Forty-eight. Regarding the simultaneous promotion of indigenous and foreign methods, and of large, medium, and small enterprises

Page 547 speaks of opposing the dispersion of construction funds in capital construction. If we are talking about many large construction units being undertaken at the same time, thus preventing any from being completed on schedule, this of course should be opposed. But if this leads to opposing medium and small enterprises in construction, then that is incorrect. Our country's new industrial base was mainly established on the foundation of the massive development of medium and small enterprises in 1958. According to preliminary arrangements, in the next eight years the iron and steel industry is to complete the construction of 29 large, nearly one hundred medium, and several hundred small iron and steel bases. The medium and small have already played a very large role in the development of the iron and steel industry. Take 1959 for example. The pig iron produced in the entire year was over twenty million tons, of which half was produced by medium and small enterprises. In the future, the medium and small will still play a very large role in the development of the iron and steel industry. Many small ones will become medium, many medium ones will become large, the backward will become advanced, and the indigenous will become foreign. This is the law of objective development.

We are to adopt advanced technology, but we cannot on this account negate the inevitable and unavoidable nature of backward technology in a certain period. Ever since history began, in revolutionary wars it has always been those with inferior weapons who defeat those with good weapons. During the civil war, the War of Resistance Against Japan, and the War of Liberation, we did not have national political power, nor did we have modernized arsenals. If we had to have the newest weapons before we could fight, that would have been tantamount to disarming ourselves.

For us to realize the complete mechanization spoken of in the textbook (page 428), it seems the second decade will still not be enough; I'm afraid it will have to be in the middle of the third decade. In the coming period, because machinery is insufficient, semi-mechanization and improved tools are still what we must advocate. At present, we do not generally advocate automation. Mechanization must be talked about, but not excessively. If mechanization and automation are talked about excessively, it will cause people to look down on semi-mechanization and indigenous methods of production. In the past, there was such a deviation. Everyone one-sidedly pursued new technology, new machines, and pursued large scale and high standards, looking down on the indigenous and looking down on the medium and small. Only after the simultaneous promotion of indigenous and foreign methods and of large, medium, and small enterprises was put forward was this deviation overcome.

In agriculture, we do not now promote chemicalization. First, because for many years it will still be impossible to produce a great deal of chemical fertilizer; the little chemical fertilizer that exists can only be used concentratedly on cash crops. Second, because if this is promoted, everyone's eyes will be fixed on it, and they will not pay attention to raising pigs. Inorganic fertilizer is also necessary, but if one relies only on it and does not use it in combination with organic fertilizer, it will cause the soil to harden.

The textbook says to adopt the newest technology in all departments, but this is not easy to achieve. There must always be a process of gradual development, and at the same time as certain new machines are adopted, there are always many old machines. The textbook says that on the one hand, new enterprises are built and existing factories are re-equipped, while at the same time, existing machines and machinery are fully and rationally utilized (page 427). This way of putting it is correct. It will always be so in the future.

As for the large and foreign aspects, we must also engage in them through self-reliance. In 1958, the slogan of breaking down superstitions and doing it ourselves was put forward. The facts have proven that it is indeed possible to do it ourselves. In the past, backward capitalist countries and the Soviet Union also relied on adopting advanced technology to catch up with capitalist countries. We will certainly do the same, and we will certainly be able to achieve it.

Forty-nine. Tractors first? Or collectivization first?

Page 563 says, "On the eve of all-round collectivization in 1928, 99% of the plowing work for spring crops was still done using wooden plows and horse-drawn plows." This fact refutes the textbook's viewpoint in many places that "one must have tractors to have collectivization." What is said on page 562, "Socialist relations of production have opened up a broad arena for the development of agricultural productive forces," is correct.

First, the relations of production must be changed, and only then is it possible to greatly develop the social productive forces. This is a universal law. In some Eastern European countries, agricultural collectivization has proceeded very slowly and has not yet been completed. This is mainly not because they do not have tractors (relatively speaking, they have far more than we do), but mainly because their land reform was a gift bestowed from above. Their confiscation of land was limited (in some countries, only land over 100 hectares was confiscated), and they used administrative orders to carry out the work of confiscation. After the land reform, they did not strike while the iron was hot; there was a full interval of five or six years. We, on the contrary, implemented the mass line, mobilized the poor peasants and lower-middle peasants to unfold class struggle, seized all the land of the landlord class, distributed the surplus land of the rich peasants, and divided the land equally according to population (this was a great revolution in the countryside). Immediately after land reform, a widespread mutual-aid and cooperation movement was launched, and from this, step by step, the peasants were continuously led onto the socialist road. We had a strong Party and a strong army. When our army went south, every province was equipped with a complete set of cadres for local work, from the provincial and prefectural levels down to the county and district levels. And as soon as they reached their destinations, they immediately went deep into the countryside, visiting the poor to ask about their hardships, taking root and establishing ties, and organizing the activist elements among the poor and lower-middle peasants.

Fifty. Regarding "Larger in Size and Having a Higher Degree of Public Ownership"

The collective farms in the Soviet Union were merged twice, from over 250,000 to over 93,000, and then merged again to about 70,000. In the future, they are bound to expand further. The textbook says, "It is necessary to strengthen and develop the production relations of each collective farm, organize common production enterprises among collective farms, etc." (page 568). In fact, in some places their methods are similar to ours, they just don't use our terminology. In its future, even if the methods are the same as ours, it seems they will not use the name "commune." The difference in terminology and name involves a substantive question, which is the question of whether or not to implement the mass line.

Of course, in terms of the number of households and people, the expansion of the scale of Soviet collective farms may not be as large as ours, because their rural population is sparse and their land is vast. But can one say because of this that the collective farms no longer need to be expanded? In our places like Xinjiang and Qinghai, although the population is small and the land is vast, it is still necessary to expand the communes. In some counties in our southern provinces, such as some counties in northern Fujian, large communes were also established under conditions of sparse population and vast land.

Expanding the communes is a major issue. A quantitative change will certainly cause a qualitative change, and will promote a qualitative change. Our people's communes are "larger in size and having a higher degree of public ownership." First is being large, and then it is inevitable that the level of public ownership will be raised, which is to say it will inevitably bring about a partial qualitative change.

Fifty-one. What is the reason for particularly emphasizing material interest?

In the chapter on the collective farm system, personal material interest is repeatedly discussed, such as on pages 565, 571, 580, etc. There must be a reason for particularly emphasizing material interest now. In Stalin's era, collective interest was overemphasized, and no attention was paid to personal income; the public was overemphasized, and no attention was paid to the private. Now things have gone to the opposite extreme, and personal interest is overemphasized, with little attention paid to collective interest. If this emphasis continues, it will certainly go to its opposite.

Public is spoken of in relation to private, and private is spoken of in relation to public. Public and private are a unity of opposites. There cannot be public without private, nor can there be private without public. We have always spoken of giving consideration to both public and private interests. We have long said that there is no such thing as being absolutely selfless, and have also said that the public comes before the private. The individual is a member of the collective. When the collective's interests increase, the individual's interests also improve accordingly.

Duality. Everything has it, and will always have it. Of course, it is always manifested in different concrete forms, and therefore its nature is also different. For example, heredity and variation are also a duality of the unity of opposites. If there were only the aspect of variation and not the aspect of heredity, then the next generation of organisms would be completely different from the previous generation. Rice would not be rice, dogs would not be dogs, and humans would not be humans. The conservative aspect can play a good and positive role. It can cause organisms undergoing constant change to take on a certain form and become fixed or stabilized for a certain period. Therefore, improved rice is still rice. But if there were only the aspect of heredity and not the aspect of variation, then there would be no improvement or development, and things would be at a permanent standstill.

Fifty-two. Man's role is decisive

The book says, "Collective farms have the economic and natural conditions for the formation of differential rent." (page 577) Differential rent is not entirely determined by objective conditions; in fact, man's role is still decisive. For example, in Hebei province, there are many machine-pumped wells along the Beijing-Hankou railway line, but very few along the Tianjin-Pukou line. The natural conditions are similar, and the Tianjin-Pukou line is just as convenient, but the improvement of the land is different in each case. Here there may be reasons of the land being favorable or unfavorable for improvement, and there may also be different historical reasons. But the most important thing is still that "man's role is decisive."

In the same Shanghai suburbs, some raise pigs well, while others do not. In Shanghai's Chongming County, it was originally said that various natural conditions there, such as the abundance of reeds, were unfavorable for raising pigs. Now that the fear of difficulty has been broken and a positive attitude has been adopted towards the enterprise of pig-raising, it is seen that the natural conditions not only do not hinder pig-raising, but are in fact favorable to it. In reality, intensive and meticulous farming, mechanization, and collectivization are also all things where man's role is decisive. Changping County in Beijing often suffered from floods and droughts. After the Shisanling Reservoir was built, the situation changed. Is this not "man's role is decisive"? Henan province plans to spend another three years after 1959 and 1960 to harness the Yellow River and complete the construction of several large-scale canals. This also proves that "man's role is decisive."

Fifty-three. Regarding transport and commerce

Transport and packaging do not add value, but they do add use-value. The labor used in transport and packaging is a part of socially necessary labor. Without transport and packaging, the production process is not complete and cannot be transferred to the consumption process. Although the use-value has been produced, it cannot be realized. For example, coal, once it is mined, if it remains at the mine and is not transported by railway, ship, or truck to the hands of the user, the use-value of the coal cannot be realized at all.

Page 585 says that their commercial system has two sets: state-run commerce and cooperative commerce. In addition, there is the so-called "unorganized market," that is, the collective farm market. We have one set, having merged cooperative commerce into state-run commerce. As it looks now, one set is better for getting things done, and is much more economical in all aspects.

Page 587 mentions public supervision of commerce. Our supervision of commerce mainly relies on the leadership of the Party, putting politics in command, and mass supervision. The labor of commercial workers is socially necessary labor. Without their labor, production cannot be transformed into consumption (including consumption for production and consumption for living).

Fifty-four. Regarding the simultaneous promotion of industry and agriculture

Page 623 speaks of the law of the priority growth of the means of production. In the unrevised third edition, it was also specially pointed out here that "the priority growth of the means of production means that the development of industry is faster than that of agriculture."

The development of industry is faster than that of agriculture, but the formulation must be appropriate. Industry cannot be emphasized to an inappropriate degree, otherwise problems will certainly arise. Take our Liaoning for example. This province has a great deal of industry, and the urban population accounts for one-third of the province's total population. In the past, industry was always put in first place, without simultaneously paying attention to vigorously developing agriculture. As a result, the province's own agriculture could not guarantee the supply of grain, meat, and vegetables to the cities. Grain, meat, and vegetables always had to be transported from other provinces. The main problem was the strain on the agricultural labor force and the lack of necessary agricultural machinery, which restricted agricultural production and caused its growth to be relatively slow. We did not understand in the past that it is precisely in a place like the Northeast, especially a province like Liaoning, that agriculture should be firmly grasped, and one cannot just emphasize grasping industry.

Our formulation is the simultaneous promotion of the development of industry and the development of agriculture under the condition of giving priority to the development of heavy industry. So-called simultaneous promotion does not negate priority growth, nor does it negate that industrial development is faster than agricultural development. At the same time, simultaneous promotion is not using strength equally. For example, this year we estimate that we can produce about 14 million tons of steel products. We will take out one-tenth of the steel products for agricultural technological transformation and water conservancy construction, and the remaining nine-tenths of the steel products will still be mainly used for the construction of heavy industry and the transport industry. Under this year's conditions, this is the simultaneous promotion of industry and agriculture. Doing so will certainly not hinder the priority development of heavy industry and the accelerated development of industry.

Poland has a population of 30 million, but only 450,000 pigs. The meat supply is now very tight. It seems that Poland has not yet put the development of agriculture on its agenda.

Page 624 says, "In individual periods, in order to raise up the backward agricultural, light industrial, and food industrial sectors, eliminate their backwardness and overcome the partial disproportions caused thereby, it may be practically necessary and appropriate to accelerate the development of these sectors." This is good. But the backwardness of agriculture and light industry, and the disproportions caused by it, cannot be said to be merely "partial disproportions." This kind of disproportion is not a partial problem.

Page 625 says, "It is necessary to rationally distribute investment, so that heavy industry and light industry maintain a correct proportional relationship at all times." This passage only talks about heavy industry and light industry, not industry and agriculture.

Fifty-five. Regarding the level of accumulation

In Poland, this has now become a very big problem. Gomulka at first emphasized material incentives, increasing workers' wages, without paying attention to raising the workers' consciousness. As a result, the workers only wanted more money and did not work well. The growth of wages exceeded the growth of labor productivity, creating a situation of eating into one's past gains. Now they are forced to come out and oppose material incentives and advocate spiritual encouragement. Gomulka also said, "Money cannot buy the hearts of the people."

Particularly emphasizing material incentives, it seems, will always inevitably go to its opposite. Many blank checks are issued. The high-salaried stratum is of course satisfied. When the broad masses of workers and peasants demand that the checks be cashed and they cannot be, they will be forced to go to the opposite of emphasizing material incentives.

According to the situation described on page 631, the accumulated funds in the Soviet Union account for about one-fourth of the national income. The proportion of accumulation in our country's national income was 27% in 1957, 36% in 1958, and 42% in 1959. It seems that in the future it is possible for our country's accumulation proportion to be regularly maintained at 30% or more. The main issue is the great development of production. As long as production increases, even if the proportion of accumulation is a bit larger, it is still possible to improve the people's livelihood.

Practicing strict economy and accumulating large amounts of material and financial resources is a constant task. It is wrong to think that this should only be done in very difficult circumstances. Could it be that when difficulties are few, there is no need to be economical and no need to accumulate?