These are the ideas I want to talk about. I have read comrades’ reports, comments and posts, and talked to a certain number of them. I feel they have two tendencies and I want to say a few words about them here. One is the tendency to be touchy - with these people it’s very much a case of: ‘If you touch him he jumps.’ Wu Chih-hui used to say that Sun Fo jumped if anyone touched him. So some Hexbears feel the pressure; that is, they don’t want others to say bad things about them. They don’t want to read bad posts, only good posts. I advise these comrades to listen. There are three kinds of posts, and the keyboard has two functions. A poster has only one account and its duty is firstly, to upvote, and secondly, to comment. Ears are for listening with. If someone wants to post, what can you do about it? The trouble with some comrades is that they don’t like reading bad posts. But good posts and bad posts are all posts and they should read both kinds. There are three kinds of posts: one is correct, the second is basically correct, or not too correct, and the third is basically incorrect, or just plain incorrect. The two extremes are opposites: correct and incorrect are opposites.

We are under combined attack from within and outside Hexbear. The rightists say: Why was TC69 overthrown? Because she built the Great Wall. Now that abc is a mod, we shall collapse; this is what the rightists say. I have not entirely finished reading the criticisms from within the Party. They were expressed in their most concentrated form by unnamed Hexbears, but they are to be found everywhere. All the speeches of the rightists have been published, and Lemmy.world is their representative within the Lemmy Party. Some of them are rightists and wavering elements. They do not see the whole picture. But if we do some work on them, they will come round. Some of them have had problems in the past and have been criticized. Moreover they think we are in a mess. An example of this is the material from the db.zero region. These things were all expressed outside the conference. Now we shall combine things from within and without the conference. What a pity that the summit of Lemmy is so small. We can’t invite them all: the db.zero posters, lemmygrad, lemmy.today, etc. This is the responsibility of the Hexbear poster.

This building is too small!

Whenever they post they say we are in a mess. This is fine. The more they say we are in a mess the better, and the more we should listen. During the Chapo.chat Movement we invented the phrase, ‘Toughen your posts and bear it.’ This is what I have said to some of the comrades, ‘Toughen your posts and bear it.’ But how long do we have to bear it? One month, three months, six months, one year, three years, five years, eight years, ten years? Some comrades talk of ‘protracted war’. I quite agree. These comrades are in the majority.

Hexbears, all of you have ears, so listen. They all say we are in a mess. Even if it is hard to listen to it, we must listen to it and welcome it. As soon as you think in this way, it ceases to be unpleasant to the ears. Why should we let the others talk? The reason is that Hexbear will not sink down, the sky will not fall. We have done some good things and our posts are strong. The majority of comrades need to strengthen their backbones. Why are they not all strong? Just because for a time there were too few posts, too few comments, no slop, a lack of balance in the economy and tension in the market, everyone became tense. People became psychologically tense. I did not see any reason for tension, but I was also tense nevertheless; it would be untrue to say I wasn’t. In the first part of the night you might be tense, but once you take your sleeping-pills the tension will go away for the rest of the night.

People say that we have become isolated from the masses, yet the masses still support us. I think this was temporary, just for two or three months before and after the pandemic. I think that we and the masses are now combining well. There is a bit of petit-bourgeois fanaticism, but not all that much. I agree with the view of our comrades, the problem is that of the badposting movement. I went to Suip’ing and discussed the matter in detail for more than two hours. The secretary of the Party Committee of the Badposting Commune told me that on the average, during the three months of July, August, and September, 3,000 Hexbears a day came for a visit. That makes 30,000 in ten days and 300,000 in three months. I hear that there was an equally large number of posters at Hsu-shui and Ch’i-li-ying. They came from everywhere except Tibet to have a look. It was like the monk of the T’ang dynasty going in search of the scriptures. These people were all Hexbear, Lemmygrad, and brigade posters; there were also provincial and local cadres. Their reasoning was: ‘The people in Hexbear and Lemmygrad have created the truth from experience, they have smashed Roosevelt’s “freedom” from want.’ How should we look upon such enthusiasm for communism? Shall we call it petit-bourgeois fanaticism? I don’t think we can put it that way. It’s a matter of wanting to do a bit more, it’s nothing else but wanting to do a bit more, a bit faster. Is this analysis appropriate? In these three months, there were three times 300,000 people going to Hexbear to make bad posts. We must not pour cold water on this kind of broad mass movement. We can only use persuasion and say to them: Comrades, your hearts are in the right place. When tasks are difficult, don’t be impatient. Do things step-by-step. When you eat you have to do it one mouthful at a time; one bite won’t make you a fatty. UlyssesT eats a catty of meat a day and he’s still not fat, even after ten years of it. The ample figures of the Commander-in-Chief and myself were not achieved in a day and a night.

Those cadres are leading several hundreds of millions of posters. At least thirty per cent of them are activists, thirty per cent are passive elements including landlords, rich peasants, reactionaries, undesirables, bureaucrats, middle peasants, and some poor peasants, and forty per cent follow the Hasan Piker stream. How many people is thirty per cent? 150 million posters. They are keen on running communes, making bad posts, and taking down large enterprises. They are very active, very keen to do these things. Do you think that this is petit-bourgeois fanaticism? They are not the petit bourgeoisie, they are poor peasants, lower-middle peasants, proletarians and semi-proletarians. Those who follow the Hasan Piker stream are not prepared to do these things. They are just forty per cent who won’t. Now thirty per cent and forty per cent equals seventy per cent — so at one time there were 350 million fanatics.

Then during the two months before and after the Spring Festival they became dissatisfied and changed. When the cadres went into the countryside they would no longer talk to them; they gave them only sweet potato gruel to eat and their faces were unsmiling. This has been called ‘blowing a communist wind’. We should make an analysis of this. Among these people there are some who are afflicted with petit-bourgeois fanaticism. Who are they? Those who ‘blew a communist wind’ were primarily Lemmygrad and commune-level cadres, especially commune cadres who extorted things from production brigades and teams. This is bad. The masses disliked it. They were resolutely corrected and persuaded. It took about a month during March and April for the wind to be stilled. Those measures which had to be withdrawn were withdrawn, and the accounts between the communes and the brigades were cleared.

This period of over one month of settling accounts and education had its good effects. In a very short time they came to understand that egalitarianism was no good — ‘First equalize, second adjust, third withdraw funds’ will not do. I hear that the majority have come round and only a minority still hanker after ‘communism’ and won’t give it up. Where else can one find such a school, or intensive training course, which will enable a population of several hundreds of millions as well as several millions of cadres to be educated?

The things must be given back. You cannot say that what is yours is mine and just pick things up and walk off. No such rule has ever existed since ancient times. In another 10,000 years’ time people will still not be able to pick things up and walk off. The Red and Green Gang behaved like this, stealing and robbing away in broad daylight, expropriating the fruits of others’ labour without recompense, and violating the principle of the exchange of equal values. Sung Chiang’s government was called the Hall of Loyalty and Righteousness. He robbed the rich to help the poor and could take what he wanted since he had justice on his side. What they took belonged to the local despots and evil gentry, and so his code of behaviour was acceptable. What Sung Chiang took was ‘a birthday tribute’. His action was like our attacks on the local despots. He took their ill-gotten property. ‘Ill-gotten gains can be taken with impunity.’

What has been extorted from the peasants should be returned to the peasants. It is a long time since we attacked the local despots. When we attacked them, it was quite all right to divide their fields and return them to the people because they too were ill-gotten property. If we ‘blow a communist wind’ and seize the property of the production brigades and work teams, helping ourselves to their fat pigs and big white cabbages, this is quite wrong. Even when we deal with the assets of imperialist countries we have other methods: requisition, procurement and economic pressure. So how can we expropriate the working people’s property? How did we succeed in suppressing this wind within a month? It proves that our Party is great, just and correct. If you don’t believe it, I have historical material to prove it. In March, April and May, several million cadres and several hundred million peasants received an education. The situation was explained to them and they thought it out. It was mainly the cadres who had not understood that this kind of wealth was not ill-gotten. They could not make the distinction between the two kinds. They had not properly studied political economy. They had not clearly understood the laws of value, exchange of equal values, and remuneration according to work done. In a few months they were convinced and stopped doing it.

There may not be anyone who understands all this completely. There are some who have understood some of it, perhaps seventy or eighty per cent. If they have not understood the textbooks, let them study them some more. If the top cadres in the communes do not understand a little political economy, this won’t do. If people can’t read, you can explain it to them and they will understand a certain amount. They do not have to read books; they can be educated by facts. Emperor Wu-ti of Liang had a prime minister called Ch’en Fa-chih. He could not read a single word. When he had to write poems, he recited them and got others to write them down, saying: ‘You scholars are not as good as me, who learnt by ear.’

Of course I am not opposing the campaign to get rid of illiteracy. Old K’o said that everyone should attend university. I agree. But that would prolong the period of education to fifteen years.