Many people avoid discussing commodities and commercial issues, as if not doing so would mean not being communist.

People's communes must produce socialist commodities suitable for exchange in order to gradually increase everyone's wages.

In terms of consumer goods, socialist commerce must be developed; and the law of value must be utilized in the form of an economic accounting tool during the transitional period, to facilitate a gradual transition to communism.

Currently, our economists dislike economics, and the Soviet Union is the same, believing that anyone who speaks of the law of value is disgraced, as expressed in a letter written by Yaroshenko.

These people disapprove of commodity production, thinking that the Soviet Union is already communist, but in reality, it is still far from it.

We have only been practicing socialism for a few years, so we are even further behind.

Lenin once vigorously advocated for the development of commerce, because at that time, there was a danger of interruption in commodity circulation between urban and rural areas in the Soviet Union.

We also faced this danger in 1950.

Now, transportation conditions are poor, leading to a state of semi-interruption.

I think we need to develop in two directions: one is to expand allocation, and the other is to expand commodity production.

Without this, wages cannot be paid, and living standards cannot be improved.

Advocate for seeking truth from facts, do not make false reports, do not report other people's pigs as your own, and do not report 300 catties of wheat as 400 catties.

This year's 900 billion catties of grain, at most, is 740 billion catties. It is more appropriate to consider 740 billion catties as the actual figure and the remaining 160 billion catties as false reports.

The people cannot be deceived.

In past war reports, false reports of military achievements could only deceive the people, not the enemy; the enemy would find them amusing.

Where there is truth, there must be falsehood; it is hard to distinguish between truth and falsehood.

Yanshi County originally wanted to conceal production, reporting more as less, and some also reported less as more.

The "People's Daily" should be a bit calmer.

Solving the problem of working methods should be the focus: Party leadership, the mass line, and seeking truth from facts.

Stalin's book "Economic Problems of Socialism in the USSR" should be read again.

Cadres above the level of provincial Party committee standing committee members and prefectural Party committee standing committee members should study it; everyone should study the first, second, and third chapters of this book.

In the past, when I read it, I wasn't interested, but now it's different.

There are many noteworthy things in these three chapters, some parts are written inappropriately, and some things he himself didn't fully understand.

What are your thoughts on the second and third chapters, which discuss commodities and the law of value?

I largely agree with many of the viewpoints expressed in them; it is very necessary to clarify these issues.

Stalin believed that in the Soviet Union, means of production were not commodities.

In our country, it is different; means of production are both commodities and not commodities. A part of the means of production are commodities; we sell agricultural machinery to cooperatives.

Entering communism must be done in steps.

We are expanding in two directions: on the one hand, developing self-sufficient production, and on the other hand, developing commodity production.

Now, we must utilize commodity production, commodity exchange, and the law of value as useful tools to serve socialism.

In this regard, Stalin gave many reasons.

Does commodity production have negative aspects?

If it does, then restrict it!

Our country is a country where commodity production is very underdeveloped, even more backward than India and Brazil.

India's railways and textiles are more developed than China's.

Last year, we produced 370 billion catties of grain, of which 30 billion catties were public grain, and 50 billion catties were sold to the state as commodities. The total commercial grain from these two categories was less than a quarter of the total grain output.

Economic crops other than grain are also very underdeveloped; for example, tea, silk, hemp, and tobacco have not recovered to their historical peak yields.

There needs to be a stage of developing commodity production; otherwise, communes cannot pay wages.

For example, Hebei Province has three types of counties: one type only has enough to eat, one type needs relief, and one type can pay some wages in addition to eating.

Paying wages also has several situations; some can only pay a few jiao.

Therefore, each commune must develop things that can be sold for money in addition to producing grain, and develop socialist commodity production and commodity exchange.

It must be affirmed that socialist commodity production and commodity exchange still have positive roles.

Allocated products are only a part; most products are exchanged through buying and selling.

Currently, there is a tendency to think that the faster communism comes, the better.

The realization of communism must be done in steps.

Fan County in Shandong proposed to achieve communism in two years; someone needs to be sent to investigate this.

Now, some people always want to achieve communism within three to five years.

The Great Leap Forward has confused some people, and there are poems everywhere.

Some say "poetry has no definitive interpretation," which is incorrect.

Poetry has a definitive interpretation; "da" means clear understanding, and "gu" means definite.

Couldn't sleep, wanted to say something.

Trying to invoke Stalin, to continue persuading some comrades.

I believe I am correct; if the comrades on the opposite side are correct, then I will submit.

It is still the peasant question.

Some comrades suddenly regard peasants very highly, thinking that peasants are first, workers are second, and peasants are even higher than the working class, they are the elder brothers.

Rural areas are ahead in some aspects; this is a phenomenon, not the essence.

Some people think that China's proletariat is in the countryside, as if peasants are proletarians and workers are petty bourgeoisie.

Is this view Marxist?

Some comrades are Marxists when reading Marxist textbooks, but when they encounter practical problems, they compromise.

This trend involves hundreds of thousands or even millions of people.

As for the masses, some are also muddled.

So, they are cautious and avoid using capitalist categories that still have positive significance—commodity production, commodity circulation, the law of value, etc.—to serve socialism.

The wording of Article 36 [2] is evidence, using vague phrases as much as possible to muddle through, so as to make it appear that peasants have entered communism.

This is an incomplete and unserious attitude towards Marxism.

This concerns hundreds of millions of peasants.

Stalin said that peasants cannot be expropriated.

In our people's communes, not only seeds, but also fertilizers and products, are owned by the peasants.

If the state does not give them things and does not conduct equivalent exchange, their products will not be given to you either.

Is it better to treat this issue rashly or cautiously?

The Party Secretary of Xiuwu County dared not declare the commune to be under ownership by the whole people.

His first fear was of natural disasters, agricultural production decreases, inability to pay wages, and the state being unable to take over or provide subsidies; his second fear was of bumper harvests, and the state taking away the grain.

This comrade thinks things through and is not rash.

We did not declare land nationalized, but declared land, seeds, livestock, and large and small farm tools as commune-owned.

During this period, only through commodity production and commodity exchange can peasants be guided to develop production and enter ownership by the whole people.

Now, some of us have a strong tendency to eliminate commodity production.

They yearn for communism, and when commodity production is mentioned, they worry, feeling that it is a capitalist thing, without distinguishing between socialist commodity production and capitalist commodity production, and without understanding the importance of utilizing the role of commodity production under socialist conditions.

This is a manifestation of not recognizing objective laws and not understanding the problem of 500 million peasants.

During the socialist period, commodity production should be utilized to unite hundreds of millions of peasants.

I believe that after the establishment of people's communes, commodity production and commodity exchange should be further developed, and socialist commodity production should be greatly developed in a planned way, such as livestock products, soybeans, jute, sausage casings, fruit trees, and furs.

Now, some people tend to not want commerce, at least hundreds of thousands of people do not want commerce.

This view is wrong; it violates objective laws.

If you take walnuts from Shaanxi and eat them without paying a single cent, would the peasants in Shaanxi be willing to work?

If cotton from Qiliying [3] is allocated without compensation, heads will immediately be broken.

This is not understanding 500 million peasants and not understanding what attitude the proletariat should adopt towards peasants.

Engels once said, "As soon as society possesses the means of production, commodity production will be eliminated, and the domination of the product over the producers will also be eliminated." [4] Products had a controlling effect on people in the old society.

Stalin's analysis of Engels' formula is correct. Stalin said: "What Engels referred to in his formula was not the nationalization of a part of the means of production, but the nationalization of all means of production, that is, the transfer of not only the means of production in industry but also the means of production in agriculture to the ownership of the whole people." "Engels believed that in such a country, commodity production should also be eliminated simultaneously with the public ownership of all means of production." [5] Currently, our ownership by the whole people is a small part, only possessing a small part of the means of production and social products. Only when all means of production are possessed can commerce be abolished. Our economists do not seem to understand this point.

Stalin said there was a kind of "poor Marxist" who believed that small and medium producers in rural areas should be expropriated. [6] We also have such people in our country. Some comrades are eager to declare people's communes as ownership by the whole people, abolish commerce, and implement product allocation, which is to expropriate peasants and will only make Taiwan happy. We made a small mistake in 1954, requisitioning and purchasing too much grain; all peasants opposed us, everyone talked about grain, every household talked about unified purchase, this was also "poor Marxists" because they did not know how much grain the peasants actually had. This was still requisition and purchase, just a bit excessive, and the peasants opposed it. We had this experience, made this mistake, and later we reduced it, deciding to requisition and purchase only 83 billion catties. Now, the peasants' labor, like land and other means of production (seeds, tools, water conservancy projects, forests, fertilizers, etc.), is their own, and therefore they have product ownership. For some reason, our philosophers and economists have obviously forgotten these issues. Forgetting this point, we are in danger of alienating the peasants.

Commodity production cannot be confused with capitalism. Why fear commodity production? It is nothing more than fearing capitalism. Now the state does business with people's communes, capitalism has long been excluded, so why fear commodity production? Don't be afraid, I think we should greatly develop commodity production. Are there still capitalists exploiting workers in our country? No, so why be afraid? Commodity production cannot be viewed in isolation. Stalin's words are completely correct; he said: "Commodity production must by no means be regarded as something independent of the surrounding economic conditions." [7] Commodity production depends on what economic system it is linked to. If it is linked to the capitalist system, it is capitalist commodity production; if it is linked to the socialist system, it is socialist commodity production. Commodity production has existed since ancient times; the character "Shang" in the Shang Dynasty indicates that commodity production already existed at that time. It is completely wrong to regard King Zhou, Qin Shi Huang, and Cao Cao [8] as bad people. King Zhou was a very capable person, both literary and martial. King Zhou attacked the Yi of Xuzhou and won a victory, but the losses were too great, and there were too many captives to assimilate, which led to the downfall of his dynasty. Saying "blood flowed so much that pestles floated" [9], that King Zhou was extremely cruel, is an exaggerated statement in the "Book of Documents." Therefore, Mencius said: "It would be better to have no 'Book of Documents' than to believe everything in the 'Book of Documents'." [10] In the era of slavery, commodity production did not lead to capitalism. Stalin said that commodity production "served the feudal system, but although it prepared certain conditions for capitalist production, it did not lead to capitalism." [11] Stalin's statement here is not very accurate. It should be said: the capitalist mode of production was already conceived in the womb of feudal society.

At the Second Plenary Session of the Seventh Central Committee in 1949 [12], my report mentioned the issue of restricting capitalist economic components, stating that capitalist economic components should not be allowed to proliferate without limit.

Starting from 1950, we allowed capitalist economic components to develop for six years, but at the same time, we implemented processing orders, unified purchase and exclusive sales, and public-private joint ventures to carry out socialist transformation of capitalist economic components.

By 1956, they had practically come over empty-handed. We already fully possessed what Stalin called "some decisive economic conditions" [13].

Stalin said: "The question is, why can't commodity production serve our socialist society for a certain period without leading to capitalism?" [14] This sentence is very important.

Having eaten the ghost, are you still afraid of ghosts? Don't be afraid, it will not lead to capitalism, because the economic basis of capitalism no longer exists.

Commodity production can obediently serve socialism and guide 500 million peasants to ownership by the whole people.

Is commodity production a useful tool? It should be affirmed: Yes.

For the sake of 500 million peasants, this tool should be fully utilized to develop socialist production.

This issue should be brought up for discussion among cadres.

Labor, land, and other means of production all belong to the peasants, they are collectively owned by the people's communes, and therefore the products also belong to the communes.

They are only willing to exchange the products they produce for the commodities they need. They will not accept any method of taking away the commune's products other than commodity exchange.

We should not think that Chinese peasants are particularly progressive.

The idea of the Xiuwu County Party Committee secretary is completely correct.

The necessity of commodity circulation is something communists must consider.

Only after products are fully developed can commodity circulation tend to disappear.

Comrades, it has only been nine years since the founding of our nation, and we are eager to abolish commodities. This is unrealistic.

Only when the state has the right to dispose of all products can the commodity economy become unnecessary and disappear.

As long as two forms of ownership exist, commodity production and commodity exchange are extremely necessary and extremely useful.

Henan proposed a four-year transition to communism. This is "too much" Marxism. Do not rush to achieve it in four years.

Do not think that after four years, the peasants in Henan will be the same as the workers in Zhengzhou. This is impossible.

We spent twenty-two years on the revolutionary war and patiently waited for the victory of the democratic revolution.

How can we carry out socialism without patience? Without patience, it will not work.

Printed based on the transcript of the speech preserved in the Central Archives.

Notes [1] From November 2 to 10, 1958, Mao Zedong convened a working conference in Zhengzhou with some central leaders and some local officials. He spoke many times at the meeting, criticizing erroneous propositions such as the eagerness to transition people's communes from collective ownership to ownership by the whole people, from socialism to communism, and attempts to abolish commodity production. This excerpt selects content from Mao Zedong's speeches regarding the issue of socialist commodity production. The first part is from the speech on November 9; the second part is from the speech on the afternoon of November 10.

[2] Refers to Article 36, which was rewritten during the revision of the first draft of the "Forty Articles of the Fifteen-Year Program for Socialist Construction (1958-1972)." The content is: "People's communes should develop production based on necessary social division of labor, both increasing self-sufficient products and increasing products for exchange. For the exchange of products, in addition to continuing to adopt the contract system between communes, the system between the state and communes should gradually transition from the contract system to the allocation system." This program did not later become a formal document.

[3] Refers to the Qiliying People's Commune in Xinxiang, Henan.

[4] See Engels, *Anti-Dühring* (*Selected Works of Marx and Engels*, Vol. 3, People's Publishing House, 1995, p. 633).

[5] See Stalin, *Economic Problems of Socialism in the USSR* (*Selected Works of Stalin*, Vol. 2, People's Publishing House, 1979, p. 546).

[6] See Stalin, *Economic Problems of Socialism in the USSR*. The original text is: "Nor can we take as an answer the opinion of another group of miserable Marxists, who believe that perhaps power should be seized and small and medium producers in the countryside expropriated, their means of production socialized." (*Selected Works of Stalin*, Vol. 2, People's Publishing House, 1979, p. 547).

[7] See Stalin, *Economic Problems of Socialism in the USSR* (*Selected Works of Stalin*, Vol. 2, People's Publishing House, 1979, p. 549).

[8] King Zhou, also known as Di Xin, the last monarch of the Shang Dynasty. Qin Shi Huang, i.e., Ying Zheng (259-210 BC), the founder of the Qin Dynasty. Cao Cao (155-220), courtesy name Mengde, from Qiao, Pei State (present-day Bozhou, Anhui), a statesman and military strategist during the Three Kingdoms period.

[9] See *Shangshu*, *Zhou Shu*, *Wu Cheng*.

[10] See *Mencius*, *Jinxin II*.

[11] See Stalin, *Economic Problems of Socialism in the USSR* (*Selected Works of Stalin*, Vol. 2, People's Publishing House, 1979, p. 549).

[12] Second Plenary Session of the Seventh Central Committee, see note [8] on page 98 of this volume.

[13] Refers to the establishment of public ownership of the means of production, the abolition of the wage labor system, and the abolition of the exploitation system. See Stalin, *Economic Problems of Socialism in the USSR* (*Selected Works of Stalin*, Vol. 2, People's Publishing House, 1979, p. 549).

[14] See Stalin, *Economic Problems of Socialism in the USSR* (*Selected Works of Stalin*, Vol. 2, People's Publishing House, 1979, p. 549).