Hou Huiqin: Deeply Comprehend the Spirit of Further Comprehensively Deepening Reform
Reform and opening up is a crucial "magic weapon" for the cause of the Party and the people to catch up with the times in giant strides. The Third Plenary Session of the 20th CPC Central Committee, committed to the Second Centenary Goal of building a great modern socialist country, has placed reform in an even more prominent position. By closely revolving around the advancement of Chinese-path modernization to implement the further comprehensive deepening of reform, it continues to stand at the forefront of the trends of the times. The construction of Ideological and Political Theory Courses (hereafter "Ideological-Political Courses") needs to center on this spirit, exploring the spirit of further comprehensively deepening reform in the New Era and the major theoretical and practical issues it involves, while integrating these results into Ideological-Political Course teaching.
I. Clarifying Direction through Comparison: Relying on Reform and Opening Up to Catch Up With, Grasp, and Lead the Times; Understanding the Spirit of Further Comprehensively Deepening Reform via New Epochal Characteristics
Reform and opening up is a great new revolution carried out by the Party under new historical conditions, uniting and leading the people of all ethnic groups nationwide; it is the most distinctive feature of contemporary China. New epochal characteristics are the key to our understanding of the "Three Third Plenaries." As pointed out by the Third Plenary Session of the 20th CPC Central Committee, the Third Plenary Session of the 11th CPC Central Committee was "epoch-making," and the Third Plenary Session of the 18th CPC Central Committee was "also epoch-making." [1] At the same time, we must say that the Third Plenary Session of the 20th CPC Central Committee possesses equally epoch-making significance. To call them "epoch-making" indicates that these three Third Plenaries were all critical choices made by the Party at historical turning points, embodying new epochal characteristics. The Third Plenary Session of the 11th CPC Central Committee shifted the focus of the Party's work from "taking class struggle as the key link" [1] to centering on modernization, "initiating the new period of reform, opening up, and socialist modernization." Its epoch-making significance lay in "breaking the ice and breaching the perimeter" [2]. The Third Plenary Session of the 18th CPC Central Committee responded to the practical need to strengthen "top-level design" as reform entered the "storming-the-fortifications stage" and "deep-water zone" [3]. It "initiated a new journey of comprehensively deepening reform and advancing reform through systematic and holistic design in the New Era, creating a brand-new situation for China's reform and opening up." Its epoch-making significance lay in "advancing through holistic design." The Third Plenary Session of the 20th CPC Central Committee, under current era conditions where the changes unseen in a century are accelerating and our nation’s journey toward building a strong country and national rejuvenation is at a critical juncture, responds to the "questions of the times" by "further comprehensively deepening reform to advance Chinese-path modernization," laying the foundation for the realization of the Party's Second Centenary Goal. Its epoch-making significance lies in "systematic integration."
First, the epochal characteristics of the Third Plenary Session of the 20th CPC Central Committee. To grasp these characteristics, one must proceed from two advantages not previously possessed: first, the scientific judgment regarding the New Era; second, the basic finalization of the system of socialism with Chinese characteristics.
Our establishment of economic construction as the center and the implementation of reform and opening up as a basic national policy were predicated on having a relatively peaceful and stable international environment. This required changing the long-standing epochal judgment that took "war and revolution" as the themes. At the start of reform and opening up, we had not yet made a holistic judgment on this; it was not until 1985 that Deng Xiaoping clearly identified peace and development as the two major epochal issues and confirmed the possibility that a new world war would not occur for a relatively long period. He pointed out: "Currently, the truly big problems in the world—strategic problems of a global nature—are one, the problem of peace, and two, the economic problem or the problem of development." 2 The judgment that a new world war was unlikely to break out for a long time was based on the fact that only the two superpowers, the United States and the Soviet Union, were "qualified" to fight a world war; however, due to numerous constraints and the excessive cost of a world war, they could not help but have reservations. The following year, he made an even clearer judgment: "It is possible that no large-scale world war will occur for a relatively long period, and there is hope for maintaining world peace. Based on these analyses of world trends and our surrounding environment, we have changed our previous view that the danger of war was very imminent." 2 This was a fundamental shift in the understanding of epochal characteristics. However, we were not yet able to judge whether we were facing a New Era distinct from the epoch initiated by the October Revolution.
When the 19th Party Congress convened, it coincided with the centenary of the October Revolution. The Congress explicitly proposed that "socialism with Chinese characteristics has entered a New Era." Although this primarily focused on China's reform, opening up, and socialist modernization entering a new historical stage, its broader background was an epochal transition. Proceeding from epochal trends and international megatrends, Xi Jinping first proposed the scientific judgment that we face "changes unseen in a century," [4] foreshadowing the arrival of a New Era distinct from the new epoch of human history initiated by the October Revolution. The reason we assert that the world has entered a New Era characterized by peace and development is that the Third World—which Deng Xiaoping regarded as "feeble" as a world pole in the early 1980s—has seen the Chinese nation stand tall in the East with a brand-new posture as socialism with Chinese characteristics enters the New Era. Meanwhile, the "unipolar world" the United States sought to maintain has entered an irremediable decline. One could say for the United States, today's sole superpower, fighting a new world war is no longer just a matter of high cost; it is likely beyond its capabilities.
There are three objective bases for judging the arrival of a New Era of peaceful development distinct from the October Revolution era: First, the trend of globalization in the productive forces drives economic globalization; the world's nations are increasingly integrated, with "you in me and me in you." Realistic common interests continually transcend confrontations based on narrow self-interest, providing the objective possibility for managing risks and "contesting without breaking" [5]. Second, the reason peace and development remain the themes of the current era is that all major contemporary issues, including sovereignty and security, are derived from them; they are also the central hub for solving era-based problems, determining that the ultimate means of responding to and solving these problems lies in developing new quality productive forces and prevailing through "innovation and technology." Third, the root of the two points above lies in the fact that the essence of the changes unseen in a century is the accelerating evolution of the international landscape and the balance of power; the situation of capitalist hegemony is being fundamentally overturned. Meanwhile, "the collective rise of emerging market countries and developing countries is unstoppable, making the map of global development more comprehensive and balanced, and the foundation of world peace more solid and stable." 2 The essence of the shift in epochal themes is the end of the capitalist unipolar world and the practical advancement of a new form of human civilization that transcends capitalism.
We know that Marx revealed a great epoch of transition from capitalism to communism through the scientific judgment of the "two inevitabilities" [6]. However, history proved that this is a long process requiring the continuous struggle of over a dozen or even dozens of generations. During this time, the basic contradictions and the broad historical direction will not change, but the principal contradictions, methods of resolution, and practical paths will exhibit stage-specific characteristics, forming partial qualitative changes within a framework that lacks fundamental qualitative change. This necessitates dividing the historical epoch identified by Marx into several "sub-epochs" based on the development of practice, to better grasp the times and advance historical development. Since the birth of Marxism, we can distinguish three interconnected yet distinct sub-epochs: the era in which scientific socialism emerged and became the guide for the world workers' movement; the era of world proletarian revolution, including national liberation movements, initiated by the October Revolution; and the New Era of peaceful development oriented toward the 21st century. The division of these sub-epochs does not negate but enriches the great historical epoch revealed by Marxism. As Xi Jinping pointed out: "Although the era we live in has undergone tremendous and profound changes compared to Marx's era, from the broad perspective of the 500-year history of world socialism, we are still in the historical epoch identified by Marxism. This is the scientific basis for our firm confidence in Marxism and our conviction in the inevitable victory of socialism." 3
Clarifying that we are today in a New Era of peaceful development is the objective basis for us to grasp the world trends of the current era and unswervingly advance reform and opening up; it is the strategic resolve for us to lead the times by standing on the right side of history; and it is the point of departure for our correct handling and construction of the basic relationship between China and the world. This determines that the further comprehensive deepening of reform proposed by the Third Plenary Session of the 20th CPC Central Committee is the extension and deepening of the reform process led by our Party—a reform practice characterized by self-awareness, initiative, depth, and foresight. Without doubt, like the Third Plenary Session of the 11th and 18th Central Committees, the Third Plenary Session of the 20th CPC Central Committee is also epoch-making.
Second, the characteristics of further comprehensively deepening reform in the New Era. The new epochal characteristics determine that the Decision [7] adopted by the Third Plenary Session of the 20th CPC Central Committee possesses several important features distinct from previous reforms:
First, the general goal of reform to improve the system is clearer. This is to "continue to improve and develop the system of socialism with Chinese characteristics and advance the modernization of the state governance system and governance capacity." [1] Although the Decision of the Third Plenary Session of the 18th CPC Central Committee contained similar phrasing, at that time the system of socialism with Chinese characteristics could not yet be called mature or finalized. In fact, as early as the beginning of 1992, Deng Xiaoping predicted: "I am afraid it will take another thirty years for us to form a set of more mature and finalized systems in all aspects. The principles and policies under this system will also become more finalized." 4 The core issue therein is the position of upholding the Party's leadership in the state governance system—how to organically unify upholding the Party's leadership with upholding a people-centered approach and the rule of law, and how to transform the political advantages of Communist Party leadership into advantages for the state governance system and governance capacity. Precisely because of this, reflecting on the development and perfection of the system and the modernization of the state governance system, there were still differing opinions, even frequent lapses into debates over pseudo-problems like "is the Party greater or the law greater?" [8]
Under the strong leadership of the CPC Central Committee with Comrade Xi Jinping at its core, the Party has continuously achieved major breakthroughs in state governance; the system of socialism with Chinese characteristics has been continually improved and matured. In 2019, the Fourth Plenary Session of the 19th CPC Central Committee elucidated the overall composition of the system of socialism with Chinese characteristics, including the fundamental, basic, and important systems. This indicated that the system of institutional frameworks for upholding the leadership of the Communist Party of China has largely been finalized and will, in the process of continuous refinement, gradually and fully demonstrate the superiority of our system. This indicates that the direction for further comprehensively deepening reform is clearer, the overall design is more mature, and the strength of coordinated planning and holistic advancement is greater, and will not be distracted by pointless debates.
Second, the advantage of relying on the system for reform is more prominent. Compared to the reform situation faced by the Third Plenary Session of the 18th CPC Central Committee, today we have greater confidence in further comprehensively deepening reform. In a 2014 interview with a Russian television station, Xi Jinping pointed out: "China's reform, after more than 30 years, has entered the deep-water zone. You could say that the easy, crowd-pleasing reforms have been completed; the 'delicious meat' has been eaten, and what remains are the 'hard bones' that are difficult to chew." 5 Reform was facing a major transition from the "crossing the river by feeling the stones" approach of localized exploration and breaking the ice, toward strengthening top-level design and comprehensively deepening reform. There was a lack of experience and an unstable foundation, presenting a severe challenge as to whether the overall design for comprehensively deepening reform could be effectively implemented.
The reform situation we face today, however, is different. While various challenges remain severe, the foundational institutional frameworks in various fields have been basically established; many fields have achieved historical changes, systematic reshaping, and holistic reconstruction. Overall, the institutional foundation for completing the reform tasks set by the Third Plenary Session of the 18th CPC Central Committee has been laid. Advancing the construction of a modern socialist country through the system's increased maturity and finalization not only finds its direction more resolute but also finds conditions increasingly ripe. This situation determines that our further comprehensive deepening of reform must highlight "tangible results and efficacy" and complete tasks within a time limit—hence the "five-year plan" [9]. We must persist in taking institutional innovation as the main thread, fortifying fundamental systems, improving basic systems, and innovating important systems, continuously elevating reform results into institutions while advancing the deepening of reform through the construction and improvement of those institutions.
Third, "systematic integration"...
The reform characteristics have become even more distinct. To implement the various reform tasks proposed by the Third Plenary Session of the 20th CPC Central Committee, it is necessary to recognize that it possesses characteristics different from previous reforms. In the past, constrained by the objective conditions of reform, we needed to "break the ice" [10] and charge through encirclement; we had no choice but to make certain sacrifices. At the breakthrough points of reform, there were singular choices; in the evaluation of reform effectiveness, there were singular standards; and regarding the distribution of reform benefits, there was a distinction between those who "get rich first" and those who "get rich later" [11], and so forth.
Today, this cannot be the case. First is the holistic nature of reform goals. All must center on the development and perfection of the current system, solving whatever problems exist according to specific circumstances. There are no longer "either-or" choices involving who comes first or who is subordinate outside the institutional framework. Clearly, under the premise that the foundational institutional framework has been basically established, our fundamental and basic systems only require further consolidation and improvement; there is no possibility of deviating from them. Consequently, if we become entangled in abstract "side-taking" such as "the state sector retreats as the private sector advances" (guótuì-mínjìn) versus "the state sector advances as the private sector retreats" (guójìn-míntuì) [12], the result will only be the delay and damage of reform.
Second is the comprehensive nature of reform performance evaluation. We must break away from singular economic value evaluation standards such as "GDP-only." Different types of institutional reforms have different performance requirements and evaluation standards; their value must be comprehensively evaluated based on the further improvement of the national institutional system. Ecological value, historical value, and cultural value are all fundamental value bases in this comprehensive evaluation.
Third is the fairness of reform achievements benefiting all people, continuously meeting the people's new expectations for reform. In times of economic scarcity, incentive mechanisms for some to get rich before others were necessary. At present, the principal contradiction in our society is no longer the contradiction between the people’s ever-growing material and cultural needs and backward social production, but rather the contradiction between the people’s ever-growing needs for a better life and unbalanced and inadequate development. Therefore, we must take the promotion of common prosperity as the goal, advance reforms centered on the urgent problems that concern the masses in their daily lives [13], and ensure that the people's sense of gain, happiness, and security is continuously enhanced through further comprehensively deepening reform.
II. Grasping Key Points in Implementation: Persist in the Problem-Oriented Approach, Focus on Tangible Results, and Deeply Grasp the Reform Spirit of Further Comprehensively Deepening Reform from the Mission and Responsibility of the Ideological and Political Theory Course
Upholding the guiding position of Marxism in the ideological sphere is a fundamental system within the system of institutions for upholding Party leadership; it is also the fundamental mission and responsibility of the Ideological and Political Theory Course (sīzhèngkè) [14] in universities. Currently, universities face the major task of deepening the reform of the educational system, which the sīzhèngkè cannot ignore. However, as the main front for Marxist theoretical education in universities, we must translate the improvement and development of the system of socialism with Chinese characteristics and the modernization of China’s system and capacity for governance into the improvement and advancement of the fundamental system of upholding the guiding position of Marxism in the ideological sphere.
First, the sīzhèngkè is an important component of the work system for arming the whole Party and educating the people with the Party’s innovative theories. The fundamental system of upholding the guiding position of Marxism in the ideological sphere belongs to the institutional system of upholding the leadership of the Communist Party of China. Party leadership is, fundamentally, leadership in political thought. Mao Zedong consistently adhered to "ideological Party building" and regarded the leadership over ideology as the Party's "primary leadership power." The Party’s ideological leadership roughly includes theoretical innovation and theoretical arming, which complement each other. Upholding the fundamentals and breaking new ground in theory is the "soul of the Party." However, without powerful theoretical arming, it cannot be transformed into a practical force for the millions of people who create history. From the perspective of institutional building, the work system of arming the whole Party and educating the people with the Party’s innovative theories is the foundation.
The sīzhèngkè occupies a vital position in the work system of theoretical arming. To begin with, universities are the "barometer" for social hotspots, public sentiment, and the influence of major domestic and international social trends; they provide an important basis for the Party’s theoretical arming work to "aim the arrow at the target" (yǒudì-fàngshǐ) [15]. Aiming the arrow at the target is the essence of integrating theory with practice. Whether it is theoretical innovation or theoretical arming, one must start from problems and aim at solving them. But to grasp problems accurately, one needs typicality and representativeness. The "Great Sīzhèngkè" [16] construction we advocate is a two-way process: it not only helps solve students' ideological problems but also recognizes that doing so is what society requires, utilizing the advantages of university ideological and political education to promote the resolution of ideological problems existing in society. This latter aspect is something we easily overlook.
Furthermore, universities are a gathering place and important battlefield for various contradictions in theoretical arming. University sīzhèngkè carry the major mission of "blazing a trail" for the Party's theoretical arming. Theoretical arming is primarily oriented toward the masses. To popularize theory as a scientific system, two contradictions must be resolved: first, the contradiction between systematicity and practicality; second, the contradiction between academic rigor and popular accessibility. If the first contradiction is poorly handled, the Party's innovative theories can easily become "scattered fragments" of slogans, leading not only to ambiguity and bias in understanding but also to failures in practice. If the second contradiction is poorly handled, innovative theory will turn into simple political posturing, losing its intellectual charm. How to grasp these "degrees" (dù) is a subject that always requires exploration. The talent pool of university sīzhèngkè includes both teaching talents who excel at popular interpretation and research talents who excel at deep academic cultivation, thus possessing a unique advantage in organically unifying the two. Bringing the two together is not only weight-bearing for improving the effectiveness of the sīzhèngkè but also for advancing the Party’s work of theoretical arming.
Again, university students are the key targets of the Party's theoretical arming and the critical factor for testing its effectiveness. Fundamentally, the future of the Party and state's cause lies with the youth; if the youth thrive, the country thrives. Universities provide all kinds of talent for all walks of life in our country and are important bases for technological innovation, industrial change, and innovation in philosophy and social sciences. University students are not only builders of socialism with Chinese characteristics but also the primary reserve for cadres at all levels of the Party and state, including the "key few" [17]. Therefore, perfecting and strengthening the construction of sīzhèngkè in universities is not merely a general fulfillment of the university’s duty to "foster virtue through education" (lìdé-shùrén) [18]; it is a major institutional construction relating to the long-term peace and stability of the Party and the country.
Second, the reform and innovation of the sīzhèngkè is an important part of innovating the Project to Study and Build Marxist Theory. The twenty years of implementing the Project to Study and Build Marxist Theory (Mǎ-gōngchéng) [19] are inseparable from the reform and innovation of the sīzhèngkè. On one hand, the fact that the sīzhèngkè has taken root in the national education system and that its status and role have been continuously strengthened is a major achievement of the Project. On the other hand, the sīzhèngkè plays an irreplaceable and major role in theoretical arming with the innovative achievements of Marxism and its Sinicization and modernization, in opening and guarding Marxist ideological positions, and in building the ideological foundation for the common struggle of the Party and the people; this has pushed the Project to Study and Build Marxist Theory to continuous deepening. How to innovate this interactive relationship is a challenge facing the innovation of the Project today.
The first is institutional innovation in the cultivation of ideals and convictions. The sīzhèngkè must take action in "promoting the regularization and institutionalization of education on ideals and convictions." Its fundamental responsibility is to strive to cultivate more newcomers of the era who can put the Party's mind at ease, are patriotic and self-sacrificing, and shoulder the heavy responsibility of national rejuvenation—and in this, education on ideals and convictions is the key. It should be said that the sīzhèngkè itself is an important form of regularizing and institutionalizing education on ideals and convictions. Its irreplaceable role lies in imparting ideals and convictions as scientific knowledge. Only when ideals and convictions become a knowledge system can their study, teaching, discussion, assessment, and dissemination be regularized and institutionalized. Although our theoretical assertions regarding ideals and convictions are sufficient, there is still room for expansion in forming them into a knowledge system. As a knowledge system, education on ideals and convictions must first clarify why they can become science. Why can science not stop at empirical science? Why can faith not be monopolized by religion? It must clarify how Marxism brings faith into the scientific horizon, how it eliminates the gap between the empirical and the transcendental, and establishes the unity of fact and value, thereby scientifically solving world-view questions such as the ultimate existence of the world and the ultimate value of life.
It must also clarify from a broad perspective that scientific faith is a special kind of knowledge. Scientific faith is not only about "learning for application" but more importantly about "changing the world." It is therefore the highest form of humanity consciously creating history, the concentrated expression of the ideological power of Marxism, and the fundamental guarantee for achieving historical confidence and enhancing historical initiative. To speak broadly, ideals and convictions are the foundation of the Party, establishing the essence of scientific theory that unifies scientificity, practicality, and openness. To speak narrowly, they are the foundation of one’s personal character, the ideological source for the unity of knowing, believing, and acting, and the integration of thinking, learning, and realizing. Devoting oneself to the cause of national rejuvenation and human liberation and continuously transcending oneself is the inevitable path to cultivating ideals and convictions. Internalizing them in the heart, striving to overcome the inconsistency between knowing and believing, and resolutely rejecting "two-faced people" [20] is the unceasing pursuit of cultivating ideals and convictions. The great enemy of education on ideals and convictions is remaining a detached observer; placing ideals and convictions on the "other shore" of history, the "other side" of life, or outside of oneself is a major taboo. The cultivation of ideals and convictions needs to be integrated into one's way of life, based on "personally figuring out the problems," and tested against matters of major principle and major ideological struggles, continuously overcoming the phenomenon of "two separate skins" [21] between learning and living as a person.
The core of cultivating ideals and convictions is firming up the communist ideal. Addressing the theory that communism is "remote and illusory," we must clarify that this ideal is a realistic force based on historical objective laws and necessity; it is a leading force based on the unity of the ultimate goal and stage-by-stage goals; it is an irresistible progressive force characterized by the termination of humanity's "pre-history." Without a scientific grasp of the communist ideal, the issue of ideals and convictions cannot be explained clearly. Making the firming up of the communist ideal the core of the knowledge system of ideals and convictions and completing the construction of this system is undoubtedly a major mission of the construction of the sīzhèngkè.
The second is innovation in advancing theoretical elucidation. Advancing the "Three Entries" [22] of the Party's innovative theories is the fundamental task of the sīzhèngkè. The construction of the sīzhèngkè must proceed in synchronization with the systematic and academic articulation of the Party's innovative theories. Currently, it is necessary to establish the following three basic principles and directions for advancing the systematic and academic articulation of the Party's innovative theories.
First, theoretical sublimation: elucidating Xi Jinping's New Era Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics with "worldview" as the core. Worldview and methodology are the essence of a scientific theoretical system. To accurately and comprehensively elucidate the Party's innovative theories in the New Era, we must take the "New Era" as the historical coordinate, "grasping and leading the era" as the historical basis, "people first" as the value ontology, and "systemic thinking" as the characteristic of the worldview and methodology to achieve a holistic grasp. We must elevate all major theoretical innovations and original contributions to the level of worldview and methodology, revealing their standpoint, viewpoint, and method (lìchǎng, guāndiǎn, fāngfǎ). We must summarize and refine the philosophical essence of Xi Jinping's New Era Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics from the Party's "persistent application" of dialectical materialism and historical materialism.
Second, historical narrative: elucidating Xi Jinping's New Era Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics from the pulse of historical development. That is to say, we must elucidate it within the historical inheritance of over 5,000 years of Chinese civilization, the ideological changes in the 500-year history of world socialism, and the adherence to fundamentals and innovation (shǒuzhèng-chuàngxīn) in the nearly 200-year history of the development of Marxism. The uninterrupted Chinese civilization of over 5,000 years contains all the mysteries for answering the "China questions." Standing at the new starting point of contemporary Chinese historical development, we must continuously return to the deep "root and pulse" (gēnmài) that is the fine traditional Chinese culture. World socialism is the product of the self-negation of capitalism and provides the world-historical basis for Chinese-path modernization, which is distinct from Western modernization. To always stand on the right side of history, we must "breathe the same air and share the same fate" with world socialism. The birth of Marxism was not only a great leap in the tide of world socialist thought but also the most magnificent sunrise in the history of human thought. The "upholding the fundamentals and breaking new ground" in Marxism is an important ideological method for the CPC’s governance of the country and the essence of Xi Jinping's New Era Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics.
Third, ideological confrontation: elucidating Xi Jinping's New Era Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics from the perspective of defeating erroneous trends of thought. Truth always exists in comparison with falsehood and develops in struggle against it. Major innovations in Marxist theory are not only products of practical needs but also the result of transcending erroneous viewpoints. The "Four Confidences" are powerful theoretical weapons for eliminating erroneous trends of thought: first, firming up "confidence in our theory" and eliminating the "Marxism is outdated" theory...
By dividing epochs into large and small scales and exploring their interconnections; by examining the community of shared future formed by Marxism and its Sinicized and modernized iterations; and by observing how socialism with Chinese characteristics has entered a New Era, we have powerfully refuted the so-called "obsolescence of Marxism." Second, we must strengthen confidence in our path and dispel the "end of history" [23] narrative. We have not only blazed a path to modernization distinct from that of the West but have also theoretically demonstrated Chinese-path modernization and the new form of human civilization it has created. Through the integration of theory and practice, we have overturned the fallacy that capitalism cannot be transcended. Third, we must strengthen confidence in our system and dispel the "theory of innate selfishness." Western institutional design is predicated on the assumption of selfish human nature; it denies the socio-historical character of humanity as well as the systemic value of collectivism and socialism. Historically, socialist countries struggled for a long time to effectively transform socialist state systems into the modernization of national governance systems, which lent leverage to Western viewpoints. Today, having solved this difficult problem, we have fundamentally negated the ultimate value-basis of Western systems. Fourth, we must strengthen confidence in our culture and dispel the "theory of Western cultural superiority." Seeking to rule the world under the guise of "modernity," the West attempts to dress its civilization up as a "universal civilization." We have shattered the illusion of "Western cultural superiority" by revealing that civilizational diversity is the inexhaustible engine of human progress, by exposing the antagonistic and unsustainable nature of Western civilization, and by shaping the modern form of Chinese civilization.
Third, the ideology and politics course serves as the ideological vanguard for "implementing the innovation project for philosophy and social sciences." The Third Plenary Session of the 20th CPC Central Committee proposed the major task of "implementing the innovation project for philosophy and social sciences and constructing an independent knowledge system for Chinese philosophy and social sciences," thereby driving profound reform and development in our nation’s scholarly fields. The ideology and politics course bears the mission of acting as a pioneer in this endeavor.
First, the ideology and politics course must explore disciplinary characteristics distinct from Western knowledge systems while constructing its own body of knowledge. The academic traditions and knowledge systems of Western philosophy and social sciences are built upon a dualism of knowledge and faith, restricting science to empirical knowledge while leaving faith to religion. This contains a profound paradox: on one hand, the "positivization" of knowledge—which treats mathematical modeling, replicability, and falsifiability as absolute criteria for scientificity—increasingly detaches social sciences from socio-historical practice based on interests. On the other hand, because philosophy and social sciences cannot be truly "value-free," they must inevitably posit an absolute value as the source of all social phenomena to ensure that positivized social knowledge can form a coherent system. Consequently, the non-critical, dogmatic value-presupposition of an unchanging human nature becomes the natural premise for various disciplinary knowledge systems; examples include the "economic man" [24], "moral man," or the "knave hypothesis" [25]. Thus, Western knowledge systems in philosophy and social sciences are fundamentally exclusionary toward Marxism.
A knowledge system for philosophy and social sciences established under the guidance of Marxism differs from Western systems in three ways: 1. Proceeding from the view of socio-history as an organic whole, it treats knowledge and faith as a unified knowledge system and recognizes no absolute value outside of truth. The knowledge system does not begin from presupposed value premises; instead, guided by a scientific worldview, it determines the research objects of specific disciplines and forms a demonstrable system of scientific categories. 2. Proceeding from the view of socio-history as a law-governed form of motion, it treats the categorical system as a historically changing body of knowledge and recognizes no "man" or "human nature" outside of history. All concepts, including human nature, are formed and evolved within history; it is not human nature that creates history, but history that transforms human nature. 3. Proceeding from the mission of philosophy and social sciences, it emphasizes synthesizing the major connections between individual facts into laws, and it does not acknowledge any "micro-narrative" that excludes "grand narratives." Micro-narratives that reject grand narratives stop at the level of phenomena and become fixed in the status quo; in reality, they serve as defenders of entrenched interests and are incompatible with the Marxist quality of changing the world and promoting historical progress. These three points represent the academic requirements for a Marxist-guided knowledge system and the basic principles for constructing the ideology and politics course's knowledge system. Persistent exploration in this direction is an important path toward breaking dependency on Western knowledge systems and creating an independent knowledge system.
Second, the ideology and politics course should set an example in promoting academic openness and absorbing excellent foreign academic achievements. Constructing an independent Chinese knowledge system for philosophy and social sciences by no means implies self-seclusion or "behind-closed-doors" scholarship. We must unswervingly absorb all excellent academic achievements from around the world, but this must be done on our own terms, through scientific analysis—taking the essence and discarding the dregs. Today, Western scholarship still holds a dominant position, making its absorption and utilization indispensable. However, a scientific analysis is required, beginning with the fundamental Marxist judgment regarding capitalism. From a Marxist perspective, the bourgeoisie underwent a process of transformation from a revolutionary and progressive class to a decadent and moribund one. Correspondingly, academic tendencies in Western philosophy and social sciences have shifted from being theoretically uninhibited to being fearful of and evasive toward the truth. Therefore, regarding Western academic achievements, while we should establish a view centered on absorbing their excellent theoretical fruits, we must also recognize the declining trend of Western scholarship as capitalist decadence increases. We must not simply "follow the fashion."
Third, the ideology and politics course should strive to integrate with the realities of various disciplines in philosophy and social sciences to contribute to the comprehensive implementation of a scientific worldview and methodology. As a public theoretical requirement, the ideology and politics course covers all disciplines and majors, providing the conditions for the comprehensive implementation of the Marxist scientific worldview and methodology. We must clarify that so-called "pure academic" research does not exist in the humanities and social sciences. We must return to the most fundamental question of "what constitutes scholarship and knowledge": truly understanding the "real scholarship" of philosophy and social sciences means raising real questions from actual practice, making summaries based on laws, and forming forward-looking predictions. We must implement materialist dialectics and historical dialectics into the construction of academic categories and discourse systems. We should distinguish between the different levels of categories formed by different realistic foundations and grasp the flexibility of categories due to their historical nature—categories must not be allowed to become fixed or rigid. Proceeding from the basic principles of Marxism, we must establish the core discourse and fundamental problems for each discipline. We must resolutely overcome the phenomenon where basic Marxist principles are decoupled from a discipline's core discourse. The fundamental problems and core discourse of philosophy must align with dialectical and historical materialism; those of jurisprudence and political science must be based on the Marxist views on the people, the party, and the state; those of economics must be grounded in the Marxist labor theory of value, and so forth.
III. Sublimation through Comprehension: Systemic Integration and Overall Planning—Deeply Comprehending the Spirit of Reform in Further Comprehensively Deepening Reform through Innovations in Worldview and Methodology
Every historic leap in the CPC’s successful promotion of reform and opening up has embodied the creative application of dialectical and historical materialism. Therefore, comprehending the spirit of reform through innovations in worldview and methodology is a necessary requirement for enhancing our self-awareness regarding reform. Fundamentally, reform and opening up is a process of "emancipating the mind" and seeking truth from facts, though the focal points of the three sessions of the Third Plenary Committee differ. The Third Plenary Session of the 11th CPC Central Committee emphasized breaking old concepts and advocating for innovative thinking that dares to think and act. The Third Plenary Session of the 18th CPC Central Committee highlighted strategic thinking through the strengthening of top-level design and overall planning. The Third Plenary Session of the 20th CPC Central Committee is primarily reflected in the systemic concept of promoting the systemic integration of reform.
First, the systemic concept is the ideological foundation for comprehending further comprehensively deepening reform. For one, systemic integration is the hallmark of further comprehensively deepening reform. This begins with the systemic integration of reform ideas—priorities, weaknesses, advantages, and breakthrough points are not determined by a prefabricated formula but by their impact on the overall situation of reform. Thus, laying out a plan based on the "big picture" (大局, dàjú) is the guiding thought for reform today. We must truly understand the overall layout of comprehensively promoting the rejuvenation of the Chinese nation through Chinese-path modernization. This involves advancing the Five-Sphere Integrated Plan and the Four Comprehensives in a coordinated manner, balancing the "two big pictures" (domestic and international), and implementing this balance through "dual circulation"—specifically, a brand-new development pattern where domestic circulation is the mainstay and domestic and international circulations reinforce each other. This is a highly conscious reform strategy. By resolving the principal contradiction within the country, it promotes a better alignment between the relations of production and the productive forces, the superstructure and the economic base, and national governance and social development. Next is the systemic integration of reform implementation. In promoting holistic progress, more attention is paid to highlighting key areas and reform efficacy, providing power, institutional guarantees, and a favorable international environment for Chinese-path modernization. It aims to stimulate more internal development momentum, commit to better institutional innovation, build higher-level opening-up to the outside world, and promote the effective construction of a community with a shared future for humanity. It actively promotes the implementation of the Global Development Initiative, the Global Security Initiative, and the Global Civilization Initiative. Finally, there is the systemic integration of reform results. Today, any breakthrough in reform is an institutional breakthrough and thus carries significance for the entire situation. Any success in reform is the result of coordinated, holistic advancement. The value of any reform outcome must be measured and grasped within the institutional system.
Furthermore, the philosophical basis of systemic integration is the adherence to the systemic concept. The systemic concept is a form of dialectical thinking, but it is not a simple repetition of the general principles of dialectics regarding the universal connection, interdependence, and mutual transformation of things. Rather, it is materialist dialectics with a historical foundation, epochal characteristics, and specific intellectual features. The systemic concept emphasizes that the "particular" must be elevated to and grasped within the "totality." Without recognizing the totality, one cannot truly face the "particular." This is why we emphasize comprehending the worldview and methodology of Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for the New Era today. Although Lenin, in "On the Question of Dialectics," affirmed that "any individual is (in one way or another) a universal; any universal is a fragment, or an aspect, or the essence of an individual" and recognized this as dialectical, he also clearly pointed out that this is "only a partial case of dialectics" [28]. This view cannot be absolutized. One should not assume that the "universal" can only exist as an abstraction of concrete things and cannot exist as a "substance" (实体, shítǐ) in its own right, just as the "particular" does. Many "substance" concepts in Marxism, such as social formation, the people, and class, are not "particulars" but are "universals" existing as entities or even as subjects. These substances that embody the "universal," while inseparable from the "particular," are not merely abstractions or aggregations of "particulars," but are the true existence of the "particular."
Further, the systemic concept proposed by Xi Jinping not only emphasizes the foundational significance of the substantive existence of the "universal" but is also an innovation of worldview and methodology adapted to the transition of the era. First, the deep development of economic globalization has brought the world into an era of win-win cooperation where "no one can thrive alone." Second, "two big pictures are intertwined and agitating each other" [26]—history has entered an era of a community with a shared future where "China will do well only when the world does well, and the world will do better when China does well." Third, human development faces many "global" problems that only a systemic concept can resolve to guide us out of predicament.
Second, the systemic concept is the worldview and methodology for grasping the trend of the times and advancing Chinese-path modernization. To start, the systemic concept is the philosophical basis for building a "community with a shared future for humanity." Xi Jinping’s "community thinking" based on the systemic concept is scientific; it accurately grasps the characteristics of the present era—namely, peaceful development, open innovation, equality and mutual benefit, and win-win cooperation. In today's world, the trend of the times is surging forward irresistibly on one hand, while on the other, it encounters undercurrents and dangerous shoals, with an increase in uncertain and unpredictable factors. A "community with a shared future for humanity" is the best way to respond to the themes of the times and maintain strategic initiative. All "Cold War mentalities," "bloc confrontations," unilateralism, pseudo-multilateralism, and "decoupling and severing chains" are regressive actions against the trend of the times. Even if the murky waves hit the sky, they cannot change the course of history.
The system concept is rich in innovativeness; it is grounded in the maximum integration of the common interests of all parties to draw the largest "concentric circles" [27]. Although the pattern of global interests remains complex and volatile today, and the risks of uncertainty, fragmentation, and even confrontation are increasing, we have a choice: shall we allow the actual common interests of humanity to continuously grow, or shall we allow the selfish interests of a single individual or nation to hijack and ultimately ruin those common interests? We firmly believe that the contemporary common interests of humanity are greater than the particular interests of individual countries or blocs, and that the momentum of peace and development overwhelms the petty maneuvers of provocation and confrontation. You are in me and I am in you; the fact that "no one can do without the other" is an objective reality. Community-based thinking provides a methodology for us to evade the risks of interest confrontation and realize the maximization of the actual interests of humanity.
The system concept possesses foresight; it is the practical means for creating a new form of human civilization, moving toward a society of individual freedom, and ultimately transcending capitalist civilization. Marx once predicted that humanity would "unite" as a way to master the immense social productive forces that capitalism could no longer manage. Today's global development has already demonstrated that by carving out a path to modernization distinct from that of capitalism, and by creating a new form of human civilization that transcends capitalist civilization, humanity will "end" its prehistory and move toward true human history. Community-based thinking seizes historical opportunities to continuously transform this Marxist prophecy into the reality of contemporary human history.
Second, the system concept is the world outlook and methodology for accurately grasping contemporary Chinese reality. The fact that the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation has entered an irreversible historical process is not only the objective basis for our judgment that socialism with Chinese characteristics has entered a New Era, but also the important basis for the irreversibility of the historical trends of economic globalization and peaceful development; moreover, it is a scientific judgment we have made starting from the system concept.
On the one hand, the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation today possesses "irreversible" subjective and objective conditions. Objectively speaking, through more than a century of struggle, the Communist Party of China has overcome various difficulties and obstacles and has never been as close to the goal of the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation as it is today. It can be said that there is now no external force that can stop us from achieving this goal. Subjectively speaking, in the process of exploring the path of Chinese-path modernization, we have continuously strengthened the Party’s self-revolution, remaining undeterred by difficulties and unswayed by interference. We have consistently adhered to the ideological line of seeking truth from facts and strengthened our confidence in our path. This can be summarized as "unswervingly following the path of socialism with Chinese characteristics, unswervingly pursuing reform and opening up, not returning to the old path [28], not taking the wrong path [29], and courageously forging new paths." The unity of these subjective and objective aspects has converged into the "irreversible" historical tide of the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation.
On the other hand, there is the international significance of the transformation of the principal contradiction in our society. The shift from the contradiction between the people's ever-growing material and cultural needs and backward social production to the contradiction between the people's ever-growing needs for a better life and unbalanced and inadequate development [30] not only sets the tone for the nature of contemporary China’s development, but also explores a way for the world today to escape its developmental predicament. The current transformation of the principal social contradiction is based on major changes in the state of productive forces and social development—that is, underdeveloped productive forces are no longer the primary aspect of the problem. The new situation is: how to ensure health and sustainability under conditions of sustained high-speed economic growth is a severe challenge; how to resolve the rising pressure of the widening gap between rich and poor on the basis of a significant increase in total economic volume and per capita income; and how to effectively promote the elevation of spiritual needs in a state where basic food and clothing have been secured and people’s material pursuits are increasingly vigorous. In reality, issues of climate and ecological environment, common prosperity, and the promotion of free and well-rounded human development cannot be solved purely by economic development. Therefore, elevating the realization of balanced, adequate, and high-quality development to the primary aspect of the contradiction requires the guidance of the system concept.
More importantly, grasping the transformation of our social principal contradiction from a system concept aligns highly with the actual requirements of contemporary global economic development. The key to promoting the sustainable development of economic globalization is win-win cooperation, mutual benefit, and common development among all countries, which requires implementing the New Development Philosophy of innovation, coordination, green development, openness, and sharing. What hinders global economic recovery and development today is not a lack of material or technical means, but an obstinate adherence to the erroneous developmental concepts of "zero-sum games" and "winner-takes-all." These outdated developmental concepts ultimately stem from a "Cold War mentality," which pursues "bloc confrontation" based on self-interest. Therefore, to grasp the transition of the times and recognize the trend of the times, we must replace self-centered, unidirectional thinking with the system concept.
Third, the system concept is the philosophical world outlook for grasping the relationship between contemporary China and the world. The "two overall situations" [31] are "interwoven and resonating with each other," laying the basic pattern of the relationship between contemporary China and the world. The great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation has become an overall situation of world significance, merging into the world's changes unseen in a century; this is our important basis for grasping the transition of the era. As early as July 2018, Xi Jinping pointed out: "Currently, China is in its best period of development since modern times, and the world is undergoing changes unseen in a century; the two are interwoven and resonating with each other." The reason the "two overall situations" are interwoven is that both face common "questions of the times" and influence each other in resolving contemporary contradictions and seeking a way out. The "interweaving" of the two overall situations demonstrates both the deep integration of contemporary China with the world and contemporary China's massive role in driving global trends. The Chinese-path modernization that promotes the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation is completely consistent with contemporary world trends: it is a modernization of peaceful development, win-win cooperation, common prosperity, and never seeking hegemony, totally consistent with the era's themes of peace and development; it is a modernization of harmony between humanity and nature that adheres to the principles of prioritizing conservation, protection, and natural restoration, totally consistent with contemporary humanity's efforts to address global issues such as climate and environment; it is a modernization that promotes the coordinated development of material and spiritual civilizations and the well-rounded development of the person, totally consistent with the direction of contemporary human civilization’s progress. China's continuous development and growth inject certainty into a world of increasing uncertainty.