Wang Weiguang: Building a New Form of "Modern Chinese Civilization" Guided by Xi Jinping’s Thought on Culture

On October 28, 2022, during an inspection of Anyang in Henan province, General Secretary Xi Jinping first proposed the goal of "building a modern Chinese civilization." He emphasized that "to more deeply study and understand Chinese civilization and to make the past serve the present ^[1] will provide a reference for better building a modern Chinese civilization." At the Meeting on Cultural Inheritance and Development on June 2, 2023, General Secretary Xi Jinping emphasized and pointed out once again: "To continue promoting cultural prosperity, building a leading country in culture, and building a modern Chinese civilization at this new starting point is our new cultural mission in the New Era. We must strengthen our cultural confidence, shoulder our mission, forge ahead with enterprise, and work together to create a new culture belonging to our era and build a modern Chinese civilization." On July 7 of the same year, while listening to work reports from the Jiangsu Provincial Committee of the CPC and the Provincial Government, he pointed out: "Building a modern Chinese civilization is an inevitable requirement for advancing Chinese-path modernization and is an important component of the construction of socialist spiritual civilization ^[2]." General Secretary Xi Jinping’s important expositions on "building a modern Chinese civilization" are a vital part of Xi Jinping Thought on Culture. We must take Xi Jinping Thought on Culture as our guide, strive to build a modern Chinese civilization, advance Chinese-path modernization, build a great modern socialist country with Chinese characteristics, and realize the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation.

I. Taking Historical Materialism and the Marxist View of Civilization as the Theoretical Basis to Scientifically Understand and Correctly Grasp the Important Expositions of Classical Marxist Authors on "Building a Modern Chinese Civilization"

To comprehensively and scientifically understand, grasp, and implement General Secretary Xi Jinping’s important expositions on "building a modern Chinese civilization," we must first apply the stance, viewpoint, and method of historical materialism to master the Marxist view of civilization. We must understand social civilization historically, dialectically, and concretely, and accord social civilization a scientific Marxist definition. Only in this way can we truly clarify "what a modern Chinese civilization is and how to build a modern Chinese civilization."

The classical Marxist authors did not write specialized works focused solely on clarifying the issue of social civilization. However, from their classic discourses concerning social civilization, we can learn to understand how they utilized the stance, viewpoint, and method of historical materialism to analyze social civilization. From this, we can summarize their basic outlooks and viewpoints on social civilization and grasp the Marxist view of civilization. The Marxist view of civilization is a general outlook and viewpoint formed by applying the stance, viewpoint, and method of historical materialism to analyze the nature, characteristics, history, and status of human social civilization, and to summarize the laws and trends of its development. When viewing human social civilization, the Marxist view starts from the broad perspective of the Marxist philosophical worldview and historical outlook. It begins with a scientific analysis of the movement of the basic social contradictions—namely, the productive forces and relations of production, and the economic base and the superstructure—and focuses on the objective laws governing the evolution of major historical eras and social formations ^[3] to understand the social phenomenon of human civilization.

First, when classical Marxist authors used terms such as "civilization," "civilized system," "civilized realm," "civilized state," "civilized society," "industrial civilized society," "modern civilization," "civilized nations," and "European civilization" in specific contexts, they generally used the word "civilization" to refer specifically to capitalist social civilization and the capitalist social civilizational system. Using historical materialism, they conducted the most thorough exposition, critique, and exposure of capitalist social civilization in a manner most consistent with historical dialectics. While affirming the historical progressiveness of capitalist social civilization and the "great civilizing influence of capital," they started from the premise that class struggle—determined by the basic contradictions between productive forces and relations of production—is the driving force of progress in class-based social civilizations. They profoundly exposed the class-exploitative essence and hypocrisy of capitalist social civilization. They believed the foundation of the capitalist "civilized system" is the exploitation of surplus value. This exploitation causes capitalist society to become increasingly fractured, splitting into owners of capital and wage laborers who possess nothing but their labor power, thereby creating two fundamentally opposed classes: the "bourgeoisie" and the "proletarians." The class basis of capitalist social civilization is this class division and opposition between the bourgeoisie and the working class, built upon the exploitation of surplus value. The bourgeoisie’s exploitation of the working class’s surplus value and the oppression of all oppressed and exploited countries, nations, and laboring masses constitute the foundation of the capitalist "civilized system"; this is the most fundamental characteristic of capitalist social civilization. They explicitly pointed out that capitalist social civilization is "bourgeois civilization" and the "civilization of capital," exposing its nature as a civilization of an exploiting class. They believed that the capitalist system of social civilization serves the interests of the bourgeoisie, oppressing the proletariat and the broad laboring masses internally while conducting imperialist aggression externally.

Second, standing on the side of the proletariat, the classical Marxist authors, while analyzing the defects and development trends of capitalist social civilization, strongly condemned and lashed out at it as a "wicked civilization" and a "false civilization" used to suppress the proletariat. They explicitly pointed out that whenever the proletariat rises to resist the bourgeoisie, the "civilization and justice of the [capitalist] system show their true, ferocious face." They satirized the bloody suppression of the proletariat by the bourgeoisie as "truly 'an advance of civilization,'" thereby thoroughly exposing the ferocious class nature, hypocrisy, and deceitfulness of capitalist social civilization. They clearly stated that capitalist social civilization is the "last stage of the old civilization," and that this "old civilization" would surely be replaced by a "true and universal civilization"—namely, communist social civilization. They firmly believed that capitalist social civilization created the social conditions for the global proletariat to unite, achieve a proletarian socialist revolution, and establish proletarian political rule to overthrow capitalist society. The proletariat is the material force for creating communist social civilization. They revealed that the dictatorship of the proletariat and the socialist state are capable of reaching, and indeed have reached, a "high degree of civilization," revealing the future development trends of social civilization.

Third, the classical Marxist authors criticized the historical idealist view of civilization held by certain Western bourgeois politicians and scholars, who viewed social civilization as the result of a purely spiritual movement. They explicitly pointed out that the formation and progress of social civilization are the results of the development of social productive forces, the movement of contradictions between the productive forces and relations of production, and the social practice of the masses. They started from the theory of the "five social formations" ^[4]—the evolution from primitive society, slave society, feudal society, and capitalist society, through a socialist transition to communist society (with socialist society being the first stage of communist society). They summarized the stages and forms of the evolution of human social civilization: from the foundational civilization of communal ownership in primitive society, through slave-based civilization, feudal civilization, and the capitalist wage-labor civilization, to the "true and universal civilization" of the future society characterized by socialist ownership and communist public ownership. They thus revealed the objective laws of the historical development of human social civilization.

For instance, when Friedrich Engels used the term "civilization," he sometimes referred to and borrowed Lewis H. Morgan’s periodization of human social history, using the term "the age of civilization." He divided history into "ancient civilization" and "modern civilization." It should be noted here that the "ancient civilization" Engels spoke of should also include the initial, sprouting, and originating civilization of primitive society. This is because Engels borrowed Morgan’s assertion that "the age of civilization is the period in which man learns a more advanced processing of natural products." This exposition implies that civilization begins when humans learn to process natural products—transforming natural materials into tools, such as Paleolithic and Neolithic implements. In fact, when humans in primitive society began learning to process natural materials into tools of production and daily necessities, the origins of social civilization had already begun; this is the starting point for "ancient civilization." Of course, they regarded the division of labor, the exchange and production of commodities arising from that division, and the emergence of private property, classes, and the state as important markers of the formation of social civilization and humanity’s entry into the "age of civilization." This does not contradict Engels' agreement with the judgment that "ancient civilization" originated from tool-making. His references to "ancient civilization" sometimes included the originating civilization of primitive society. However, the originating civilization of primitive society does not specifically mean that humanity had already entered the "age of civilization." For Engels, the "age of civilization" specifically referred to social civilization since human society entered class society. In a certain sense, the "ancient civilization" he discussed included the beginning, sprouting civilization or "origin civilization" of primitive society, while the slave society following the disintegration of primitive communal ownership marked the entry into the "age of civilization." According to Engels’ markers for entering the "age of civilization," "ancient civilization" refers to slave-society civilization and feudal-society civilization, while "modern civilization" refers to capitalist social civilization.

Fourth, although classical Marxist authors occasionally borrowed the term "barbarism" as used by Westerners to refer to the state of social civilization prior to capitalist society, they were fundamentally different from the narrow Western bourgeois historical viewpoint. They highly affirmed the "ancient civilizations" that existed before capitalist social civilization. In contrast, some Western bourgeois politicians and scholars viewed the "ancient civilizations" of human society—especially those of Eastern nations—as "barbaric," promoting the narrow bourgeois idealist historical viewpoint of "Western-centrism." When they called "ancient civilization" "barbarism," it was to disparage it, particularly the "ancient civilizations" of Eastern nations. This is fundamentally different from the Marxist view of civilization held by Marx and Engels, who highly affirmed "ancient civilization," especially those created by Eastern nations. As Mao Zedong pointed out in a 1958 conversation with a delegation of youth from Black Africa: because "China has not occupied other countries in the past, does not do so now, and will not occupy the United States or Great Britain as colonies in the future, we have always been a civilized country." In a 1959 conversation with Communist Party leaders from several Latin American countries, he further pointed out the need to break down the absurd claims and superstitious notions promoted by certain Western bourgeois politicians—claims like "Western civilization vs. Eastern barbarism," or that "Westerners are civilized peoples while Easterners are barbaric peoples"—which disparage Eastern civilization. Mao Zedong resolutely opposed the viewpoint of some Western bourgeois politicians and scholars who "say we are barbaric and uncivilized," arguing that "this must be turned on its head." The truly barbaric countries should be the imperialist brigands who cruelly oppress, exploit, and slaughter the people of colonies and semi-colonies, while the Eastern nations are civilized countries because they never occupy or colonize others.

Fifth, the classical Marxist writers insisted on using the perspectives of class and class struggle to understand and analyze the question of social civilization in class societies. They revealed the class nature of social civilization in such societies, pointing out that the history of human civilizational development since the dissolution of primitive communal ownership is a history of class struggle. For instance, Engels believed that at the end of primitive society, the first great split between the exploiting and exploited classes occurred, and from then on, class differentiation and antagonism “continued to exist throughout the entire period of civilization,” that is, the entire “age of civilization.” He pointed out that “slavery,” “medieval serfdom,” and “modern wage labor” are the institutional forms of the three great systems of private ownership of the means of production in slave, feudal, and capitalist societies. These are the “three great forms of servitude” characteristic of the three major periods of the total “age of civilization,” and these forms always accompany it. He referred to “modern wage labor”—capitalist wage labor—as “disguised slavery.” Engels’s exposition demonstrates that within the so-called “age of civilization,” there have always existed the “three great forms of servitude” belonging to slave civilization, feudal civilization, and capitalist civilization. He believed that the “age of civilization” since slave society began with the division of labor and the resulting exchange and production of commodities. Economically, it is characterized by four features: the emergence of money capital, interest, and usury; the appearance of a merchant class; the emergence of private land ownership and mortgages; and the appearance of slave labor. Regarding family forms, the individual family emerged, characterized by the rule of men over women under monogamy. Politically, its characteristic was the emergence of the state, as the “state is the summary of civilized society” and is “in essence, always a machine for suppressing the oppressed and exploited classes.” He also pointed out other characteristics of the “age of civilization,” namely the emergence of the old-style division of labor between town and country and the system of inheritance of private property. Through this analysis, Engels indicated that the “age of civilization”—whether “ancient civilization” (slave and feudal civilization) or “modern civilization” (capitalist society)—is characterized by class exploitation, class oppression, class contradiction, the opposition between town and country, and the old-style division of labor. He exposed the essence of all prior class-based civilizations as "forms of servitude" based on class exploitation and revealed the developmental history of the entire "age of civilization" from "ancient civilization" to "modern civilization."

Through the above overview of the classic discourses, arguments, and evidence provided by classical Marxist writers on social civilization, one can grasp their basic views on human civilization. We can clearly recognize how they applied the basic principles and methods of historical materialism to analyze the issue, thereby allowing us to correctly understand and expound the Marxist view of civilization.

The term “civilization,” in its broadest sense, can have many different usages, referents, and connotations. One can use the term from various disciplinary perspectives such as history, ethnology, anthropology, sociology, and archaeology. Examples include Eastern civilization, Western civilization, ancient civilization, modern civilization, industrial civilization, agricultural civilization, nomadic civilization, slave society civilization, feudal society civilization, capitalist society civilization, and socialist society civilization. When classical Marxist writers used the term and expounded on social civilization, they remained consistent with the standpoint, viewpoints, and methods of historical materialism, embodying the Marxist view of civilization. Classical Marxist writers were strictly limited in their usage, defining the concept of civilization through historical materialism.

First, they take the nature, state, and level of the productive forces as the fundamental standard for understanding the emergence, development, nature, state, and level of human social civilization. Classical Marxist writers believe that the productive forces are the ultimate driving force of civilizational progress. The masses are the creators of social civilization; their productive practice creates civilization, and the contradictory movement between the productive forces and the relations of production, and between the economic base and the superstructure, is the true cause of human social progress. For example, Marx equated “all progress of civilization” with “every growth of social productive forces,” believing that civilization is the object created by workers. He also pointed out: “In order that they may not be deprived of the result attained and forfeit the fruits of civilization, they are obliged, from the moment when their mode of commerce [N] no longer corresponds to the productive forces acquired, to change all their traditional social forms.” He thus viewed civilizational progress as the result of the contradictory movement between productive forces and relations of production.

Second, to judge the nature, state, and level of a social civilization, one must first analyze the nature, state, and level of the social formation ^[5] in which that civilization is situated. Starting from the fundamental cause of social change—the basic contradictions between productive forces and relations of production, and between the economic base and the superstructure—and following the general laws of the evolution of social formations, classical Marxist writers used the "five social formations" ^[6] theory. They viewed human civilization as a historical process in which "five stages of social civilization" develop sequentially, revealing the law of civilizational development from lower to higher stages.

Third, in a class society, social civilization has a distinct class character. One must conduct a class analysis of such civilizations and view civilizational phenomena through the lens of class and class struggle. For instance, both Marx and Engels regarded the emergence of classes and the state as important markers of humanity's entry into the “age of civilization.” Engels pointed out that civilization is a quality of society. Sociality is the developmental characteristic of human civilization, and class character is the concentrated expression of that sociality within class societies. Marx stated: “From the very moment that civilization begins, production begins to be founded on the antagonism of orders, estates, and classes, and finally on the antagonism of accumulated labor and actual labor. No antagonism, no progress. This is the law that civilization has followed up to our days.” Furthermore, Marx and Engels believed that from the “ancient civilization” of slave society (following the dissolution of primitive communal ownership), through the “ancient civilization” of feudal society, up to the “modern civilization” of capitalist society, all have been civilizations of class exploitation and antagonism. Their foundation is "the exploitation of one class by another"; "every step forward in civilization is at the same time a step forward in inequality"; and "the state is the summary of civilized society," which "in all cases is essentially a machine for the suppression of the oppressed and exploited class."

Classical Marxist writers used class viewpoints and methods to conduct a class analysis of civilization, profoundly revealing that civilizations of class exploitation are built on the foundations of class antagonism and exploitation. They argued that class struggle has been the driving force of civilizational progress since the dawn of class society. The antagonism and struggle between classes is the objective law followed by civilizational development. As Mao Zedong pointed out in his 1949 work Cast Away Illusions, Prepare for Struggle: “Class struggle, some classes triumph, others are eliminated. Such is history, such is the history of civilization for thousands of years.” Since the dissolution of primitive communal ownership, the history of human civilization has been the history of class struggle.

Fourth, civilization is a historical category. One cannot use an abstract, eternal, or supra-historical “universal civilization” to measure concrete social civilizations under different social formations, classes, and historical conditions. Classical Marxist writers believed that social civilization is a social phenomenon and possesses sociality. They fully elucidated that human civilization is historical and concrete. There has never been an abstract, supra-class, or “universal” social civilization. One must never use an unchanging, so-called “universal civilization” standard to measure different social formations, classes, or types of social civilization.

Fifth, the social civilization of any given social formation possesses historical progressiveness relative to the preceding formation and contributes to the development of human civilization. It is a historical necessity that the old social civilizations of class exploitation will be replaced by the new social civilizations of a future society. For example, classical Marxist writers gave a due historical-dialectical evaluation of the progressive nature of bourgeois civilization, affirming the “great mobilizing [civilizing] influence of capital.” Furthermore, Marx and Engels believed that capitalist civilization, built on the antagonism and struggle between the two great classes of capitalist society, is an “old civilization” that will inevitably trigger a proletarian socialist revolution. Through the dictatorship of the proletariat, it will be replaced by a new civilizational form—a “true, universal civilization,” namely socialist and communist civilization.

Sixth, we must resolutely use the historical materialist view of civilization to defeat historical idealism. Standing on the ground of historical materialism, classical Marxist writers thoroughly criticized the narrow historical idealist views of Western bourgeois politicians and scholars. These figures argued that civilization is a product of pure spirit, advocated a binary “barbarism-civilization” division of history, claimed that everything before capitalism was a "state of barbarism" and that "capitalist society is the end of civilization," and promoted "Western-centrism." For instance, Engels criticized the idealist view that attributed "rapidly advancing civilization entirely to the head, to the development and activity of the brain," pointing out that historical activities driving civilizational progress should be based on the "needs" of real material production and life, rather than the thoughts of a few individuals. The "clash of civilizations" theory advocated today by Samuel Huntington is a contemporary variant of the idealist view of civilization criticized by the classical Marxist writers. The "clash of civilizations" erases the fact that the history of human civilization is a history of class struggle, attempting to replace the theory of class struggle with an ultra-historical, abstract concept.

From the discourses of classical Marxist writers, we can clearly outline the basic content and viewpoints of the Marxist view of civilization—that is, the general outlook and basic principles of Marxism regarding social civilization. Although Marx and Engels did not provide a formal definition of civilization, it is evident from their writings that civilization is a social phenomenon of human progress. It is an important category that manifests, marks, and measures the state, nature, and degree of social progress. One must learn to apply the standpoint, viewpoints, and methods of historical materialism to perform a historical, concrete, dialectical, and class-based analysis of social civilization.

II. Chinese-path modern civilization is not any other civilization, but a "new form of human civilization" characterized by the comprehensive development of socialism with Chinese characteristics

Regarding the nature, connotation, and significance of “Chinese-path modern civilization,” we should understand it from the following aspects:

First, judging from the perspective of historical materialism and the Marxist view of civilization, Chinese-path modern civilization is not any other civilization, but a “new form of human civilization” of socialism with Chinese characteristics. Looking across the history of human development, human civilization has experienced the originating civilization of primitive society, slave civilization, and feudal civilization. Currently, it is in the stage of capitalist civilization, while simultaneously in the historical process where socialist civilization is gradually replacing it. In the contemporary process of world history, humanity has already created socialist civilization—the first stage of communist civilization—which replaces and is superior to capitalist civilization. All civilizations from the post-primitive era to capitalist civilization have been civilizations of class exploitation, built on cruel class oppression, exploitation, antagonism, and struggle. The civilization of class-exploiting societies is inextricably linked with exploitation, oppression, war, bloodshed, and killing. While capitalist civilization created a greater social civilization than any previous society, it still has not overcome the defects of class-exploiting civilizations. It contains polarization and antagonism, struggle and bloodshed; it harbors various dark sides of society and extremely uncivilized social problems.

In 1920, in "International Working Women's Day," Lenin pointed out: "Only the dictatorship of the proletariat, only the socialist state is able to achieve, and has already achieved, a high level of civilization." As we say, the October Revolution led by Lenin established the first socialist state in human history, opening a new era in human history. This so-called "new era" meant the birth of a new social formation to replace the old one; socialist society created a new form of human civilization that is more advanced than that of capitalist society. Although Soviet socialism, as a new form of human social civilization, was cut short mid-way, the success of socialism with Chinese characteristics has allowed this new form of socialist social civilization to be continued and inherited. Socialism with Chinese characteristics has brought about Chinese-path modernization, creating a new type of social civilization in human history—a new form of human civilization that will thoroughly replace capitalist social civilization.

Second, Chinese-path modernization is an advanced social civilization characterized by the historical and concrete unity of civilization in its material form and civilization in its conceptual form. Dividing by the two great social phenomena of humanity—the material and the spiritual—we can categorize social civilizational phenomena into material-form civilization and conceptual-form civilization. Material-form civilization can be referred to in short as material civilization, and conceptual-form civilization as spiritual civilization. Human social civilization is the historical, concrete, and dialectical unity of material-form civilization and conceptual-form civilization. For example, bronzeware was the material form of civilization in Chinese slave society; it was a material-form civilization. Through technical processes such as mining, smelting, and casting, the material raw materials of bronzeware became a civilizational symbol of Chinese slave society—a material civilization. However, the inscriptions and decorative patterns on the bronzeware embodied the "rule of rites" ^[8] ideology of the slave system and reflected aesthetic ideas, both of which are conceptual-form civilizations—spiritual civilizations. Furthermore, the "ritual" (礼 li) institutional system of the strict hierarchy of slave society embodied in bronzeware is an institutional-form civilization. Thus, it is evident that the bronzeware itself was a historical and concrete unity of material-form and conceptual-form civilization, as well as a manifestation of the economic, political, cultural, institutional, and ecological civilizations of slave society. Conceptual-form civilization must use material-form civilization as its material bearer, while material-form civilization must use conceptual-form civilization as its spiritual manifestation. Material-form civilization cannot exist apart from conceptual-form civilization, nor can conceptual-form civilization exist apart from material-form civilization. Any material-form civilization would fail to constitute a material-form civilization if it were not permeated by ideas, concepts, and techniques. Therefore, any social civilization is a unity of material-form and conceptual-form civilization—a unity of material and spiritual civilizations. Chinese-path modernization is a "new form of civilization" of socialism with Chinese characteristics characterized by a high degree of unity between material-form and conceptual-form civilizations; it is a social civilizational unity where material and spiritual civilizations are closely linked and indispensable to one another.

Third, Chinese-path modernization is a systematic social civilizational complex based on the "Five-Sphere Integrated Plan" of economy, politics, culture, institutions, and ecology. Divided by the three major spheres of social economy, politics, and culture, human social civilization can also be termed as economic-form civilization, political-form civilization, and cultural-form civilization—abbreviated as economic, political, and cultural civilization. Material and spiritual civilization, and economic, political, and cultural civilization, are distinctions made from different angles, fields, and scopes; they are not strictly separated but are interconnected, interacting, intersecting, and overlapping. Economic, political, and cultural civilizations each contain both material-form and conceptual-form aspects. For example, economic civilization is primarily based on material-form civilization, yet it also contains conceptual-form civilization; the economic thought permeated within economic operations and economic systems is conceptual-form civilization. The same applies to political and cultural civilizations; they contain both material and conceptual forms, though the conceptual component is more prominent than the material one.

Human social civilization is not only conceptual-form civilization but also material-form civilization; it is not only cultural-form civilization but also economic-form, political-form, institutional-form, and ecological-form civilization. Institutional civilization and ecological civilization are generalizations of specific social civilizational phenomena from other perspectives. Institutional and ecological civilizations run through material and spiritual civilizations and permeate the three major fields of economy, politics, and culture. Viewing human social civilization merely as conceptual or cultural is an incomplete understanding. Precisely because social civilization is a unity of material and conceptual forms, it must be an all-encompassing, multi-level social civilization existing in a systematic manner.

The foundation of social civilization is economic-form civilization—that is, economic civilization. Economic civilization is primarily composed of the mode of production of material goods—the unity of the productive forces and the relations of production; it is composed of all means of production and means of subsistence created by human social production, and it is composed of the economic base of society. Economic civilization in human history has passed through the economic civilization of the communal ownership mode of production in primitive communes, the private ownership mode of production by slave-owners in slave society, the self-sufficient natural economy mode of production based on private land ownership by landlords in feudal society, the large-scale industrial mode of production based on private capital ownership in capitalist society, and the communist mode of production based on public ownership (for which the incomplete public ownership economic civilization of socialist society is the prerequisite and preparation). Naturally, different countries, nations, and regions possess economic civilizations with their own national characteristics.

The political superstructure of social civilization is political civilization. The political superstructure refers to the state and its coercive apparatuses such as the army, police, courts, and prisons; the political superstructure is the political civilization of human society. In the historical eras of different social formations in the development of human society, political civilization has progressed continuously. The political civilization of slave society was more mature and progressive than that of primitive society; the political civilization of feudal society was more mature and progressive than that of slave society; and the political civilization of capitalist society was more mature and progressive than that of feudal society. The political civilization of communist society inherits the excellent components of the political civilizations of all previous social formations while overcoming their historical limitations; it is bound to be a new form of political civilization that transcends that of capitalist society—a new type of political civilization that eliminates the malaise of all class-based social civilizations.

Culture and civilization are two categories that are closely related, aligned, and overlapping, yet possess their own distinct connotations and extensions. The scope of application for "culture" is much narrower than that of "civilization." Mao Zedong pointed out: "A given culture (as an ideological form) is a reflection of the politics and economics of a given society, and the former in turn has a tremendous influence and effect upon the latter; economics is the base and politics the concentrated expression of economics. This is our fundamental view of the relation of culture to politics and economics and of the relation of politics to economics." Human society is composed of three major fields: economy, politics, and culture. Economics is the base; politics is the concentrated expression of economics. Culture is one field, one aspect, and one level of human society; it is the reflection, manifestation, sublimation, and generalization of that society's economy and politics, while simultaneously exerting a counter-reaction—either promoting or hindering—the development of the economy and politics.

In a class society, culture is subordinate to a specific class and possesses a distinct class character. "In the world today, all culture, all literature and art belong to definite classes and are geared to definite political lines. There is in fact no such thing as art for art’s sake, art that stands above classes, art that is detached from or independent of politics." In a class society, a given culture is the culture of a given class, serving specific class interests and specific class struggles. Culture is created by humans in social practice. Human cultural life is the deepening and elevation of economic and political life; culture is the continuation and reflection of economy and politics.

Within the Marxist perspective, culture has two layers of meaning: broad and narrow. In the broad sense, culture is the sum total of all material and spiritual achievements created by humanity, including economic and political results. In the narrow sense, culture refers to the spiritual products determined by economy and politics—things of a conceptual form. Culture can be divided into two categories: material-form culture and conceptual-form culture. A given material-form culture must have conceptual-form culture as its core, essence, and reflection, while a given conceptual-form culture must use a material-form culture as its carrier and bearer; the two are unified. Take religion as an example: it belongs to the category of the ideological superstructure and is a specific social cultural phenomenon—religious culture. Temples and halls are material-form religious culture, while religious dogmas, beliefs, thoughts, and theories are conceptual-form culture; together, they constitute a unified religious culture. Religious culture is both conceptual and manifested through material-form culture such as temples, scriptures, and ritual objects.

In short, material-form culture and conceptual-form culture are inseparable, together constituting the unity of social cultural phenomena. According to the distinction between broad and narrow senses of culture, in the broad sense, culture includes both material and conceptual forms; in the narrow sense, culture specifically refers to conceptual-form culture, such as ideological theory, literature and art, science, and education. Culture is an important content, aspect, and field of social civilization; it is also an important manifestation and hallmark of civilization. It can also be said that culture and civilization are both connected and distinct, both overlapping and separate. Civilization is the total achievement and total hallmark of social progress. Culture is an important manifestation of social civilization. Civilization includes culture; culture is one aspect, one content, one manifestation, and one hallmark of civilization. It can be said that culture is a social civilizational phenomenon in its concentrated manifestation, also known as cultural civilization. Of course, it is incomplete to limit social civilization merely to conceptual-form culture such as spirit, thought, and consciousness.

Institutional civilization is a special form of social civilization. Institutional civilization is social civilization existing in institutional form; it is a monitor of the nature, state, characteristics, and level of social civilization, and a major hallmark of the degree of social civilization. The level of a society's institutional civilization marks the progressive level of that society's civilization. The more human social civilization develops, the higher the degree of institutional civilization. Institutional civilization permeates all fields, aspects, and levels of human society—including economy, politics, and culture—such as economic systems, political systems, cultural systems, and party systems; it embodies both material-form and conceptual-form civilization. The higher the degree of institutional civilization, the higher the degree of social civilization. Institutional civilization is also a cultural phenomenon; it is humanity’s elevation, generalization, and reflection of economy and politics. The core of institutional civilization is humanity’s institutional cognition based on ideological theory, manifested both in the political superstructure and the ideological superstructure. To strengthen the building of social civilization, we must strengthen the building of institutional civilization.

Ecological civilization is also a special form of social civilization. Ecological civilization embodies the state, degree, and level of humanity’s understanding, transformation, and protection of nature; it reflects the relationship between man and nature. Since the formation of human society, humans have maintained a relationship with nature involving the understanding, transformation, protection, and utilization of nature. Humanized nature is the result of humans understanding, transforming, protecting, and utilizing nature. In the social development process of transforming and utilizing nature, humanity has received both nature's blessings and its punishments. People have gradually realized that the relationship between man and nature must be handled correctly to maintain harmony between them. Humans must not only transform and utilize nature and take from it, but also love and protect nature. The degree of humanity's understanding, transformation, utilization, and protection of nature is likewise a manifestation of the progress of human civilization. When human society developed into capitalist society, along with the development of capitalist industrialization, the disorderly expansion of capital made nature’s punishment and retaliation against humanity increasingly severe. Insightful individuals in capitalist society proposed ecological views on protecting the environment and nature; however, it is impossible to thoroughly establish a harmonious relationship between man and nature through the capitalist system. Only through an advanced social system, such as the socialist system, can a true ecological civilization be built. The building of ecological civilization is the inevitable result of social civilization reaching a certain stage of development; only socialism can build a true ecological civilization.

Civilization in its institutional and ecological forms summarizes the phenomena of a particular social civilization from another perspective. Institutional civilization and ecological civilization run through both material and spiritual civilization, and permeate the three major fields of economy, politics, and culture.

Any civilization in human society possesses aspects that are superior to those of preceding societies, while simultaneously possessing historical limitations. This is true whether one considers civilization in its material or conceptual forms, or as economic, political, cultural, institutional, or ecological civilization. For instance, socialist civilization is the first stage or the preparatory stage of communist civilization; it has created a social civilization that is more advanced and mature than capitalist civilization, yet compared to the higher stage of communist civilization, it still possesses imperfect and immature aspects. Capitalist political civilization created a civilization superior to all prior political civilizations in human history, yet it contains unavoidable malaises and defects—as is inevitable for the political civilization of any social formation.

Human social civilization is not merely a civilization of conceptual forms, but also one of material forms; it is not merely a civilization of cultural forms, but also of economic and political forms, and moreover, of institutional and ecological forms. To view human social civilization solely as a conceptual or cultural form is an incomplete understanding. Precisely because social civilization is a unity of material and conceptual forms, it must be a comprehensive, multi-layered social civilization existing as a system.

Modern Chinese civilization is a comprehensive, systematic, and all-encompassing new form of human civilization. It includes not only material forms but also conceptual forms; it is a comprehensive, systematic, and advanced system of Chinese-path socialist social civilization encompassing economic, political, cultural, institutional, and ecological civilizations. As a new form of human civilization under socialism with Chinese characteristics, modern Chinese civilization should be a civilization where material and spiritual civilizations are organically combined and flourish together, and where the economic, political, cultural, institutional, and ecological civilizations develop in an all-around way. Socialism with Chinese characteristics has created "modern Chinese civilization," a new form of social civilization in human history. The all-around development of modern Chinese civilization is the inevitable path toward the highest realm of civilization: the free and well-rounded development of individuals ^[9] in a communist society.

III. Comprehensively Advancing the Great Rejuvenation of the Chinese Nation Through Chinese-path Modernization and Accelerating the Construction of the New Form of "Modern Chinese Civilization"

Modern Chinese civilization is not any other kind of social civilization; it is the new form of civilization of socialism with Chinese characteristics. It is a social civilization characterized by the historical, concrete, and dialectical unity of material forms (material civilization) and conceptual forms (spiritual civilization). It is a social civilization system based on the "Five-Sphere Integrated Plan" of economy, politics, culture, institutions, and ecology. It is a new type of social civilization that is consistent with, coordinated with, and connected to the future free and well-rounded development of individuals in communist society. To build modern Chinese civilization, we must achieve the following points:

First, we must always adhere to the socialist direction. All societies since the dissolution of the public ownership of the primitive commune ^[10] have been class societies. The civilization of any class society possesses a distinct class nature; the dominant civilization of any society is the social civilization of the ruling class and necessarily carries certain historical limitations. This is true whether it is slave society, feudal society, or capitalist society. Only a communist society that eliminates class distinctions and oppositions is the most advanced new form of social civilization in human history. The civilization of its transitional society (socialist society) is the most progressive social civilization to date and is the new form of civilization transitioning toward the most civilized communist society of mankind. Socialist civilization creates the conditions and provides the premises and preparations for the elimination of classes and the transition to the most progressive, comprehensive, and advanced communist civilization. So-called trans-historical, universal, or abstract social civilizations simply do not exist; the pursuit of such civilizations is nothing more than a deceptive trick. In building modern Chinese civilization, we must first uphold the socialist nature of civilization. Modern Chinese civilization is the new form of civilization of socialism with Chinese characteristics. To build it, we must always adhere to the socialist direction and unswervingly follow the socialist path. To maintain this direction, we must always uphold the guidance of Marxism-Leninism, the people's democratic dictatorship, and the centralized and unified leadership of the Communist Party of China.

Second, we must always persist in a people-centered approach to build and develop a comprehensive, coordinated, and sustainable modern Chinese civilization. Modern Chinese civilization is a civilization of the people and for the vast majority. Its construction must always adhere to the people-centered approach, taking the people’s needs, the people’s sharing, the people’s preferences ^[11], the people’s conscious will, and the people’s initiative as its principles. The construction of modern Chinese civilization must take the free and well-rounded development of individuals as its tenet, promoting a "two-handed" ^[12] approach where both material and spiritual civilizations are emphasized with equal strength, and ensuring the coordinated development of the "five civilizations": economic, political, cultural, institutional, and ecological.

Third, we must always persist in building an advanced socialist culture and an ideology with strong cohesive and leadership power. No matter how much modern Chinese civilization develops, progresses, or prospers, if it departs from socialist spiritual civilization and the guidance of advanced socialist culture, it will lose its vitality and fail to sustain its development. The reason the Chinese civilization has continued to this day without interruption is that it has been maintained and nourished by the roots and soul of spiritual civilization and advanced culture. If we focus only on material civilization while neglecting spiritual civilization, the construction of advanced socialist culture, and the development of an ideology with strong cohesive and leadership power, modern Chinese civilization will lose its roots and soul, leading to interruption or even extinction. To ensure that Chinese civilization continues to develop, endures through the ages, and remains vibrant, we must always attach great importance to the construction of advanced socialist culture and build a culturally strong socialist country with Chinese characteristics. The most important aspect of this is to uphold the guiding position of Marxism in the ideological field, vigorously strengthen the construction of Marxist theory, take the socialist core values as a guide, and strive to build modern Chinese civilization.

Fourth, we must always persist in inheriting, promoting, and glorying the fine traditional Chinese culture to ensure that Chinese culture has a long history, flourishes, and develops sustainably. To carry forward fine traditional Chinese culture, we must adopt a scientific attitude toward it and achieve a "critical inheritance." We resolutely oppose the two absolutist attitudes of either total negation or total affirmation of traditional Chinese culture. We should stand on the Marxist position to conduct a scientific analysis of traditional Chinese culture, distinguishing the good from the bad, discarding the dross and absorbing the essence to form a new form of socialist civilization with Chinese characteristics. We must oppose both historical and cultural archaism ^[13], as well as historical and cultural nihilism ^[14]. We must place the integration of the basic tenets of Marxism with China’s specific realities and with fine traditional Chinese culture at the forefront of building modern Chinese civilization, continuously advancing the Sinicization and modernization of Marxism. Marxism is the soul and guide for building modern Chinese civilization; its construction must adhere to Marxist guidance and take the "two integrations" as the main thread to lead its continuous development.

Fifth, we must always persist in absorbing the advanced civilizations of foreign countries to build an open and inclusive modern Chinese civilization. Modern Chinese civilization is not a closed or rigid social civilization system; it never rejects any excellent foreign civilization. Traditional Chinese civilization is both a social civilization developed through the integration of multiple ethnic groups and one that absorbs advanced foreign civilizations. In building modern Chinese civilization, we oppose both "indiscriminate borrowing" ^[15] and "closed-doorism." We must critically accept advanced foreign civilizations, taking "Marxist studies as the root, Chinese studies as the substance, and Western studies for utility" ^[16], making them our own and using them for our purposes.

Sixth, we must always persist in using Chinese-path modernization to advance the construction of modern Chinese civilization. Chinese-path modernization is the only path for building modern Chinese civilization. It is the modernization of socialism with Chinese characteristics: it is the modernization of a huge population, of common prosperity for all, of material and spiritual cultural-ethical progress, of harmony between humanity and nature, and of peaceful development. Chinese-path modernization has debunked the fallacious theories that "modernization equals Westernization, privatization, or capitalization," and has independently carved out a broad road toward national rejuvenation through socialism with Chinese characteristics. Only by advancing and developing Chinese-path modernization can modern Chinese civilization be built.

Seventh, we must always persist in the Chinese characteristics of modern Chinese civilization, building a modern Chinese civilization with Chinese characteristics, Chinese style, and Chinese ethos. The fundamental feature of modern Chinese civilization is its Chinese character. The most fundamental task in its construction is to maintain Chinese national characteristics; if these are lost, modern Chinese civilization itself is lost.