Hou Huiqin: Practicing Socialist Core Values Requires Prioritizing Truthfulness
The socialist core values are the concentrated expression of contemporary China's spiritual pursuits and the ideological and moral foundation for congealing China’s strength. Cultivating and extensively practicing the socialist core values is a strategic measure for building a socialist ideology with powerful cohesive and leadership forces in the New Era; it is a "soul-building" project for leading socialist cultural construction and promoting cultural confidence and self-improvement. Therefore, the cultivation and practice of socialist core values must truly reflect the essence of socialist ideology as a scientific ideology, consistently adhering to the priority of truth to unify the true, the good, and the beautiful.
I. Contemporary Ideological Struggles Focus 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 era’s 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, continuously create "anti-globalization" crises, causing the horizon of history to become treacherous and blurred. This shift focuses 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 favor of socialism in the historical evolution and contest between the two ideologies and two social systems of socialism and capitalism on a global scale." [1] The overall strategy of the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation and the world’s profound changes unseen in a century are "intertwined and interacting synchronously," indicating that today’s world is in a period of major upheaval and transformation. While Western countries, led by the United States, suppress our country almost irrationally, they continuously play the Western "universal values" card, which they regard as a "winning hand." Thus, the clash 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 like to play the "values" card today. The most fundamental reason is the inertial advantage possessed by their ruling ideas. Marx long ago argued: "The ruling ideas of each age have ever been the ideas of its ruling class." [2] Although the global hegemony established by capitalism during its centuries of expansion is heading toward an all-around decline in the 21st century, the advantages of Western political systems and values remain, relative to their obvious loss of momentum in economic and social development. In other words, it is easy to break the tip of the iceberg of ruling ideas through revolutionary consciousness, but difficult to subvert the ruling ideas in their entirety. It must be recognized that the party that has established a new order may still retain space in its thinking for the legitimacy of the old order, while the overthrown old rulers will certainly not recognize the legitimacy of the new order; they still retain a massive advantage in the realm of thought. "Thus, although the victory was won by the proletariat, its struggle with the bourgeoisie remains unequal." [3] The reversal of 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 continuously engineer "color revolutions" today. What it has lost today are only certain comparative advantages, while in terms of core values, it indeed still possesses clear advantages. That Western civilization is the mainstream civilization of contemporary humanity and Western values are "universal values" is the "consensus on human values" that Western ideology desperately maintains and promotes today.
Ideology determines the occupation of the moral high ground and is therefore the basis for the legitimacy of national systems. Consequently, the struggle over core values is essentially a struggle for the moral high ground. The foothold of capitalist core values is "Dasein" (this-worldly existence); it constructs a value system based on the "reified" individual of the capitalist world. This type of human, who seems identifiable 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 reified individual's autonomy and self-existence, it is the foundation of the social formation of private ownership. Since the individual is the source of all value, "the people" and "public opinion" can all be reduced to the reified individual; and state power, as a conditional transfer of individual rights, must operate under political frameworks such as voting democracy, party rotation, and the separation of powers. Since "non-dependence" is the "personality" characteristic it flaunts, individualism—which worships abstract human nature and believes in "rational" self-interest—is its value anchor.
However, the Western ideological shaping of the triple significance of the reified individual is a historical fabrication, not a historical reality. First, the reified individuals observable to the naked eye today have never been the subjects 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 types of groups—for example, the "clan" in primitive society, the tribe in slave society, and the kin group in feudal society, as well as the various social estates and classes based upon them. Marx thus called this historical period a society of "relations of personal dependence" to characterize the way humans acted as subjects of historical activity during that time. 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 is not social interaction with individuals as subjects, but commodity exchange with value as the link; the individual has not become the subject of history. The subjects of historical activity in the capitalist era are primarily the increasingly simplified classes: 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 the history of mankind thus far.
Similarly, this ahistorical reified individual has never been the ontology of value. From a Marxist perspective, rights originate from the economic relations of society and are therefore concrete and historically changing. "Right can never be higher than the economic structure of society and its cultural development conditioned thereby." [4] The Manifesto of the Communist Party clearly states that "the history of all hitherto existing society [with written records] is the history of class struggles," which demonstrates that the value ontology of civilized society is not the individual, but 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 the demands of human nature do not issue from the "inner voice" of the individual, but are the historical accumulation of the ruling class's ideas. Therefore, there is no doubt that the rights embodied by the reified individual are, fundamentally, merely an expression of bourgeois right.
(2) "Ahistoricism" is the Historical Degeneration of Capitalist Core Values
In the contemporary capitalist ideological fiction regarding the triple value of the reified individual, the most fundamental aspect 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 the critique of reason was its magic weapon. This was a historical dividing line—farewell to the past and facing the future—firmly believing that a "kingdom of reason" would follow. "Only now did the sun rise, the realm 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 Social Contract 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 guest of history.
However, as capitalism moves toward decline and decadence, the fantasy of the end of history has stubbornly accumulated within bourgeois ideology. Its prominent change is the replacement of the "rational man" with the "spontaneous and natural" man, which is a major degeneration of the bourgeois conception of history. The "rational man" was a historical yardstick. Through rational scrutiny and critique, it distinguished between historical illusion and 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. Reason became the sole measure of everything." [4] Changing the "rational" person to a "natural" person means that the historical yardstick has been discarded.
Why do bourgeois scholars describe the capitalist system and its reified individuals as "natural," eternal, and unchanging, and succeed in doing so repeatedly? From the perspective of the genealogy of the conception of history, they use Hegel's "end of history" theory to create momentum. For Hegel, the "end of history" was primarily a historical high ground used to reveal the necessity of realistic transformation; he never lightly claimed to have reached that end. Francis Fukuyama, claiming to be a contemporary Hegelian, asserted based on this that history would "end" before 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 person of social history back to a "natural" person and turning historical existence into natural existence is to deny revolutionary transformation and social progress, and to undisguisedly maintain the interests of vested interest groups.
(3) Worship of Spontaneity is the Core Value of Contemporary Capitalist Ideology
The reactionary nature of discarding the historical yardstick in favor of a "natural" turn is self-evident. However, to continue occupying the moral high ground, conservatism must be dressed up as progress, and obfuscation as self-evident truth. The weapons used are twofold: first, "spontaneous freedom," and second, "spontaneous nature." The history of "spontaneous freedom" is quite long: it bundles autonomy and social fairness with spontaneity, an inkling 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 the automatic balancing of economic and ethical conflicts by market exchange behavior—is actually a reality fantasized by vested interest groups in a market economy; it is nothing more than a self-justification hoping for the eternalization of the existing order. History proves that when faced with conflicting interests and concepts, if there is no conscious coordination, they will inevitably break out 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 adjustments forced by external conflicts.
It should be pointed out that Adam Smith's "invisible hand" is similar to Hegel's "cunning of reason" [1]; it was merely a guess at the way reason operates in the absence of historical evidence at the time, and did not regard spontaneity as an ideal state of freedom. However, in neoliberalism (such as Hayek), spontaneity becomes "nature," and becomes the ultimate freedom and ultimate history of humanity. There are two fundamental changes here: first, the absolute individual ontology has replaced the individual through whom humanity flows, completely denying the possibility of humanity as a historical subject; second, evolutionary reason has replaced dialectical reason, completely denying historical leaps and social revolutions.
In classical liberalism, although individual historical subjectivity was emphasized, universal reason was not seen as the exclusive property of any specific individual. Consequently, the individual as the carrier of reason was essentially the "Individual" with a capital "I," interconnected with all of humanity. In this framework, 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—which it terms "constructivist reason"—thereby thoroughly negating the existence of any social subject other than 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, and the negation of Hegel’s objective truth that "freedom is the recognition of necessity." The premise of this view of "reason" is undoubtedly the unshakable ontological status of the individual and the immutable selfish nature of such individuals. This is the fundamental guiding ideology for various institutional designs in the contemporary West. 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; 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 grope toward increasingly refined social norms such as administration, law, and morality. Their function is to protect free competition, and their purpose is to realize individual interests. Therefore, the so-called "society" is merely a synonym for "abstract rules of the game," completely severed from the human person. This constitutes the basic analysis of the state, law, historical progress, and social justice within 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, achieving continuous perfection through constant local improvements.
The shift from critical reason to spontaneous reason exposes the degeneration of capitalist ideology, while simultaneously demonstrating that a philosophical worldview constitutes 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. The idealist conception of history is, fundamentally, an individualist conception of history; the materialist conception of history is, fundamentally, the people’s 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’s conception of history found in historical materialism, upholding the leadership of the Communist Party would be like a building on sand—its ideological foundation would be extremely unstable. Without the foundation of a thoroughgoing Marxist materialist philosophy, the "Four Confidences" would be hollowed out. Therefore, discussions of core values must delve deep into the philosophical worldview.
II. A Scientific Worldview is the Ideological Foundation of a Scientific Ideology
Whether an ideology can be scientific depends crucially on whether it can be established on the basis of a scientific worldview. The notion that Marx and Engels only defined ideology as a "false system of ideas," while Lenin believed there could be a scientific ideology, is a violation of Marx and Engels' views, yet it 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—this is the only scientific way to treat Marx. Precisely for this reason, we believe that on this issue, Lenin profoundly grasped and innovatively developed Marx’s views on ideology. Thus, attempts to use pure textual philology cannot refute Lenin.
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 capacity to grasp the world. Marx and Engels' critique of Hegel’s celebration of the "age when humanity stood on its head" [2] following the French Revolution was also reserved; they never denied the pioneering nature of revolutionary ideas. Furthermore, we must recognize 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 subverted two frames of reference that exerted—and continue to exert—broad influence: First, he subverted the popular Ancient Greek notion of philosophy as the "love of wisdom" (philosophia). It must be said that the title "love of wisdom" has a long history and is widely disseminated; it was not only used extensively in Hegel’s time, but people today still favor this expression. Hegel, however, was quite dismissive of it. He explicitly proposed that philosophy should be liberated from this title: "To help bring philosophy closer to the form of science—that goal where it can lay aside the title 'love of wisdom' and be actual knowledge—is what I have set before me." [3] Clearly, the reason Hegel disdained a general term like "love of wisdom" was that it failed to grasp the essence of philosophy—namely, the scientific form of "actual knowledge." The result was that philosophy became a rather arbitrary and vacuous "game for the wise." He established the direction of opening philosophy up as a discipline with scientific characteristics—that is, as actual knowledge based on a system of truth.
Second, he subverted the "natural conception" prevalent since Kant that humanity cannot transcend the limits of its own cognitive capacity 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, the delineation of the scope of human knowledge through the study of human cognitive capacity itself. They both shared a common assumption: that a fundamentally unbridgeable chasm exists between the knowing subject and the object yet to be known. This means that human cognitive capacity is fated to stop at the realm of phenomena and cannot scientifically cognize the world as a whole. This "natural conception" created a chasm between the phenomenon and the noumenon, insulating science from faith. As Lenin pointed out, by limiting human cognitive capacity to phenomena, faith is left to mysticism. "Kant argued thus: if our reason is limited to the knowledge of natural phenomena, if we can know nothing more than this, then we must believe in something mystical, higher, and metaphysical. Kant’s conclusion was: behind the phenomena there must be something else, 'for where there is an appearance, there must be something that appears.'" [4] It is evident that Kant’s unfathomable "thing-in-itself" [5] is essentially a question of the possibility of scientific faith. Dietzgen [6] correctly observed: "Kant, in form at least, drove metaphysics out of science, to let it remain in faith." 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 highly significant conclusions: First, the thesis that "philosophy is the quintessence of the spirit of its age," which established the positioning of philosophy as having the mission of revealing historical laws. Second, the judgment that philosophy is a "system of absolute truth (i.e., a scientific grasp of the world as a whole)," establishing the direction of grasping the unity of the world through a monistic worldview. The young Marx was deeply inspired by this and, in his own philosophical explorations, elaborated as follows: "Since every true philosophy is the quintessence of the spirit of its age, the time must come when philosophy not only internally by its content, but also externally through its appearance, 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 then the philosophy of the world in general, the philosophy of the contemporary world." [8] From this, Marx formed the logic of the mutual interaction between a monistic philosophical revolution and the holistic transformation of the world, laying the foundation for the direction of his own philosophical exploration and revolution.
(2) Grounding the Question of the Ultimate Existence of the World on a Scientific Cognitive Basis
The emergence of the Kantian problem of the "unfathomable thing-in-itself" was, from a historical perspective, the result of nature and human history remaining in a state of fragmentation within the human horizon of that time. In Hegel, nature was merely a pure expansion of quantity (space) without qualitative change (time), and thus constituted a "bad infinity." In Hegel’s philosophical system, it was logic that had not yet become a contradiction and 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 the laws of motion of nature in a certain respect, he did not bridge the gap between nature and human society. This spatial division 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 three previously isolated fields: nature, human society, and the phenomena of thought. Generally speaking, they solved the following three difficulties: First, regarding the question of the ultimate structure of the world, they expanded from external space to an internal integration of space and time. To solve the problem of the ultimate existence of the world, one must first grasp its structure. Previously, this question remained unresolved indeed because of defects in the mode of thinking. In fact, continuously questioning the noumenon "behind" the phenomenon pushes the problem into boundless, infinite space, thereby falling into what Hegel called a "bad infinity" devoid of ultimateness. Hegel made a very astute judgment: "Reciprocal action is the true causa finalis [ultimate cause] of things." [9] However, for him, the active force originated only from the spiritual subject; there was no active object, and thus there was only "externalization," not true "reciprocal action." Marx, by establishing "sensuous man" and his "sensuous activity," [10] opened the door to the dynamism of matter. From reciprocal action in objective practical activity to the metabolism of the entire universe, reciprocal action—that is, contradiction—was proved to be the structure of the ultimate existence of the world. "We cannot go back further than to the knowledge of this reciprocal action, for the very reason that there is nothing behind it to be known." [11]
Second, regarding the form of the ultimate existence of the world, they shifted from the unity of matter to a processual unity. The Kantian problem of the "thing-in-itself" was raised after traditional metaphysics had been subverted. Facts have proven that the ultimate existence of the world cannot be reduced to a single substance (like "atoms"); its ultimateness was bound to be broken through. However, this does not mean that the ultimate existence of the world has no unified form and can only be reduced to "fragmented" existence. In his exploration of philosophical revolution, Marx made a major epistemological shift: from cognizing existence in terms of "what it is" to "how it manifests its existence." For example, in The German Ideology, Marx turned 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." [12] 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 "once we have known 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 shall have known matter itself as well, and so our knowledge is complete," [13] 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 because of this that Kant's "thing-in-itself" harbors an "unknowable" tendency. Marx's efforts in this regard culminate in one point: the persistence of thorough materialism. The unity of the world does not lie 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 the 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' [N1] (Kant) the phenomenon, or that we can and should use a philosophical barrier to isolate ourselves from the question of the part of the world that is not yet known but exists outside of us (Hume)—all these philosophical fabrications are nonsense, eccentricities (Schrulle), sophistry, and inventions." [25]77 Marx's new materialism is a materialistic monist worldview; any wavering 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 question of pure values, possessing an even more intangible and inexpressible mystery. However, since faith is ultimately a way of satisfying the needs of human existence, it cannot truly remain unclearly explained or understood. Marxism profoundly reveals the socio-historical conditions under which supernatural faiths, such as religion, arise and their internal relationship with the human existential condition, scientifically elucidating the historical positioning of religion as a phenomenon of the social superstructure. Yet, 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 varying understandings of suffering and immortality, common social suffering and ultimate concerns of 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 the beautiful future of humanity. The "Kingdom of Heaven" is the most important ultimate concern in religious faith for providing "consolation" for the immortality of life and secular suffering, and 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 in 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 the "prehistory" [N2] of humanity 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, and is therefore always "actually existing" objective truth. Its difference from the "Kingdom of Heaven" lies in the fact that, although communism has not yet been fully proven by experience today, it is being continuously proven by experience, and its transcendental components are being continuously transformed into experience. Therefore, although contemporary humanity still faces 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 avalanche and the force of a thunderbolt, maintaining their wonderful youth." [26]686
Second, replacing "God" with the masses of the people led by the working class, thereby returning supernatural mysterious powers to humanity. Since Feuerbach's critique of Christianity, people have known that the essence of God is nothing more than the alienation of the human essence. Returning the characteristics of God’s omniscience, omnipotence, forgiveness, and benevolence to humanity has become an important pursuit of human liberation in the modern era. However, history has proven that this "return" of human power is not merely a matter of ideological consciousness, but even more so an awakening of subjective power. Although the masses of the people have always been the decisive force in history, they began to become a self-conscious historical subject only when the modern proletariat ascended the stage of history. Marx replaced individual reason with class consciousness and scientific faith (through 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 universal human character because it has no vested interests of its own class [N3], then in theory and practice, it manifests as the unreserved and full absorption of the outstanding achievements of predecessors, becoming the true social subject. Schumpeter also admitted: "Social classes are not the creatures of the taxonomist, but live, existing entities. Their existence has consequences that are entirely missed if we look upon society as an amorphous collection of individuals or families." [27]21 With the formation of the working class as a historical subject, the masses of the people 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, making it difficult to produce actual effects in improving the conditions of human existence; at most, it is a kind of spiritual relief. Facts prove that self-change divorced from the change of the existential environment is merely interpreting and passively adapting to the world. Whereas "the coincidence of the changing of circumstances and of human activity or self-changing can be conceived and rationally understood only as revolutionary practice." [24]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, one transforms the subjective world; while pioneering the construction of a new society, one shapes the builders of that new society; while material wealth becomes increasingly abundant, one eliminates polarization and promotes the free and all-around development of the person. This concrete historical unity of the change of environment and the change of man gives scientific faith and the communist ideal and conviction a majestic and indestructible force.
III. Scientific Truthfulness Is the Competitive Advantage of Socialist Core Values
Competition over core values and national soft power has gradually become the focus of current ideological conflicts. For us, this is both an opportunity and a challenge. The most significant and profound change in the Great Changes Unseen in a Century is the change in the relationship between China and the world, with China becoming 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. 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," indicating 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 Marxian revival and resurgence, but interest in socialism with Chinese characteristics is also increasing. We must seize this opportunity and fight well in the battle over core values.
It is important to note that Western core values have consistently donned the cloak of "universal values," using abstract human commonalities as chips to continuously confuse the theoretical rights and wrongs of major value concepts while diluting their own ideological nature. Therefore, in practicing the socialist core values today, we must leverage their advantages, prioritize truthfulness, strengthen targetedness, and highlight the following characteristics:
(1) Highlighting the advanced leading nature of socialist core values
Socialist core values are a highly condensed summary and concentrated manifestation of the Marxist standpoint, viewpoint, and method. They are the fundamental value pursuit and value concept of Chinese Communists, and they represent a value pursuit that is distinct from and superior to that of capitalism. They both solidify the value consensus of the entire society—embodying the common value pursuits of contemporary humanity and the greatest common denominator of value consensus—and highlight the trend of the times and the direction of history, leading socialism with Chinese characteristics in the New Era to forge ahead on a new journey. The reason for this is that socialist core values are based on the scientific cognition of the objective laws of historical development, enabling them to establish value coordinates from the historical high ground 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 pursuits of the revolutionary period also served capitalist interests, they were, after all, fundamentally consistent with the requirements of historical development at that time. Consequently, "at such a moment, its demands and rights are truly the rights and demands of society itself; it is then truly the social head and the social heart." [28]13 Therefore, during this period, it spoke in the name of humanity with historical authenticity and gained relatively broad social recognition. From the perspective of value forms, while bourgeois values certainly had their class limitations (such as highlighting private interests and formal equality), there was still space for truthful cognition, and hypocrisy had not yet become their essence.
Today, the situation is completely different. Western countries, represented by the United States, increasingly act in a way that runs counter to the historical trend 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 standards and the double-standardization of implementation are among the inherent contradictions of contemporary Western core values. On one hand, due to the denial of laws, the evasion of truth, the indifference toward theory, and an obsession with current human nature, contemporary Western values have completely lost the truthful standard of judgment and can only fall into hallucinations and metaphysical fantasies. As Engels pointed out when exposing the German bourgeoisie after they became vested interest holders, "the old fearless zeal for theory has now disappeared as completely as has classical philosophy... the official representatives of this science have become the undisguised ideologists [N4] of the bourgeoisie and the existing state." [23]258 The phantom transformation of the difference between socialism and capitalism into a struggle between "democracy" and "totalitarianism" is the masterpiece of these meta-physicians. 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 concrete matters, they must inevitably implement double standards. 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 practical dangers
The more capitalist ideology becomes a defensive consciousness for special interests, the more it must desperately cling to the concept of "all-humanity," and the more its hypocrisy is exposed. "Universal values" are its representative work. Originally, Western values based on individualism always flaunted pluralism, relativity, and de-centering. However, under the institutional framework of "universal values," there is only one framework for the modern state, and naturally only one set of core values—that is, the established capitalist system and its spirit. Therefore, taking the path of "universal values" means taking the path of "total Westernization"; it means 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 not qualified as a "modern state," and can only be a "totalitarian state." Formal value pluralism and factual value singularity are another inherent contradiction of contemporary capitalist core values.
Obsession with "universal values" bears witness to the historical transformation whereby the core values of capitalism lost their historical progressiveness and became a means of guarding narrow self-interest. The suppression of revolution and the implementation of superficial reforms have become its keynote, while conservative liberalism has become its mainstream thought. It attributes the vast disparity between ideal and reality to the "sins" of revolution and to the so-called "usurpation of reason" [18]. Through "de-revolutionization," it forces people to submit to the existing distribution of interests; through the denial of objective truth, it promotes the "law of the jungle" where might makes right; through egoistic individualism, it denies the people's status 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 individual interests and a struggle over civil rights versus public power. In this way, 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 apologetic tools 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 a truthful understanding of reality, but rather a "universal ethic" that is self-evident within people’s hearts; the resulting pursuit of values becomes the force that inspires collective action. The shift where ethical value stands above truth-value, and the "moral high ground" takes precedence over 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 used by the West today to "Westernize" and "split" [19] our country. Their specific target is "socialist consultative democracy with Chinese characteristics," and their bullseye is the national system of persisting in the leadership of the Communist Party of China. Only from the historical high ground can we break the Western monopoly over shared human values such as democracy and freedom, and "rectify the names" [20] of the system of Communist Party leadership and the socialist market economy system of socialism with Chinese characteristics.
3. Historical Contrasts of Rise and Fall Reveal the Future of Human Civilization
The degeneration of Western-style democracy into the "low-quality democracy" that serves as the root of contemporary global turmoil, contrasted with the rise of "non-Western democracy" represented by socialism with Chinese characteristics, forms a vivid historical mirror. The world today is experiencing a level of upheaval and chaos rarely seen since the collapse of the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, or even since the end of World War II. The primary reason is the increasing decline of the West-centered world system; the Western "democratic systems" represented by the United States have malfunctioned, and their various distorted "low-quality democracies" have brought disaster to the globe. Western-style democracy is increasingly irrational, degrading into "political theater" for special interest groups and political figures—a mere political trick. Its electoral methods have become increasingly base, "black money" politics [21] runs rampant, and candidates compete to curry favor with voters to cover up social contradictions, focusing only on victory or defeat rather than right or wrong, thereby corrupting social mores.
In sharp contrast, the "whole-process" people's democracy of socialism with Chinese characteristics is flourishing. It illustrates the internal consistency between formal democracy and substantive democracy, and between upholding the leadership of the Communist Party and the people being 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 to sacrifice and dedicate itself, 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 must be led by advanced forces. To change the social reality—extant since the dawn of class society—of the few ruling the many, and to realize the people's status as masters of the country (something never before achieved in 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 through voting; rather, it is armed with Marxism, holds itself to the strict standards of the working class, and is tempered through continuous testing in practice, daring to "turn the blade inward" [22] through conscious self-revolution.
The leading role of socialist core values is also prominently manifested in promoting cultural confidence and strength in the New Era and in forging new glories for socialist culture. Unlike previous historical periods, most people’s daily lives do not directly encounter theory; even thorough theories must be transformed through real life to be accepted by the masses. The leading role played by socialist core values centrally embodies the latest fruits of cultural development—the combination of Marxism with fine traditional Chinese culture. It integrates into social life in diverse forms, allowing people to perceive and comprehend it in practice until it reaches the level of being "used daily by the common people without their realization" [23]. This fully demonstrates that socialist core values are a key link in translating the theoretical innovations of the Sinicization and modernization of Marxism into practice.
(2) Highlighting the Function of Socialist Core Values as a Scientific Faith
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 building the Party and the nation on a scientific faith is a requirement 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" [24]. This is a requirement for both political construction and the advancement of human civilization. Adhering to dialectical materialism and historical materialism, and maintaining a thorough materialist philosophical stance, manifests as the unremitting exploration, understanding, and grasping of the objective laws of historical development; the unwavering adaptation to, promotion of, and leading of the trends of the times; and the clear-cut adherence to and implementation of a people-centered view of history and development. Thorough materialism embodies a scientific spirit that seeks 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.
Socialist core values are based on human needs, but they never view these needs as fixed. Rather, "the first need itself, having been satisfied, the action of satisfying and the instrument of satisfaction which has been acquired, leads to new needs" [25]. This is a fundamental human activity—the "first historical act." Since human nature is human need, it shows that human nature is historically formed, changing, and developing. Therefore, on the one hand, we absolutely reject the fabrication of Western ideology that "selfishness is human nature," and 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 by no means be achieved easily with the beating of drums and gongs" [26]. 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 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 Socialist Core Values in the New Era
In rejecting the West’s "universal values," we must profoundly reveal the essential differences that exist beneath identical terminology. Only by fully grasping the advanced nature of socialist core values can we truly clarify the fundamental difference between them and the "universal values" of Western liberal democracy. Only then can we correctly advocate for and promote the common values of all humanity, turning the "greatest common denominator" [27] of the community for the Chinese nation and the spiritual home shared by humanity into a 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 socialist core 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 elaboration of socialist core values, the most important points are "putting the people first," "common prosperity," and the "greatness of labor." These embody the theoretical pillars and ideological essence of socialist core values; without them, these values cannot be clearly explained or understood. That "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 materialist conception of history. Common prosperity is a historical necessity that reflects 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 opened the history of comprehensively promoting the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation through Chinese-path modernization. In defining the nature of socialist core 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 carries this theoretical thoroughness into the construction of a great modern socialist country, consolidating the moral high ground of Chinese-path modernization. Socialist core values specifically need to play a role in theoretical construction, lifestyles, and the construction of academic discourse.
The simultaneous advancement of theoretical innovation and theoretical arming is a powerful driving force for socialism with Chinese characteristics in the New Era. Regarding theoretical construction, socialist core values are directly linked to people's interests, life experiences, and emotional perceptions. Thus, they vividly present different value choices and paths of life before everyone, prompting people to think, question, and explore, thereby elevating genuine theoretical needs. On the other hand, core values focus on the cultivation of lifestyles while simultaneously regulating institutional construction, organically unifying the cultivation of people, the employment of people, and institutional building. This can effectively overcome the current phenomenon where some institutional orientations are disconnected from theoretical orientations. In short, by focusing closely on the cultivation and infiltration of core values, ideological and theoretical construction must exist by looking toward the needs of actual life and various interest claims, thereby allowing the disregard for theoretical study and the disconnect between learning and application to be overcome. Truly integrating theoretical study and construction into the practice of socialist core 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 socialism with Chinese characteristics in the New Era, and a vital landing point for socialist core values. The differing lifestyles of capitalism and socialism stem from their different understandings of human nature. In Western liberalism, maintaining a "sense of superiority" and the "competitive" channels to achieve it serves as the inexhaustible source of lasting social vitality; its premise is the recognition of "inevitable and ineradicable" inequality. The inequality discussed here does not refer to natural differences between people but to social differences—primarily economic, political, and cultural-psychological differences. It is evident that the "equality" recognized by Western liberalism is merely a formal "concept of equality," not equality in the sense of the abolition of classes, the elimination of exploitation, and common prosperity. Under conditions where actual inequality is maintained, full interaction between person and person, and between person and nature, is impossible. Not only is the space for human development necessarily limited, but social antagonism and malignant conflict are inevitable. It is certain that humanity will not remain forever intoxicated within the lifestyle enclosures built by capitalist civilization; breaking through the trap of "illusory community" [28] to construct a real community is the trend of history. In the cultivation of healthy lifestyles, socialist core values—by ridding social interaction of the "smell of money" through "close yet clean" [29] relationships and by turning reading into a rich and diverse way of life—continuously create new types of social relations that transcend the reified relations of capitalism.
Leading the construction of Chinese-path philosophy and social sciences through 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 Chinese-path philosophy and social sciences constitutes the academic pillar of that cultural power. Due to the inherent ideological attributes of the philosophy and social sciences, the construction of its disciplinary, academic, and discourse systems is always laden with the infiltration of values.
It must be recognized that Western philosophy and social sciences, under the banner of "academicity," have long falsely alleged that Marxism is merely "ideology" rather than science, thereby extensively infiltrating and occupying the positions of our country's philosophy and social sciences. In academic research, separating oneself from the overall situation of national development to flaunt "pure scholarship"; in the discourse system, rejecting dialectical materialism and historical materialism while flaunting "value neutrality"; and in academic style, blindly copying the West under the fine name of "international perspective"—these practices can be described as commonplace in our country's philosophy and social sciences. In the process of practicing socialist core values, it is a strategic goal that must be achieved to break down the barriers [30] obstructing the construction of Chinese-path philosophy and social sciences and a great modern socialist power.
(Author Profile: Hou Huiqin, Professor and Doctoral Supervisor, President of the China Society of Historical Materialism) Web Editor: Tongxin Source: Journal of Jinggangshan University (Social Sciences Edition), Issue 1, 2024