September 21, 2025 updated

Perspective on the Gorbachev-Deng Dialogue

Author: Huang Guorui

In 1989, when Soviet General Secretary Gorbachev visited China, Pravda journalist Oufuqin (original name Vsevolod Ovchinnkov) accompanied the delegation as both a member and an expert participating in drafting relevant documents. This person later publicly revealed to the world a conversation he heard between Gorbachev and Deng Xiaoping—truly unprecedented, unseen before, and astounding.

According to Oufuqin's recollection, on May 16th, before he was asked to leave the Gorbachev-Deng talks, he only heard Gorbachev say to Deng Xiaoping: "We should use bulldozers to flatten this obsolete communist political system, and only then can all reforms proceed; otherwise everything will fall into sand piles."

To this, Deng Xiaoping replied: "Now we and you are traveling on a country dirt road, which is the planned economy. It's bumpy and potholed, but has been flattened by vehicle traffic. To the right there's a highway, which is the market economy. We need to turn from our current road to that road. To be able to make this turn, we must firmly grasp the steering wheel, yet you suggest removing steering control! So how would you turn the car from this road to the other road?" (See Press Digest Issue 2735, Weekend Edition October 23, 2009, "Oufuqin: Visiting Three Generations of Chinese Leaders." Excerpted from Oriental Outlook Weekly Issue 43, author Zhao Jialin)

Reading this dialogue, one cannot help but be shocked. The two sides of this conversation were the supreme leaders of both the Chinese and Soviet parties and states—one a 58-year-old Chairman of the USSR Supreme Soviet Presidium and General Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee, the other an 85-year-old Chairman of the CPC Central Military Commission and China's de facto leader. How could they ostensibly discuss reform while actually discussing anti-communism? It seems the dialogue wasn't between Gorbachev and Deng Xiaoping, but between Bush and Blair.

Gorbachev, facing Deng directly, spoke bluntly: "We should use bulldozers to flatten this obsolete communist political system." Let everyone think about this—this so-called obsolete communist political system is nothing other than the political system of communism (first stage), whose core is the dictatorship of the proletariat! Where did Gorbachev get the audacity to openly invite Deng Xiaoping to join him in operating bulldozers to flatten the communist political system, especially the dictatorship of the proletariat? Such an invitation was tantamount to persuading Deng Xiaoping to become a traitor alongside him.

Facing such an invitation, such a suggestion, such provocation, unexpectedly, Deng Xiaoping showed neither anger nor fury, neither criticism nor rebuttal, but instead discussed with his counterpart how to do things better. In Deng Xiaoping's view, the problem wasn't the "bulldozer" but firmly grasping the "steering wheel." With the steering wheel in hand, whether bulldozers or cars, they could go wherever directed. Deng was more seasoned than Gorbachev—he advocated not rushing to flatten everything, but first using it to achieve transition, moving from the communist economic system (planned economy) to the capitalist economic system (market economy) track, waiting for the right moment to comprehensively launch political system reform.

In Deng's mind, the planned economy was fundamentally unworkable—he dismissed it as a "bumpy country dirt road," while beautifying the market economy as a solid, smooth "highway." He suggested that Gorbachev join him in first using the communist political system as a "steering wheel" to turn the socialist economy's vehicle from the left "country dirt road" (planned economy) to the right "highway" (market economy).

This shows that Gorbachev and Deng had no disagreement about changing communism's political system (dictatorship of the proletariat) and economic system (planned economy)—the difference was only in emphasis. The former mainly discussed democratization, the latter mainly discussed marketization; the former vigorously promoted democratic socialism, the latter vigorously sold market socialism; the former advocated politics-first-economics-later hard landing, the latter advocated economics-first-politics-later soft landing.

Claims like "reform means more socialism" and "more democracy" (see Gorbachev's New Thinking); or "reform must uphold the Four Cardinal Principles" and "must persist in public ownership as the main body and common prosperity"—all of this was merely to deceive people, said for outsiders to hear.

Practice has already proven: the result of politics-first-economics-later hard landing was the Soviet Union's collapse; the result of economics-first-politics-later soft landing was China's transformation [note: the author uses "变质" meaning deterioration/degeneration]. These are harsh objective facts, and facts ultimately triumph over eloquence!

Deng Xiaoping's Speech 

at the Central Party's Theoretical Work Conference in the 1980s

All who have come are veteran comrades. Everyone suffered during the ten years of the Cultural Revolution. Comrades who have already been rehabilitated must work hard, and those who haven't been rehabilitated yet should wait a little longer—Comrade Yaobang [note: referring to Hu Yaobang] is working on this matter. Please be patient a bit longer, comrades. In a few more years, the situation will be much better. Those days when we couldn't work normally and had to watch the masses' faces for everything are over. The rebels must be suppressed—catch them one by one. We can't leave them to cause trouble. Today I want to discuss two issues: the Cultural Revolution and reform.

The Cultural Revolution that Chairman Mao launched was wrong both in theory and practice. We are all people who lived through it and experienced it firsthand.

Comrade Shaoqi [note: Liu Shaoqi] and I were overthrown in 1966. Although we still had cars, secretaries, and kitchens, we had no work. The masses held criticism meetings, and we had to make self-criticisms. I was already 50 years old and had been in revolution my whole life. When I started my revolution, Wang Hongwen hadn't even been born yet. More importantly, we could no longer protect our children. Everyone knows that my son broke his leg at Peking University. Although Mao Zedong's son died on the Korean battlefield, my son was also gloriously wounded during the Cultural Revolution. Comrade Jianying [note: Ye Jianying] told me that if we didn't arrest the Gang of Four, we wouldn't be able to live out our later years peacefully. Exactly. We must completely negate the Cultural Revolution—no one would disagree with this.

Chairman Mao launched the Cultural Revolution from the perspective of opposing and preventing revisionism. His intentions were good, but it was unnecessary. When did Comrade Shaoqi and I ever say we wanted to pursue capitalism? Whether it was "making is inferior to buying, buying is inferior to renting" or bonus incentives, these were for building socialism. What we were doing would never lead China onto the capitalist path. It would only make China flourish on the socialist path. It's no use for me to say this—practice will test it. Shaoqi once told me: "If my line really leads China onto the capitalist path, if the masses struggle against and defeat me, I'll accept it."

We fought so many battles, and countless martyrs' blood was shed for today. How many comrades sacrificed themselves shouting "Long live Communism!" One of my soldiers said to me before dying: "Political Commissar Deng, we must achieve communism!" I said: "Don't worry, I will definitely make China prosperous." In 1974, when critiquing "Water Margin," Jiang Qing said at a Politburo meeting: "You, Deng Xiaoping, are Song Jiang. Chairman Mao leads us in revolution against imperialism, but you will surrender to imperialism after the Chairman passes away." Nonsense! I won't!

If one day we abandon our Third World friends and collude with imperialism, our reform will have gone astray. If one day imperialism drops bombs on our heads, our reform will have gone astray. If one day imperialism runs amok on our territory, our reform will have gone astray. If one day America betrays the Shanghai Communiqué and supports Taiwan again, our policy will have problems. But none of this will happen—practice will test it.

Reform is the way forward, divided into two steps. First, return to the line of the Eighth Party Congress of 1956—that is, the line that Comrade Shaoqi and I represented. Second, open up to the world and welcome foreign investment. Some people fear this and that—isn't this like worrying the sky will fall? With Comrade Shaoqi's writings there and me here, there won't be problems.

One comrade [note: referring to Deng Liqun] had a dream: he said he dreamed that China was full of corrupt officials. Nonsense! Our cadres are all Communists, personally promoted by us. Even if they have some bureaucratic tendencies, they wouldn't become corrupt officials. Besides, we still have public security, procuratorate, and courts. If it were really like that, our reform would have problems.

He also said he dreamed that China would have a bourgeoisie. Impossible! We eliminated the bourgeoisie in 1949 and engaged in socialist construction—how could there be a bourgeoisie? Class struggle isn't finished yet? Cultural Revolution thinking!

We should let some people get rich first, and they will help the backward people, ultimately achieving common prosperity. Our children have all received communist education since childhood—they will help others. I'm confident! That comrade also dreamed that China had organized crime. Ridiculous! Only Hong Kong and Taiwan would have that.

We eliminated organized crime 31 years ago. China doesn't have it now and won't have it when we become prosperous in the future. Otherwise, our reform would really have problems. That comrade also dreamed that rich people could kill and get away with it, while poor people had grievances with nowhere to appeal, and Communist Party members became estranged from the masses. Impossible! Our Party only became estranged from the masses during the Cultural Revolution. Now that we're reforming, the Party's work will get better and better, and Communist Party members will grow closer and closer to the masses.

Practice will test this. That comrade also dreamed that workers became unemployed and laid off, capitalists returned to exploit people, peasants had no land to farm, and the people suffered twice. Isn't this absurd? We have too much work now—we're worried there aren't enough workers. There isn't enough grain—how could peasants have no land to farm? If it were really like that, our reform would have gone astray.

Most ridiculous of all, that comrade also dreamed that China was full of prostitutes and sexually transmitted diseases, with poor people sending their daughters into hell. I think he went too far. I wouldn't be inferior to even Chiang Kai-shek, would I? The Communist Party eliminated STDs long ago. Although the Chairman and Premier are no longer with us, I'm still here, Chen Yun is here, and so many veteran comrades are here. Could it be that the socialism won by countless martyrs would be destroyed in our hands? Practice will test truth. It's useless to say anything—if reform reforms away socialism, I would be a criminal of history!

Chen Yun and Peng Zhen also said: The problems are very likely to explode with the fourth generation.

From January 18th to February 21st, 1992, Deng Xiaoping made his Southern Tour, visiting Wuchang, Shenzhen, Zhuhai, Shanghai, and other places, and delivered important speeches. It is one of the most critical milestones for China's social development since Deng Xiaoping, the General Designer of China's capitalist restoration, took power. From here, readers may have ideas about Socialism with Chinese Characteristics. It was precisely from this moment that the capitalist restoration started running on the fast track, continued by all successive Chinese leaders.  As the theoretical foundation of socialism with Chinese characteristics, it was emphasized again by Xi Jinping during last year's commemoration of Deng Xiaoping's 120th birthday: "Establishing Deng Xiaoping Theory as the guiding ideology of the Party and the state is an unshakable conclusion drawn by the Party and the people from both history and reality." 

In Deng Xiaoping's South Tour speeches, at least he declared several main points. 

1. he, as the general designer of China's capitalist restoration, named “reform and open up”, frankly repeated several times: "Who can clearly explain socialism and Marxism? Who can clearly explain capitalism? Anyway, I don't understand"; 

2. “If it's clearly inexplicable, why insist on arguing about it every day?” ” Development is the only hard truth. What's the point of arguing all day about what capitalism is and what socialism is?“ ”We really need to add a point: no debate! No debate should be a principle."; 

3. Smearing the socialism of the Mao Zedong era has failed, and all that's left is to pursue capitalism "Our key setback was that since the 1950s, we focused on class struggle rather than the economy, pursuing 'large-scale and public ownership' socialism。 I'm not saying socialism was wrong, but I can't say we got everything right either. People's daily lives required all kinds of ration coupons—grain coupons, cloth coupons, tobacco coupons, liquor coupons were everywhere, and everything required queuing. If this continues, the Soviet Union's today will be our tomorrows. " For development, we not only tolerate and encourage capitalism in Hong Kong, but we should also tolerate and encourage differences and market mechanisms in the mainland.".

4. Defaming Mao Zedong,  "Chairman Mao succeeded in the early period by seeking truth from facts..... Later, he also believed he was the truth, the embodiment and development of Marxism. In fact, he was just like me, an ordinary mortal...Throughout history, scholars who rebel and attempt reform mostly fail. Wang Mang of the Han Dynasty, Wang Anshi of the Song Dynasty, and even Mao Zedong of modern times were primarily known as scholars. Their initial achievements were brilliant, but once they adopted the posture of great literary men, they became arrogant, and the final results were tragic. ... Chairman Mao still sought truth from facts before the Eighth Party Congress."

5. Threatening fiercely officials at all levels, especially the supreme leaders in Beijing: "Mr. Secretary, remember, development is the hard truth! You should learn more from Guangdong rather than from Beijing. Whoever doesn't pursue reform and opening up must step down. You can report these words of mine to Beijing."

Below is the English translation of the Excerpts from Deng Xiaoping's Southern Tour Speeches:

Deng Xiaoping said to Guan Guangfu, Secretary of the Hubei Provincial Party Committee: "Take out your pen and write down my words. I have several points that I'd like you to convey to Beijing:

"First, practice since the Third Plenary Session of the 11th Central Committee has proven that only reform and opening up can save China. Within the Party's basic line of focusing on economic construction, reform and opening up are the theme and main thread. The two previous General Secretaries still made contributions to reform and opening up. The economic development from 1983 to 1988 was very rapid and laid a very good foundation. Without those five years of major economic development, your current rectification and consolidation wouldn't be possible. The economic achievements of Hu Yaobang and Zhao Ziyang should be affirmed. They only had some problems with opposing liberalization, but their work and achievements cannot be completely negated.

"Second, development is the hard truth. What's the point of arguing all day about capitalism versus socialism? Can you figure it out clearly? I certainly can't. The Eighth Central Committee meeting was good; it stabilized the basic rural policies. Going to the countryside to conduct so-called socialist education movements and debates about whether things are capitalist or socialist—empty talk harms the country, while practical work makes it prosper. Let's not continue with these so-called debates! No more debates! This should be established as a system! The basic line of focusing on economic construction cannot waver. It should be maintained for a hundred years—yes, remain unchanged for a hundred years.

"Third, economic development requires a certain speed. For a country with such a weak foundation as ours, 6% is no achievement. I believe we can strive for over 10% for five consecutive years. Currently, some neighboring countries and regions are developing faster than us. If we don't develop or develop too slowly, people will start making comparisons and problems will arise. Ultimately, we should develop as fast as we can, without hindering progress. The current economic work lacks innovation, lacks ambition and creativity, and most people don't understand economics. Lacking ambition means lacking a sense of historical responsibility!

"Fourth, the discourse on reform and opening up has weakened in the past two years, and the banner is no longer prominent! This is wrong. We are influenced by rightist things, but also by leftist things. However, the deeply rooted problem is still leftist thinking. Some theorists and politicians use big labels to intimidate people. It's not the right, but the left. The left carries a revolutionary color, as if the more leftist one is, the more revolutionary. Leftist tendencies in our Party's history have been terrifying! A good thing can be ruined in an instant. Reform and opening up are described as introducing capitalism, believing that the main danger of peaceful evolution comes from the economic domain. These are leftist ideas, and we must maintain a clear head. Given China's current situation, neither non-development nor slow development is acceptable. And how do we develop? There's only one way, which is reform and opening up. The country needs reform and opening up, the people need reform and opening up. Whoever doesn't reform steps down! Yes, without reform and opening up, step down! Step down!"

"That's it for now... You may go. Report to Beijing when you return."

"Convey exactly what I said, word for word, to Beijing! You may go!"

"Remember, report to Beijing as soon as you return!"

"Remember, Mr. Secretary, the same applies to you—without reform and opening up, you step down!"

*** On a sunny afternoon, in the Tengwang Pavilion rest room, Nanchang ***

Deng Xiaoping said to Mao Zhiyong, Secretary of the Jiangxi Provincial Party Committee: "I'm a retired old man, and my hearing isn't good either. You can spare me your report."

"However, I can offer some advice as an ordinary citizen to you, Mr. Secretary: It's been exactly twenty years since I left Jiangxi. Coming back for this visit, it seems things haven't changed much here. Your southern neighbor is Guangdong, and you can see Guangdong is bustling with energy and developing rapidly. They focus on reform and opening up all day, while your place seems rather quiet and cold. You can tell your provincial committee team, and you can also tell Beijing—these are my words—that reform and opening up are the big picture and the main direction. Development is the hard truth. Not developing or developing slowly with empty talk can only harm the country. Especially in your Jiangxi, with its thin foundation and limited resources, how can you not strive for reform and opening up? When you have real achievements in reform and opening up, I'll be happy to hear your report. But for now, if it's still the same old routine, let's skip it."

"By the way, Mr. Secretary, remember, development is the hard truth! You should learn more from Guangdong rather than from Beijing. Whoever doesn't pursue reform and opening up must step down. You can report these words of mine to Beijing."

*** On a brightly lit evening, at Guiyuan in the Shenzhen Guest House ***

After dinner, the old man's enthusiasm remained high. He called Ruilin, Maomao, Feifei, and Pufang and Deng Nan (who had just arrived in Shenzhen) to his side. He had something to say.

"Everyone has seen Shenzhen today. This is the direction of China's reform and opening up, and it's the hope for China's future survival and development. I want to chat with you about another issue."

"Can you guess what directly prompted me to come out this time? Or what factors have been troubling me the most these past few months?"

"Isn't it concern about the country's fate?" Feifei hesitantly replied.

"That's partly right, but not direct enough. Pufang, what do you think?"

"I think—" Pufang hesitated for a moment, then said straightforwardly, "Is it the collapse of the Soviet Union?"

"Correct, it's the Soviet issue!"

"Two days before leaving Beijing, Ruilin told me about a scene that kept me awake at night. It was when Yeltsin announced the suspension of Communist Party activities in Russia as the Soviet Union collapsed. When he made the announcement, thousands of ordinary people spontaneously gathered in front of the Communist Party Central Committee building. When the people who worked at the Central Committee left the building, the crowd automatically made way for them to pass. But what accompanied these staff members? The spit and garbage from ordinary citizens! A colossus that had ruled for seventy years, claiming tens of millions of party members, collapsed overnight! You must know that the Soviet Union's housing, wages, resources, productivity, and social development were all much better than our country's! In the mid-1960s, when we were quarreling with the Soviet Union, newly installed Brezhnev declared that the Soviet Union had already built developed socialism, and according to his description, the Soviet Union was just one step away from communism. And communism was the lifelong pursuit of our generation!"

"Chairman Mao succeeded in the early period by seeking truth from facts. When conquering the country, Chen Duxiu, Qu Qiubai, Zhang Guotao, and Wang Ming each thought they were more educated than Mao, but Mao prevailed because he sought truth from facts. Alas, later on, he too believed he was the truth, the embodiment and development of Marxism. In fact, he was just like me, an ordinary mortal. Who can clearly explain socialism or Marxism? And who can clearly explain capitalism? Anyway, I don't understand, I can't explain it clearly. When we clearly can't explain it, why insist on debating it every day? I believe development is the hard truth. We really need to add one principle: no more debates! Not debating should be established as a principle."

*** On a beautiful sunny afternoon, in the reception hall of the Shenzhen Guest House ***

Deng Xiaoping: "When people get old, they ramble. But I won't be rambling for many more days. Today, let me ramble a bit more for all of you."

"In the past, our revolution often looked to the Soviet Union as a model. But these days, what I've been thinking about most is still the Soviet Union. Those abundant natural resources, that profound cultural tradition, that powerful state apparatus, and that enormous Communist Party, all seemed to collapse and disappear overnight. The Soviet Union, a term we used to worship, suddenly became a historical relic, a historical term. This deserves our deep reflection!"

"With the Soviet Union gone, people worldwide naturally think about China. Where is China headed? What should we do?"

"Actually, the Soviet Union collapsed due to many factors. Not to mention others, constantly developing nuclear weapons, pursuing theoretical dictatorship, disregarding people's lives while citizens queued daily for basic goods—I see this as a major factor. Claiming to be developed socialism after struggling for over seventy years without even being able to feed the people—is that acceptable? Certainly not. What should China do? China must focus on economic construction and improve people's lives. I believe the basic line of focusing on economic construction must never waver, not even in a hundred years." (Enthusiastic applause from everyone)

"Yesterday, we were chatting at home about the Soviet collapse. The children told me there are two major historical phenomena in the 20th century. Politically, it's the rise and fall of the Soviet Union; economically, it's the rise of the Four Asian Tigers over the past thirty years. In recent years, besides the Four Tigers, Thailand, Indonesia, and Malaysia have also caught up. Are the people of the Four Tigers and Southeast Asian countries smarter or more hardworking than Chinese people? I don't think so. I once told Lee Kuan Yew that the Chinese could potentially be another Jewish people economically. Chinese people are politically fragmented without a core, but they have market-oriented pragmatism and acumen, with vast markets and networks. Lee Kuan Yew agreed with my view. Our key setback was that since the 1950s, we focused on class struggle rather than the economy, pursuing 'large-scale and public ownership' socialism. I'm not saying socialism was wrong, but I can't say we got everything right either. People's daily lives required all kinds of ration coupons—grain coupons, cloth coupons, tobacco coupons, liquor coupons were everywhere, and everything required queuing. If this continues, the Soviet Union's today will be our tomorrow. Regarding socialism and Marxism, besides seeking truth from facts, I still can't explain it clearly today. I don't think many people can explain it clearly. If we can't explain it clearly, let's not debate it. Constantly debating whether things are capitalist or socialist is a waste of time. That's why I say we should establish the principle of not debating. Empty talk harms the country, while practical work makes it prosper!" (Another round of enthusiastic applause)

"Don't applaud yet. I need to give you some pressure. I just mentioned that one major economic phenomenon of the 20th century is the rise of the Four Tigers. What should China do? I think we shouldn't rush to catch up with Britain and America, or even compare ourselves with Japan. China's current task and path is to learn from the Four Tigers and achieve moderate prosperity through two to three decades of hard work. Some time ago, in Beijing, Hubei, and Jiangxi, I didn't dare say this, but after coming to Shenzhen, I've gained confidence. Shenzhen has only developed for about ten years and has already reached this level. If we continue like this, the Four Tigers won't be so formidable. I think the basic task for Shenzhen and Guangdong is to blaze a trail and set an example for the whole country in a relatively short time, taking the lead in surpassing the Four Tigers. I believe that with twenty years, Guangdong can catch up with the Four Tigers. During the Liberation War, Comrade Liu Bocheng and I led troops on a thousand-mile expedition to the Dabie Mountains. Others tried to encircle and block us, but Comrade Bocheng proposed that when two armies meet, the brave one wins. Eventually, in a strategic advance to Central China without a base area, without winter clothing, and with poor equipment, we headed straight for Nanjing. We were brave, and we won! Today, I want to give you a similar strategic task: be the vanguard of China's reform and opening up, blaze a trail in China's reform and opening up, and prove that Chinese people aren't weaklings in running the economy! Regardless of what others say, even regardless of what some self-proclaimed Marxist theorists say, don't waver in reform and opening up, don't waver in upholding the Party's basic line, catch up with the Four Tigers, and use twenty years to build Guangdong into Asia's fifth dragon!"

"Reform and opening up won't be smooth sailing. Currently, reform and opening up can't take big steps, and there's fear of bold exploration. The key issue is whether it's capitalist or socialist. The standard for judging whether something is capitalist or socialist should be the three benefits: whether it benefits the development of productive forces, whether it benefits the enhancement of comprehensive national strength, and whether it benefits the improvement of living standards. The practice of the special economic zones shows that reform and opening up can not only develop productive forces but also liberate them. Therefore, I invented a principle called 'no debate.' What's there to debate? If we debate, we'll waste all our time and accomplish nothing. No debate—boldly try, boldly explore. There was debate about establishing special zones, and some people still disagree today. There was also debate about rural reform, but the fastest-growing sectors in rural areas in recent years have been aquaculture and fruit farming—precisely the industries not planned in our planned economy and barely regulated by the government. Previously, people in Beijing queued daily for Chinese cabbage, which was distributed by the government. But now, with several wholesale markets established, the shortage and queuing for Chinese cabbage have disappeared. There's also much debate about the Three Gorges Project. When I went to the United States, I saw that they had already built hydroelectric stations wherever possible. The Soviet Union and European regions have done the same. Think how much this can increase national strength and wealth! I firmly advocate doing it. Many people still disagree today, and some even criticize it harshly. What's there to fear? If you're sure about something, you should resolutely pursue it. I believe that since the Third Plenary Session of the 11th Central Committee, at least these points have been clearly established: the Party's basic line of focusing on economic construction, the reform and opening up policy symbolized by the special economic zones, the rural reform with the household contract responsibility system as its basic system, and the market mechanism aimed at developing and liberating productive forces. Speaking of markets, some argue that a market economy is capitalist. In fact, both planning and markets are means, not ideological doctrines with many rigid rules. My proposal of 'one country, two systems' for the Hong Kong issue faced less opposition. On the sovereignty issue, many people can compromise on systems, but why can't we be more accommodating and compromising on national strength, people's prosperity, and developing productive forces? It still comes down to that truth: seek truth from facts. China is poor, and development is the hard truth. For development, we not only tolerate and encourage capitalism in Hong Kong, but we should also tolerate and encourage differences and market mechanisms in the mainland. Without this, how can we attract foreign investment and implement reform and opening up?"

"Going to Hong Kong to witness the handover is one of my dreams. I would definitely go if I could. But I'm already 88 years old, and this might be my last outing. Time waits for no one! You must persist in reform and opening up, which is upholding China's future. The dream that Sun Yat-sen couldn't realize more than 80 years ago might be realized through reform and opening up. What I've said today, you can tell those below you, and you can also tell Beijing above. I also said in Hubei and Jiangxi: whoever doesn't pursue reform and opening up must step down! You should convey this point as well!"

*** On a rainy afternoon during Spring Festival, at Building No. 1 of the Xijiao State Guest House, Shanghai ***

"Scholars rebel, but don't succeed for ten years—this is not just an ancient Chinese teaching but also a modern truth. Throughout history, scholars who rebel and attempt reform mostly fail. Wang Mang of the Han Dynasty, Wang Anshi of the Song Dynasty, and even Mao Zedong of modern times were primarily known as scholars. Their initial achievements were brilliant, but once they adopted the posture of great literary men, they became arrogant, and the final results were tragic. Our Party's historical leaders like Chen Duxiu and Qu Qiubai were genuine great scholars, but they lacked operational skills and practical spirit. The Party's cause did not develop under their leadership, whereas the 'country bumpkin' Mao Zedong, whom they looked down upon, won recognition through his practicality and seeking truth from facts. During the Jinggangshan period, Chiang Kai-shek's first four encirclement campaigns failed, mainly because Chairman Mao sought truth from facts—when the enemy advances, we retreat. But when scholars like Qin Bangxian, Wang Ming, and Otto Braun took control and tried to fight conventional warfare to keep the enemy outside the gates, the Red Army was defeated. Before the Eighth Party Congress, Chairman Mao still sought truth from facts. Our Party has had two quite good congresses: the Eighth and the Thirteenth. What made them good? They sought truth from facts. The Eighth Congress focused on economic construction with Mao taking a backseat, while the Thirteenth Congress discussed the primary stage of socialism. Unfortunately, the spirit of these two good congresses was never fully implemented."

"Literati ruin the country. It's unclear how Havel will do. I think the Soviet Union was prematurely destroyed by Gorbachev's literary complex—he only cared about his own reputation, disregarding the survival of the party and country. And Yeltsin is a person who values reputation even more. For the Soviet Union to calm down, it definitely needs someone more composed, more practical, and more operational. I believe Shanghai is promising precisely for this reason. Shanghai people are very practical, unlike Beijing, which focuses on empty talk all day. Shanghai people are rich in technical skills and operational spirit. As long as they're allowed to work, they will definitely create a new world."