Hou Huiqin: Practicing Socialist Core Values Requires Prioritizing Truthfulness
Socialist core values are the concentrated expression of contemporary China’s spiritual pursuits and the ideological and moral foundation for congregating China’s strength. Cultivating and extensively practicing socialist core values is a strategic measure for building a socialist ideology with strong cohesive and guiding power in the New Era; it is a "soul-building" project for leading socialist cultural development and advancing cultural confidence and self-improvement. Therefore, the cultivation and practice of socialist core values must truly embody the essence of socialist ideology as a scientific ideology, consistently prioritizing truth as the unifying force for the true, the good, and the beautiful.
I. Contemporary Ideological Struggle Focuses on Core Values
Entering the 21st century, human history is undergoing major changes that far exceed the imagination of the 20th century. On one hand, the trend of mutual dependence between countries—where "no one can do without the other"—is evident, and the historical tide of peaceful development and win-win cooperation is surging forward. On the other hand, Western forces represented by the United States, in their desperate attempt to maintain "unipolar" hegemony, continually create "anti-globalization" crises, leaving the historical horizon turbulent and blurred. This shift is focused on the relationship between contemporary China and the world: socialism with Chinese characteristics is leading contemporary China toward the bright prospect of the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation in an irreversible manner. Meanwhile, the success of Chinese-path modernization has exposed the systemic crisis of Western modernization, causing "a major shift in the historical evolution and contest between the two ideologies of socialism and capitalism and the two social systems worldwide in favor of socialism." [1] The overall strategy of the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation and the world’s major changes unseen in a century [1] are "intertwined and interacting," indicating that the world today is in a period of major upheaval and transformation. While Western countries, led by the United States, suppress China almost irrationally, they continually play what they regard as their "trump card": Western "universal values." Consequently, the collision of core values is not only the focal point of current ideological struggles but also a major choice concerning the future of human civilization.
(1) Core Values and the Moral High Ground
There is a reason why Western countries favor playing the "values" card today. The most fundamental reason is the inertial advantage possessed by their ruling ideas. Marx argued long ago: "The ruling ideas of each age have ever been the ideas of its ruling class." [2] Despite the global hegemony established by capitalism over centuries of expansion trending toward total decline in the 21st century, Western advantages in terms of political systems and values remain, relative to their obvious loss of momentum in economic and social development. In other words, it is easy to use revolutionary consciousness to break the tip of the iceberg of ruling ideas, but difficult to overturn them entirely. It must be recognized that the side that has established a new order often retains space in its thinking for the legitimacy of the old order, while the overthrown old rulers certainly will not recognize the legitimacy of the new order; they still retain a massive advantage in thought. "Thus, even though victory was won by the proletariat, its struggle with the bourgeoisie remained unequal." [3] Changing this ideological disadvantage is an arduous process, during which the possibility of the restoration of the old regime exists at any time; this is precisely the capital that allows the West to continually manufacture "color revolutions" today. What the West has lost today are only certain comparative advantages, while in terms of core values, it indeed still possesses a clear edge. The claim that Western civilization is the mainstream civilization of contemporary humanity and that Western values are "universal values" is the "human value consensus" that Western ideology desperately maintains and promotes today.
Ideology determines the occupation of the moral high ground and is thus the basis for the legitimacy of a state system. Therefore, the struggle over core values is essentially a struggle for the moral high ground. The foothold of capitalist core values is "being-in-the-world" (this-centeredness); it constructs a value system based on the "reified" individual of the capitalist world. This type of person, who seemingly can be identified through the naked eye and empirical observation, is endowed with a triple significance: as the subject of history, the ontological basis of rights, and the "primordial human" (the authentic human). Since the possession of private property is the prerequisite for the autonomy of the reified individual, it constitutes the foundation of the private-ownership social formation. Since this individual is the source of all value, "the people" and "public opinion" can all be reduced to the reified individual. Furthermore, state power, as a conditional transfer of individual rights, must operate under political frameworks such as ballot-box democracy, party rotation, and the separation of powers. Because "non-dependence" is its touted "personal" characteristic, individualism—which worships abstract human nature and believes in "rational" egoism—serves as its value support.
However, the Western ideological shaping of the triple significance of the reified individual is a historical fabrication, not a historical truth. First, the reified individual observable to the naked eye today has never been the subject of history. Before the establishment of the capitalist social formation, individuals were not differentiated from the collective. The subjects of history during this long historical period were various collectives—for example, the "clan" in primitive society, the tribe in slave society, and the family in feudal society—as well as the social ranks and classes based upon them. Marx thus called this historical period a society of "personal dependence" to characterize how humans acted as the subjects of historical activity. After the establishment of capitalist society, individuals became "independent" conditionally, but not as human beings; rather, they gained independence and freedom as "things" (commodities). This was not social interaction with the individual as the subject, but commodity exchange with value as the link; the individual did not become the subject of history. The subjects of historical activity in the capitalist era have been primarily the increasingly simplified classes: namely, the bourgeoisie as personified capital and the modern proletariat as wage laborers. "Our epoch, the epoch of the bourgeoisie, possesses, however, this distinct feature: it has simplified class antagonisms. Society as a whole is more and more splitting up into two great hostile camps, into two great classes directly facing each other—Bourgeoisie and Proletariat." [2] In short, it is certain that the individual has never served as the subject of history in any history thus far.
Similarly, this ahistorical reified individual has never been the ontology of value. In the Marxist view, rights originate from social economic relations and thus change concretely and historically. "Right can never be higher than the economic structure of society and its cultural development conditioned thereby." [4] The Manifesto of the Communist Party explicitly states that "the history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles," which indicates that the value ontology of civilized society is not the individual, but the class. The state is not an expression of individual will through the transfer of individual rights, but the expression of the interests and will of the ruling class. Class relations are not reciprocal relations between individuals, but relations of production based on private ownership. Fashionable concepts, mass psychology, and appeals to human nature do not originate from the "inner voice" of the individual, but are the historical accumulation of the ideas of the ruling class. Therefore, there is no doubt that the rights embodied by the reified individual are, fundamentally, merely the expression of bourgeois rights.
(2) "Ahistoricism" is the Historical Degeneration of Capitalist Core Values
In the contemporary capitalist ideological fiction of the triple value of the reified individual, the most fundamental element is the fabrication of this individual as the "primordial human" (man in his original state). The bourgeoisie ascended the stage of history under the banner of "human liberation," and historical change under rational critique was its magic weapon. This was a historical dividing line that bid farewell to the past and faced the future, firmly believing that a "kingdom of reason" would follow. "Only now did the sun rise... the kingdom of reason; henceforth superstition, injustice, privilege, oppression, were to be superseded by eternal truth, eternal right, equality based on Nature and the inalienable rights of man." [4] However, subsequent facts proved: "This kingdom of reason was nothing more than the idealized kingdom of the bourgeoisie; that this eternal Right found its realization in bourgeois justice; that this equality reduced itself to bourgeois equality before the law; that bourgeois property was proclaimed as one of the essential rights of man; and that the government of reason, the Contrat Social of Rousseau, came into being, and only could come into being, as a democratic bourgeois republic." [4] Clearly, capitalism did not "end history"; it remains a mere transient traveler in history.
However, as capitalism trended toward decline and decay, the imagination of the end of history became stubbornly embedded in bourgeois ideology. A prominent change was the replacement of "rational man" with "spontaneous-natural man," marking a major degeneration of the bourgeois conception of history. "Rational man" is a historical yardstick. Through rational scrutiny and critique, it distinguished historical appearance from reality and established true existence within historical movement and development. "Religion, natural science, society, political institutions—everything was subjected to the most unsparing criticism: everything must justify its existence before the judgment-seat of Reason or give up existence. the reasoning intellect became the sole measure of everything." [4] Changing "rational" man to "natural" man means the historical yardstick has been discarded.
Why do bourgeois scholars describe the capitalist system and its reified individuals as "natural," eternal, and unchanging—and why do they succeed so often? From the perspective of the origins of historical conceptions, they use Hegel’s "end of history" theory to create momentum. For Hegel, the "end of history" was primarily a historical commanding height used to reveal the necessity of reality’s transformation; he never lightly claimed to have reached that end. Francis Fukuyama, claiming to represent the contemporary Hegelian school, asserted that history would "end" at the capitalist system, after which historical laws would transform into natural laws. As Marx pointed out, to say that "the existing relations (bourgeois relations of production) are natural is to suggest that these are the relations in which wealth is created and productive forces developed in conformity with the laws of nature. These relations therefore are themselves natural laws independent of the influence of time. They are eternal laws which must always govern society. Thus, there has been history, but there is no longer any." [4] Reducing the real people of social history to "natural" people, and changing historical existence into natural existence, is a denial of revolutionary change and social progress, and a naked defense of vested interest groups.
(3) Worship of Spontaneity is the Value Core of Contemporary Capitalist Ideology
The conservative nature of substituting the historical yardstick with a "natural" shift is self-evident. However, to continue occupying the moral high ground, conservatism must be dressed up as progress and concealment as axiom. Two weapons are used: first, "spontaneous freedom," and second, "spontaneous nature." The history of "spontaneous freedom" is quite long—namely, the bundling of autonomy and social fairness with spontaneity, clues of which can be seen in Adam Smith’s "invisible hand." He believed that a market trader "generally, indeed, neither intends to promote the public interest, nor knows how much he is promoting it... he intends only his own gain, and he is in this, as in many other cases, led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention. Nor is it always the worse for the society that it was no part of it. By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it." [5] Facts have proven that the view that economic activity can spontaneously form a corresponding moral order and social fairness—advocating for market exchange behavior to automatically balance conflicts between economics and ethics—is actually a reality fantasized by vested interest groups in the market economy. It is nothing more than a self-justification hoping for the eternalization of the existing order. History has proven that, faced with conflicting interests and ideas, without conscious coordination, they will inevitably explode in the form of external conflicts (economic crises, social crises, and even revolutionary crises), forcing mainstream society to face the interests and values it has ignored and make corresponding adjustments. The history of capitalist self-regulation is, in fact, a history of passive, defensive response under the pressure of external conflict.
It should be noted that Adam Smith’s "invisible hand" is similar to Hegel’s "cunning of reason"; it was merely a guess at the way reason operates in the absence of historical evidence at the time, and it did not treat spontaneity as an ideal state of freedom. However, with neoliberalism (such as Hayek), spontaneity became "nature," the ultimate freedom and ultimate history of humanity. Here, two fundamental changes occurred: first, the absolute individual ontology replaced the individual connected with humanity, completely denying the possibility of humanity as the subject of history; second, evolutionary reason replaced dialectical reason, completely denying historical leaps and social revolutions.
In classical liberalism, although individual historical subjectivity was emphasized, universal reason was not considered the exclusive property of any specific individual. Therefore, the individual as the carrier of reason was essentially the "Individual" with a capital "I," continuous with humanity as a whole. In this view, the individual subject and the human subject possessed identity; the individual did not monopolize historical subjectivity. Neoliberalism, however, is different. It uses so-called "evolutionary reason" to negate the universal reason that it terms "constructivist reason," thereby thoroughly negating the existence of any social subject beyond the individual. The essence of neoliberalism’s negation of universal reason is the negation of the possibility of cognizing the objective laws of historical development; it negates Hegel’s objective truth that "freedom is the recognition of necessity." The premise of this view of "reason" is undoubtedly the unshakeable ontological status of the individual and the immutable selfish nature of such individuals. This is the fundamental guiding ideology for various contemporary Western institutional designs. Consequently, we see Hayek’s concept of a "spontaneous social order," Buchanan’s public choice theory, and Nozick’s "entitlement theory of justice" and its political framework. Social activity is essentially a spontaneous activity under the game of individual interests, and historical progress can only be groped for through "trial and error." It is precisely within the mutual conflict of spontaneous individual interests that people gradually feel their way toward increasingly refined social norms such as administration, law, and morality. Their function is to protect free competition among people, and their purpose is to realize individual interests. Therefore, the so-called "society" is merely a synonym for "abstract rules of the game," thoroughly severed from the human person. This is the basic analysis of the state, law, historical progress, and social justice in Western liberalism. In Hayek’s words, this is a "spontaneous extended human order," in which the human reason embodied is not a so-called "constructivist rationalism" characterized by the construction of specific social goals, but a so-called "evolutionary rationalism" that corrects its own errors during spontaneous activity, attaining continuous refinement through constant local improvements.
The shift from critical reason to spontaneous reason exposes the degeneration of capitalist ideology, while simultaneously demonstrating that the philosophical worldview is the theoretical foundation of an ideology and its core values. Western institutional design is based on an idealist conception of history, whereas the philosophical foundation of the system of socialism with Chinese characteristics is the materialist conception of history (historical materialism). The idealist conception of history is, fundamentally, an individualist conception of history; the materialist conception of history is, fundamentally, a people-centered conception of history. The philosophical foundation of private ownership, multi-party systems, and the separation of powers is liberal individualism, while the historical-materialist foundation for upholding the leadership of the Communist Party lies in being people-centered. Without the people-centered conception of history found in historical materialism, upholding the leadership of the Communist Party would be like a building on sand—its ideological roots would be extremely unstable. Without the foundation of Marxism’s thoroughgoing materialist philosophy, the "Four Confidences" [2] would be rendered hollow. Therefore, the discussion of core values must delve deep into the philosophical worldview.
II. A Scientific Worldview is the Ideological Root of a Scientific Ideology
Whether an ideology can be scientific depends on whether it can be established on the basis of a scientific worldview. The notion that Marx and Engels only identified ideology as a "false system of ideas" while Lenin believed there could be a scientific ideology—and that this contradicts the views of Marx and Engels—still finds a market today. In studying Marx, we must not only know what he said but also clarify why he said it, and further consider how it should be said today; this is the scientific way to treat Marx. Precisely because of this, we believe that on this issue, Lenin profoundly grasped and innovatively developed Marx’s views on ideology. Therefore, attempts to refute Lenin through pure textual exegesis will not succeed.
It must be pointed out that although Marx and Engels identified Hegelian ideology as false consciousness and his dialectics as "standing on its head," they never doubted the mind's ability to grasp the world. Marx and Engels’ critique of Hegel’s celebration of the "age when the world was stood on its head" [3] via the French Revolution was also qualified; they by no means negated the pioneering nature of revolutionary ideas. Furthermore, we must see that Marx’s new materialist worldview emerged precisely through the critique of Hegelian philosophy, thereby demonstrating the theoretical inheritance between the two. It was Hegel who first attempted to establish the status of ideology as a system of absolute truth by constructing a philosophical worldview as a system of scientific knowledge.
(1) Hegel’s Positioning of Philosophy and Its Value
Hegel possessed a unique and brilliant understanding of philosophy. He overturned two reference frames that were widely influential then and remain so today. First, he overturned the popular Ancient Greek notion of philosophy as the study of "the love of wisdom." It should be said that the title "love of wisdom" for philosophy has a long history and wide dissemination; it was not only widely used in Hegel’s time, but even today people still favor this phrasing. However, Hegel was quite dismissive of this. He explicitly proposed that philosophy should be liberated from this title: "To help bring philosophy closer to the form of Science, to the goal where it can lay aside the title 'love of knowing' and be actual knowing—that is what I have set myself to do." [4] Clearly, the reason Hegel disdained such a general term as "love of wisdom" was that it failed to grasp the essence of philosophy—namely, the scientific form of "actual knowledge"—resulting in philosophy becoming a rather arbitrary and vacuous "game for the wise." He established the direction of opening philosophy up as something with scientific characteristics—that is, actual knowledge based on a system of truth.
Second, he overturned the "natural conception" prevalent since Kant that humanity cannot transcend the limits of its own cognitive abilities to grasp the world as a whole. In the preface to the Critique of Pure Reason, Kant praised the "physiology of the human understanding" proposed by Locke—that is, defining the scope of human cognition through the study of the cognitive faculty itself. They both shared this assumption: that a fundamentally unbridgeable chasm exists between the cognizing subject and the object yet to be known. This means that human cognitive ability is determined such that it can only stop at the realm of phenomena and cannot scientifically cognize the world as a whole. This "natural conception" created a chasm between appearance and the thing-in-itself, insulating science from faith. As Lenin pointed out, by limiting human cognitive ability to phenomena, faith was left to mysticism. "Kant argues thus: since our reason is limited to the knowledge of natural phenomena, since we can know nothing more than this, we must therefore believe in something mysterious, higher, and metaphysical. Kant's conclusion is: behind the phenomena there must be something, 'for where there is an appearance, there must be something that appears'." [5] It is evident that Kant’s unfathomable "thing-in-it-self" (Ding an sich) is essentially a question of the possibility of scientific faith. Dietzgen correctly saw that: "Kant, at least formally, drove metaphysics out of science to leave it in faith." [6] Enabling science to break through the "physical" (xing er xia) [7] and expand toward the "metaphysical" (xing er shang) is the key to grasping the Marxist worldview and its scientificity.
From this, Hegel drew two conclusions of great significance: First, the thesis that "philosophy is the essence of the spirit of the age," which established the position of philosophy as having the revelation of historical laws as its mission. Second, the judgment that philosophy is a "system of absolute truth (i.e., a scientific grasp of the world as a whole)," which established the direction of grasping the unity of the world through a monistic worldview. The young Marx was deeply inspired by this and elaborated upon it in his own philosophical explorations: "Since every true philosophy is the intellectual quintessence of its time, the time must come when philosophy not only internally by its content, but also externally through its form, comes into contact and interaction with the real world of its day. Philosophy then ceases to be a particular system in relation to other systems; it is becoming philosophy in general in relation to the world; it is becoming the philosophy of the contemporary world." [8] From this, Marx formed the idea of the interaction between monistic philosophical transformation and the holistic transformation of the world, laying the direction for his own philosophical exploration and transformation.
(2) Grounding the Question of the World’s Ultimate Existence on Scientific Cognition
The posing of the Kantian problem of the "unfathomable thing-in-itself" was, from a historical perspective, the result of nature and human history still being in a state of partition within the human horizon of that time. For Hegel, nature was merely the expansion of pure quantity (space) without qualitative change (time), and was thus "bad infinity." In Hegel’s philosophical system, it was logic that had not yet become a contradiction; it had not entered history. This was precisely the greatest weakness of Hegel’s idealist dialectics. Although Kant proposed the "nebular hypothesis," introducing change and development (time) into nature and guessing at the laws of motion of nature in a certain respect, he did not bridge the gap between nature and human society. This spatial partition became a cognitive chasm between the finite and the infinite, ensuring that the problem of the "thing-in-itself" still had a basis for existence.
In the process of founding the new materialist worldview, Marx and Engels bridged the three previously seemingly isolated fields: nature, human society, and the phenomena of thought. Generally speaking, they solved the following three difficult problems: First, regarding the ultimate structure of the world, they expanded from external spatial extension to the integration of internal space and time. To solve the problem of the world’s ultimate existence, one must first grasp its structure. Previously, this problem remained unresolved precisely due to defects in the mode of thinking. In fact, constantly questioning the noumenon "behind" the phenomena pushed the problem into boundless infinite space, thereby falling into what Hegel called "bad infinity," which lacks ultimacy. Hegel made a very sagacious judgment: "Interaction is the true causa finalis [ultimate cause] of things." [9] However, for him, the acting force only came from the spiritual subject; there was no active object, and thus there was only "externalization," not true "interaction." By establishing "sensuous man" and his "sensuous activity," Marx opened the door to the dynamism of matter. From the interaction within objective practical activity to the metabolism of the entire universe, interaction—that is, contradiction—was proven to be the structure of the world’s ultimate existence. "We cannot go back further than to knowledge of this interaction, for the very reason that there is nothing behind it to know." [10]
Second, regarding the form of the world’s ultimate existence, they moved from the unity of matter to the unity of process. The Kantian problem of the "thing-in-itself" was raised after traditional metaphysics had been overturned. Facts proved that the ultimate existence of the world cannot be reduced to a single piece of matter (such as "atoms"); it was inevitable that its ultimacy would be broken through. However, this does not mean that the world’s ultimate existence has no unified form and can only be reduced to a "fragmented" existence. In his exploration of philosophical transformation, Marx had a major epistemological shift—namely, the understanding of existence shifted from "what it is" to "how it manifests its existence." For example, in The German Ideology, Marx shifted from the traditional abstract questioning of "what man is" to how man "manifests himself." "It is a definite form of activity of these individuals, a definite form of expressing their life, a definite mode of life on their part. As individuals express their life, so they are." [11] It was precisely by grasping the mode of expression as the ultimate mode of existence of things that Marx successfully solved the problem of the material unity of the world. Because "by our having recognized the forms of motion of matter (for which, it is true, we still lack a great deal, in view of the short time that natural science has existed), we have also recognized matter itself, and therewith our knowledge is complete," [12] and the chasm between phenomenon and noumenon ceases to exist.
Third, regarding the question of the identity of the finite and the infinite: transitioning from "antinomies" to dialectical unity. Undoubtedly, we will always face an infinite unknown world and will never reach its end. The question is whether this unknown world contains certain "unknowable" realms. It is precisely for this reason that Kant's "thing-in-itself" [13] harbors an "unknowable" tendency. Marx's efforts in this regard boil down to one point: adhering to a thorough materialism. The unity of the world lies not in its existence, but in its materiality. Objective reality is the primary attribute of material existence; reflection theory is the primary attribute of human cognition; and objective truth is the primary characteristic of truthful cognition. The material unity of the world establishes the objective basis for a scientific understanding of the world as a whole. "There is absolutely no inevitable difference between the phenomenon and the thing-in-itself, and there can be none. The difference exists only between what is already known and what is not yet known. The claim that there is a special boundary between the two—the claim that the thing-in-itself is 'beyond' [14] the phenomenon (Kant), or that we can and should use a philosophical barrier to isolate ourselves from the question of a part of the world that is not yet known but exists outside of us (Hume)—all these philosophical fabrications are nonsense, quirks (Schrulle), sophistry, and inventions." [24]77 Marx's new materialism is a materialistic monist worldview; any hesitation or ambiguity on this issue would constitute a subversive error.
(3) Grounding the ultimate value of the immortality of life upon a realistic historical foundation.
Whether faith can be scientized is another major challenge for metaphysics to enter the scientific field of vision and for science to grasp the world as a whole. Compared to the problem of the "thing-in-itself," faith is a purely value-based issue, possessing an even more invisible and unspeakable mystery. However, since faith is ultimately a way to satisfy the needs of human existence, it cannot be truly inexplicable or unintelligible. Marxism profoundly reveals the socio-historical conditions under which supernatural faiths such as religion arise and their internal relationship with the human condition; it scientifically elucidates the historical positioning of religion as a phenomenon of the social superstructure. However, faith is not a forbidden zone for science or the exclusive domain of supernatural mystery. Scientific faith is not only possible but is destined to become the dominant force in human belief as society progresses. So-called faith is the pursuit of absolute value that transcends the finitude of individual life and actual suffering. Although different individuals have different understandings of suffering and immortality, common social suffering and ultimate concerns for humanity do exist.
Marxism’s key to resolving the issue of scientific faith lies in the following three points: First, replacing the "Kingdom of Heaven" with "ideals" and using historical laws to grasp a beautiful future for humanity. The "Kingdom of Heaven" is the most important ultimate concern in religious faith for the "solace" of life's immortality and secular suffering; the soul ascending to "heaven" is undoubtedly the highest value pursuit of the religious believer. It goes without saying, however, that the "Kingdom of Heaven" cannot be recognized through reason; in the end, it is merely a matter of believers believing it exists and non-believers believing it does not. Marxism holds a firm conviction regarding the beautiful future of humanity, but this conviction is not based on emotional needs, but on scientific cognition. Marxism reveals the historical law that capitalism must inevitably perish and that human "prehistory" will necessarily end with the realization of communism. The communist ideal is not a "beautiful wish" situated on some distant shore, but a historical driving force running through the entire process of the transition from capitalism to communism; therefore, it is always an "actually existing" objective truth. Its difference from the "Kingdom of Heaven" lies in the fact that, although communism has not been fully proven empirically today, it is being continuously proven by experience, and its transcendental components are constantly being transformed into experience. Therefore, despite contemporary humanity still facing the challenge of "where to go," it is an indisputable fact that "the communist ideological system and social system are spreading through the world with the momentum of an outgoing tide and the force of a thunderbolt, maintaining their wonderful youth." [25]686
Second, replacing "God" with the masses of the people led by the working class, thereby returning supernatural mysterious powers to humanity. Beginning with Feuerbach's critique of Christianity, people have known that the essence of God is nothing but the alienation of the human essence. Returning the attributes of God’s omniscience, omnipotence, forgiveness, and benevolence to man has become a major pursuit of human liberation in modern times. However, history has proven that this "return" of human power is not only a realization in thought and cognition but, more importantly, the awakening of the subject's power. Although the masses have always been the decisive force in history, their becoming a conscious historical subject only began with the modern proletariat's ascent to the historical stage. Marx replaced individual reason with class consciousness and scientific faith (via the political party), making collective wisdom and collective creation possible, and in principle solving the difficulties of evolution and leaps, spontaneity and consciousness, and freedom and necessity in the historical process. If the working class possesses a "human character" because it has no vested class interests, then in theory and practice, this is manifested in its uninhibited and full absorption of the outstanding achievements of predecessors, becoming a true social subject. Schumpeter also admitted: "Social classes are not the creatures of the taxonomer but living entities. Their existence has consequences which are entirely missed if we think of society as an amorphous collection of individuals or families." [26]21 With the formation of the working class as the historical subject, the masses have become the "God" who liberates themselves.
Third, replacing "prayer" with the cause of human liberation, and achieving true "redemption" through the realistic transformation of the world. Redemption in religious faith is not only an individual act but is also limited to emotional activity; it can hardly produce actual effects in improving the human condition, serving at most as a form of spiritual release. Facts prove that self-change divorced from the change of the living environment is merely interpreting and passively adapting to the world. Whereas "the coincidence of the changing of circumstances and of human activity or self-change can be conceived and rationally understood only as revolutionary practice." [23]500 The Marxist cause of human liberation is rooted in the world socialist movement led by the working class. This great cause, which requires the continuous struggle of many generations, has laid a solid realistic foundation for scientific faith. While transforming the objective world, we transform the subjective world; while opening up the construction of a new society, we mold the builders of that new society; while achieving increasingly great abundance of material wealth, we eliminate polarization and promote the free and well-rounded development of individuals. This concrete and historical unity of changing the environment and changing the person gives scientific faith and the communist ideal and conviction a majestic and indestructible force.
III. Scientific Truthfulness is the Advantage of the Socialist Core Values
Competition over core values and national soft power has gradually become the focus of current ideological conflict. For us, this is both an opportunity and a challenge. The most significant and profound change in the great changes unseen in a century [15] is the change in the relationship between China and the world—the fact that China has become an important force influencing the global landscape. The world’s attention to China has never been as broad, deep, and focused as it is today; China’s influence on the world has never been as comprehensive, profound, and long-lasting as it is today. Especially since the outbreak of the 2008 global financial crisis, Western ideology has retreated from a full display (and even flaunting) of its institutional superiority to a struggle to hold its "bottom line." This indicates that the pattern of its comprehensive ideological offensive has begun to loosen, thereby providing an opportunity for socialism to expand its influence. Facts show that in today’s Western intellectual circles, there are not only signs of a Marxist "resurrection" or "renaissance," but interest in socialism with Chinese characteristics is also increasing. We must seize this opportunity and fight the battle over core values well.
It is important to note that Western core values have consistently donned the cloak of "universalism," using abstract human commonalities as chips to constantly blur the theoretical boundaries between right and wrong while diluting their ideological nature. Therefore, today, when practicing socialist core values, we must leverage their advantages, prioritize truthfulness, strengthen our targeting, and highlight the following characteristics:
(A) Highlighting the advanced leading nature of Socialist Core Values
Socialist core values are a highly condensed summary and concentrated manifestation of the Marxist stance, viewpoint, and method; they are the fundamental value pursuits and concepts of Chinese Communists, and they represent value pursuits that are distinct from and superior to those of capitalism. They both condense the value consensus of the whole society, reflecting the common value pursuits of contemporary humanity and the "greatest common denominator" of value consensus, while also manifesting the trend of the times and the direction of history, leading socialism with Chinese characteristics in the New Era to break new ground on the new journey. The reason for this is that socialist core values are based on the scientific cognition of the objective laws of historical development, allowing them to stand on the historical high ground to establish value coordinates and judge the historical rationality of value pursuits.
- Viewing the rationality and limitations of bourgeois core values historically
It is necessary to historically distinguish contemporary capitalist core values from the bourgeois values of the revolutionary period. Although the bourgeois value pursuit during the revolutionary period also served capitalist interests, it was, after all, basically consistent with the requirements of historical development at the time. Therefore, "at this moment, the demands and rights of this class truly become the rights and demands of society itself; it is truly the social head and the social heart." [27]13 Consequently, during this period, it spoke in the name of humanity with historical authenticity and received relatively broad social recognition. From the perspective of value forms, while bourgeois values certainly had class limitations (such as emphasizing private rights and formal equality), they did not squeeze out the space for truthful cognition; hypocrisy had not yet become their essence.
The situation today is entirely different. Western countries, represented by the United States, are increasingly running counter to the historical trends of peaceful coexistence, win-win cooperation, equality, and mutual benefit. Consequently, the narrowness, hypocrisy, and anti-scientific nature of their core values have become increasingly obvious. Core values are no longer their mode of faith but a pragmatist tool and a method for achieving their base ideological hegemony. The subjectivization of judgment criteria and the "double standards" in implementation are among the internal contradictions of contemporary Western core values. On the one hand, by denying laws, evading truth, remaining indifferent to theory, and being obsessed with present-day human nature, contemporary Western values have completely lost the truthful criteria for judgment and thus can only fall into hallucinations and metaphysics. As Engels pointed out when exposing the German bourgeoisie after they became vested interest holders: "That old unconcerned spirit in theory has completely disappeared along with classical philosophy... the official representatives of this science have all become unvarnished metaphysicians of the bourgeoisie and the existing state." [22]258 Fantasizing the difference between socialism and capitalism as a struggle between "democracy" and "totalitarianism" is the masterpiece of these metaphysicians. On the other hand, even according to the standards subjectively fantasized by the West, Western society is not so perfect, and socialist China is not so worthless. Thus, in the judgment of specific matters, double standards must inevitably be implemented. The pragmatization of core values is a sign that Western ideology is gradually losing the moral high ground today. Leading the pursuit of values with truthful cognition is an ideological principle we must adhere to in carrying out the struggle over values.
- The historical degeneration of "universal values" and their realistic hazards
The more capitalist ideology becomes a defensive consciousness for special interests, the more it must desperately cling to "all-humanity" status, and the more its hypocrisy is exposed. "Universal values" are its representative work. Originally, Western values based on individualism consistently flaunted pluralism, relativity, and de-centering. However, within the institutional framework of "universal values," there is only one structure for the modern state, and naturally only one set of core values—namely, the finalized capitalist system and its spirit. Therefore, following the path of "universal values" means following the path of "total Westernization," which means mechanically copying the West institutionally, especially the Western-style multi-party system. Anyone who does not do so is excluded from being a state of democracy and the rule of law, is unqualified as a "modern state," and can only be a "totalitarian state." Formal value pluralism and factual value singularity are another internal contradiction of contemporary capitalist core values.
The obsession with "universal values" bears witness to the historical degeneration of core capitalist values as they lose their progressive character and shift toward guarding narrow self-interest. Suppressing revolution and promoting superficial reforms have become its keynote, while conservative liberalism has become its ideological mainstream. It attributes the vast disparity between ideal and reality to the "sin" of revolution, or to a so-called "presumption of reason." [16] Through "de-revolutionization," it forces people to submit to the existing distribution of interests; by negating objective truth, it promotes the law of the jungle where "might makes right"; through egoistic individualism, it denies the principle of the people as masters of the country; and by denying the existence of a unified "general will," it hollows out democracy into a "democracy of voting," twisting social contradictions into a game between personal interests and a struggle between civil rights and public power. Thus, the "universal human rights" that once encompassed revolutionary principles and embodied the courage to pursue truth during the drafting of the "Declaration of the Rights of Man" have completely degenerated into an apologetic tool for whitewashing reality. Consequently, "formal democracy" has become the specimen of democracy, the laissez-faire market economy has become the optimal economic order, and the pursuit of self-interest maximization has become the core value of freedom.
What builds consensus and leads people forward is no longer a theoretical logic based on the grasping of truth, but an "axiological" universal ethic that is self-evident in people's hearts; the resulting pursuit of values becomes the force that inspires collective action. The shift toward ethical values being superior to truth-values, and the "moral high ground" being superior to the "historical high ground," represents a new development in Western ideology. It is not difficult to see that "universal values" possess a distinct historical regressiveness and political conservatism; they are the theoretical cornerstone for the West's current attempts to "Westernize" and "split" [17] our country. Their specific target is "socialist consultative democracy with Chinese characteristics," and their bullseye is the state system based on upholding the leadership of the Communist Party of China. Only from the historical high ground can we break the Western monopoly on common human values such as democracy and freedom, and "rectify the names" [18] of the system of Communist Party leadership and the socialist market economy system under socialism with Chinese characteristics.
3. Historical Contrasts in the Ebb and Flow Reveal the Future of Human Civilization
The degeneration of Western-style democracy into the "low-quality democracy" that is the source of turmoil in the contemporary world stands in sharp historical contrast to the rise of "non-Western democracy" represented by socialism with Chinese characteristics. The world today is experiencing a level of upheaval and chaos rarely seen since the disintegration of the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, or even since the end of the Second World War. The primary cause is the increasing decline of the West-centric world system and the failure of the Western "democratic system" represented by the United States; its various mutated forms of "low-quality democracy" have brought disaster to the globe. Western-style democracy is increasingly irrational, degrading into a "political show" for special interest groups and political figures, becoming nothing more than pure political trickery. Its electoral methods have grown increasingly sordid, with "dark money" politics running rampant, and candidates competing to pander to voters to cover up social contradictions—prioritizing victory over right and wrong, thereby corrupting the social atmosphere.
In vivid contrast, the "whole-process" people's democracy of socialism with Chinese characteristics is flourishing. It interprets the internal consistency between formal democracy and substantive democracy, and between upholding the leadership of the Communist Party and ensuring the people are masters of the country. The construction of democratic politics in contemporary China demonstrates that without a Party that dares to take historical responsibility, possesses the courage for sacrifice and dedication, and serves the people heart and soul, democracy can only be a political game or even a scam. History fully proves that any social progress or historical leap requires the guidance of advanced forces. To change the social reality—extant since the dawn of class society—of the few ruling the many, and to realize the vision of the people as masters of the country (a feat never before achieved in the thousands of years of human civilization), would be unimaginable without the sustained struggle of an advanced, powerful, and self-sacrificing political party. Such a party is not produced by voting; rather, it is armed with Marxism, holds itself to the strict standards of the working class, and is tempered through constant testing in practice, daring to "turn the blade inward" and consciously carry out self-revolution.
The leading role of core socialist values is also prominently reflected in promoting cultural self-confidence and self-strengthening in the New Era and in creating new glories for socialist culture. Unlike in previous historical periods, most people today do not directly encounter theory in their daily lives; even thorough theories must be transformed through real life to be accepted by the majority. The leading role played by core socialist values centrally embodies the latest fruits of cultural development—the combination of Marxism with the fine traditional Chinese culture. It integrates into social life in rich and diverse forms, allowing people to perceive and comprehend it in practice until it reaches the level where "the common people use it daily without realizing it." [19] This fully demonstrates that core socialist values are the key link in transforming the theoretical innovations of the Sinicization and modernization of Marxism into practice.
(2) Highlighting the Scientific Faith Function of Core Socialist Values
Historical experience proves that upholding the guiding position of Marxism in the ideological field, adhering to a monistic scientific worldview, holding high the banner of Marxist truth, and founding the Party and the state on scientific faith is a necessity not only for social progress but also for human development. Lenin thus proposed that the Party's "task is to fight spontaneity, to divert the working-class movement from this spontaneous, trade-unionist striving to come under the wing of the bourgeoisie, and to bring it under the wing of revolutionary Social-Democracy." [20] This is a requirement for both political construction and the advancement of human civilization. Adhering to dialectical materialism and historical materialism, and maintaining a thoroughgoing materialist philosophical stance, manifests as the unremitting exploration, understanding, and grasping of the objective laws of historical development, steadfastly conforming to and leading the tide of the times, and clearly implementing and practicing the people-centered historical outlook and development concept. Thorough materialism embodies the scientific spirit of seeking the true existence of the world, the true face of things, and the truth of matters; it adopts a scientific attitude that takes truth as its highest pursuit, objective truth as its highest value, and objective laws as its highest guide. Scientific faith thus possesses an indelible charm.
Core socialist values are rooted in human needs, but they never view these needs as fixed or stagnant. Rather, "the first need itself, when satisfied, and the instrument of satisfaction, and the acquired satisfaction, lead to new needs." [21] This is a fundamental human activity—the "first historical act." Since human nature is human need, it follows that human nature is historically formed, changing and developing. Therefore, on the one hand, we absolutely reject the Western ideological fabrication that "selfishness is innate human nature"; on the other hand, we recognize that the rational transformation and healthy development of human nature is no easy task. General Secretary Xi Jinping has pointed out: "The great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation will not be achieved easily with the beat of drums and gongs." [22] This refers not only to the difficulty of transforming the environment for survival but also to the difficulty of transforming human nature. The value of scientific faith lies in its profound revelation of the relationship between individual destiny and human development, activating the human need for self-transcendence and leading both human development and social progress. "When the people have faith, the state has strength, and the nation has hope." This is absolutely true!
(3) Highlighting the Theoretical Essence of Core Socialist Values in the New Era
In rejecting the Western "universal values," we must profoundly reveal the essential differences that lie beneath certain shared terms. Only by fully grasping the progressive nature of core socialist values can we truly clarify the fundamental difference between them and the Western liberal-democratic "universal values," rightly advocate for and promote the common values of humanity, and turn the "greatest common denominator" of the community for the Chinese nation and the shared spiritual home of humanity into reality. Therefore, studying and implementing the theoretical essence of Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era, and grasping the worldview and methodology therein, is the fundamental basis for practicing core socialist values.
As a complete scientific system, Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era is rich in content. However, for the theoretical exposition of core socialist values, the most important fundamental points are: putting the people first, common prosperity, and the greatness of labor. These embody the theoretical pillars and ideological essence of core socialist values; without them, these values cannot be clearly explained or understood. "The people create history" and "labor creates history" are synonymous; they reveal the objective laws of historical development from subjective and objective perspectives respectively, constituting the core of the historical materialist outlook. Common prosperity is a historical necessity reflecting the people as the subjects of history and labor as the source of progress; it embodies the essence of socialism. The persistent application of these theories has initiated the history of comprehensively advancing the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation through Chinese-path modernization. In defining the nature of core socialist values, it must be clear that these are socialist, not "universal values"; they are collectivist, not individualist.
While Marxism profoundly revealed the class essence and historical limitations of Western freedom, democracy, and human rights, it also successfully seized the moral high ground of contemporary human civilization, providing moral support for the proletarian revolution. Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era advances this theoretical thoroughness into the construction of a great modern socialist country, consolidating the moral high ground of Chinese-path modernization. Core socialist values specifically need to play a role in theoretical construction, the cultivation of lifestyles, and the construction of academic discourse.
The simultaneous advancement of theoretical innovation and theoretical arming is the powerful driving force of socialism with Chinese characteristics in the New Era. From the perspective of theoretical construction, core socialist values are directly linked to people's interests, life experiences, and emotional perceptions. Thus, they vividly present different value choices and life paths before everyone, prompting people to think, question, and explore, thereby increasing real theoretical demand. On the other hand, core values focus both on the cultivation of lifestyles and on regulating institutional construction, organically unifying the cultivation of people, the utilization of people, and institutional building. This can effectively overcome the current phenomenon where certain institutional orientations are somewhat disconnected from theoretical orientations. In short, by focusing closely on the cultivation and penetration of core values, ideological and theoretical construction must survive by addressing the needs of actual life and the demands of various interests, and the situation of neglecting theoretical study or the decoupling of theory and practice is expected to be overcome. Truly integrating theoretical study and construction into the practice of core socialist values is an important way to link theory with practice.
The cultivation of an active and healthy lifestyle is the support for social construction in the New Era and a crucial landing point for core socialist values. The different lifestyles of capitalism and socialism stem from different understandings of human nature. In Western liberalism, maintaining a "consciousness of superiority" and the "competitive" channels to achieve it is seen as the inexhaustible source of lasting social vitality; its premise is the recognition of "inevitable and ineradicable" inequalities. The inequality discussed here refers not to natural differences between people but to social differences—primarily economic, political, and cultural-psychological disparities. Clearly, the equality recognized by Western liberalism is merely a formal "concept of equality," rather than equality in the sense of eliminating classes, eliminating exploitation, and achieving common prosperity. Under conditions where actual inequality is maintained, comprehensive interaction between person and person, and between humans and nature, becomes impossible. Human development space is inevitably limited, and social antagonism and vicious conflict are unavoidable. It is certain that humanity will not remain intoxicated forever within the fenced-in lifestyle constructed by capitalist civilization; breaking through the trap of the "pseudo-community" [23] to construct a true community is the trend of history. In the cultivation of healthy lifestyles, core socialist values—by fostering "pro-business and clean" [24] social relations that shake off the "smell of copper" (money-worship), and by enriching life through habits such as reading—constantly initiate new types of social relations that transcend the reified relations of capitalism.
Leading the construction of philosophy and social sciences with Chinese characteristics through the Socialist Core Values is a major strategic task put forward in the New Era. If a great modern socialist power must be a cultural power, then the construction of philosophy and social sciences with Chinese characteristics provides the academic support for such a cultural power. Due to the inherent ideological attributes of philosophy and social sciences, the construction of their disciplinary, academic, and discourse systems is always laden with the infiltration of values.
It must be observed that Western philosophy and social sciences, flying the banner of "academicism," have long falsely alleged that Marxism is merely "ideology" and not science, thereby comprehensively infiltrating and occupying the front [25] of our country’s philosophy and social sciences. In academic research, it is common to see people detach themselves from the overall situation of national development while flaunting their "pure scholarship"; in discourse systems, they reject dialectical materialism and historical materialism while boasting of "value neutrality"; in academic style, they mechanically copy the West, bestowing upon it the fine name of "international perspective." In the process of practicing Socialist Core Values, breaking down these barriers to the construction of philosophy and social sciences with Chinese characteristics and a great modern socialist power is a strategic goal that must be achieved.
(Author details: Hou Huiqin, Professor, Doctoral Supervisor, President of the Chinese Society of Historical Materialism) Web Editor: Tongxin Source: Journal of Jinggangshan University (Social Sciences Edition), Issue 1, 2024.