Regarding this question of the principal contradiction, should we raise it or not? Is it beneficial or not to raise it? (Kang Sheng: I have spoken with Comrades ×× and Qingshi. People believe that the contradiction between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat is the principal one during the transition period. But some doubts have been raised: will it affect the rectification campaign, and second, will it provoke a debate over a few sentences from the Eighth Party Congress: "the contradiction between the advanced social system and the backward productive forces." Currently, the struggle between the two lines is the principal one, that is, the contradiction between the two roads of socialism and capitalism.) We have carried out two revolutions. One was the democratic revolution against imperialism and feudalism, which did not touch the bourgeoisie and the individual economy; the second revolution is the socialist revolution of a proletarian nature. In the first revolution, there were two roads, namely, the two roads of democracy and feudalism, which are different in nature from the two roads today. Now it is a socialist revolution of a proletarian nature, a contradiction between the two roads of capitalism and socialism. Theoretically, there is no problem. The socialist revolution has been underway for some time. After the general line was announced at the National Conference on Financial and Economic Work in 1953, the Central Propaganda Department was asked to write an outline for publicizing the general line that winter. Not counting this year, it was only three and a half years until the high tide of socialist transformation; counting this year, it is only four and a half years. A severe blow was dealt to the bourgeoisie, and the problem of individual peasants was also resolved. This situation was reflected at the Eighth Party Congress. The Eighth Congress said that the socialist transformation had basically achieved victory and that the large-scale, mass class struggle had basically ended. Can this be said to be wrong? The ownership system was resolved, and they obediently beat gongs and drums. The Eighth Congress pointed out that it was not yet completely resolved in the economic system (capitalists receiving fixed interest), nor was it completely resolved in the political struggle (ideological struggle); transformation must continue. A part of the democratic parties—the rightists, bourgeois intellectuals, and some well-to-do middle peasants—were dissatisfied with the socialist transformation. This was not entirely unclear at the time of the Eighth Congress. The Eighth Congress did not relax their ideological transformation. At that time, they were submissive; now they want to rebel. This article from Qingdao ("The Situation in the Summer of 1957") has made this clear. For tactical purposes in the future, the Qingdao formulation is better, that is, the struggle between the two roads exists in both urban and rural areas, and the class struggle has not been extinguished, etc., have all been stated. It is enough for those present at this meeting to know this. Let's not cause a great upheaval over the words "principal contradiction."

××× spoke of that factory in Chongqing where the cadres were struggled against by the workers to the point they couldn't go on. The new workers have bourgeois ideology, and our cadres have bureaucratism, sectarianism, and subjectivism. These are all bourgeois ideas, all to be put on the account of the bourgeoisie. These are all contradictions among the people. The people include two kinds of people: one kind who exploits the people, and the other kind of people who do not exploit. The largest group is the middle-of-the-roaders; without the middle-of-the-roaders, it won't work. This issue will not be dealt with in the newspapers recently; in a few months, something will be written in the form of a theoretical article. Decades from now, when no one exploits anyone anymore, it can no longer be put on the account of the bourgeoisie. But there will still be the contradiction between the advanced and the backward. (××: There is a Liu Jiemei in Hubei who is not a bourgeois, but he wants to take the capitalist road.) Zhu Yuanzhang of the Ming Dynasty and Liu Yu of the Song during the Southern and Northern Dynasties were also such people. The political forces and ideology have not been completely resolved. The three "isms" within the Party also belong to ideology.

Great contending and blooming is the best form of revolution. Revolution requires gaining experience. If some people want to make a big fuss, let them. For so many years of revolution, this method was never invented. This year, in cooperation with the rightists, this method was invented: great contending, great blooming, and big-character posters. This method of great contending and blooming was proposed by them, and we took it over. In Yan'an, there were soldiers' newspapers and light cavalry teams, but this method was not promoted at that time. "Let a hundred schools of thought contend, let a hundred flowers bloom" was spoken of in the artistic and academic spheres. In the political sphere, the rightists proposed great contending and blooming, and it is very good that we took it over. Comrade ×× previously visited the factory in Xinxiang. Judging from the situation in that factory and the current report, using the old methods will not work. During the transition period, the contradiction between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat is the principal contradiction; this is definitely correct. Second, for the next few months, do not publicize the principal contradiction in the newspapers, so as to avoid causing new confusion, stirring up trouble, and affecting the rectification campaign. The newspapers should only publicize the struggle between the two roads.

The so-called people include several kinds of people: the proletariat, the petty bourgeoisie, and the bourgeoisie. There are also several kinds of people within the Party. In reality, contradictions among the people include class contradictions. The so-called contradiction between ourselves and the enemy is an antagonistic class contradiction. Bourgeois intellectuals are people, but they have an antagonistic aspect. The principal contradiction now is no longer the contradiction with the landlords. It is the contradiction among three parts of the people. Among these three parts of the people, there is a portion of hidden, antagonistic class contradiction, such as Zhang Bojun and others. This year they have been exposed. We are using the policy of peeling a bamboo shoot; it cannot be completely peeled this year. The principal contradiction now is not the contradiction with the landlords. Seven thousand people were arrested in Hunan, and the people did not object. But arresting someone like Zhang Bojun would not be acceptable. Today, the contradiction between ourselves and the enemy is secondary. The main targets of the socialist revolution are the bourgeoisie, the bourgeois intellectuals, and the petty bourgeoisie. The bourgeoisie, including their families, numbers in the tens of millions, and the petty bourgeoisie numbers in the hundreds of millions. For these people, the main issue is one of transformation. Among the bourgeoisie and petty bourgeoisie, there is a large number of middle-of-the-roaders. The contradiction with these people cannot be said to be antagonistic. The likes of Zhang Bojun are antagonistic. Ninety percent are contradictions among the people. Contradictions among the people include class contradictions. (××: The contradiction between ourselves and the enemy includes landlords, rich peasants, counter-revolutionaries, bad elements, and rightists.) There are also contradictions between workers and peasants, and the worker-peasant contradiction is also called the contradiction between the two roads. How many rightists are there? At most, around 150,000, not that many. It cannot be said to be the principal contradiction. It is estimated that a portion will be split off, which is beneficial to us, especially those with knowledge. The basic contradiction of the transition period is the contradiction between the two roads of the bourgeoisie and the proletariat.

The Eighth Party Congress spoke of the contradiction between the advanced social system and the backward productive forces. That was speaking of the problem of production, not the problem of relations between people. The problem of the relations of production between people has been resolved, but not yet completely resolved. The question is raised as to whether the socialist system is suited to the development of the productive forces. We say it is basically suited. Stalin's saying that it is completely suited is problematic. In a number of years, when the productive forces have developed, collective ownership will be in contradiction with the development of production. The current relations of production are suitable. Why are they suitable? The cooperatives are for developing production! Compared to India, our system... India's first five-year plan increased steel production by 3.1 million tons; we increased it by more than 4 million tons. Can you say our system is not good? Our relations of production are basically suited to the development of the productive forces, but there are also shortcomings. Decades from now, when the productive forces have developed, the law of value will be useless. Money can be done away with.

That sentence from the Eighth Party Congress (the contradiction between the advanced social system and the backward productive forces) does no harm. It does not hinder the rectification campaign, production, the anti-rightist struggle, or the improvement of work. This sentence is a good one; its meaning is to let us develop production and enrich our material foundation. It is not talking about contradictions among the people; this is in comparison with foreign countries and with our country's past. (Kang Sheng: When this sentence was originally written, there was consideration as to whether to write it or not. A sentence from Lenin was considered repeatedly.) This sentence is poorly phrased, but it is not harmful. In reality, it has not had a bad effect. There is no need to change this sentence. It will be addressed at an appropriate time in the future. We originally wanted to change it, but it had already been printed and distributed.