Speech at Supreme State Conference
(October 13, 1957)

Source: Wansui (1969), pp. 126–145. Other Chinese Texts: Wansui (n.d. 3), pp.
223–231; URI (1976), pp. 353–368. Available English Translations: URI (1976),
pp. 369–389; CLG, 9:3(Fall 1976), pp. 34–62.

Another version of this speech is in Xuanji, V, pp. 480–495, under the title Jianding de
xiangxin qunzhong de da duoshu (Have Firm Faith in the Majority of the People). (English
translation in SW, V, pp. 498–513). The version in Xuanji is clearly an edited version that
was put together later. In it, some of the more personal and earthy comments that Mao made,
and that we can see in the Wansui version, have been eliminated. On the other hand, it also
clears up some of the textual confusions and lapses which, either by mistake or by convention
(such as in those cases where names of other CPC leaders or cadres are often replaced by
XXX in the Wansui edition) are found in the Wansui version. In general one may say that
the Wansui version is a more “complete” version while the Xuanji version is a “cleaner”
version. One should also note that while they differ quite substantially in length, by and
large the two versions cover the same political points.
Since these two versions are clearly of the same speech and since there are no major
omissions of significant political arguments in either version by comparison, we have opted
in this publication to translate and present only the Wansui version, on the rationale that
the Xuanji, V version, through SW, V, is already much more accessible to the general reader.
At the same time, since the textual discrepancies between the two versions are too many and
too complicated in detail, we are unable to annotate such textual discrepancies in every
incidence. We believe that the reader must compare the two versions for himself or herself
by reading both what we present here and what is in SW, V. We have, however, annotated

OCTOBER – DECEMBER 1957 / 725

discrepancies that appear to us to bear contextual or political significance. For example,
as mentioned above, where some uncertainties in the text, or typographical errors in the
Wansui version, have been clarified or brought to our attention by a comparison with the
Xuanji version, these have been annotated. Another category of discrepancy that is significant is where in the Xuanji version Mao is reported as having used terms or descriptions—
e.g., minzu ziben zhuyi (national capitalism) instead of minzu zichan jieji (national
bourgeoisie)—which differ from the Wansui version and are unusual terms or descriptions
for 1957. We leave the reader to decide for himself or herself, however, what to make of
these terms.

For a contextual summary of the Supreme State Conference at which Mao made
this speech, see K. Lieberthal (1976), pp. 101–102. The majority of what Mao said
in this speech is not new to us. Here he repeats many of the things that he had been
saying with regard to the CPC rectification of 1957, the contending and blooming
process, the anti-Rightist campaign, the Zhang-Luo Alliance, the Wenhui bao affair,
all of which had been discussed since June and July of the year. (See texts April
1957[2]; May 15, May 22, June 8, June 9, June 14, July 1957[1], July 1, July 8, July
9, Oct. 7, Oct. 9 in 1957.) On the surface, one may say that Mao was repeating himself
once again here.
There are, however, several things that are significant about this speech. First,
although he speaks of continuing the “counterattack” on the Rightists, Mao’s tone
in this speech is a bit more moderate than the strident and severely polemical articles
of June and July. At the same time, just as in September Mao began to formularize
the summary of the entire rectification of 1957 by the phrases “great contending,
great blooming, great debate and big-character posters,” in this speech Mao begins
to set the formulae for dealing with the Rightists who have emerged and “exposed
themselves” in 1957—a four-stage process of “letting things bloom, counterattacking, remolding, and learning.” Given the continuous nature of the “blooming and
contending” (i.e., the Hundred Flowers Campaign,) the CPC rectification, and the
anti-Rightist campaign, one may see this speech as an in media res summary of all
the happenings of the earlier half of 1957. Significantly, here Mao speaks of many
of the slogans such as “great contending, great blooming, great debate and big-character posters” and formulae such as continuing the rectification through May 1958,
which had been suggested only rather tentatively in his own speeches or in the reports
of other CPC leaders such as Deng Xiaoping, in July and September, in a tone that
connotes that by this time, i.e., October 1957, the decision has already been made
and ratified vis-à-vis these issues. This is apparently the product of the delayed effect
of the many (thirteen in all) discussions and forums held among the democratic parties
and people’s organizations in May and June under the aegis of the United Front Work
Department (headed by Li Weihan) and to which Mao briefly alludes as “the events
of May” in this speech. These decisions were taken pretty much as given by Mao at
this time (i.e., mid-October). The issue of scheduling the rectification campaign up
to May 1958 was mentioned also in a very definite tone, in the October 9 speech (see
text Oct. 9, 1957[1], two paragraphs after note 43). Therefore, this speech should be
read in conjunction particularly with texts Oct. 7 and Oct. 9, 1957(1) and (2). Finally
this speech is also significant in that here Mao, for the first time as far as we can tell,
suggests specific ways in which the Rightists who have been “flushed out” in the
course of 1957 should be dealt with. For example, he discusses the issue of whether
or not some of them can be elected as deputies to the People’s Congress, and he also
suggests that jobs must still be arranged for them. These suggestions would take on
a particular significance in 1958, as the CPC and the nation prepared for the Great


In the current rectification [campaign] we have discovered a [proper] form [for
carrying out such campaigns]. This form consists simply of the set [of methods]
including great contending, great blooming, great arguing, great debates, and
big-character posters.1 This particular approach has been created among the
masses. This approach is distinct from [others] in history.2 During the rectification
in Yanan there were also big-character posters, but at that time we dared not push
ahead [with them]; I’m afraid [it was because] we were a bit frightened.3 Later there
was a Three Investigations and Three Rectifications [Campaign].4 The three
investigations consisted of investigating [a person’s] past history, investigating that
person’s work [performance], and investigating that person’s thought; I have
forgotten what the three rectifications were [intended to] rectify. At that time the
director of our Xinhua [News] Agency, Fan Changjiang, was put on the spot.5 Only
after he had gone through two months of rectification did he turn himself around.6
Because [we had] mobilized the masses, during the Three-Anti’s [Campaign,] there
were many ministers who got themselves out on a limb; it was not until afterwards
that we put up a ladder [for them], and helped them down.7 In the past, in the army,
in wartime [we] relied on the soldiers and on the local people; there wasn’t any
place where we could pay [the soldiers], and we didn’t have any factories that
manufactured rifles or artillery pieces, so [we] could only rely on the masses;
therefore, for a long time, a kind of democratic work style took shape in the army
and in the localities. Still, at that time, and during the entire revolutionary period,
there was not this great blooming and great contending, great arguing, great
debates, and big-character posters that we have now. [In the] Three-Anti’s and
Five-Anti’s [campaigns] we didn’t use big-character posters,8 and during the Three
Investigations and Three Rectifications [campaigns] there were no big-character
posters. Going back further, during the Yanan period there appeared a few bigcharacter posters but we didn’t encourage this. What was the reason for this? I think
that perhaps we were a little stupid at the time, don’t you think? I’m afraid there is
also an objective reason, namely that at that time there was the clamor of gongs
and drums;9 there was fighting, and class struggle was so acute. It wouldn’t have
been good if there had also been great arguments among ourselves. [But things]
are different now. That kind of class struggle is already past, and has basically been
concluded.10 The entire nation is at peace. So only now has such a thing [as great
blooming and great contending] appeared, and [only now] have we discovered this
[proper] form. The substance of this revolution requires that it take this type of
form. The present revolution is a socialist revolution; its purpose is construction.
And once it has taken this kind of form, it can be popularized very quickly and
learned very quickly. It can be learned in just a few months. Although there are
several [fears],11 there are two major ones. One is a fear of disorder. Are you afraid
of disorder or not? Do you really have that much guts? I for one don’t fully believe
it, because we do have a lot of people who are afraid of disorder. [Even if] you say
that you are not the least bit afraid of disorder, isn’t it true that the democratic
parties12 are a little afraid of disorder? The other fear is the fear of being put on the
spot. For those who hold positions as factory directors, directors of cooperatives,
school principals, or Party committee secretaries, once the airing of views begins,13

OCTOBER – DECEMBER 1957 / 727

and the fire gets going,14 how will they be able to get off the limb? It’s easier now,
but in May, for example, it was very hard to persuade people [to let things bloom].
The thirty-four universities, colleges and institutes in Beijing didn’t let things
bloom until many meetings had been held.15 Beijing University’s Luo Longji may
be considered one who was [relatively] willing to have an airing [of views], and
yet even then many meetings had to be held [first].16 Why is it that people need not
be afraid? Why is the airing [of views] beneficial? Which is more beneficial, great
blooming and great contending or small blooming and small contending? Or is,
perhaps, having no blooming and no contending at all that what would be beneficial? Having no blooming and no contending is not beneficial; small blooming and
small contending cannot solve problems; it’s [got to be] great blooming and great
contending. [As for] great blooming and great contending, first of all, there will be
no disorder, and, second, no one will be put on the spot, except in [a few] isolated
cases. Ding Ling, for example, she was put on the spot.17 Or Feng Xuefeng, for
example, who was director of a publishing house: He was setting fires there and so
he was put on the spot.18 But they are a minority; they are Rightists. When they set
fires, their aim is to burn up the Communist Party. Feng Xuefeng is a Communist
[Party member]. As for the others, they should have no fear. The foundation [of
this policy] is to have faith in the majority of the masses. We should have faith that
the majority of the people are good. What we should say is that the majority of the
workers are good, the majority of the peasants are good, and the majority of the
capitalists can be remolded. [As for] the intellectuals, members of the democratic
parties, [members of] the Communist Party, and [members of] the Youth League,19
we should have faith in the majority [among them]. They are not planning to throw
our nation into disorder. When we talk about the majority, what actually do we
mean by this majority? Is 51 per cent a majority? That’s not the figure. [A majority]
is 90 to 98 per cent. Right now throughout the country—and I am exploring this
situation with the comrades from the localities—how many people actually disapprove of socialism? In this matter of promoting socialism20 everyone is inexperienced. We are all inexperienced hands. In the past we have only successfully carried
out a democratic revolution.21 That [revolution] was of a bourgeois nature; it did
not destroy the system of individual ownership, nor did it destroy the system of
capitalist ownership;22 all it did was to destroy the system of ownership by the
feudal classes and by the comprador class23 (by such people as Chiang, Song, Kong,
and Chen).24 Therefore there were many people who, during the stage of democratic revolution, were able to pass [the test of the revolution]. Even so, some people
were not enthusiastic about a thoroughgoing democratic revolution, yet they were
able to come through. There were people who were willing to take action for a
thoroughgoing democratic revolution. For example, in Hubei Province there was
this hired peasant laborer named Liu Jiemei. This was in the newspapers. He was
a third-generation beggar, and later everything was turned around for him; he
now become a cadre at the district-chief level.25 [But] this time
he was extremely dissatisfied with socialism, and very much disapproved of
cooperativization; he wanted to practice “freedom,” and opposed unified [state]
purchasing and marketing.26 Now he is putting on an exhibition, crying bitterly and


begging not to be expelled from the Party, and he's willing to reform. He is from
Huanggang xian in Hubei, and an exhibition has been put on in that xian, with him
as the guide. [His life] is divided into two parts; the beggar stage and the later stage
when he prospered. People like that—I have discussed it with the comrades in
Hubei—can probably be exempt from being stripped of their Party membership,
because they are willing to reform, right? They can pass the test of the democratic
revolution, but there are some people for whom this test of socialism is [more]
difficult to pass.27 This is because it is the last test; it is to destroy private ownership
and change into collective ownership. Of course, this struggle will have to be
carried on for many years. It is still difficult to determine at present how long the
period of transition will be. Roughly speaking, I would say it will take three
five-year plans, or a bit more. One five-year plan is already past, and we still need
about ten [more] years.28 But it seems to me that the current year represents a peak.29
Will there be more crests of this kind after [this year]? The crests in the flow of
the Huanghe [Yellow River] come every year in July and August, or in August and
September. In these next fifteen years will there be a crest every year? [If so,] you
people from the Ministry of Water Conservancy had better build some dikes.
(Laughter.) It seems to me that it probably won't be like that; the crest is getting
smaller and smaller. Even if a hundred thousand or so Rightists are found, out of
a population of 600 million, it is still a very small number. I would say that among
the people of the entire country there are 10 per cent who do not approve of
socialism. A good number of comrades have looked into this thoroughly; some say
that it's 15 per cent, and some say that it's not [even] 10 per cent; that it's only a
few per cent. Ten per cent is probably a reliable [figure].30 Those who in their hearts
do not approve of socialism include the landlord class, rich peasants,31 part of the
bourgeoisie, part of the bourgeois intellectuals, part of the urban, upper-stratum
petty bourgeoisie, and even certain individual poor peasants, lower-middle peasants, workers, and people like the Liu Jiemei whom we just talked about. How
much is 10 per cent in a population of 600 million? It's sixty million. This figure
is not small, and we should not take it lightly. On this [question] we have two points
of departure; first, we have 90 per cent of the people approving of socialism, [and
therefore] the working class has a vast ally army. The first ally is in the countryside
and consists of poor peasants, lower-middle peasants, and some of the well-to-do
middle peasants.32 As I just said, some people say that 10 per cent oppose socialism,
oppose cooperativization, and oppose unified [state] purchasing and marketing.
(XXX interjects: It's 15 per cent among the middle peasants.) I'm talking about
the population of the country as a whole. I've tried to get to the bottom of this with
a few provincial [Party] committee secretaries. However, the so-called intransigent
elements, which include ultra-Rightists and counterrevolutionaries, those who
engage in sabotage, as well as those who, although they don't engage in sabotage,
are still very intransigent and will probably take [their intransigence] with them to
the grave—none of them will reform, none of them will hear anything of socialism.
[For them] the moon in the United States is still better; in China the moon is just
not quite as good.33 How many people of this kind are there? Probably only about
2 per cent. You (pointing to XXX) just said, the proportion among three million

OCTOBER – DECEMBER 1957 / 729

people is 2.2 per cent.34 How much is 2 per cent of the entire national population?
It’s twelve million. If twelve million people were gathered together, that would be
a very big army. If they had rifles in their hands, that would be an army of twelve
million. So why isn’t there great disorder throughout the land? Because [this army]
is scattered in this cooperative and that cooperative, in this village and that village,
in this factory and that factory, in this school and that school, in this Communist
Party branch and that Communist Party branch, in this Communist Youth League
branch and that Communist Youth League branch, in this branch of a democratic
party and that branch of a democratic party. They are scattered everywhere, and
they can’t gather together. Therefore, our foundation consists of that 90 per cent
of the people who approves [of socialism], including the proletariat, the semiproletariat in the countryside, the poor peasants, the lower-middle peasants, the
petty-bourgeoisie, bourgeois intellectuals, and upper-stratum petty bourgeois intellectuals. At the moment we’re not counting two classes, the landlords and the
compradors. Those two classes were the targets of the democratic revolution. Are
we not opposed to imperialism, feudalism, and bureaucratic capitalism?35 Imperial-ism is now outside our borders; we have already chased it out. Inside the country
we have only feudalism and bureaucratic capitalism, that is, the landlord and
comprador classes, and these are [still] the targets of revolution. Within what
framework is this revolution [to take place]? Which are the classes among which
struggle will arise? It will be the proletariat, the petty bourgeoisie, and the
bourgeoisie, these three classes.

The numbers of the proletariat are small, but they have the vast ally army of the
petty bourgeoisie, that is, the poor peasants and the lower-middle peasants. The
poor peasants are the semiproletariat; the lower-middle peasants are middle peasants who are propertied but [lead] a relatively hard life. They constitute 70 per cent
or a little more of the rural population. In general the well-to-do middle peasants
make up 20 per cent. At this time, the well-to-do middle peasants can be divided
roughly into three parts: one part consists of those who approve of cooperativization, and they make up 40 per cent; [another consists of] those who are wavering,
who could go either way, and who make up 40 per cent; [and the third part consists
of] those who oppose [cooperativization] and who make up 20 per cent. There is
also a division among the landlords at present; not all landlords oppose socialism
now. Because of the education of the last few years, there has emerged a group of
landlords who do not make trouble with regard to the food [situation], who approve
of unified [state] purchasing and marketing, and who approve of cooperativization.
A group [like this] has also emerged among the rich peasants. We should not
[mistakenly] think that at present all landlords oppose socialism, that all rich
peasants oppose socialism, that all capitalists oppose socialism, and that all high-level intellectuals oppose socialism. In fact that is not the case. We should carry
out an analysis. The intransigent elements probably constitute 2 per cent, and
therefore we should have faith in the majority. Look at it, [those who support
socialism are] 90 per cent! Through work and through great debates, we can get 8
per cent more; then [the figure] will become 98 per cent, and those intransigent
diehards only amount to 2 per cent. Of course [we] must keep in mind, as Comrade


XXX just said, that they are still a very big force!36 The landlords have less prestige
[than ever], and the comprador bourgeoisie have lost [all their] prestige. The
bourgeoisie and the proletarian intellectuals,37 the rural petty bourgeoisie (the
well-to-do middle peasants), the upper-stratum urban petty bourgeoisie (a few
relatively well-to-do owners of small enterprises), and the intellectuals of that
class—these people do have prestige. For example, in the rural areas, well-to-do
middle peasants have prestige, because the well-to-do middle peasants are relatively strong producers, and the poor peasants cannot catch up with them. As for
the bourgeoisie, bourgeois intellectuals, and upper-stratum petty-bourgeois intellectuals, these intellectuals get along quite well in China. Haven’t [we] said that
they are our nation’s wealth? Indeed they are: In any facet [of life] you cannot do
without them.38 Without them you can’t open schools. Without them you can’t have
professors. Without them you can’t have middle-school and primary-school teachers. If you run a newspaper you need reporters; if you put on an opera you need
performers. We must have scientists, engineers, and technicians. The number of
people in this class is not great—a few million; even [with] their families included
there are [only] a few tens of millions—probably thirty million people. I hear that
the number of those who are truly capitalists is seven hundred thousand, not
including their families. There may be four to five million intellectuals.39 I would
say that, altogether, let’s make it six million; at five persons to a family (because
they are fairly well-to-do they tend to have more sons and daughters)—five times
six [million] is thirty million. This class is relatively well-educated and is the most
skilled. This is also precisely why the Rightists cock their tails in the air [and strut
around].40 Didn’t Luo Longji say it? [He said] the petty intellectuals of the
proletariat simply cannot lead the big intellectuals of the petty bourgeoisie.41 He
himself insists on saying that he is of the petty bourgeoisie, and that he is a big
intellectual of the petty bourgeoisie. As I see it, not only the petty intellectuals of
the proletariat, but the [entire] proletariat, whose members can’t recognize more
than a few characters,42 is better and smarter than Luo Longji. The bourgeoisie and
the bourgeois intellectuals, the upper-stratum petty bourgeoisie and the intellectuals of that class, including the middle-of-the-roaders [among them], are not willing
to accept the Communist Party or the proletariat.43 They support the Communist
Party and they support the Constitution; oh yes, they support them all right, and
they raise their hands [in approval]. But in reality, in their hearts they are not
willing to accept it. Here we should do some analysis: the Rightists are opposed
[to us] while the non-Rightists44 are partially willing to accept [us] and partially
unwilling. Aren’t they saying that we can’t provide leadership in this, and that we
can’t provide leadership in that? It’s not only the Rightists who think this way;
other people do too. In sum, [they are saying that we’re] just about finished. The
Communist Party has no choice but to move abroad, and the proletariat has no
choice but to go to the moon, since, [according to them,] we are no good at this and
we are no good at that! No matter which area of activity you talk about, they say
that we’re no good at it. I say that in going through the present debate, the primary
goal is to win over those who are partially willing to accept [us] and those who are
really unwilling, to make them understand what, ultimately, is [meant by] this

OCTOBER – DECEMBER 1957 / 731
business [about] the laws of social development. [To convince them that they] must
yet listen to that not-so-highly-educated proletariat, and in the countryside listen
to the poor peasants and the lower-middle peasants. [If you] talk about education,
or talk about skills, the poor peasants45 are not as good as the well-to-do middle
peasants; but [if you] talk about revolution, it is precisely [the poor peasants] who
are the capable ones. Can we persuade the majority of this [fact]? [We] can persuade
the majority of people, [we] are entirely capable of persuading the majority of
people. [As for] the majority of the bourgeoisie, the majority of the upper-stratum
petty bourgeoisie, I just said that only 40 per cent of the well-to-do middle peasants
approve of cooperativization, 40 per cent are wavering, and only 20 per cent
disapprove. We can persuade these waverers. We can persuade the majority of the
many university professors, middle- and primary-school teachers, artists, writers,
scientists, and engineers. [If we] use the approach of persuasion, those who are not
so willing will slowly become willing. It seems to me that it will still take a number
of years, probably ten years. For example, [with regard to] the Soviet Union,
[people were] never willing to accept them [before]; now that they’ve put up a
“moon” it appears that they may indeed have a bit of ability.46 (Laughter). In the
Soviet Union they also went through this stage, [with people] saying that the
Communist Party was not capable, that it couldn’t provide leadership in this, and
couldn’t provide leadership in that. They solved [this problem] a long time ago
now; their revolution [took place] forty years ago. Ours is still only eight years
past, so it’s no wonder. Since 90 per cent of the people support socialism, we
shouldn’t fear disorder; there won’t be disorder, disorder will not develop. As long
as you’re not the kind of people such as Feng Xuefeng and Ding Ling, you shouldn’t
be afraid of being put on the spot. How can you be put on the spot? You can get
out of it! All we need to do is to carry out [the democracy in] the Three Great
Democracies;47 if you have [a mistake], then just correct it.48

On this basis, it is greatly beneficial for great blooming, great contending, great
arguing, great debates, and big-character posters to appear at the present moment;
this form has no class character.49 Big-character posters, great blooming, and great
contending, whatever—the Rightists, too, can engage in great blooming and great
contending, and the Rightists can also put out big-character posters. I say [let’s]
thank the Rightists, for the appellation “great” [here] was invented by them.
Blooming and contending were invented by us. [In my speech] on February 29 this
year I didn’t say anything at all about great blooming and great contending, or about
great arguing, great debates, or about big-character posters—this word “great”
wasn’t [in my speech].50 Last year XXX had an article,51 and in May last year we
talked here about a hundred flowers blooming—that was just “blooming”—and
about a hundred schools contending—that was just “contending.” That word
“great” was not there. Moreover, [the idea] was limited to a hundred flowers
blooming in literature and the arts, and a hundred schools contending in academics.
It did not extend to politics. Afterward, the Rightists needed to extend it to politics,
and so, they turned everything over to [a question of] blooming and contending.
They called that the time for blooming and contending, and moreover, they wanted
to engage in great blooming and great contending. One can see, therefore, that this


slogan can be used by the Rightists, by the middle-of-the-roaders, as well as by the
Leftists. Which class, after all, will great blooming and great contending and
big-character posters benefit? In the final analysis they benefit the proletariat; in
the final analysis they do not benefit the Rightists. The point is that 90 per cent of
the people do not wish the nation to be in disorder, but wish to [continue and]
accomplish the building of socialism. Among [the other] 10 per cent of the people
there are a good many who are wavering. As to the intransigent elements, they
constitute only 2 per cent [of the people]. How can they possibly cause disorder?
Therefore a slogan such as great blooming and great contending approaches and
methods such as big-character posters, great blooming and great contending, and
great debates will, in the final analysis, be of benefit to the self-transformation of
the majority of the people. [Of the] two roads, the socialist road and the capitalist
road, [these methods will] in the final analysis benefit the socialist.52 I say it's like
putting on a play. Formerly, during the period of resistance against Japan, there
was a Society for the People's Rejuvenation [Xinmin hui] in the North, which was
organized by Miao Bin.53 Miao Bin was an old friend of mine who belonged to the
Reorganization Clique.54 Miao Bin later became a traitor and organized the Society
for the People's Rejuvenation, and they put on plays. It was reported in the
newspapers; they went to Taiyuan to put on plays to laud Japan's Imperial Army
and oppose the Chinese.55 So, because traitors put on plays, should we then not put
any plays on? We should still put them on. There's also the matter of the old-style
poetry. You, venerable old Mr. Huang,56 you are an expert [in this]—this is
something that can be used by anybody. In those poems written by a professor at
Beijing University there is a line that reads “XXXX is running wild and roughshod
over others.” He can use anything to oppose the revolution. Even at that time I
said [we] shouldn't take excessive action against such a person. At the time, with
the ideas he then had, he just had to write a little poetry to insult people. I had great
appreciation for those poems of his. (Laughter.) We mustn't be afraid of disorder,
and we mustn't be afraid of being put on the spot. Of course, the Rightists will be
put on the spot, but they will also be able to get out of it. The Rightists will
eventually get out of it, won't they? [On this problem of] getting out of it, according
to dialectics, it seems to me to be [a case where] one divides into two;57 the
two-point theory58—some of the Rightists will be able in the future to get their
Rightist labels removed.59 Must they wear them forever? Will they never get to
turn themselves around?60 It seems to me that that's not necessarily the case.
Perhaps there will be a fairly large number of Rightist elements who, having
thought things through, will follow the general trend and change for the better,
[becoming] more honest and a little less obstinate. We will then remove their labels,
and we won't call them Rightists anymore. Furthermore, we should arrange jobs
for [them]. The Rightists, by virtue of their opposition to socialism, are a kind of
hostile force, but now we are not going to handle them the way we did the landlords
and counterrevolutionaries in the past.61 The basic indication [of this] is that we
are not taking away their right to vote.62 There will probably be certain individuals
whose right to vote will have to be taken away. (The Premier: [they will have to
undergo] reform through labor.)63 For example, someone like Lin Xiling, what kind

OCTOBER – DECEMBER 1957 / 733

of work is she doing now? She is sweeping floors at the People’s University.64 I
hear that she wanted to do that work. That kind of person, a kid; [but] she’s
twenty-eight now, and not a kid any more. She lies and says that she’s only
twenty-one, but she’s actually twenty-eight already. She couldn’t get into the Youth
League and she was unhappy. Now she’s become isolated, and she does a little
work at school, undergoing reform through labor. That is an individual case. But
how can you expect Fei Xiaotong,65 or even Wu Jingchao66 of the People’s
University, to undergo reform through labor? It wouldn’t quite be appropriate,
would it? Such big intellectuals; their shoulders can’t carry anything, their hands
can’t lift anything. Right now a good many of our cadres should go to do labor;
Beijing has sent several tens of thousands of people down [to the countryside].67
They must labor for several years, and this can be considered reform through labor,
too. In the future, university students should first do a few years’ labor; otherwise
they will go through their entire lives without ever having done any labor, without
ever having tilled the soil. Of course, I’m not here to make announcements to
frighten you, demanding that you, venerable Mr. Huang Yan[pei], Mr. Chen
Yuan,68 and Zhang Wenbo,69 all go down and do hard labor. (Huang Yanpei: Doing
a little work around the house is all right.) Didn’t the ancients say, “Clean the house
and sweep the courtyard, and behave yourself appropriately in conversation and
action?”70 (Laughter.) All these things we’ve said before. Of course we didn’t say
it as explicitly and thoroughly as this, and in particular, we didn’t go into it as deeply
as this. This disturbance has made us get to the bottom of [the situation]. [Our
analysis showed that] one side was [between] 90 per cent and 98 per cent and the
other side was [between] 10 per cent and 2 per cent. Having gotten thus to the
bottom of [the situation], we now have a clear, more confident picture of how things
add up. Using this method of ours, we can avoid a Hungarian type of incident, and
we can also avoid the kind of incident that is now occurring in Poland.71 Poland
has not yet solved this problem. They have to shut down a newspaper. We don’t
need to shut down newspapers; for us just an editorial will do. [Regarding] Wenhui
bao, [we] wrote two editorials;72 the first wasn’t thorough and didn’t explain things
fully; however, after the second editorial, [Wenhui bao] started to correct itself.73
Xinmin wan bao also corrected itself.74 When Zhao XX75 was chatting with me, I
said, “You managed things very well.” He said that actually he had committed
errors. I said, “You’ve committed errors, and you’ve corrected them, so it’s all
right.” The Xinmin wan bao is a very small paper; none of you read it, do you? This
newspaper is worth reading. This [method] wouldn’t work in Poland. They had to
close down a newspaper. When they closed it, they provoked trouble. I don’t know
what the outcome has been these last two days. (The Premier: It’s not over yet.)
That problem of theirs, in a word, has not been solved yet. They haven’t solved the
[problem of] counterrevolution, they haven’t solved the problem of Rightists [and
of] bourgeois ideology, and they haven’t solved the problem of the two roads.
The proletariat should train intellectuals of its own. Were you taken aback when
you just heard that? Since a good many of you are not the proletariat’s own
intellectuals. Although the proletariat is small—before Liberation there were only
four million industrial workers and now it’s twelve million in the last eight years


it has increased by eight million. Don't belittle these people on account of their
small numbers. The future lies with this class alone; all the other classes are [just]
transitional classes. The first step is for the entire peasantry to make the transition
to collectivization. The second step will be the changeover to state farms.76 As for
the petty bourgeoisie and the bourgeoisie, they are both transitional classes. We
don't want the bourgeoisie any longer; this class must be eliminated. I'm not talking
about eliminating people; [but] they must be changed; we want them to change into
proletarian intellectuals, and they can change gradually. I said on April 30, “If there
were no skin, what would the hair be attached to?”77 Otherwise, there's the danger
of becoming gentlemen on the beam.78 The main thing at that [meeting] was to talk
about this problem:79 about the classes undergoing a change. These few classes are
all transitional classes. They will all make the transition to the side of the working
class. A good many people have now joined trade unions, and this raises the
question—doesn't one become [a member of] the working class by joining a trade
union? [No; some people have]80 joined the Communist Party, [but] they [still]
want to oppose communism—Communist Party members opposing communism!
Aren't Ding Ling and Feng Xuefeng Communist Party members who oppose
communism? When one joins a trade union it doesn't mean that one has become a
[member of] the proletariat. The teachers and staff members of schools have all
joined trade unions. Isn't Qian Weizhang a trade union member?81 Isn't Qian
Duansheng a trade union member?82 [Nevertheless,] they still need to undergo a
process of remolding. A good many of the Rightists are talented people; on this
point I actually have considerable appreciation for them. But it would not be
acceptable for them to use this talent of theirs to oppose communism and to oppose
socialism. How can we remold them? Take Fei Xiaotong for example. I had a chat
with him, and I said, “Can't you change a bit?” (Laughter.) He has learned our
method of putting down roots and forging links [through exchanging experiences],
which was used in [the campaign for] land reform.83 Altogether he has more than
200 friends who are high-level intellectuals. They are everywhere—Beijing,
Chengdu, Wuhan, Shanghai, Wuxi. He says that is exactly where he suffers, and
that he can't get out of that circle. Not only is he unable to get out, he has
deliberately organized these people and represented them in [the course of] the
great blooming and great contending. I said, “Don't deal with that 200; find another
200; go among the workers and peasants and look for 200 [friends].” He said he
didn't know if [we] wanted him any more. I said, “Didn't you talk about the need
for making an investigation? You can go make another investigation. If you go
make an investigation from the standpoint of the working class, who wouldn't want
you?” This is what I chatted with him about, at the beginning of June. So, it's good
to have a few Rightist friends. We should make friends with a few Rightists [so as
to] understand their state of mind somewhat. We should have friends in all circles,
should have friends on the Left, in the center, and also on the Right. We should
have friends among the workers, we should have friends among the peasants. At
present, [members of] the democratic parties, university professors, [people in]
literary circles, and a good many writers in the Communist Party do not have friends
who are workers or peasants. This is a very great shortcoming. I think that one

OCTOBER – DECEMBER 1957 / 735
should go among [the masses of workers and peasants]84 to look for friends.
Genuine friends are to be found where there are workers and peasants. [When you
go] among the peasants, you shouldn’t take things too lightly and look for
well-to-do middle peasants to be friends with. You shouldn’t seek out that Liu
Jiemei and make friends with him; he represents the well-to-do middle peasants.
You should look among the poor peasants and lower-middle peasants, look among
the old workers. Old workers perceive very clearly the [correct] direction [to be
followed]. Poor peasants and lower-middle peasants [also] easily perceive the
[correct] direction. That’s why I believe that the situation is hopeful with regard to
China’s affairs; I’m never pessimistic. Didn’t I talk about this on February 29?85
Disorder cannot develop. Didn’t I say that we must not be afraid of disorder? [In
any case], disorder can become a good thing. Whenever there is thorough blooming
[of various opinions], [as when] the ghosts shrieked for a while at Normal
University, causing total disorder, then, it would seem to me that there is hope with
regard to the affairs [of that place].
We are prepared to have four stages in the rectification [campaign], and
Comrade Deng XX86 has just said something about them. These are: the great
blooming and great contending; a counterattack against the Rightists; rectification;
and transformation through rectification.87 Finally, there is one more point: [we
must] examine our thinking, study a little Marxism-Leninism, have a gentle wind
and a fine rain,88 and hold small-group meetings to carry out a little criticism and
self-criticism. The May 1 document on rectification89 talked about having a gentle
wind and fine rain. A good many people didn’t approve, and called for a violent
wind and stormy rain.90 The results were very useful. We had already anticipated
this [happening] at the time, because it had been that way when we carried out
rectification in Yanan. You talk about a gentle wind and fine rain, and you end up
with a violent wind and a stormy rain. But, in the end, things will have to conclude
in a gentle wind and a fine rain. At one factory, as soon as they started to put up
big-character posters, several thousand were put up, and the authorities of the
factory found it very hard to take. After a period of ten days or so like that, some
people wanted to quit. The shop directors were thinking of resigning and said that
they couldn’t stand it any more, that they couldn’t eat and couldn’t sleep. Then the
Rightists said, you can’t argue against us, we are the ones to do the great blooming
and great contending. And, at that time, we also said to them that we would let them
talk, and that [we] wouldn’t argue. That’s why in May we didn’t argue; we didn’t
argue at all before June 8,91 and a full-scale blooming and contending took place.
Probably more than 90 per cent of the blooming and contending was correct. A few
per cent consisted of the opinions of Rightists. At the time we just had to toughen
the scalp and endure it.92 I guess all you democratic parties will also have
experienced this by now. Every unit has to go through such a stage—every cooperative, and every factory; and now even in the military things are being done this
way. Whether or not we will do it next year will be determined next year; we’ll
discuss it further, because, since the movement is to continue until May 1 of next
year,93 there will be the question of whether or not it will be necessary to do it again
in the second half of the year. However, as long as it is not done, “free markets”94


will appear again. Some things in the world are just so strange, [if we go] three
years without a rectification [campaign], then many weird arguments95 are bound
to reemerge from the Communist Party, the Youth League, the democratic parties,
among university professors, middle- and primary-school teachers, news reporters,
engineers, and in the scientific circles, and capitalist thinking will once more rear
its head. It's like our sweeping floors; it's best to sweep this house every day; our
faces have to be washed at least once every day.96 From now on it seems to me we
should have [rectification] roughly once a year. A month or so each time will do
it.97 There won't be the kind of high peak we're having now, [but] perhaps there
will [still]98 be a little crest in the flood at that time. This crest in the flood [we are
experiencing now] wasn't created by us. There are some things we hadn't figured
on. Haven't we said this? The Communist Party produced Gao Gang.99 Don't you
democratic parties have a single Gao Gang? I can't believe it. Currently, the
Communist Party has produced people like Ding Ling, Feng Xuefeng, and Jiang
Feng.100
[As for] the four stages of rectification, the first is contending [of views], the
second is counter[attack], the third is transformation, and the fourth is study. These
four stages [taken together] will probably take a few more months.
The need for remolding must be recognized.101 Rightists just don't admit that
they are in need of being remolded. They don't admit that they must be further
remolded. Furthermore, they have influenced other people to be also rather unwilling to remold [themselves], saying that they have already completed their remolding. Zhang Naiqi102 said, “How can one endure that [remolding]?” He refers to it
as being gutted and skinned. You say that one must be completely reborn; he says
that being completely reborn amounts to being gutted and skinned.103 Many people
in this country of ours, China, have forgotten what it was our goal to achieve, why
we must do these things, what the good points of socialism are, and why we should
carry out ideological remolding.104 It's simply for the purpose of establishing a
proletarian viewpoint. Intellectuals must be changed into proletarian intellectuals.
These old intellectuals will simply have to change in the future, because new
intellectuals will have arisen. Teaching assistants, lecturers, whatever, will all
become professors one day. You talk about learning and say that they are not good
[at that] now. But in the future, they will be. [Among] engineers and scientists, new
people are emerging; this will challenge the old scientists, old engineers, old
professors, and old teachers105—they'll have no choice but to move ahead. We
figure that the great majority of people are capable of moving ahead, and that
intellectuals are capable of becoming proletarian intellectuals.106 The proletariat
must create its own corps of intellectuals, in the same way that the bourgeoisie
created its own corps of intellectuals. It won't do for the political regime of a class
not to have [its own] intellectuals.107 If the United States didn't have such intellectuals, how could their bourgeois dictatorship work? In the dictatorship of the
proletariat, the proletariat must create its own intellectuals.108 An editorial should
be written about this, to clear up this question. As for those Rightists who won't
change, and who aren't willing to be completely reborn—[we] probably shouldn't
count Zhang Naiqi [among them]109—if you want them to become proletarian

OCTOBER – DECEMBER 1957 / 737

intellectuals, well, they just won’t do it. They say they have already changed for
the better a long time ago, and that they are the red bourgeoisie. We say that you’re
still not good enough; that you’re white; Zhang Naiqi is a white bourgeoisie. To
be expert first and then red is simply to be white first and then red.110 They don’t
want to be red right now, they want to wait to be red in the future. If you’re not red
now, then what color are you, anyway? Aren’t you white? You should be red and
expert at the same time. If you want to become red, it’s quite easy. It’s not difficult
at all; all you have to do is to set your mind to it.111 You really don’t have to read
a lot of books. The main thing is to put [your] emphasis on what it is that [we] call
the proletariat and what it is that [we] call the dictatorship of the proletariat, [on
why it is that] the future lies with the proletariat alone, and the other classes are all
transitional classes, [and on] what direction this country of ours should follow.
They don’t understand this. Those things I said on April 30112 haven’t sunk in with
them. “If there were no skin, what would the hair adhere to?”
I said that China has had five pieces of skin. Three [of them] are old ones:
imperialist ownership, bureaucratic-capitalist ownership, and feudal ownership. In
the past the intellectuals depended upon these three pieces of skin for their
livelihood. In addition, they also depended upon national capitalist ownership and
on individual, small-producer ownership.113 The democratic revolution we had last
time was nothing more than a revolution against these three pieces of skin. Counting
from [the time of] Lin Zexu, that revolution has lasted more than a hundred years.114
The socialist revolution is directed against the two [other] pieces of skin: national
bourgeois115 ownership and small-producer ownership (petty-bourgeois ownership).116 None of these five pieces of skin exists any longer; the three pieces of old
skin have not existed for a long time; the two pieces of newer skin no longer exist
either. What skin remains? It is this skin—the socialist ownership—this system of
public ownership. Of course, this is further divided into two parts; ownership by
the whole people, and collective ownership.117 On whom [do the intellectuals]
depend for their livelihood now? The democratic parties, university professors,
scientists, news reporters, no matter who, all live off the workers, live off the
collectivized peasants, and live off the ownership by the whole people and collective ownership. In short, they live off socialist ownership, live off public ownership.
That [old] skin is gone; so what about this hair? Now it’s drifting around in the air,
and even if it comes down it won’t take hold. [Nevertheless,] they even despise
this [new] skin, [saying that] this proletariat, these poor peasants and lower-middle
peasants, are really too dull; that they don’t know anything about the heavens above
nor about the earth beneath their feet,118 whereas they [the intellectuals] themselves
are superior to the Three Teachings and Nine Schools [of philosophy].119 At that
time (April 30) I exhorted everybody. I used a metaphor. I said this was not a simple
matter. [I said take] for example eating dog meat. It’s with this matter that I have
some [applicable] experience: I have never eaten dog meat in my life. I have never
eaten it, and yet I oppose eating dog meat. [People may say,] if you’ve never eaten
it, why do you oppose it? You just haven’t had any experience [with it], have you?
You say dog meat tastes bad; have you ever eaten it? How can you know that dog
meat tastes bad, huh? You haven’t ever eaten it, and yet you express your opinion


all over the place, saying dog meat tastes bad. Furthermore if dog meat is put in
front of you, you take one sniff and run away. That's because social opinion has
always said [that dog meat isn't tasty]. [Actually] the ancients ate a lot of dog meat.
Mencius's economic program had a provision: raise dogs. He said, “If chickens,
pigs, and dogs do not miss their breeding season, then those who are seventy will
have meat to eat.”120 Only those who are seventy-years old might eat meat—you
can't if you are only sixty-nine—[this was] because at that time the [society's]
productive forces were weak, and there were only just so many things [to eat].
[Getting back to] Marxism, because there were so many in the past who opposed
it—the imperialists opposed it, and Generalissimo Chiang121 opposed it every
day—people have become scared to death of the thing. There was a saying,
“Communism does not fit the national conditions of China,” which is like saying
that dog meat does not fit the needs of the people. There must be a process [of
change], and furthermore, there must be a campaign.122 This year's campaign is
opening up this road [to change].

At present there are some organs and schools where, after the Rightists had been
opposed, the wind became calm and the waves still,123 and although a good many
suggestions124 [for change] have been made, [people are] no longer willing to make
changes.125 I think [we] will need another upsurge of blooming and contending,
putting up some big-character posters, and directly challenging [people];126 challenging [people] is very effective. As for the transformation, a short period of time
is required, say, one or two months. [Furthermore], we must study. With regard to
studying, it won't be finished in just one or two months, of course. I'm only saying
that this campaign will come to the end of a stage.127 The Rightists have anticipated
this. They say, this storm must eventually pass, and that's that. Quite correct! You
can't be opposing the Rightists all the time, opposing them year after year, day after
day. For example, in Beijing right now this anti-Rightist atmosphere is not that
intense any more, because [the process of] opposing [the Rightists] has been more
or less [carried through], although it hasn't yet been fully concluded. Don't slacken
up. There are some people who will not surrender even till they die. Luo Longji
and Zhang Naiqi, for example, would rather die than surrender. [So] I think that
we will [have to keep trying to] persuade them. Talking to them a few times
certainly won't convince them. But are you going to continue to hold meetings
every day? Put them [aside] somewhere and let them do as they please. We have
adopted a procedure under which we don't arrest people, and we don't take away
their right to vote either. With these people, give them room to turn around, and
split them up. Now, as for that group who are diehards, if they never become willing
to reform, what should we do? Just forget about it. Their numbers are very small.
Put them [aside] somewhere, put them [aside] for a few decades. The majority of
the people will move forward, and after three five-year plans have been completed,
there will be transformation in the face of this country of ours.

Let me talk now about the Forty-Article Program for Agriculture.128 After two
years' practice, the goal [we began with] still basically holds, namely “four-five-eight,” that is, [an output per mu of] 400 catties north of the Yellow River, 500
catties north of the Huai River, and 800 catties south of the Huai River.129 We must

OCTOBER – DECEMBER 1957 / 739

reach this goal in twelve years. This is the basic point. The entire program is
unchanged in its fundamentals, but a few things have changed. For example, some
[problems] have already been resolved. The problem of cooperativization [is one
that] has basically been resolved. In addition, there have been some changes in the
order of the articles. Furthermore, in the past, there were some things that were not
emphasized; machines and chemical fertilizers, for example. These two things we
did not stress in the past, [but] now we must produce them on a large scale; we
must give them more emphasis. In the next few days let’s hold a joint session of
the Standing Committee of the [National] People’s Congress and the Standing
Committee of the [Chinese People’s] Political Consultative Conference to discuss
[the program] a bit.130 After the discussion it can be published in the newspapers
and taken to the entire countryside for discussion. It can also be discussed in
factories, and among the people in the various circles, and the democratic parties
can also discuss it. This winter, or sometime in December, the Communist Party
must hold a national Party congress,131 and only at that time will [the program] be
ratified. This was a proposal put forward by the Communist Party. This is something that was designed by the Political Planning Council, but not Zhang Bojun’s
Political Planning Council.132 The Communist Party will submit it to the State
Council, and the State Council will in turn submit it to the People’s Congress.
[Let’s] hold a National People’s Congress this winter in December or in January
next year [so that we can] pass next year’s plan and budget a little earlier [than
usual]. In the past haven’t we always done this in May or June? Now we should
change it; do it earlier. At that time [we should] also pass the agricultural program.
There is a great need to mobilize the entire peasantry to discuss this program. We
must drum up a surge of energy. We have now begun to be somewhat energetic,
but in the second half of last year and the first half of this year our energy began to
sag. Now, with the rectification [campaign], this energy has again been aroused. I
say to [you], comrades, that these Forty Articles, as well as the plan for industry,
and the plan for culture and education have every hope [of success]. They are fairly
well-suited to China’s national conditions, and they are not subjective. If there are
some subjective [elements] in them, then we’ll just change them. For example, in
the Forty-Article Program for Agriculture there was one [article calling for] six
million double-shared plows.133 This [proposal] was [the result of] a subjective
[speculation], and now we’ve gotten rid of [that article]. There have been some
revisions too. After all, [we’ve] gone through two years of practice! But in general
there is hope [of success]. Our China can be transformed. Ignorance can be
transformed into knowledge, and that which is sagging can be transformed and
stirred up.
In the program there is an article on eliminating the Four Pests: rats, sparrows,
flies, and mosquitoes.134 I am very interested in this matter. I don’t know how you
people [feel about it]. I suspect you also are interested in it, aren’t you? Some people
say that sparrows can eat insects, [but] in my view we should wipe them out,
[because] they compete for food with people. On the one hand they do eat insects,
but they also eat grain. As for rats, nobody approves of them. Nobody approves of
flies and mosquitoes, either; they have a bad reputation. At present, there aren’t too


many flies and mosquitoes in Beijing, but they have come out again. In the past we
didn’t do anything about mosquitoes; we have only concentrated on flies and
sparrows. This is a large-scale sanitary and public health campaign, and it’s [a
campaign] to break down superstitions. It’s not easy to get rid of things like these.
If we mobilize the people of the entire nation to work on this, I think the spirit of
these people of ours will be aroused. We must arouse this nation [of ours].
To achieve [an annual production of] twenty million tons of steel in three
five-year plans: In ten more years [this goal] can be [reached]. This year it’s 5.2
million tons; in five years we have had an increase of more than three million
tons.135 The figures for 1949 show that [production] then was only a hundred and
some thousand tons;136 during the three years of recovery (1950, 1951, 1952) we
made more than a million tons; now, after five more years of effort, we have reached
5.2 million tons; and with another five years of effort we can surpass 10 million
tons or an even slightly higher target and reach 11.5 million tons. Then, in carrying
out the third five-year plan, can’t we reach twenty million tons? It’s just like playing
majong—you double your stakes.137
Getting rid of the Four Pests will also require several years of spot experimenting138—probably three years of spot experimenting, five years of sudden and
all-out attack, and two years of mopping up.139 Of the twelve years [covered by the
program], two have already passed and ten years remain. If we produce some
accomplishments in this area, the mental attitudes of the people will change. Once
we have moved ahead in this, I think, birth control will have some hope [of success].
I think that birth control will also [require] several years of spot experimentation,
several years of sudden attack, and several years of mopping up. This matter, too,
can be submitted to a great debate.
In getting rid of the Four Pests, [we] should engage on a large scale in great
blooming and great contending, great debates, and [putting up] big-character
posters. [We should debate] whether it is actually possible to eradicate the flies,
mosquitoes, and rats in the countryside and in the cities. I say that this country of
ours absolutely has every hope [of success]. The Rightists say that there is no hope.
That is wrong; it’s completely mistaken. They have no faith. There is a reason for
this lack of faith. Of course they have no faith; it’s because they don’t want to
undertake this task. We want to establish socialism, and I feel that there is absolutely
every hope. This includes eradicating rats, sparrows, flies, and mosquitoes; this
includes eliminating illiteracy; and this includes planned population growth. There
are many things to be done; in those forty articles there are a good many things.
Who says that it is only a plan for agriculture; there’s also a plan for industry, and
there’s also a plan for culture and education.
As for whether [we should] throw the Rightist elements into the ocean, we won’t
throw even a single one of them in. Didn’t [we] just talk about the two kinds of
people? One kind consists of those who have corrected their ways, and who can
later get rid of their Rightist labels and return to the ranks of the people; the other
kind are those [who will remain the same] right down to the time they see King
Yan.140 They’ll say, I’m one who has not surrendered; King Yan, Your Highness,
see how much backbone I have! These are the loyal vassals of the bourgeoisie who

OCTOBER – DECEMBER 1957 / 741

do not surrender. The Rightists have ties to the remnants of feudalism; they are
joined in spirit.141 Although they have never exchanged letters and haven’t held
any meetings [together, they echo each other. The landlords were extremely happy
[with] Wenhui bao. The landlords bought the newspaper and read it to the peasants,
[saying] look, it’s been printed in the paper! They just want to turn things around.
Therefore, the remnants of feudalism, the remnants of the counterrevolution, and
the Rightists are in actuality all joined in spirit. Moreover, [those] in foreign
countries are joined in spirit with [those in] China as well.142 For example, Taiwan
and Hong Kong are very much in support of Chu Anping’s [theory of] the
[Communist] Party treating the country as its own [private] domain, Zhang Bojun’s
Political Planning Council, and Luo Longji’s Rehabilitation Committee.143 There
is also Ge Peiqi. He’s the most famous.144 And there’s the United States. They very
much disapprove of our opposing the Rightists. They have great sympathy for the
Rightists. I’ve already talked with you [about this]. I said, supposing the Americans
captured Beijing, what would you do? What attitude would you adopt? What would
you prepare to do? Would you organize a [collaborationist] organization with them,
to maintain order,145 or would you go into the mountains? I said that my idea is to
go into the mountains; the first step is to go to Zhangjiakou, the next step is to go
to Yanan. Didn’t I talk about this two days before February 29?146 Saying this is
putting it in an extreme way. [If we] considered the problem thoroughly, we would
not be afraid of disorder. Even if you occupied half of China, I wouldn’t be afraid.
Didn’t Japan occupy the greater part of China? Afterward, didn’t we create a new
China? We say “thank you” to the Japanese. I’ve talked with the Japanese, and I
said, this invasion of yours was very advantageous for us.147 This invasion of yours
stirred up an entire people to oppose you and raised their consciousness.

Besides these, there are a few other documents [dealing with] labor and wages
and matters having to do with the overall system. These will be discussed with
everybody [here], and they will be presented to the Standing Committee of the
[National] People’s Congress. There is also the [issue of the connections between]
wages and labor insurance and benefits; this will also be discussed. I am afraid we
should do a bit more experimenting first; consider it a draft [plan] and do some
spot experimenting in the factories. Only then will we be able to make a final
decision.

Rightists don’t tell the truth, but we do. They are dishonest. They do things
behind our backs. Who would know that Zhang Bojun was involved in so many
things? The way I see it, the higher the official positions such people hold, the more
they would rebel against us. What about as the head of a ministry? [People like
that] couldn’t serve as ministers any more, could they? If a Rightist became a
minister, the people probably wouldn’t approve of it, would they? Another [matter
is], how do we arrange [jobs] for [the Rightists who are] People’s [Congress]
deputies? How should we arrange jobs for the Rightists? Well, as far as a job is
concerned, they must have some sort of a job. With these well-known Rightists, it
would probably be [too] difficult to place them in positions as People’s [Congress]
deputies. Can Ding Ling be elected a deputy? No, she cannot be elected a People’s
[Congress] deputy. Next year we will have elections, and we’ll have to talk with


you about the slates for the elections. With certain people it’s probably not good
for them to be without any duties at all, either. Arranging [job assignments] for the
Rightists is indeed a problem; we should consider it very carefully. There are some
professors, such as Qian Weizhang, who are probably all right as professors but
cannot serve as vice-presidents [of a university]. [Then] there are some [other]
people who, for the time being, are probably not even good enough to serve as
professors, [because] the students won’t listen to them. Well, what should they do?
We can assign them some other work in the schools, to allow them to remold
themselves. They can become professors after a few years. We should give thought
to all these problems. These are bothersome problems. This business of revolution
is a troublesome business.
What is the situation in the various democratic parties, and at the basic levels?
I’m afraid that even you people haven’t gotten to the bottom [of the situation], just
as we haven’t gotten to the bottom of the situation in many areas. This time, this 2
per cent of intransigent Right-wing elements could muddy up the water quite a bit
for a time, making us unable to see the bottom. On investigation, however, we
immediately realize that in fact they only make up 2 per cent and that’s all. As soon
as a handful of alum is put in, we will be able to see the bottom. This rectification
[campaign] is [like] putting a handful of alum [into the muddy water]. After great
blooming, great contending, and great debates, we are able to see the bottom. We
are able to see the bottom in the countryside, we are able to see the bottom in the
factories, and in the schools, the Party, the [Youth] League, and the democratic
parties. All of these have bottoms [that can be fathomed]. [With] people like Zhang
Naiqi, [if you want] long-term coexistence, they are for short-term coexistence; [if
you want] mutual supervision, they want no mutual supervision at all.148 The
Zhang-Luo Alliance149 was most happy with this slogan of long-term coexistence.
Long-term coexistence, mutual supervision, a hundred flowers blooming, and a
hundred schools contending [were the things] they liked most. [But], as it turned
out, [they] moved to their own opposite; long-term coexistence became short-term
coexistence. I ask you all to give thought to the problem of dealing with the
Rightists, and to discuss what method [we should use] to deal with them.
This meeting today has been one of a briefing nature. Will everyone please
study, when you go home, the problem of rectification and the program for
agriculture. The program for agriculture will be distributed to all of you.

Notes

1. Mao is repeating in this introductory paragraph much of what he said thematically in
his two recently delivered speeches of October 7 and 9, 1957. (See text Oct. 7, 1957, text
surrounding notes 15 and 19, and text Oct. 9, 1957[1], text surrounding note 4.)
2. The Xuanji version reads “different from other forms that have been adopted in our
Party’s history.”
3. See text June 30, 1953, vol. I, note 9; and text Aug. 12, 1953(1), vol. I, note 24. See
also text Oct. 9, 1957(1), note 10.
4. See text Mar. 12, 1957, note 18; see also text Oct. 9, 1957(1), note 11.
5. Fan Changjiang (a.k.a. Fan Xiwen, b. 1910) was one of the most famous Chinese

OCTOBER – DECEMBER 1957 / 743
journalists in the 1930s and 1940s. In the 1930s he was a reporter for Dagong bao of Tianjin.
In 1938 he was instrumental in the establishment of the Guoji xinwenshe (International News
Agency) in Changsha, Hunan. When Changsha fell to the Japanese in 1939, he moved the
agency to Guilin in Guangxi. Here he began to be connected with Communist circles. When
the Communist organs were ousted from Guangxi by the KMT in 1941, Fan went to Hong
Kong where he established the Huashang bao (Chinese Commercial News) and continued
to use the Guoji xinwenshe as a source of news of China for the overseas-Chinese press. In
1942 he began to work for the Xinhua News Agency in its Central China branch bureau in
the Jiangsu-Anhui border region. Throughout the 1940s and in the early years of the PRC,
Fan worked in the field of journalism, at one time as the chief of the Xinhua Bureau in
Nanjing, which was then under KMT control, and where, under the aegis of the United Front,
Communist organs nominally operated as participants in the affairs of the Nationalist
government. In 1949 Fan became editor-in-chief of the North China edition of RMBB and
later was the managing editor of Jiefang ribao (Liberation Daily) in Shanghai.
It appears as if Mao, or his scribe here, was a bit confused about Fan’s history at this
point. According to the record, Fan did not go to Yanan until 1947, when the negotiations
between the CPC and the KMT had broken down, the “Second United Front” had come to
an end, and Communist organs in KMT-controlled cities were again ejected. It was not likely
therefore that Fan was directly a target of the Yanan rectification. Also, he was not chief of
the Xinhua Agency in Yanan (in fact, Yanan fell to the KMT shortly after he arrived). It is
perhaps for the reason of this confusion that this paragraph about Fan is not included in the
Xuanji version of this speech; We do not know for sure why Mao mentioned Fan here in the
original speech; one speculation may be that, as of 1956, Fan was assigned to positions of
science administration in the PRC and came into direct contact with the scientists and
technological intellectuals who played such a major role in affecting Mao’s political
viewpoint during this time. (One of these scientists, whom Mao mentions later in this speech,
was Qian Weizhang, who, together with Fan, served on the State Council’s Scientific
Planning Commission at this time. Another was Zeng Chaolun, who was implicated in the
Zhang-Luo Alliance; see text July 1, 1957, note 28.)
For more biographical information on Fan, see D. Klein and A. Clark, eds. (1971), I, pp.
262–264, and Zhonggong renming lu, pp. 391–392.
6. The term Mao uses here is fanshen, but it is used in a slightly different sense from
how the term is most often used in the PRC. See text Feb. 17, 1951, vol. I, note 6.
7. The term that Mao uses here, which we translate as “put on the spot,” is xia bu liao
tai, which means to be unable to come down from the stage. The term is derived originally
from the practice in Chinese operas whereby a performer, having done his or her part and
ready temporarily to leave the stage, would be given a line or so to explain why he or she
was leaving. To be left without a line for exiting therefore connotes, metaphorically, an
inability to give good reason for extricating oneself from an embarrassing situation. The
terms shang tai and xia tai (getting up onto the stage and leaving the stage) have also come
to acquire social and political meaning, as when someone takes on political or other offices,
he or she is said to shang tai, and when he or she quits or is removed from office, xia tai.
(See text Feb. 27, 1957, note 20.) To be unable to leave office honorably is therefore xia bu
liao tai. The image of putting up ladders is used here for providing excuses or reasons for
these people’s graceful exiting.
It should be noted that Mao also uses the term xia lou (coming downstairs) or its opposite,
xia bu liao lou, which we translate as “out on a limb” here, and that this usage is different
from the “going downstairs,” which he used in an earlier speech. (See text July 8, 1957[2],
note 51.)
8. See text Nov. 1951–Mar. 1952, vol. I, source note and text.
9. The term here is jin gu qi ming, which means “with great clamor and fanfare.” The
gong (jin) and drum (gu) are two instruments used in traditional China on the battlefield to
direct the movement of troops. When the drum is beaten, the troops advance; when the gong
is sounded, as when, in the West, the bugle is blown, the troops retreat or regroup. The

beating of drums and gongs is also a customary part of the depiction of battle scenes in
Beijing opera, especially when major characters (e.g., generals) come on to the stage. This
aphorism has the same meaning as when Mao speaks of the masses going about the activities
of 1957 in a qiao luo da gu (beating gongs and drums) or da luo da gu (big gongs and big
drums) fashion. See text April 1957(2), note 59.
10. See text Feb. 27, 1957, text surrounding note 43; see also text Mar. 20, 1957, note 7.
11. The text here in the Wansui version shows a word missing or unclearly printed. The
entire phrase is missing in the Xuanji version.
12. See text Sept. 21, 1949, vol. I, note 1.
13. The term here is fang. See text April 1957(2), notes 4 and 17; text April 10, 1957,
note 1; and text Mar. 12, 1957, paragraph 14, for the several meanings of this term and
various translations.
14. See texts July 8, 1957(1) and July 9, 1957; first paragraphs in both speeches.
15. See “Comment” in the source note here for reference to meetings and forums held
in May and June. For details, see RMSC (1958), pp. 30ff. See also text June 8, 1957(2),
source note; text June 8, 1957(3), note 3.
16. For Luo Longji, see text July 1, 1957, note 8. The concession that Luo was relatively
willing to let the airing of views, or “blooming,” appear was eliminated from the Xuanji
version. Also, the language in the Wansui version here is a bit garbled.
17. See text Jan. 1957, note 19.
18. See text Oct. 16, 1954, vol. I, note 4.
19. See text Feb. 27, 1957, note 74.
20. The Xuanji version here has “socialist revolution.”
21. See text June 15, 1953, vol. I, note 2, and text Aug. 12, 1953(1), vol. I, note 23. It
appears that Mao is speaking of the “old democratic revolution” as distinguished from the
“New Democratic Revolution.” However, it does sound a bit odd to hear Mao suggest that
the CPC had (up to late 1957) so far succeeded only in carrying out the old, bourgeois
democratic revolution—if indeed that is what he means here.
22. The Xuanji version here reads “the national bourgeois ownership system” (minzu
ziben zhuyi suoyouzhi); the words minzu are missing in the Wansui version.
23. See text Feb. 27, 1957, note 85.
24. Chiang, Song, Kong, and Chen refer to the so-called “four big families” (si da jiazu)
in the Nationalist republic. Chiang refers to Chiang Kai-shek, Song refers to Song Ziwen,
Kong to Kong Xiangxi, and Chen to the Chen brothers, Guofu and Lifu, who were the leaders
of the so-called C. C. Clique. These four families dominated the economics and politics of
the KMT and the Nationalist government. There was also much interconnection between
the four families in that Song Ziwen’s three sisters were each married to powerful leaders
of the republic (Qingling to Sun Yat-sen, Meiling to Chiang Kai-shek, and Ailing to Kong
Xiangxi, respectively).
Song Ziwen (a.k.a. T. V. Soong) was minister of finance for the Nationalist Government,
president of the Executive yuan, governor of the Central Bank of China, and minister of
foreign affairs. Kong Xiangxi (a.k.a. H. H. Kung) was minister of industry and commerce,
and minister of finance. For the Chen brothers, see text Sept. 16–18, 1953, vol. I, note 4. For
more on Song and Kong, see H. Boorman et al., eds. (1970), III, pp. 149–153, and (1968),
II, pp. 263–269, respectively.
25. This was referred to in the Xuanji version merely as a “Party member who came
from the background of a hired agricultural laborer.”
Liu Jiemei was a native of Shangbahe xiang, Huanggang xian, Hubei Province. He
became the director of the Agricultural Technical Instruction Station of Macao xiang in
Huanggang xian in 1957, at a three-level cadres’ meeting. Liu criticized CPC policies. The
vice-committee of the CPC then organized an exhibition at which artifacts from Liu’s home
were displayed to compare his life before and after Liberation, land reform, and
cooperativization. Liu’s self-criticism appeared in RMRB on September 30, 1957.
26. See text Jan. 18, 1957, note 29.

OCTOBER – DECEMBER 1957 / 745

27. The Chinese term here is guan. See text June 23, 1950, vol. I, note 8.
28. For the scheduling of the five-year plans, see text Feb. 10, 1953, vol. I, note 2; text
Dec. 27, 1955(2), vol. I, note 117; and text Nov. 11, 1956, note 4.
29. The “crest” or “peak” here seems to refer to a climax in the emergence of Rightists.
30. See text Oct. 7, 1957, notes 29 and 32.
31. See text Mar. 12, 1950, vol. I, source note and notes 1 and 2. See also text Oct. 7,
1957, note 28; and text Oct. 9, 1957(1), note 7.
32. For these classifications, see text Mar. 12, 1950, vol. I, note 1; text Sept. 25, 1956(2),
note 2; and text Mar. 20, 1957, note 20.
33. See text Mar. 1, 1957, note 39.
34. From the context and from the contextual information in the Xuanji version, XXX
here seems to refer to Deng Xiaoping, although we have no text of any speech that Deng
may have made at this conference. From the earlier sentence attributed to XXX quoted (in
parentheses) here, the “three million” figure appears to represent a portion (the portion that
opposes socialist transformation) of a particular subset of the middle-peasant stratum,
probably the “well-to-do middle peasants,” since that would likely be the smallest subdivision in that stratum and might fit the “three million” estimate.
35. See text Mar. 12, 1957, note 5.
36. The Xuanji version identifies XXX here as Deng Xiaoping.
37. While the Wansui version here has “proletarian intellectuals,” the Xuanji version
reads “bourgeois intellectuals,” which appears to us to make better sense in this context.
38. Mao is here repeating an assessment of intellectuals that he made in a speech in early
1956. (See text Jan. 20, 1956.)
39. See text Mar. 12, 1957, paragraph 4, and text Mar. 20, 1957, note 41.
40. See text June 14, 1954, vol. I, note 13.
41. See text July 8, 1957(2), notes 19, 48, and 60.
42. The Chinese term here is da zi, or “big characters,” which connotes that the peasants
cannot recognize simple characters even if they are enlarged for them. (The metaphor is
spurious, of course, in that enlarging a character does not make it any more comprehensible.)
The basic notion is that they are simply illiterate.
43. The Xuanji version here reads “not willing to accept the leadership of the Communist
Party.” The Chinese term is fu qi, meaning, colloquially, “to swallow it.”
44. The Xuanji version here reads “middle-of-the-roaders” for “non-Rightists.”
45. The Xuanji version here reads “poor peasants, the proletariat, and the lower-middle
peasants.”
46. Mao is referring to the Russian launching of the Sputnik satellite (hence a “moon”).
See text Oct. 9, 1957(2), note 43 and text surrounding notes 44 and 45.
47. See text July 1957(1), note 27.
48. The expression here is you ze gai zhi, which is a variation of the saying you guo ze
gai; see text June 9, 1957, note 2.
49. See text July 8, 1957(2), text surrounding note 40.
50. There is, according to record, no February 29 in 1957. Mao may be referring either
to his article of February 27, 1957 (“On Correctly Handling Contradictions Among the
People”), or to his speech of March 1, 1957. From the context here, the former likelihood
is greater.
51. Mao is referring to the speech that Lu Dingyi, director of the Department of
Propaganda of the Central Committee of the CPC, made on May 26, 1956, at a meeting of
the academic circles in Beijing at the invitation of Guo Moruo, president of the Chinese
Academy of Sciences. The slogan of “Letting a hundred flowers bloom and a hundred
schools of thought contend” in the academic disciplines was proposed in this speech, which
was printed in RMRB on June 13, 1956. See text Autumn 1956. For more biographical
information on Lu Dingyi, see D. Klein and A. Clark, eds. (1971), II, pp. 661–665, and
Zhonggong renming lu, pp. 660–663.
52. See text July 1957(1), source note.


53. Miao Bin (1899–1946) was a KMT official who joined
that party in the mid-1920s.
He became an alternate member of the KMT’s Central Executive Committee in 1926 and
participated in the Northern Expedition. In 1927 he was suspected by Chiang Kai-shek of
collusion with the Communists and escaped a dire fate in Chiang’s purges of that year
through the intercession of He Yingqin. Later, in 1928, he became a member of the KMT’s
newly organized Executive yuan. In the 1930s Miao began to advocate Sino-Japanese
cooperation, and when, after the outbreak of war between China and Japan, a puppet regime
was set up by the Japanese in Beiping (now Beijing), Miao went there and was given funds
for establishing the Xinmin hui, which was a pro-Japanese propaganda group, and of which
be became vice-president. In 1940, he fled to Nanjing and joined Wang Jingwei’s puppet
government there. He later also became the leader of the East Asia League, a Japanese-sponsored organization formed to promote Japan’s ideology of the “Greater East Asia Coprosper-ity Sphere.” At the end of the war Miao held onto hopes of helping the Chinese government
to negotiate peace with Japan and in fact took a trip to Japan for that purpose. These efforts
failed, and in 1946 he was arrested in Shanghai. In the summer of that year he was executed
by the KMT. For more biographical information on Miao, see H. Boorman et al., eds. (1970),
III, pp. 36–37.
54. The Reorganization Clique (gaizu pai) was a faction in the KMT organized,
informally, in 1928, which opposed the growing power of Chiang Kai-shek which had grown
even more solid after the purging of the Communists from the KMT in 1927. This
organization, officially the Association for the Reorganization of the Kuomintang, was led
by Wang Jingwei and backed, at first, by warlords such as Yan Xishan and Feng Yuxiang.
In 1930, an attempt was made to organize a government in Beijing to rival Chiang’s
Nationalist government in Nanjing. Although the organization per se began to lose its
discrete identity through the 1930s by way of political compromises and accommodation
made by its leaders with the Chiang faction, through the person of Wang Jingwei, who
became the head of the Japanese-sponsored puppet government at Nanjing (after Chiang
and the Nationalist Government had moved to Chongqing) in 1940, this “reorganization”
faction continued to exist in spirit if not in name, became collaborationist, and challenged
Chiang’s authority until 1944.
55. Taiyuan is the capital city in Shanxi Province. Immediately after the outbreak of the
Sino-Japanese conflict in 1937, that province and the Ping-Sui Railroad, which ran through
its northern part, connecting central-northern China and its political nerve center to the vast
regions and resources of the Northwest all the way to Mongolia and Xinjiang, became a
prime target for the Japanese. This became one of two attack routes the Japanese mounted
in the autumn of 1937, the other being directed at Central China in the Wuhan region.
Throughout September and October 1937, battles raged in the key cities and the mountain
passes in Shanxi. On November 8, the garrison of Taiyuan, under the command of Fu Zuoyi
(see text Sept. 16–18, 1953, vol. I, note 6) surrendered to the Japanese. This concluded the
major Japanese offensive in the region. We are unable to ascertain the specific event of which
Mao spoke here. However, the falling of Taiyuan marked the consolidation of Japanese
control over all of North China, and consequently also the beginning of total Japanese power,
through the agencies of collaborationist entities, over the political developments in North
China for the remainder of the war. See also text July 8, 1957(2), note 43, on the type of
plays Mao describes here.
56. This is almost certainly a reference to Huang Yanpei; see text Feb. 17, 1951, vol. I,
source note.
57. The term yi fen wei er (one divides into two) is a partial, but key, concept in Mao’s
view of the fundamental law of dialectical materialism—the law of the “unity of opposites”
(see text Nov. 15, 1956, note 27, and text Feb. 27, 1957[2], note 34), which he considered
to be the “fundamental law of the universe” held to be true by all Marxist-Leninists. The law
of the unity of opposites holds that everything in the universe is a unity of opposite aspects
which exist within the unity under specific conditions and are related to one another in a
mutually contradictory and yet also mutually dependent way, and that these contradictory

OCTOBER – DECEMBER 1957 / 747

aspects struggle against one another constantly and under specific conditions, bringing about
each other’s transformation. The concept of “one divides into two” defines the dynamism
within the law. It emphasizes the inevitable disintegration of the unity as a result of the
struggle between its contradictory parts, and therefore the destruction of the old unity giving
way to the emergence of a new unity. This is a constant and infinite process of change by
which all things in the universe, particularly social realities, are constantly rejuvenated. It
stands in opposition to an alternate concept of the law in which it is not the dynamism of
change, i.e., the splitting of the unity into antithetical parts, but rather the synthesis of
opposing entities, that is emphasized. This latter concept is known as the he er wei yi (two
combine into one) concept, which was advanced by Yang Xianzhan in the 1960s. The debate
between these two concepts became the philosophical core of the polemical and political
struggle between Mao and Liu Shaoqi in the early part of the Cultural Revolution. Here Mao
is applying the concept to his idea that the Rightists must also split into two factions. See
also text Jan. 27, 1957(1), note 18.
58. The term Mao uses here is liang dian lun, which can be translated as the theory that
holds that there are two points, or two aspects, to everything, or, a specific theory of
dialectical dualism. For its meaning and its connection to Mao’s dialectics, see text Nov. 15,
1956, note 35, where it is contrasted with the term yi dian lun.
59. The Chinese term for “label” here is mao zi; see text Dec. 8, 1956, note 33, for the
usage of this expression.
60. The term here is again fanshen, and we have yet a third variation in the usage of the
term. See note 6.
61. On the history of the suppression of counterrevolutionaries, see text Dec. 19, 1950,
vol. I, and other relevant texts in that volume; see also text Jan. 27, 1957(1), note 10, and
text Feb. 27, 1957, notes 44, 47.
62. See text Jan. 18, 1957, note 9; text July 1957(1), note 2; text Oct. 7, 1957, note 30;
and text Oct. 9, 1957(1), note 70.
63. The Premier refers to Zhou Enlai.
64. As far as we can tell, Lin Xiling was a student at the People’s University in Beijing
(Renda) and was labeled as a Rightist in 1957.
65. See text July 1957(1), note 45.
66. Wu Jingchao is a noted economist. He was then a professor at the People’s University
and a leading member of the Democratic League. He was one of the six professors who
attended the meeting convened by Zhang Bojun on June 6, 1957. See text July 1, 1957, note
28. See also text Mar. 18, 1951, vol. I, note 2.
67. See text Feb. 27, 1957, note 102, for this particular practice and the usage of the term
attached hereto.
68. Chen Yuan was a historian whose specialty was Inner Asia. He was also at this time
chancellor of Beijing Normal University. For more biographical information on Chen, see
H. Boorman et al., eds. (1967), I, pp. 261–264.
69. Zhang Wenbo is another name for Zhang Zhizhong, a prominent member of the
KMT military before 1949 and after 1949 a vice-chairman of the Revolutionary Committee
of the Kuomintang. Having had an illustrious career in soldiering during the war against
Japan, Zhang became a major go-between for the KMT and the CPC in both rounds of
negotiations between the two parties (before the outbreak of the Civil War, late in 1945, and
at the end of the civil war, in early 1949). In the first round, Zhang’s most significant
achievement was as Chiang Kai-shek’s personal representative dispatched to Yanan to
initiate negotiations with the CPC. Zhang escorted Patrick Hurley, the American ambassador, to Yanan and also escorted Mao to Chongqing at the end of August 1945 for
negotiations. In the second round, some three and a half years later and at the end of a war
that the KMT was losing, Zhang was asked by Li Zongren, who had nominally replaced
Chiang Kai-shek as president of the Republic of China, to go to Beijing (then Beiping) to
negotiate peace terms with the CPC. These negotiations, conducted in early April 1949,
failed, and Zhang remained in Beiping. This was a major blow to the KMT regime. For more


biographical information on Zhang, see H. Boorman et al., eds. (1968), I, pp. 41–46. See
also text May 5, 1951, vol. I, source note.
70. This is a saying that describes the Confucian teaching on rules of everyday behavior. It
is derived from the nineteenth segment of the book “Zi Zhang” in Lun yu (Analects of Confucius).
71. See text Nov. 15, 1956, note 27. We do not know, however, why Mao is referring
to something happening in Poland at or about the time of this speech.
72. See texts June 14, 1957(2), and July 1, 1957, especially note 1 in the latter text.
73. See text July 1, 1957, notes 2 and 19.
74. The Xuanji version identifies this as Xinmin bao and not Xinmin wan bao. Given
Mao’s identification of Zhao XX as in charge of the paper, however, we believe that the
Wansui version is correct. The Xinmin wan bao is based in Shanghai.
75. The managing editor of the Xinmin wan bao was Zhao Chaogou.
76. See text Mar. 19, 1953, vol. I, note 4.
77. See text April 1957(2), note 14. Although the April 1957(2) text is placed at the end
of April in this collection, it is believed that the Hangzhou Conference, at which that speech
was made, was held in early April. Thus Mao’s reference to April 30 here would not be to
that particular instance in the speech at the Hangzhou Conference, but to some other instance
at which Mao spoke on the same subject. This reference to the date does not appear in the
Xuanji version.
78. See text July 9, 1957, note 84.
79. Mao is referring to the Twelfth Supreme State Conference held in Beijing on April
30, 1957. Presumably Mao spoke on the subject at this conference, as he indicated here and
also on another instance (at the Supreme State Conference in late January 1958; see text Jan.
28–30, 1958); but we have no full text of this speech. For more on this conference, see K.
Lieberthal (1976), p. 96.
80. This phrase in brackets appears only in the Xuanji version. We have included it here
because it helps to clarify Mao’s position of giving a negative response to his rhetorical
question in the preceding sentence.
81. Qian Weizhang (b. 1910) is a noted physicist. After graduating from Qinghua
University, he attended the University of Toronto in Canada where he received his doctorate
in 1942. Later he worked at California Institute of Technology. On his return to China he
became a professor at Qinghua University, where he later doubled as vice-president. He was
a member of the Standing Committee of the All-China Federation of Professional Societies
in the Natural Science and also a member of the Central Committee of the Democratic
League. In 1957, he participated in drafting a program proposing an alternative to the
Twelve-Year Plan of the Scientific Planning Commission of the State Council. Qian was
also one of the six professors who attended Zhang Bojun’s meeting on June 6, 1957 (see
note 66, referring to text July 1, 1957, note 28). For more biographical information on Qian,
see Zhonggong renmin lu, pp. 994–995.
82. Qian Duansheng (b. 1900) is a political scientist. He came to the United States in
1919 and studied at the University of North Dakota, the University of Michigan, and
ultimately at Harvard University where he received his M.A. (1922) and Ph.D. (1924). On
his return to China he taught at National Beijing University and later, in the 1930s, at National
Central University in Nanjing. During the war with Japan, he taught at Southwest Associated
University in Kunming and made several trips to the United States. Throughout this period
he was critical of Chiang Kai-shek’s political control. His most famous work, The Govern-ment and Politics of China, published by Harvard in 1950 and reprinted in 1961, was a good
example. Although he did not hold political positions between 1945 and 1949, he was vocal
and open in accepting the new Communist regime. After undergoing ideological reform in
the early days of the PRC, Qian was appointed president of the new Beijing College of
Political Science and Legal Studies. At this time, (i.e., 1957), he was a member of the Central
Committee of the Democratic League, a member of the CPPCC, and a delegate to the
National People’s Congress. He was implicated as a member of the Zhang-Luo Alliance in
1957 (see text July 1, 1957, source note) and labeled a Rightist. He was stripped of official

OCTOBER – DECEMBER 1957 / 749

and public positions, and although the label was ultimately re-moved in 1961, he did not
regain any of these positions. For more biographical information on Qian, see H. Boorman
et al., eds. (1967), I, pp. 376–379.
83. See text July 1, 1957, note 16.
84. The phrase in brackets here appears only in the Xuanji version. For reference to
this point earlier, see, for instance, text Jan. 27, 1957(1), paragraph 65.
85. See note 50.
86. This refers to Deng Xiaoping; see notes 34 and 36.
87. The phrase for this last one is zheng gai; see text Oct. 7, 1957, note 23.
88. See text Aug. 24, 1956(2), note 29.
89. This refers to the “Directives of the Central Committee on the Rectification
Movement,” which were passed on April 27, 1957, but appeared in RMBB on May 1, 1957.
90. See Mao’s explanation of this situation in the speeches of October 7 and 9, 1957;
see also text Feb. 27, 1957, text surrounding note 43.
91. This refers to the publication of the editorial, “What Is This For?,” in RMBB on
June 8, 1957. Mao also drafted an intra-CPC directive on the rectification on June 8. (See
texts June 8, 1957[1] and [2].)
92. See text July 8, 1957(2), note 2.
93. Here Mao uses the term wu yi, which, besides meaning May 1, also refers to the
labor festival May Day. See source note comment here and text Oct. 9, 1957(1), two
paragraphs after note 43.
94. The quotation marks here appear only in the Xuanji version. For the meaning of
“free markets,” see text Oct. 11, 1955(1), note 9. Mao is here using the term metaphorically
to connote expressions and exchanges of ideas which are not regulated.
95. See text Jan. 18, 1957, paragraph 9, and text Jan. 27, 1957(1), paragraph 34.
96. See text Feb. 27, 1957, note 100.
97. See text July 8, 1957(2), paragraph 8.
98. The word for “still” appears only in the Xuanji version.
99. See text Mar. 31, 1955, vol. I, source note and note 5.
100. See text April 1957(2), note 43.
101. The Xuanji version here reads, “The bourgeoisie and the bourgeois intellectuals
must recognize their need to be remolded.” See also text Feb. 27, 1957, section 4, paragraph
4, and text Mar. 12, 1957, note 10.
102. See text Jan. 27, 1957(1), note 73.
103. Mao’s physical metaphor here actually extends to the description “reborn,” for
which he uses the Chinese phrase tuo tai huan gu, which means “to relinquish one’s
embryonic mold and change one’s bones.” The Chinese for “being gutted and skinned” is
chou gen bo pi. The first aphorism is derived from the chapter “Tuoxie” in Yanzi jian (The
Writing Tablet of the Swallow), and from the Yuan qu (opera), Laisheng zhai (The Debt for
the After-Life). The locus classicus of the latter aphorism is not known.
104. See text May 15, 1957, note 11.
105. The term Mao uses here for what we translate as “challenge” is jiangjun which
refers to the act of checking in the game of chess. See text Mar. 1, 1957, note 32.
106. The Xuanji version here reads “some intellectuals are capable of becoming proletarian intellectuals.” (Italics added; not in original.)
107. See text Oct. 9, 1957(1), paragraph 18, and Deng Xiaoping’s Report on the
Rectification Campaign (RMSC [1958], pp. 33–34, 40).
108. The Xuanji version adds here, “including all those intellectuals from the old society
who truly take a firm working-class stand after being remolded.”
109. The Xuanji version here presents an opposite meaning. It reads, “Zhang Naiqi is
probably one of them.”
110. See text Oct. 9, 1957(1), note 32, and surrounding text.
111. The Xuanji version adds, “To thoroughly transform your own bourgeois world
view.” 112. See note 79.


113. The Xuanji version adds here, “that is, petty-bourgeois ownership.” 114. On the
democratic revolution, see text July 8, 1957, note 20. On Lin Zexu, see text Feb. 14, 1957,
note 1. See also text May 20, 1951, vol. I, note 3, and text Mar. 20, 1957, note 15.
115. The Xuanji version here reads “national capitalist ownership.” On the national
bourgeoisie, see text Mar. 12, 1950, vol. I, note 3.
116. The phrase (petty-bourgeois ownership) is not in the Xuanji version.
117. See text Mar. 5, 1956, note 12.
118. The expression here is shang bu zhi tianwen, xia bu zhi dili; for the meaning of the
expression tianwen dili, see text Dec. 8, 1956, note 25. The total expression refers to “utter
ignorance.”
119. See also text Dec. 8, 1956, note 25.
120. This is a quotation from the chapter “Liang Wei Wang (I)” in the book Meng zi
(Mencius). It should be noted that the Wansui version here contains a typographical error,
where it substitutes the character fu for the correct character su, which means breeding. Zhu
Xi’s annotation of Meng zi explains that it was customary in Mencius’s day for elderly people
over the age of seventy to be given meat to eat everyday as a sign of respect from the younger
people.
121. The term Mao uses here is weiyuan zhang. See text Mar. 1, 1957, note 19 for an
explanation.
122. The Xuanji version here reads “a campaign of socialist ideological revolution.”
123. The Xuanji version here reads, instead, “people have become settled down in comfort.”
The aphorism in the Wansui version is feng ping lang jing, which is a common saying. Some
glossaries and dictionaries of aphorisms cite its usage in the seventeenth hui of the
Qing-dynasty novel Er shi nian mu du zhi guai xianzhuang (Strange Things Seen in Twenty
Years of Living), and in the novel Qi xia wu yi (Five Martyrs Among Seven Heroes), also
in the seventeenth hui; the origin of the aphorism is likely to be much earlier.
124. The Xuanji version here adds the qualifier “correct” to the term “suggestion.”
125. The Xuanji version says here, “some organs and schools in Beijing are affected
precisely by this problem.”
126. See note 105.
127. A corresponding passage in the Xuanji version reads: “Furthermore, we must study.
We must study Marxism-Leninism for a bit. We must have gentle winds and fine rain and
do some criticism and self-criticism. That would be in the fourth stage [of rectification]. This
studying, of course, is not going to be for [just] one or two months. I am only saying that
this movement should come to the end of a stage so as to arouse interest in studying.”
128. See text Dec. 6, 1955, vol. I, note 3, text Oct. 11, 1955(1), vol. I, note 56, and text
Oct. 11, 1955(2), vol. I, note 18. See also text Oct. 9, 1957(1), note 17.
129. See text Dec. 21, 1955, vol. I, note 8. See also text Oct. 9, 1957(1), note 21.
130. According to the press release of the Xinhua News Agency on October 14, 1957,
this Supreme State Conference adopted Mao’s suggestion here. However, we have records
(see RMSC [1958], p. 326) only of meetings of the Standing Committee of the National
People’s Congress, which were held October 16 and 22 (the eightieth and eighty-first
meeting) to discuss the Forty-Article Program for Agriculture. It may be that these meetings
were “enlarged” to include the Standing Committee of the CPPCC.
131. This suggestion was not included in the Xuanji version. It was, in any case, either
not adopted or not carried out. The next CPC Party congress (i.e., the ninth) was not held
until 1969, and the Second Session of the Eighth Party Congress, which was probably closer
to what Mao was referring to here, was not convened until May 1958.
132. For Zhang Bojun, see text July 1, 1957, note 3. In May 1957, at a forum held by
the United Front Department of the CPC (see text June 8, 1957[2], source note, and text June
8, 1957[3], note 3), Zhang criticized that whenever the State Council convened meetings
with the democratic parties, it was to bring up “finished products” to be approved by the
parties. He said that such meetings were better off not held. Furthermore, he suggested that,
just as there were many planning and designing councils for industrial development

OCTOBER – DECEMBER 1957 / 751

(referring perhaps to such things as the State Scientific Planning Commission), there ought
to be corresponding planning councils (sheji yuan) in politics. He proposed that the CPPCC,
the People’s Congress, the democratic parties, and the people’s organizations should be
organized into four such “planning councils,” which should discuss and pass resolutions on
political matters before they are implemented.
By “not Zhang Bojun’s Political Planning Council,” it is not clear whether Mao was
referring to the State Council or the State Planning Commission.
133. See text Oct. 9, 1957(2), note 52.
134. See text Dec. 21, 1955, vol. I, note 9. The specific reference is to Article 27 of the
Forty-Article Program, see R. Bowie and J. Fairbank, eds. (1962), p. 125. The earliest
mention of these “Four Pests” antedates the Forty-Article Program (even the draft form of
that program). In the October 9, 1957 speech just preceding this one, Mao made an emphatic
announcement that he was very interested in the program to eliminate the Four Pests.
135. See text Feb. 27, 1957, note 37.
136. The Xuanji version here reads “a hundred and ninety thousand tons.” Mao also
went on, according to the Xuanji version, to draw a comparison between conditions in China
and in India, saying, “In India, the [annual] production of steel in 1952 was 1.6 million tons,
and now it is a bit over 1.7 million tons. After five years of effort they have only increased
by a bit more than a hundred thousand tons.”
137. In the popular game of majong, which is as much a game of skill as a game of
chance, one does not merely increase one’s stakes in a bet, but instead tries to create a hand
of superior value that would increase the points (or cash value) that one would gain should
one win the hand. This value is measured in terms of fan, which is the character Mao
uses here. A hand which is described as liang fan (“two” fan), should it turn out to be
the winning hand, would be worth twice as much all around (the winning player
collecting from each of the losers in each hand) as a hand that is described as yi (one)
fan, and a san (three) fan hand is worth twice as much as a “two” fan hand. Mao gives
us, through his writing, reason to suspect that he is extremely knowledgeable in this
popular game and is probably an avid (maybe even addicted) player. He uses the term
fan as a synonym for the “doubling” of figures in many of his writings and speeches.
This is particularly the case in 1958 and 1959, as will be seen in the following
documents, when he deals with the statistics in rural and industrial development prior
to and during the Great Leap Forward. For more on Mao’s reference to this game, see
text June 14, 1954, vol. I, note 12.
138. See text Winter 1954, vol. I, note 2.
139. See text Oct. 9, 1957(2), paragraph 3.
140. See text April 25, 1956, note 38, and text July 8, 1957(2), note 76.
141. The Chinese term here, which we translate as “joined in spirit,” is tong qi. Literally
it means to be in communication with one another in breathing, or to share the same breath.
It is sometimes used to mean “being accommodating to one another.” Interestingly, given
the semantic roots of the various words in various languages here, it can very facilely be
translated as “conspire.”
142. The Xuanji version has “the reactionaries in Taiwan and Hong Kong.”
143. For Chu Anping and his theory, see text July 1, 1957, note 4. For Luo Longji, see
text July 1, 1957, note 8. In a forum in May 1957 (see note 132 here), Luo suggested a
method for “guaranteeing that those who speak up in the spirit suggested by the CPC would
not suffer retaliation in the future” (see text Mar. 1, 1957, note 4, and text June 9, 1957, note
2), which is that the National People’s Congress and the CPPCC should establish a
“Rehabilitation Committee” to review the cases of people who had been labeled as counterrevolutionaries in the “Three-Anti’s” and “Five-Anti’s” campaigns (see text Nov. 1951–
Mar. 1952, vol. I, source note) and who are criticized or deposed by the CPC in the future.
On Zhang’s “Political Planning Council,” see note 132.
144. Ge Peiqi was a lecturer at the People’s University.
145. This refers to the organizing, by collaborationists, of many “committees to maintain


social order” (zhian weichi hui) in Japanese-controlled cities throughout China during the
time of the Sino-Japanese War of 1937–1945.
146. This obviously refers to text Feb. 27, 1957. See also note 50.
147. See text April 21, 1957.
148. See text Feb. 27, 1957, note 82.
149. See text July 1, 1957, source note.