After twenty days of meetings, we finally had a chance to meet. I’ve been reading all your briefings. Regarding the two systems of labor and education, someone asked whether ×× had anything similar; ×× replied that they did and had been raising this issue for several years. The Chairman remarked that he had already proposed moving distilleries to the countryside back in Zhengzhou, though not at such a high level. On the subject of the two educational systems, the Chairman emphasized self-study as the primary method. He cited Xiao Chunu, who never attended formal school but worked as a waiter in teahouses. The Chairman greatly admired him, noting that Xiao taught at the Peasant Training Institute, where he served as one of the main instructors. Xiao was capable of breaking free from the constraints of traditional texts. Later, he became an instructor at the Whampoa Military Academy. At the Peasant Training Institute, we would distribute small pamphlets to the students. Nowadays, schools do not provide handouts; instead, they require students to copy notes. Why is this? Some say it’s to avoid making mistakes. But does copying really prevent errors? If you simply gave out handouts for students to read, you could speak less. Moreover, materials should be distributed on both sides—whether new or old historical perspectives, both versions should be made available to students. When I wrote about strategic issues, I prepared lecture notes and then delivered the talk without referring to them. My treatise On Protracted War was also composed in this manner. As for On Contradiction, I spent several weeks typing and retyping day and night, yet the actual lecture lasted only two hours. Surely we could just let people read it! Current education, however, tends to be rather lazy. Natural sciences are somewhat different, as they rely heavily on experimentation. We need laboratories and factories. In the past, everything remained stuck in abstract concepts: today it’s one concept, tomorrow another—students never get to see anything concrete. If teachers don’t prepare their own lecture notes (some argue that once handouts are provided, there’s little left for the teacher to say), then perhaps they could spend more time reading themselves!

Someone asked ××: Didn’t you already discuss this with Comrade ×××?

Liu ×× responded: ××× is a fine comrade—a core member of the leftist camp—and Hill is likewise a good comrade.

In some countries, there isn’t yet a cohesive leftist core; activities remain confined to small groups. The Chairman observed that those who emerge first are often the most active individuals.

××× operates along the Germany–Italy axis. They have failed to recognize the contradictions between these two powers. Many European nations harbor a fear of German resurgence. Khrushchev sought to place Germany under U.S. control. However, the Chairman argued that German reunification would be detrimental to our interests. France also fears Germany, as do several other European communist parties.

During World War II, the French Communist Party commanded an army of 400,000 troops. Churchill worried that France might fall. De Gaulle devised a solution: first, he granted promotions; second, he reorganized the force into a regular defense army of 300,000, disbanding the remaining 100,000 troops and dismantling the extensive militia network. Thorez returned from the Soviet Union to persuade everyone to surrender their military authority. Afterward, he served as Deputy Prime Minister before ultimately being ousted. Similar dynamics played out across Europe. Liu ×× explained that conditions there resembled those during our Great Revolution: workers and peasants were organized and armed, and they turned to us for guidance. Yet we had not anticipated seizing power, nor had we prepared for the possibility that the Nationalist government might disarm us.

At the time, the situation seemed favorable, but we underestimated the likelihood of a bourgeois counter-revolution. The Wuhan government even included two Communist ministers: Tan Pingshan, who later founded the Third Party and, after liberation, led the Peasants’ and Workers’ Democratic Party; and Su Zhaozheng. It was precisely that bourgeois betrayal that proved indispensable to the success of the Chinese Revolution. Today, we face a comparable scenario: initially, we were unprepared for Khrushchev’s eventual betrayal. Now, two types of communist parties exist worldwide—one genuine, the other spurious. The October Revolution demonstrated that the emergence of revisionism within the Soviet Union held profound significance. Revisionism in Yugoslavia, by contrast, was an isolated incident. The Soviet Union, however, had nurtured revisionist tendencies over decades under Lenin’s leadership; its case was far from accidental.

We have already established operations at the Silver Mine and Xiaozhan. Previously, we paid insufficient attention to addressing problems at their root cause.

At the Zhengzhou Conference, the Chairman raised the question of whether Khrushchev was a good or bad person, stressing that we should not blindly follow his directives. Hill pointed out that he had long recognized Khrushchev’s true nature, though we hesitated to make this public.

We must develop the First, Second, and Third Fronts, preparing for potential warfare that could lead to widespread destruction.

This brings us to the matter of publishing Volume Five of Mao’s Selected Works.

Dividing into two embodies dialectical thinking, while merging into one reflects revisionist tendencies.

For the writing of our party history, we should appoint Elder Dong as chief editor. Furthermore, we ought to reprint the complete works of Chiang Kai-shek so that we can examine how he vilified us.

The Premier speaks too frequently; it would be more appropriate to publish a collected works.

The question arises: if Khrushchev were to act in a harmful manner, how should we respond? What measures should China take if a revisionist central leadership were to emerge? County committees must stand firm against any such revisionist leadership.

It is imperative to establish the Third Front and accelerate development of the southwestern rear base, but we must proceed deliberately rather than haphazardly. Given our limited financial resources, we cannot spread our efforts too thinly. Instead, we should prioritize rapid construction of railway lines at both ends.