Annotations and Revisions on the Revised Draft of "On the Situation and Tasks" (July 24, 1959)

1

Return to Comrade Hu Qiaomu.
Mao, 24th
Titles should be added.
Printed based on the manuscript.

2

The total number of workers and staff nationwide increased from 24.5 million at the end of 1957 to 45.32 million at the end of 1958. Although the increase in the number of workers and staff was excessive and too rapid, and about half of the newly added workers need to return to the countryside, employment has risen, income has grown, and the masses of the people are pleased.

3

However, our experience is still insufficient, and our learning is also insufficient. Consequently, quite a few problems have arisen in our work. We have already begun to address these problems. Some have been resolved, some have not yet been fully resolved, and some remain unresolved.
Printed based on Mao Zedong’s revised manuscript.

**Notes**

[1] The revised draft of "On the Situation and Tasks" issued by the General Office of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China on July 23, 1959, was the first part of "The Agreed Minutes on the Issues at the Lushan Conference."

[2] In sections (2) and (3) herein, the text printed in Song typeface was added by Mao Zedong. Additionally, before the sentence in the draft "prematurely negated the nature of collective ownership of the people's communes," Mao added the words "Many comrades, mainly commune cadres." From the sentence "Now, the shortcomings arising from the people's commune movement have been fundamentally corrected through commune rectification and accounting, and the Party's prestige in the countryside has risen," Mao deleted the phrase "and the Party's prestige in the countryside has risen."

[3] Hu Qiaomu was then serving as an alternate secretary of the Secretariat of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China and Mao Zedong's secretary. He was one of the members of the drafting group for "The Agreed Minutes on the Issues at the Lushan Conference."

[4] The revised draft of "On the Situation and Tasks" was divided into six parts. When it was submitted to Mao Zedong for review, each part did not yet have a title. Mao Zedong's annotation was written in response to this situation.

---

Comments on a Letter (July 26, 1959)

A letter has been received, which is a document of a representative nature. The author of the letter has collected some materials on our economic work, materials that deal exclusively with shortcomings. The author is interested only in materials of this aspect. As for materials of the other aspect, namely those concerning achievements, one can say he has absolutely no interest in them. He believes that since the fourth quarter of 1958, shortcomings and mistakes have been the mainstream in the Party's work. He therefore draws the conclusion that the Party has committed the errors of "'Left' adventurism and opportunism." Moreover, he attributes the root cause to the failure to "simultaneously" oppose the danger of "Left" adventurism during the 1957 rectification and anti-Rightist struggle. Comrade Li Yunzhong (he is a deputy bureau chief of the State Planning Commission, recently transferred to serve as the head of the General Office of the Northeast Cooperation Zone Committee) holds fundamentally erroneous views; he almost negates everything. He believes that the tens of millions of people mobilized for large-scale steel smelting caused immense losses with no benefit whatsoever, that the people's communes are also a mistake, and he is extremely pessimistic

about capital construction. On agriculture, mentioning water conservancy, he holds that the Party's errors of "'Left' adventurism and opportunism" were triggered by the large-scale launching of water conservancy projects. He has no favorable assessment of the hundreds of millions of peasants who, under the Party's leadership, undertook large-scale water conservancy projects during the winter and spring of the previous and current year. He is a proponent of the "loss outweighs gain" theory, and in some respects, practically a proponent of the "all loss, no gain" theory. The author places these conclusive views in part (1) of his letter, and they do not take up much space. This comrade's merit lies in his laying bare his entire thinking. This distinguishes him greatly from some other comrades we have observed, who are basically not pleased but dissatisfied with the main work of the Party and the people, who greatly underestimate achievements and overestimate shortcomings, who are intimidated by the current difficulties, who, toward cadres, do not boost their morale but dampen their spirits, who lack confidence or even lose confidence in the future, but who are unwilling to speak out their thoughts and views, or say a little and withhold a little, adopting an attitude of hesitating and faltering, hiding and evading. Comrade Li Yunzhong is different from these people. He does not conceal his political views. He wrote to a central comrade with full enthusiasm, hoping the Central Committee would take measures to overcome the current difficulties. He believes that the difficulties can be overcome, although it may take a longer time—this view is correct. The author's critique of the shortcomings in planning work occupies the majority of the letter's length, and I consider it very pertinent. In the past ten years, there has not been a single comrade willing and daring to pertinently, analytically, and systematically expose the shortcomings in our planning work to the Central Committee, thereby seeking correction. I have not seen such a person. I know such people exist, but they simply dare not bypass the hierarchy to report to higher levels. Therefore, I suggest: that this letter be discussed, and extensive discussions be launched, within the Party organizations at both the central level and the local level (provinces, cities, autonomous regions), especially within planning organs. Such discussions should correctly analyze the strengths and weaknesses, successes and failures, gains and losses of the work done in 1958 and 1959, so as to unify understanding, unite comrades, improve work, boost morale, and advance courageously, striving for new great victories in economic work and other work (political work, military work, cultural, educational and health work, the leadership work of Party organizations at all levels, and the work of trade unions, youth leagues, and women's federations). Since the First Zhengzhou Conference last November, up to the current Lushan Conference, the Party Central Committee has, under the condition of adequately assessing achievements (achievements are primary, shortcomings and mistakes are secondary), engaged in serious criticism of the erroneous shortcomings in various major current tasks under its leadership. This work of criticism has been going on for nine months now.

It must be seen that this criticism is absolutely necessary and has been effective both rapidly and progressively. It must also be seen that this serious and earnest criticism has inevitably brought about, and indeed has already brought about, some side effects, namely, a certain dampening of spirits for some comrades. Mistakes must be criticized, but dampening of spirits must be prevented. Morale can be boosted but not dampened. If a person lacks spirit, what good can they be? We must adhere to what was stated in the record of the Second Zhengzhou Conference this March: under the spirit of protecting cadres with full enthusiasm, guide those who have committed mistakes and have shortcomings in their work to criticize and correct their own shortcomings and mistakes. Mistakes are not terrible; what is to be feared is unwillingness to engage in criticism, unwillingness to correct them, and dampening of spirits due to criticism. We must attend to both aspects: correcting mistakes and boosting morale. It must be seen that although the work of criticism and rectification has been carried out for nine months now, all unfinished tasks must be persistently completed and no loose ends should be left behind. However, at present, a new phenomenon has emerged both inside and outside the Party, namely, an increase in Right-leaning sentiment, Right-leaning thinking, and Right-leaning activities, which threatens to mount a wild offensive. This is evident in the many materials distributed to all comrades at this conference. This situation has by no means reached the scale of the wild offensive launched by the Rightists inside and outside the Party in 1957, but the signs and trend are already quite conspicuous, having appeared on the horizon. This situation is of a bourgeois nature. The other situation is of an ideological nature within the proletariat. They, like us, want socialism and do not want capitalism; this is the basic commonality between us and these comrades. However, the views of these comrades differ from ours. Their mood is somewhat abnormal. They have overestimated the mistakes the Party has made to a somewhat excessive degree, while underestimating to a somewhat small degree the great achievements created by several hundred million people under the Party's leadership, and they have drawn inappropriate conclusions. They are somewhat lacking in confidence regarding overcoming the present difficulties. They have unconsciously placed themselves in an improper position, situated between the Leftists and the Rightists. They are typical centrists. They are theorists of "gains and losses balancing out." They waver and vacillate at critical moments. We do not fear a wild offensive by the Rightists, but we fear the vacillation of these comrades. For such vacillation is detrimental to the unity of the Party and the people, and detrimental to the whole Party's unified effort to boost morale, overcome difficulties, and strive for victory. We believe that the attitude of these comrades can change. Our task is to unite them and strive to win them over to change their attitude. To achieve this goal, it is necessary to make a necessary assessment of this kind of dynamic within the Party. It must not be overestimated, thinking that they have the power to capsize the great ship of the Party and the people in the wind and waves. They do not have such great power; they are only a relative minority, whereas

we constitute the majority. We and the majority of the people (workers, poor peasants, lower-middle peasants, a portion of upper-middle peasants, and revolutionary intellectuals) are united and of one mind. The Party's general line and the guidelines, policies, and working methods that embody the general line are welcomed by the vast numbers of Party members, cadres, and the masses of the people. But neither should their power be underestimated—there are quite a few of them. Before their erroneous views are subjected to criticism, accept criticism, and rectify their attitude, they will not easily relinquish their views; this point must be recognized. When the Party encounters major issues, controversy arises, different views are expressed, some people waver temporarily, standing in the middle, and some stand to the right—this is a normal phenomenon, and there is no need for alarm. In the final analysis, erroneous views, and even erroneous lines, will surely be overcome. The vast majority, including those who waver temporarily and even those who commit line errors, will certainly unite on a new basis. The thirty-eight-year history of our Party has been traversed in just this way. Opposing the Right inevitably produces "Left," opposing the "Left" inevitably produces Right—this is an inevitability. Now is the time to speak of this point. Not speaking of it is detrimental to unity, and to the Party and individuals alike. This current controversy may prove to be one of significant importance. Just like the various major controversies during our revolutionary period, it cannot be that there are no controversies, that all is calm and tranquil, in the new historical period—the period of socialist construction. The Lushan Conference may prove to be a conference of significant importance. Unity—Criticism—Unity, learning from past mistakes to avoid future ones, and curing the sickness to save the patient—this is our correct method, proven effective by history, for resolving contradictions within the Party and among the people. We must persist in this method.

These opinions of mine were generally stated at the plenary meeting on July 23, but some were not fully elaborated. As a supplement to that speech, I have written these words.

Mao Zedong
July 26
Printed based on the manuscript.

**Notes**

[1] This comprises the comments on a letter written by Li Yunzhong to Mao Zedong on June 9, 1959, concerning certain issues in the current economic life. The title was drafted by Mao Zedong.

[2] In his letter, Li Yunzhong stated: I wish to offer some opinions concerning certain problems arising in current economic life, linking them to some issues of ideological style of work, for your reference. (1) I feel that over the past year or so, we have committed the error of "Left" adventurism in our work. The main reason for this is that we have somewhat neglected the struggle on two fronts on the ideological front, i.e., while opposing Right-leaning conservative thinking, we have overlooked the inroads of "Left" adventurism. The most important lesson from our Party's historical experience is: to continuously wage a struggle on two fronts on the Party's ideological front, meaning we must at times oppose the harm of "Left"

adventurism to the revolution, and at times oppose the inroads of Right opportunism against the Party. (When forwarding this letter, Mao Zedong added the following annotation in parentheses after this sentence: "Mao's note: At times oppose this, at times oppose that; speak when the time is right, which shows it cannot be simultaneously.") However, in the work over the past year, we have somewhat neglected...

These historical lessons thus led to the emergence of a "Left" adventurist trend of thought as a mainstream within a relatively short period. This is specifically manifested in the following points: First, undertaking water conservancy projects was certainly a good thing and yielded significant results, but during the peak of water conservancy construction, it seemed to create an atmosphere suggesting that, in the short term and regardless of conditions, we could accomplish anything and that nothing was problematic. Second, the policy of taking steel as the key link was correct, but since the fourth quarter of last year, it has not been about taking steel as the key link in practice, but rather making steel everything. It should be particularly noted that the nationwide mass campaign for indigenous iron smelting was a failed experience, and the drain on the state’s economic resources was far too great. Third, the people’s commune movement is undoubtedly a direction to follow and a form for resolving the transition from socialism to communism. The problem is that it should have developed gradually based on objective conditions. Yet last year’s communication movement, in terms of changes in the relations of production, namely the question of ownership, may have moved too quickly, resulting in "equalitarianism, uncompensated transfers of labor and resources, and arbitrary requisition of funds." Fourth, last year, the number of above-quota construction projects commenced nationwide reached over 1,900, double the number during the First Five-Year Plan period. Almost every province had plans to establish an industrial system within a few years. Due to the lack of the necessary material conditions, this number has been reduced repeatedly, and now only a few hundred projects remain under continued construction. It is truly heartbreaking to see such waste and losses. Fifth, as a result of the massive push for iron and steel, the large-scale development of various industries, and the extensive undertaking of various capital construction projects everywhere, the number of workers and employees increased by 21 million last year. In summary, the excessive expenditure of social labor that cannot produce results in these areas—this, I believe, is the main cause of the current economic strain. Our Party’s fine tradition is to conduct investigation and research in all work, to use typical demonstrations, and to gain experience before comprehensive promotion. This is the Marxist method of work. However, some of the major movements last year were rarely carried out according to this method. The rectification campaign and the anti-rightist struggle of 1957 yielded tremendous gains, yet at the same time, the thinking of "Left" adventurism and opportunism raised its head to some extent, and subjectivist styles of thinking and work also developed somewhat. Perhaps we can consider using gentle, mild methods within the Party, employing criticism and self-criticism, to sum up some experiences and lessons. (2) Combating subjectivist styles of thinking and work among cadres at all levels and educating all Party members to uphold Party principles and strengthen Party spirit is currently a very important issue on the Party’s political and ideological front. A main reason why subjectivism has been able to proceed unchecked in some areas of work is the failure to foster an atmosphere within the Party of adhering to principles. In some instances, there has been a strong mood of pandering, characterized by petty-bourgeois opportunism. This is the ideological root that allowed the "Left" adventurist trend of thought to grow. (3) On the question of the peasantry and the relationship between workers and peasants. First, since the latter half of last year, the production of means of production centered on iron and steel has grown very rapidly. Too much agricultural labor was diverted, which will have a significant impact on this year’s agricultural production. Second, after the six-level cadres’ conference, the peasants’ sentiments have basically stabilized, but some problems regarding ownership and distribution remain unsolved, and the peasants’ initiative has not yet been fully mobilized. Third, recently, the prices of industrial goods have risen somewhat, while the purchasing prices for many agricultural and sideline products have remained unchanged; as a result, a portion of agricultural and sideline products cannot be procured. Fourth, in many areas, the supply of means of production and means of subsistence needed in the rural areas cannot be guaranteed. Fifth, the system for agricultural production planning needs to be studied and improved. It used to be said that agricultural planning is an indirect plan, but in practice, it is even more rigid than a direct plan, leaving the peasants with no flexibility whatsoever. (4) On the issue of planning work. First, planning work must achieve comprehensive balance, yet for several years now, the actual situation has consistently been one of attending to one thing and losing sight of another, and there are often figures without measures, plans without inspections. Second, the main reason for these problems cannot be attributed to a lack of experience, but rather to the very serious subjectivist style of thinking and work in planning work. For years, there has been a lack of both comprehensive investigation and research into the national economic situation and a shortage of comprehensive analysis and planning. The proposals put forward have rarely been the result of discussion and study from lower levels upward by all parties concerned, and the opinions of specific economic planners and industrial and mining enterprises have seldom been taken into account. Third, during major movements, there has often been an inability to correctly uphold Party principles. Various departments and regions are sometimes enthusiastic and sometimes indifferent, differing only in degree. Another pressing issue in current planning work is the necessity to compile a long-term plan as soon as possible; otherwise, many major issues cannot be resolved. (5) On the issue of systems and structures. Since last year, the central authorities have delegated some control over the systems in industry, commerce, finance, and materials. This has played a role in giving scope to local initiative. This year, some control has been retracted in industry and materials; now it appears there are many problems. For instance, the follow-up work after the system changes did not keep pace, causing disconnections between production, supply, and marketing, which has had a significant impact on both production and the market. (6) On the issue of fostering a spirit of frugality and simplicity. Wastefulness and extravagance have recently increased, specifically manifested in: First, too many luxurious, high-class guesthouses and hotels have been built. Second, the food expense standards for conferences are too high. Third, the custom of leading cadres enjoying excessively special treatment in daily life remains unchanged in some places. [3] Refers to the working conference convened by Mao Zedong in Zhengzhou from November 2 to 10, 1958, with the participation of some central leaders, heads of the greater administrative areas, and some provincial and municipal Party secretaries. [4] Refers to the enlarged meeting of the Political Bureau of the CPC Central Committee then being held at Lushan. [] Refers to the "Zhengzhou Conference Record" issued at the enlarged meeting of the Political Bureau of the CPC Central Committee held in Zhengzhou from February 27 to March 5, 1959; see note [1] on page of this volume.