Concluding Remarks at the Supreme State Conference
(March 1, 1957)

Source: Kau & Leung, The Writings of Mao Zedong 1949-1976, Vol. II
Pages 351-363
============================================================

argued that it was wrong to have such an “adventurist advance,” and warned the CPC to “get
off the horse quickly,” advocating a policy of “drastic, or resolute, reduction.” See text July
31, 1955, vol. I, section 9 and note 18; also see text Dec. 6, 1955, vol. I, notes 6 and 10, and
text Dec. 27, 1955(2), vol. I, source note. (Note here that in the last of these, on p. 693 of
vol. I, “note 13” was mistakenly written for what should be “note 18.”)

D7, See text Jan. 18, 1957, paragraphs 4, 5, 6, also paragraph 12 for a different context
for the use of the expression “typhoon.”

65. The “cooperatives’ accumulation” here refers primarily to the accumulation of
certain funds by the cooperatives to be held in reserve for their own development and
expense. Seetext April 25, 1956, note 26. In terms of the state’s taxation (or revenue) here
the term is guojia de shuishou—we have in light of the context added the word “agricultural”
in brackets. The stat&s taxation on the agricultural sector at this time was primarily and
overwhelmingly, thoughnot exclusively, conducted in the form of grain accumulation. Thus
it is also known as gong /iang, or public grain. The amount of tax is calculated for the year,
and collection is done im the\summer and autumn. The major item is the chief grain crop of
the area, supplemented occasignally by other products and even cash. This is “requisitioned”
grain, or grain tax, and is considered apart from the state purchase of grain. It is considered
a part of public accumulation. See also text Jan. 18, 1957, paragraph 15; and text Jan. 27,
1957(1), paragraphs 72, 73, 74.

130. Also see Kang Chao (1970), pp. 225-229.

68. The PRC’s official statistics on grain requisition and state purchasing lump the two
categories together under the “unified purchasing and unified marketing” rubric. Moreover,
the statistics run annually from the second half of one year to June the following year. Hence
it is not possible to find out specifically about 1956’s figures, or those of any calendar year.
According to RMSC (1958), p. 541, the total amount of requisitioned grain for the 1955-1956
twelve-month period was 85.99 billion catties, and that for the 1956-1957 period was 83.43
billion catties.

ee


system.* Well, this leadership by the working class is [exercised through] a
Party. The present is still the age of parties. This class and this Party have a
particular ideology, namely, Marxism—[or,] the ideology of Communism. The
question, then, is how does the Party exercise leadership? How does it exercise
guidance? That is not to say that everybody must join the Communist Party or
that everybody must believe in the principles of the Communist Party and
espouse a dialectical materialist world view. These things, such as this question
of a [particular] world view, can [be done] only by making people understand
gradually. In the beginning, very few people [will understand], then a few more,
and still more later. You can’t just demand that a great number of people believe
[in these things]. You can’t force people to believe in anything; I spoke about
this day before yesterday.3 In matters of the mind, you can’t force a person to
believe; nor can you force a person not to believe. For instance, it won’t work
to force people not to believe in religion, or to force people to believe in one
religion but not in another. Would it work to force people to believe in the
Marxist world view? That wouldn’t work either. However, the Marxist world
view is spreading daily. Every day some more people come to believe in it. Yet
no matter what, [ believe that several decades from now there will still be people
who do not believe in it, who will not believe in that world view. Marxism is
atheistic; those who believe in a God don’t believe in it. What shall we do if,
even after several decades or however many years, there are still some of these
people who do not believe in it? From the very beginning, the Marxist-Leninist
leadership should have made provisions for this; that is, they should have
recognized that there would be some people who would not believe in it and in
reality perhaps that’s just the way it is, and just the way it has to be.

Can there be criticism or not? Marxists are not afraid of criticism. If Marxism
can be repudiated through criticism, then it’s of no use; if it can be proven that
Marxism is not the truth, well, then it just won’t work. If even Marxism were to
fear criticism, then it would be no good. Therefore the question of whether or not
Marxism can be criticized doesn’t arise. As a matter of fact, the idealists criticize
Marxism, and [people in] the religious circle also criticize Marxism; it’s just that
some of them don’t say so, that’s all. Some people integrate Marxism with religion,
asserting that [Marxismj is compatible with their religion. If old cadres can be
toppled by criticism, they deserved to be criticized. If you topple as soon as you
are criticized, you are just made of paper and cotton, and paper and cotton are
toppled by a puff of wind. You ought to be unafraid of criticism. So, at this time,
to bring up [the problem of] being afraid of criticism is simply [an indication that
you] have weaknesses. Do these weaknesses exist? I think both old cadres and new
cadres have weaknesses. [Their] weak aspects should all be criticized; regardless
of what kind of cadre or government [is involved], shortcomin gs and errors should
be criticized. Moreover, this should become a habit: the people’s government
should make this a habit. Criticism [should be] nothing to worry about. If the
criticism ts correct, of course it’s good. If the criticism is incorrect, then of course
it doesn’t matter. This is [what we mean by] “Those who speak out shall not be
held guilty.”* In matters [that fall] within the purview of the people, the people

eal


should have the right to criticize. We deny this right only to counterrevolutionaries.
[The provisions in] the Constitution should be enforced; [this includes] the freedoms of speech, assembly, association, and publication.‘

Some people say that I didn’t address myself adequately to the long-term
coexistence and mutual supervision [between the Communist Party and other
democratic parties].© Strictly speaking, this is also a kind of criticism. The day
before yesterday I didn’t talk much about this question, and some friends mentioned
it today.’ What is meant by long-terta? As I thought about it, this question is rather
easy to answer. Long-term? It meang that as long as your Communist Party lasts,
they [the other parties] will last, and [we must simply] act according to this
assumption. However long the life span of the Communist Party may be, the life
span of the democratic parties will be just as long. Today, old venerable Mr. Guo8
said that we all should keep up with him; [this illustrates that] those without Party
affiliations last longest. The Communist|Party will be eliminated one day. We hope
that day will not be too long, nor too sooh, in coming. It’s probably impossible for
it to be too soon, but there is no need for}it to be too distant either. All things that
occur [have their definite life span], dnd because all things in this world are
occurrences, [all things] have their definite life spans. The Communist Party, for
one, is a thing. What are the ways of supervising [each other]? These simply fall
within the scope of criticism and suggestion. We supervise [each other] by using
these methods, right? We have all kinds of opportunities, don’t we? For instance,
today 1s an opportunity. There are all kinds of other opportunities to carry out
criticism. The main method is criticism. In criticizing shortcomings, [one must]
proceed from the desire for unity, and, through criticism, achieve unity and improve
[our] work.9

Some people say, “You said on the one hand that big democracy!® is not
appropriate for dealing with the class enemy, but you also said on the other hand
that it is permissible to have strikes and student boycotts. Aren’t you self-contra-
_dictory?” The question is this: by “big democracy” we are referring to mass
movements. It is something we have done in the past, and includes certain measures
used in the movement to suppress counterrevolutionaries. At present there are
people who suggest that we don’t need big democracy, that now [our] methods
have already changed, and that the problems that remain are old ones. [They say
that] the transformation of industry and commerce is not through democracy, and
the ideological transformation of the intellectuals is not [through] big democracy
either, but small democracy. For some even the word “small” is not adequate, and
they add another “small” to it, making it “small, small democracy.” [All this is to
say that] gentle breezes and fine rain are better.!! [But] what we are talking about
now is [the kind of place where] not [even] small democracy is practiced, where
there is no democracy whatsoever. What shall we do about places, factories,
cooperatives, schools, stores, government organs, and units that are like that? They
have no democracy of any kind, no big democracy, no small democracy, not even
small, small democracy; they are riddled with outright bureaucratism.!2 There will
be problems that cannot be solved even in a hundred years; problems just can’t be
[completely] solved. This has forced [a situation of] big democracy to appear, and


there are strikes in factories and schools. I don’t think it’s good to prohibit this kind
of antibureaucratism [activity]. We should permit it, although the Constitution does
not have an article on strikes.!3 This is not to say that we are advocating strikes in
factories and schools on a national scale. We are not advocating this; we advocate
opposition to bureaucratism and we advocate the practice of using criticism to solve
problems that fall within the purview of the people. Do strikes count as a form of
struggle? Yes, they do count as a form of struggle. When [the method of] using
criticism for struggle fails, the use of this method [of struggle] against severe [cases
of bureaucratism] and stubborn bureaucratists should be permitted. What, then, if
the teachers are unable to control the students? There should be discipline. No
matter whether it’s a factory, school, cooperative, or store, every place should have
[discipline]. This nation of ours, the Chinese people, have discipline and are very
well-disciplined. The problem is that we haven’t done work among them; political
and ideological education is very deficient, and there is deficiency in many respects.
Bureaucratism is very severe, and in some places and in quite a number of schools
problems cannot be solved, and no education [has been given]. Education about
discipline should be given to young people, especially the young people in schools.
When disturbances occur in factories, and in technical workers’ schools, they are
all [caused by] the young workers. They only understand a few things and should
be educated. But our education has not reached them. To strengthen discipline, we
should carry out [the work of] education; teachers should unite as one with students,
factory managers should unite as one with workers, and [teachers and managers]
should show a concern for [students and workers]. When this is done, will there
still be strikes? Wherever we have accomplished this, there will be no strikes.
Therefore, the first point is to oppose bureaucratism. As for the second point, that
is what we will now discuss. If bureaucratism is extremely serious in a particular
place or in a localized area, in a particular factory, a particular cooperative, or a
particular school, then, at such a time, whether or not there are actually strikes or
student boycotts, strikes should be permitted within these limitations for the simple
reason that there isn’t even small democracy in these places. We permit [strikes]
within these conditions. [However, when some of [you] comrades from the localities return to your respective areas, don’t say that [according to] the meeting held
in Beijing from now on we can have nationwide strikes (laughter), or nationwide
boycotts of classes, and say that I said so. That’s not so. Let’s take the military
as an example. In the military we once conducted sharp criticism: the soldiers
criticized the officers and made the officers very uncomfortable; the soldiers
criticized their company leaders; and cadre meetings criticized the army and
division commanders. After extensive criticism, the division commanders, the
army commanders, or the company commanders found their work easier to
perform. The soldiers are the ones who carry the guns. They can use this method
of criticism to criticize and make self-criticism. After that you [officers] should
make a self-examination. Those who are company commanders should review
the errors they have committed. You can’t beat people; officers can’t beat the
soldiers. Things have been done this way in the military. We have a very great
degree of democracy in our [People’s] Liberation Army. Why can’t our schools


do likewise? Why can’t our factories do likewise? In our cooperatives, at
present, commandism is very serious in many places.!4 Why can’t our government organs practice [democracy] in this way? Is it that if we do, there will be
rebellion all over the country, there will be chaos everywhere? Nothing of that
sort, because the army is not in chaos} Then, how did we win wars? And what
did we rely on to win wars? One, we had no atom bombs; two, we had no
hydrogen bombs. We didn’t have a single intercontinental missile; we didn’t
even have airplanes. In those days our weapons were inferior to those of our
enemies; how then did we get united? We relied on exterminating bureaucra-.
tism, on curtailing bureaucratism, on forging a unity with the masses, and on
following the mass line.!>

About obeying leadership: Factories must follow the leadership and direction of the factory managers. Students must follow the direction of their
teachers. They should have discipline in studying. But teachers must forge a
unity with the students, be concerned about the students, and solve the students’
problems. At present there are still many unsolved problems in the schools. For
instance, there are too many classes, arid the work load of the students is too
heavy. As I see it, we Chinese are likethis: Either you don’t understand a single
character, in which case you are called an illiterate, or, if you want to become
literate, you are given a huge pile [of characters to read] every day. Therefore,
when we talk about things like strikes and class boycotts, parades and demon-
Strations, and petitions, we regard them as one of the ways of regulating the
social order, a kind of supplementary method. The usual method should be the
overcoming of bureaucratism, and making criticism. But if this method can’t
be applied, it is possible, and should be permitted, to use the method [of strikes
and boycotts] as a supplementary method to regulate our social order. It’s a
supplementary method to overcome contradictions among the people and to
regulate social order.

We must broaden our horizons and understand the international situation and
the enemy’s situation. We are preparing to publish a journal, Cankao xiaoxi
[Reference News].'© Those present here have probably all seen it. What was the
circulation of Cankao xiaoxi in the past? Two thousand copies. Now we are
preparing to expand it into a major newspaper [with a circulation of] 300,000
copies. Dagong bao, for example, has a circulation of 280,000 copies;!’ this
newspaper’s circulation will be larger; it will be 300,000 copies. We are preparing
to expand its circulation from 2,000 to 300,000. It will circulate down to the xian
level. You just have to pay to get [a copy], that’s all. Anyone who wants to buy this
publication, either inside or outside the Party, may read it. Now some people will
Say that we are putting up money to run a newspaper for the imperialists, or that
the Communist Party and the People’s Government are unconditionally running a
newspaper for the imperialists. And I’d say you just might put it that way; it’s
exactly that kind of a thing. Namely, we want to take what [the imperialists] say in
berating us, the way in which they berate us, and [news of] disruptions occurring
among them, and publish them in this newspaper, making it into an internal
publication that 300,000 people can read. [And, since] each copy will not be


356 {/ MAO ZEDONG

restricted to one reader, there will not only be [300,000 readers, but more]. What
do you mean it mustn’t be lost? What should be done if some people should lose
this thing? Well, what does it really matter? (Laughter.) (Premier Zhou: Nobody
does that now.) Nobody does that any more? Don’t be so commandist! We Just
want our people to face the world and understand things in the outside world. As
to whether they will be affected by [the imperialists’] propaganda or influenced by
imperialism and become their people, I think it’s possible that one or two will
change. One or two might change, but we Chinese are so numerous. Just a while
ago the venerable Mr. Ma Yinchu!8 said [we have] a population of 600 million. So,
what does it matter if a few people change? Regarding the issue of Generalissimo
Chiang:19 Chiang Kai-shek has said a lot of things; he has many publications
and speeches, of considerable length, I hear. I approve of publishing his
complete collected works; some people oppose that, so we’ll [just] publish his
selected works.2° This, of course, will not be made available publicly. Is it all
right to make it available publicly? Perhaps it is not feasible to do so at present,
[but] libraries are willing to buy it and take a look at it. If you want to study
history, he is a historical personage and a reflection of social existence. Chiang
Kai-shek’s ideology and his collected works are reflections of social existence.
We should criticize those things. How can we criticize him if we have not read
his writings? Is it that all those who have read his writings will want to go to
Taiwan and join that party of his? Is there any danger of that? I don’t think
there’s any danger of that. If there are a few people who want to go join his
party, that’s all right! The point here is that we must broaden our horizons and
brave the storm, and we must not hide in a greenhouse. Things that have grown
up in greenhouses are not sturdy.2! So now we should even better understand
[the principle of] letting a hundred schools of thought contend, and letting a
hundred flowers bloom.22 Why should we let a hundred schools of thought
contend and a hundred flowers bloom? [It’s true that] some trouble will always
come out of it, and some bad things will emerge in the process of contending.
The day before yesterday I spoke about how one should look at bad things. Bad
things have another function. On the one hand they are bad; on the other hand,
they are good. Poisonous weeds have their good points.23 They are not merely
poison. I have given the example of the smallpox vaccination.24 Bacteria,
viruses are bad things, but they sometimes perform a useful function. They can
cause people to develop immunities.

What other things are there [to talk about]?

Take [the situation in] Hungary.*> Some people have criticized me for not having
spoken enough [about it], for not having clearly explained its causes. What, in the
final analysis, were the errors committed in Hungary? I talked a little about the
errors the other day; but I didn’t have time to talk about them very much. [Frankly, ]
we weren't very clear [about the situation]. We were not very clear about that
Rakosi in the past, about what that comrade was doing.26 There were also a good
many things in the Soviet Union about which we were not very clear either. The
Soviet Union was better, but Rakosi, at the time, was doing ridiculous things!
Generally there were these various things, bureaucratism, dogmatism, alienation


from the masses, and errors in industrial policy. Didn’t I mention [these] the other
day? In [formulating] industrial policy there was [no consideration of] raw materials or markets; they ran large factories, workers’ wages were lowered by 20 per
cent, and the capitalists were simply overthrown. That’s like overthrowing our Mr.
Rong Yiren2/ and sending him to be a worker in Shenxin No.\9 Factory. The minute
a Hungarian [type of] incident occurred, he would go out and organize a workers’
committee. What kind of committee would he organize? He would organize a
workers’ committee. It’s that simple, so obviously simple. (Layghter.) [In Hungary]
the intellectuals hadn’t been reformed; there wasn’t even talk of reforming intellectuals. And thus the Petofi Clubs, the Correspondents’ Association, and the
Student Federation appeared.8 Furthermore, the counterreVolutionary elements
had not been suppressed, and there was no struggle between the masses and the
counterrevolutionaries. Instead, only a small number of people were involved in
the struggle, and the great bulk of the real counterrevolutionaries were not injured.
And so, big democracy arrived in Hungary! This time, big democracy didn’t last
long, and yet how long will it take to recover? Some~people say it will take three
years. [The Hungarians] said that themselves. Their people told us that it would
take them three years to recover from [the effects of] the big democracy in the one
or two months between last October 23 and December. Big democracy is good,
yes, but it will take three years before the recovery can be completed. Big
democracy in Poland cut production in haif. October, November—in October,
production was cut in half; I don’t know what the situation is like now. They may
have recovered somewhat. Therefore, it is better to engage in small democracy. If
we were to have big democracy, a fairly large number of those of us sitting here
wouldn’t be able to stand it. Isn’t that true?

The population is to be limited to 600 million; and not a single person more?
(Laughter.) This is a postulation. It refers to a period of time, for instance when
conditions [for supporting a larger population] have still not been met, that ts, food,
clothing, housing, education, and so forth. At present there is an increase each year
of over ten million [people]. You want to stop this increase, but it’s very hard to
say, because at this point we have anarchy! The realm of necessity has not been
transformed into the realm of freedom.2? In this area humanity is not at all
conscious, and it has not found the solution. We can study this; we ought to study
it, and the government should set up a department [for this purpose]. I said the other
day that the government should establish a department or a commission. People’s
Organizations should extensively study this problem [of population growth] and
think up solutions. In short, humankind has to control itself and that’s all there ts
to it. Sometimes [the population] can be increased a little; at other times the increase
has to stop; Can 1t be made into planned production? (Laughter. ) That is conjecture.
The venerable Mr. Ma Yin[chu] has stated this point very well; he really stated it
well today! He and I are comrades. Previously, [during the period of] “letting a
hundred flowers bloom” his opinion didn’t have a chance to bloom. He was
prepared to state his opinion, when others opposed him. They said he should not
be allowed to speak. Today one may say that he has talked to his heart’s content.?°
But this problem still deserves further study; the government should set up


organizations [to deal with it] and provide certain measures. Are the people likely
to make this demand, or 1s this merely our subjective [perception of a problem]?
The people are demanding this. Not everybody is demanding it, but a great many
people are. For instance, peasants demand this. When there are too many people
in a family, they demand birth control. This demand exists in both the cities and
the countryside. It isn’t right to say there’s no demand for it. Mr. Zou!3! Hi, you
two are sitting together now. (Laughter. )

Don’t pour cold water on the scientists. Is this a good rule? I think it is. Don’t
pour cold water. How could we pour cold water on the scientists? Of course it’s
bad to pour cold water on the scientists. Likewise we should not pour cold water
on any specialists, on such other specialists as political scientists, artists, and
writers. Don’t pour cold water on the scientists. We want active elements to remain
active. Even when sometimes their work isn’t done well, we shouldn’t pour cold
water, but should help them correct their mistakes. Only those individual [cases of]
extremely stubborn and incurable elements should be handled differently, the
incurable ones. Don’t pour cold water on the scientists. For me to visit the Academy
of Sciences? The venerable old Mr. Guo has put me in check32 today. There is no
way out of it, I’m afraid, since you put me in check. Otherwise you would already
have labeled me as a bureaucratist. (Laughter.)

The problem that the purely technical viewpoint 1s on the upswing: Our
comrades have raised this question, and have put it well. [We should] teach our
cadres, scientists, technical personnel, technical cadres, and students not to have a
purely technical viewpoint. A technical viewpoint is good. One should have a
technical viewpoint. How can one handle technology without a technical viewpoint? Without [such a] viewpoint can there be technology? We want to develop
science and technology, and we must have a scientific, technical viewpoint, we
must develop it until everyone is enthusiastic about it. But to have a purely
[technical viewpoint] is not good! It could lead to [the point where people
would] serve either socialism or capitalism [without discrimination]. Therefore,?3 we now hope that our comrades will show concern for the new politics
and for the new overall situation; however, we have to do the work on our part
well. We can’t put the blame entirely on them, because it is we who haven’t
done our work well. There are some things that they cannot accept, that is to
say, our ideological work, political work, and educational work have made it
difficult for people to accept [these things]. They don’t have any interest in
accepting these things from us [because] these things are simply a kind of
dogmatism and lack persuasiveness, and they fail to arouse their interest.
Therefore, we must improve our political work. In schools, in scientific research
organizations, in factories, and in all places where there are scientific and
technical personnel, and among students, we must strengthen and improve our
ideological and political work.

Concerning what happens when the dao prevails in the state. What happens
when the dao prevails in the state? It becomes a matter of shame for one to be poor
and base. That is the problem.34 This problem is indeed not a problem of the
individual; this is the so-called [job] assignment problem. This problem has two


_ TE OE TO

~ MARCH 1957 / 359

facets: one is the failure to assign [jobs] to some people; the other is the
unsuitability of [some job] assignments. An unsuitable assignment means a
position without authority, without anything to do, or an\assignment that is
incompatible with the person’s learning and talent. People have acknowledged
that the dao prevails in the state. It is good that the dao prevails in the state. By
“state” we are referring to the People’s Republic of China. What is this dao? It
1s none other than socialism, none other than dialectical materialism! (Laughter.) What is being poor and being base?35 Being poor is having insufficient
salary; being base is not having any work; this probably does not mean that they
do not show an interest in physical labor; it means they don’t havé¢ work or their
work assignments aren’t suitable, {and so] they use Confucius t@ criticize us.36
(Laughter.) So, Confucius is still useful sometimes after all. {Laughter.) This
is a problem related to shortcomings in the area of Uniféd Front work. Shortcomings in this area are numerous. The Central Committee of the Communist
Party of China is preparing to convene a conference this year, a Central
Committee plenum, especially to discuss the problems of the United Front.37 I
hope the comrades of the various parties and comrades without party affiliations
will do some preparation in this respect, will give us suggestions, and will speak
frankly. Gather information about the number of people who are “poor and
base,’ their names, and their native places.

Furthermore, we have many shortcomings. We have encountered many difficulties in the course of our advance. But we must not forget that foreign countries
also have their difficulties. For instance, the United States has its own difficulties.
The famous character Wang Xifeng in Hongloumeng [The Dream of the Red
Chamber] once said, “The great have difficulties peculiar to the great.”38 When
other people wanted to borrow money from her, she complained, saying, “The great
have difficulties peculiar to the great.” Old Woman Liu [came to] borrow some
money, but because [Wang] spoke that way, she became greatly discouraged. It’s
true; the great do have their own difficulties. Things in the United States are not
that easy to manage. As I see it, an economic crisis will come in the United States.
An economic crisis [will come] in Britain, France, Western Europe, the free world,
the Western world, and the Western nations. Their internal contradictions are very
great, and economic crises will come. Such a thing is probably unavoidable. The
moon in America is not necessarily that bright; that has still to be proven.39 For a
time, they had their atom bombs, they had a few more catties of steel. They are
Strong now. Should we acknowledge this? We should. We have called them a paper
tiger.49 People don’t understand why we say they’re a paper tiger when they have
SO many things. What we are saying is that those things of theirs are established on
an unstable foundation. Whose foundation is more stable? It is our foundation that
IS more stable; it is the socialist foundation. The socialist camp is not that secure
{either}. We also have our defects and our shortcomings. Our people are dissatisfied
with us on a good many [points]. Our economy is still backward, and our culture
is still backward. Our socialist [society], taken as a whole, is still backward
Compared with theirs. But they are established on a foundation that embodies a
greater contradiction. We mustn’t forget this point.

- ~~


Finally, this talk and my talk of the day before yesterday [need to be] supplemented and revised a bit in some places. Regarding what I said today, the comrades
have brought up a good many opinions. We do not intend to publish all of what I
said. [This is] because as soon as certain questions are made public, such as this
matter of strikes in factories and boycotts in schools, then, okay, the entire nation
would go on strike! (Laughter.) And our cadres are not prepared [for this]; our
comrades are not prepared. [Therefore, you] comrades who have come to the
meeting from the localities, when you return home, please see to it that people are
prepared. Now it’s easy for us to talk about these things; it’s easy [for us] to sit here
and talk. It is they who will bear the brunt of the events. We must make them
prepared. Furthermore, [with regard to the strikes], the limitations that we are
referring to are that they must be appropriate, localized, and in various individual
cases [they should occur] where, because of [the existence of] that type of severe
bureaucratism, problems have remained unsolvable for a long time. Finally, we
intend to circulate this speech of mine to the xian level after it has been somewhat
revised and properly edited, [so that] people inside and outside the Party will be
able to read it. We are preparing to hold a conference on propaganda and education
in a few days, that is, a conference on propaganda, on propaganda work, and
newspapers.4! [I] am preparing to talk [about this] once more with the people at
that conference. That’s all. (Applause.)

Notes

1. For previous discussions of these two issues, see sections 6 and 8, text Feb. 27, 1957.

2. See text Feb. 27, 1957, section 1, paragraph 6.

3. Mao is obviously referring to the speech of February 27, 1957, which would be
earlier than “the day before yesterday.” See text Feb. 27, 1957, section 1, paragraph 9.

4. This is derived from a dual aphorism, yan zhe wu zui, wen zhe zu jie (blame not the
speaker, but be warned by his words). This saying is used to propose that people should
not fear to speak up, because they are not to be incriminated by what they say.truthfully.
It is derived from the section “Da xu” (Major Preface) in the Shi jing (Classic of Odes). An
earlier use of this aphorism by Mao can be found in his key April 24, 1945 essay, “On Coalition
Government”; see SW, III, p. 266. Subsequently, it was also incorporated into the “principles”
regarding rectification, as articulated in the CPC Central Committee’s directive on the
rectification campaign, issued on April 27, 1957. (See RMSC [1958], p. 29.)

5. See text Jan. 27, 1957(1), note 66, and text Feb. 27, 1957, notes 11 and 17.

6. See text Feb. 27, 1957, note 82.

7. This refers to text Feb. 27, 1957.

8. This refers to Guo Moruo, see text Sept. 4, 1956, note 7; the fact that Guo addressed
the plenary session of the conference on Mar. 1 was mentioned in RMSC (1958), p.
326. However, no transcripts are available.

9. See text Feb. 27, 1957, note 22 and surrounding text.

IQ. See text Nov. 15, 1956 (section 4 in both versions). Mao also spoke continuously
on the subject in text Jan. 18, 1957 (both versions), and text Jan. 27, 1957 (both versions).
The Wansui (1969) text here is a bit garbled. The Wansui (n.d. 3) text reads, in translation:
“Some people say: “You talk of big democracy again; that is not appropriate; big democracy
is used to deal with the class enemy....’ ”

11. See text Aug. 24, 1956(2), note 29; see also text Feb. 27, 1957, note 43 and
surrounding text.


12. See text Feb. 27, 1957, section 9, paragraph 1; see also text Jan. 27, 1957(1), note
64, and text Feb. 27, 1957, note 94.

13. See, again, text Feb. 27, 1957, note 17.

14. See text June 6, 1950(1), vol. I, note 11; see also text Feb. 27, 1957, note 30.

15. See text May 15, 1951, vol. I, note 7; see also text Feb. 27, 1957) note 49.

16. See text Jan. 27, 1957(1), note 55.

17. See text Jan. 27, 1957(1), note 7. The Wansui (1969) source readg 2,800, while the
Wansui (n.d. 3) source reads “280,000.” In this case we have accepted the figure in Wansui
(n.d. 3) as more plausible.

18. The Wansiui (n.d. 3) version has “Ma XX” here, as well as where Ma Yinchu is
mentioned in the third paragraph down from here. This refers to Ma Yinchu (1882-1982),
a prominent economist who studied at Yale University and received his Ph.D. degree in
applied economics at Columbia University in 1914. In 1920, he was instrumental in the
founding of the Shanghai College of Commerce, and in 1923 he founded and became the
first president of the Chinese Economics Society. In the late 1930s, Ma began to assail the
‘‘bureaucratic-capitalism” that dominated China’s economic development under Chiang
Kai-shek’s Nationalist government, presided over by people such as H. H. Kung and T. V.
Soong. From 1940 to 1942, he was under house arrest by Chiang’s government. Early in
1949, at Zhou Enlai’s request, he went to Communist-controlled Northeast China, and later
in that year served as a nonpartisan delegate to the Chinese People’s Political Consultative
Conference (see text Sept. 21, 1949, source note). In October 1949 he was made a member
of the GAC and the vice-chairman of its finance and economics committee. From 1950 to
1951, he was president of Zhejiang University, and from 1951 to 1960, he was president of
Beijing University. In 1960, he was dismissed from this post because of the political
unorthodoxy of his economic views. For more biographical information on Ma, see H.
Boorman et al., eds. (1970), II, pp. 475-478. Ma’s theories, out of vogue for some time in
the PRC, have begun to regain an audience. In 1981, Beijing University Press (Beijing daxue
chubanshe) published a two-volume set of his essays, under the title Ma Yinchu jingji lunwen
xuanjt (Selected Essays on Economics by Ma Yinchu); the introductory essay by Zhang
Chunyuan and Song Jingan also include important biographical information on Ma.

19. Mao often sarcastically referred to Chiang Kai-shek by his former title of
weiyuanzhane (chief councillor), which refers to his position as director of the National
Military Council. This is equivalent, during the period of the War of Resistance Against
Japan, to commander-in-chief of China’s forces. To the West, however, Chiang in this
Capacity was more familiarly known as “Generalissimo Chiang.”

20. See text Jan. 27, 1957(1), text surrounding note 42 and final paragraphs in text Jan.
18, 1957, version II. The last part of the sentence here—‘‘so we’ll [just] publish his selected
works”—does not appear in the Wansui (n.d. 3) version.

21. See text Feb. 27, 1957, section 8, paragraph 4.

22. See text Autumn 1956, note 3: see also text Feb. 27, 1957, note 81.

23. See text Feb. 27, 1957, section 10 and note 83; cross reference to text Jan. 18, 1957,
note 38.

24. See text Feb. 27, 1957, text surrounding note 89, and text Jan. 27, 1957(1), paragraph 28.

25. See text Nov. 15, 1956, note 27; see also text Feb. 27, 1957, note 18.

26. See text Jan. 27, 1957(1), note 68.

27. See text Dec. 8, 1956, note 38.

28. The Petofi Club was a renowned intellectual association in Hungary whose membership consisted of scholars, many academicians (professors at universities), scientists, and
artists. The membership of this association led the way in making criticism in the Hungarian
Incident. For more on this, see text Jan. 27, 1957(1), note 84. We are not sure about the
other associations mentioned here, but the Hungarian Incident was triggered by a demon-
Stration, primarily made up of intellectuals and university students, in Budapest on October
23, 1956.


362 {/ MAO ZEDONG

29. In Marxist thought, “freedom” and “necessity” are two philosophical categories that
represent the relationship between objective laws and human conscious activity. “Necessity”
stands for the laws that govern the objective development of things, while “freedom” stands
for the understanding of the objective laws and the resultant ability to transform the objective
reality. Since human action is willful and purposeful, Marxist dialectics holds that in human
action, to transform nature and in social struggle, there has to be a relationship between
freedom and necessity. Before people are aware of the objective laws, their actions, however
willful, are governed and dictated by these laws unconsciously, or blindly, and there is no
freedom. After they become aware of the laws, their actions, though still governed and
limited by the laws, are no longer unconscious. Rather, people then become capable of using
the laws that they understand to serve a certain purpose. Thus they attain a certain degree of
freedom. Thus freedom is linked to necessity, and under certain conditions, necessity can
dialectically transform into freedom. The understanding of objective laws, or the objective
necessity of things, is a prerequisite for the attainment of purposed consequences in human
actions to transform the objective world. Yet until human action does in practice achieve the
transformation of the objective world through conscious employment of laws that it has
come to understand, necessity has remained necessity, and has not yet transformed into
freedom. Freedom is therefore the product of the basic dialectical process of historical life.
Through history, freedom is developed on the basis of the continuous growth and deepening
of human grasp of objective laws through practice. In this way, human history 1s a continuous
process from the realm of necessity (biran wangguo) to the realm of freedom (ziyou
wangguo). This is recognized as a basic concept in the classical Marxist-Leninst idea of the
process of world transformation. For classical origins of the idea in Marxism, see K. Marx,
Thesis on Feuerbach, and F. Engels, Anti-Duhring (chapter 1, section 11, “Morality and
Law; Freedom and Necessity’). See also a piece of writing by Mao in 1941, given the
arbitrary title ‘“[On] Freedom Being the Understanding of Necessity, and the Transformation
of the World,” in Mao zhuzuo xuandu, II, pp. 485-486.

30. One of the political-economic subjects that concerned Ma Yinchu most was the issue
of population. He wrote an essay “New Theory of Population” in 1954-1955, intended for
presentation to the Second Session of the First National People’s Congress in July
1955. This essay, however, was withdrawn and criticized as nothing more than an extension
of the Malthusian Theory. He then revised the thesis and later, in July 1957, presented it to
the Fourth Session of the First NPC. His theory mainly consisted of the idea that population
control must play a most significant role in the achievement of comprehensive balance or
equilibrium in China’s economy, which he explained through the paradigms of “circular
progression” and “spiral upward mobility.” He argued that overpopulation will have a dire
impact on capital accumulation for construction and on the productivity of labor. Having no
transcript of Ma’s statement at this conference, we are unable to ascertain what he proposed,
but it most likely was along the lines of the general thesis he would propose some three
months later.

31. The Wansui (n.d. 3) version does not have this last portion of the paragraph. We
have no documentary evidence for who it is that Mao is referring to here, but we surmise that it might be Zou Dapeng (b. 1908), an old member of the Communist Party
whose pre-Liberation activities had been largely located in northeastern China. He was
a delegate to the First Session of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference,
and in 1949 he also was appointed to the post of director of the Information Administration of the GAC. After the Information Administration was abolished in 1952,
he occame director of the Liaison Department of the People’s Revolutionary Military
Council. This unit was itself abolished in 1954 when the constitutional government was
formed. In the summer of 1953, however, Zou had assumed the post of deputy general secretary of the United Front Department of the Central Committee of the CPC.
For morc information on Zou’s life, see D. Klein and A. Clark, eds. (1971), II, pp.
870-871.

32. The term here is jiang jun, which ts aterm used tn Chinese chess equivalent to putting

| oe
a:


|

the king in check in Western chess. While not the ultimate move in the game, it is part of
the end game and connotes putting great pressure on the opponent to get out of difficulty.
Mao often employs this term to refer to the pressure put on the Communist Party and the

people’s government by other elements in society, not altogether maliciously, but enough
to keep the CPC on its toes.

33. The text here reads yin wei, which translates as “because.” However, we believe that
it may have been a typographical error for yinci (therefore), which makes better sense in this
sentence.

34. This aphorism, bang you dao (when the dao prevails in the state), 1s derived from
the sayings of Confucius. In this particular instance, tt refers to section 13 of the chapter
“Taibo” inLun Yu (The Analects of Confucius). The term dao here is not the dao, or “nature’s
way, Of Daoist philosophy; rather, it refers to the wang dao, or king’s way, or, in other
words, an orderly state of affairs in the polity; when the dao prevails, i.e., when there is good
government, there will be a stable society. Confucius said, in this chapter, that in such a state
of affairs, it is a shameful thing for a man to be poor and 1n a condition of meanness and
unable to better himself. At the same time, if the dao does not prevail and society is in
disorder, then it is equally shameful for one to be rich and occupy a high position and not
know to step down. Here Mao is saying that since the country, after the revolution, has

achieved a state of stability and there is good government, it would be shameful for the
country not to be able to provide for all people to have suitable jobs.

The Wansui (1969) text 1s a bit garbled here. The Wansui (n.d. 3) version reads in
translation, in lieu of this first part of the paragraph: “Mr. Liu Wenhui says that someone
has been grumbling, saying: “When the dao does not prevail in the state, it is a matter of
shame for one to be rich and exalted; when the dao does prevail in the state, it is a matter of
shame for someone to be poor and base.” ” Liu Wenhui (b. 1894) was a military commander
of the Nationalist forces in the Sichuan-Xikang region from the 1920s through the period of
the War of Resistance Against Japan. He surrendered to the Communists in late 1949. In
September 1954 he became a member of the National Defense Commission and in December
of the same year was elected to the Standing Committee of the Second National Committee
of the CPPCC. For more biographical information on Liu, see Zhonggong renming lu (1967
edition), p. 609.

35. The phrase here, pin che jian yan, is quoted from the locus classicus of bang you
dao mentioned above.

36. The term here is Kong fu zi, meaning Master Kong, the honorific for Kong Qiu
(Confucius) which Mao uses especially when he intends to convey irony and sarcasm. Kong
Qiu is often referred to simply as Kong Zi (which also means Master, or Teacher Kong, but
this is not as much of a term of reverence as Kong fu zi). “Confucius” is the Latinization of
these three characters, but is the name by which Kong Qiu is known to the West.

37. The Third Pienum of the Eighth Central Committee of the CPC was held September
20—October 9, 1957. By “United Front,” Mao is referring to the general problem of Party
rectification in order to allow the Party to be more effective in playing the leadership role in
such broad social programs as agricultural production and cooperativization, and in transformations in the other sectors of the economy. See also text Feb. 18, 1951, vol. I, note 13.

was another character in the novel Hongloumeng. This particular episode referred to here
by Mao is the subject of the sixth Au: of the novel.

| foreign things.

1957 (see text Mar. 12, 1957).

SC
--- Notes

38. For the character Wang Xifeng, see text Mar. 31, 1955, vol. I, note 18, and text Nov.
15, 1956, note 50. Old Woman Liu (or Grandma Liu, known in the novel as Liu /aolao)


39. This is a reference to a saying in contemporary China that the moon is brighter
(actually, in Chinese, rounder) in Western countries (meaning that everything is better in the
West). This is taken to be a reflection of the slavish attitude some Chinese hold toward


| 40. See text July 14, 1956.

41. The National Conference on Propaganda Work of the CPC was held March 6-13,


58. See text Dec. 27, 1955(2), vol. I, note 5.

59. See text Jan. 18, 1957, note II; also see text Dec. 27, 1955(2), vol. I, note 5.

60. See text Jan. 18, 1957, note 10, and text Mar. 12, 1950, vol. L, note 1.

61. See text Feb. 10, 1953, vol. I, note 2, on the First Five-Year Plan, and text Dec. 27,
1955(2), vol. I, note 117; text April 25, 1956, note 22, and text Aug. 30, 1956, note 8, on
the Second Five-Year Plan.

62. See text July 31, 1955, vol. I, note 21.

63. In the temporal context of this speech, the shengchan dui, or “production team,”
referred to here is the basic unit of collective production outside of and beneath the level of
the agricultural producers’ cooperative. The delineation of this unit at this time does not
involve the questions of the level-by-level size and ownership status (i.e., whether ownership
of certain means of production is to be vested in one level or the other) of the various units
known as the shengchan dadui (production brigade) and the shengchan dui (production
team), and the shengchan xiaodui (small production team). These problems came into the
picture in late 1958 and early 1959 in the early stages of agricultural communization.

64. See text April 25, 1956, section 4.

66. See text Jan. 18, 1957, paragraphs 4 and 16.

67. According to RMSC (1957), p. 471, in accordance with data submitted by the
National Exhibition of Agriculture of the PRC, the total grain output in 1956 was 368.59
billion catties. It claims that this represents an increase of 152.4 billion catties above the
output of 1949. The same page in RMSC (1957) displays other tables on grain-(and other
products) output from 1949 to 1955 in metric tonnage. It should be noted that there are
Western scholars and statisticians who disagree with the growth rate suggested by Mao here,
and generally dispute PRC statistics on these matters. See J. Prybyla (1970), pp. 124—

69. See text Dec. 8, 1956, note 6.

70. The aphorism that Mao uses here, zi si gi li, literally means “eating of one’s own
strength,” and here refers to the ability to feed oneself. The saying is derived from the “Fa