Talk at the Conference of Party Member Cadres of Shandong Provincial Organs

Date: 1957-03-18
Source: Secret Speeches of Chairman Mao: From the Hundred Flowers to the Great Leap Forward
        (Harvard University Press, 1989), ed. Roderick MacFarquhar, Timothy Cheek, Eugene Wu

---

276 TJTEXT ELEVEN ve
Atte
mete?
1, oa
bs
superiority of socialism. Some say that socialism doesn’t have any’
advantage, that the APCs are mismanaged. And indeed some APCs 4
are not well managed, and the Communist party doesn’t understand.
much about science. Then again, the Soviet Union used to be [con- i
sidered] quite good, but since last year it has been [considered] rather
bad, for what reason, I don’t know. In short, it was quite good the
year before last, last year it was quite bad, this year it’s been getting a |
lead [the development of] science. They are also skeptical about the ‘4
little better again. [Yet] the Soviet Union is still the same Soviet’
Union. Some intellectuals say that the United States is better than
China and that the United States is better than the Soviet Union,
that the United States is turning out much more steel than the Soviet @
Union. Apart from that, [our] people have been creating disturbances frequently. Last year, particularly the latter half of the year ay
don’t know what it was like in Shandong, [but] I gather there were a |
A? -
D
f
I
ia
few [disturbances] here, too), there were strikes by workers and by students [as well as] demonstrations; discipline was somewhat lax. This @
doesn’t mean that discipline in factories and schools, [and] work atten- | @
dance in the APCs were not generally maintained. On the whole, 4
these were maintained quite well, but there were exceptions. [Then
take] newspapers: I don’t know how it is with your newspapers in 4%
Shandong, [but] in Beijing, Shanghai, and Tianjin, more and more a
essays, [258] sarcastic and satirical articles have appeared in magazines Wm
-and newspapers, criticizing our shortcomings and scoffing at us, a
Under such circumstances, as I see Comrade Shu Tong has said, some a
people have begun to take a negative view of the APCs which, they |
said, [not only] showed no superiority, but were full of darkness. “4
Others, on the contrary, have adopted a highly positive attitude
toward the APCs, so much so that they completely ignore their short- 4
comings. This being the situation, some Communists have been led yy
astray by other people. Some party members and Youth League mem- ‘J
bers have followed in the footsteps of the bourgeoisie, negated every- “|
thing without analysis, and perceived the situation as being pretty 4
Conference of spandaong Provincia Urgans
bad. Other Communists are uncomfortable [with the situation], say-
‘ag that all this trouble has resulted from Let a hundred flowers
bloom, let a hundred schools contend.” Did things such as this also
happen in your province? Have you implemented the “Let a hundred
fowers bloom” [policy]? It has been tried elsewhere. “Let a hundred
flowers bloom,” but so far barely a dozen or so flowers have
bloomed. (Laughter) They haven't all bloomed yet. “Let a hundred
schools contend”; yet perhaps only ten or twenty schools have come
out to compete. In the course of blooming and contending, [people]
have said that certain things are not quite right, so some comrades
were quite offended. They wanted to call it off, saying that there has
been too much blooming and it must be brought to a halt. In other
words, blooming should be either abolished or restricted. “Let a hundred schools contend” should also be restricted. [These comrades]
favor the idea of restriction. So there are two types of people in our
party: One type echoes whatever ts said outside the party and follows
in other people's footsteps; the other type wants to bring everything
to a halt and considers resorting to coercion when they are disobeyed. This is how things stand at present. [That] is the internal
cause. Of course, what happens abroad also affects us. The Twentieth
Congress [of the CPSU] which criticized Stalin, the incidents in
Poland and Hungary, the worldwide anti-Soviet and anti-communist
agitation, the speeches of Tito and Kardelj? (have the Shandong newspapers carried this article?), all this has caused confusion in people's
thinking. Moreover, there have been many mistakes in our work;
whether it was in the campaign to suppress counterrevolutionaries,
in land reform, in the collectivization movement, or in socialist transformation, we have made the mistakes of subjectivism, bureaucratism, and sectarianism, thus causing some confusion in people's
thinking. But there has been no major turbulence. I'd say that here in
China things are not so turbulent as abroad, certainly not so turbulent as in Hungary and Poland. Compared with other socialist countries, too, there isn’t so much turbulence in China. For example,
Aa
counterrevolutionaries, and the campaign to Resist America and @
Aid Korea, these were [also] large-scale class struggles. Socialism is
also class struggle. Against what class is this struggle waged? It is 9°
struggle against the bourgeoisie and the individual economy linked 4
with capitalism. We had to wipe out the bourgeoisie together with a
the individual economy, the base that produced capitalism, and that 4
massive struggle was basically concluded in the first half of last year, a
With the end of this big struggle, problems among the people have:.@
become prominent. Herein lies the fundamental cause. This is why
problems among the people have increased and been exposed, and’
why many ideological problems have been exposed and people’s a
thinking has become somewhat confused. Did we have ideological @
problems in the past? I'd say we did, especially during the period, 4
which you comrades all went through, when we first entered the @
cities, when the big cities were liberated. Weren’t the years 1949, °50,:%
°51, 52, and 53 chaotic? Were those years more chaotic, or is it more 4
chaotic now? In fact, those years were more chaotic. For instance, the :
bourgeoisie at that time were so uneasy that it was like having fifteen
buckets at the well, seven up, eight down—they didn’t know what to
do. But differences of opinion in the past were covered up by large-scale class struggle. Many people were so scared by the War of Liber-. “4 |
ation, [the campaign to] suppress bandits, [the War to] Resist Amer- a
ica and Aid Korea, the campaign to suppress counterrevolutionaries,
and land reform, that they didn’t dare open their mouths. It certainly @
wasn't [the case] that there were no problems; problems were legion .
at the time. [But] we did solve many problems. For example, the fact
that in the past six or seven years the democratic personages have
made tremendous progress is precisely because we cooperated with 4
them in those struggles, and we should acknowledge that they have a
made progress. Class struggle was basically concluded in the first half .
a
if
#4 i
ar. :
Z
Pye
fn
tks
Lonyerence Of SPANAON LYOvincidt U/TgZans
of last year By saying “basically concluded,” [ mean there is still class
uggle. particularly in the ideological sphere; it has only been basiam -oncluded, not completely concluded. This must be made clear
" ‘nat no room is left for misunderstanding. [260] This is quite a
long tail to drag. Particularly when it comes to class struggle in the
‘deological sphere, I'd say there are not “a hundred schools contending,” just two. Of these two among the hundred schools, one is the
proletariat, the other is the bourgeoisie. This contention will indeed
g0 on for decades.
So the problem of how correctly to handle contradictions among
the people has now been placed on the agenda. The correct handling
of contradictions among the people is not large-scale class struggle.
As I just said, there is still class struggle, particularly in the ideological sphere, but we treat it as a contradiction among the people. We
treat the national bourgeoisie as a contradiction among the people,
not as Nationalist spies. [Take] the bourgeoisie, [take] your Miao Ha1-
nan.? We drew a distinction between Miao Hainan and Chiang Kaishek or a spy. We declare that he is not a spy, nor is he a Chiang Kaishek, he is simply Miao Hainan. We cooperate with him. Seeing,
this, he says OK; he says he is willing to cooperate with us. So our
two schools can easily do things [together] for both us and you are
willing. As I mentioned just now, there are quite a few comrades in
our party who don’t understand very well “Let a hundred flowers
bloom, let a hundred schools contend,” nor, what’s more, [the policy
of] “Long-term coexistence and mutual supervision.” Some even
don’t really endorse such policies. Whether you comrades here
endorse them or not, I’m not sure, because I’ve just got here, and
besides, we don’t ordinarily work together. In other places where I’ve
been, for instance Beijing, Id say among high-ranking comrades,
[those at the level of] minister, perhaps only one out of ten did come
around to the idea and endorse it. Of the rest, some sort of endorsed
it, but not totally and in varying degrees. As for comrades of the
Communist party represent only one school; how terrible it woulg™
be if we were to be surrounded by the other ninety-nine schools} i
(Laughter) Then we'd have to get help from the PLA and fight our
way out. Only by fighting a bloody battle would we be able to ger
away. “Long-term coexistence” they also [261] didn’t endorse. To have!
those democratic parties around for seven or eight years would be:
about enough! Let them dig a hole and bury us? Who is going to.
supervise whom? Why ask them to supervise the Communist party? i
Would you say these comrades had some justification [to say] this? I 4
think [what they said] was quite logical. What right do the democra- |
tic parties have to supervise the Communist party? Who actually did."
the fighting and won state power? Was it the working class and the |
peasantry under the leadership of the Communist party, or you a
democratic parties? That’s why what they said sounds quite plaus- 9
ible. But still it is better to adopt this policy. What are the reasons? :.@
“Let a hundred flowers bloom, Jet a hundred schools contend”: This
is both a method and a policy. It is a method that can promote the:
flourishing of literature, art, and science. No matter how many |
flowers you are, you must always bloom! Among them there are beau-. 4
tiful flowers, and some that are not beautiful, [but] are ugly, and even 4
poisonous weeds. All may bloom. What are we going to do if poisonous weeds spring up? There are [certainly] poisonous weeds in the
world. But what about people? Will they die if they are in contact
with poisonous weeds? This way there’s a comparison. It’s easier todeal with things by making comparisons. It’s not all that easy, but.
very complex. Every kind of flower should be allowed to bloom (art 8 ]
in its various forms). People then say, in this event won't ghosts. 4
emerge, won't monsters and demons all swarm onto the stage? What
sort of plays do you put on here? Are there any monsters and .:@
demons in the plays? Elsewhere there are, particularly in Shanghai, 3am
where many previously unstaged backward pieces are being brought jam
back on the stage again. For instance, the Judge Bao shows never go a 3
without the beating of somebody’s buttocks on the stage. Now we aay
are talking about abolishing corporal punishment, aren't we? Yet on [3
stage our Judge Bao still demands buttock-beating. Such practices = 7
; Co
VOmference Of SVANGONR ©£rovulincial U/TZans
will sooner OF later be abolished. At present should we let it be con-
-inued in plays for a while? I think it doesn’t matter if we let 1t be con-
-inued for a while. When such plays become too numerous, people
ill start complaining. The more people complain, then audiences
qill diminish. Then these plays won't be acted. In the Past we
imposed a harsh ban through administrative decree to prohibit such
plays from being staged, but it is not so good a method as tree competition of letting a hundred flowers bloom. As for Long-term coex-
‘stence and mutual supervision,” what this means is: because our
party has made great contributions, [262] because it is a political
party of workers and peasants, workers and poor peasants are the
chief elements of our party, which by virtue of its very character 1s
the vanguard of the proletariat; and because it has high prestige
among the people, when this prestige grows too high, it produces the
dangerous [consequence] that [the party finds it] easy to run things
by itself by simply resorting to administrative decree, [thinking that
the party] has got both numerical strength and tremendous prestige
among the people. In view of this, we specially invite some people to
supervise us, and [to partake in] long-term coexistence. As long as we
exist, they will also exist. We don’t need to say that if the Communist
party lasts for a hundred years, they will be allowed only fifty years;
if the Communist party lasts fifty years, they are to be allowed only
twenty-four years. In a word, they must die first, they must die
decades before us. Is this necessary? Will it be easier to get things
done if they die first? Will there be more grain? (Laughter) Will there
be more steel, more lumber, and more cement? Will auditoriums be
built even better? Not necessarily. It can’t be proved that if the democratic parties become extinct, we would be able to build better auditoriums. It can be argued that it would be better if some democratic
parties put on a rival show and made sarcastic comments, revealing
our shortcomings with sarcastic comments several times a year.
Therefore, instead of tightening up [control] now, we must loosen up
more. There is insufficient loosening up just now. We shouldn't try to
suppress it; on the contrary, we should not suppress it. Ideological
problems, problems in the spiritual sphere cannot be solved by using
crude or coercive methods. We should all of us develop discussion on
the basis of democracy and equality, and debating among ourselves.
This is the method of persuasion, not the method of coercion. Of
these two methods, which one should be adopted? One is coercion;
me AY
ae
os YL :
. ae
+ eee
ee
iF ye
a eo
the other is persuasion. The method of coercion is for dealing with:
the enemy. Those of us who have fought battles all know that since:
the time we began the struggle on Jinggangshan, whether it was in the
Dabie Mountains or elsewhere, we have learned that in dealing with
the enemy we can use only this method. In dealing with the Amer. 'J
icans in North Korea, that is during [the War to] Resist America and @
Aid Korea, we used the method of coercion. What method should @
we use in dealing with counterrevolutionaries and spies? We simply "|
suppress them! First ferret them out, then persuade them. The
method of coercion is to be used to deal with the enemy and to solve
contradictions between the enemy and ourselves. It involves the use '#
of force. Contradictions among the people doesn’t call for the use of q
force. The superior man only uses his mouth, but never uses his fists, 4
[263] (Laughter) Among the people persuasion rather than coercion “@
should be adopted. It just won't do to settle things by force. When i
one uses administrative orders to enforce a prohibition, though nom.
inally no force of arms is being used, in reality the PLA is there. The 9
fact is, administrative orders can be carried out only because of the “i
presence of the PLA, without which such orders cannot be enforced. 4
Who would obey your orders? In other words, one has to rely on its
strength to enforce administrative orders. Later [sic] we had the PLA, 4
which was several million strong. We also have the common people...
We have a basic mass [following], namely the workers and peasants. g
First, we've got the basic mass [following]; second, we've got armed 8
Par
' ee
tae
Be ‘tl I
+ eRe o
Crate,
Ji
: oe |
oe
ne 4
‘ FS 1
“ " 2
en: -
al a .
: ‘Aa
a
= es
force. This explains why those democratic personages cannot get:
their own way. They’ve not got these two things. First, they don't
have a basic mass following; second, they’ve got no armed force. If,
instead of imposing restrictions, we employ the method of encourag- «4%
ing the free airing of views along with the method of persuasion, @
then our country will become prosperous and flourishing. Since 9@
there are now contradictions among the people, we mustnt use
methods for dealing with the enemy among the people; we mustnt “9
use methods for dealing with the enemy in dealing with the people. |
These two things must be distinguished from each other. What 1s dic- a
tatorship? Don’t we talk about the dictatorship of the proletariat?
Dictatorship is over the enemy, whereas democracy is among the peO @
ple. Mutual relationships among the people are democratic relation- *
ships. Of course, democracy must be under centralized leadership. ©
[I'm] not saying one doesn’t want leadership. At present in some
Conference of spanaong Frovinctai Organs
places discipline is rather lax. There is a lack of discipline. This is going
, bit too far. We must use the method of persuasion to overcome this
roblem. We must talk to them patiently and hold meetings with
them. If things cannot be cleared up by holding one meeting, then hold
second and a third. Can we persuade students, workers, and peasants?
[ think we can, as long as we are in the right, that is to say we use the
method of talking sense with reasoning. If we get it wrong and extend
the scope of dictatorship to [include] the people, if whenever there is a
contradiction or problem the method of coercion is employed, then
our country will suffer losses, tremendous losses. And sooner or later
we would have to turn back, when we cannot convince the people by
coercing them. The superior man uses only his mouth, never his fists.
You [may] want to use your fists, but sooner or later you'll have to
desist, because this 1s not the way to solve problems among the people,
but the way to handle the struggle between us and the enemy.
[264] Is there something to be afraid of? Contradictions among
the people have been growing, yet neither coercion nor administrative orders are to be used—isn’t this very dangerous? In my own view,
there’s no danger at all, because differences of opinion can only be correctly resolved through debate and democratic discussion from
which the truth emerges. In the arts, that’s the only way there'll be
more liveliness and creativity; that’s the only way literature, art, and
science can develop. The results won't be visible in one or two years.
It might take a few years, a dozen years, or decades before we can see
the effects. Here and now we must get prepared in case of truly bad
people and opinions. That is to say, in the realm of art there are poisonous weeds, weeds with poison, and very ill-looking flowers will
spring up. What shall we do if they crop up? We believe those things
can also be useful, because they allow everyone to take a good look
land see that] there are these kinds of poisonous weeds and these
kinds of flowers. If a person is compelled every day to see only good
things but no bad ones—‘ Truth develops through its struggle against
falsehood. Both Marxism and our party have developed like that,
through the struggle against false opinions. Unless we let false opintons be expressed, we won't know what they are. The beautiful devel-
Mao appears to have left his thought unfinished; presumably he was implying that someon . . Ly
© exposed only to good things would not recognize a bad one when confronted with it,
as he indicates later.
IVO TEAL CLEVEN
ops through the struggle against the ugly; the good man develops ‘tm
through his struggle against the bad man. Ten thousand years fron im
now there will still be truth and falsehood, the beautiful and the ugly.
good men and bad men. Some bad men are indeed bad and not good, jam
[but] they are also the teachers of good men. [As long as] there are bad.
men, people have [negative] models and won't emulate their wicked. Mg |
ness. [As long as] there are good men, people can learn from them. But jam
without the contrast between good men and bad men, people won't be tif
able to distinguish the good from the bad. When a kid of a certain age ie
watches a play, the first question he will ask is, Who's the goodie and i
who’s the baddie? (Laughter) So don’t be afraid of things like bad men ‘4
and false arguments. There’s no point in being afraid. Given this, it'll be 4
relatively easy to overcome the mistakes of our party and government.
If it were the other way round, namely adopting the method of coercion, that would be bad, [and] really fearful. a
Our party is used to struggling against the enemy. Having practiced
class struggle for decades, we know how to do it; and since we won, we
proved ourselves to be qualified. Decades, indeed! That’s why people
admire us for this, [but] what do [people] feel the Communist party is
competent at? You are quite adept at politics and military affairs. There
are these two things for which people [265] admire us. Now, did they
admire us from the outset? Not necessarily so. At the time when we
first founded the party, no one admired us. The slogans we raised then—
“Down with imperialism!” “Down with feudalism!” “Down with the
warlords!”— people only listened, [but] effectively never paid attention.
Later we also made blunders, [which is why we had to] make the Long 8
March. Few adults survived it. At that time we advocated the over- — aq
throw of imperialism, but people still wouldn’t pay much attention to |)
us. After that, however, we had some achievements to show. By 1948, .
many people changed their attitude. It looks as though the Commu- >;
nist party all of a sudden had become popular and admirable. Particu- 9
larly when the outcome of the Civil War had become a foregone 18
conclusion in 1949, even more people expressed their admiration.
Despite all this, comrades, when it came to construction, they didn’t
admire us: ““The Communist party is capable of undertaking construction?” They wanted to look for a while. Now it appears that we are
quite up to the job: “These people really know how to get things done;
there’s such animal energy!” (Laughter) Who would have credited us
Conference of Shandong Provincial Organs
with being capable of carrying out construction? As far as construction
s -oncerned, by now they have gradually built up a little confidence in
ys. After watching you do it for six or seven years, it looks as though you
do have some qualifications. But when one talks of science, that’s something entirely different. “Things like physics, chemistry, mathematics,”
they say, “you can't handle, and we still have to come [and help].” What
should we do? What do you think we should do? All of you here are scientists, aren't you? (Laughter) There aren’t many scientists in our party.
The reason is simply that there aren’t many scientists, professors, and
engineers. Of the various types of artists, there are some but not many.
There are few men of letters. In other words, in these various fields we are
not adequate. University presidents are mostly non-party personages.
Who is the president of Shandong University?
(Answer: Chao Zhefu)
[Chairman:] Is Chao Zhefu a party member or non-party?
(Answer: A party member)
[Chairman:] A party member university president still has to listen to non-party personages. You don’t have any professors.
(Laughter) Some hold the position of vice-president, but the nonparty personages don’t think highly of them. A large proportion of
our party members are students and teaching assistants. There are
also some lecturers but very few. Professors are even fewer. Now,
should the students lead the teachers or the teachers lead the students? Should the teaching assistants lead the professors or the professors lead the teaching assistants? That this question should arise is
very natural. I believe there is justification [for it]. What they have
said is right. The Communist party is indeed unqualified; for very
few of us are professors, scientists, or engineers, [266] almost none.
The same can be said about the many fields of literature and art.
What’s the reason? This is because [we] were too busy in the past. For
decades we were engaged in class struggle and were too preoccupied
with class struggle to be able to do [all] these [other] things. In those
days you, had to have territory under your control to do what you
did. In those days they simply wouldn’t allow us to come to Jinan or
other places. They simply wouldn’t allow us to enter universities «4
such as Shandong or Qilu. They wouldn't even allow us to come! | 48
once lived in Beijing, but for thirty-one years I couldn't go there. ] 3%
couldn’t enter the city. If I had come, they would have invited me to 4am
stay in the jail. (Laughter) So we admit all this. But can we still learn? a
We studied class struggle for twenty-four years, right up to the ‘#
[CCP’s] Seventh Congress, 1921 through 1945; after twenty-four @
years we finally summed up [our experience]; only then had we bas. 4
ically learned these things, [after] making numerous mistakes. To 49
these must be added [the mistakes we have made in] the many years °‘%
since the Seventh Congress. So can we learn how to carry out construc- 4
tion, how to run science, how to be professors, how to be a doctor in
a hospital, performing surgery? Is it as difficult as class struggle? I
think that that class struggle business is more difficult; for as soon as
you strike, it runs away. (Laughter) It’s easier to conduct an operation, because the patient doesn’t run away. (Laughter) In the natural
sciences it takes five years to graduate from college. With five years of.
work that’s ten years. Another five years of work, that'll be fifteen
years. Couldn’t he become an engineer [by then]! Can't this kind of
person become a professor? Yes, he can. Given ten to fifteen years, he
can learn. Now we've already learned a great deal about design, construction, and installation. We also have learned quite a bit about
how to manage factories. With class struggle basically finished, what
task should we switch to next? We should switch to learning those 4%
things and carrying out construction. So the whole society, [all] 600
million people, must wage a struggle against nature. We must bring
prosperity to China and transform it into an industrialized nation.
This can be learned. Don’t be afraid of “Let a hundred flowers
bloom, let a hundred schools contend,” nor of “Long-term coexistence and mutual supervision.” It’s good if there’s criticism; it’s bad
not to have criticism or to suppress criticism. Stalin made exactly
this mistake. Stalin did a lot of good things, but he [also] did some
bad things. He confused two things. He used method [appropriate]
for the enemy towards the people and contradictions among the people. The government couldn't be criticized; [267] the party couldnt
be criticized. As soon as one made any unpleasant remarks, at the
first sign of trouble, a person would be labeled a spy and put under
arrest. So currently we don’t encourage strikes, student strikes,
demonstrations, or petitions, but we must oppose and overcome
Conference of sbandong Provincial Organs
bureaucratism. [If this can be done,] things such as strikes and student strikes will decrease. But there may still be some, [and] then
what do we do? When such things occur, we should deal with them
by using the methods appropriate for contradictions among the people. Is the People’s Liberation Army still needed, then? Or should we
disband it? Would that work? “Maintain an army for a thousand days
to be used in one morning,”® to be ready to cope with imperialism.
The People’s Liberation Army is for dealing with imperialism, not
for dealing with the people. The People’s Liberation Army is the son
of the people. How could the son [of the people] ever oppose the
father of the people?* (Laughter) It doesn’t bear discussing! The son
of the people opposing the people! The people fighting the people?
That won't do. The People’s Liberation Army is an instrument of
class struggle and a weapon of dictatorship. We must be different
from the Nationalist party. Who is more afraid of criticism, the Communist party or the Nationalist party? I think the Nationalist party
is. That party 1s terribly atraid of criticism. They are terrified of such
things as “Let a hundred flowers bloom.” We alone dare to advocate
“Let a hundred flowers bloom, let a hundred schools contend.” As
for “long-term coexistence,” we say we want to coexist with them for
a few years, but they absolutely won't do it. Once they set up a so called National People’s Participation Council [guomin canzheng
hui]. The Communist party was represented by several members; |
was one of them. What was our status? We were not representatives
of the CCP, but were called worthy and prominent personages.
(Laughter) It sounded good but that was all, “worthy” as well as
“prominent.” (Laughter) They didn’t recognize us as representing the
CCP. They wouldn’t accept short-term coexistence, let alone longterm coexistence. (Laughter) So we're the only ones who will talk
about “Let a hundred flowers bloom, let a hundred schools contend”
land] “Long-term coexistence and mutual supervision.” The proletarlat is relatively selfless, because its goal is the liberation of all mankind, Only by liberating all mankind will it itself be liberated. The
CCP should have the least fear of criticism. No criticism can topple
us, and no wind can blow us down. We are not even afraid of a force-
See Text 10, n. 1,
°Mao seems to have got carried away by his metaphor. He presumably means “How could
the son of the people oppose his father (i.e., the people)?”
QiV TREAT ELEVEN
12 typhoon. A force-12 typhoon can sweep away a large auditorium or
a tree as thick as this (with a gesture [which indicated one] about 2 feet
[in diameter]). But as for the CCP, the People’s Government, Marxism -
can it blow them down. (Laughter) Even a force-12 typhoon cannot -
blow them down, let alone a force-5-6 or a force-6-7 one. (Laughter) .
Have you been to Qingdao? I have never been there, but I would like «4
to.”? I have been to Beidaihe. [Even] when there is a force-7 wind &
[there], one can swim perfectly comfortably in the ocean. Normally
there's not a breath of wind and no waves, and to propel oneself for- .#
ward takes a lot of effort. But when there’s a typhoon, the waves can ‘@
reach the height of a man or [even] two. I’ve never seen a force-12
typhoon. Criticism can’t topple us; nor can it topple the CCP, the
working class, or the peasantry; for truth is in our hands. And since
we have truth on our side, [since] we have grasped the truth, the path
upon which we are set is truer than that [taken by] any other class. We
have the basic mass [following] of the workers and peasants. How can
a party and government such as ours, which is rooted in a basic mass
[following] of the workers and peasants, be toppled by criticism? How
can Marxism be toppled by a breath of criticism? Anything which can
be brought down by a puff of wind must be bureaucratism. Perhaps
bureaucratism doesn’t need a typhoon, just give it a push like this and
bureaucratism will fall to the ground. (Laughter) I think it would be
better if such things as bureaucratism, subjectivism, and sectarianism
got blown down a bit. That sort of thing should be blown down. We
Communists sometimes still need the help of non-party forces. This is
called attack from both within and without. Let bureaucratism, subjectivism, and the like get blown away a bit.
Just a moment ago Comrade Shu Tong brought up the issue of the
superiority of socialism, because there are some people who doubt
the superiority of socialism. Once one talks about superiority, then
it’s all superior and there’s not a single shortcoming; once one talks
about the lack of superiority, then there’s not a single good point.
There are two kinds of one-sidedness to be found both within and
without the party. In the struggle between the two systems, which
one is to win and which one is to lose? In other words, which of the
7Mao soon got his wish; a major party conference was held in Qingdao in July 1957. See
Origins 1, pp. 285-9.
La b i
i Fu wee F
' r we. .
. 4 i)
dit
oa
i ay
Ih
Reet
4 if fl
te
Conference of Shandong rrovincial Urgans
social systems is to overcome the other, socialism or capitalism?
wa this issue been resolved or not? Do you think the final outcome
mre determined? According to the resolution of the Eighth Congress of our party, one should say that the final outcome has been
determined. Who has won and who has lost? Ot course capitalism
has lost and socialism has won. Basically socialism has won. Is it the
fal victory? Not really. In the competition between these two sysrem, socialism as a social system basically has come out as the winner, But this is not yet the final victory. It still hasn't been
consolidated. We still have to [wait and] see. People still want to [wait
and] see. Capitalists, peasants, [269] the capitalist class, the pettybourgeois peasantry, and urban petty-bourgeois handicraftsmen still
want to [wait and] see. Some people in the Communist party also
still want to [wait and] see. In the struggle between the two systems,
who's won, who's lost, which has won, which has lost, one can say
has basically been decided; but the final victory will still require a
period of time, perhaps two or three five-year plans. It will take at
least five years for the APCs to be consolidated. Most APCs as of
now only have a history of little more than a year. If we look at the
struggle between the two ideologies—capitalist ideology and proletarian ideology, Marxism and non-Marxism—and [try to find out]
which is going to win and which is going to lose in the ideological
sphere, then the situation becomes even more problematic. That's
why there’s such chaos now. [Speaking of] the ideological aspect, it's
intentional that the general topic of my talk today is the ideological
issue. Despite all the changes in social systems, ideas will continue to
exist quite stubbornly, particularly [people’s] world outlook. In
other words, whether it’s the bourgeois world outlook or the proletarian world outlook, materialism or Idealism, dialectical materialism or metaphysical idealism, or metaphysical materialism, the
struggle between these two types of ideology will last even longer.
How many intellectuals are there in our country today? Approxtmately five million. Of these, two million are associated with schoolls:
universities, middle schools, and elementary schools. Besides them,
there are intellectuals in the party system [xztong], the government
system, and the army system; intellectuals in the economic, commercial, and industrial systems; and intellectuals in literature and the
arts. Altogether these people, it’s said, amount to as many as five million; but only a minority believes in Marxism. Ours is a culturally
Jiz
true for many of you comrades sitting here who are intellectuals
When your mother gave birth to you, she didn’t pass on the duty of 4
having to join the Communist party, or having to believe in Marx.
ism. I had the same experience. When my mother gave birth to me.
she never told me these things. (Laughter) She didn’t know that there
were in the world [such things as] Marxism and the Communist
party. It was social struggle that eventually drove me to go up the
Liangshan.* My Liangshan was called Jinggangshan. Each of you has
his own Liangshan, which ts here in your Shandong. Those who
truly believe in Marxism are the minority, about 10 percent perhaps;
out of five million there are probably 500,000, maybe a little more.
There are the ones who truly understand Marxism. In addition,
there are always a few percent who basically oppose Marxism and
adopt an antagonistic attitude toward us. But they are not spies, these
democratic personages, though they do nurse a grievance and are basically opposed to us. Are there such people? I think there are. They
are also the minority. In the middle, more than 80 percent are the
middle faction. Of true Marxism, [they] understand very little. They
show no interest when told to go to the countryside. When they visit
a factory, they just make a cursory tour and then come back. Instead
ot becoming as one with [dacheng yipian] the workers and peasants, .
they are divorced from them. We call on them to become as one; but
they say it would be better if they could remain separate, because >
there is no harmony of feelings, [and so] it’s impossible for them to
unite with the people. The intellectuals don’t feel close to the work- -
ing people, and there remains a gap between them. The world view
of these people has not changed; the basic cause is still their bour- - 4
geois world view. Their ideological confusion arises in this way. Why
*For Liangshan, see above, Text 8, n. 4. Jinggangshan, the Jinggang mountains in Jiangx!,
was the first base of Mao and Zhu De when they began to build up a guerrilla force in the
late 1920s.
. Ge
eas. |
rid
Lk, yr
en a a7
backward country, yet five million is by no account a small figure a
Therefore we must make good use of this contingent of intellectual, 3
This body of intellectuals can all be considered bourgeois intellecty. 4
als; [and] having studied in bourgeois schools—I was one of them a
namely a bourgeois intellectual who went through bourgeois schools 4
and was subject to the influence of bourgeois society; and | only f
became a proletarian intellectual afterwards. I think [270] this is also a
Conference of spanaong Frovinciat Urgans
are they confused in their thinking? Because they keep wavering like
grass on the top of a wall, which sways with every wind, which
stands still only when there is no wind. Whenever a wind blows,
they sway. The Hungarian incident came as a gust of wind; the Twenseth Congress of the CPSU came as a gust of wind; from somewhere
else came still another gust of wind. As wind will never stop blowing
4 the world, so they keep swaying back and forth all the time. They
are also very proud, with their tails held high. They consider themselves important because they are intellectuals. In a country such as
ours, intellectuals indeed are valuable, but as far as world outlook is
concerned, genuine proletarian intellectuals they are not. These are
still bourgeois or petty bourgeois intellectuals. The overall category is
bourgeois intellectuals. Some people call them petty bourgeois intellectuals, [271] and that’s all right. When you call them bourgeois
‘atellectuals, they will be offended. Nevertheless, the overall category
‘s still that of bourgeoisie. It will probably take as long as three fiveyear plans (a few years have already passed); maybe a dozen years or
so are still needed before Marxism can win a decisive victory. We
must win them over to our side. Do you want to know who are the
people now teaching? It’s them. All of them are teachers. They run
newspapers; they teach in schools; they plan and manage everything
in our offices; and they are engineers. Not even for a single day can
[we] do without them. There are intellectuals here in your midst as
well, comrades; but they are rather few. If you say we can leave the
intellectuals [alone], that won’t wash. We can’t leave them; we
wouldn’t have anyone else to teach. Two million of them are teaching
and working in universities, middle schools, and elementary schools.
In addition to literature and art, there are all kinds of newspapers.
The acrobatic actors and [those who sing] the drum songs in Shandong cannot be considered as intellectuals, can they! But Mei Lantang? must be counted as one; Mei Lanfang is an intellectual. What is
the name of that Mei Lanfang of yours in Shandong? Don’t you Shandong folks know who the Mei Lanfang in Shandong is?
_ Now I would like to talk again about the issue of working-class
intellectuals. In the course of leading the revolution, the proletariat
trom the very first won over a group of intellectuals to serve it. This
For Mei Lantang, see Text 3, n. 66.
is how Marx was won over. Marx, Engels, and Lenin were all bour. |! 4
geois intellectuals who served the working class. Our Chinese intel 7
lectuals are the same. Now there is a group of intellectuals who’
understand Marxism. They make up, as I said a moment ago, about’
10 percent of the 5 million. That’s 500,000. They are the nucleus of ‘;
ofa
the intellectuals.
Of the various classes, which one has a future? Only the workin a
class has a future. How many do we have in the working class? Prior if
to the revolution, before Liberation, there were only a few million
[The number] has increased to 12 million in recent years. Now there “4
are 12 million industrial workers working in the factories. In a pop- a
ulation of 600 million, only 12 million are workers. That’s a little 4
more than 1/50th, only one worker in every 50 people. [272] 4
Though so few in number, they alone have a future. All others are “4
transitional classes. It means [they have to] keep going. Go where?
Go where [the working class is]. [Take] the peasants, for instance, the ‘if
peasant in the future will become an agricultural worker and collec- 4
tivized through mechanization. As for collectivization, it will in the “4
future become socialism, and [then] will be transformed into a
national ownership, ownership by the whole people. A few decades 4
from now, the current APC ownership by the peasants will be trans- - a
formed into something like a factory, an agricultural factory. In this q
factory, corn, millet, rice, sweet potatoes, peanuts, and soybeans will i
be planted. The capitalist class now is, as you know, in the middle of 4
the transition. They, too, will become workers. The several hundred «4
million peasants and handicraftsmen, who now have already become a
collective farmers, in the future will become state farmers, agricul- oe
tural workers, operating machines. Apart from a minority, the rest of oN
the 5 million intellectuals all endorse and support the socialist sys- ie
tem, even though in their world outlook and their thinking they are a
still wavering. Generally speaking, with the exception of a small num: +}
ber of people, they all support socialism and are willing to serve it. a
OK, then, the working class has already won them over. Through ; a
the Communist party it has won the intellectuals over to our side 3
and to cooperate with us. But to cooperate and serve socialism is one
thing; their world outlook and their souls are quite another thing. It
will take time for them to change their world outlook into that of
Marxist dialectical materialism and historical materialism, or, to put
it in a simple way, into that of Marxism.
a
ah
1) ie
es
- |e a
f ps
Conference Of JNANGONZ Lrovuinciat W/TZaNs
Most intellectuals have not changed their bourgeois thinking and
bourgeo!s world outlook so far. Some have changed, but only
slightly, on have not greatly changed it. As I just said, they still remain
estranged from, and still haven't integrated themselves with, the working people. Writers and artists are unwilling to go down to the factor-
‘es and the countryside; and when they do, they come back almost
- mmediately. With their attention turned elsewhere, they don’t have
such interest in the workers and peasants. They want to go home
and be with other intellectuals. I'd say these people are half-hearted.
Half of their heart wants to serve socialism; this half of their heart is
good. And since half of their [273] heart is good, we can take our
-ime to change the other half. The other half still belongs to the kingdom of the bourgeoisie, to bourgeois ideology. If I were to say this to
‘ntellectuals, they would jump up and say, “How can you say we are
half-hearted?” I would say, “Of course I can; even if you jump on the
roof, I will still say so. (Laughter) Because you are still wavering in
this manner. You are willing to serve the working class, but only haltheartedly, not wholeheartedly. Is there any proof? [The proof] is
[that] instead of becoming one with the workers and peasants, you
remain estranged from them. You have no friends among the workers and peasants. All your friends are intellectuals. It would be better
to make friends with the workers and peasants than with intellectuals.” But they won't listen. Even if you try to drive them down [to the
grassroots], they still won’t go. Those who have been driven down
will come back right away. The working class requires the intellectuals to serve it wholeheartedly. It not only makes this demand, but
also asks them to change their world outlook and give up their bourgeois world outlook. In the newspapers I once said that we must
destroy capitalism and build socialism. Destruction and construction
always go hand in hand; without the destruction of the one, the
other cannot be established. Hence the task of carrying out destruction. Destruction entails some pain. In that case, you capitalists
Should let us know now. Among the capitalists are a large number
of intellectuals. We must use them. The working class needs a great
number of intellectuals to serve it wholeheartedly. If not a 100 percent, then the majority of them should believe in Marxism and have
interests in common with us. Now we do have interests in common.
AAs far as socialism is concerned, they have some interests in com-
Mon with us—except for a few of them who have no interests in
Jw
common with us, who are happy upon hearing that the APCs are © :
not running well, who are pleased when the APCs are having bag a
luck, and who rejoice when the Communist party gets into trouble “3g
There are a few such people, but the majority are willing to cooper.
ate with us. But they are still hanging in mid air. Consequently, oy,
task is to win them over.
Our party is now recommending that we prepare for rectification, “#
In order to win over the intellectuals as well as non-party personages, 4
we must first rectify our own style of work. The Central Committee “%
plans to hold a conference this year, but it hasn’t been decided yet,
Today I might as well talk about it briefly. [274] We haven't had rec.
tification for years. The Three-Antis and the Five-Antis!° were sharp 4
struggles, but they didn’t solve the ideological problem. We are preparing for rectification; and it is our expectation that, if through such
rectification the work style of the Communist party can be 4
improved, then we can win over the vast numbers of non-party personages. Speaking of the non-party personages, there remains a prob- 4
lem: Should we or shouldn’t we cooperate with them? This is not 4
their problem; it is not a problem of whether they want to cooperate 4q
with us, but rather whether we want to cooperate with them. There -@
is still another problem. It’s easy to talk about cooperation. You iff
democratic personages, you Miao Hainan, we want to cooperate with J
you. But the question is whether we should use them. Some say they a
are not of much use and even call them waste matter. Well, waste mat- ‘4
ter can also be made use of. Why can’t waste matter be made use of? @
Today I can’t talk concretely. Miao Hainan has been called waste mat- .@
ter, but he is perhaps a very useful person. Even those who are not am
very useful can still be made use of. Some have coined the epithet J
“waste matter,” but waste matter can also be made use of. When holding a conference, we mustn't adopt a perfunctory attitude. Every
year, as a mere formality, a Political Consultative Conference and a
session of the People’s Congress are convened, but afterwards @
nothing happens. Probably only one or two weeks are spent on the "@
matter in a year. Such an attitude is a negative attitude. I think we .@
must adopt a positive attitude. These democratic personages are
largely non-party intellectuals. They are veteran intellectuals, a leg: sg
acy left over by the old society.
‘For details of these two campaigns in the early 1950s, see Text 3, n. 35.
Conjerence of spandong frovinciai Urgans
How many students currently in college are from workers’ and
easants families? Twenty percent according to the nationwide statisics. Out of a hundred college students, only twenty are from workers’ and peasants’ families. Eighty percent are sons and daughters of
landlords, rich peasants, and capitalists. [The situation with regard
to] middle school students is not very clear; the ratio is probably 4:6,
chat is, 60 percent are from the families of landlords, rich peasants,
and capitalists, while 40 percent are from workers’ and peasants’ fam-
‘lies. It could be half and half. Do you have statistics on this? I don’t
have them. Of those who enter senior middle schools, I’m afraid they
still constitute the majority, it’s still those of exploiting class origin
who are in the majority. When will a hundred percent of the college
and senior middle school students come from workers’ and peasants’
families? It will take at least three five-year plans, or at least [275]
eleven to twelve years for these conditions to be fundamentally
changed. Perhaps it will take an even longer time, and another two
five-year plans won't be long enough; perhaps three more five-year
plans are needed.!! As a species, sooner or later they will become
extinct. There is no doubt about that. What is awaiting them is their
extinction. Will the bourgeoisie remain as a species? Will the landlord class remain as a species? They won't remain as a species, and our
very goal is to bring about their extinction! In the future there will
be no capitalist system, nor will there be a feudal landlord system.
Thereafter for 10,000 years there'll be a system of workers and peasants and all [children] will be workers’ children.
The proletariat is the class with the brightest future. But currently
[it is beset by] a temporary shortage [of proletarian intellectuals]. As
you know, we can’t move a single step without them [i.e., bourgeois
intellectuals]. Suppose we abandon them, there will be no teachers,
no engineers, and no scientists. Most professors as well as middle and
elementary school teachers come from these people, so do most writers and artists. We can’t move without them. If we leave them, we
wont be able to move a single step. This is why we must take pains
to unite with them. After a number of five-year plans then there'll be
a change. By then they, too, will have changed; the capitalists will
11 ,
Mao's custo
th
mary reckoning of a lengthy period required for major social change was
ree five-year plans, starting with China’s first FYP (1953-7), with success in sight by 1967.
cre he js taking the precaution of adding in the fourth FYP, ie., three five-year plans from
1957, or 1972.
a
. 4 4 .
om Ye ley
4 Bir
ea
Bes
have become workers, and the landlords peasants. Their children wij) z,
have changed, too. They are undergoing changes now. a
Rectification is a method to solve intra-party contradictions through a
self-criticism. It is also a method to solve contradictions between the %
party and the people. Dogmatism, sectarianism, and bureaucratism
these three styles of work must be rectified. These aside, other problems
are also to be addressed: for instance, the problem of corruption,
which exists in political institutions, particularly in such basic leve]
units as APCs, factories, and mines; the problem of the decline of the @
spirit of serving the people with heart and soul, and that of waning |
revolutionary will; such phenomena as striving for position and fame
and fighting for personal gain have become more widespread. The'™
death-defying spirit some of our comrades used to display in class’
struggle, that is, in the struggle against the enemy, now has disap
peared. [Now they] are fastidious about food and clothing, and try te a
match each other in terms of salary; and if the wage grades [they get]
are below their expectations, [they] would cry their hearts out. Every.
body has two eyes, right? The water in our eyes is called tears; that in
a teacup is called tea. When their wage grades fall short of what they 4
think they deserve, [276] these people become all tears. (Makes a gesture
and the audience burst into laughter.) During the time when they were
cf
fighting Chiang Kai-shek, during the War to Resist America and Aid a
Korea, and during land reform and the campaign to suppress the coun:
terrevolutionaries, they never shed a tear, nor in the construction of '®
socialism. But when their personal interests are affected, they become all
tears. (Laughter) Someone is said to have refused to eat for several days.
This person, who I’ve heard is from here, didn’t eat anything for three
days. We think not eating for three days is no big deal, but eating
nothing for a whole week is a bit dangerous. (Laughter) In short, striving for fame and position, trying to match each other in terms of salar), -
clothing, and luxury, all these things have emerged; and they are also to
be seen as contradictions among the people. Two streams of tears trickle
down; starve and weep for personal interests. There is a play called Lin §
: ij
Cong Flees at Night [Lin Cong ye ben]? in which a line reads, “A
mis
iy."
* Aes
i
man [nan‘er] does not easily shed his tears ({Chinese] Editor’s note: i
According to the play’s text, this line should read “A real man [zhangtuf is
a
a
a. oh
ee
Ly
ith
uh
12This is a scene from a Ming dynasty opera, in the Kiangsu Kunqu style, called The Story. 4
of a Sword; see SW5, p. 439. E 7
: ies
Conjerence of spanaong frovincial Organs
foes not easily shed tears until his heart is broken”).'3 We at present
have some comrades who are also [real] men or perhaps [real] women.
Look, 4 man should not easily shed his tears until the time when his
wage grade is to be reviewed. Comrades, don’t you need to rectify this
style of work of yours! Let’s go back and talk them round. That a man
doesn't easily shed his tears is right. What is it that really breaks our
hearts? It’s when the survival of the working class and the peasant class
is in the balance. It ts quite all right if you shed a few tears at such a
rime. As for your wage grade, even if it were not fairly determined, you
still must accept tt. Don’t let your tears flow outwardly, let them flow
inwardly (Laughter) so that you can swallow them. Indeed, there are
numerous cases in which things have been unfairly settled, and it is very
likely that some people’s wages are not fixed correctly; but as long as
everybody gets enough to eat, they don’t matter very much. Ours is a revolutionary party and our principle is that no one should die of hunger.
Those who have not died of hunger are all revolutionary comrades. We
must struggle. Ten thousand years from now we still must struggle. We
must struggle when there is a Communist party. Even when the Communist party no longer exists, by that time when it will have disappeared, leaders and a group of managers will always be there. They will
also be serving the people. In short, we must serve the people wholeheartedly, not half-heartedly, nor one-third-heartedly or two-thirds—heartedly.
Those whose revolutionary will has waned must bestir themselves.\4
This year we propose, this year is the preparatory phase. We'll serve
notice to people, telling them we are going to have a rectification.
Each locality may also conduct its own pilot rectification. There are
a few corrupt elements, and they must wash their hands quickly this
year. If you took [277] some things, you had better put them here;
then we won't treat you as a criminal. Next year rectification will
formally be launched, so this year you should stop embezzling and
disgorge what you have stolen. What about things that have already
been gulped down, digested, and turned into shit? If they have
already turned into shit, then, depending on each different case, they
'SThis correction of Mao’s misquotation was perhaps the work of a party editor with a tendency to bourgeois pedanticism! More interesting is that this note underlines the unwilling
ness of compilers of Mao's speeches to correct or elucidate any of the Chairman's own words.
The italicized paragraph corresponds fairly closely to SW5, pp. 436-7. Compare New
a0 Texts 1, pp. 275-6, to XJ5, pp. 419-20. The unitalicized part of the fourth sentence has
"0 parallel in the previously published excerpt.
that case, you may pay them back in three installments. Ten yuan 4
this year, ten yuan next year, and ten yuan the year after next. Those ‘a
who have disgorged everything and have become thoroughly |
remolded will not be viewed as criminals next year. That’s why we 4
make the announcement this year. Once bureaucratism has been over. ‘#
come, both our relations with the people and our relations with sub.
ordinates will be improved. Indeed it’s not easy to be the chief of a (4
provincial department! Most of the subordinates ordinarily don’t say a
anything; but when the rectification campaign comes, they begin to “ff
speak up. Some of you here must be department, bureau, or section 4
chiefs. Is it that, after throwing a bomb, the rectification will get @
started? I'd say no. I think we shouldn’t blow things up; we only need. #
to correct them. In dealing with our own shortcomings, in dealing J
with the shortcomings of the people, we mustn't resort to big democ-. 4
racy or a large-scale movement. They are to be applied to the enemy
only. What we need is small democracy. If one small still won't do,
another one may be added to it; then it becomes ultra-small democ- a
racy. In short, what we need are a gentle breeze and mild rain [hefeng
xiyu].15 Though a typhoon may not be necessary, the fine drizzle “4
[maomao xiyu] will keep coming down and the gentle breeze will
keep blowing. (Laughter) Let it blow for three years. This year we get
prepared, but next year and the year after next, there will be a little
drizzle [maomao yu] and a little breeze [weiwei feng]. It will blow
away our bureaucratism and subjectivism. Our point of departure is
to protect our comrades. Start from the desire for unity and arrive at
a new unity through proper criticism. That’s it, comrades.
15“Centle breeze and mild rain” was the phrase used in the actual Rectification Campaign, |
see Text 8, n. 22. In that earlier talk on 10 March, Mao used a similar phrase, “drizzle” [mao- a
mao ‘yu], also used here. The Chairman appears to have been groping towards a character: a
istically memorable phrase with which to delineate the methods of the forthcoming jag
Rectification Campaign and this may have been when he devised the final formulation.
i Ai
aad shit
. ee
i] Fe
eae
oe
oie ’
oo
cay
=, a
On Ideological Work (Talk at a Conference
Attended by Party Cadres from People's
Liberation Army Units under the Nanjing
Command and from Jiangsu and Anhui Provinces)
19 MARCH 1957
[278] Giving a talk at every stop on my journey, I have turned myself
into a wandering lobbyist. In the present period, a number of questions need to be answered. That’s why I have talked all the way here
to your place. This place is called Nanjing, and I’ve been here

--- Notes

“It is not clear to which utterance of Edvard Kardelj, the Yugoslav Vice-President, Mao was
referring. Conceivably it was his. article explaining the Yugoslav road to communism published in Pravda on 2 June 1956 to coincide with the arrival of the Yugoslav President, Marshal Tito (1891-1980), in Moscow at a period of Soviet-Yugoslav rapprochement; see
Wolfgang Leonhard, The Kremlin Since Stalin (London, Oxford Univ. Press, 1962), p. 204.
In Tito’s case, Mao is clearly referring to his Pula speech; see Text 3, n. 2.
ya |
SUQ TEXT ELEVEN
Vietnam has been in upheaval for quite a while. Let us [259] now ana
lyze the causes. There are external causes, to be sure, but it is primar. 4
ily because we are in the kind of period, the kind of conditions
under which large-scale class struggle has basically been concludeg'#@
and socialist transformation has basically been accomplished. The:4
Eighth Congress reached a conclusion on this, [and] that conclusion’
was in conformity with the actual situation. In the past our whole
nation fought against Chiang Kai-shek, the War of Liberation, these
were large-scale class struggles; land reform, the campaign to suppress

>Miao Hainan (b. 1902, in Shandong) joined the CCP while studying at a textile college. In
1949, he was the manager of Chengtong Textile Mill in Jinan. He became a leading member
of the All-China Federation of Industry and Commerce and the China Democratic
National Construction Association. He was made a Vice-Governor of Shandong in 1950.
From January t September 1956, he served as a Deputy Secretary of the Secretariat of the
Shandong provincial party committee. See Who’s Who in Communist China, vol. 2 (Hong
Kong, URI, 1969), pp. 519-20. Mao clearly still thought of Miao as non-party.
Jw i
JOL TEXT ELEVEN a
Mth
f
ranks of department, bureau, and section chiefs, most of them inis
me
i
“Let a hundred schools contend’—isn’t that very dangerous? We the

Sources: 1:278-301; alternate text, 10:112-35. In the full title of this text, the date 1s given as
20 March 1957; but a short extract from the speech, published in SW5 (p. 436) 1s dated 19
March. If Mao was traveling south by train, he would have reached Nanjing before Shanghai, where it is known that he gave a speech on 20 March (see Text 13). It seems more likely
that he made the speeches on successive days than that he spoke in Nanjing, made the four-
Our trip east, and spoke again in Shanghai on the same day. We have, therefore, accepted
the SW5 date.
— ————$_