Yang Zhenwen: A New Form of Human Civilization: The Innovative Development of Marx and Engels' Concept of Civilization
A meticulous examination of the classic texts of Marx and Engels reveals that "civilization" is an important philosophical category they discussed frequently. In the process of founding and developing historical materialism, Marx and Engels provided profound answers to a series of major questions concerning civilization—its essence, paradoxes, driving forces, and paths—forming a rich and self-consistent systemic view of civilization.
In ancient society, the Chinese people authored a glorious Chinese chapter of human civilization—traditional Chinese civilization—making indelible contributions to the development of human civilization. Guided by the theoretical framework of the Marxist and Engelsean view of civilization, contemporary Chinese Communists must make new and even greater contributions to the development of human civilization in the historical process of promoting the comprehensive building of a great modern socialist country and the realization of the Chinese Dream of the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation.
The report to the 20th National Congress of the CPC explicitly stated that "creating a new form of human civilization" is one of the essential requirements of Chinese-path modernization. The report's positioning of this as an "essential requirement" fully demonstrates our Party's responsibility and commitment to its civilizational mission in the New Era. It is precisely in the process of leading Chinese-path modernization that our Party has achieved a multi-layered transcendence of traditional Chinese civilization, traditional socialist civilization, and Western civilization, creating a new form of human civilization. This represents the creative application and innovative development of the Marxist and Engelsean view of civilization in contemporary China.
I. The Formative Trajectory of the Marxist and Engelsean View of Civilization
Marx and Engels were the revolutionary teachers of the global proletariat and the working people. Their profound critique of the "paradox of civilization" in capitalist society, their deep reflection on the trajectory of human civilization, and their creative conceptualization of the future communist civilizational form together formed their richly nuanced view of civilization. The formation and development of this view did not happen overnight; rather, it underwent a transformation from historical idealism to historical materialism, specifically involving the abandonment of the "crutch" of rationalist philosophy, the birth of a new worldview, and the critique of capitalist civilization.
(1) Gestating through the breakthrough of the loss of rationalist philosophy
Fukuzawa Yukichi pointed out in An Outline of a Theory of Civilization [1] that civilization is a relative term with both narrow and broad senses: the former primarily refers to the increase in human material needs, while the latter encompasses both the satisfaction of material needs such as food, clothing, housing, and transportation, and the elevation of spiritual realms such as the cultivation of intellect and virtue. This indicates that Fukuzawa defined the connotation of "civilization" from the two dimensions of the material and the spiritual.
The era in which the young Marx and Engels lived was one where capitalist civilization was striving to extend itself across the globe. How to accurately grasp the category of "civilization" from the dimension of the unity of matter and spirit, and how to scientifically evaluate capitalist civilization, together constituted the "Civilizational Question" of the capitalist era. Bourgeois thinkers attempted to philosophically demonstrate that capitalist civilization possessed eternal rationality, interpreting civilization as the result of a certain spiritual movement. Hegel, for example, interpreted history as the evolution of the consciousness of freedom. In his view, "World history is the training of the untamed natural will to obedience to a universal principle... The Orient knew and to the present day knows only that one is free; the Greek and Roman world, that some are free; the German world knows that all are free." This shows that Hegel utilized the spiritual dimension of civilization (i.e., free will), using the contrast of "one," "some," and "all" to defend the advanced nature, rationality, and eternity of the capitalist system.
Hegel's view of civilization had a significant influence on Marx. Marx spent his university years primarily in Berlin; during his studies, he became familiar with the philosophical ideas of Hegel and his disciples and established contact with the Young Hegelians. Deeply influenced by Bruno Bauer’s philosophy of self-consciousness, he attempted to engage in the resolution of German social problems through radical democracy. Engels arrived in Berlin in 1841 for military service, which provided him the opportunity to participate in the Young Hegelian movement and throw himself into the critique of Schelling's philosophy of revelation. Between June and July 1842, Marx pointed out in "Leading Article in No. 179 of the Kölnische Zeitung" that "any true philosophy is the spiritual quintessence of its time... the living soul of civilization." This important discourse fully demonstrates that Marx's thinking at this time was developing through contradictions: on the one hand, materialist elements were constantly increasing, manifesting as dissatisfaction with the philosophy of self-consciousness and a requirement for philosophy to focus on social reality, especially to highlight the spirit of the age; on the other hand, the crutch of rationalist philosophy had not yet been truly abandoned, emphasizing that the essence of human civilization could only be presented in an ideal form (especially philosophy). Overall, Marx and Engels's view of civilization during this period was primarily interpreted through the dimension of thought and culture, especially philosophy, bearing deep traces of Hegelian rationalist philosophy.
(2) Establishment during the birth of the new worldview
Marx and Engels, who took the realization of human liberation as their personal responsibility, were not mere ivory-tower academics, but true thinkers who "established the heart for heaven and earth, and established the mission for the lives of the people" [2] in the process of actively engaging in the socio-political arena. Working at the Rheinische Zeitung, Marx began to keenly realize the special importance of material interests and economic factors for the development of civilization. In the October 1842 article "Proceedings of the Sixth Rhine Province Assembly (Debates on the Law on Thefts of Wood)," Marx profoundly recognized that although the law should be synonymous with "fairness and justice," the actual content of legislation was not determined by abstract concepts like "fairness and justice," but by the material interests of the property owners represented by the deputies of the Rhine Province Assembly, "turning the state authority into a servant of the forest owners." This indicates that at this time, Marx was beginning to draw a line between himself and Hegel's idealist view that the "Absolute Idea decides everything," profoundly revealing the extreme hypocrisy of capitalist legal civilization and moving toward a historical materialist understanding of human civilization.
In 1844, in the article "The Condition of England: The Eighteenth Century," Engels proceeded from the facts of economic and social development to profoundly interpret the history of Western Europe in the 18th century and the trends of civilizational development. This stood in sharp contrast to the idealist argumentative methods of the Young Hegelians, who used abstract ideas to deduce historical development. In this article, Engels also profoundly elaborated a famous dictum—"Civilization is a matter of practice, a quality of society." The proposal of this dictum marked the beginning of Engels's view of civilization breaking free from the shackles of the rationalist view of civilization held by bourgeois scholars, consciously interpreting the essence of civilization from the perspective of historical materialism. In Engels's view, civilization is not a spiritual product deduced from purely abstract concepts, but a product of human social practice, and thus possesses practicality and sociality. In the article, Engels also scientifically discussed the dialectical relationship between industrial development and civilizational development, profoundly noting that "the increase in the degree of civilization is the indisputable result of all improvements in industry."
In the same year, Marx and Engels co-authored The Holy Family, which was their first collaborative intellectual achievement. it holds a particularly important position in the process of founding their new worldview, serving as an important document in which they drew an ideological line against idealism, and a key text for the gestation of their view of civilization. In this work, Marx and Engels settled accounts with the idealist "philosophy of self-consciousness" of Bauer and others, emphasizing that material production is the most fundamental form of human practice. The development of human civilization is inseparable from this form of practice, and the masses of the people are the true subjects of civilizational practice—"history is the work of the masses."
From 1845 to 1846, Marx and Engels collaborated again to write The German Ideology, which completely cleared away the Young Hegelian philosophy that represented German ideology. It centrally elaborated the new materialist worldview and completed the systematic formulation of the theoretical system of historical materialism, providing scientific theoretical support for their view of civilization. Regarding human history and human civilization, although previous thinkers had this or that specific insight, they generally fell into the errors of the idealist conception of history. The German Ideology fundamentally overcame these errors and formally announced the birth of historical materialism, making it a highly original theoretical work. In the work, through a profound analysis of the basic contradictions of society, Marx and Engels examined the forms of ownership that had appeared in human history and the fundamental drivers of the leap in human civilizational forms. They revealed the serious drawbacks of capitalist ownership in hindering the further development of social productive forces and human civilization, clarifying that communism "is the real movement which abolishes the present state of things." As a high stage of human civilization, the "present state of things" that communism needs to abolish naturally includes the various social maladies existing in capitalist society that hinder the development of civilization.
In summary, the Marxist and Engelsean view of civilization was established through the process of bidding farewell to the Young Hegelians' philosophy of spirit and Feuerbach's metaphysical materialism, alongside the founding of historical materialism and the birth of the new worldview.
(3) Development through the critique of capitalist civilization
In 1848, in the Communist Manifesto—the programmatic document marking the birth of the Marxist worldview—Marx and Engels clearly envisioned the bright prospects of human civilization: the future society (communist society) would be an ideal society realizing the free and comprehensive development of the person. This prospect of a beautiful civilization was laid on the foundation of Marx and Engels's profound critique of Western civilization. On the one hand, they fully affirmed that "the bourgeoisie, historically, has played a most revolutionary part"; the appearance of capitalist civilization rapidly developed social productive forces and created enormous material wealth unprecedented in previous societies. On the other hand, they profoundly revealed the paradox of capitalist civilization: although capitalist relations of production were more advanced than those of feudal society and better promoted the development of productive forces, the repeated appearance of economic crises showed that "the conditions of bourgeois society are too narrow," and capitalist ownership relations had become an obstacle to the further development of productive forces. At the same time, in capitalist society, human value and dignity were not fully manifested due to the rapid growth of productive forces; on the contrary, "it has resolved personal worth into exchange value." Neither did the backward countries of the East achieve healthy economic and social development because of the opening of the bourgeois world market; on the contrary, they were reduced to colonies or semi-colonies, making "barbarian and semi-barbarian countries dependent on the civilized ones."
After the publication of the Communist Manifesto, in the process of combining theoretical creation with the workers' movement, Marx and Engels continued to launch profound critiques of Western civilization from multiple dimensions. For example, in Capital, Marx analyzed Western civilization from the dimension of political economy, revealing that the secret of capitalist exploitation lies in the extraction of surplus value. The bourgeoisie possesses a "werewolf-like hunger" for the extraction of surplus value, and its limitless squeezing "exceeds the cruelties of the Spaniards against the redskins of America." It is precisely because capital possesses the nature of chasing profit that the capitalist society suffers from tense labor-capital relations and serious class antagonism. This also fully demonstrates that capitalist civilization possesses an irreconcilable antagonistic contradiction within itself.
In the Critique of the Gotha Programme, Marx further elaborated on the complexity of the evolution of human civilization: as the highest realm of human civilization, the establishment of communist society cannot be achieved in a single step. Before the arrival of the higher stage of communist society, there will inevitably be a "first phase of communist society" and a "political transition period in which the state can be nothing but the revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat." In his later years, Engels continued to reflect on the question of civilization. In the book The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State, he conducted a profound analysis of early human social civilization, elucidating the dialectical relationship between women's liberation and social liberation in the process of human civilizational evolution.
II. The Core Essentials of the Marxist and Engelsean View of Civilization
The Marxist and Engelsean view of civilization is rich in content and forms its own system. Its core essentials are primarily reflected in the following four aspects.
(1) The essence of civilization
As mentioned previously, the Marxist and Engelsean view of civilization was established alongside the birth of the historical materialist worldview, after a complete break with metaphysical materialism and Young Hegelian idealism. It was precisely based on the philosophical perspective of historical materialism that Marx and Engels revealed the essence of civilization. Specifically, this primarily includes the following three aspects:
First, "civilization is a matter of practice." The perspective of practice occupies a paramount position in Marxist philosophy. Marx noted: "All social life is essentially practical." Regarding "objects, reality, and sensibility," old materialism understood them "only in the form of the object or of contemplation... while idealism, in contradistinction to materialism, developed the active side abstractly," whereas Marxist philosophy emphasizes grasping them from the subjective aspect of practice. The spiritual philosophies of figures such as Hegel and Bruno Bauer relied primarily on the abstract evolution of conceptual ideas (such as the "Absolute Idea" or "self-consciousness") to discuss the logic of civilizational progression. In contrast, Marx and Engels based themselves on the social practice of human beings to reveal the deep logic of civilizational evolution. In doing so, Marx and Engels stood on the side of the new materialism, drawing a clear line between themselves and the idealistic spiritual philosophy they originally followed. They constructed the preliminary framework for a historical materialist view of civilization, emphasizing that "in essence, civilization is the essential power revealed in practical activities." It was precisely based on the Marxist view of social practice that Engels profoundly analyzed the deep-seated reasons behind the different characteristics exhibited by Britain, France, and Germany in their social development and civilizational evolution: compared to the French Revolution (a political revolution) and the German Revolution (a philosophical revolution), "the English revolution is a social revolution, and therefore much more comprehensive and far-reaching than any other." [3]
Second, civilization is the result of the development of productive forces. Civilization is not immutable; rather, it possesses a distinct historicity. In primitive society, due to the extremely low level of productive forces, humanity remained in a stage of primitive ignorance. With the continuous development of productive forces, society began to split into different classes. Because class contradictions were irreconcilable, the state emerged. Engels believed that the so-called "age of civilization" refers to the stage where, following the development of productive forces, the "division of labor, the resulting exchange between individuals, and the commodity production that combines both, have reached full development." Communist society is the ideal society and the advanced stage of the development of human civilization. Furthermore, the realization of the communist ideal cannot be the result of the logical deduction of ideas and concepts, but must take the highly developed social productive forces as its prerequisite. As Marx and Engels stated, "the establishment of communism is essentially of an economic nature."
Third, civilization takes "the free and well-rounded development of the individual" as its supreme ideal. In explaining the evolution of human civilization, Marx and Engels consistently adhered to the principle of unifying the "measure of things" and the "measure of man." From the measure of things, the birth and progress of civilization must take the development of social productive forces as a prerequisite. From the measure of man, the history of the development of human civilization is, in fact, a history of human liberation. The complete liberation of humanity can only truly become a reality in the future communist society, truly resolving the contradictions between man and man, man and society, and man and himself. Precisely based on the human measure of civilizational development, Marx creatively proposed the theory of the three stages of human development ("personal dependence," "objective dependence," and "free individuality"). [4] In societies prior to capitalism, human development generally resided in the stage of "personal dependence." In this stage, human survival capacities were generally low. To survive, individuals had to attach themselves to groups such as primitive tribes or kin clans; thus, their existence possessed no independence to speak of. As Marx stated, "The further back we go in history, the more does the individual... appear as dependent." This existential dependency indicates that the first form of human development ("personal dependence") was still in the nascent stage of human civilization. Upon entering capitalist society, "individuals gained legal freedom, and man escaped social fetters in the form of rights," obtaining an existential "independence" not found in previous societies. However, Marx simultaneously pointed out that this "independence is generally nothing more than an illusion," because it is an "independence of man based on objective dependence." [5] In this stage, human development finally escaped one type of shackle prevalent in pre-capitalist societies (personal dependence), only to immediately fall into another (objective dependence). This fully demonstrates that the evolution of human civilization does not happen overnight but is an extremely complex process. Only when reaching the future communist society as an "association of free individuals" can human development truly enter the stage of "free individuality" envisioned by Marx. Only at this stage, by escaping personal relations of dependence and the control of capital over man, can the free and well-rounded development of the individual truly become a reality, "producing the universality and comprehensiveness of personal relations and personal capacities." From the perspective of the evolution of human civilization, the "free individuality" of communist society is the highest realm of human civilizational development.
(2) The Paradoxes of Civilization The Marx-Engels view of civilization includes both a macro-level grasp of the basic trajectory of human civilizational evolution (personal dependence—objective dependence—free individuality) and a focused discourse on a specific stage: capitalist civilization characterized by "objective dependence." In The Poverty of Philosophy, Marx pointed out: "No antagonism, no progress. This is the law that civilization has followed up to our day." This law-like phenomenon of "civilizational paradox" is particularly prominent in capitalist society. Its essence is the tragedy of Western modernization, which Marx and Engels analyzed brilliantly.
First, the paradox between the requirement for further development of productive forces and the restricted space for that development. In the process of capitalist modernization, social productive forces were greatly liberated and developed on one hand, accumulating material wealth unattainable by any previous society; on the other hand, the institutional contradictions inherent in capitalist society—the contradiction between socialized production and private ownership of the means of production—stifled the space for further development of productive forces. Due to the pervasive phenomenon of exploitation in capitalist society, the purchasing power of workers—who are both the exploited and the consumers—is low. Commodities produced cannot be fully sold, yet capitalists would rather destroy surplus goods, such as pouring milk into rivers, than provide them free of charge to workers in need. This "excess of civilization" appearing because there are "too many means of subsistence" in society results in production stagnation, commodity gluts, worker unemployment, and social chaos. On the surface, what Marx and Engels revealed in the Manifesto of the Communist Party as the manifestation of "excess civilization" is a capitalist economic crisis, but in essence, it is an institutional crisis unique to capitalism itself and the tragedy of capitalist modernization.
Second, the paradox between "carrying civilization to every corner of the world" and "base greed." Because of the nature of capital expansion, as capitalist countries break more thoroughly through the isolation between different nations via colonial expansion and ubiquitous plunder, "history becomes world history all the more," and capitalist civilization subsequently extends to all parts of the globe. From the perspective of the developmental process of human society, the process of globalization revealed by "world history" is an irresistible historical trend in the development of human civilization. However, the role played by the bourgeoisie in this process was merely as an "unconscious tool of history." Viewed through the history of human civilizational development, in the process of globalization driven by capitalist civilization, the countries and nations reached by capital expansion have, regardless of their willingness, been "dragged into civilization." Nevertheless, the motive of the bourgeoisie in spreading this civilization was by no means a benevolent gift, but was based on the base greed of the bourgeoisie to "fill their bottomless pit of desire." Marx profoundly exposed the "extreme hypocrisy and inherent barbarism of bourgeois civilization." Colonial expansionists "still assumed a respectable appearance" in their homelands, but their hideous, insatiable faces were "not concealed in the slightest" in the colonial nations.
Third, the paradox between human development and human reification. [6] Compared to previous societies, human development under the conditions of capitalist society made significant progress. This is firstly because the level of productive forces rose rapidly and social material wealth grew at an unprecedented rate, such that "nature truly becomes an object for man," reflecting "the great civilizing influence of capital." Secondly, it is because people escaped relations of personal dependence and obtained a formal independence and freedom. However, simultaneously, the paradox between human development and human reification emerged. This is because, in capitalist society, the distribution of material wealth is highly unjust; the creators of wealth are not its owners, and the phenomenon of polarization between the rich and the poor is severe. After breaking the shackles of blood ties and similar bonds, individuals in capitalist society did not thereby obtain true freedom, but instead fell back into a new relation of dependence—that is, being dominated by reified relations such as capital and money, manifested as the dominance of "dead labor" (capital) over "living labor" (workers). Fetishism and mammonism became prevalent throughout society. As Marx pointed out, the independence of the individual characterized by "objective dependence" under the conditions of capitalist society "is nothing more than an illusion."
(3) The Drivers of Civilization Before the birth of Marxism, the driving force behind the development of human civilization was an unsolved mystery. The German Ideology, co-authored by Marx and Engels, is the classic document marking the birth of historical materialism. It profoundly reveals the internal driver of continuous social development and civilizational evolution: the basic contradictions of society. The mechanism by which this driver operates is the two basic laws—the law that relations of production must suit the state of the productive forces, and the law that the superstructure must suit the state of the economic base—working together in interrelation. It is the interaction of these two laws that constitutes the contradictory movement of human society, driving the continuous development and progress of human history and the stepwise evolution of human civilization.
The movement of basic social contradictions takes the development of productive forces as its starting point and end goal. "According to the materialistic conception, the determining factor in history is, in the last resort, the production and reproduction of immediate life." Engaging in material production and solving the fundamental problems of human food, clothing, and shelter are the prerequisites for satisfying the multifaceted needs of human beings. Human needs are constantly growing, and social productive forces are continuously enhanced in the process of constantly satisfying these new needs. The continuous development of social productive forces inevitably requires that relations of production adapt to them, creating new conditions and opening new spaces for their own further development. However, once relations of production are formed, they undergo a period of relative stability; therefore, new contradictions and conflicts arise between the productive forces and the relations of production. As productive forces develop further, the transformation of the original relations of production becomes unavoidable. The transformation of relations of production is simultaneously a change in the social economic base, which ultimately and inevitably brings about changes in the superstructure. This chain of movement of the basic social contradictions is, in essence, the process by which changes in the mode of production lead to changes in social formations, and is also the process by which human civilization continuously evolves during these changes in social formation.
(4) The Paths of Civilization The historical materialism founded by Marx is not a form of economic materialism or mechanical determinism, but a form of historical-dialectical determinism. For instance, on the question of the development of human civilization, historical materialism holds that the path of civilization is a dialectical unity of universality and diversity. The so-called universality of civilizational paths, viewed from the perspective of the five social formations, refers to the fact that different countries and regions, in the absence of external interference, generally go through the sequence of primitive civilization, slave civilization, feudal civilization, capitalist civilization, and socialist civilization. Viewed from the perspective of technological-social formations, it refers to the fact that various countries and nations generally go through stages such as hunter-gatherer civilization, agricultural civilization, industrial civilization, and information civilization. The so-called diversity of civilizational developmental paths refers to the fact that some countries and nations, due to their specific historical conditions, may leap over one (or even several) social-formational civilizations during the transition from one type of civilization to another. Thus, it can be seen that the universality of civilizational paths does not exclude the diversity of civilizational paths. The dialectical unity of universality and diversity presented by the development of human civilization is a concrete manifestation of the dialectical unity of the universality and particularity of contradictions in historical development.
In his later years, Marx devoted significant energy to researching the developmental paths of Eastern societies. In his letter to the editorial board of Otechestvennye Zapiski [8], Marx explicitly opposed elevating his historical sketch of the origins of Western European capitalist civilization into a historico-philosophical theory of the general developmental path of human civilization. Based on his latest understanding of the actual situation in Russia, Marx further believed that under specific historical conditions, the rural communes prevalent in Russia could enable the country to become the "starting point of development" for a new society and civilization without passing through the "Caudine Forks" [9] of the capitalist system. Marx's research demonstrates that the civilizational paths chosen by different countries and nations under specific historical conditions do not follow a single, fixed model, but rather reflect an organic unity of the universality and diversity of civilizational paths. For the specific path of civilizational development chosen by a country or nation to truly achieve lasting results by persisting over the long term, it must follow the universal laws of the development of human social civilization while remaining truly suited to the historical reality of its own development.
III. The Innovative Development of Marx and Engels's Outlook on Civilization
Marx and Engels's outlook on civilization has guided the development of human civilization. Since Marx and Engels lacked personal experience in the practice of socialist construction, their descriptions of the prospects for the civilizational development of future society were only principled interpretations. Lenin developed Marx and Engels’s outlook on civilization under new conditions; his theory of imperialism developed their critique of capitalist civilization, and his New Economic Policy, along with a series of new explorations regarding socialist construction, contained the preliminary conception of a new form of human civilization. After Lenin's death, Soviet socialism continued to develop, but it later fell into a rigid model characterized prominently by a highly centralized planned economic system. Ultimately, under the influence of multiple factors, the Soviet Union collapsed. The great historical task of creating a new form of human civilization has since fallen upon the shoulders of the Chinese Communists. The Communist Party of China (CPC) has lived up to its mission, creating a new form of human civilization in the process of leading Chinese-path modernization. This new form of civilization differs from Western civilization, traditional Chinese civilization, and the traditional socialist civilization of the Soviet model. In essence, it is a new form of socialism with Chinese characteristics, representing the creative application and innovative development of Marx and Engels's outlook on civilization in contemporary China.
(1) Creatively resolving the "civilizational paradox" inherent in Western civilization through the "theory of the coordinated development of the five civilizations."
Marx and Engels's outlook on civilization holds that basic social contradictions are the source of energy driving the evolution of human civilization, productive forces are the force that plays the ultimate decisive role in the development of human civilization, and the "civilizational paradox" is a widespread phenomenon in capitalist society. Although capitalist civilization historically liberated and developed social productive forces to a great extent, as capitalism progressed, its inherent paradoxes were increasingly exposed. These include the paradox between the requirement for further development of productive forces and the restricted space for that development, the paradox between "bringing civilization to every corner of the world" and "base greed," and the paradox between human development and human reification. The essence of these civilizational paradoxes is the comprehensive crisis of capitalism under the rule of the logic of capital. Strictly speaking, this includes economic crises (periodic economic and financial crises caused by the socialization of production and private capitalist appropriation), political crises (the crisis of political dysfunction caused by hypocritical democracy under money-driven elections), social crises (the social crisis of comprehensive control of "things" over "people," i.e., "things" over "members of society"), and cultural crises (the crisis of cultural hegemony carried out under the guise of "universal values" through "color revolutions" [10]), among others.
The new form of human civilization is, in essence, socialism with Chinese characteristics, a new form created by our Party in the process of advancing Chinese-path modernization. The fundamental reason why this new form of civilization can overcome the civilizational paradoxes inherent in Western civilization lies in its consistent adherence to the people-centered development philosophy, the comprehensive implementation of the New Development Philosophy, and the construction of a holistic civilization characterized by the coordinated development of the "five civilizations." Specifically:
First, in the building of material civilization, the new form of human civilization emphasizes that "high-quality development is the primary task of building a modern socialist country in all respects." The "conductor's baton" for high-quality development is adherence to the New Development Philosophy of innovation, coordination, green development, openness, and sharing. In terms of developmental methods and paths, it emphasizes the coordinated development of material and spiritual civilizations; the ultimate goal and destination of its development is shared development. Development that is "innovative, coordinated, green, and open" is, in the final analysis, for the sake of "shared" development, which is essentially development for the people. This fundamentally overcomes the domination and alienation of people by things caused by the materialistic logic of Western civilization.
Second, in the building of political civilization, the new form of human civilization emphasizes that "whole-process people's democracy is the essential attribute of socialist democratic politics," ensuring that the people enjoy democratic rights—including democratic elections, democratic consultation, democratic decision-making, democratic management, and democratic oversight—across the entire chain and in all dimensions and aspects. This is fundamentally different from Western formal democracy, which remains stuck in a single link (democratic elections). At the same time, whole-process people's democracy differs from Western democracy in many ways: "the most extensive democracy" differs from the Western democracy of the few; "the most genuine democracy" differs from Western hypocritical democracy which relies on money; and "the most effective democracy" differs from Western democracy that serves as a mere ornament.
Third, in the building of spiritual civilization, the new form of human civilization emphasizes "upholding the fundamental system of the guiding position of Marxism in the ideological field." It uses Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era to cultivate the roots and soul of the nation, satisfying the people's ever-growing spiritual and cultural needs, focusing on cultivating the "new person of the era," and striving to realize the well-rounded development of individuals. In other words, the liberation to be achieved by the new form of human civilization is a dual liberation: it must not only liberate and develop social productive forces but also liberate and develop the human being itself. Its highest value ideal is to realize the free and well-rounded development of individuals. This fundamentally avoids the drawbacks brought about by the one-dimensional development of material civilization under capitalist conditions.
Fourth, in the building of social civilization, the new form of human civilization emphasizes improving people's well-being, solidly promoting common prosperity, realizing shared development, and manifesting fairness and justice. The reason why capitalist civilization must be replaced by socialist civilization, from the perspective of value evaluation, is that capitalist civilization is characterized by the widespread phenomenon of man's exploitation of man and the widening gap between rich and poor, leading to a lack of fairness and justice. Socialist civilization is a new type of civilization based on public ownership; common prosperity is the essential requirement and the fundamental superiority of socialism. The logic of common prosperity upheld by the new form of human civilization fundamentally adheres to the essential requirements of socialism, thereby avoiding the social problem of polarization caused by the capital logic of Western civilization.
Fifth, in the building of ecological civilization, the new form of human civilization emphasizes respecting, conforming to, and protecting nature, realizing the harmonious coexistence of man and nature, and building a Beautiful China. This fundamentally rejects the old path of Western modernization characterized by "pollute first, treat later."
Overall, the new form of human civilization created by Chinese-path modernization is a holistic civilization featuring the coordinated development of the "five civilizations," manifesting a humanistic logic that puts people first. This logic transforms the view in Marx and Engels's outlook on civilization—regarding the high degree of unity between the creators and beneficiaries of civilization—into reality. It stands in sharp contrast to Western civilization dominated by the logic of capital and fundamentally overcomes the civilizational paradoxes prevalent in Western society.
It should also be pointed out that the new form of human civilization not only transcends Western civilization but also transcends traditional Chinese civilization and the traditional socialist civilization of the Soviet model. These two "transcendences" can be explained from the perspective of the aforementioned holistic civilization of the coordinated development of the five civilizations. For instance, an important manifestation of its transcendence over traditional Chinese civilization is its emphasis on upholding the guiding position of Marxism in the ideological field within its spiritual civilization, whereas traditional Chinese civilization was guided by Confucian values during the long feudal era. Likewise, an important manifestation of its transcendence over the Soviet model of traditional socialist civilization is its emphasis on achieving high-quality development by constructing a high-level socialist market economy system, whereas the Soviet model adopted a highly centralized planned economic system in the economic field.
(2) Creatively answering the major question of "where human civilization is headed" in the context of the world undergoing changes unseen in a century.
Xi Jinping’s significant judgment that the world is undergoing "changes unseen in a century" profoundly reveals the characteristics of the current era. Currently, the balance of international power is undergoing profound adjustments. Factors such as the prevalence of anti-globalization trade protectionism and unilateralism, major challenges to a new type of major-power relations, increased geopolitical risks, the frequent occurrence of proxy wars, global warming, and the "pandemic of the century" have increased instability and unpredictability. All of these are specific manifestations of the accelerating evolution of the "great changes." All these developments indicate that human modernization and human civilization are at a crossroads. Will it be win-win cooperation or a zero-sum game? Will it be peaceful development or hegemony? Will it be harmonious coexistence or "draining the pond to catch the fish" [11]? Humanity needs to make the right choice.
The right choice cannot be made without the correct guidance of Marx and Engels's outlook on civilization. This outlook takes the realization of the free and well-rounded development of individuals as its highest value proposition, emphasizing that the ideal human society will replace the "illusory communities" of previous exploitative societies with a "true community"—an "association of free individuals."
On the major question of "where human civilization is headed," the new form of human civilization created by the Chinese people under the leadership of the CPC has inherited and developed the thought in Marx and Engels's outlook on civilization regarding the true community of future society. It consistently maintains a global perspective, "deeply discerning the trends of human development and progress, and actively responding to the universal concerns of the people of all countries." To solve the practical problems of the peace deficit, development deficit, security deficit, and governance deficit facing today's world, it offers "China's solution": building a community with a shared future for humanity. Taking the moral high ground of the shared values of humanity and holding high the banner of multilateralism, this solution advocates win-win cooperation, peaceful development, and harmonious coexistence. It emphasizes that "China will always be a builder of world peace, a contributor to global development, a defender of the international order, and a provider of public goods," pointing out the correct direction for the development of human civilization.
(3) Creatively providing a brand-new choice of civilizational development path for developing countries seeking modernization.
The evolutionary process of human civilization since the dawn of the modern era is also the process of humanity continuously moving toward modernization. The changes brought by modernization are not limited to the social life of a single country; they represent a worldwide social transformation. Restricted by the logic of capital, Western civilization has an impulse to expand outward and seek the appreciation of capital, leading to the modernization consequence of "the East being subordinated to the West." The rapid progress of Western civilization and the tremendous leap in social productive forces since the Industrial Revolution have formed a "modernization myth" in some people's minds that "modernization equals Westernization."
Marx and Engels's outlook on civilization, especially their theory regarding the civilizational development path of Eastern societies, profoundly reveals that the path of human civilizational development is a unity of universality and diversity. Proceeding from this principle, Xi Jinping emphasized that "as to what path a country should take, only the people of that country have the most say." On the issue of developmental paths, the CPC has always emphasized the principle of independence and self-reliance. The path of the New Democratic Revolution [12], the path of socialist transformation, and the path of building socialism with Chinese characteristics are all successful paths forged by the Chinese people under the leadership of the CPC through independence and by following their own road. In the process of leading the Chinese people along the path of Chinese-path modernization, the Chinese Communists "do not act according to the whims of others and keep China's future and destiny firmly in their own hands." They persist in the path of peaceful development, respect civilizational diversity, and focus on mutual learning between civilizations. They have created a new form of human civilization and shattered the myth that "modernization equals Westernization."
Since the beginning of the 21st century, the repeated occurrences of multiple crises in Western society—including financial, social, and ecological crises—have proven with ironclad facts the correctness of the important discourses by Marx and Engels regarding the limitations of Western civilization. The vast number of developing countries in the world wish to achieve modernization while simultaneously overcoming the limitations of capitalist civilization, standing on the side of human civilizational progress, and maintaining their own independence. The reason developing countries hold such views on the issues of modernization and civilizational development is that, as Marx stated, these formerly colonized countries "lost their old world without gaining a new one" [13], and thus urgently hope to forge a path to modernization distinct from capitalist civilization. As a "late-developing nation," we possess the conditions and the obligation to avoid the various problems that arose during Western modernization. The new type of civilization of socialism with Chinese characteristics, "in the process of advancing China into a great modern socialist power, has achieved a transcendence of Western capitalist civilization." It demonstrates a powerful vitality and affinity, providing a brand-new path selection and methodological inspiration for the vast number of developing countries seeking to move toward modernization and achieve a civilizational leap.
(IV) Creatively providing a new approach for exchange and mutual learning among world civilizations
From antiquity to the present, human civilization has been in a state of constant transformation. In today's world, diverse civilizations coexist in the global village. In a globalized era where "you are in me and I am in you," how to correctly perceive other civilizations and how to interact correctly with them is a contemporary question concerning "the inquiry of civilizations" that must be answered well. In this regard, the report to the 20th CPC National Congress, when expounding on the new form of human civilization, provided a scientific answer based on "one respect and three transcendences": emphasizing the need to "respect the diversity of world civilizations, and ensure that civilizational exchange transcends estrangement, mutual learning transcends conflict, and coexistence transcends superiority." Here, the "one respect" is the holistic answer, while the "three transcendences" are the concrete manifestations of that "respect."
First, respect the diversity of world civilizations. Just as no two leaves in the world are identical, the civilizational forms of different countries are also distinct. At a specific historical stage, the civilizational form a country or nation chooses is the result of the interaction between its historical traditions and realistic conditions, and between its historical subject and historical object. Differences in civilization are a normal state of civilizational society. As Xi Jinping has stated: "If human civilization were reduced to only one color or one model, the world would become too monotonous and too dull!" Therefore, regarding the treatment of other civilizations, any approach characterized by being high and mighty or pointing fingers is wrong; mutual respect is the correct way for civilizations to interact.
Second, ensuring that civilizational exchange transcends civilizational estrangement. Xi Jinping pointed out: "Exchange and mutual learning are essential requirements for the development of civilizations." Openness is a fundamental characteristic of a system. As a system, civilization is no different; if one "draws a circle on the ground to imprison oneself" [14], civilization will wither away. Only by adhering to openness and engaging in mutual exchange with other civilizations can civilizational development find a "source of living water" [15].
Third, ensuring that civilizational mutual learning transcends civilizational conflict. Distinct from the "clash of civilizations" theory of Western scholars, Xi Jinping emphasizes civilizational inclusiveness and mutual learning, as well as the principle of "sharing the beauty of all" (meimei yu gong) [16]—noting that we "must have eyes that appreciate the beauty of all civilizations." A very important reason why Chinese civilization has endured without interruption and can still radiate vigorous vitality after thousands of years lies in its broad civilizational magnanimity. This logic is evidenced by everything from the historical peaceful coexistence of imported Buddhism and Islam on Chinese soil, to the "Eastward spread of Western learning" (xixue dongjian) since the Opium War [17], to the combination of Marxism with China’s fine traditional culture, and further to the formation of the new form of human civilization in the New Era. The Silk Road of history and the "Belt and Road" of the New Era are both successful practices of civilizational exchange and mutual learning.
Finally, ensuring that civilizational coexistence transcends civilizational superiority. To achieve coexistence, civilizations must treat one another as equals. Xi Jinping emphasized: "Civilizations only differ in terms of their brilliant colors; there is absolutely no distinction of high or low, or superior or inferior." Western civilization looks through tinted glasses and upholds Western-centrism. Western developed countries often position themselves as civilizational "lecturers" (jiaoshiye) [18], pointing fingers at foreign civilizations or even engineering "color revolutions." The consequences are not civilizational progress, but regional turmoil. Unlike Western civilization, the new form of human civilization adheres to the concept of civilizational equality, rejects ignorance, arrogance, and prejudice regarding civilizational issues, and advocates that different civilizations should engage in dialogue and live in harmony.
Conclusion
In summary, creating a new form of human civilization is both an essential requirement of Chinese-path modernization and the mission and responsibility of the Communists in the New Era regarding civilizational creation. Traditional Chinese society wrote glorious Chinese chapters for the development of human civilization. Communists in the New Era, with a more conscious civilizational responsibility, have successfully created a new form of human civilization in the process of advancing the path of Chinese-path modernization. They have made new contributions through "four creativities": creatively using the "theory of the coordinated development of the five civilizations" to resolve the "civilizational paradox" inherent in Western civilization; creatively answering the major question of "where is human civilization headed" against the backdrop of changes unseen in a century; creatively providing a brand-new choice of civilizational development path for developing countries moving toward modernization; and creatively providing a brand-new approach for exchange and mutual learning among world civilizations. This constitutes the creative application and innovative development of the civilizational outlook of Marx and Engels in the New Era.