I will address three topics: the international situation, the domestic situation, and certain issues of ideology and policy.

Our policy is to boldly mobilize the masses, expand the people’s forces, and, under the leadership of our Party, defeat the Japanese aggressors and their lackeys, and build a new China of New Democracy.

Within this policy, to boldly mobilize the masses and expand the people’s forces means to organize our ranks; under the leadership of our Party means the commander-in-chief, the commanding officer; to defeat the Japanese aggressors and their lackeys refers to the enemy; and to build a new China refers to the objective.

On the question of boldly mobilizing the masses, the hands are our own, whether to let go or not is up to us—who is stopping us from letting go?

There are many people, and among them is Chiang Kai-shek.

The thirty-point political program adopted at the last congress of the Kuomintang included one point: absolutely prohibiting any actions that violate government laws and decrees, or that undermine unification in diplomacy, military affairs, finance, transportation, and currency.

For instance, military unification means we must not have the Eighth Route Army or the New Fourth Army.

This struggle began long ago.

The Zhongshan Gunboat Incident on March 20, 1926, was meant to prevent us from boldly mobilizing the masses. Chiang Kai-shek would not allow it, Wang Jingwei would not allow it, and we ourselves did not dare to let go.

At that time, we should have boldly let go, but we did not dare to, so we failed.

During the civil war period, we did let go, but we went a bit too far, failing to distinguish it from adventurism.

During the War of Resistance, this line has been followed, and this congress is simply reaffirming this line, drawing on many years of past experience.

Letting go must be under conditions of being justified, advantageous, and restrained—not adventurism.

Being justified, advantageous, and restrained is letting go, not adventurism.

This policy will not change until victory is won nationwide.

The pressure is immense. It is not easy to free the vanguard of the proletariat from the spiritual oppression that binds them hand and foot—this has always been the case historically.

The First International consistently did not dare to boldly mobilize the masses.

The Communist Manifesto by Marx and Engels from 1847 to 1848 set forth the policy of boldly mobilizing the masses.

The First International violated this policy, worshipping the theory of spontaneity and letting everything take its own course.

The Communist International and the Russian Bolsheviks revived Marxism, boldly mobilized the masses, expanded the people’s forces, and, under the leadership of the Russian Party (the "United Communist Party"), defeated the Russian Czar and established a worker-peasant regime.

Therefore, we must propagate and affirm this policy.

As long as classes are not eliminated, this policy of ours will not be abandoned.

Circumstances vary at different stages, and policies may change, but the overall policy will not change.

As for how to implement this policy, that must be decided based on surrounding circumstances and their internal connections.

The first issue is the international situation.

The report states that the five major nations are uniting to lead the world toward progress—this is the general historical trend.

Among the five major nations, the Soviet Union takes the lead.

Is this trend correct?

Will the world regress?

The report also mentions regression, noting that there are still powerful reactionary forces in the world that seek to undermine this progressive trend, and temporary, even severe historical reversals may yet occur.

Because there are still powerful reactionary forces unwilling to witness the strength of the people and the progress of the people, and under such circumstances, another assessment must be made—namely, that a third world war, an anti-Soviet war combining Britain, the United States, and France, could break out immediately. Reports say that some reactionary newspapers are fabricating rumors to instigate an anti-Soviet war between Britain and the United States.

There is also turmoil at the San Francisco Conference, and many people are concerned about it. In recent years, the international situation over the past four or five years has been constantly contradictory—good news, bad news. In the future, it will continue to be sometimes good, sometimes bad, sometimes neither good nor bad, developing in a wave-like pattern.

Why is this so?

Because there are two forces struggling in the world: the Soviet Union and the people of the world on one side, and the reactionary forces on the other.

The world today is a world of contradictions.

But is it possible for Britain and the United States to immediately join forces with Japanese and German prisoners to organize a reactionary third world war against the people?

It is not possible.

Objective reality does not permit it.

If it existed, it would exist; if it does not, it does not. Precisely because it does not exist, we say it does not. There are two kinds of objective reality—we do not base our views on the objective reality of the reactionaries, but on the objective reality of the Soviet Union and the people.

According to the prisoners, the isolationists, the Munich faction... do they want a third world war?

They do.

According to the Soviet Union and the people of the world, they do not. The danger of an anti-Soviet, anti-people great war does not currently exist.

Within the Anglo-American bourgeoisie, there is a faction of reactionaries that wants it, a faction that does not want it, and another faction that wants it but dares not.

They form a tripartite composition: progressive, reactionary, and middle.

The current British government is not the Chamberlain government, but another faction of the British Conservative Party. British foreign policy may change. The San Francisco Conference may end without results, or it may end with some achievements.

The analysis by Soviet journalists at the San Francisco Conference is very apt: we can only discuss the general trend. There are three possibilities: first, some achievements, but not entirely satisfactory; second, ending without results but without a breakdown—like our negotiations with Chiang Kai-shek, to be continued next time; third, the worst case, a complete breakdown that overturns the Crimea decisions.

This third possibility is unlikely; the first and second possibilities are more likely.

However, even if the third scenario occurs and the Crimea resolutions are overturned, does that mean Britain and the United States will organize the reactionaries and launch a third world war to attack the Soviet Union?

It does not.

As Molotov rightly said at the San Francisco Conference, even if an international security mechanism cannot be established now, it does not mean it cannot be established in the future. We must strive to establish it.

If things do not go well this time, we will try again next time—this also applies to the overall global situation.

We believe in the strength of the Soviet Union, in the strength of the people of the world, and in the fact that within the Anglo-American capitalist class, there is disunity and not all are entirely anti-Soviet—some are still willing to cooperate with the Soviet Union.

We believe in the strength of the people of India, South America, and China.

These circumstances—that is, the current world situation—show that the war is only half over; Japan has not yet been defeated. Looking at all these factors together, even if the San Francisco Conference fails this time, it cannot be said that it will permanently fail.

On the day victory in Europe was declared, Stalin said that Europe had entered a period of peace.

Stalin was right; he spoke based on the overall situation. The Soviet Union has won victory on the international scale.

Lenin once said: "As long as the Bolsheviks maintain correct relations with the peasantry for ten to twenty years, victory on a worldwide scale can be guaranteed—even if the proletarian revolution in developing countries is delayed—otherwise we will suffer the horrors of twenty to forty years of White Guard terror."

This was said in 1921. Comrades, was it ten to twenty years?

When Moscow was in crisis, Stalin said: "Either victory or annihilation."

Now, victory has been achieved.

The Soviet Union's victory began with the battle for Moscow, not only starting from Stalingrad.

Without the victory at Moscow, there would have been no victory at Stalingrad.

Now, the Soviet red flag flies over Berlin.

As Lenin said, "Victory is possible even without a global situation of proletarian revolution."

Lenin's words proved prescient.

The Soviet Union has won victory on the international scale.

Now, efforts to consolidate this victory are the victory of the people of the world and also the victory of the Chinese people.

Capitalism has its own history. Long ago, there was no capitalism in the world. More than two or three hundred years ago, a child called capitalism was born in the world, and another child called the proletariat.

In old Chinese and foreign books, there is no mention of the bourgeoisie, the proletariat, or the Communist Party.

These are all products of modern times.

Capitalism is bound to fight world wars, and during such wars, socialism may achieve victory in a single country alone.

Previously, Marx and Engels said that revolution could only succeed simultaneously in several countries.

But by the 20th century, Lenin, based on new circumstances, defined moribund capitalism and imperialist wars as the eve of socialist revolution. Lenin's words again proved prophetic.

In the past, the world only saw small-scale wars. The large-scale war that engulfed all the major powers and even some minor powers first occurred in 1914. We have witnessed it; the ancients did not—this was their misfortune. Our generation has seen two such wars. From 1914 to 1939, a gap of twenty-five years, we fought the Second World War. The First World War brought forth the October Revolution, causing new changes in the entire history and opening a new era in world history.

From that time on, capitalism fell on hard times and went downhill, while socialism went uphill.

In "On New Democracy," I also stated that capitalism is developing downward and socialism is developing upward.

Then came Hitler, who drove on Moscow, as if socialism was heading downward.

Now, the Red Army has taken Berlin, and socialism is heading upward again.

From that time (the October Revolution), capitalism lost one leg. The remaining capitalism split into two major parts: one became fascist capitalism, the other became "democratic" capitalism.

These two parts of capitalism fought each other. One part, the "democratic" capitalism, cooperated with socialism, and together they squeezed out fascism—squeezing away Germany, and with another squeeze, Japanese fascism will be squeezed away.

Capitalism is like a four-legged horse that has already lost two legs, leaving only two legs—a cripple, an iron crutch, unable to form a complete entity. Capitalism is maimed, having lost a leg and an arm. Trying to walk with a wooden leg—tell me, is this remaining capitalism stronger than before, or weaker?

It is weaker.

We must look at the big things, at the general and mass phenomena. Many comrades often fail to see the big things and only perceive the partial, small things. The October Revolution cut off one of capitalism's arms; the Second World War brought down German and Italian capitalism. The worst elements within Germany collapsed, many minor monarchs also collapsed, and small countries changed, all moving forward—this can be considered another leg cut off. These are all major events.

One must see these major events to avoid mistakes in analysis.

Now, the news agencies and newspapers of the United States and Britain are fixated on minor issues—like the Polish question, the Trieste question, the Austrian question—biting down relentlessly, kicking up an incessant fuss. It seems very strange. Why do they do this?

I say capitalism has a trait: it loses big but calculates small.

It lost an arm in the First World War and lost a leg in the Second World War, yet now it grabs a single hair and refuses to let go, shouting, "This is mine!"

Why cling to a tiny braid?

Britain itself is battered and exhausted from the war. This shows that capitalism is crippled. The Soviet Union and the people of Europe have grown strong. If they don't grab that braid, they have nothing left.

Their capitalism is very small, so they can only cling to the braid, unable to let go—if they let go, they have nothing left to say.

That is our view, but they have their own intentions.

The reactionaries and their counterrevolutionary rhetoric in various countries serve three purposes: first, to obstruct the development of the Soviet Union and the strength of the European people, and in front of the Soviet Union and the European people, to grab a small braid and bargain; second, to mobilize domestic and international reactionary forces—Munichites, the Hull faction, the Hardwick faction, and so on.

Seeing the rise of the Soviet Union and the European people, the Churchill government, needing someone to back it, had to sing tunes that suited the reactionaries in order to rouse the reactionaries to support him and unite those reactionaries as his base; third, to suppress the revolutionary people. Finding himself surrounded by the European people, Churchill had to sing a reactionary tune for a while to suppress the people.

Altogether, three purposes.

From this, we can understand why the arguments at the San Francisco Conference are so fierce.

In the future, there will be similar arguments over Eastern issues.

These arguments are like writing an essay—they are all inherent themes. Because they still have one arm and one leg not yet cut off, they are not reconciled. The arguments are understandable. If everything were like the Soviet Union, there would of course be no trouble at all.

But if there were no trouble at all now, that would be incomprehensible.

In the world's diplomacy today, only the Soviet Union takes the initiative.

Britain, the United States, and China are all passive.

The Polish question, that small braid, will not hold for many days.

The Soviet Union has no trailer, so it is proactive.

Britain and the United States were both passive in fighting this war.

They originally followed the Munich line.

The United States and Britain wanted Hitler to attack the Soviet Union. This hired laborer (Hitler) showed a bit of independence, first striking his bosses and making them howl in pain. It was only then that Britain concluded a twenty-year treaty with the Soviet Union.

Their approach to Japan is the same.

They originally hired workers with money to fight the Soviet Union. Sending money and gasoline to Japan is also a form of paying out money. Japan provoked the Soviet Union every day, taking wages from Britain and the United States. Once it had the wages in hand, Japan did not go fight the Soviet Union but instead attacked Pearl Harbor.

It was only after Pearl Harbor was attacked that the United States entered into an agreement with the Soviet Union.

Capitalism took the initiative in the eighteenth century and still had some left in the second half of the nineteenth century, but by the early twentieth century it had become completely decadent, turning into imperialism and falling into a passive position.

The First World War was fought under compulsion, without a plan.

They did not recognize Yugoslavia, then later they did.

They do not recognize Poland, but in the future they will still have to recognize it.

Now they do not recognize the Liberated Areas, the Eighth Route Army, or the New Fourth Army, but in the future they will recognize them too.

On the 4th, Hurley declared that he did not recognize us. He said the Communist Party asked him for weapons. This account must be settled—let us see who said what.

Even if he wanted to send them, I might not necessarily want them. Japanese capitalism has declined, British capitalism has declined as well, but American capitalism is "on the rise." Its production during the great war saw an unprecedented expansion in its history, surpassing pre-war production by one to two times.

Stettinius said: during the prosperous period from 1911 to 1918, U.S. production was 60 billion dollars; now it is 110 or 120 billion. Some say 180 billion.

Stettinius said it is between 150 billion and 110 or 120 billion, and after the war, it intends to maintain a production level of 150 billion. This is an increase of 90 billion compared to before the war. Now it is probably more than 100 billion. It has made such a huge fortune. Therefore, it is correct to say that American capitalism is "on the rise."

But to use this point to assert that American capitalism will last "ten thousand years," to say it will continuously rise—if one says that, then there would be no Marxism left in the world.

It will not happen. America's current "prosperity" has a special character; this special "prosperity" is a flash in the pan before death.

The crisis in the United States will arrive very soon.

After the First World War, within ten years, a great crisis occurred. At that time, President Hoover boasted about America's organized capitalism (Bukharin also said the same), claiming no crisis would occur.

Less than three weeks after speaking, the crisis came.

In 1933 (the year Hitler came to power), Roosevelt took office and served as president for 11 years, implementing the New Deal, which made capitalism "prosperous" again, but this was mainly wartime "prosperity."

Previously, production was 60 billion; now it is 150 billion to 110 or 120 billion. If there are ten million soldiers on the front lines and 11 or 12 million munitions workers, when they return, how will their livelihoods and positions be resolved?

The United States has a total population of 130 million, including 60 million workers—one in every [so many] people is a worker. It is certain to say that maintaining wartime production of 150 billion to 110 or 120 billion after the war is impossible. With this population of 60 million, let me see how it resolves the problem.

Therefore, its crisis will arrive very soon.

How soon? It will not wait ten years.

Economically speaking, the United States is the world's Himalayas, but this mountain is going to collapse. According to the Marxist viewpoint, this is how we should see it. In the final analysis, the American crisis cannot be overcome by capitalism; it must be overcome by the proletariat.

Churchill is surrounded by the British people. Can Churchill win this British general election?

Even if Churchill wins, he lacks domestic support for war and there are strong forces restraining him. After defeating Japan, the domestic front in the United States will also crack. The Communist Political Association of America should have this mental preparedness. Even if this San Francisco Conference fails to achieve anything, another San Francisco Conference will still come, because the world situation demands it.

Churchill's difficulties are enormous. The British people are holding him back, the Indian people are holding him back, the European people detest him, and the American capitalists are still eyeing the purse at his waist.

Regarding the establishment of an anti-Soviet cordon sanitaire, the British Conservative Party indeed has such an intention.

Previously, it was composed of countries like Poland and Romania, but that wall has now been broken down by the Soviet Union.

Let him try that again, and he would be going back to Chamberlain's ways. But this is no longer that era. Hitler has fallen, the Soviet Union has grown powerful, the European people have awakened, the British people have awakened...

To summarize: after the First World War, the stability of capitalism no longer exists. Crisis has always existed historically, like menstruation—the menstruation of the bourgeoisie.

After the October Revolution, it is called the general crisis. The general crisis means it is the same everywhere, always like that. After a major crisis comes a minor crisis. This time the United States has special "prosperity," but afterward, it will not be stable either.

Crisis is contained within it. Among the eight great powers, who is the leader? The Soviet Union or the United States?

Some say the United States is the leader. This statement is wrong. Economically, you can say that, but besides economics, there is politics. It is the combination of politics and economics that makes someone stronger, and that is the Soviet Union.

Economically, the Soviet Union's strength is inferior to that of the United States, but the Soviet Union has a socialist economy, which generates incomparably great power, producing a powerful Red Army and a heroic people. The Soviet Union is the leader of the people of the whole world.

Thus, the people of Britain, the United States, and all countries hold the Soviet Union in very high esteem. China is also developing capitalism. What is the nature of China's capitalism?

As mentioned before, there is reactionary fascist capitalism and there is democratic capitalism.

Reactionary fascist capitalism has already been crushed.

Democratic capitalism is somewhat more progressive than fascist capitalism, but it still oppresses the colonies and oppresses its own people; it is still imperialism. On one hand, it fights Germany; on the other hand, it oppresses the people. Fighting fascism is good; oppressing the people is not good. During the fight against fascism, we tolerate some of its oppression and do not raise the slogan of overthrowing Chiang Kai-shek.

Chiang Kai-shek represents semi-fascist, semi-feudal capitalism. Ours is New Democratic capitalism. This kind of capitalism has its vitality and still possesses a revolutionary character.

One part of capitalism still has a role during the anti-fascist period; another part is New Democratic capitalism, which will still be useful in the future. In China and in the countries of Europe and South America, it will still be useful. Its nature is to help socialism; it is revolutionary, useful, and conducive to the development of socialism.

In general, capitalism is declining, while capitalism in agricultural countries is rising unevenly.

Regarding the question of whether victory can be achieved alone: the view that victory can be achieved alone is incorrect. When Lenin spoke of achieving victory alone, he meant that under certain conditions, victory can be achieved—like the October Revolution and repelling the intervention of fourteen nations, which succeeded only by exploiting contradictions and receiving help from the proletariat of various countries.

Can China achieve victory without foreign aid? China relies on self-reliance while striving for foreign aid; it was never said that foreign aid is unnecessary. Otherwise, the phrase from the *Communist Manifesto*—"Workers of the world, unite!"—could be crossed out.

We do not propose doing that. We still need to conduct diplomatic work. The Chinese revolution must have the help of the proletariat of the whole world.

First question: the domestic situation. As stated above, the Chinese revolution cannot achieve victory alone; it requires conducting liaison work with foreign countries.

Comrade Dong [Bi Wu] went to San Francisco this time to do this work, and we will continue to do this work in the future. Our diplomatic principles have already been set; we must act according to them.

China is a semi-colonial country.

Now it is a country oppressed by Japan. In the future, under Kuomintang rule, it will still be a semi-colony; independence can only be in form. China is not a small country; it is a large country with a population of 450 million. Therefore, many people want to scheme against it.

The Japanese want to squeeze the wealth from the Chinese people.

The United States helps Chiang Kai-shek with the intention of controlling China. Troubles still lie ahead. Without the help of the British, American, and Soviet proletariat, China cannot achieve victory. The little finger is invisible to others; the middle finger is visible, right? In the future, it will become a thumb, and then a fist—one fist, two fists. Will they be visible then?

Who recognized the Soviet Union at the beginning? In 1933, the United States restored relations with it. Now, almost all countries in the world have diplomatic relations with it. Human effort is the deciding factor.

The unity of the international proletariat is necessary; without international unity, it will not work. The joint action of the international proletariat is an essential condition for proletarian liberation.

In two to three years, China's situation will undergo great changes. We must be prepared for this. Now there have been three congresses: the Democratic League Congress last September, the Kuomintang's Sixth Congress currently, and our Seventh Congress.

The three congresses have one thing in common, i.e., fighting Japan. What differs is that the Kuomintang's nature is fascist.

You can read the articles in the *Liberation Daily* yesterday and today criticizing the Kuomintang Congress. The characteristic of the last Kuomintang Congress was: whatever was said was deemed revolutionary. Central Committee members had to swear an oath to obey President Chiang Kai-shek and obey President Chiang's orders. No bourgeois party anywhere in the world has such a rule.

Another point: they are forbidden to join any other political groups. We do not have the freedom to join the Party, but we have the freedom to leave it. When someone leaves, we may try to persuade them to stay, but the freedom remains theirs. If a Party member joins a counter-revolutionary group, that falls under the jurisdiction of the security department.

Now the Kuomintang wants its party members to swear an oath not to join any other political party. This shows that the Kuomintang has become even weaker.

They are very afraid of members joining other political groups, especially afraid that Sun Ke might form something. However, swearing oaths now is of little use.

When Sun Yat-sen established the Xing Zhong Hui, he had his thumbprint and palm print taken by others. Now Chiang wants to force oath-swearing. When a party falls to relying on oaths to maintain itself, one can well imagine its fate.

They do not rely on ideological enlightenment but on oath-swearing.

The nature of the Kuomintang Congress is just as we have described; there has been no change. It does not want to reduce rent and interest; instead, it speaks of "land to the tiller." The Kuomintang is fascist; the Democratic League represents old democracy; we represent New Democracy.

There are also old democrats within the Kuomintang.

The Democratic League can be a united front partner. Someone asked: Should we help the Democratic League develop? I think it depends on the specific circumstances.

In the Great Rear Area, we can help. In our own areas, there is no need; they will not come here, because we need to engage in production and eat millet, which they cannot endure. In the future, when we go to big cities, the situation will be different again.

Someone asked: What influence did the report "On Coalition Government" have after it was distributed? We say it had great influence. Thirty thousand copies were distributed in the Great Rear Area.

Some people who received it stayed up all night reading it until they finished. The Kuomintang reactionaries disliked it, calling it the greatest disgrace in history. Chen Bulei read it and said it contained only two words: "civil war." Many delegates attending the Kuomintang's Sixth National Congress, however, said after reading it that the Communist Party spoke logically and had solutions. Their congress was originally scheduled to end in ten days, but after our report was issued, it disrupted them, and they extended it for several more days.

Their congress declaration had already been drafted, but they then had to draft it anew, which is the one published now. Some of their content was influenced by us.

For example, on the minority nationalities issue, they had no choice but to discuss the problem of inequality among China's nationalities. We proposed reducing rent and interest, and they came up with many articles on peasant land policy. All these reflect our ideas while still opposing us.

In the future, China may become a semi-colony ruled by the Kuomintang with the United States playing the dominant role. Before the War of Resistance, China was a semi-colony ruled by several imperialist powers. During the War of Resistance, the Kuomintang relied on the United States, and China may become a semi-colony where the United States holds sway, with one foot planted there.

This will be a long-term trouble. We must prepare well, be ready for this change to occur. The downfall of Japan is another change. Some comrades hope I will talk about difficulties and bright prospects.

There is much brightness, but we must also prepare for difficulties. For example: 1. Foreign scolding. Someone has demonstrated against us. I said: we eat millet, you eat bread; you have the energy. Since your mouths are on your bodies, if you scold us, there's nothing I can do. Prepare to be scolded.

2. Domestic scolding. Prepare for the Kuomintang to scold us loudly—with claims like "sabotaging the War of Resistance," "endangering the nation," "killing people and committing arson." 3. Having several tens of thousands of our troops wiped out by them. Since 1941, this has essentially happened. We talked about preparing to be reduced by half, but later it didn't happen. I simply do not prepare to be right on this point; I prepare for the worst-case scenario. At that time, we had 500,000 troops. If we lost 125,000, we would still have 125,000 left, lean and strong.

Prepare to suffer heavy losses. Prepare that when we develop to 1.5 million people in the future, we might lose one-third and still have one million; even if we lose half, we would still have 750,000. Having such preparations makes it easier to handle matters.

4. Having several large areas seized by them. They want to start a civil war—Scobie plus Chiang Kai-shek.

They want to "recover lost territory." If we talk about territory, they plant mines; they still want to occupy these large areas. During the civil war period, they once occupied several large areas.

5. Puppet troops welcoming Chiang Kai-shek. The puppet troops will instantly change their allegiance and become Chiang Kai-shek's puppet troops, shouting "Long live Yan Xishan," while Yan shouts "Long live the puppet troops, nine thousand years!"

6. The outbreak of civil war. We must use all methods to prevent civil war and expose it. The longer civil war is postponed, the better.

Our policy towards Chiang Kai-shek over the past eight years has been to make it impossible for him to surrender and also impossible for him to suppress the Communists.

The Japanese are about to leave, and Yan Xishan will take over.

Seven, if Scobie emerges in Greece—Greece has a population of six million, while China's population is seventy times that of Greece—we must use every method to avoid the appearance of a Scobie. Should it happen by any chance, we must act with reason, advantage, and restraint: first, as Laozi said, "Do not take the lead under Heaven"; second, as the Zuo Zhuan says, "Retreat three stages"; third, as the Book of Rites says, "Courtesy demands reciprocity."

Eight, we do not recognize Poland. Right now, the middle finger does not recognize it. In the future, two thumbs, one fist, two fists—we’ll see whether you recognize it or not. You don’t recognize it for one year, two years, a hundred years. I give the order; the orders will be given in the future. Giving them too early is useless.

Nine, tens of thousands of Party members have run off and scattered.

When the situation is bad, some people may think: "I didn’t foresee this move back then."

And so they turn around and run away.

The most severe scattering happened in 1911–1917, and there was also a great deal of scattering during the civil war period. In the end, at most, only a few tens of thousands remained. We have experienced two great scatterings. This time, we are prepared to lose one-third. When Lu Zhishen raised havoc on Mount Wutai, the monks scattered. We are Communists. Ten, pessimism and despair, fatigue of spirit—the revolution has not succeeded in fourteen years.

The army has been lost, some Party members have scattered. Could such a situation happen?

Do not conceal the problems!

Leading organs, from the central to the local level, must speak clearly.

If you cannot sleep for three days, on the fourth day you will fall asleep. In the past, there was a habit within our Party: we never spoke of darkness, always said the enemy was utterly collapsing, that we were achieving great victories, that we were one hundred percent Bolshevik.

Now speak of difficulties—at worst, it is only darkness. If we fully assess all aspects and have full self-confidence, then darkness ceases to be darkness...

Eleven, natural disasters spread, leaving the land barren for a thousand miles.

Recent reports indicate that North and Central China are suffering from drought. Sages like Mencius said: "Hardship and distress are what bring you to completion." When famine struck the Taihang Mountains, they exterminated locusts and mitigated the disaster—there are ways. This provides the Communist Party with an opportunity to temper itself. Within bad things, there are good elements. We must prepare for the spread of natural disasters and land barren for a thousand miles, utterly desolate. The skill of the Communists lies precisely in opening a path to survival under such severe conditions.

(Eleven) Economic difficulties—worse with natural disasters, but also difficult without them. Within two or three years, we must learn to do economic work. Leading officials must take responsibility and personally engage in overcoming difficulties. Thirteen, some comrades ask: What is to be done if the enemy withdraws from South China, Central China, and North China?

Right now, we are fighting the fascists, contending for every inch of territory; they will not retreat. Even if they do retreat, the Kuomintang will then arrive. I think the enemy on the Xiang-Gui Road may not necessarily retreat. Even if they all retreat to North China, must we then cry out in despair? But we must prepare for their withdrawal to North China.

The overall situation is that Japan will collapse next year. If a scenario of peace and compromise emerges, what then? We must prepare ideas and means to deal with it.

Fourteen, the Kuomintang is carrying out assassination plots. We must prepare for what to do should this happen. If one dies, another comes; we must be prepared for everything.

Fifteen, differences of opinion and divergent views arise within leading organs of the Party.

Do not assume it will not happen. With preparation, it may occur less frequently.

If the aforementioned difficulties arise, differences of opinion and divergent views may emerge, with no consensus in sight. Dissatisfaction, various opinions, and so on. Sixteen, the proletariat of foreign countries and the Soviet Union do not aid us for a long time, because they have not yet had the opportunity to aid us. When our difficulties arise, distant water cannot quench a nearby fire. Though we engage in diplomatic work in hopes of aid, especially from the great Soviet Union, if aid is not forthcoming for a long time, we must be prepared. It is not that they do not wish to aid us, but that circumstances do not permit. The proletariat of other nations has not yet risen, and the Soviet Union’s circumstances do not allow it.

All these, and still more unforeseen things. All senior leading cadres of the entire Party must be fully prepared to deal with extremely unfavorable situations.

Now, let us discuss the reasons why we will certainly achieve victory.

First, temporary loss, eternal victory. Second, failure here, victory elsewhere. The Chinese revolution is characterized by imbalance: if the east does not shine, the west does; if the south turns dark, there is the north. Third, some people run away, and some people come. Let those who want to run, run; by running, they will eat less millet. These are vacillating elements within the Party—those who join the excitement when times are lively and run off when difficulties arise. Though some run away, others will come. Fourth, some people die, some live. The weather has its sudden changes, and human fortunes shift between morning and evening. There will always be those who survive. Do not fear; with such a great nation and such a great Party, what is there to fear? Fifth, economic difficulties. Learn to do economic work. We thank He Yingqin for not issuing pay—we will provide for ourselves. At that time, we did not support disbanding, nor were we willing to starve. Those who remained began working to produce for themselves. Sixth, natural disasters spread. The Taihang Base has experience; Communists can catch locusts. Seventh, through internal rectification, we gain tempering. Raw iron becomes steel; how many times must it be forged? Eighth, without international aid, we learn self-reliance. Prepare for the absence of aid. This is now a great test for the Communist Party, to see whether we have the ability. Of course, international aid will ultimately come in the end...

Third, several issues concerning ideology and policy. (1) On the issue of leadership. Leaders must have foresight. Foresee the future and deviations; without foresight, there is no leadership. For the sake of leadership, foresight is necessary. From primitive society to capitalist society, there was never foresight regarding social movements—it was entirely blind. Revolutions in social development were often spontaneous, yet in people’s daily lives there was foresight. The peasant plows in spring and sows seeds, foreseeing an autumn harvest; the worker labors; the doctor prescribes medicine—all because they have foresight that a certain action will yield a certain result. The bourgeoisie also has foresight in the natural sciences, but in the social sciences, they are blind (because it is anti-scientific). Only when Marxism emerged in the world in 1843 did foresight on social questions become possible, and humanity began to step onto a new stage. The Communist Party, based on Marxism, sees the future and the direction in which society is moving. For example, in China, there are three classes—the proletariat, the petite bourgeoisie, and the big bourgeoisie—all in motion. Where are they heading? What is to be done after defeating Japan? Three congresses have been held. Our congress foresees which path to take in the future and has prescribed our line and tasks. Stalin said: One who sits on the command platform and sees nothing cannot be called a leader. People often fail to perceive the big things before them—microorganisms are invisible, yet so too is the water buffalo. During the civil war period, the big cities, the Kuomintang, and imperialism—the big thing was not seen. Our ambition was great, and we were always talking about the enemy’s "general collapse." Japan was also misunderstood—a big thing, yet we thought it would be easy to fight, advocating a quick victory; a contempt-for-the-enemy viewpoint. The ten years of civil war were a decade of nationwide warfare—a big thing too, yet sometimes forgotten. In the time of Chen Duxiu, tens of millions of peasants rose up demanding land—a big thing! But they did not see it. All those who make mistakes in policy fail to see what is right before them. Missing small things is not so serious—though still bad, it is not a grave error. The grave error is failing to see what is large-scale and universal. Foresight, however, requires seeing the small and uncommon things—at the moment it first peeps over the world’s horizon, to discern the significance of its future development. This is what foresight demands. For instance, this congress demands that we pay attention to work in the cities, attention to the Northeast. These things do not yet exist today; even after you return, you may not sense them. The large cities are vast, the Northeast has a population of forty million—these are large-scale, universal things, but having them is a matter of tomorrow. The congress should point out that if we fail to see this great thing, it will be catastrophic; the Communist Party will perish. If we cannot solve the problems of workers’ movements, large cities, the economy, industry, regularization, and so on, we will certainly perish. The economy is in their hands, industry is in their hands, mechanization is in their hands, everything is in their hands—we will certainly perish. If you cannot secure the large cities, and your sons and grandsons still cannot solve it, forever? Then you will perish, definitely perish. So we must solve the worker and peasant movements. We began as a party of workers and peasants; industry and machinery all depend on workers. Our path has been from the workers’ movement to the peasants’ movement, and back again to the workers’ movement. To lead, one must foresee. Blindness hinders foresight; dogmatism and empiricism can never have foresight. Without foresight, there is no leadership, no victory, no anything. Marxism was born in 1843, the Bolshevik Party in 1903; then all humanity gained a guiding direction. Forty years ago, in 1903, the direction was set, but it was not yet realized. Eleven years later, the world war broke out, and fourteen years later (1917), the October Revolution was victorious. Without the October Revolution, what would have become of the Chinese revolution? From the October Revolution of 1917 onward, the development of the world shifted in a new direction. After the birth of the Chinese Communist Party in 1921, China’s development also shifted in a new direction. This Party is unmatched in any prior history because it has foresight and sees the future clearly. Within the Party, to solve certain problems, we must have foresight and eliminate blindness. When the New China News asked me for an inscription, I wrote the two characters "多想" (Think More) based on my feelings at the time. They were not entirely satisfied. I wanted to advocate that comrades think more—this is called starting the machine. The organ of the brain is for nothing else but "thinking." Mencius said: "The office of the mind is to think." Mencius understood this principle. I ask all comrades to return and tell every comrade: all must think more about problems. On matters of class, nation, Party... all must be thought over. It does not matter if you think incorrectly; it can be corrected. When comrades gather, do not make trivial daily matters the main topic of conversation. Shift your interest toward pondering various problems. Start the machine, offload baggage, travel light and cheerful. Start the machine. Analyze. In the past, there was a frame within the Party—an easy frame to learn, applied everywhere—namely, the so-called Party eight-legged essay. Dimitrov told us to break this frame. The quintessence of Marxism is the concrete analysis of concrete problems. When a problem arises, it doesn’t matter if you don’t understand it; just analyze it. If one person cannot analyze it, several can analyze it together, exchanging views with comrades, analyzing it together. We must foster an atmosphere of exchanging views. To have an opinion yet refuse to share it with others, to regard an invention as solely one’s own—that is opportunism. We simply ask the common people, ask our comrades, about every question. The same applies in battle: what harm is there in sharing credit with others? "Driven to Join the Liangshan Rebels," "Three Attacks on Zhu Village"—collective creation. What harm is there? The right to speak is not an individual’s property; it should be shared with everyone. One person alone cannot do everything completely. This is how we must lead—by inspiring thought and eliminating blindness.

(2) Democratic centralism. Unfettered democracy, high-level centralism. Its nature lies in the degree. On every previous occasion, the degree of democracy has been insufficient, and centralism has at times been inappropriate. The two are contradictory but can be unified. We must open wide the channels of speech, open the windows. Even good autocratic emperors of antiquity could open wide the channels of speech; can we Communists refuse to open the windows? Opening the windows does little harm, but the air that flows in brings great benefit. What is to be feared in a high degree of democracy? It is precisely about letting people speak freely, speaking out reason; it does not matter if they speak wrongly. In the final analysis, the Party is most fair. They demand centralism—demand that a company commander call out commands, and every person must heed the order of one individual when charging the enemy in battle. There are anarchistic ideas, but do not fear them. Once the Party’s level of consciousness is raised, it understands the necessity of high centralism. Do not fear criticism from others. We leading comrades have great capital, which is our lives. Even if we make mistakes, we will not be hounded to death. So long as we correct our errors, even those guilty of mistakes in line need not be hounded to death—that would be best. The more opportunities we give for people to speak, the fewer dissenting opinions there will be. Speaking within the organization is permissible; speaking outside the organization is gossip. When gossip exists, leading comrades should collect that gossip. I am not advocating that everyone engage in gossip; rather, when gossip exists, gather it as raw material. For political work, the more raw material, the better. We must also post advertisements. Our advertisement reads: "Say all you know and speak without reserve"; "No blame to the speaker, words are a caution to the listener"; "Correct the errors if you have them, guard against them if you do not." Turn the black market legitimate, and there will be no gossip. Only through this can we unite comrades, unify will, concentrate will, and form high centralism. Without centralism, we cannot achieve victory and will be wiped out. We seek high centralism based on high democracy.

(3) Cadres’ relations. The nature of this issue is a question of the peasantry. In the future, it will be a question of the entire people. Lenin said: "A correct relationship over ten to twenty years ensures victory on a world scale (even should the world proletarian revolution be delayed); otherwise, we will have to endure twenty to forty years of white terror." This statement also applies to China. If over ten to twenty years relations with the peasantry are handled well, then victory on a world scale can be won; otherwise, we will have to endure ten to twenty to forty years of white terror. The relations between new and old cadres, between outside cadres and local cadres—their nature is precisely the relationship with the peasantry. Why do we speak of this problem time and again?

The Gutian Conference already addressed it, and it was raised again during the rectification movement in 1941—this is a universal historical issue.

During the civil war period, the Soviet areas collapsed. Was one of the reasons not that outsiders were extremely confident in themselves but did not trust local cadres?

The same was true in the White Areas—when the imperial envoy arrived, work collapsed by 99.9%!

The relationship between outside cadres and local cadres was a line issue during the civil war period, but not during the War of Resistance against Japan. In the border region, I personally witnessed this matter. It was said: "Border region cadres can only create Soviet areas, they cannot lead the Red Army." First, they were not good to the 2nd and 6th Red Armies, and later not good to the 27th Red Army.

I am one of the 25,000 Li! "You are a bumpkin!" Now the yangge troupes dance yangge together with the common people. In the past, when hiding from airplanes, outsiders and locals did not take the same road. The group would always say the locality had let it down. In the past, we did not resolve problems systematically. System is science, non-system is common sense. At the Senior Cadres Meeting, this issue was systematically explained, so it was resolved.

Before it was resolved systematically, we could not persuade comrades. One comrade said: only after 1941 did I understand that the army should bear more responsibility. Now, the relationship between the army and the locality in the border region has made great progress, but it has not been thoroughly resolved. In North China and Central China, it will take another one to three years. This issue is very easy to waver on—leading comrades in military regions and sub-regions must take responsibility.

Now we have an army of one million, and it will increase in the future. Whether we can achieve victory depends on whether we can unite the 360 million peasants. We must often stand up and speak about the Three Main Rules of Discipline and the Eight Points for Attention. The localities also have things they do wrong, but problem-solving must start from the army. The key lies with the responsible comrades in the military regions and sub-regions; the one at the helm must uphold this principle. Those in charge of the army are veteran cadres, who are the main backbone—this is good. For comrades who join the leadership later, this is also good. During the Northern Expedition period, the army numbered less than a thousand; during the civil war period, cadres were no more than 20,000. Veteran cadres are good; they are treasures of the people and the honor of the nation—this is the people's valuation, and their valuation is very high.

The army is related to the survival of the nation. Without a people's army, there is nothing for the people. Since the army is important, it must especially take care of the localities. The relationship between the army and the locality is the relationship between the army and the people. Understand this point: wherever you go, no matter how poorly the local people treat us, you should blame yourself, not blame the local people. Adopt an attitude of forgiveness and respect toward the localities. We must educate our army well. Are we a people's army or not? Now we are, and we have long been one, but there are still many shortcomings, as many comrades have pointed out. We must learn to be better suited to being teachers; teaching methods must be studied constantly. When you hear criticism, you must study it thoroughly. There is a responsibility to study, to possess a spirit of fearing that you have let the people down, and to practice self-criticism—only this way can problems be resolved.

After Wang Shiwei wrote "Wild Lilies," we once said we must reply to "Wild Lilies" by resolving material problems—achieving ample food and clothing to answer him. Solving economic issues is no easy task.

It is the same glory—every front army, every army is glorious. Comrades working in base areas and White Areas, and now comrades in enemy-occupied areas, are all equally glorious. Comrades doing political, military, economic, cultural, and general work are all equally glorious. Technical cadres and so on are also glorious. For things we are sorry about, admit they were wrong, admit they are canceled. Where army-locality relations were bad, admit they were wrong, admit they are canceled.

IV. Rectification, Investigation of Cadres, and Elimination of Traitors: In the old phase, rectification and cadre investigation achieved significant results but also had considerable errors. Later, the second phase was handled somewhat better, showing progress. From now on, we should act according to the progressive methods of the second phase. Mistakes made in cadre investigation, where some were wrongly accused, were very bad. They were unhappy, and we were unhappy too—as it is said, "When one person faces the corner and weeps, the whole hall is disconsolate." Now that some are unhappy, we should make amends to them. We should have used a "few but precise" approach, but instead we applied a "many and crude" one. The quantity should be small, and the methods should be precise. During the first phase, the number of spies was perceived as very high; during the second phase, it was perceived as very low. Few is correct; from now on, proceed according to this "few." On the issue of self-surrender and the issue of party factions: in the past, we did not pay attention, but now we know these are quite numerous. This issue also concerns the seriousness of the Party; we cannot adopt a liberal attitude. During the civil war era, when combating counter-revolutionaries? Some used physical torture. Physical torture is a remnant from the feudal era. In the first year, a resolution to abolish physical torture was made; in the second year, people were still being beaten. Thus, two lessons were learned: first, abolish physical torture; second, do not readily believe confessions. In eliminating counter-revolutionaries, we went down an extreme path. Counter-revolutionaries should be opposed, but when the Party was immature, it lacked experience on this issue, took detours, and made mistakes. Today, in Yan'an, where mistakes were made, we should even more grasp the seriousness of it, because it carries national implications. If the whole nation does not take detours, the whole nation can achieve victory. "Many and crude" is wrong; "few and precise" is right. When we make mistakes, we should apologize.

Is there sectarianism? For example, veteran cadres rectifying new cadres, or worker-peasant cadres rectifying intellectual cadres? Do not be hasty in saying whether it exists or not. Instead, use objective facts to prove it. At the congress, someone demanded that a clause be added to the Party constitution: "Safeguard the political rights and lives of Party members." Do not underestimate this clause; we should take warning from it. These several guiding principles were also gradually developed through the process over several months. Some people do not know that security work is a painstaking task. Someone said: "Why did the army fail? Because I wasn't the General Secretary." "Why did the anti-espionage campaign make mistakes? Because I didn't hold power." Not necessarily so. You try it and see. To prevent mistakes, we must also guard against liberalism and maintain the seriousness of the Party. The counter-revolution has failed, has been overthrown, but the reactionary class will inevitably seek revenge. If things are handled badly, we could suffer greatly.

V) Preparing for the Transition: The transition arises from changes in the situation during the democratic revolution—from the countryside to the cities, from guerrilla warfare to regular warfare, from reducing rent and interest to land-to-the-tiller. I don't think I need to elaborate much on how to make the transition; we must act according to actual circumstances. Prepare mentally for going to the cities. The importance of the labor movement has increased; once we have large cities, we need a labor movement, otherwise we cannot control the cities. The four northeastern provinces are extremely important; there is a possibility they will come under our leadership. Having the four northeastern provinces, we will have the foundation for them. Currently, our base areas are still not consolidated and lack a solid foundation. Once we have the Northeast, we will have that foundation.

VI) The Issue of the Line: The political, military, and organizational reports of the congress have provided the whole Party with a weapon—a weapon for examining work. Over the past eight years, considering the nation as a whole, the line has been correct. But for certain periods, in certain places, among certain comrades, and in certain departments, there have been mistakes, including errors in principle or line errors. For certain comrades, these were also time-specific. Neglecting either aspect is not good.

VII) Military Line (Omitted)

VIII) Can We Lead the Big Bourgeoisie? Sometimes we can, sometimes we cannot—it depends on the situation. At the beginning of the War of Resistance, our policy influenced Chiang Kai-shek. Later, when he convened the Fifth Plenary Session, he wanted to eliminate us and stopped listening. Stalin said: In the anti-imperialist struggle, the emperor of Afghanistan and the merchants of Egypt could all become reserve forces. The main part of leadership is not directed at the big landlord class but is a question concerning the peasants and the petty bourgeoisie. The key is to liberate the peasants and the petty bourgeoisie from the influence of the big landlords and big bourgeoisie and place them under our leadership. As for "joint leadership," it depends on how it is done. The San Francisco Conference was joint leadership by five nations; the Crimea Conference was joint leadership by three nations. In the past, it was said we were under Sun Yat-sen's leadership. Whether joint leadership is correct depends on how it is carried out. You lead that crowd, and I will boldly mobilize the masses. The issue is not joint leadership but whether one dares to boldly mobilize the masses.

IX) Are There Hopes for Talks Between the Two Parties? There is still a bit of possibility. If there were not even a shred of possibility, we would not be talking. The possibility is slim, but some still exists, right? We still demand that he wash his face and turn over a new leaf. Supposing another situation arises—he refuses to wash his face and civil war breaks out—then we will respond according to the circumstances. We will call on the masses to rise up and overthrow Chiang Kai-shek. Regarding the coalition government, if you don't come out, I'll still "invite" you. Even if a rupture occurs tomorrow morning, tonight I will still go and "invite." Is this possible? If he comes, it's possible; if he doesn't, it's not.

The role of the China Liberated Areas Representative Conference: 1) It does not have the character of a second central government, meaning it does not aim to replace the National Government. 2) It bears the nature of political power, issuing orders and directives—a form of organization for the transitional period. When to convene? Around October 10th. He is convening his on November 12th; we will convene ours a bit earlier or simultaneously.

X) Cooperation with Non-Party People: The United Front is a science. Study, study—many comrades in the Party still need to study well and learn how to cooperate with non-party people.

XI) Party Spirit and Individual Character: The relationship between the two is that of universality and particularity, the collective and the individual. Within the Party and the Liberated Areas, a relatively liberated individuality exists. In feudal society, the broad masses had no individuality, no freedom, no independence, no personal dignity. This was caused by the bourgeoisie's property ownership rights. If you had property, you had individuality, freedom, independence, and personal dignity; without property, you had nothing. Communists are a part of the people; if the people don't have these, we cannot have them either. But within the Party, individuality has greatly developed because we have gained freedom. The "Communist Manifesto" states very clearly: "The free development of each is the condition for the free development of all." It is unimaginable what Party spirit we would have if over 1.2 million Party members became over 1.2 million wooden blocks. We cannot make every comrade exactly the same. As long as one obeys the Party, within this basic scope, develop personal strengths to the utmost. Don't only like those who are like paper and mud figures. There are two kinds of individuality: creative individuality, such as that of some model workers, crack marksmen, those with independent work ability, those whose blindness is reduced, and those who do not blindly echo others—Party spirit and individuality are completely unified in this kind. That is one kind. Destructive individuality, such as individualism and unconventionality (seeking to be different). There are also two kinds of unconventionality: one is revolutionary unconventionality, like that of a model worker; the other is destructive unconventionality, which is a petty-bourgeois error. There are also two kinds of independence: revolutionary and counter-revolutionary. Asserting independence within the Party violates Party spirit and is splittism. On the surface, it seems like freedom and individuality, but it is destructive individualism, reactionary, individualistic, and heroic—it is also reactionary. It is destructive because it lacks Marxism and is anti-collectivist. Having unanimous opinions and unified action on certain issues is an expression of Party spirit; this does not harm individuality. Many individualities are concentrated to form a unanimous opinion and unified action—this is absolutely necessary. Materialist unanimous opinion, New Democratic unanimous opinion—must one have differing opinions to be counted as having individuality? Unanimity is wonderful. In rectification, production, military affairs, and government work, there is both Party spirit and individuality. All work done by Party members includes both.

XII) Utilizing Foreign Experience: We should learn from the experience of the Comintern. If we could have 10,000 Party members read five important books to the point of general understanding, that would be very good. Always carry these five books with you, read them whenever you have time, and note the date each time you finish reading. After poking and exploring, the flavor will emerge. Kawakami Hajime of Japan read the "Communist Manifesto" seventy or eighty times. Pay constant attention to reading articles published in newspapers, such as declarations and programs of various Communist parties. The Comintern rendered tremendous service to China. Where did dogmatism come from? It did not come from Marx, Engels, Lenin, or Stalin themselves—they often taught us not to become dogmatic. We messed it up ourselves and turned it into dogmatism. It is wrong not to value theoretical workers; we must respect them. Foster an atmosphere that values translation work. Translating a book well is a fine deed. "Bumpkins" do not understand foreign languages; if you translate a foreign book, it is a great help to comrades. Theoretical workers should also value their own work and not waver due to outside influences.

Finally, seek truth from facts. Positions must be captured one by one; strength must be gathered bit by bit. Twenty-five years of experience proves that the enemy contests every single inch of territory with us. Rifles are increased one by one, land is expanded piece by piece—when combined, they make up the whole realm. We are realists. Our ideals are realistic; we are revolutionary realists, earnestly and sincerely, bit by bit, capturing positions one at a time. Next, after the congress, the entire Party must unite on principles and line. This is a unity of clear-headedness, not a blind unity. Comrades, we must dig up all the counter-revolutionary mountains in China. Long live the Communist Party of China!