(1) Theory

When convening meetings, there must first be precise documents. Do not rely on oral presentations—that is very dangerous. Documents serve as the basis, to be passed through the Central Committee. Both "May First" and "May Second" had documents; every clause was reviewed by the Central Committee. These concern several hundred million people. One must not simply rush in, read aloud, and disperse, considering the matter settled.

(2) Investigate a few typical cases. Send people or have them come—too many will spoil the matter. During the War of Resistance, the typical materials from twenty townships in Jin-Sui could not yield a conclusion (and were criticized), forming a patch of total darkness. Ren Bishi solved the problem with just one township.

In Hebei, 6 percent were dissolved, 7 percent withdrew. The poor peasants wept and refused to withdraw; there was also a portion unwilling to withdraw.

If you don’t calculate the overall account and only count the number of problems, how can that work? You bury yourselves in the work and never come out.

The same goes for grain—very bitter in spring, then fine again in autumn. In the spring of ’53, everyone cried out that it was unbearably bitter; both inside and outside the Party wailed, coinciding without prior consultation, like husband singing and wife following.

This year, another report to the Marshal: the general situation is bad. I said, probe again. The big situation is good; small matters are bad. The wheat is good; 94 percent of the cooperatives are good. How can it be bad? This is not production enthusiasm—it is negativity. I have personally investigated sixteen provinces; roughly 98 percent are generally fine. You have no figures in your minds. Eighty-five percent of the peasants have improved their status—generally fine. Put this way, it can be made clear in half a minute. You don’t speak of the large numbers, only the small numbers.

(3) The Central Committee put forward the cooperative policy in both ’51 and ’52. Those who came to Beijing in ’53 kept their mouths shut about transformation, utterly without influence. "Words do not touch upon righteousness—how difficult indeed!" I resisted this tide—the Four Great Freedoms, the individual economy. The Communist Party idles all day long, words never touching upon socialism, fond of dispensing small favors for the individual economy. To achieve the goal of protecting the state and benefiting the people—how difficult indeed! In ’51, the General Line was transmitted to the provinces; in ’53, no one spoke of socialism. I farted—very foul—and no one listened.

(4) You engage in socialism like Lu Junyi forced up Mount Liang—unwilling to sit in the first chair. Cancel this metaphor, because you are not captives. Nevertheless, you are so brilliant, your tails stick up so high! Unenthusiastic about socialism. In ’53, at the West Building, you spoke well of dispensing small favors. At the Finance and Economics Conference, in Zhongshan, the General Line was resolved. Thereafter, it was not called implementing the General Line but was said to be toppling the big tigers. Gao and Rao slashed across with one cut; many people spoke imprecisely. The Central Committee was isolated and helpless, so we brought in ××. You yourselves harbor capitalist thinking—the Four Great Freedoms, stabilizing the rural economy—for an entire period, indeed!

Socialism was not the center. I spoke a few famous words: "The transition period"—you had no interest. Among high-ranking cadres, a capitalist atmosphere prevailed; they were not prepared to engage in socialism. If you don’t believe it, please reexamine the speeches at the 1953 Finance and Economics Conference.

We criticized Bo and Gao-Rao with two objectives. We aimed to do the work well, but they used this to attack the Central Committee.

I farted—the fart of socialism—surely it is fragrant after all!

In winter, Deng Zihui came around, and all under heaven was at peace.

Today, we discuss rural work:

1. Chen Boda grumbled. This man is not straightforward—says there’s no problem when there is a problem, says there’s nothing when there is something. Why can’t a vice minister inquire? Apart from shitting, pissing, and sleeping, there is no fourth task. A miscellaneous-brand vice minister—there is reason to value him. You seem to think your Marxism is somewhat higher than ours; though higher, you must still consult, not be ashamed to ask those below. He drafted two draft regulations, after all!

2. Since you already knew the Central Committee’s General Line directive, why didn’t you speak of socialism in ’53? Not a hint revealed—proving there was not a shred of socialism in your brains, your minds full of capitalism. I specialize in harming people—spoke of "words not touching upon righteousness," ridiculed you thoroughly.

At the Finance and Economics Conference, Enlai announced those few sentences (the sentences of the General Line). At the conference, capitalism opposed capitalism; in the speeches, socialism was nowhere to be seen.

Your words did not meet the Central Committee’s requirements. We were repairing ×××; Gao Gang swept across with one slash. You, ×××, and I are from the same mountain, same hometown, comrades—yet at that time you could not be in accord with me. Only at the April Party Congress was the problem resolved; only from then did we become comrades of the same mountain and same hometown. You must look again at the speeches—utterly disgraceful, tails so numerous, third or fourth under heaven, very unsound, not in the Marxist style.

Steaming wine, grinding bean curd—dare not claim to be master craftsmen. In short, you were not prepared to enter socialism.

At the Rural Work Conference (’53), Deng Zihui’s speech only tucked in a bit of my opinion within his own speech—it did not form a system.

Transformation has already been underway for four years, from ’51 to ’55. Our Party has already established a vast socialist industry, commerce, and cooperative network. For capitalist transformation, a portion is joint state-private, the majority is processing and ordering. Vast mutual aid teams—large numbers of cooperatives (already existing in ’51). People from the provinces and municipalities do not recognize these great things. Such great socialist industry, commerce, cooperatives—new things—as if they had not been seen. At that time, I added cooperatives to every document. Opposing the "Five Excesses"—correct, but words did not touch upon righteousness. The Four Great Freedoms, stabilizing the rural economic order—that was incorrect.

This shows that the revolutionary transition, propagated through the Central Committee, first of all through propaganda among high-ranking cadres—at that time, everyone could not listen. Except for Gao, Rao, and the like, all were good people, after all!

At the Finance and Economics Conference on July 8 the year before last, and the Rural Work Conference in October, some comrades were not active in the struggle against Gao and Rao; some comrades were unwilling to engage in self-exposure. Li Xiannian is honest. For instance, he changed his opinion on the peasant question. I directly sent people to investigate, and all said there was great improvement. In ’53, people from the greater administrative regions all came saying it was bitter, wanting to reduce taxes and oppose the land survey and fixed production quotas. I was quite wavering, but did not know why they opposed it. Was it fear of infringing on peasant interests? What crime had been committed? Now I have swung back to the original proposition, because standing on the peasants’ bitterness, standing on protecting private ownership, is why they opposed the land survey. In construction expenditures, workers bear 90 percent, peasants bear 10 percent—who is suffering?

The individual economy cannot produce even this much. One worker equals several dozen people. You all do not produce; workers and peasants are the producers; workers and peasants are the bearers of burdens. Indirect taxes—of course, peasants bear quite a lot, but after all calculations, workers still bear more. Toward the Chinese peasants, our policy is steady.

Gather ten thousand pieces of material (dead people, livestock, grain seizures, ten thousand instances of darkness)—all together they amount to no more than 6 percent. (Hebei) People 7 percent; 94 percent are solid; 80 percent are genuine. The materials from Xiyu Township, Anping—two lines, requesting not to join the cooperative for one year, considering it the Chiang Kai-shek line. Full-year cooperativization, 45 percent withdrew—both sides comfortable.

In Hebei, a small cooperative of six households: three poor peasant households wanted to run it, three middle peasant households did not—yet it still continued. The middle peasants are vacillating; the mutual benefit policy is not so efficacious either. If you don’t take advantage of them, they still won’t come—resisting the superiority of socialism. Nothing but the force of the general trend can compel them; willing consent is impossible. It won’t be as comfortable as picking up girls or strolling the streets.

Compulsion is precisely the problem with the middle peasants. The First Five-Year Plan is still largely for the poor peasants; the middle peasants need the Second Five-Year Plan. To compromise with the middle peasants, unless there is complete freedom (half-compromise—abstract words, if spread, will cause problems. In unified procurement, with certain people, you cannot compromise with them. But it is not using a knife; rather, they must eat. We must definitely engage in socialism; we cannot not do it. I have never said we don’t need mutual benefit and voluntariness.) That is to say, we must do propaganda and education work; socialism does them no harm. It is precisely to make them unfree. The problem of unfreedom is very great; total compromise cannot succeed.

Seventy to eighty percent are peasants. Without the Central Committee plus the provincial and municipal committees persisting, it won’t work. Six or seven people decide major affairs; seven hundred and several hundred thousand people listen to their words—it’s just eating a meal. Relying on seven million people to express opinions will not succeed, because cooperation is not free. Simply propagandizing "upstairs and downstairs, electric lights and telephones"—he says, I don’t need it. Propagandizing this is called not understanding the times.

Admit that your own Marxism is insufficient. Last year, it was decided to issue 600,000—successful. In ’53, "the peasants are suffering"—incorrect. A thin foundation is also the peasants suffering. Opposing the land survey and fixed production quotas was also incorrect. Those who spoke wrongly must make a statement.

Gao said, estimating the overall situation was favorable to him, only the Southwest was not yet settled—wrong!

When you hear the wind, you don’t speak to me. When Mei Lanfang went to Shanghai to perform opera, he still had to pay respects to Du Yuesheng. Why not pay respects to me?

I like to speak sarcastically, to make people not forget, lest it become yesterday’s faded flower. I am very impolite; politeness is not my habit.

People say grain has damaged peasant enthusiasm. It must be understood: grain purchases of 70–80 billion jin—I procured 88 billion jin, less than one-third. 35 billion jin returned to the countryside. Supplies are not much more than under Japan and the Kuomintang. The Communist Party came, the population increased—the majority were born by the peasants themselves! In the past, peasants supplied the cities like this; the army is smaller than the Kuomintang’s, waste is less.

We purchased a little more; the adverse result affected livestock and pigs. Actually, it was slightly too much. If it affected pigs and livestock by two million, the factors are multiple; natural slaughter is also one. The Hui people are cattle slaughterers. In Xiangcheng, Henan, they started fighting—fighting is also a good thing; lessons were learned. In Yan’an, there were many, yet they still slaughtered; hide prices were too expensive. Two million—Henan slaughtered 600,000 head. But the total number in Henan increased. Matters must be analyzed.

Emaciation and weakness exist, but not the majority.

A dozen examples like not accumulating fertilizer—once spoken, they form a concept, without analysis. Damaging enthusiasm does not conform to the facts. Only pigs and cattle suffered some losses; within three years, they can be restored.

Don’t use cadres to investigate; I use righteous men. Whatever you want, the cadre provides. "What the superior loves, the inferior will surely surpass."

The assessment of cooperatives was inappropriate (Comrade Chen Yun’s report, absorbing your materials, right?), not speaking well of them—you did not see it.

Everyone speaks of unified procurement, every household speaks of grain. A gust of wind requires dictatorship. Block the wind, think of methods, persist in the policy.

Over five hundred million people, the majority, can overturn our socialism—dictatorship is necessary.

Can Zhejiang be restored a bit? "A meat bun thrown at a dog—gone never to return" is not good.

Huang Yanpei, immensely pleased with himself—we straightened him out a bit.

Dictatorship, in practice, is the dictatorship of the proletariat. If you only listen to the peasants, they will want freedom. The middle peasants, even if you don’t take advantage of them, still won’t come. When the time comes, they consider whether to join or not. Which is better, joining or not? Better to prefer unfreedom. The poor peasants may not necessarily follow us completely—not necessarily. Basically, ensure the middle peasants do not suffer losses. There are cooperatives entirely of middle peasants; there are those with many poor peasants. Persist in having three-tenths middle peasants as committee members; the interest-based public opinion of poor and middle peasants will then not be uniform.

Generally passable—let the middle peasants get by. Livestock, private ownership versus public ownership—historical experience has always been thus: public feeding is not conducive to raising.

Work Methods

First, prepare the documents well. Do not make them long; if long, they are counterproductive.

For nationwide issues, not isolated problems, there must be documents so the Central Committee has a basis. Let the Central Committee see them first. × can also participate; the Central Committee knows the entire content beforehand, to avoid mismatched caliber and loss of prestige.

Two meetings a year. For this meeting, the documents were not distributed—already late, fallen behind. A charter must be issued; based on the charter, express opinions.

Must we wait until after autumn to assess? No need. We can fully assess now; otherwise, it shows no faith in enthusiasm. Ninety percent of cooperatives are solid; grain outcries are less than 5 percent. We can fully assess now. Every year, we must assess like this. Although there are many shortcomings, over 95 percent are good. (At the ’53 Finance and Economics Conference, it was said that the line of every ministry was erroneous—several dozen finance and economics departments were seen as fundamentally incorrect. It should be: fundamentally correct, but with shortcomings. This makes it clear.) This time, there are counterrevolutionaries, but over 95 percent are good; people’s hearts are stable.

I call for pressing from above and suppressing from below, inspecting, resolving the few percent. With no figures in mind, after eating, you play the gramophone, speak casually, shackle yourselves. Recently, you even said cooperatives are fundamentally bad. You have been through several revolutions—why does this ailment appear? After the Rural Work Conference opened, the Central Committee met again, and internal quarrels broke out. If there had been a document beforehand, it would have been fine.

Interjections

1. (When speaking of the errors in Cao County, Shandong) Expand a small number of errors into the whole.

2. It is not that you don’t listen, but that you listen to another kind of talk.

3. The transition period is in turmoil every day; every day, capitalism is weakened, socialism developed. There must be turmoil, not stability. Once there is movement, there will be an earthquake. With the Four Great Freedoms, it becomes unstable instead.

4. Peasants fearing to stand out is a very good thing. The strength of the poor peasants, the atmosphere of socialism—you, on the contrary, want to dispel it, making it "Long Live Capitalism." Precisely, you should fear it.

5. Stabilizing the New Democratic order is the general slogan summarizing the Four Great Freedoms and other slogans.

6. The Dongting Lake Cooperative in Hunan held a meeting—like the first congress of the Russian Workers’ Party—but it is also a history that cannot be erased.

7. The opponents are resolute; we must be even more resolute. If we ourselves are not firm, we cannot make others firm.

8. Twelve categories of people: grain-deficient households, disaster victims, economic zones, rural handicraftsmen, small peddlers, fishermen, salt workers, herders, foresters, boat people, urban dwellers, self-sufficient households (20 percent), surplus-grain households (65 percent). According to the laws of social economy, the relations of production must correspond to the nature of the productive forces. Unified procurement is related to the relations of production and ownership; it has a coercive nature. Without dictatorial means, it absolutely cannot be accomplished; we cannot rely on the bourgeoisie. The productive forces develop; the relations of production do not suit the development of the productive forces. The productive forces will become mischievous—grain seizures and riots are all the productive forces becoming mischievous. Various methods (starving-belly method—demonstration nature). Some are fake non-joiners who will join, demanding capital; some are genuine. Pay attention; if you don’t, there will be retribution. Generally, they are suitable—blooming, planting wheat, making fertilizer, etc. There is also minor destruction. The current measures are stable: grain purchases reduced, levies not increased. Twelve thousand cadres sent to the countryside to persuade.

Dictatorship: capitalists, landlords, rich peasants, surplus-grain households will oppose to some degree. Rely on the proletariat, rely on the resolute ally—the poor peasants.

Look at history: the founding of the Republic marked the beginning of the transition period. Internally, it was ’52. But in Yan’an, there were already state-operated industries and mutual-aid cooperatives; in the Soviet areas, there were already elements of socialism. Must we wait until ’49!

9. The Rural Work Conference resolved the issue of taking advantage of the middle peasants—very good. Mutual benefit is still needed, exchange of equal value. Now, the poor peasant base is too small; we cannot build entirely on them. Among families, it is not calm; there are quite a few disputes in public opinion.

10. If poor peasant loans do not go through, the poor peasants will inevitably take advantage of the middle peasants—it is certain. That the middle peasants’ advantage will definitely not be taken—also impossible. In another two years, a great wind will blow in—two roads; they will have to come.

11. Increase support.

12. Cadres (some say) "The upper level is good, the middle level is few, the lower level is rotten." Not necessarily. There are also bad ones at the upper level—Gao and Rao, bad elements. Quite a few in the middle. "The lower level is rotten"—very bad. The worker-peasant base—if the upper level is bad, it topples. A few percent are rotten; over ninety percent are good. Among the bourgeoisie, too, only a few percent can be reformed—cannot all be rotten. This is a one-sided view. Those few phrases sound nice but are not right. Workers and peasants, after all, are not exploiters.

13. Make phone calls; grasp organizational issues.

14. Guard against "Left"; there must be seasons—study this. Before the autumn harvest, develop greatly; let it blow up first, then talk. After the harvest, assess again; the ’55 figures are set. We want both quantity and quality. We have already made a pact. Henan, 30 percent—empty-handed, nothing to do. Why be idle? Must fill it up! He fears it will rot; if not a single one rots, it’s even worse. Let it rot, then rebuild it well. If someone dies in a house, do you stop living in it? Let a batch collapse. In spring, hold a meeting to moderate things—hold a meeting for a day or so, fifteen minutes per person.

Note: This text appears to be an incomplete record, with many ellipses, and is quite difficult to understand. It would be better if one could refer to the background of the work situation of the Rural Work Department (unified procurement, cooperativization) and the inner-Party struggle (anti-Gao-Rao).