You two are responsible for the report and the party constitution. Today I have asked you to
discuss a few things. Recently, there have been some unsatisfactory issues in the Ministry of
Foreign Affairs. I think you are aware of this?
The United States and the Soviet Union held two meetings. The views of the Ministry of
Foreign Affairs are not as good as those of several embassies in France, Switzerland, and
even Syria. There are many others, all of which are more insightful than the views of the
Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs has a "New Situation", which first
says that the big things are not good, then says that the deception is greater, and then says
that the atmosphere of the United States and the Soviet Union dominating the world is
stronger. It is probably about uranium-235, enriched uranium. Everyone says it is good and
that the article is well written. I read it and thought that maybe I am wrong and your
ministry is right! However, it is not related to the opinions of the Central Committee, at least
for several years. For example, the Central Committee always says that the domestic and
international situation is very good. A very good situation is not medium good, not small
good, and certainly not bad. But the Ministry of Foreign Affairs says that the big things are
not good, which is more deceptive and the atmosphere of the United States and the Soviet
Union dominating the world is stronger. This situation will continue to be so strong. By next
year, the deception will become even greater and will escalate. This deception problem has
been going on for more than a year.
You are still young, so it is best for you to learn some foreign languages to avoid being
deceived by those gentlemen and getting on their pirate ship.
Regarding the Vietnam issue, the U.S. military strategy shifted its focus eastward, and I
proposed shifting the focus westward. It was Europe! They were the ones who acted out
this! They wanted to withdraw their troops, but one country refused to let them withdraw,
saying that the revolutionary storm in Asia was in Vietnam. If they stopped fighting, it would
be a disaster. It was opportunism, right-wing opportunism. We are that kind of person. I am
talking about me. I have a bad reputation in recent years. The only Marx and the only
beacon in the world is in Europe. Even a fart from that place smells good! They regard it as
an imperial decree! I will ignore it! What can you do to me? I am a right-wing opportunist.
The "beacon" was written in my name, but I did not read it. As a rule, I do not read any
documents of this kind, including the Prime Minister's speeches, because I cannot bear to
read them.
Should the focus be shifted eastward or westward? Discuss it. I think it should be shifted
westward to some extent. If they want to walk, we will stop them even if we die. "Revolution



cannot be compromised, and we cannot compromise under any circumstances." Which
Marxism is this? We compromised with Chiang Kai-shek twice. The president of the United
States is coming, please. He sat here and blew for an hour.
It is the Ministry of Foreign Affairs' rubbish department (Asia Department) that says Tanaka
cannot come to power and that even if he does, it will not improve Sino-Japanese relations.
(Interjection: The Second Ministry thinks Tanaka cannot come to power, while the Ministry
of Foreign Affairs thinks that even if Tanaka comes to power, Sino-Japanese relations will not
change quickly.) To laugh at someone who has taken fifty steps is to laugh at someone who
has taken a hundred steps. Abandoning armour and dragging away soldiers, those who have
fled fifty steps laugh at those who have taken a hundred steps. This is in terms of quantity. If
we talk about nature, they are all deserters. Go and look up the "Mencius".
So I formally advise comrades to read a little, so as not to be deceived by intellectuals. What
about the arguments between Mr. Guo, Mr. Fan (referring to Guo Moruo and Fan Wenlan),
Ren Jiyu, and Yang Liuqiao? Mr. Guo now says that Confucius is a saint of slave owners. In
"Ten Critiques", Mr. Guo claims to be a humanist, that is, people-centred. Confucius is also a
humanist, just like him. Mr. Guo not only respects Confucius, but also opposes the law.
Respect Confucius and oppose the law. The Kuomintang is the same! Lin Biao is the same! I
agree with Mr. Guo's historical periodization. Slavery is divided by the Spring and Autumn
Period and the Warring States Period, but we cannot curse Qin Shihuang. He was very
chaotic. A few decades ago, Chinese textbooks said that Qin Shihuang was good. The wheels
were standardized, the writing was standardized, and the weights and measures were
unified. Even when Li Bai talked about Qin Shihuang, he started with a long paragraph saying
that he was great. "The King of Qin swept across the world, looking so majestic! He waved
his sword to cut through the floating clouds, and all the princes came to the west.”
A long article only has two sentences at the end, "But I see the golden coffin buried in cold
ashes in the three springs." It means he is still dead. What about you, Li Bai? You wanted to
be an official! In the end, you were exiled to Guizhou. When you arrived at Baidi City, the
general amnesty order came. So "I left Baidi in the morning among the colourful clouds." In
fact, he (referring to Li Bai) wanted to be an official. "Liangfu Yin" said that it is not possible
now, but there will be hope in the future. "Don't you see the drunkard in Gaoyang drafting"
and "commanding Chu and Han like a whirlwind." He was very arrogant at that time. I added
a few sentences to make it more complete: "Unexpectedly, Han Xin was disobedient and led
an army of 100,000 to Licheng. The King of Qi was furious and arrested the drunkard and put
him in a cauldron to cook." He was put into the oil pan.
They also said that the United States was no longer good and could not stand up straight.
They both said that American meat and vegetables were not tasty after returning from the
United Nations. Nixon himself admitted that there were three pieces of meat in the middle
of the meat-filled bread that he could not chew: China, Europe, and Japan. This is not to
mention other third world countries.



They often boast about great upheavals, great divisions, and great reorganizations, and
suddenly there comes a great deception or a great master. In short, in terms of thinking,
they focus on the surface and not the essence.
Our party has always been like this. When a wind blows, it will… For example, Wang Ming’s
line, the main leadership of each base area and each white area was taken away. In less than
four years, alas! The self-proclaimed 100% Marxist, the leader of the Central Soviet Area,
refers to me, without any Marxism. When a wind blows, we will follow the wind. There are
many people, not just a few. Those who stubbornly resist are a minority. Fortunately, Teng
Daiyuan is not dead yet. He can prove how to fight against the Lisan line. I am the only one
left. I am afraid of being isolated, so why follow the wind? It is best to stop the Japanese
north of Shijiazhuang and Taiyuan. But if the Japanese don’t listen, what will you do? Fight
all the way to Guangxi and Guizhou. What I mean is that it is best to fight to Chongqing and
Xi’an, but they will not listen to me. My thought is close to Lenin’s, called the theory of half
defeat. Openly support Chiang Kai-shek in resisting Japan and opposing the diehards, but
actually hope that Chairman Chiang will be killed. Now this person is still alive, but he cannot
see anyone.
I met a reporter stationed in West Germany, Wang Shu, who was tortured to death by
Xinhua News Agency! He cried when I saw him. This diplomacy was only successful because I
entrusted him to do it [2]. It was me who colluded with the bad guys such as the United
States, Japan, West Germany, and Britain.
The doctrine that there can be no compromise in the revolution is not Marxism. Lenin
repeatedly said that if you encounter bandits, you should either be killed or surrender your
pistols and cars. He advocated surrendering pistols and cars, and waiting for the opportunity
to wipe out the gang of bandits one day, and take back the pistols and cars.
I haven't finished reading the Trotsky documents you guys have, I've only read a part of
them. He was against the Brest-Litovsk Treaty. Lenin advocated ceding territory and paying
compensation, and signing a peace treaty. This peace treaty was signed with eyes closed.
First, it was written that the territory was ceded, and second, the compensation was paid.
German imperialism ran away, dealing with two parties, and it couldn't fight on two fronts.
That was the First World War. Later, the territory was not ceded, and the compensation was
not paid. The treaty was a piece of waste paper, just like what Nixon said.
I believe in the theory of half defeat. Lenin advocated complete defeat, that the government
army was completely defeated. At that time, the Russian and Japanese armies were fighting
in Lushun, Dalian, and Liaoyang. The more thorough the better, the revolution will rise, and
the prestige of the Russian emperor will be destroyed. When we fight Japan, we cannot
learn everything from him, but actually use his knowledge. Chiang Kai-shek, you bastard,
what are you doing? ! The representatives of the big landlords and the big bourgeoisie, the
millions of troops are all counter-revolutionary troops, fighting us for ten years, and there



have been three anti-communist climaxes. I hope that the Japanese can occupy as much of
China as possible.
The trend of Wang Ming's line was different the second time, but in the end, it was still in
line with the opinions of some comrades who wanted to revolutionize and had Marxism. I
wrote an article called "On Protracted War" to criticize the theory of quick victory. It was
called criticizing those outside the party, but in fact it was criticizing those inside the party,
and criticizing the theory of national destruction.
 There are many examples of this kind, including the First World War. Germany's William I
(interruption: the second) let's call it William X, was majestic and murderous, attacking from
east to west, but in the end, no one knew where the emperor was. He was killed, died, or
ran away. I didn't find out clearly. The army was completely wiped out.
In the Second World War, this Hitler was even more vicious. The more vicious, the better, do
you believe it? The more people are killed, the more revolution is needed. The First World
War brought about the October Revolution, and the Second World War brought about the
Chinese Revolution. The method is very simple. You can kill people, so I can't? Lu Xun wrote
in "The True Story of Ah Q", "The monks can move, but I can't?"
The conclusion is four sentences: Don't discuss major issues, but send minor issues every
day. If this tune is not changed, it will inevitably be revised. If you engage in revisionism in
the future, don't say I didn't tell you in advance.
(Interjection: Some people look forward to the Tenth National Congress. After the Tenth
National Congress, the National People's Congress will be held. Once the National People's
Congress is held, the salary issue must be resolved.)
Everyone has their own concerns. When Jia Mu died, [3] everyone cried, each with their
own purpose. If they were the same, there would be no personality. Crying is a common
trait. As for what each person thinks and what makes them sad, it is different, that is
personality. I advise people to watch the times when Sister Liu and Qin Xian's family
competed for the kitchen. [4]
[1] These are the minutes of the conversation between Mao Zedong, Wang Hongwen and
Zhang Chunqiao on July 4, 1973.
[2] On July 24, 1972, Mao Zedong, Zhou Enlai, Ji Pengfei and Qiao Guanhua summoned
Wang Shu to discuss the situation in Europe and the prospects for establishing diplomatic
relations with Germany and Japan. In September 1972, he served as a negotiator of the
Chinese government and reached an agreement with the Federal Republic of Germany on
the establishment of diplomatic relations. In October 1972, he was appointed Political
Counsellor and Chargé d'Affaires of the Embassy in West Germany, preparing for the
establishment of the Chinese Embassy.




[3] Jia Mu, or Mother Jia, was the mother of Ja Baoyu, a central character in “The Dream of
Red Mansions”. As she died, she took Baoyu’s hand, knew she could no longer protect him,
and said “My son, you have to fight for yourself!” (Trans.)
[4] Referring to class struggles depicted in “The Drean of Red Mansions, Mao advised Wang
and Zhang  to consider the descriptions of Sister-in-law Liu's fight for the kitchen with Qin
Xian's family – Trans.