Yu Weihai and Li Yuwei: The New "Networked" Trend in International Communist Party Relations in the 21st Century
On December 1, 2017, Xi Jinping proposed at the CPC in Dialogue with World Political Parties High-level Meeting: "Political parties of different countries should enhance mutual trust, strengthen communication, and close coordination. We should explore the establishment of a new type of party-to-party relations based on a new type of international relations—one characterized by seeking common ground while reserving differences, mutual respect, and mutual learning. We should build a multi-form, multi-level global network for party-to-party exchange and cooperation, and gather a powerful force to build a community with a shared future for humanity." The concept of a "new type of party-to-party relations" is a fresh initiative and perspective on global party interaction offered by Chinese Communists from the standpoint of a community with a shared future for humanity; it constitutes a scientific summation of the history, experiences, and lessons of global political party relations. Since the drastic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe [1], the landscape of the international communist movement has undergone a historic shift. In the new historical period, relations between foreign Communist Parties (CPs) have experienced a series of new changes and manifested new characteristics, overall presenting a new "networked" development trend. Researching the current state of foreign CP relations in the 21st century is not only a practical necessity for comprehensively understanding the developmental trends of today's foreign CPs and accurately grasping the reality of the international communist movement, but also an inevitable requirement for practicing the concept of a new type of party-to-party relations.
I. The Proposal of "Networked" Relations Among Foreign Communist Parties
Currently, domestic academic discussions on the relations between foreign CPs are scattered across articles concerning the developmental trends of these parties. The content primarily focuses on two aspects: First, the strengthening of communication and cooperation among CPs worldwide. In the 1970s and 80s, CPs across the globe had not established extensive international links. Upon entering the 21st century, through regional and international meetings, the once-interrupted connections between Communist, Workers', and Left parties were restored. By "aligning vertically and horizontally" [2], these parties have strengthened their mutual communication, coordination, contact, and cooperation, gradually forming a new form of association characterized by multiple levels, broad fields, and networking. The channels for inter-party contact among global CPs are continuously expanding. Beyond the International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties (IMCWP) held since 1998, various parties also exchange representatives to attend each other's party congresses and party press festivals, organize various seminars, and expand cooperation with other leftist parties and NGOs through collaboration with new social movements. Second, internal friction and fragmentation persist within the global communist movement. Currently, CPs in some countries are riddled with factions, splitting into several or even dozens of groups, while sectarianism runs rampant within international communist umbrella organizations. The development of the international communist movement has long been accompanied by splits, internal friction, and disputes. Numerous communist party organizations are active on the contemporary international stage, and each faction possesses its own international platform with clear boundaries and obvious exclusivity.
Contemporary relations between foreign CPs have long since broken the former pattern of being centered around the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU), showing new changes. However, existing research remains fragmented, mostly discussing the relationship between unity and division at a descriptive level. Yet, unity or division is only one facet of party relations. In the 21st century, foreign CP relations more prominently reflect a "networked" trend—namely, that typified sovereign forces have become more prominent, intensive exchanges have become more frequent, diverse modes of connection have become more apparent, loose internationalism has become more distinct, and the normalization of disputes has become more significant.
II. Manifestations of the "Networked" Trend in Current Foreign Communist Party Relations
Following the drastic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, the landscape of the international communist movement underwent a major transformation, with foreign CPs gradually forming "networked" party relations. Compared to party relations in various periods of the history of the international communist movement, these "networked" relations exhibit a series of characteristics distinct from previous stages.
(1) Typified sovereign forces have become more prominent Since the beginning of the 21st century, the world socialist movement has gradually emerged from the shadow of the collapse of the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe and is slowly moving toward revival. Correspondingly, the systemic crisis of capitalism continues to deepen. In this process, Marxism and socialism have gained increasing recognition, triggered more social reflection, and catalyzed many new communist parties or organizations. Facing the new circumstances of the 21st century, foreign CPs have adopted differentiated understandings and applications of Marxism, forming diverse theoretical interests and strategic choices. This has made the typification of current world CPs more prominent. According to incomplete statistics, there are more than 400 large and small CPs worldwide; whether governing or in opposition, legal or illegal, they remain active across various countries and regions. Furthermore, in some countries—such as Turkey, India, Nepal, and the United States—there exists more than just one or a few CPs; some countries even have dozens of communist party organizations.
Differences also exist in how these CPs articulate their guiding ideologies in their party constitutions and programs. Some use the term "Marxism-Leninism," intending to emphasize that while upholding the guiding status of Marxism, they also adhere to Leninism, believing it remains significant for guiding the working class in seizing power and conducting socialist construction. Others use "Marxism," viewing it as the theoretical foundation for working-class parties but maintaining a questioning, critical, or even negative attitude toward Leninism. Some use "Marxism-Leninism-Maoism," which, on the basis of emphasizing the guiding status of Marxism-Leninism, particularly highlights the guiding role of Mao Zedong Thought, viewing Maoism as the product of the third stage of world revolution and a scientific guiding ideology succeeding Marxism and Leninism. Still others use "Scientific Socialism," viewing it as synonymous with Marxism-Leninism but seeking to draw a clear line against Soviet-style Marxism-Leninism and rejecting personality cults. This pluralism in ideological expression reflects the typified characteristics of foreign CPs. According to these different expressions, major foreign CPs can be categorized into several types: (1) innovative developmental Marxism, (2) traditional revolutionary Leninism, (3) Western democratization-oriented (advocating the negation of Leninism, softening ideological colors, and staying close to daily life and reality), (4) Western Marxism, (5) nationalist-indigenous characteristic type, (6) Maoist "People's War" type, (7) Trotskyist type, (8) Hoxhaist type, and so on.
(2) Intensive exchanges and interactions have become more frequent Although the typification of 21st-century foreign CPs is distinct and their paths toward socialism differ, frequent and intensive interactions have become common—driven either by the needs of party development or the internationalist nature of the communist movement. Regarding methods of exchange, CPs in various countries deepen inter-party communication and cooperation through mutual visits, multilateral meetings, and invitations to party press festivals or congresses. With the development and application of digital technology and the internet, when offline meetings are inconvenient, CPs maintain contact through telephone consultations between leaders or multilateral teleconferences. Regarding the content of exchange, in addition to exchanging views on long-standing classic issues—such as the "relationship between the two systems" (capitalism and socialism), "socialist revolution and construction," "theories and strategies regarding capitalism," and "war and imperialism"—parties also focus on contemporary topics such as "political parties and modernization," "ecology and environment," and "gender politics," reaching many points of consensus. Regarding frequency, taking international meetings as an example, global CPs utilize various platforms and organizational mechanisms every year to discuss and exchange views on topics of mutual concern. The International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties (IMCWP) has operated on an annual basis since its inception, having held 23 consecutive annual meetings. Regarding timing, CPs typically carry out inter-party contacts on major anniversaries related to the international communist movement, important holidays, or key events, using online letters, joint statements, or offline cooperation, visits, and attendance. For example, in early October 2024, as tensions in the Middle East escalated again, numerous CPs released joint statements on leftist websites like "Defense of Communism" and "SolidNet," expressing solidarity with the peoples of Palestine and Lebanon and opposing the further expansion of war in the Middle East. Examples include "We Oppose the Expansion of War in the Middle East" signed by 59 parties on October 7, and the "Joint Statement in Solidarity with the People of Palestine and Lebanon, Opposing Occupation and Genocidal War" signed by 61 parties on October 8.
(3) Diverse modes of connection have become more obvious Faced with a harsh survival environment and the practical needs of conducting socialist struggle, foreign CPs have actively pursued international unity following the changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, exploring new forms of solidarity for the 21st-century international communist movement through diverse methods of association. At the organizational level, foreign CPs have established a series of normalized organizational mechanisms to enhance exchange and collaboration. Regarding regional alliance mechanisms, every region where CPs are active today has corresponding solidarity organizations, such as the "Union of Communist Parties—Communist Party of the Soviet Union" (СКП-КПСС) in the post-Soviet space; the "São Paulo Forum" (FSP), an annual meeting of Latin American leftist parties and organizations; the "Arab Left Forum," a meeting organization for CPs and leftist parties in the Arab region; the "African Left Networking Forum" (ALNEF), jointly initiated by the South African and Sudanese CPs; the "Party of the European Left" (PEL), dedicated to exploring new paths for European socialism; and the "European Communist Action" (ECA), led by the Communist Party of Greece. The IMCWP serves as a global international cooperation organization, creating conditions for broad alliances between Communist and Workers' parties. At the behavioral level, CPs have carried out a series of coordinated joint actions, manifesting as synchronized demonstrations and collective solidarity protests, as well as the formation of party alliances or united fronts, thereby deepening inter-party interaction. In terms of specific forms, beyond traditional offline visits, joint meetings, and collective protests, the development of internet technology has provided more convenient and rapid channels for interaction. They frequently utilize party media and network platforms to issue joint statements on major issues of common concern. Today, most CPs in the world have public official websites, electronic publications, and new media platforms. Different types of CPs have also created their own network platforms, such as the Marxist-Leninist "SolidNet" (http://www.solidnet.org/); Maoist platforms like "Marxis-Leninist-Maoist Online Library" (https://ci-ic.org/), "Red Herald" (https://redherald.org/), and "Maoist Road" (https://maoistroad.blogspot.com/); the Trotskyist "In Defence of Marxism" (https://marxist.com/); and Hoxhaist platforms like the "International Conference of Marxist-Leninist Parties and Organizations" (https://cipoml.net/) and "Communist International" (http://ciml.250x.com/). Communist and Workers' parties make full use of these platforms on key dates such as major anniversaries or holidays to issue statements on global hotspots and struggle objectives, creating a synergistic effect with offline resistance.
(4) Loose internationalism has become more distinct
Looseness is characteristic of the specific phenomenon wherein contemporary foreign Communist Parties implement internationalism and explore new forms of party alignment. The international joint organizations established by world Communist Parties at various levels and scales are primarily intended to facilitate strengthened communication, dialogue, and the exchange of ideological perspectives and work experience; they serve as multilateral contact mechanisms to deepen mutual solidarity and cooperation. These mechanisms share certain traits: they do not insist on centralized unified leadership, they lack permanent leading bodies, and they possess no common program or statutes. For example, as the largest current platform for multilateral exchange among Communist and Workers' Parties, the International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties (IMCWP) has no leading body, establishing only a Working Group responsible for meeting affairs. According to regulations, the Working Group "has no right to make decisions on behalf of Communist and Workers' Parties on matters other than those clearly specified in the Working Group's tasks, and must fully respect the equality among members." The International Coordination of Revolutionary Parties and Organizations (ICOR) also proposed in its founding declaration that "the consensus-based exchange and cooperation of independent parties and organizations is our organizational principle," that "each organization decides for itself which programs and activities to support," and that it is "based on mutual respect for the sovereignty of member organizations and non-interference in internal affairs." The European Communist Action also clearly stated in its founding declaration that it is not a unified political party; any Communist or Workers' Party from a European country, including non-EU countries, can join as long as they agree with the contents of the declaration. Its organizational goal is to promote contact and exchange between parties and strengthen joint action. Overall, in their actual operation, most of these joint organizations uphold principles such as independence, equality of status, mutual respect, and non-interference in internal affairs. Furthermore, they do not impose excessive constraints on membership; parties can participate in multiple joint organizations or movements simultaneously. Communist Parties in various countries sign joint statements or carry out coordinated international struggles on a voluntary basis. For instance, the 2022 IMCWP ultimately resulted in two distinct resolutions: 28 parties, including the Communist Party of Greece (KKE), signed the "Resolution on the Imperialist War on the Territory of Ukraine," while 37 parties and organizations, including the Communist Party of the Russian Federation (KPRF), signed a separate "Resolution on the Struggle against US and NATO Imperialism for World Hegemony as a Key Task for Progressive Forces." In response to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, there have been statements supporting the Palestinian people and the Palestinian Communist Party, anti-war demonstrations, and humanitarian aid for war refugees. These are all voluntary actions taken by Communist Parties under the guidance of the spirit of internationalism, demonstrating the absolute autonomy of each party within international alignment mechanisms. It is thus evident that the international alignment of contemporary world Communist Parties lacks both a unified organization and central leadership, as well as a written program or action framework; it is a form of loose internationalist behavior.
(5) The trend of normalized strife has become more prominent Divergences, internal friction, and strife among Communist Parties are concomitant phenomena of the International Communist Movement. Since the dramatic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe [3], struggles between foreign Communist Parties have continued unabated, and internal friction and mutual disputes have shown a trend toward normalization. For example, to reintegrate their forces after being severely impacted, 15 Communist Parties from 11 countries established the "Party of the European Left" (EL) in 2004. However, due to questions regarding the nature and developmental direction of the EL, the Communist Party of Greece and others formed another joint organization of European left-wing parties in 2013—the "Initiative of Communist and Workers' Parties" (hereafter referred to as the "Initiative"). Although both are joint organizations of European left-wing forces, they are fundamentally opposed in practice. As the Initiative stated in its founding declaration: "The EU is the center of European imperialism; it supports aggressive plans against various peoples and is allied with the US and NATO. We are not a so-called 'European Party' within the EU, nor are we members of the 'Party of the European Left' therein." The two operated in parallel for a decade until the Initiative dissolved because internal differences could not be mitigated over the long term. However, these differences did not dissipate with the termination of the Initiative's activities; rather, they were further intensified by the KKE’s unilateral declaration of dissolution, triggering sharp criticism from some former member parties and highlighting long-standing internal strife. The disputes among foreign Communist Parties are mainly concentrated on ideological and theoretical struggles. Major issues facing the International Communist Movement since the 21st century, as well as global hotspots, have become "normalized topics" of debate. For example, parties frequently argue over the crisis of capitalism, imperialism, social alliances, opportunism, revolution versus reform, and models of socialism. In recent years, with frequent localized wars, foreign Communist Parties have debated fiercely over the nature of war, the identification of imperialism within war, and the united front. As consensus remains difficult to reach, these issues have gradually evolved into "normalized topics" of debate among today's foreign Communist Parties.
III. New Characteristics of the "Networked" Relations Among Contemporary Foreign Communist Parties Compared to traditional relations between Communist Parties, "networking" has become the new form of relations among contemporary foreign Communist Parties. This presents many new characteristics in the basic landscape of the International Communist Movement, the interaction logic of Communist Parties, the structural form of the movement, and the ideological struggle.
(一) Coexistence of parallelism and interweaving in the basic landscape The tragedy of the dramatic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe made Communist Parties generally realize that "there is no single model for socialism; the starting point and realistic conditions of the socialist path must be considered from the perspective of historical materialism." Therefore, since entering the 21st century, Communist Parties have explored socialist development paths suited to their own national conditions based on their respective historical traditions and realities, manifesting the characteristic of pluralistic and autonomous exploration. Examples include France’s "Ecocommunism," the CPUSA’s "Bill of Rights Socialism," the Communist Party of Brazil’s "New National Development Project," and the Communist Party of India (Marxist)’s theory of "People's Democratic Government."
Although specific national conditions differ and it is impossible for Communist Parties to follow an identical development path, under the guidance of the socialist-communist ideal, parties have still reached consensus in many areas through necessary exchange and contact, reflecting a multi-dimensional network landscape of interwoven progress. Under the influence of the 2008 international financial crisis, Communist Parties achieved consensus on several fronts: re-emphasizing the political task of conducting class struggle and striving for proletarian political power; advocating for democratic nationalization to make economic preparations for the transition to socialism; and shifting from defense to offense by taking various measures to awaken the class consciousness of the masses. In recent years, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic allowed anti-communism in capitalist countries to rise, creating a more severe situation for Communist Parties. To this end, parties have unanimously agreed on the need to strengthen the Party's political, ideological, and organizational building to enhance the capacity to lead the socialist struggle; to lead the working class and the popular strata in broad struggles to awaken their class awareness and revolutionary confidence and improve their political literacy to prepare conditions for socialist revolution; to value left-wing and socially progressive forces and establish broad social alliances or united fronts; and to carry out various forms and levels of inter-party interaction under the principle of proletarian internationalism to counter the "alliance of bourgeois brothers" with an alliance of proletarians. The consensus among Communist Parties on ideals, goals, values, ideology, and practical struggle is conducive to promoting the formation of a new common socialist spirit that accords with the characteristics of the times, allowing scattered communist actions to be interwoven through spiritual bonds to jointly push the contemporary International Communist Movement forward.
(二) Mutual exclusion of alignment and struggle in interaction logic The current alignment of world Communist Parties is neither the highly centralized and unified organizational form of the Comintern period, nor the international conference format characterized by "big-party chauvinism" [4] that the CPSU was once fond of. Instead, it presents a new set of methods. Communist Parties are actively exploring the establishment of various meeting and forum mechanisms to provide platforms for strengthening inter-party contact and cooperation. Whether it is a joint mechanism like the IMCWP, bilateral or multilateral meetings and exchanges, or joint statements, resolutions, and mutual solidarity and action, these all reflect the efforts of Communist Parties to actively explore new forms of solidarity and cooperation under the new international situation, further strengthening the trend of alignment.
Yet it is undeniable that a grand international alignment of contemporary Communist Parties remains unachievable due to the existence of internal struggles. In fact, such struggles stem from the differences between parties. "Because of differences in economic, political, cultural, and historical traditions across countries, the historical tasks to be undertaken also differ; thus, theories and tactics manifest certain differences between Communist Parties of different countries or types." However, when some parties absolutize these differences, viewing them as fundamental and elevating them to ideological opposition, it results in ideological and organizational confrontation and division. For example, on September 11, 2023, the official website of the Initiative of Communist and Workers' Parties announced the dissolution of the organization due to serious internal differences.
This trend of alignment still contains tendencies of separation, leading to the current contradictory interaction network of the International Communist Movement. In a movement where unity and opposition coexist, the alignment of Communist Parties helps alleviate mutual antagonism and restricts the expansion of struggle, preventing the movement from collapsing again. At the same time, however, the struggles between parties hinder the deepening of this alignment, keeping the current international alignment in a state of "weak union."
(三) Fusion of flattening and mesh-working in structural form Before the dramatic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, the CPSU often regarded itself as the leader of the International Communist Movement, continuing the "big-party chauvinism" and "patriarchal party" [5] practices of the Comintern era. Correspondingly, more and more Communist Parties attempted to break free from the control of the Soviet Union and the CPSU to carry out independent inter-party exchanges and cooperation based on seeking common ground while reserving differences. However, the central landscape and hierarchical relations within the movement were never completely eliminated. After the collapse of the Soviet Union and the fall of the CPSU, hundreds of Communist Parties of various sizes and types were born across the world; the consensus that a unified leadership center is unnecessary has been reached by the vast majority of parties. As the most successful and outstanding socialist country of the current era, the China-path modernization led by the Communist Party of China has become the mainstay of 21st-century world socialism. However, the CPC never regards itself as a "patriarchal party." Instead, it upholds the concept of a new type of party-to-party relations based on "seeking common ground while reserving differences, mutual respect, and mutual learning," carrying out exchanges and cooperation with other parties based on equality of status and mutual respect. Currently, the International Communist Movement has moved beyond the 20th-century model of "one center" and "unified leadership," truly achieving "decentralization" in its structural form.
On this basis, the International Communist Movement has also transformed from the "center-periphery" movement of the past into the flattened network movement of today. The collapse of the Soviet Union allowed Communist Parties to break free from the interference of CPSU big-party chauvinism and strict ideological constraints, achieving independence and mutual equality in their status. On the one hand, regarding their own development, parties can autonomously explore socialist paths suited to their own countries and carry out socialist struggles. On the other hand, from the perspective of mutual relations, although Communist Parties are distributed worldwide, they can voluntarily unite on the basis of equality and mutual respect due to shared issues of concern. They utilize various meeting and forum mechanisms to conduct bilateral and multilateral exchanges and cooperation, as well as coordinate actions at domestic, regional, or global levels. Communist Parties overlap by participating in joint actions and multiple organizational mechanisms, presenting a mesh-like pattern of interaction and forming an interlaced network structure in party relations.
(四) Confrontation between internationalism and sectarianism in ideology Internationalism is a position that Communist Parties have always maintained. Entering the 21st century, to avoid repeating the mistakes of the Soviet and Comintern periods, foreign Communist Parties have advocated for a return to the Marxist-Leninist principle of internationalism. "Since the dissolution of the Comintern, the forms and norms of solidarity in the International Communist Movement have naturally changed. With the maturation and growth of Communist Parties in various countries, and considering the complex national conditions and different responsibilities they face, relying on an organized center to direct the world socialist movement is no longer feasible." Consequently, most Communist Parties advocate for international alignment based on the premise of respecting differences. Internationalism has flourished once again, guiding Communist Parties in conducting fruitful practical explorations.
However, a small number of Communist Parties currently still pose as the "Marxist Orthodoxy," adopting a monistic [6] and "either-or" attitude toward differences in political views and ideological disparities. This continues the sectarianism [7] found throughout the history of the international communist movement and has formed distinct factions within today's communist camp. They unilaterally emphasize proletarian internationalism while ignoring, denying, or even directly attacking the explorations of other Communist Parties in localization, adaptation to the times, and nationalization [8]. These parties attempt to restore the historical tradition of "one center of leadership" and "one line of action" from the Comintern era. Such sectarianism completely deviates from the principles and requirements of proletarian internationalism, severely severing the spiritual ties that bind the Communist Parties of various countries together as a unified proletarian party. This has led to the long-term fragmentation of the communist camp and ideological confrontation.
IV. Reflections on the Current "Networked" State of Relations Between Foreign Communist Parties
The current new trend of "networked" relations among foreign Communist Parties enriches the connotations and forms of the 21st-century international communist movement. It reflects the development and progress of the movement since the 20th century, particularly following the Second World War. However, this "networked" state also contains internal contradictions and disputes between various Communist Parties, resulting in the continued difficulty of achieving a true international union of foreign communist forces. The Communist Party of China (CPC) is not only the world's largest Marxist governing party but also a Marxist mission-driven party. The current "networked" trend in foreign communist relations warrants our reflection.
First, the current "networked" relations indicate that the international communist movement has not disappeared; rather, it has formed new content and forms suited to the era. These relations reflect both the theoretical explorations of foreign communists and the practical development of the movement in the 21st century. Ideologically, the international communist movement no longer adheres to "World Revolution Theory." Organizationally, it has undergone a process of "de-centrally" evolving. In terms of movement patterns, it is no longer a "center-periphery" proletarian revolutionary movement. Today, most Communist Parties possess a more contemporary understanding of the "international nature" of the socialist cause. Various Communist Parties maintain close inter-party ties through intensive exchanges and aggregate their collective strength through diversified connections—such as establishing coordination mechanisms, issuing joint statements, and taking unified actions—demonstrating clear characteristics of alignment. Simultaneously, due to differentiated explorations in ideology and practice, the world's Communist Parties exhibit marked characteristics of pluralism and categorization regarding their core forces, joint mechanisms, joint agendas, and developmental directions. To a certain extent, this has led to internal sectarianism and dogmatism. Evidently, the current relations between foreign Communist Parties involve both parallel exploration and intertwined progress, as well as multi-party alliance and frequent struggle, thereby constituting the new content and features of the 21st-century international communist movement. The new changes and characteristics presented therein undoubtedly signal that we cannot rely on inherent theoretical systems and analytical frameworks to understand and interpret the contemporary movement. Instead, we must study and establish a discourse system and disciplinary framework for scientific socialism and the international communist movement that corresponds to the new historical characteristics of the 21st century.
Second, achieving a true union of international communist forces remains a long and arduous task. Under current conditions, promoting a "limited union" of the international communist movement is the only feasible path. Compared to the development of the movement after World War II, current "networked" relations certainly represent progress, but the deep-rooted sectarianism and factional opposition therein also reveal the divisions within international communist forces. It is precisely because this fundamental problem has long remained unresolved that the movement remains in its current loose "networked" state. To some extent, the "networked" nature of foreign Communist Parties today is a manifestation of the immaturity of Marxist parties’ exploration of international union. The cause of communism is the common cause of all humanity. Winning the final victory through international union cannot rely solely on the self-association of the proletariats; it also requires proletarian parties to unite with parties representing the interests of other working classes or strata to take common action, uniting all forces that sympathize with and support the proletarian revolutionary movement. At present, given the reality of "weak union" and "frequent struggle" among Marxist parties themselves, it is clearly unrealistic to achieve a great unity and grand alliance of the proletariat and the world socialist movement. However, "networked" relations still contain the possibility of alliance and connectivity. Establishing a perspective on the international communist movement that is "centered on our own initiative" [9], and promoting the development of the movement under the goal and concept of "limited union" within the discourse system and practical mechanisms, is our viable strategic choice at present.
Third, the CPC must insist on leading the healthy development of relations between Marxist parties with the concept of a new type of party-to-party relations. At the ceremony marking the 100th anniversary of the founding of the CPC, Xi Jinping pointed out: "The CPC is concerned with the future and destiny of humanity and moves forward hand in hand with all progressive forces in the world. China has always been a builder of world peace, a contributor to global development, and a defender of the international order." This fully demonstrates the mission and responsibility of the CPC as the world’s largest Marxist governing party. The "networked" relations of foreign Communist Parties indicate the complex state of the international communist movement, and the resurgence of the world socialist movement still faces numerous obstacles. The "new type of party-to-party relations" proposed by Xi Jinping clarifies the basic norms and proper modes of interaction between parties epistemologically, and serves as the key to guiding the healthy development of relations between Marxist parties methodologically. Therefore, it is necessary for us to deepen our research and interpretation of the formation, connotation, characteristics, value, and path of the "new type of party-to-party relations." We must earnestly promote the application and transformation of this concept. Relying on exchange mechanisms such as the CPC in Dialogue with World Political Parties High-level Meeting and the World Socialism Forum, we should create high-end political dialogue platforms with broad representation and international influence, tell the story of the CPC well, and construct a Chinese discourse and narrative system. The CPC must fully exert its leading role, promoting cohesion, unity, and collective action among the world's Communist Parties, and work together with foreign Communist Parties to make new and greater contributions to the development of world socialism and the progress of human society.