Speech at the Congress of Communist Parties and Workers' Parties in Socialist Countries (Nov 16)
(November 16, 1957)

Source: Kau & Leung, The Writings of Mao Zedong 1949-1976, Vol. II
Pages 771-771
============================================================

Speech at the Congress of Communist Parties and
Workers’ Parties in Socialist Countries

(November 16, 1957)

Source: Wansui (n.d. 3), pp. 204-205.
See text Nov. 2, 1957, source note.

I think that our declaration is good.! We used a very good method to attain our
goal, and that is the method of consulting [one another and talking things over. The
declaration] upholds the sense of principle and yet has flexibility; it is a unity of
principle and flexibility. Thus, an atmosphere of consultation has now been formed,
whereas in the last stages of Stalin[’s time] that was impossible. We have not
forcibly imposed anything on anybody. It is not good to adopt a method of forcible
imposition [in matters] among the people, especially among comrades. We have
now replaced the method of suppression with the method of persuasion. We spent
quite a bit of time on this, but this time is necessary. When we adopt a method of
consultation we are not advocating anarchism; we are not a debating club. Our
method is to have a center, and yet also everybody [else]; it is a unity of the center
and everybody [outside of the center]. If we did not have a center, say, if we did
not have the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, we would turn into anarchism;
if, [on the other hand,] we did not have everyone [else] raising opinions, but had
only one party raising an opinion,‘ then things just would never be complete. Right
now there is a center, and yet also everybody else, all of us; in a certain sense, it
can be said that we have centralism, and also democracy.° It cannot be said that
this congress of ours did not have democracy; I think that there is a full measure
of democracy [here].

This declaration is correct. It does not contain any element of revisionism or
opportunism. When we see Marx in the future, he [might] ask us, what kind of a
declaration did you make? How would he evaluate this declaration? There are two
possibilities. One is that he, the old gentleman, would throw a temper tantrum and
say: You have ruined things; there are elements of opportunism here, and [you
have] violated my doctrine. The other possibility is that he would say: Not bad; it
is not opportunistic; it is correct. Perhaps Lenin would stand up to speak on our
behalf. He might say: [Dear] Marx, [dear] Engels, the two of you passed away
earlier. | happen to have passed away a bit later, so I got to know these people well.
They now know how to get things done; they are now very mature. See, XXXXXX,
my successors, convened this meeting, and it was done well.® Not only should all
the countries be grateful to them, but I, too, must thank them, be grateful to my
successors. He might also mention that the drafting committee worked very hard.
Does this declaration contain any adventurism?’? What would Marx and company