CLASS STRUGGLE

October 11, 1955

[Concluding speech at the Enlarged Sixth Plenary Session of the Seventh Central
Committee of the Chinese Communist Party.]


Our present session has been a great debate. This debate concerns the question
of whether our Party's general line for the period of transition from capitalism
to socialism is entirely correct or not. This all-Party debate was triggered
by the question of our policy on the co-operative transformation of agriculture,
on which your discussion has also centred. However, the debate covers a wide
range of subjects, bearing on the work of the departments of agriculture,
industry, communications, transport, finance, monetary affairs, trade, culture,
education, science, public health, etc., on the transformation of handicrafts
and capitalist industry and commerce, the suppression of counter-revolutionaries,
the armed forces and foreign affairs; in short, it touches on the whole range
of our work, the work of the Party, the government, the armed forces and
the people's organizations. There should be a great debate of this kind.
For nothing like it has been conducted in our Party since the promulgation
of the general line. We must unfold the debate in the countryside and in
the cities as well so that our work in every sphere and its tempo and quality
will fit the tasks set by the general line and be covered by a comprehensive
plan.

Now I shall speak on a number of questions.

I. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN AGRICULTURAL CO-OPERATION
AND THE TRANSFORMATION OF CAPITALIST INDUSTRY AND COMMERCE

The relationship between agricultural co-operation and the transformation
of capitalist industry and commerce, which is the relationship between the
two tasks of basically and simultaneously accomplishing the socialist
transformation of agriculture and of capitalist industry and commerce in
a period of about three five-year plans, is in fact the relationship between
agricultural co-operation and the bourgeoisie.

We believe that only when the alliance of the working class and the peasantry
is gradually consolidated on a new basis, that of socialism, in the course
of the thoroughgoing socialist transformation of agriculture, will it be
possible to sever all the ties between the urban bourgeoisie and the peasantry,
completely isolate the bourgeoisie and facilitate the thoroughgoing
transformation of capitalist industry and commerce. The purpose of our socialist
transformation of agriculture is to cut off the source of capitalism in the
vast countryside.

We have not yet accomplished agricultural co-operation, the working class
has not yet consolidated its alliance with the peasantry on a new basis and
the alliance remains unstable. The peasants are no longer satisfied with
the alliance we formed with them in the past on the basis of the agrarian
revolution. They are beginning to forget about the benefits they reaped from
that alliance. They should now be given new benefits, which means socialism.
The peasants have not yet attained collective prosperity, and grain and
industrial raw materials are far from sufficient. In these circumstances
it is likely that the bourgeoisie will find fault with us and attack us on
this score. But in a few years we shall witness an entirely new situation,
namely, an alliance between the working class and the peasantry on a new
basis, an alliance more consolidated than ever.

The old alliance to oppose the landlords, overthrow the local despots and
distribute land was a temporary one; it has become unstable after a period
of stability. Since the agrarian reform polarization has taken place among
the peasants. If we have nothing new to offer them and cannot help them raise
their productivity, increase their income and attain collective prosperity,
the poor ones will no longer trust us and will feel that there is no point
in following the Communist Party. Since they remain poor after land has been
distributed to them, why do they still have to follow you? As for the well-to-do
ones, namely, those who have become rich peasants or grown quite well off,
they won't trust us either and will invariably find the policies of the Communist
Party not to their taste. As a result, neither the one nor the other, neither
the poor nor the rich, will trust us, and the worker-peasant alliance will
become quite shaky. To consolidate this alliance, we have to lead the peasants
onto the road of socialism, enabling them to attain collective prosperity;
not only the poor peasants but all of them must prosper and, what is more,
they must become far better off than the present-day well-to-do peasants.
Once the countryside goes co-operative, the life of the entire rural population
will get better and better as the years go by and there will be more commodity
grain and more industrial raw materials. By then the bourgeoisie will be
silenced and find themselves completely isolated.

We now have two alliances, one with the peasants and the other with the national
bourgeoisie. Both are indispensable to us, and Comrade Chou En-lai has also
spoken of this. What advantage is there in our alliance with the bourgeoisie?
It enables us to obtain more manufactured goods to exchange for farm produce.
This was precisely what Lenin had in mind at one phase after the October
Revolution. Since the state had no manufactured goods to exchange, the peasants
refused to sell their grain and wouldn't take mere paper money for it. So
Lenin intended to have the proletarian state power form an alliance with
state capitalism in order to secure more manufactured goods to cope with
the spontaneous capitalist forces in the
countryside.[1] It is precisely for the purpose
of securing more manufactured goods to meet the needs of the peasants and
overcome their reluctance to sell their grain and even some of their industrial
raw materials that we have entered into an alliance with the bourgeoisie
and refrained from confiscating capitalist enterprises for the time being,
and have instead adopted a policy of utilizing, restricting and transforming
them. This means using our alliance with the bourgeoisie to overcome the
peasants' reluctance to sell their produce. On the other hand we rely on
our alliance with the peasants to secure grain and industrial raw materials
with which to bring the bourgeoisie under control. The capitalists have no
raw materials, whereas the state has. If they want raw materials, they will
have to sell manufactured goods to the state and go in for state capitalism.
If they refuse to do so, we will deny them raw materials. In either case,
they will be held in check. This will block the capitalist road the bourgeoisie
wants to follow, namely, the opening of free markets, the free acquisition
of raw materials and the free sale of manufactured goods, and will in addition
isolate the bourgeoisie politically. Such is the interaction between these
two alliances. Of the two, our alliance with the peasants is principal, basic
and primary, while our alliance with the bourgeoisie is temporary and secondary.
To an economically backward country like ours both alliances are indispensable
at present.

The agrarian reform enabled us to form an alliance with the peasants on the
basis of democracy and enabled them to obtain land. The procuring of land
by the peasants was a bourgeois-democratic revolution in nature, for it destroyed
feudal ownership only, not capitalist ownership or individual ownership.
That alliance made the bourgeoisie feel isolated for the first time. At the
Third Plenary Session in 1950, I spoke against hitting out in all directions.
The agrarian reform had not yet been carried out in vast areas of the country,
nor had peasants come over entirely to our side. If we had opened fire on
the bourgeoisie then, it would have been out of order. After the agrarian
reform, when the peasants had entirely come over to our side, it was possible
and necessary for us to start the movements against the "three evils" and
the "five evils". Agricultural co-operation will enable us to consolidate
our alliance with the peasants on the basis of proletarian socialism and
not of bourgeois democracy. That will isolate the bourgeoisie once and for
all and facilitate the final elimination of capitalism. On this matter we
are quite heartless! On this matter Marxism is indeed cruel and has little
mercy, for it is determined to exterminate imperialism, feudalism, capitalism,
and small production to boot. In this respect, it is better not to have much
mercy. Some of our comrades are too kind, they are not tough enough, in other
words, they are not so Marxist. It is a very good thing, and a significant
one too, to exterminate the bourgeoisie and capitalism in China, a country
with a population of 600 million. Our aim is to exterminate capitalism,
obliterate it from the face of the earth and make it a thing of the past.
What emerges in history is bound to die out. Everything in the world is a
historical phenomenon; as there is life, so there must be death. As a historical
phenomenon, capitalism must also die out, and it has a very nice place to
go to, that is, underground, there to "sleep".

The present international situation is favourable to our fulfilment of the
general task for the transition period. We need three five-year plans basically
to accomplish socialist industrialization and socialist transformation. We
must strive to secure this length of time for peaceful construction. Three
of the fifteen years have already elapsed, and twelve more will do the job.
It seems likely that we will gain this time, and we must strive hard for
it. We should redouble our efforts in foreign affairs and in building up
national defence.

During this fifteen-year period, the class struggle at home and abroad will
be very tense. We have already seen this to be the case We have won many
victories in this struggle and will continue to do so. In the internal class
struggle, we have done four main things in the last twelve months: one, we
have fought idealism, two, we have suppressed counter-revolutionaries, three,
we have settled the question about grain, and four, we have tackled the question
of agricultural co-operation. The struggles waged on these four issues were
all in the nature of a struggle against the bourgeoisie, we have dealt them
severe blows and are continuing to deal them crushing ones.

The struggle against idealism has been going on for a year, beginning with
the question of The Dream of the Red Chamber and including the criticism
of the Literary Gazette and the subsequent criticism of Hu Shih
and Liang Shu-ming. We must carry out an effective campaign against idealism
and we intend to devote a period of three five-year plans to the struggle.
In the course of this struggle it is necessary to build up contingents of
cadres well versed in Marxism and dialectical materialism, so that large
numbers of our cadres and people can be armed with the fundamental theories
of Marxism. With regard to the suppression of counter-revolutionaries, we
plan to spend the rest of this year and the whole of next on the work of
eliminating them from state factories, state commercial enterprises,
co-operatives and various organizations at the county, district and township
levels as well as from among army cadres and factory workers -- that is from
among the ranks of roughly twelve million people. Talking about
counter-revolutionaries, it may seem that there aren't many left and that
there are hardly any to be seen. Yet when we dig into the matter, we find
that they do exist, and we have just ferreted out a batch. A big battle has
also been fought on the question of grain. The bourgeoisie used the grain
problem as a pretext for attacking us, a spate of rumours also emerged inside
the Party, and we therefore countered by unfolding criticism. We have waged
many struggles on the question of agricultural co-operation and the present
session has also concentrated on it. We have launched momentous struggles
on these four issues, countered the resistance and offensive of the bourgeoisie
and gained the initiative.

The bourgeoisie are afraid of our struggles against them on these issues
and especially of our suppression of counter-revolutionaries. We have done
a good job of suppressing counter-revolutionaries. In this work we must pay
attention to the criteria, if we don't, it will be very dangerous. Only those
who meet the criteria are to be labelled counter-revolutionaries, that is
to say, we must ferret out genuine counter-revolutionaries and not phoney
ones. It is to be expected that cases of phoney counter-revolutionaries will
occur. It is very difficult to exclude this possibility. But we demand that
there should be fewer such cases and preferably none at all. The
counter-revolutionaries must be out-and-out and unmistakable ones who completely
meet the criteria; we mustn't wrong innocent people. On the other hand, some
genuine counter-revolutionaries may slip through our net. You say you will
make a clean sweep of them this time. Not very likely. Such cases of wriggling
through are hard to avoid, but we should do our best to keep the number to
a minimum.

II. A SUMMING-UP OF THE DEBATE ON THE QUESTION
OF CO-OPERATION

With regard to agricultural co-operation, the numerous innovations of the
masses have shattered many illusions and erroneous views. This time the
discussion has settled quite a few questions which many people did not clearly
understand a few months ago.

First, there is the question of which is better, a big or a small expansion.
This has been a major issue generating much controversy and now it is settled.
The masses demand a big expansion, and the general task for the transition
period demands that agriculture should adapt itself to industry therefore,
the view in favour of a small expansion is wrong.

Second, the question whether expansion is possible in areas which were
liberated late, in mountain areas, in backward townships and in areas affected
by natural disasters. Now this question is settled. It is possible in all
such places.

Third, the question whether co-operatives can be set up in minority nationality
areas. Now it has been proved that they can be set up wherever conditions
are ripe. In some places, such as Tibet and the Taliang and Hsiaoliang Mountains,
where conditions are not yet ripe, co-operatives should not be set up.

Fourth, the question whether co-operatives can be set up without funds, carts
and oxen or without the well-to-do middle peasants. Now this has been proved
possible too.

Fifth, the fallacy that "it is easy to set up a co-operative but hard to
consolidate it" has been exploded. Setting one up is not so easy and
consolidating it is not necessarily so hard. If you insist that it is easy
to set up but hard to consolidate a co-operative, you are actually speaking
for setting up few or none.

Sixth, the question whether co-operatives can be set up without farm machinery.
The view that there have to be machines before co-operatives can be set up
is no longer popular, but it lingers on. This fallacy can also be exploded.

Seventh, the question whether poorly run co-operatives should all be dissolved.
Of course a few that definitely cannot carry on may revert to mutual-aid
teams, but generally the so-called poorly run co-operatives should not be
dissolved, for they can take a turn for the better after a check-up.

Eighth, the statement that "if you don't get off the horse quickly, there
will be the danger of breaking up the worker-peasant alliance" is probably
an "argument" relayed down from the Rural Work Department of the Central
Committee. This department not only manufactures rumours but also produces
a lot of "arguments". I think that this statement is in the main "correct"
-- only a single word needs to be changed, that is, the word "off" be changed
into "on". You comrades of the Rural Work Department do not have to feel
discouraged, for I have accepted almost all your words and changed only one.
The difference lies in a single word, our controversy is over just one word
-- you want to get off the horse while I want to get on. "If you don't get
on the horse quickly, there will be the danger of breaking up the worker-peasant
alliance", and danger there certainly will be.

Ninth, the charge that "the co-operatives are to blame for the loss of oxen"
is not quite in keeping with the actual conditions. The chief cause of the
loss of oxen is to be found not in the co-operatives but in floods, in the
high price of ox hides and in the shortage of fodder while some oxen are
too old and have to be slaughtered.

Tenth, it is wrong to say that "the fundamental cause of the tense situation
in the countryside is that too many co-operatives have been set up". The
tense situation in the countryside last spring was chiefly due to the grain
problem. The so-called grain shortage was in most cases fictitious; the clamour
about it was raised by landlords, rich peasants and well-to-do middle peasants.
We didn't have time to conduct extensive education among the peasant masses
to counter it; besides, there were shortcomings in our work regarding grain.
We over-purchased 7,000 million catties last year, not knowing at the time
the proper amount of grain we should purchase. Now we are making an adjustment
and plan to purchase 7,000 million catties less. Coupled with this year's
good harvest, this will ease the tense situation in the countryside.

Eleventh, there is still another remark in circulation, "The superiority
of the co-operatives can last only three years"; this is pessimistic. In
my view, their superiority will certainly not be limited to three years,
for socialism will last a very long time. In the future, when socialism is
no longer the embodiment of superiority, communism with its superiority will
take its place.

Twelfth, should we set up a number of co-operatives of the advanced type
in the near future? In the past people were not clear about this question,
and it has been raised at the present session. A batch of such co-operatives
should be set up. As for the number, that's for you to consider.

Thirteenth, it is also wrong to say that "no co-operatives can be set up
with junks and animal-drawn carts". As we see it now, the millions of working
people engaged in junk or animal-drawn cart transport should also be organized
into co-operatives.

We have settled all these questions in the light of your discussions. This
is a tremendous achievement on the part of the present plenary session of
the Central Committee.

III. ON THE QUESTION OF COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING
AND MORE EFFECTIVE LEADERSHIP

Comprehensive planning should include, first, a plan for co-operatives, second,
a plan for agricultural production and, third, an over-all economic plan.
An over-all economic plan for the countryside embraces side-line production,
handicrafts, diversified economic undertakings, multi-purpose undertakings,
nearby land reclamation and population shifts, supply and marketing
co-operatives, credit co-operatives' banks and technique popularization stations,
etc., as well as afforestation of barren mountains and villages. I think
the barren mountains in the north in particular should be Forested, and
they undoubtedly can be. Do you comrades from the north have courage enough
for this? Many places in the south need afforestation too. It will be fine
if in a number of years we can see various places in the south and north
clothed with greenery. This will benefit agriculture, industry and all other
spheres.

What other plans should be made? A plan for culture and education. It should
embrace eliminating illiteracy, opening primary schools, setting up middle
schools geared to the needs of the rural areas, adding a few courses in
agriculture to the middle school curriculum, publishing popular pamphlets
and books suited to the needs of the peasants, establishing rural broadcasting
networks and film projection teams, arranging cultural and recreational
activities, and so on. There should also be plans for the consolidation and
building of the Party and Youth League organizations, for women's work and
for the suppression of counter-revolutionaries. All these should be included
in a comprehensive plan.

Plans should be of the following kinds: (1) A plan for a village co-operative.
Every co-operative, however small, should make a plan and learn how to do
so. (2) A plan for an entire township. Our country has over 220,000 townships,
each of which should have a plan. (3) A plan for an entire county. We hope
every county will make one. Some counties have already made good plans that
are interesting to read. The minds of the comrades there are emancipated,
they defy heaven and earth and are not fettered by shackles and manacles,
and their plans are dynamic. (4) A plan for an entire province (or an autonomous
region, or the suburban areas of a municipality). Here the stress should
be put on plans for entire townships and for entire counties. These two links
should be grasped, and a number of such plans should be drawn up promptly.
For instance, in each province plans for three or four counties should
be made and distributed as examples.

Plans for co-operative transformation should specify different rates of
development for different areas. There are three kinds of areas. The first
comprises the greater part of our rural areas, the second a section of the
smaller part of our rural areas and the third the remainder. For the greater
part of our rural areas the development should be in three waves, that is,
three winters and springs. The three waves consist of this winter and next
spring, next winter and the following spring, and another winter and spring.
Three winters and springs make three waves, one wave surging after another,
and in between there should be an interval. There is a valley between two
mountains and there is a trough between two waves. The first kind of area
will have basically completed semi-socialist co-operative transformation
by the spring of 1958. For the second kind of area, such as areas in North
China and the Northeast and also some suburban areas, two winters and springs,
or two waves, will suffice. Among them a few will have basically gone
co-operative by next spring, and thus they will reach the goal in only one
wave. The third kind of area, that is, the remainder of the smaller part
of our rural areas, will need four, five or even six winters and springs.
This does not include some of the minority nationality areas, namely, the
Taliang and Hsiaoliang Mountains, Tibet and other minority nationality areas
where conditions are not yet ripe, and no co-operative should be set up under
such circumstances. What is meant by the basic completion of semi-socialist
co-operation? That 70 to 80 per cent of the rural population have joined
semi-socialist co-operatives. Here a margin is allowed, 70 per cent will
be all right, and so will 75 or 80 per cent or slightly over 80 per cent
-- this is what we call the basic completion of semi-socialist co-operation.
For the rest of the rural population, co-operation will come about later.
Being too slow is not good, nor is being overhasty, both are opportunistic.
There are two kinds of opportunism, being slow and being hasty. Putting it
in this way will make it easier for ordinary people to understand.

Province (municipality or autonomous region), prefecture and county -- all
three levels must constantly acquaint themselves with the development of
the movement and tackle any problem as it arises. Make sure that you don't
wait until problems pile up before making a reckoning, that would be firing
belated shots. In the past, much of our work was done in this way, problems
were left to pile up instead of being solved as they arose, and a reckoning
or criticism was made only at the very end. Some comrades made this mistake
during the movements against the "three evils" and the "five evils". Don't
go in for criticism after the event. Of course, criticisms have to be made
after the event, but it will be best to make them the moment a mistake begins
to show itself. It is not good to go in for criticism after the event and
fail to give guidance according to the changing circumstances. What is to
be done when things turn out unfavourably? When this happens, put on the
brakes at once, or in other words, make a halt. It is like driving a car,
we put on the brakes at once when we meet with danger in going down a steep
slope. The provincial, prefectural and county authorities all have the power
to put on the brakes. Attention must be paid to guarding against the "Left"
deviation. To guard against the "Left" deviation is Marxism, not opportunism.
Marxism does not call for "Left" deviations, and "Left" opportunism is not
Marxism.

In setting up co-operatives what should we compete in from now on? In quality,
in measuring up to norms. As for quantity or speed, what we specified earlier
will do, and the emphasis now is on competition in quality. And what are
the criteria for quality? They are increased production and no loss of livestock.
How can production be increased and loss of livestock be avoided? To this
end, it is necessary to observe the principles of voluntary participation
and mutual benefit, make comprehensive plans and give flexible guidance.
Given these conditions, the co-operatives, I think, will be able to achieve
better quality, increase production and prevent the loss of livestock. We
must by all means avoid the mistake once made in the Soviet Union which led
to the slaughtering of livestock in large numbers. The next two years are
crucial, and chiefly the next five months, namely, this winter and next spring.
I would ask the comrades here to see to it that, starting from November this
year and up to March next year, no serious trouble nor any loss of oxen in
large numbers occurs. Since we have only a few tractors, oxen are a treasure,
they are the chief implement in agricultural production.

In the next five months, the leading cadres at the provincial, prefectural,
county, district and township levels, and first of all the Party secretaries
and deputy secretaries, must immerse themselves in the question of co-operatives
and familiarize themselves with the various problems connected with them.
Is the time too short? I think five months will do, if you make a serious
effort. Of course it is very important for comrades at the provincial level
to do so, but it will be very dangerous if comrades at the county, district
and township levels in particular do not go into this question and know
practically nothing about co-operatives when many are being set up. What
if a comrade simply can't dig in? He should be given a different job. The
Central Committee will probably call a similar conference five months hence,
that is, after next March. We shall then have a competition in quality, and
speakers at the conference will not be expected to repeat their present speeches,
for there must be something new, that is, the emphasis should be on questions
of comprehensive planning, management and methods of leadership. They should
speak on efficient methods of setting up more and better co-operatives faster.
In other words, they should deal with the question of quality.

Methods of leadership are very important. To avoid mistakes, one must pay
attention to these methods and strengthen leadership. Here are some suggestions
about methods of leadership, see if they are feasible. One is to hold several
large or small meetings yearly to solve current problems, as we are doing
now. When a problem crops up, you should be able to see what is universal
in a particular case. You don't have to catch all the sparrows and dissect
them before you can prove the fact that "small as it is, the sparrow has
all the vital organs". No scientist has ever acted this way. Once you are
clear about a few co-operatives, you will be able to draw proper conclusions.
Besides the method of holding meetings, you can use the telegram and the
telephone and go on inspection tours, these too are very important methods
of leadership. In addition, every province should select suitable personnel
to run publications well and improve them for the prompt exchange of experience.
Here is another suggestion which I would like you to try out. I spent eleven
days reading 120-odd reports, making corrections and writing notes to them.
In this manner I have "travelled all the kingdoms" and gone farther than
Confucius, "travelling" as far as Yunnan and
Sinkiang.[2] Perhaps each province and autonomous
region might compile a book every year or every six months, with one article
from each county, so that the experience of all counties can be exchanged;
this will facilitate the rapid spread of the co-operative movement. Still
another method is to issue bulletins. The county Party committee should submit
bulletins to the prefectural Party committee, the prefectural to the provincial
or autonomous region Party committee, and the latter to the Central Committee,
reporting on the number of co-operatives set up and on the problems that
have arisen. The leadership at various levels will acquaint itself with the
situation through these bulletins and be able to find solutions to problems
when they arise. These are a few suggestions concerning methods of leadership
for the comrades present to consider.

IV. ON IDEOLOGICAL STRUGGLE

All past experience has demonstrated one point: ideological struggle must
hit the mark. There must be confrontation of ideas, to use a current expression.
As in fighting, you thrust your sword at me and I thrust mine back, and the
two swords must cross -- this is confrontation. Without a confrontation of
ideas no clarity and thoroughness can be attained, and that's not good. At
this session we have had confrontation, thus attaining clarity and thoroughness
in our thinking. The first advantage of this method is that it helps most
comrades to get clear on questions, and the second that it helps those comrades
who have erred to correct their mistakes.

For comrades who have erred, I think there are only two requirements: one,
they themselves must be willing to make revolution; two, other people must
allow them to go on making revolution. There are individuals who don't want
to go on making revolution themselves, for example, Chen Tu-hsiu did not
want to, nor did Chang Kuo-tao, nor Kao Kang and Jao Shu-shih, but such
individuals are a mere handful. Most people want to go on making revolution.
Then there is the other requirement: they must be allowed to make revolution.
We should not act like the bogus foreign devil in The True Story of Ah
Q. who bars Ah Q from revolution, nor should we ape Wang Lun the
scholar-in-white [3] in Water Margin, who
also bars other people from revolution. Whoever bars others from revolution
will find himself in a very perilous position. Wang Lun, the scholar-in-white,
who bars other people from revolution, ends up losing his life. Kao Kang
barred other people from revolution, and didn't he end up losing his life
too?

Historical experience shows that most people who have committed errors of
dogmatism or empiricism can correct them. But this calls for two pre-conditions,
serious criticism on the one hand and a forbearing attitude on the other.
It is not good to do without the latter, for its absence would lead to unnatural
relations. Who doesn't make some mistake or other? Everyone without exception
makes mistakes, only some make major mistakes and others minor ones. In any
case the incorrigible are few, such as Chen Tu-hsiu, Chang Kuo-tao, Kao Kang,
Jao Shu-shih and also Chen Kuang and Tai Chi-ying. Except for a few persons
like them, all the others who have erred can be saved and can correct their
mistakes with the help of their comrades. We should act in this way and have
confidence. On their part, people who have erred should have confidence too.

Some comrades in the Rural Work Department of the Central Committee, and
principally Comrade Teng Tzu-hui, have made mistakes. The mistakes he has
made this time are Right deviationist and empiricist in nature. Comrade Teng
Tzu-hui has made a self-criticism. Though some comrades at group meetings
felt that it was not thorough enough, we of the Political Bureau and other
comrades have talked it over and found it satisfactory on the whole. For
the present the understanding he has shown is good enough. It should be
acknowledged that Comrade Teng Tzu-hui did a lot of work during the
long revolutionary struggle and made contributions. But he should not have
allowed his contributions to become a handicap. He himself has admitted
this, saying that he has to some extent flaunted his seniority. One must be
modest. Provided Comrade Teng Tzu-hui is modest and ready to accept the help
of his comrades, we believe he will be able to correct his mistakes.

Comrade Teng Tzu-hui once advanced the kind of programmatic formulation which
advocated reliance on the businessmen (that is, on the bourgeoisie) and the
"four big freedoms". That formulation was wrong and was a veritable bourgeois
programme in nature, a capitalist programme, not a proletarian one, and it
ran counter to the decision of the Second Plenary Session of the Seventh
Central Committee on the restriction of the bourgeoisie. We are now following
a policy of restriction towards both the urban bourgeoisie and the rural
bourgeoisie (the rich peasants). Therefore, the "four big freedoms", under
which no restrictions are placed on hiring labourers, trading, money-lending
and renting out land, must be called in question. I would say there are "four
little freedoms". Here the difference is between big and little. With
restrictions, the bourgeoisie have a bit of these freedoms, just a tiny bit.
We must prepare the conditions for depriving the bourgeoisie of these little
freedoms, too. Towards the urban bourgeoisie we adopt a policy of utilization,
restriction and transformation. We must utilize it, but at the same time
we must restrict that aspect which is detrimental to the nation's economy
and the people's livelihood. Such a policy is neither "Left" nor Right. No
restriction at all would mean leaning too much to the Right. Extreme restriction,
which bars the bourgeoisie from any undertaking whatever, would mean leaning too
much to the "Left". Lenin said it would be not only foolish but suicidal
for a political party to try to eradicate capitalism at one stroke when millions
upon millions of small producers still
exist.[4] But Comrade Teng Tzu-hui's formulation
was incorrect because he made no mention of restriction, and it differed
from that of the Central Committee and of the Second Plenary Session.

Some comrades take almost no heed of the Party's resolutions and the policies
advocated by the Party over long periods, as if they had never read or heard
of them -- I don't know why. For instance, the mutual-aid and co-operative
movement went on for many years in the central revolutionary base area, in
Yenan and in each and every base area, and yet these comrades don't seem
to have seen or heard anything about it. Back in the winter of 1951, the
Central Committee adopted a resolution on mutual aid and co-operation in
agricultural production, which they likewise ignore. As late as 1953, they
still did not talk about fundamentals but took pleasure in giving small favours.
By their not talking about fundamentals we mean they never talked about
socialism, and by taking pleasure in giving small favours we mean they took
pleasure in giving the "four big freedoms". That is to say, some comrades
take no heed at all of the Party's resolutions or of some of the policies
and programmes it has long advocated; instead they go their own way. They
never try to find out whether and how questions of a similar nature have
been discussed before. Some historians take pains to study even oracle bones,
inscriptions on bronzes and stone tablets and other relics of the ancient
past which have been unearthed, whereas these comrades pay not the least
heed to our recent past and don't bother to look into it. In short, they
completely ignore what is going on beyond their immediate surroundings and
just write and speak as they like; for instance, they have prated about the
"four big freedoms", and well, they have ended up running their heads against
a wall.

Some other comrades always prefer decentralism, they assert their independence
and even set up independent kingdoms, finding dictatorship very much to their
taste. At the outset it was in order to be comfortable that they set up kingdoms
and proclaimed themselves kings. But what was the result? In the end they
found themselves very uncomfortable as they came under criticism. Isn't there
an opera called Ascending the Throne? Look what great comfort Hsueh
Ping-kuei enjoyed on becoming king, for in those days there was no
self-criticism. That was not good. Many people are always reluctant to consult
others. Many comrades pay lip-service to collective leadership, but actually
they are inordinately fond of personal dictatorship, as if they would not
look like leaders unless they were dictatorial. One does not have to be
dictatorial to be a leader, don't you know that? The bourgeoisie has bourgeois
democracy, it stresses class dictatorship. The proletariat and the Communist
Party must likewise exercise class dictatorship, it is bad to practice personal
dictatorship. When a problem comes up, it is always advisable to consult
with others, have it solved by the collective and pool the wisdom of the
many; that's the better way.

Still another point needs to be taken up here. Many comrades bury themselves
in office work and do not study problems. Mustn't office work be attended
to? Certainly it must. It won't do to neglect such work, but it would be
dangerous to attend to it exclusively without studying problems. If you don't
go among the cadres and the masses, or if, when among them, you are always
taking them to task instead of consulting and exchanging views with them,
saying "What do you think of my ideas? Please tell me your opinions", you
won't be able to sense the political climate, your nose will become insensitive
and you will catch cold politically. Once your nose is stopped up, you can't
tell what the climate is at a given time. Today Comrade Chen Yi said that
one must be able to grasp a thing when it is in the bud. A person must be
most slow-witted if he fails to see what is already widespread and abundant.
This situation calls for attention. It is very bad for anyone to be
occupied solely with office work to the neglect of studying problems, going
among the masses and cadres and consulting with them.

V. OTHER QUESTIONS

Most of the questions I am now going to discuss have been raised by the comrades
here.

First, with regard to removing well-to-do middle peasants from leading positions
in the co-operatives, it is necessary to pay attention to the steps to be
taken and the methods to be used; do not dismiss them all at once. Although
they are not fit to be leaders, they are nevertheless working people. Each
case should be decided on its merits, depending on how the person acquits
himself. Some well-to-do middle peasants must be removed, for it simply won't
do to let them continue at their posts. But it must be made clear to the
masses (for example, the members of the co-operative) as well as to the
well-to-do middle peasant concerned that he is not really fit to go on serving
as a leader. There is another condition, namely, he is not to be removed
until a better qualified person is ready to succeed him or has been trained
to take his place. Some of the well-to-do middle peasants may continue at
their posts after making a self-criticism and correcting their mistakes,
others may be made deputy leaders or committee members. Of course those who
have done a good job should not be removed, even though they are well-to-do
middle peasants. Do not treat well-to-do middle peasants as rich peasants,
they are not. Do not remove them all at once. This question must be approached
with care and properly settled. The provinces and localities are expected
to consider whether the various ways mentioned above are feasible.

Second, it must be made clear at the Party branches and among the masses
that when we now say that the lower-middle peasants and the upper-middle
peasants are two different social strata, it is not because we are redefining
class status but because different social strata actually take different
attitudes towards co-operative transformation, some active, some passive,
and a similar difference exists among individuals within the same stratum.
For instance, even among the poor peasants there are people who do not want
to join the co-operatives for the time being. This fact can be used to convince
the well-to-do middle peasants: "Look! Among the poor and lower-middle peasants
there are also people who are rather passive. They don't want to come in,
so we won't ask them to join. As you well-to-do middle peasants don't want
to come in now, you may stay out too." We should first draw in those who
are keen on joining, then make propaganda among a second group until they
become keen enough to join, and then among a third group. This should be
done by stages and in batches. In time all will join the co-operatives. So
it is not a question of redefining class status.

Third, on the question of landlords and rich peasants joining the co-operatives.
Perhaps we can try the following way: take the county together with the township
as a unit (it is not enough to take the county alone as the unit, for a county
may have basically gone co-operative while there may still be no co-operatives
at all in some of its townships). When a county and township have basically
gone co-operative, that is, when 70 to 80 per cent of the peasant households
have joined, the consolidated co-operatives can start dealing with the landlords
and rich peasants in groups and by stages according to their behaviour. Those
who have a good record and are honest and law-abiding may be given co-operative
membership. Others may join in collective labour in the co-operative and
receive their share of remuneration but without co-operative membership,
being actually members on probation; if they do well, they too can become
members, and so they will have something to look forward to. Those in a third
group will not be allowed to join the co-operative for the time being, the
question will be taken up later and settled on an individual basis. None
of the landlords or rich peasants admitted to the co-operative are to be appointed
to posts in it. As for educated young people from landlord or rich peasant
families who have been through some testing, can't they be given such jobs
as literacy teachers in the villages? In places where there are very few
other intellectuals, there is a need to have them serve as literacy teachers under
the leadership and supervision of the Party branch and the co-operative
management committee. At present, there are still a fair number of such educated
young people among the primary school teachers. These young people from landlord
or rich peasant families are only seventeen or eighteen years old and have
just finished primary or junior middle school, and I think it unnecessarily
strict not to let them serve even as literacy teachers. We can enlist them
in teaching the peasants to read and write, in wiping out illiteracy. Please
consider whether this is feasible. However, assigning them to such work as
bookkeeping would be rather risky.

Fourth, as regards the conditions for establishing co-operatives of the advanced
type and how many to establish, I shan't say anything today but ask you comrades
to study these conditions and then we'll discuss the matter next year. Different
localities can act according to the existing conditions. In short, such
co-operatives can be set up where the conditions are ripe and not otherwise,
and you may start with only a few and later increase their number step by
step.

Fifth, as to the time for establishing co-operatives, perhaps you can consider
whether it must be concentrated in winter and spring each year and whether
a number can also be set up in summer or autumn, as is actually being done
in some places already. But it must be pointed out that there has to be an
interval for rest and consolidation between two waves and that after a batch
of co-operatives has been set up, there should be check-ups and consolidation
before more are established. It is like fighting battles, there' should be
rest and consolidation between two battles. It is entirely wrong to do without,
leave no interval and allow no breathing space. There was once the view in
the army that rest and consolidation were dispensable, that a respite was
unnecessary and that what was necessary was to march on and fight all the
time, which, as a matter of fact, is impossible. Men must sleep. If the meeting
we are holding today should not adjourn but go on and on indefinitely, everybody
would be against this, including me. Men need a long rest and consolidation
every day -- seven or eight, or at least five or six, hours of sleep, not
counting the shorter rests during the day. To say that the establishment
of co-operatives, a matter of such major importance, can dispense with rest
and consolidation is most naive.

Sixth, "Run co-operatives with diligence and thrift" is a very good slogan.
It has been put forward by people at the grass-roots level. It is necessary
to practice strict economy and combat waste. A vigorous campaign against
waste is now under way in the cities and also in the villages. We must encourage
diligence and thrift in running the household, running the co-operative and
building the country. Our nation must be first diligent and second thrifty;
we must not be lazy and extravagant. Laziness leads to decay, that is not
good. To run co-operatives with diligence and thrift it is necessary to raise
labour productivity, practice strict economy, reduce costs of production,
institute economic accounting and combat extravagance and waste. All
co-operatives must raise labour productivity and reduce costs of production.
As for economic accounting, it is to be taken up gradually. As the co-operatives
grow in size, they cannot manage without economic accounting; they must learn
to do it step by step.

Seventh, it is a shortcoming of this session that no one has spoken on the
subject of state farms. I hope the Rural Work Department of the Central Committee
as well as the Ministry of Agriculture will study this question. In future
the proportion of state farms will grow year by year.

Eighth, we must go on opposing Han chauvinism. It is one kind of bourgeois
ideology. The Han people are so numerous, they are liable to look down on
the minority nationalities and not to help them wholeheartedly, so we must
relentlessly fight Han chauvinism. Naturally, narrow nationalism may arise
among the minority nationalities, that also is to be opposed. But of the
two the chief one, the one to be opposed first, is Han chauvinism. So long
as the comrades of Han nationality take the correct attitude and treat the
minority nationalities with real fairness, so long as the nationality policy
they follow and the stand they take on the question of nationality relations
are entirely Marxist and do not reflect bourgeois viewpoints, that is to
say, so long as they are free from Han chauvinism, it is comparatively easy
to overcome narrow nationalist views among the minority nationalities. At
present, there is still a good deal of Han chauvinism, for example, monopolizing
the affairs of the minority nationalities, showing no respect for their customs
and folk-ways, being self-righteous, looking down on them and saying how
backward they are. At the National Conference of our Party last March, I
said that China could not do without its minority nationalities. There are
scores of nationalities in China. The regions inhabited by the minority
nationalities are more extensive in area than those inhabited by the Han
nationality and abound in material wealth of all kinds. Our national economy
cannot do without the economy of the minority nationalities.

Ninth, as for the campaign to wipe out illiteracy, I think we had better
get it going. In some places, this campaign has itself been wiped out. This
is not good. It is illiteracy and not the campaign that should be wiped out
in the course of co-operative transformation, that is, we should wipe out
illiteracy and not the campaign to wipe it out.

Tenth, some people ask, what is meant by "Left" and Right deviations? As
we have said on previous occasions, everything moves in space and time. Here
I'll chiefly deal with the question of time. If the observation you make
of the movement of things does not agree with reality, it is a "Left" deviation
if your judgment is premature, and it is a Right deviation if your judgment
lags behind. Take the co-operative movement for example. Although the conditions
are already ripe, such as the masses' enthusiasm, the widespread presence
of mutual-aid teams and the leadership of the Party, some comrades still
deny this. When it is already possible (not several years ago, but right
now) for the co-operative movement to develop in a big way, they still say
it is impossible. All this is a Right deviation. On the other hand, it is
a "Left" deviation if it is demanded that 80 per cent of the whole nation
should go co-operative in a very short time, when such conditions as the
level of political consciousness of the peasants and the leadership of the
Party are not yet ripe. As the old Chinese sayings go, "When a melon is ripe,
it falls off its stem," and "When water flows, a channel is formed." We should
act in accordance with specific conditions and achieve our aims naturally
instead of forcing the their attainment. Take childbirth for instance. It
requires nine months. If, in the seventh month, the doctor should exert pressure
and force the child out, that would not be good, that would be a "Left"
deviation. If, on the other hand, the unborn child is already nine months
old and very much wants to come out and yet you don't allow it, that would
be a Right deviation. In short, everything moves in time. When the right
time comes for something to be done, it has to be done. If you don't allow
it, that is a Right deviation. If the right time has not come for something
and yet you try to force it through, that is a "Left" deviation.

Eleventh, some people ask, isn't it possible that "Left" deviationist mistakes
will occur? Our reply is that it is entirely possible. If the leadership
in a given locality, whether a township Party branch or a district, county,
prefectural or provincial Party committee, does not take note of the level
of political consciousness of the masses and the development of the mutual-aid
teams, and if instead of drawing up plans, exercising control and establishing
co-operatives by stages and in batches, it only seeks quantity and does not
care for quality, serious "Left" deviationist mistakes are bound to appear.
When there is an upsurge of enthusiasm among the masses, when everyone asks
to join the co-operative, it is imperative to envisage all kinds of difficulties
and every unfavourable condition conceivable, openly make them known to the
masses and let the masses consider the matter fully. If they are not afraid,
they can join up; if they are afraid, they don't have to. Of course, we must
not frighten people away. I suppose I won't scare you away today, for we
have been in session for so many days. It is necessary to cool people's heads
at the right moment so that they won't become hot-headed.

We are opposed to boundless anxiety and countless taboos and regulations.
Does this mean that we should have no anxiety at all? Not a single taboo?
Not a single regulation? Of course that is not the case. Who is there who
does not have anxiety, the necessary anxiety, the warranted anxiety? And
we should have the necessary taboos and regulations too. Without a few taboos,
without a few regulations, how can we carry on? It is absolutely right to
have the necessary anxiety, taboos and regulations, and the necessary pauses,
intermissions, putting on of brakes and cut-offs.

Here is one method: when people are on the point of becoming conceited, when
they are about to get cocky, they should be assigned a new task (for instance,
we have now proposed a competition in quality and next year when you come
here, the results will be compared; by then the question of quantity will
have become secondary) so that they won't have a chance to become conceited,
as they won't have the time. We have tried this method before. When an army
unit won a battle and some comrades started talking about it with gusto to
people around them and got too cocky, you set them a new task--to fight another
battle. No sooner was a new task set than they had to start considering the
problems it entailed and make preparations, so that they stopped being cocky
and had no time for conceit.

Twelfth, some comrades have suggested that the county level might perhaps
be given the right to a margin of manoeuvre of 10 per cent. Take the
establishment of co-operatives, their number might be either 10 per cent
less or 10 per cent more. I think this suggestion can be adopted, it is a
good one, so don't make things too rigid. Please give the matter further
thought.

Thirteenth, aren't there people who want to reverse our decisions There are
quite a number. They think the co-operatives will come to nothing and what
we are doing will be entirely reversed, and they say we are not Marxists,
but opportunists. But, in my view, as the general trend indicates, this decision
is irreversible.

Fourteenth, some people ask, what will be the trend in the future? It will
be the basic accomplishment of socialist industrialization as well as of
the socialist transformation of agriculture, handicrafts and capitalist industry
and commerce within a period of about three five-year plans. So far as I
can see, that will be the trend. Besides, it may be added, as I indicated
at the last National Conference of our Party, that in about fifty to seventy-five
years, that is, within a period of ten to fifteen five-year plans, we shall
be able to make China a powerful socialist country.

During this period of fifty to seventy-five years, many serious and complicated
conflicts and struggles will certainly take place abroad, at home and inside
the Party, and we are bound to meet with a lot of difficulties. In our own
experience, we have lived through I don't know how many conflicts, armed
and peaceful, with bloodshed and without, so how can you guarantee that there
will be none in future? There will certainly be conflicts, and not a few,
but a lot. Among them there will be the outbreak of a world war, the dropping
of atom bombs on our heads, and the appearance of Berias, Kao Kangs, Chang
Kuo-taos and Chen Tu-hsius. Many things cannot be foreseen now. But, as we
Marxists see it, it is definite that all difficulties can be overcome and
that a powerful socialist China will emerge. Is that certain? I think it
is. According to Marxism it is. The bourgeoisie has prepared a grave-digger
for itself. Its grave is ready. How can it not die? Speaking of trends, this
is roughly the trend.

Fifteenth, you have made many suggestions for the revision of the two
documents--the resolution and the regulations. That is very good. We'll have
your suggestions collected for consideration. After its adoption today, the
resolution will be revised and published in a few days by the Political Bureau.
The regulations will take a longer time. The democratic personages will have
to be consulted and the legislative procedure will have to be followed. Or,
like the Draft Bill, the regulations may first be submitted to the Standing
Committee of the National People's Congress for discussion and then sent
to the State Council for publication in order to get opinions. Tentatively
and for a period of time, localities may act in accordance with the regulations
until they are submitted to the National People's Congress for adoption next
year.

Finally, in passing I would ask you to pay attention to writing. I hope all
present will become "teachers of composition". Your articles are well written,
except, perhaps, for a few shortcomings. You should take care to help other
people improve their style of writing. Now, of the articles written by many
comrades, some are long-winded and devoid of substance, but these are relatively
few; the chief defects are an overuse of classical Chinese and too strong
a flavour of the semi-literary, semi-vernacular style. In writing articles
one must pay attention to logic. That is to say, one must pay attention to
the structure of an article or speech as a whole, and there must be some
sort of relation between the beginning, the middle and the end, a sort of
inner relationship, and the three must not be at variance with one another.
One must also observe the rules of grammar. Many comrades tend to omit the
subject or the object of a sentence when it should not be omitted, or use
adverbs as verbs or even leave out verbs. All this is ungrammatical. Attention
must also be paid to rhetoric, to how to write more vividly. In short, to
be logical, to be grammatical and to have a better command of rhetoric--these
are the three points I would like you to bear in mind when you write.

NOTES


1. V. I. Lenin, "The Tax in Kind".

2. This refers to the compilation of How to Run
Agricultural Producers' Co-operatives by Comrade Mao Tsetung, who
undertook it after reading the reports on agricultural co-operation sent
in by various localities. See "Prefaces to Socialist Upsurge in
China's Countryside" below.

3. In the classical Chinese novel Water Margin, Wang
Lun (nicknamed "the scholar-in-white") becomes head of the peasant rebels
when they seize Liangshan Mountain, and he wants to remain head. When Lin
Chung, chief instructor to the capital garrison, is forced to rebel against
the authorities and seeks shelter on Liangshan Mountain, Wang Lun first tries
to turn him away and then makes things hard for him. Later, he refuses to
allow Chao Kai, a rebel peasant leader, and his followers to join forces
with the Liangshan Mountain rebels. In the end Wang Lun is killed by Lin
Chung.

4. V. I. Lenin, op. cit.

Transcription by the Maoist Documentation Project.