Truong Chinh asked when the fourth volume of the *Selected Works of Mao Zedong* could be published.

Chairman Mao said: It has been delayed because I have been slacking off. I wanted to read over what I had written before publishing it, but I am always too lazy to look at it. I am rarely completely satisfied with the things that have already been published. For example, "On Practice" is one I am relatively satisfied with, but "On Contradiction" is not very satisfactory. When the first draft of "On New Democracy" was half-written, the view that the nearly 100 years of modern Chinese history could be divided into two stages—the first 80 years and the last 20 years—only gradually became clear. Therefore, I started writing it again from scratch, and the final draft was settled only after repeated revisions. "On Coalition Government" is just an arrangement of the political program with little refinement, so it is not good. As for the "Talks at the Yan'an Forum on Literature and Art," I don't even want to look at it now.

Premier Zhou interjected, saying that "On Coalition Government" had a great mobilizing force and effect at the time, even greater than "On New Democracy"; the "Talks on Literature and Art" had great positive significance at the time and solved many major problems.

Aidi asked if, after the third volume of the *Selected Works of Mao Zedong* was published, Chairman Mao had any plans to make any revisions to the first and second volumes.

Chairman Mao said: I have no such plans at present, only that some annotations could be added.

Aidi further asked specifically, there is an article in the *Selected Works of Mao Zedong* that discusses the issue of armed struggle in revolution. I don't know if that refers to the characteristics of China, or to all countries. Premier Zhou interjected, saying that the article discusses the problems of war and strategy, and the revolutionary principles of armed struggle it talks about are correct not only in China but also in foreign countries. Chairman Mao said, that does not only speak of the China problem, but also includes foreign countries.

Aidi asked again if it is still said that way now. Chairman Mao said, it is still said that way now. Comrade Pollitt also mentioned this issue when he came to Beijing, asking if it needed to be revised. On this issue, our opinion is not consistent with Comrade Pollitt's. (Note: The beginning of "Problems of War and Strategy," Section 1, "China's Characteristics and Revolutionary War," in Volume Two of the *Selected Works of Mao Zedong* [horizontal edition], page 56, states: "The central task and the highest form of revolution is the seizure of political power by armed force, the settlement of the issue by war. This Marxist-Leninist principle of revolution is universally correct, for China and for all other countries." It continues: "But while the principle remains the same, its application by the party of the proletariat finds expression in varying ways according to the varying conditions.")

Chairman Mao said on this issue: Whether or not to have armed struggle is not something we can decide unilaterally; we are not the chief of staff of the bourgeoisie. We can and must say this: we want to strive for a peaceful transition to socialism. But we must also say, and even if we don't say it for a time, we must consider the problem this way: when the bourgeoisie attacks us with armed force, we will be forced to carry out armed struggle to achieve revolutionary victory. Engels once said in his lifetime that under specific conditions, Britain and the United States could also transition peacefully to socialism. But by the 20th century, in the era of imperialism, both the United States and Britain had become imperialist countries, and the situation was different. Lenin no longer said that. Naturally, one can also imagine that in the future, a small number of countries, under conditions where the overall balance of forces has fundamentally changed, may be able to achieve revolutionary victory peacefully without going through domestic armed struggle. The factor of strength is very important, and it includes armed forces. Right now, our camp only includes one-third of the world's countries. When we constitute the majority, the overwhelming majority, there will be some countries that, surrounded by our immense power, will not need to go through domestic armed struggle to achieve revolutionary victory peacefully. In countries where the bourgeoisie controls the state apparatus and the army, if we only plan for achieving revolutionary victory peacefully, we will suffer losses, because we are not the chief of staff of the bourgeoisie. Whether he lets you achieve victory peacefully is not determined by your subjective wishes. We now also say we want to strive for the peaceful liberation of Taiwan, but we are not the chief of staff for the United States and Chiang Kai-shek; we cannot answer for them. Chairman Mao then turned and asked Changzheng: You are not Ngo Dinh Diem's chief of staff either, are you? Whether he will let you reunify peacefully, can you answer for him? He then turned and asked Aidi: How is your work in the army going? Aidi replied: We only have a general influence on the army, no specific work. Chairman Mao said, work in the army is very important, I hope you will pay attention to it. You have already achieved great success in the elections; if the army work is done well, it will be even better, and you will have more strength.

Chairman Mao also mentioned that his view on the nature of the two stages of World War II, before and after, also differed from Comrade Pollitt's. Stalin's statements in 1946 and 1952 were different. We still believe that at the beginning, the imperialist countries were fighting for their own interests, not for the interests of the people. The nature of the war only changed after the Soviet Union resisted the German fascist offensive. Comrade Pollitt believes that Britain's war against Germany had a progressive nature from the very beginning; we do not agree with this view. On this issue and the issue of Britain's peaceful transition to socialism, our opinions failed to reach a consensus.

Aidi mentioned that many comrades in Indonesia believe that Chairman Mao's thinking is mature and that he must write articles in one go, without needing revision. Chairman Mao said, such a statement does not conform to reality. Our minds and thoughts reflect objective reality, and no one can reflect it completely correctly and without any error or omission at any given time. Objective reality is intricate, complex, and constantly developing and changing. The reflection of objective reality by our minds and thoughts is a developmental and changing process from incomplete to more complete, from not very clear to clearer, from not in-depth to more in-depth, and at the same time, it must develop and change along with the development and change of objective reality. When writing "On New Democracy," many things were not clear at the beginning and only gradually became clear during the writing process. And it was only after repeated revisions that the meaning was expressed relatively accurately. I am not satisfied with many of the articles I wrote in the past. Superstition is not good. When you listen to our opinions, you must analyze them and proceed from the actual conditions of your own country. Our opinions on China's domestic issues are not always without any mistakes, let alone when applied to handling foreign affairs. Chairman Mao also said that some stories about Chairman Mao do not conform to reality and are not credible. For example, a newspaper (or magazine) in Hong Kong said that I once went to a place 40 li away from Yan'an late at night to see a wounded soldier because he said he had to see Chairman Mao before he died. But no such thing ever happened. I did visit wounded soldiers, but it was right in Yan'an, and during the daytime. I never rushed to see a dying soldier at his request. There is another story that says I stopped believing in gods at the age of 8 and became an atheist. But at that time I still believed in gods, and later I was an idealist and an anarchist. What that article said does not conform to reality. That is also a kind of superstition. That is not good.

Chairman Mao also talked about some other issues at the time, such as the ideological method of proceeding from reality, which was also mentioned during the reception; the issue that Vietnamese affairs should be handled mainly by the Vietnamese people; and the issue, mentioned again in conversation after the banquet, of arresting few, not beating, and not killing a single person in the work of suppressing counter-revolutionaries and screening cadres. These are not recorded separately. In addition, some words cannot be recalled, and some are remembered too vaguely, so they have to be omitted.