All the relevant contents of "On Ten Relationships"

(1April 25, 956)

In recent months, the Political Bureau of the Central Committee has listened to the work reports of 34 central departments such as industry, agriculture, transportation, commerce and finance, from which he has seen some problems related to socialist construction and transformation. Taken together, a * * * has ten problems, namely ten relationships.

These ten questions are put forward around a basic principle, which is to mobilize all positive factors at home and abroad to serve the socialist cause. In the past, in order to end the rule of imperialism, feudalism and bureaucratic capitalism and win the people's democratic revolution, we adopted a policy of mobilizing all positive factors. Now, in order to carry out the socialist revolution and build a socialist country, this policy is also implemented. However, there are still some problems to be discussed in our work. It is particularly noteworthy that the Soviet Union has recently exposed some shortcomings and mistakes in the process of building socialism. Do you still want to take the detour they took? In the past, it was because of their experience and lessons that we avoided some detours. Of course, now we should take a warning.

What are the positive factors at home and abroad? At home, workers and peasants are the basic forces. The middle forces can be won over. Although the reactionary forces are a negative factor, we should do a good job and try to turn the negative factors into positive ones. Internationally, all forces that can be United should be United, those that are not neutral can strive for neutrality, and those that are reactionary can also be used separately. In a word, we should mobilize all direct and indirect forces and strive to build our country into a powerful socialist country.

Let me ask ten questions.

The relationship between heavy industry, light industry and agriculture Heavy industry is the focus of China's construction. It has been decided that priority must be given to developing the means of production. But we can't ignore the means of subsistence, especially the production of grain. If we don't have enough food and other necessities, we can't support workers, let alone develop heavy industry. Therefore, we must deal with the relationship between heavy industry, light industry and agriculture.

We have not made any mistakes in principle in dealing with the relationship between heavy industry, light industry and agriculture. We did better than the Soviet Union and some Eastern European countries. For example, the problem that the grain output of the Soviet Union has not reached the highest level before the revolution for a long time, and the serious problems caused by the uneven development of light and heavy industries in some countries in Eastern Europe do not exist here. They pay one-sided attention to heavy industry and neglect agriculture and light industry, so there are not enough commodities in the market and the currency is unstable. We attach more importance to agriculture and light industry. We have been focusing on and developing agriculture, which has ensured the food and raw materials needed for industrial development to a considerable extent. We have an adequate supply of necessities for people's livelihood and stable prices and currencies.

Our problem now is to properly adjust the investment proportion of heavy industry, agriculture and light industry, and develop agriculture and light industry more. So, is heavy industry no longer the main body? It is still the mainstay and the focus of investment. However, the proportion of investment in agriculture and light industry should be increased.

What is the result of aggravation? As a result, on the one hand, it can better meet the needs of people's lives, on the other hand, it can increase the accumulation of funds more quickly, so it can develop heavy industry more and better. Heavy industry can also accumulate, but under our current economic conditions, light industry and agriculture can accumulate more and faster.

Here's a question. Do you really want to develop heavy industry or are you imagining it? Do you want it very much or almost? If you are imagining things, or thinking a little worse, focus on agriculture and light industry and invest less. If you really want it or think badly, then you should pay attention to agriculture and light industry, make more raw materials for grain and light industry, accumulate more, and invest more money in heavy industry in the future.

We now have two roads to develop heavy industry. One is to develop agriculture and light industry less, and the other is to develop agriculture and light industry more. In the long run, the former method will make the development of heavy industry less and less, slower and slower, at least the foundation is not so solid, and it is not cost-effective to calculate the general ledger decades later. The latter method will make heavy industry develop more and faster, and because it ensures the needs of people's lives, it will make its development foundation more stable.

Second, the relationship between coastal industries and inland industries.

Our country's industries used to be concentrated in coastal areas. The so-called coastal areas refer to Liaoning, Hebei, Beijing, Tianjin, eastern Henan, Shandong, Anhui, Jiangsu, Shanghai, Zhejiang, Fujian, Guangdong and Guangxi. About 70% of all light and heavy industries in China are located along the coast, and only 30% are located in the mainland. This is an unreasonable situation formed in history. We must make full use of coastal industrial bases, but in order to balance the layout of industrial development, we must vigorously develop inland industries. We have not made any big mistakes in the relationship between the two, but in recent years we have underestimated the coastal industries and paid little attention to their development. This needs to change.

In the past, Korea was still at war and the international situation was still tense, which could not but affect our view of coastal industries. Now it is estimated that a new war of aggression against China and a new world war will not break out in a short time, and there may be a peaceful period of ten years or even longer. In this way, it would be wrong if the equipment capacity and technical strength of coastal industries are not fully utilized. Let alone ten years, even five years, we should do a good job in coastal industries for four years, and wait until the fifth year before fighting again. Judging from the existing materials, the construction and accumulation of light industrial factories are generally very fast. After all the factories are put into production, within four years, in addition to recovering the investment of the factories, three factories, two factories, one factory and at least half of them can earn back. Why not do such a good thing? It is wrong to think that the atomic bomb is already on our heads and will fall in a few seconds, so it is wrong to take a negative attitude towards coastal industries.

This does not mean that all new factories are built along the coast. There is no doubt that most new industries should be located in the mainland, so as to gradually balance the industrial layout and help prepare for the war. However, some new factories and mines can also be established along the coast, and some can be large. As for the expansion and transformation of the original light and heavy industries along the coast, some have been done in the past and will develop greatly in the future.

Making good use of and developing the old industrial bases along the coast will give us more power to develop and support industries in the Mainland. If we adopt a negative attitude, it will hinder the rapid development of mainland industry. So this is also a question of whether it is true or not to develop mainland industries. If it is true, not imagined, we must make more use of and develop coastal industries, especially light industry.

Third, the relationship between economic construction and national defense construction.

National defense is indispensable. Now, we have a certain national defense force. After the War to Resist US Aggression and Aid Korea and several years of training and consolidation, our army has been strengthened, stronger than the Soviet Red Army before the Second World War, and its equipment has been improved. Our national defense industry is being established. From the beginning of Pangu, we didn't know how to build airplanes and cars. Now we can build them.

We don't have an atomic bomb yet. However, in the past, we didn't have planes and cannons. We defeated Japanese imperialism and Chiang Kai-shek with millet and rifles. We are stronger now than before and will be stronger in the future, not only with more planes and cannons, but also with atomic bombs. In today's world, we can't live without this thing unless we are bullied by others. What should we do? The reliable way is to reduce the military and political expenses to an appropriate proportion and increase the economic construction expenses. Only when economic construction develops faster can national defense construction make greater progress.

In 1950, at the Third Plenary Session of the Seventh Central Committee of the Communist Party of China, we put forward the problem of streamlining state institutions and reducing military and political expenses, which was considered as one of the three conditions for striving for a fundamental improvement in China's financial and economic situation. During the first five-year plan [3], military and political expenditures accounted for 30% of the total national budget expenditure. This ratio is too large. During the second five-year plan [4], it should be reduced to about 20%, so as to increase capital, open more factories and build more machines. After a period of time, we will not only have many planes and cannons, but also have our own atomic bombs.

Here's another question. Do you really want the atomic bomb, do you really want it, or do you just want a little, but not very much? If you really want it, you really want it, then reduce the proportion of military and political funds and do more economic construction. You don't really want it, you really want it, so you still follow the old rules. This is a strategic policy issue, which I hope the CMC will discuss.

Now let's fire all the soldiers, shall we? This is not good. Because the enemy is still there, we are still being bullied and surrounded by them! We must strengthen national defense, so we must first strengthen economic construction.

The relationship between the state, production units and individual producers

We should properly handle the relationship between the state and factories and cooperatives, as well as the relationship between factories, cooperatives and individual producers. Because of this, we can't just focus on one end, we must give consideration to the country, the collective and the individual, that is, we used to say "giving consideration to the military and the people" and "giving consideration to the public and private". In view of the experience of the Soviet Union and ourselves, we must solve this problem better in the future.

Take the workers as an example. With the improvement of their labor productivity, their working conditions and collective welfare also need to be gradually improved. We have always advocated hard work and opposed personal material interests above all else. At the same time, we have always advocated caring for people's lives and opposed bureaucracy that does not care about people's suffering. With the development of the whole national economy, wages also need to be adjusted appropriately. With regard to wages, it has recently been decided to increase some, mainly among the lower classes and workers, in order to narrow the gap between the upper and lower classes. Our wages are generally not high, but the lives of workers have been greatly improved because of the large number of employed people, low and stable prices and other conditions. Under the proletarian regime, workers' political consciousness and labor enthusiasm have always been high. At the end of last year, the Central Committee called for opposing right-wing conservatism, and the workers enthusiastically supported it. They fought for three months, making an exception and exceeding the plan for the first quarter of this year. We should vigorously carry forward their spirit of hard struggle and pay more attention to solving urgent problems in their work and life.

Here I also want to talk about the independence of the factory under the unified leadership. I'm afraid it's wrong not to give factories a little power, a little leeway and a little profit, and everything is concentrated in the central government or provinces and cities. We don't have much experience and need to study how big the rights and interests of the central government, provinces, cities and factories should be. In principle, unity and independence are unity of opposites. There should be unity and independence. For example, we have a unified meeting now. After the meeting, some people walked, some people read books, and some people ate, representing independence. If we don't give everyone independence after the meeting and let the meeting go on endlessly, won't everyone die? This is true for individuals, as well as for production units such as factories. Every production unit must have an independence related to unification, which will make it more vivid.

Let's talk about farmers. We have always had a good relationship with farmers, but we made a mistake on the issue of food. 1954, in some areas of our country, production was reduced due to floods, but we bought 7 billion Jin more grain. As a result, last spring, almost everyone in many places talked about grain, and every household talked about unified marketing. Farmers have opinions, and there are also many opinions inside and outside the party. Although many people deliberately exaggerate and seize the opportunity to attack, it cannot be said that we have no shortcomings. The investigation was not enough, I couldn't figure out the bottom, and I bought another 7 billion Jin. This is the disadvantage. We found shortcomings. 1955, we bought 7 billion Jin less, and made "three decisions", that is, fixed production, ordering and bumper harvest, so that farmers had more than 20 billion Jin of grain in their hands. In this way, farmers who had opinions in the past also said that "it's good to have a * * * production party". This lesson must be remembered by the whole party.

The Soviet way made farmers dig very hard. They take the so-called compulsory sales system [5] and other measures, take away too many things produced by farmers and pay very low prices. Their accumulation of funds in this way has greatly damaged farmers' enthusiasm for production. You want the hen to lay more eggs, but you don't give it rice to eat. You want the horse to run well, and the horse doesn't eat grass. There is no such truth in the world!

Our policy towards farmers is not a Soviet policy, but takes into account the interests of the country and farmers. Our agricultural tax has always been relatively light. In the exchange of industrial and agricultural products, we adopt the policy of narrowing the scissors difference, equivalent exchange or almost equivalent exchange. We buy agricultural products at normal prices, and farmers do not suffer, and the purchase price is gradually increasing. In the supply of industrial products to farmers, we adopt the policy of small profits but quick turnover, stabilize prices or reduce prices appropriately, and generally give some subsidies to farmers in grain-deficient areas. But that's all. If you are careless, you will still make mistakes of one kind or another. In view of the serious mistakes made by the Soviet Union on this issue, we must pay more attention to handling the relationship between the state and farmers.

The relationship between cooperatives and farmers should also be properly handled. In the income of cooperatives, there must be appropriate regulations on how much the state takes, how much the cooperatives take, how much the farmers take, and how to take it. What the cooperatives take is directly given to farmers. Needless to say, production costs and management fees are also necessary. The provident fund is to expand reproduction, and the public welfare fund is for the welfare of farmers. However, we should reach a reasonable proportion with the farmers on the proportion of each item. Production costs and management fees should be saved. The provident fund and public welfare fund should also be controlled, and we cannot expect to finish all the good things in one year.

Except in case of catastrophic natural disasters, on the basis of increasing agricultural production, we should strive for an increase in the annual income of 90% members over the previous year, and the income of 10% members will not increase or decrease. If there is a reduction, we must find a solution as soon as possible.

In short, countries and factories, countries and workers, factories and workers, countries and cooperatives, countries and farmers, cooperatives and farmers should all be considered, not just one. No matter which side you only care about, it is not conducive to socialism and proletarian dictatorship. This is a major issue that concerns 600 million people and must be repeatedly educated among the whole party and the people of the whole country.

The relationship between the central and local governments

The relationship between the central and local governments is also a pair of contradictions. To solve this contradiction, what we should pay attention to at present is to expand the power of local governments, give them more autonomy and let them do more things on the premise of consolidating the unified leadership of the central government. This is more beneficial for us to build a strong socialist country. Our country is so big, the population is so large and the situation is so complicated. It is much better for the central and local governments to have two initiatives than to have only one initiative. We can't concentrate everything on the central government like the Soviet Union. We have no right to maneuver at all.

The central government should develop industry, and so should local governments. Even the industries directly under the central government still rely on local assistance. As for agriculture and commerce, we need to rely more on local governments. In a word, to develop socialist construction, we must give full play to local enthusiasm. If the central government wants to consolidate, it must attach importance to local interests.

Now dozens of hands are stuck in the local area, and local affairs are difficult to handle. When a Ministry is established, it needs a revolution, and if it needs a revolution, it needs to give orders. Ministries and commissions are not good at giving orders to provincial party committees and committees, just like provincial and municipal bureaus, giving orders to them every day. Although the CPC Central Committee and the State Council are not aware of these orders, it is said that they all come from the central authorities, which has brought great pressure to local authorities. There are too many newspapers and periodicals, which is a disaster. This situation must be corrected.

We should advocate the style of consulting with local governments. The Party Central Committee always consults with local authorities, but never gives orders when consulting with other places. In this regard, I hope that the central ministries will pay close attention to it, and all matters related to the localities should be discussed with them first, and then orders should be made after consultation.

Central departments can be divided into two categories. One, their leaders can always be in charge of enterprises, and their local management institutions and enterprises are supervised by local governments; First, their task is to put forward policies and work plans, and things should be handled by local governments.

For a big Congress Party like ours, it is a very important issue to deal with the relationship between the central and local governments. Some capitalist countries also attach great importance to this issue. Their system is fundamentally different from ours, but their development experience is still worth studying. According to our own experience, the large-scale regional system [6] implemented in the early days of the founding of the People's Republic of China was necessary at that time, but it also had shortcomings. Later Gao Rao's anti-party alliance [7] took advantage of this shortcoming to some extent. In the future, it was correct to decide to cancel the large area and put the province directly under the central government. However, the necessary local independence was abolished, and the result was not so good. China's constitution stipulates that legislative power is concentrated in the central government. However, under the condition of not violating the central policy, local governments can formulate articles of association, regulations and measures according to the situation and work needs, and are not bound by the constitution. We should be unified and special. In order to build a powerful socialist country, there must be strong unified leadership of the central government, unified planning and unified discipline throughout the country, and this necessary unity must not be undermined. At the same time, we should give full play to local enthusiasm, and all localities should have special conditions suitable for local conditions. This particularity is not the particularity of Jeremy goldkorn, but for the overall interests and the needs of strengthening national unity.

There is also the relationship between local governments. What I'm talking about here is mainly the relationship between local superiors and subordinates. Provinces and cities have problems with the central government, but prefectures, counties, districts and townships have no problems with provinces and cities? The central government should give full play to the enthusiasm of provinces and cities, and provinces and cities should also give full play to the enthusiasm of prefectures, counties, districts and townships, and should not be too rigid. Of course, we should also tell the following comrades what must be unified and not fooling around. In short, what can and should be unified must be unified, and what cannot and should not be unified cannot be forcibly unified. Provinces, cities, prefectures, counties, districts and townships should all have legitimate independence and legitimate rights and should all strive for them. This power struggle based on the overall interests of the whole country is not a power struggle based on national interests. It can't be called localism or independence.

The relationship between provinces and cities is also a local-local relationship, which should be handled well. Our principle has always been to advocate the overall situation and mutual assistance and mutual accommodation.

We have no immature experience in Otawa in solving the relationship between the central government and local governments and between local governments. I hope you will seriously study and discuss, sum up your experience every once in a while, carry forward your achievements and overcome your shortcomings.

The relationship between Han nationality and ethnic minorities

With regard to the relationship between the Han nationality and ethnic minorities, our policy is relatively stable and has been recognized by ethnic minorities. We focus on opposing Han chauvinism. Local nationalism should also be opposed, but this is generally not the point.

China has a small number of ethnic minorities and a large area. In terms of population, the Han nationality accounts for 94%, which is an overwhelming advantage. If the Han people practise chauvinism and discriminate against ethnic minorities, it will be very bad. Who has more land? There are many ethnic minorities in China, accounting for 50% to 60%. We say that China has a vast territory and a large population, but it is actually a "large population" of the Han nationality and a "vast territory and abundant resources" of ethnic minorities. At least the underground resources are likely to be "rich in resources" of ethnic minorities.

All ethnic minorities have contributed to the history of China. The Han nationality has a large population, and it was also formed by multi-ethnic mixed blood in a long period of time. The reactionary rulers in history, mainly Han rulers, once created all kinds of estrangements between our ethnic groups and bullied ethnic minorities. The influence of this situation is not easy to eliminate quickly even among the working people. Therefore, we should carry out extensive and lasting education on proletarian ethnic policies for cadres and the masses, and always pay attention to the relationship between the Han nationality and ethnic minorities. I had a check-up two years ago, and now I should do it again. If the relationship is not normal, we must deal with it seriously, not just talk about it.

In minority areas, it is necessary to study how the economic management system and the financial system adapt to each other.

We should sincerely and actively help ethnic minorities to develop their economic and cultural construction. In the Soviet Union, the relationship between Russians and ethnic minorities is very abnormal, and we should accept this lesson. The air in the sky, the forest on the ground and the underground treasure are all important factors needed to build socialism, and all material factors can only be developed and utilized through human factors. We must do a good job in the relationship between the Han nationality and ethnic minorities, consolidate the unity of all ethnic groups and jointly build a great socialist motherland.

7. Relations between political parties and non-political parties

Which is better, one party or several parties? Now, I'm afraid several parties. Not only in the past, but also in the future, that is, long-term existence and mutual supervision.

In our country, many democratic parties formed in the anti-Japanese and anti-Chiang struggle, mainly the national bourgeoisie and its intellectuals, still exist. At this point, we are different from the Soviet Union. We consciously left the democratic parties behind, gave them the opportunity to express their views and adopted a policy of unity and struggle against them. We should unite with all Democrats who kindly give us advice. We should continue to mobilize the enthusiasm of patriotic Kuomintang military and political personnel such as Wei and Weng. Even those who scold us, such as Long Yun, Liang Shuming, Peng, etc. [9], we should raise them up and make them curse inappropriately. We refute them and accept them. This is more beneficial to the party, the people and socialism.

Now that there are classes and class struggles in China, there will be no various forms of opposition. Although all democratic parties and independents have expressed their acceptance of the leadership of China Producers' Party, many of them are actually opposition parties to varying degrees. On the issues of "carrying out the revolution to the end", resisting US aggression and aiding Korea, and land reform [10], they are both opposed and not opposed. They still have opinions on suppressing counter-revolutionaries [1 1]. They said * * * the same program [12] was excellent, and they didn't want a socialist constitution, but when the constitution was drafted, they all raised their hands in favor. Things often go their own way, and so do the attitudes of democratic parties on many issues. They are the opposition, not the opposition. They often go from objecting to not objecting.

* * * Producers' Party and Democratic Party both happened in history. Everything that happens in history will be eliminated by history. So the * * * production party will be eliminated one day, and so will the democratic parties. Is extinction that hard? I feel very comfortable. I think it's good that the production party and the dictatorship of the proletariat will be abolished one day. Our task is to make them disappear early. We have said it many times in the past.

However, proletarian political parties and dictatorship are now necessary and must be further strengthened. Otherwise, we can't suppress counter-revolutionaries, resist imperialism, build socialism and consolidate socialism. Lenin's theory on proletarian political party and dictatorship is by no means "outdated" as some people say. The dictatorship of the proletariat cannot be without strong coercive force. However, we must oppose bureaucracy and huge institutions. Under the condition of not wasting things, I suggest that the party and government organizations be greatly streamlined and cut off by two-thirds.

On the other hand, the need to streamline party and government institutions does not mean that democratic parties are not needed. I hope you can grasp the United front work, improve their relationship with us, and mobilize their enthusiasm to serve socialism as much as possible.

The relationship between revolution and counter-revolution

What are the counter-revolutionary factors? It is a negative factor, a destructive factor and an opposing force of positive factors. Can counter-revolutionaries be remoulded? Of course, some die-hard counter-revolutionaries will not change. However, under the conditions of our country, most of the future will change to varying degrees. Thanks to our correct policy, many counter-revolutionaries have now turned into non-counter-revolutionaries, and some have done some useful things.

There are several points that should be affirmed:

First, it should be affirmed that it is necessary to suppress counter-revolutionaries in 1951 and 1952. There is a view that counter-revolutionaries could not be suppressed at that time. This view is wrong.

The way to deal with counter-revolutionaries is to kill, shut down, control and release them. Kill, everyone knows what it is. Close, that is, lock up and reform through labor. Management is to put it into society and accept the supervision and transformation of the masses. Letting go means that you don't catch what you can and can't catch, or you can let him go if you behave well after you catch him. Counter-revolutionaries should be treated differently according to different situations.

Now just say kill. Suppressing counter-revolutionaries killed a group of people. Who are those people? It is a counter-revolutionary with heavy debts that the people hate very much. In the great revolution of 600 million people, the people could not get up without killing those "tyrants in the east" and "tyrants in the west". If it were not for repression, we would adopt a lenient policy today, and it is impossible for the people to agree. Now some people have heard that Stalin killed some wrong people, and they say that the counter-revolutionaries we killed were also wrong, which is wrong. It is of practical significance to affirm that the past was fundamentally correct.

Second, there should definitely be counter-revolutionaries, but they have been greatly reduced. After the problem of Hu Feng [13] comes out, we should investigate counter-revolutionaries. Some have not been found out yet, and we will continue to look into them. We must affirm that there are still a few counter-revolutionaries engaged in various counter-revolutionary sabotage activities, such as killing cattle, burning grain, destroying factories, stealing information, posting reactionary slogans and so on. Therefore, it is wrong to say that the counter-revolution has been eliminated and we can rest easy. As long as there is class struggle between China and the world, we can never let our guard down. However, it is also wrong to say that there are still many counter-revolutionaries.

Third, in order to suppress social rebellion in the future, we should catch less and kill less. Because the counter-revolution in society is the direct injustice of the people and the people hate it, a few people still want to kill it. Most of them should be handed over to agricultural cooperatives to control production and reform through labor. However, we cannot declare "no killing" or abolish the death penalty.

Fourth, the investigation of counter-revolutionaries in government organs, schools and armed forces should adhere to the principle of starting from Yan 'an, that is, not killing one and not arresting most of them. Counter-revolutionaries who have real evidence are investigated by the authorities, but the public security bureau does not arrest them, the procuratorial organs do not prosecute them, and the courts do not try them. Of the 100 counter-revolutionaries, more than 90 were dealt with in this way. This is the so-called least grasping. As for killing, it means not killing.

What kind of people don't kill people? People like Hu Feng, Pan Hannian and Rao Shushi [14] were not killed, and even captured war criminals like Xuan Tong and Kang Ze [15] were not killed. If you don't kill them, it's not that you have no sin to kill, but that you kill them. Such people kill one, the second and the third will compete, and many people will fall to the ground. This is the first rule. Second, you can kill the wrong person. History has proved that people's heads can't be picked up when they fall to the ground, and they don't grow like leeks when they are cut once. If you cut it wrong, there is no way to correct it. Third, destroy the evidence. There must be evidence to suppress counter-revolutionaries. This kind of counter-revolution is often living evidence of that kind of counter-revolution. You can consult him if you have a lawsuit. If you destroy him, you may never find any evidence again. This is only beneficial to counter-revolution and not to revolution. Fourth, killing them will not increase production and improve scientific level, but will help to eliminate the four pests, strengthen national defense and recover Taiwan Province Province. Kill them, and you gain a reputation for killing prisoners. Killing prisoners has always had a bad reputation. Another point is that the counter-revolution of government agencies is different from that of society. The counter-revolution in society climbs to the people's head, and the counter-revolution in the system is far away from the people. They have common grievances, but there are not many direct ones. What's the harm in not killing these people? Those who can reform through labor should be reformed through labor, and those who cannot be reformed through labor should be raised. Counter-revolutionaries are waste and pests, but after they are caught, they can be made to do something for others.

However, do you want to make a law saying that counter-revolutionaries in the organs will not be killed? This is our internal policy. We don't need to announce. In fact, we should try our best to do it. If someone dropped a bomb and killed all the people in this room, or half, or a third, would you like to kill them? Then you must kill it.

The principle of "not killing" by the authorities to eliminate counter-revolutionaries does not prevent us from taking a serious attitude towards counter-revolutionaries. However, we can guarantee that we will not make irreparable mistakes, and there is still a chance to correct them if we make mistakes, which can stabilize many people and avoid mutual distrust among comrades in the party. If you don't kill your head, you have to be fed. All counter-revolutionaries should be given a chance to live and a chance to make a new start. Doing so will benefit the people's cause and international influence.

There is still hard work to be done to suppress counter-revolutionaries, and no one can relax. In the future, in addition to suppressing counter-revolutionaries in society, we will continue to check all counter-revolutionaries mixed in government organs, schools and troops. We must distinguish between ourselves and the enemy. Everyone knows how serious the danger will be to the socialist cause and the dictatorship of the proletariat if the enemy is allowed to infiltrate our ranks and even our leading bodies.

Nine kinds of right and wrong relations

Both inside and outside the party should distinguish between right and wrong. How to treat people who have made mistakes is an important issue. The correct attitude should be to adopt the policy of "learning from mistakes and saving lives" to help them correct their mistakes and allow them to continue the revolution. In the past, when dogmatists headed by Wang Ming were in power, our party made mistakes on this issue and learned the bad side of Stalin's style. They don't want the middle forces in society, they don't allow others to correct their mistakes, and they don't allow inner-party revolution.

The True Story of Ah Q is a good novel. Please read it again for those who have seen it, and have a good look for those who have not. In this novel, Lu Xun mainly wrote about a backward and unconscious farmer. He wrote a chapter on "No Revolution", and it is impossible to say that the fake foreign devil revolutionized Ah Q. In fact, Ah Q's so-called revolution at that time was just to get something like others. However, such revolutionary fake foreign devils are still not allowed. I think some people are a bit like fake foreign devils at this point. They do not allow people who make mistakes to engage in revolution, nor do they distinguish between making mistakes and counter-revolution. They even killed some people who made mistakes. We should remember this lesson. It is not good to prohibit others from making revolution in society and comrades who have made mistakes from correcting their mistakes within the party.

Some people say that comrades who have made mistakes should be corrected by themselves. I said it's not enough just to look at it, but also to help them change it. In other words, one wants to see and the other wants to help. People need help, people who have not made mistakes need help, and people who have made mistakes need help more. People probably don't make mistakes, they have to make mistakes more or less, and they have to help if they make mistakes. Just looking at it is negative, and we must set various conditions to help him change. Right and wrong must be clarified, because there is a dispute of principle within the party.