the proletariat. The meaning of this sentence is whether to raise the program of the bourgeoisie to the program of the proletariat, or to lower the program of the proletariat to the program of the bourgeoisie. The question is whether the proletariat attracts the bourgeoisie, or the bourgeoisie attracts the proletariat. This way of putting it has been rebuked by others, saying it is not Marxism. This way of putting it is to contend for leadership; why is it not Marxism? The bourgeoisie always thinks it is right. We should propagandize to the broad masses of the peasants, calling on the peasants and the petty bourgeoisie to unite; only by uniting can Japan be defeated, can victory be achieved. Only by saying this can one be a propagandist of the Communist Party. These two sentences are not complicated: to tell the people to unite, to organize the people's army, the people's party, the people's government; to reform the Kuomintang, to reform its army, to reform its government, it won't do without reform. Relying on the Chinese people, democratic elements, and international forces, we estimated that the Kuomintang could be reformed. The result was that the Kuomintang came to reform us; an error was made in the estimation. But there was also a benefit, no money was lost. We wanted it to reform, we said this every day, the common people all know that the Kuomintang's face is very dirty, they know it should wash its face. Can the Kuomintang be reformed? It should be said there are two possibilities: it can be reformed, it cannot be reformed. By developing the progressive forces, winning over the middle forces, and isolating the die-hard forces, with these conditions, reform is possible. We Communists want Jiang Jieshi to reform, to wash his face. He says he won't wash, says "I am very clean! Very handsome!" The common people say he should wash his face! At a big meeting in Xi'an, they shouted "Long live Jiang Jieshi!" The common people said "The sooner you pay grain and taxes, the better!" The common people know he needs to wash his face, this is a victory. Up to this day, we are still asking him to wash his face, not a policy of cutting off his head, but asking him to revise his erroneous policies. The older a person gets, the more unwilling he is to wash his face. The possibility of washing is small; it is possible he might wipe it a little to put on a show, or perhaps not even wipe it at all, and contend with us for leadership. The ones dragging China into darkness are the Kuomintang reactionary clique, the representatives of the big landlords, big bankers, and big compradors. This issue was made clear at the Sixth Plenary Session. Some comrades did not demand that the Kuomintang wash its face, thinking the Kuomintang was very handsome, and put forward the slogan of supporting the Kuomintang and the National Government, helping the Kuomintang at all times, in all matters, and everywhere. The Sixth Plenary Session corrected these. At first, it was thought that the Kuomintang was very handsome, then came the "Measures for Restricting Alien Parties," launching the first anti-communist high tide, revealing the true face of the Kuomintang, and our comrades became awakened. In 1941, with two anti-communist high tides, people demanded the dissolution of the Communist Party. Thus, everyone's illusions about the Kuomintang were largely dispelled. In the minds of the broad comrades, a new picture unfolded. Only then did they understand that defeating Japan did not depend on the Kuomintang, but on boldly mobilizing the masses and strengthening the people's forces. This shows that to get rid of an erroneous idea, just talking is not enough; it must be done through experience. We invited two volunteer teachers, Japanese fascism and the Chairman, who required no salary; they taught many of our comrades well. After the Sixth Plenary Session, we resolutely implemented our leadership over the peasants, petty bourgeoisie, and landlords, thus developing our Party, army, and political power. For example, the liberated areas smashed countless enemy attacks (mopping-up operations). Since last year, we have shifted to the offensive, with offense as the main thing and defense as secondary, repelling the Kuomintang's three anti-communist high tides and countless attacks (friction). Consequently, the Kuomintang's influence has declined and its power has shrunk. The Chairman also invited a teacher, Okamura Yasuji; this teacher threw a lot of cold water on him. But we should still not underestimate the influence and power of the Kuomintang. The Kuomintang still has influence among the masses now; to get rid of it will still take many years. The Kuomintang has a history of fifty years, fifty years of influence. We have only twenty-five years; if our influence does not come, its influence will not go. So it is said that its influence has only declined, not disappeared. Its power is still great, it still has a population of two hundred million, an army of one and a half million. It has international status, we do not. So it is said that its power has only shrunk, not disappeared. But because during the War of Resistance, we implemented a correct line of boldly mobilizing the masses, we became the center of gravity for resisting Japan and saving the nation. The broad masses of the people all look to us with hope, while placing the Kuomintang in a position of declining influence and shrinking power. It has now been completely proven that only such a line is the correct line. Striving for leadership, striving for independence and autonomy, reflects the demands of the people of the whole country, reflects the demands of the majority of comrades in the whole Party. This line has grown out of the soil of China; it is the line of the popular masses against imperialism and feudalism led by the Communist Party. It is clearer now than before, not like it was before. Until the three anti-communist high tides, some comrades still did not believe in this line. Has this kind of thinking now been completely eliminated? There are all kinds of opinions within the Party; this correct line is not completely understood by everyone, not every comrade is "long live Marxism." We have people from one year old to ninety-nine years old, and also some who are ten thousand years old, but not many. They do not believe in this line, they abandon leadership, abandon independence and autonomy, abandon the policy of both unity and struggle. The position on war is temporary, partial, and self-defensive, that is, on just grounds, to our advantage, and with restraint; this is beneficial to unity. Why doesn't the Kuomintang dare to break with us? For the San Francisco Conference, we wanted to send people, Jiang said no, we said we would go, Jiang said no, in the end we went. Our representatives have already arrived in Washington. Power is fought for, not given by others. Someone said our philosophy is a philosophy of struggle (Huan Bao Geng), he was right. I say theirs is also a philosophy of struggle; the proletarian philosophy of struggle is still behind theirs. To talk of unity without struggle, or to struggle inappropriately, without vigor, this is the weakness of the petty bourgeoisie. There is a Zhang Naiqi, he told Bao Laiyuan that he had made mistakes. In a speech, I criticized Zhang Naiqi-ism's "more construction, fewer calls to action." Not asking Jiang to wash his face is a manifestation of the weakness of the liberal bourgeoisie. His theory has been defeated by us; he doesn't shout "long live" that much anymore, because "long live" doesn't want him. He is a bit like a talented scholar who meets with no success. But he won't suddenly turn around and shout "long live the Communist Party." This kind of liberal bourgeoisie will still use other weaknesses to influence the Communist Party, and will purposefully send us some soft, Lin Daiyu-like fragrances to sell. The rose is very beautiful, but it has some thorns. Our Liberation Daily releases this fragrance every day. They like Jia Baoyu, not Tanchun. The trouble is still to come. Revolution is trouble; if you're afraid of trouble, you should hurry up and report to Jia Yu. The will of our Party has become stronger, so as not to be submerged by them.
- Summary of the above issues:

(1) What about the peasants? For twenty-five years, especially the last eight years, the peasants have very much welcomed our policies. But as the leading ideology of the Party, we must draw a clear line with the peasants, not identify with the peasants. Comrades of peasant origin do not easily distinguish this issue. Class origin and joining the Party are different, they are two different things. Origin is peasant, joining the Party makes one a Party member. A Party member is a vanguard of the proletariat, must draw a clear line with the peasants, must raise the peasants a step, raise them to the level of the proletariat. In the future, we must also raise non-Party personages to the level of Marxism. Of course, this is a matter of several decades later. But not to believe in this is not to be a Marxist.

(2) What about the petty bourgeoisie? Petty-bourgeois intellectuals (whether inside or outside the Party) have a dual nature: revolutionary and vacillating. The vacillating nature can be corrected by educational methods; the rectification movement is proof. For example, the method of the forum on literature and art, where the Party puts forward a policy to educate them (not to command them), they can be reformed. The same is true for those outside the Party. We have vast liberated areas, we have powerful forces; by carrying out appropriate propaganda and education among them, we can influence and stabilize them.

(3) The liberal bourgeoisie: At present, they are our allies, but they have greater vacillation. They want democracy, which is something we have in common, so they are our allies. Under our firm influence, their vacillation can be neutralized, and they can even be made to follow us.

(4) The big landlords, big bankers, big comprador class are the representatives of the Kuomintang reactionary clique, they are the reactionaries. During the War of Resistance, they contended with us for leadership; they are a most vicious enemy in the anti-Japanese camp. They want to drag China into a dark, old-style China; they are the object of our long-term struggle. They want to place the three hundred and sixty million peasants under their influence to squeeze oil from them.
(5) Foreign countries: The Soviet Union is no problem. With other foreign countries, it is also both unity and struggle. If a Churchill appears, it won't do. There are still powerful reactionary forces abroad. The report mentioned that the unity of the three countries is dominant, the main thing. The report says little about the dark side, but we must be vigilant against them; they flatter the Chairman, sometimes acting like celestial officials bestowing blessings.
The above is called "The Situation and the Line."
II. Several Questions Concerning Policy
(1) Are the general program and the specific program divided this time? No, they have been divided before, but not in the same way as this time. For example, the pamphlet "On New Democracy" wrote about the general program, but not the specific program. The Ten-Point Program of the Sixth Congress, the Ten-Point Program for Resisting Japan and Saving the Nation, and the administrative programs promulgated by various base areas are all specific programs of the same nature with minor differences in articles. More specific ones, like the marriage law, the land policy appendix, etc., are all specific programs. New Democracy is the general program. There is a name and there are items; the specific program is the "items."
(2) Regarding Sun Zhongshan. Many of his good words are quoted, his good points are held onto tightly, not to be let go even in death; after we die, our sons must still hold on. But there is also a distinction: our New Democracy is much more progressive and much more complete than Sun Zhongshan's. A large part of the members in our Party are not too fond of Sun Zhongshan, for reasons unknown. This still shows a lack of consciousness, still maintaining the style of the civil war period. During the civil war, the Kuomintang used Sun Zhongshan against us; it was excusable not to want him. At the same time, our strength was still small then, so it didn't matter if we didn't want him. The situation now is different from the civil war period. Now our Party is large, and our strength is also great; it is beneficial to have him. In the future, the greater our strength, the more beneficial it will be to have him. The Soviet Union did not want religion before, now it wants it too. When strength is great, it doesn't matter to have it; the Soviet Union did not actively eliminate religion in the past either. We should have a clear head and use this banner of Sun Zhongshan. The greater our strength, the more beneficial it is to use it.

(3) Regarding capitalism. I have elaborated on this in the report, that is, to affirm this thing relatively fully. What is good about this? What we affirm is capitalism that does not control the national economy and the people's livelihood. A comrade once said: "We should propose the confiscation of the property of the big landlords, big bankers, and big compradors." At that time, after some consideration, it was better to quote Sun Zhongshan's words in the general program and not to mention it in the specific program. The general program says that the existence of an economy that does not manipulate the national economy and the people's livelihood is permitted; in reality, this means that what manipulates the national economy and the people's livelihood is to be confiscated. Apart from the state-run economy and the cooperative economy, to affirm the extensive development of private capitalism is only beneficial and not harmful. To confiscate now means to confiscate the property of Jiang, Song, Kong, and Chen. You say it wasn't said, but it was said, and it was Sun Zhongshan who said it. The general bourgeoisie now is not yet the object of struggle. The so-called general bourgeoisie is the petty bourgeoisie, the special bourgeoisie, that is, the bourgeoisie that does not manipulate the national economy and the people's livelihood. Europe wants to confiscate all of these. The property of traitors is to be confiscated. There is a populist ideology in the Party, that is, to go directly from a feudal economy to a socialist economy, without going through capitalism. The Russian Populists, the "Socialist-Revolutionary Party," later all became counter-revolutionaries. The Bolsheviks, on the contrary, affirmed that Russia had to go through capitalism. This is more beneficial to the proletariat than to the bourgeoisie. After the October Revolution, the economy of the middle and small bourgeoisie and the rich peasants, a part (a very large part), was still allowed to exist. Our comrades are very impatient; seeing others engage in socialism, we also want to engage in it. After the October Revolution, it was not until the second five-year plan that they eliminated the rich peasants. Before that, the grain supply mainly came from the rich peasants.
(4) Communism. It was mentioned in the report, but not emphasized. The communist program, that is, to confiscate private property and eliminate classes. Writing this down has only one benefit, which is to educate Party members. Many Party members do not know what communism is; when the landlord's land is divided among the peasants, they call it communism. It is better not to mention it here.

Some people advise us to change our name. They say: "Sir's ambition is great, but sir's name is not." Many people say it's just this name that is not good; if the name were changed, I would be willing to join. The United States also advises us to change our name.

What name should we change to? The Kuomintang? The Conservative Party? Forman wrote a book called "Red China," saying the red star shines over China. No matter what name you change to, he will still call you the Red Party. Anything that is red will be hung on our net. The common people, afraid their sons won't grow up, give them names like Gou'er (doggy), Tie'er (irony). Should we do the same? A reporter, Mr. Epstein, said we are a "moderate democratic centralism." He is a bourgeois liberal, and he even calls us moderate! This name is very good, this name should not be changed. The common people love it very much. The common people in Jiangxi calling us the "Gongchan Dang" (Sharing Property Party) is also good.

(5) There is sharp criticism of the Kuomintang, but it is objective, not exceeding the reality. If it has a good point, it is also hung on its account, but unfortunately its good deeds are too few. The sharp criticism leaves room for maneuver, for cooperation, for negotiation, and there are no words like "overthrow the Chairman," not even the words "the Chairman." Among the dead, only Sun Zhongshan and Roosevelt are mentioned; it is better to mention the living less. Among the reactionaries, only Hitler is mentioned; among the revolutionaries, Stalin is mentioned. Leaving room for maneuver can lead to fewer mistakes. If we were to overthrow Jiang Jieshi, we would make a mistake. They have provoked us several times to overthrow the Kuomintang, but we do not overthrow it. We still say: "You wash your face, we will get married, our love is very deep." But the self-defense position must be maintained. If he attacks me, I must counter-attack, I must respond to his attack. Whether civil or martial, especially martial, we must respond, be resolute, swift, thorough, and completely annihilate them. We must annihilate them cleanly. I told the liaison officer that our policy is: "not to be the first under heaven," not to fire the first shot, as Laozi said; second is to "retreat three she," from the Zuo Zhuan; third is what the "Book of Rites" says: "Propriety values reciprocity. To go and not to receive in return is against propriety; to receive and not to go in return is also against propriety." "We will not attack unless we are attacked; if we are attacked, we will certainly counter-attack." This was the policy in the past, and it is still the policy now. As long as I have a gun in my hand, I will fight to the end. You fired ninety-nine shots at me, fine, splendid, but I will also fire one. There was an old story about the Foolish Old Man who moved the mountains; he wouldn't believe it until he moved them. The reactionaries in the world will not go away unless they are overthrown. If we can't finish the fight in our lifetime, we will hand it over to our sons to fight. We will not stop until the counter-revolutionaries in the world are wiped out. But it is a self-defense position, this is called being on just grounds. Some comrades, when their spirits are high, forget this point. That's not right. A temporary, self-defensive policy; to violate this policy is to make a mistake. Be prepared for the Kuomintang to make trouble, it will be for a long time. Win over the old armies, use the old officers, reform the old armies. This matter must be propagandized throughout the Party, it cannot be treated simply, there must be a policy. The only ones who cannot be reformed are those reactionaries; a considerable number of old officers can be reformed. We have made mistakes on this issue in the past. In a semi-colonial country like China, many old officers are looking for a living, to get promoted and get rich. When our strength is great, we are not afraid of them rebelling. One must not have the heart to harm others, but one must not be without the heart to guard against others. But we must take a longer view, we must win over the nine million old troops. When doing this, we must be serious and vigilant. With this "-ness," we need not fear hidden special agents or open rebellion. Rebellion? Haven't they been rebelling for many years? Want to leave? Hold a farewell party, give them travel expenses. He wasn't here before, now he's gone, isn't it the same? We have no loss, we lost some millet, some legal tender, but the political victory is very great. If he leaves and wants to come back someday, he can come back. We must win over the progressive ones, and give them appropriate help. "Appropriate" means not too much, not too little. In the past, we had two extremes: "disarm all" and "help all," helping without principle, which was a disservice. We must carry out a two-line struggle, opposing both "Left" and "Right." For the progressive old armies and old officers who have connections with the people, we must give appropriate help, reform them, and educate them.

(7) Our army. The Eighth Route Army, the New Fourth Army, the Red Guards, the Shanxi New Army, are all united fronts, alliances, both internally and externally. Was there an alliance between Party and non-Party members during the civil war period? Yes. We also called it the Party's army. The so-called Party's army means it is under the Party's leadership, not that it does not cooperate with non-Party personages. Within our army, Party members only account for a minority (one-third), the majority are non-Party personages (peasants, intellectuals). Now our army belongs to the popular masses, is owned by the popular masses and serves the popular masses, that is, of the people, by the people, for the people, and also has the leadership of the Communist Party. If someone asks: "What is the nature of your army?" The simple answer is: "An army of the popular masses against imperialism and feudalism led by the proletariat." Don't say every day: "I lead you, I lead you." It makes people dislike it. How to lead is to lead through policy, action, and work. As long as people follow us, even if you don't say it, you are leading. Leadership must be grasped, but it is not by chanting it like a sutra every day that leadership can be grasped. In Shandong now there are three puppet armies, which were not originally Marxist. Now we say we should straighten out their thinking, they are very happy, and have become the Eighth Route Army. This is cooperation outside the army. Cooperation inside the army: if there is food, everyone eats; if there is a battle, everyone fights; no pay, we do it ourselves, ample food and clothing, the Three Main Rules of Discipline, the Eight Points for Attention. This is also a two-line struggle. Those who are resolutely anti-communist and counter-revolutionary will not do. As long as they approve of democracy, are willing to come, approve of our propositions, and join our army, we welcome them all. Jiang Taigong fishing, those who are willing will take the bait; the position is very clear.

(8) Expand the liberated areas. Attack all places that can possibly be taken. We must also guard against enemy attacks. Originally, it was defensive; at the beginning of the War of Resistance, we were on the offensive within the defense. In 1941 and 1942, we shrank; in 1942 and 1943, we expanded again. So now two things are stipulated: first, attack; second, defend. Expand and develop, concentrating small work teams, and six large corps. The policy of attacking is because the situation has changed. The enemy is now too busy to take care of himself, while our strength has greatly increased. If we concentrate our forces to attack him, he will have very little strength to attack us. Is this adventurism? No, we talk about attacking places that can "possibly" be taken, and we also talk about consolidation, so it is not adventurism.

With another year of offensive, we will gradually shift from dispersed guerrilla warfare to regular warfare as the main form.

At the beginning of the War of Resistance, the enemy was Japan, the friendly army was the former enemy—the Kuomintang, and we were a little finger, with only thirty thousand men (in 1936), and not many when we set out in 1937. The task at this time was to add a finger, then another finger—to grow up. Everyone agreed. How to grow? Sparrow warfare, guerrilla warfare. The Sixth Plenary Session gave eighteen reasons. Go wherever there are sparrows to eat, fly all over the sky. It's beneficial to state eighteen reasons; would it be okay if you had one less! We should engage in sparrow warfare. The Japanese and the Kuomintang can do nothing about us. They provoke us to fight big battles, "national heroes!" Is sparrow warfare opportunism? No one wants to be an opportunist, but wants to be a national hero. Sparrow warfare is a bit opportunistic. Now that we have concentrated to 910,000, is that a sparrow? Forever a sparrow, long live the sparrow! No! Our sparrow has grown into a wild pheasant. In the books, there is a great roc that flies from the northern ocean to the southern ocean; with one flap of its wings, it can cross all of China. We must turn the little sparrow into a big sparrow.

At the beginning of the War of Resistance, you held the lines, I held the areas. We also had to find food; we had to disperse to find food. To survive, we had to disperse. During the civil war period, we engaged in a regular army, forgetting that people need to eat, roads need to be walked, and bullets can kill people. No production, after eating for a