Welcome, friends.

Today we have friends from Latin America, and all of you are our friends. We share many commonalities, and the positions of China and the Latin American countries are generally similar. We must stand on the same front. Of course, the specific circumstances of each country differ, but we share common ground in that we are all in a relatively underdeveloped state. Politically, China has achieved independence, but economically, it remains very poor, having long been mired in stagnation. As you probably know, China was in a semi-colonial position for over a century—nominally independent but actually controlled by foreigners. During those hundred-plus years, the imperialists extracted a great deal of wealth from the Chinese people. We had no industry. China’s national industry was oppressed. China was a country ruled by imperialism, feudalism, and comprador capitalism; the people were impoverished, with many dying of hunger each year; there was no education, with 80 percent of the population illiterate. Thus, we were a country “poor and blank.” For example, the steel production controlled by the Chinese government—specifically, the steel under Chiang Kai-shek’s control—amounted to only 100,000 tons annually. We have friends from Brazil here, and I hear Brazil produces 1.6 million tons of steel a year, while in 1949, when Chiang Kai-shek fell, China produced only 100,000 tons. There were only four million industrial workers in all of China, but a vast number of impoverished peasants totaling hundreds of millions of people. Therefore, the working class relied on the poor peasants, forming an alliance; that is, the proletariat first allied with the semi-proletariat, then united with the middle peasants, and afterward with the national capitalists and patriotic intellectuals. In this way, we united ninety out of every hundred people, leaving only ten percent as opponents. With such unity, the revolution could win. There was also help from abroad—international assistance—though it was essentially moral support. We were long blockaded by the enemy and unable to obtain material aid from foreign countries, but we received moral support. For instance, the Soviet Union and other socialist countries, as well as the forces of national independence movements in Asia, Africa, and Latin America, all helped us. Today, in this room are friends from Latin America, and your struggles are a form of help to us. Therefore, we must thank you. You tie down the forces of imperialism—take Cuba, for example, right next to the United States; your struggle assists us. Other Latin American countries like Chile, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Colombia, Brazil, Argentina, and Peru, with whom we have not yet established diplomatic relations between states, nonetheless contribute through your work, and we are very grateful. We see it this way: You are our friends, not our enemies. There are no enemies of ours present here, are there? (The entire audience laughs.) We have no conflicts of interest; we share a bond of friendship. We hope you succeed.

Latin America has a population of nearly 200 million, while the United States has just over 100 million. Not all Americans are against us; we must distinguish between the American people and the capitalists. The U.S. monopoly bourgeoisie is the class that works against your interests. For example, Cuba’s sugar is monopolized by that bourgeoisie. I hear Chile’s copper and Colombia’s oil are also controlled by the United States. Does the U.S. have investments in Brazil? (Brazilian friends say: a great deal.) And in Argentina? (Argentine friends answer: also a lot.) Americans just have an abundance of money. (The audience becomes lively.) Their wealth is derived not only from exploiting their own working class and peasants but also from exploiting people in all countries. Their riches are built on the exploitation of us all. Yesterday, I met with friends from twelve African countries and regions. Africa’s population is similar to Latin America’s—210 million compared to Latin America’s 190 million, just slightly more, nearly equal. Combined, that makes 400 million people. Asia has a population of 1.45 billion, the Soviet Union has 200 million, and other socialist countries have 100 million. The world’s total population is 2.7 billion. The Western world has only 500 million people, but even among them, a distinction must be drawn—most are good, while colonialists are but a tiny minority. The colonialists worldwide, along with their allies in various countries—such as Chiang Kai-shek in China, Syngman Rhee in Korea, Adnan Menderes in Turkey, and Fulgencio Batista in Cuba—number at most a hundred million. Even if they accounted for a tenth of the population, that would be just 270 million—relatively few. Out of ten fingers, they’re only one. Some people remain unenlightened for now; for instance, some American workers collaborate with the bourgeoisie, but they will one day awaken. In the end, the people decide what prevails. Was Batista’s power greater, or that of the July 26 Movement? Three years ago—before July 26, 1957—when you landed from Mexico, you numbered only eighty-two people, while Batista had great power and had killed twenty thousand Cubans. In our past, we too were unarmed; power lay in Chiang Kai-shek’s hands, and later the Americans aided him. Yet Chiang Kai-shek was defeated. Batista, too, was beaten. From this we draw a conclusion: The reactionaries—the imperialists and their lackeys—may seem very powerful in form, but in reality, some have already been overthrown, and others will be. Those without weapons topple those with weapons; the exploited class overthrows the exploiting class; the poor overturn the rich. It is we who overthrow the enemy, not the enemy who overthrows us. Again, the people decide. By uniting ninety percent of the people, we find a way. We must organize the united front, rallying all who can be rallied. We united not only the workers and peasants but also the national capitalists—we still work with them to this day. We unite with the national bourgeoisie and their intellectuals—professors, teachers, artists, engineers, technicians, journalists—anyone who supports the national independence and democratic revolution.

We have been liberated for ten years. In the past we had only 100,000 tons of steel, but last year we produced over ×××× ten-thousand tons; in × years we may reach around ×××× ten-thousand tons; in × years we can surpass Japan and France. Let’s look again in × years—if we can reach ×× million tons, we could overtake Britain. So, things are built by people. I see our efforts as feasible, and this applies to Latin America, Africa, all of Asia, and the socialist countries as well. Of course, there are difficulties: some countries are controlled by foreign powers and host imperialist military bases. But the people will struggle. The people of South Korea and Turkey have already risen up to struggle, and this aids all of you. China’s work may also provide some help to you. Though our beliefs and social systems differ, we can still unite.

Another question: What do we do about the Western countries? For centuries, the world was decided by them. I hear their power is still considerable. To prevent war and strive for peace, should we engage with them? We believe we should. Therefore, we support the great-power conferences; it would be good if we can achieve disarmament and avoid an atomic war. But is it enough to rely solely on great-power conferences? I’m not sure what your opinions are. In our view, relying on them alone probably won’t work. (Someone among the foreign guests says: Walk on two legs.) Walk on two legs—I agree, meaning we must simultaneously rely on the struggles of the people of all countries. The first reliance is on the people’s struggles. The second is on conferences. For instance, I may want to engage with the Americans, but they refuse, and they even influence many other countries—France, West Germany, Japan—all refusing to engage with us. What can we do? Are we losing sleep over this? No. It is not we who lose sleep. They want to divide China into two, recognize Taiwan, and deny us recognition, allowing Chiang Kai-shek to represent China at the United Nations. Chiang Kai-shek is China’s Batista. Batista fled to Portugal; Chiang Kai-shek fled to Taiwan, both under U.S. protection. We think Americans have a bad habit: they like to help villains. (The entire audience laughs.) They like to help Batista, Chiang Kai-shek, Syngman Rhee, Adenauer, Kishi, Franco. They favor those people—a very strange disposition. (The entire audience laughs.) Do you, friends, have any thoughts?

(Cuban Chief Army Inspector: I think everyone agrees with your opinion.)

Very good. We can arrive at a consensual viewpoint, which is why we are friends. We have many friends; at most, only a tenth of the world are villains.

(Cuban Chief Army Inspector: Even less than a tenth—some people are deceived. All the people are noble.)

Possibly less than a tenth. But the people cannot include Chiang Kai-shek, Syngman Rhee, or Batista; they are the people’s enemies. In sum, as long as we unite, things become manageable. Everything depends on the people. This year, we might achieve over ×× ten-thousand tons of steel, but given our large population, per capita it is still not much. We have many people, but not much grain, not much cotton, not much steel. Yet we believe we can develop; for that we need time, we need peace, and we need friends.

How long do you plan to stay in China? (One foreign guest: The time will be decided by the Chinese trade unions. China is very big, and it takes a lot of time to visit.)

Let you decide. Stay as long as you like. Any other friends have remarks?

[After several foreign guests have spoken] Let me add a few words. Some friends mentioned coming to China to study. We must learn from each other, exchange experiences, and especially take note of Cuba’s experience. Cuba underwent two and a half years of struggle; we went through more than twenty. Circumstances differ: Cuba is very close to the United States and achieved victory; we are far from the United States and also achieved victory. China’s experience was born on Chinese soil, under China’s conditions. I hope you friends will analyze it: discern what are strengths and what are weaknesses, what constitutes experience and what constitutes mistakes. In our work, there are still some errors; we have a rectification movement, once or twice a year. Studying the errors China has made holds meaning for you too, as it can help you avoid repeating similar mistakes. Experience cannot be mechanically copied; it can only serve as a reference.

Some friends raised the issue of establishing People’s Communes. Our People’s Communes developed out of the expansion of cooperatives—merging twenty or thirty cooperatives into a single commune. With more people, averaging five thousand households per commune—some as small as two thousand, some as large as ten thousand. With more people, more land, and greater strength, they are better than cooperatives. Some friends also wish to set up People’s Communes. If you intend to do so, I suggest not using the term “People’s Commune.” In 1958 and 1959, we got scolded heavily because of that name. If you don’t use the term, you can simply expand cooperatives. But do we regret it? We don’t. The name was chosen by the masses, starting right here in this province—Henan. In the summer of 1958, the People’s Communes were established. Dulles cursed us, saying the communes were no good, couldn’t last, involved slave labor, lacked freedom, and broke up families—husbands couldn’t see their wives, mothers couldn’t see their children. And there’s another name they sling mud at: the Great Leap Forward. If we had changed the name to “high-speed development,” we probably wouldn’t have been scolded. In short, if we change only a little of our habit, they revile us. But we’ve already made the change, and they can do nothing about it. We are far from the United States, and far from God. (The entire audience laughs.) The Pope doesn’t like us—that can’t be helped. Are the People’s Communes slave labor? Do they lack freedom? The friends here have already given their answer. Chinese people were once slave laborers, working for the imperialists and their lackeys, serving as their slaves. Now they are no longer slaves; they have taken control of their own destiny. The enemy says only Taiwan has freedom, while the mainland is enslaved. Now it’s Cuba’s turn. The U.S. says that under Batista they had freedom, and under ××××’s leadership they’re slaves. That’s their logic. The West and America have a logic entirely different from ours. Friends, which one is right, only the future will tell! Their imperialist system is supposedly so excellent, but I see nothing good about it. So let them take a walk—go back to their own home. (Laughter.) One day, the American people will no longer like the imperialist system.

Because the United States was unprepared and saw our strength, it did not dare to start a world war. But it is hard to say—there are two possibilities. One is the chance to strive for lasting peace, and we must work for it. The other is the possibility of another major war. As our Argentine friends have well put it: "We must keep our powder dry." In the East, there is Japan, with a population of 100 million, a militarist state that has signed an aggressive military alliance treaty with the United States. Like West Germany, it is reviving militarism. West Germany and Japan are both favored and supported by the United States. However, another reality is that the Japanese people are rising in struggle. They do not support the Kishi government or the aggressive military treaty between Japan and the United States. Tomorrow, millions of Japanese people will hold demonstrations. We must support the Japanese people. The struggles of the people in South Korea and Turkey are also helpful to us and to you, just as the struggle of the Japanese people is helpful to you.

I wish you victory in your struggle! Let us all unite!