October 9, 1957

There are basically two methods of leadership. By following one method, we can carry out our undertakings with greater, faster, better, and more economical results; by following the other method, we will achieve lesser, slower, poorer, and more costly results.

Not only in revolutionary work but also in construction work are there two methods. Our First Five-Year Plan for economic construction was a correct plan and achieved great successes. But could this plan have been carried out even better? It seems possible. For example, if we had fully developed large-scale enterprises on the one hand while actively developing medium- and small-scale enterprises on the other, and if we had focused on enterprises under central management on the one hand while fully unleashing the initiative of local enterprises on the other, the pace might have been faster. Looking at it now, can we reach an annual steel output of 18 million tons, or even 20 million tons, in eighteen years—that is, in the three-year recovery period plus three five-year plan periods? If our methods are correct and we work hard, this is possible.

Greater, faster, better, and more economical results on the one hand, and lesser, slower, poorer, and more costly results on the other, are two mutually contradictory and opposing methods. Without waging a struggle and opposing the method of lesser, slower, poorer, and more costly results, the method of greater, faster, better, and more economical results cannot be realized. In January 1956, in addition to putting forward the slogan of "greater, faster, better, and more economical results," we also proposed the draft Forty-Article Program for National Agricultural Development. This program is a plan for developing our socialist agriculture with greater, faster, better, and more economical results. We also introduced the concept of "promoters," meaning that everyone should be a promoter, not a retarder. Because of these things, our country's entire economic and cultural undertakings took a great leap forward in 1956. Of course, some shortcomings also emerged—we spent a bit more money, recruited a few more workers, and there was some strain on market supply. These shortcomings were not major and were easily overcome. However, some comrades underestimated the achievements and exaggerated the shortcomings, claiming that 1956 was a year of "rash advance." A gust of wind blew away the slogan of "greater, faster, better, and more economical results," the "Forty Articles," and the "promoters' association." As a result, this year's progress in economic construction, especially in agriculture, has been affected. This is a very significant lesson that we must take to heart. In short, pouring cold water on the masses and dampening their enthusiasm is wrong. Whatever we do, we must always foster the enthusiasm of the masses and protect their enthusiasm. Shortcomings in our work must also be criticized and corrected, but this should be done under conditions that protect the enthusiasm of cadres and the masses—criticizing both their shortcomings and our own. In this way, they will be full of drive, and our work can be done even better. In my view, "greater, faster, better, and more economical results," the "Forty Articles," and the "promoters" are all good things that must not be blown away but must be restored.

I am pleased that at this meeting some comrades have spoken of the slogan "greater, faster, better, and more economical results."

When "greater" and "faster" are constrained by "better" and "more economical," there are no drawbacks. "Greater" and "faster" mean getting more things done. "Better" means achieving good quality. "More economical" means spending less money. If we demand both good quality and less spending, then "greater" and "faster" will have no flaws. Of course, "greater, faster, better, and more economical results" should be based on seeking truth from facts and conforming to reality; it should not be subjectivist or divorced from reality. In building socialism, we should always strive, as far as possible, to achieve more and faster results, and not under subjectivist conditions.