Chairman: Welcome, Cuban comrades, welcome, Cuban poet.

Bida Suideligesi (hereinafter referred to as Bida): Formally I am a poet, but in reality I am a revolutionary.

Ambassador Pita Sangtuofu (hereinafter referred to as Ambassador): Is the Chairman in good health?

Chairman: I had a bit of a cold in the summer. I went to the south for a month, and my health is a little better. In Beijing, I have to read many documents; when I go outside, I can climb mountains and get close to the masses.

Ambassador: The Chairman's complexion is even better than last year.

Chairman: When did we meet last year?

Ambassador: We met when you received the Cuban military delegation.

Chairman: Is the Ambassador in good health? How are you two (referring to Bida and his wife)?

Bida: We are in very good health. We are very happy; in China we have become younger.

Chairman: How long have you been in China?

Bida: Two months. We visited the south for a month. When we were in Shanghai, we heard that the Chairman was also in Shanghai.

Chairman: That was the time of the autumn harvest in the south.

Bida: In Shanghai, with incomparable excitement, I visited the former residence of Lu Xun. Lu Xun is a literary giant whom we have long admired.

Chairman: Lu Xun is a revolutionary literary giant of China. In the first half of his life, he was a democratic leftist; in the second half, he converted to a Marxist-Leninist.

Bida: Not long ago, the Cuban National Publishing House published one hundred thousand copies of the *Selected Works of Lu Xun*. This is a large number in Cuba, but insignificant in China. In Cuba, a print run of thirty thousand copies for a book is already a lot. This shows how much the Cuban people revere Lu Xun.

Chairman: Lu Xun's struggle against imperialism and feudalism was very clear. He came out of that society, he knew the situation of that society, and he also knew how to struggle. The old intellectuals said he had a "second heart" and was a traitor, so he wrote *Second Heart Collection*. They also said he had bad luck, that he was under an unlucky star, so he published a collection called *Unlucky Star Collection*. They also said he was a degenerate man of letters, so he adopted "degenerate man of letters" as a pen name. Lu Xun's criticism of those people was relentless. Among those he criticized, one part came over to the revolutionary ranks, and another part went with U.S. imperialism.

Bida: The enemy cannot be given a chance to breathe.

Ambassador: This is a truth that can be applied to all aspects of life.

Bida: We were very honored to visit your hometown, Shaoshan.

Chairman: That is a small, poor place, with many mountains and little land. It's a place one can go and see.

Bida: For us, Shaoshan is not a place worth going to see, but a place one ought to go and see. We went with extremely moved hearts to pay our respects to a place that produced the roots of revolution.

Chairman: In the past, there were many poor people in Shaoshan who often encroached upon the big landlords and were called bandits by the big landlords. From the day our Communist Party was founded until today, Chiang Kai-shek still calls us "Communist bandits." The imperialists say we are "warmongers" and "aggressors." I think these names are not bad. They say we, first, aggressed against China, because we oppose the U.S. aggression against China; second, aggressed against Korea, because we fought the Americans in Korea; third, aggressed against Tibet; they also say we are aggressing against Vietnam and Laos. They probably also say you are aggressing against Cuba!

Bida: They do say so.

Ambassador: Indeed, the works of Lu Xun and the works of Chairman Mao are "aggressing" against Cuba.

Chairman: Haha! The United States says you want to "aggress" against Latin America. I think it's worth "aggressing" a bit.

Bida: The United States is afraid that Cuba's single spark will start a prairie fire in Latin America.

Chairman: That Havana conference had a great impact, especially the second one. The Cuban revolution has two tasks. The first task is to enable Cuba to continue to exist; the second task is to help the Latin American revolution achieve victory, to let a fire start in the "backyard" of the United States. Every country has revolutionary parties; some so-called revolutionary parties are no longer revolutionary. But there are always revolutionary people, for example, in Venezuela, Peru, Colombia, Uruguay, Chile, Argentina, Ecuador, Mexico, Guatemala, Nicaragua, etc., there are all revolutionaries. In the two countries next to yours, Haiti and the Dominican Republic, there are also revolutionaries. Many Communist Parties follow the bourgeoisie. This doesn't matter; revolutionaries will always rise up. Cuba is just like that. The *26th of July Movement* was not a Marxist-Leninist party at the beginning, was it?

Ambassador: It was not.

Chairman: There were Marxist-Leninists participating, like Comrade Guevara. How old are you (to Bida)?

Bida: Fifty-four.

Chairman: Are you about the same age as Guevara?

Bida: A little older.

Chairman: What about Bilojia?

Bida: A little younger.

Ambassador: Guevara is forty-five; he is one of the oldest among the leading members of the Cuban revolution.

Bida: The Cuban revolution was almost started by young people.

Ambassador: A bit like the Chinese revolution; at the beginning, the leading comrades were all very young.

Chairman: Generally speaking, young people are more progressive, but not all are more progressive than Marx, Engels, and Lenin. Many people later ceased to be revolutionary. Life cast them behind. They lost their revolutionary sensitivity and became afraid of revolution. Their title is revolutionary party, but they are afraid as soon as revolution is mentioned. What kind of revolutionary party is that? They are unwilling to get close to the people, to get close to the poorest lower-stratum people, that is, the workers and poor peasants. The victory of our revolution and the consolidation of our political power rely on the workers and poor peasants. These two groups constitute the absolute majority of the population. Only when these two groups are united will the well-to-do middle peasants draw close. Intellectuals are also divided into left, center, and right. First, unite the leftists, and the centrists will follow and draw close. As for the rightists, as long as they are anti-imperialist and patriotic, they can also be united. They have a temporary role; sometimes things can't be done without them. For example, university professors and primary and secondary school teachers were all left over from the old society; they are not Communist Party members or very few are. In the past fourteen years, a portion has been remolded and joined the Communist Party, while another portion still retains their old viewpoints. It is the same with literary and art workers. It takes a very long time to remold them, and a small portion is basically impossible to remold. It doesn't matter; they are a minority. Let them go to see God with their rightist viewpoints! I am not clear about the situation in your country; perhaps you also have these few types of people.

Bida: It is exactly the same. We have the same struggle, the same process of remolding. Our revolutionary youth can see the prospects of the revolution and joined the revolution before its victory; some also joined the revolution after the victory. Another portion is watching from the sidelines.

Chairman: Let them watch. In Beijing, there are also some people watching from the sidelines: in the revolution, who will win and who will lose in the end? They want to see. How will the struggle against revisionism turn out? They also want to see. Regarding domestic socialist construction, they also want to see. With every great storm and wave, they are bound to waver.

Bida: Their "patience" is too great.

Chairman: They can only watch, and we can only watch. They are a minority; we are not afraid of them, we do not bully them, we do not kill them. How many years have you (to the Ambassador) lived in Beijing?

Ambassador: Three years.

Chairman: You can see that we rarely arrest people, rarely kill people, but use the method of mass supervision to supervise bad elements in their labor. We rely on the great majority of the masses, seventy, eighty, ninety percent, to supervise the one, two, or three percent of people in their labor. Generally speaking, the majority of bad people can be remolded into good people under certain conditions.

Zhang XX (hereinafter referred to as Zhang): Comrade Bida has met Puyi.

Bida: I was just about to tell the Chairman that I have met Puyi.

Chairman: I have also met him once and invited him to a meal. He was so happy!

Zhang: Puyi is fifty-seven years old this year.

Bida: My impression of him is that he has truly been remolded. He talked with me at length about his past mistakes, very sincerely.

Chairman: He was very dissatisfied with his past unfree life. Being an emperor is very unfree.

Ambassador: I would like to ask the Chairman a question: what are the future prospects for the struggle to oppose imperialism and defend the principles of Marxism-Leninism?

Chairman: It is already very clear now that imperialism cannot win against us. Imperialism is a class that is about to perish. Such a mess has occurred in the United States, that is, a president was shot dead in broad daylight. Did your country lower its flag to half-mast?

Ambassador: No.

Chairman: Did you play a dirge?

Bida: No.

Chairman: We did not lower the flag to half-mast, did not play a dirge, and did not send a telegram of condolence.

Ambassador: We received instructions from home: if the Chinese comrades lower the flag to half-mast, we will also lower it to half-mast.

Chairman: The Communist Party does not approve of assassination. This is not a problem of one person, but a problem of the system. Your country changed the system, not just replaced Batista the individual. Batista is not dead, is he?

Ambassador: No.

Chairman: But he no longer has any effect on Cuba. The internal contradictions of imperialism cannot be resolved. First is the contradiction between the working class and the bourgeoisie, which cannot be resolved unless there is a revolution. Second is the contradiction between one monopoly group and another. There is also the so-called issue of allies; the United States has contradictions with Europe, North America (Canada), Japan, Australia, and New Zealand. It also has contradictions with Nehru and Tito. Have you (to the Ambassador) been to India?

Ambassador: I stayed in India for a few days. My deep impression is that India and China present a sharp contrast. India is taking the capitalist road, and China is taking the socialist road.

Chairman: Ninety percent of the Indian people do not approve of Nehru's rule. More than half of the people in India are very poor and destitute. The situation in India is even worse than in Burma. Have you (to the Ambassador) been to Burma?

Ambassador: No.

Chairman: In short, the world is changing, changing to the advantage of revolution and to the disadvantage of counter-revolution. Why are some revisionist elements as grieved by Kennedy's death as if they had lost their parents? This reflects that the world is unstable; some people who rely on the "sensible" faction of the bourgeoisie panicked as soon as the "sensible" faction fell. This so-called "sensible" faction was the commander of your Bay of Pigs (i.e., Playa Girón) landing, and also the director of the Caribbean crisis last October. The Playa Girón incident was not done by Eisenhower. Only you are vigilant. The slogan put forward by your leaders, one hand holding a machete (for cutting sugarcane, for production), the other hand holding a weapon, is very good. This slogan cannot be abandoned. The United States can do nothing to you. In my opinion, it is the United States that is afraid of you, not you who are afraid of the United States. It is the big that is afraid of the small, not the small that is afraid of the big. Of course, the small is also a little afraid; it would not be true to say there is no fear at all. American planes fly overhead every day, there are so many marines, and there is the Guantanamo base; how can one not be worried? But in the overall picture, it is the big that is afraid of the small. In South Vietnam, the forces of the United States and the South Vietnamese rulers are not small, yet there is no hope of victory. The United States and the South Vietnamese rulers are afraid of the guerrilla warfare of the South Vietnamese people. Would you (to the Ambassador) like to go to South Vietnam to have a look?

Ambassador: I have been to the Democratic Republic of Vietnam.

Chairman: Go to Vietnam to understand how the people of South Vietnam conduct guerrilla warfare that makes the Americans so panicked. Are you (to Bida) going back soon?

Bida: I leave tomorrow.

Chairman: It's a pity you didn't take some time to go to Vietnam to have a look.

Bida: This will require me to come again.

Chairman: Next time you come, go to North Vietnam to investigate the situation of the guerrilla war in South Vietnam. Then go and see the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. See how they practice self-reliance. They went through great destruction; in 1950, 1951, 1952, and 1953, the United States bombed Korea to smithereens. But now, not only industry but also agriculture have solved their problems. You really should go and see these two countries. The Chinese experience should of course be studied. Korea was formerly a Japanese colony. After the war, it had a population of only seven million. The United States took away more than two million (not counting war deaths). From the second half of 1953 to the present, in ten years, it has completely recovered and developed. The population has also increased rapidly, from seven million to twelve million.

Ambassador: We have taken up a lot of Chairman Mao's time. The Chairman has spoken of the contradictions between the United States and the socialist countries, the contradictions between the United States and the national liberation movements, the contradictions between the United States and its allies, the contradictions within the U.S. ruling group, etc. The Kennedy incident occurred in the United States; the main factor was internal contradictions. Does this mean that we should pay greater attention to the internal contradictions of imperialism? Imperialism has consistently played a two-handed game: one hand of peace, one hand of war. Some people say that Kennedy's death was the work of those who advocate war. Of course, I am not saying that Kennedy was of the sensible faction.

Chairman: That is possible, but it is not clear now. The United States is not revealing who killed Kennedy. One can imagine that the Kennedy incident is somewhat beneficial to the Communist Party; the Democratic Party has suffered a major blow. The Republican Party has several factions; which faction did it is not known. Whether the current president, Johnson, can be elected is still a question. His prestige is not as high as Kennedy's. This person wants money, has a bad reputation, and is a big embezzler. Our country carried out the Five-Antis campaign; he would be a target of the Five-Antis. (All laugh)

Zhang: The Chairman should rest now!

Chairman: It doesn't matter, let's talk a little longer. On the whole, the world is changing, changing to the disadvantage of counter-revolution and to the advantage of revolution. Decades of history have proven this point. The changes in Cuba, you yourselves have seen. Cuba is right at the doorstep of the United States, a few dozen nautical miles away, and it has changed. Who can say that Cuba has not changed?! China has changed; this is also a fact. I know it, and you have also seen it. The imperialists and Chiang Kai-shek just can't come to Beijing! Africa has also undergone great changes, and Asia has also undergone great changes, such as Indonesia, Cambodia, etc. Little Cambodia dares to refuse "U.S. aid." Why does it have such boldness? Only because: first, the United States wants its life; second, the consciousness of the people at home; third, France and China help them. Cambodia's population is about the same as Cuba's, six million people. A strange phenomenon has now occurred. The United States "aids" Cambodia with thirty million U.S. dollars a year; in the past, it "aided" a total of over three hundred million U.S. dollars. Cambodia feels that U.S. "aid" is a dangerous thing. It is buying off cadres, corrupting cadres, and carrying out subversive activities. This can explain why Cambodia refused U.S. "aid." Alright, let's stop here.