How to Optimize and Strengthen the Discipline of CPC History and Party Building
Editor’s Note: The construction and development of the discipline of CPC History and Party Building is both an important theoretical issue and a major practical issue. On the "road to sitting the exam" [1], where opportunities of the era and severe challenges coexist, it is particularly urgent to build and strengthen this discipline with a focus on continuing to contribute wisdom and strength to the advancement of Party building in the New Era. Focusing on issues such as how to understand the necessity and practical significance of establishing CPC History and Party Building as a first-level discipline; how to define its research objects, contents, and methods; how to build a disciplinary system, academic system, and discourse system with distinct characteristics; and how to better integrate it with the construction of ideological and political theory courses, this journal invited four experts and scholars for a collective discussion to provide a reference for our readers.
Guest Interviewees: Wang Binglin, Dean of the Institute of CPC History and Party Building, Beijing Normal University Song Xueqin, Secretary of the Party Committee and Vice Dean of the School of CPC History and Party Building, Renmin University of China Ouyang Junxi, Vice Dean of the Institute of CPC History and Party Building, Tsinghua University Zhou Liangshu, Professor at the School of Marxism, Peking University
Moderator: Zhang Shaoyi, reporter for this journal
Reporter: Since being established as a first-level discipline in September 2022, CPC History and Party Building has encountered new opportunities for development, with increasing disciplinary construction efforts and gradually emerging results. Looking back at the journey taken, where are the necessity and practical significance of establishing CPC History and Party Building as a first-level discipline reflected?
Wang Binglin: Establishing CPC History and Party Building as a first-level discipline is both necessary and highly beneficial. It holds important theoretical value and practical significance for better exerting the discipline’s function of "consulting for governance and educating people" [2], accelerating the construction of an autonomous knowledge system for Chinese philosophy and social sciences, and advancing the cause of the Party and the state.
Fundamentally speaking, the establishment of CPC History and Party Building as a first-level discipline is determined by the status and role of the Chinese Communist Party. The CPC is the highest force for political leadership in the country and plays a role as the core of leadership in China’s economic and social development; it is only right to build a first-level discipline commensurate with the Party’s governing status. Only by establishing an independent discipline and conducting continuous, in-depth research can we truly understand why such immense changes have occurred in modern and contemporary Chinese society, more profoundly interpret why the CPC "can," why socialism with Chinese characteristics is "good," and why Marxism that has been Sinicized and adapted to the times "works," and better provide theoretical support for upholding and strengthening the Party's overall leadership and building a Marxist governing party that remains in power over the long term.
Establishing CPC History and Party Building as a first-level discipline helps to better exert the disciplinary function of consulting for governance and educating people. As the governing party, research into the CPC’s historical process possesses greater political, theoretical, and practical character than other historical sub-disciplines. It bears an important knowledge-education function and can provide historical wisdom for governance. Strengthening research on major theoretical and practical issues of Party leadership and Party building can provide intellectual support for strengthening the Party’s overall leadership, comprehensively and strictly governing the Party, and insisting on leading social revolution through the Party’s self-revolution. Simultaneously, it can promote the continuous improvement of professional curriculum teaching and talent cultivation systems, increase the reserve and "new blood" [3] of professional talent in CPC History and Party Building, and meet the needs of strengthening ideological and political work and conducting Party affairs management, thereby providing academic wisdom for building a strong country and national rejuvenation.
Establishing CPC History and Party Building as a first-level discipline is also an inherent requirement for accelerating the construction of philosophy and social sciences with Chinese characteristics. The discipline of CPC History and Party Building manifests distinct Chinese characteristics, a Chinese style, and a Chinese spirit, playing an irreplaceable role in constructing China’s autonomous knowledge system. This is a characteristic discipline that achieves a high degree of unity between scientific rigor and Party principle [4], and it maintains a very close connection with actual social reality. Many of the major strategic issues raised during the current transformation of social practice in China fall within the focus or scope of CPC History and Party Building research. Raising it to a first-level discipline helps to deeply explain the Chinese path, Chinese governance, and Chinese logic, deepening our understanding of the laws governing the fundamental question of "what the CPC is and what it aims to do," and accelerating the construction of an autonomous knowledge system for Chinese philosophy and social sciences.
Song Xueqin: Indeed, establishing CPC History and Party Building as a first-level discipline is a practical necessity in the New Era for upholding and strengthening the Party’s overall leadership and deeply advancing comprehensively and strictly governing the Party and the Party’s self-revolution. It is also an internal requirement for advancing the Project to Study and Build Marxist Theory and for constructing a disciplinary, academic, and discourse system for philosophy and social sciences with Chinese characteristics. It holds irreplaceable strategic value for serving the Party's overall leadership, enhancing the Party’s level of scientific governance, promoting the prosperity and development of philosophy and social sciences with Chinese characteristics, and advancing the Sinicization and modernization of Marxism.
The establishment of this first-level discipline has built a bridge between academic research and practical needs. By cultivating professional talent through disciplinarization, we can supply professional forces equipped with theoretical literacy and practical capabilities to Party organizations at all levels, government departments, and social organizations. Strengthening the construction of this discipline in the New Era is not a simple merger of "CPC History" and "Party Building," but rather aims to achieve the goal of "1+1 > 2." By adhering to an integrated concept for the mega-discipline, we can integrate the knowledge systems of both the Party's history and its construction. This allows the discipline to connect the CPC's past, reality, and future, as well as its theory and practice, thereby achieving the unity of political and academic character, historical and realistic character, and theoretical and practical character.
Connecting research on Party history and Party building helps us use history as a mirror to observe the present and serve reality. By centering closely on the General Requirements for Party Building in the New Era [5], and focusing on the Party’s fundamental principles, guiding policies, main lines of work, and overall layout, we can deeply mine the laws of Party building within the historical process. Only then can we promote the continuous deepening of the "Great New Project of Party Building" in the New Era based on realistic needs. By grounding ourselves in China’s reality and integrating the major achievements and historical experience of the Party’s century of struggle, as well as the new major results and successful experiences of Party building in the New Era, into the teaching, research, and management of the discipline, we can give full play to its mission and function of serving the overall interests of the Party and the state.
Reporter: Disciplinary boundaries are important markers of a discipline’s knowledge production and academic division of labor. Specialized and stable research objects, alongside recognized and clear research content, are key to the high-quality development of a discipline. Specifically for CPC History and Party Building, how should its research objects and content be defined?
Song Xueqin: The definition of research objects and content directly shapes the disciplinary affiliation, methodological application, and academic representation of CPC History and Party Building. Clearly articulating these is an unavoidable basic proposition in the development process of the discipline.
What distinguishes CPC History and Party Building research from historical or political science research involving the CPC is precisely its emphasis on the proactive, subjective position of the Party within the research scope. It emphasizes detailed interpretation of lines, principles, policies, strategies, and major documents and texts, transcending purely philological or evidentiary research to focus on the interconnected significance and practical value between specific figures or events and the major issues of CPC history and building. Therefore, more accurately, the research objects of the discipline are the major issues concerning the history of the CPC and its own construction.
In January 2024, the four second-level disciplines [6] under CPC History and Party Building were established: Theory of CPC History and Party Building, History of the CPC, Party Leadership and Party Building, and Theory and Practice of Party Affairs. Although the division of research content is closely related to these second-level disciplines, they are not identical but exist in a relationship of inclusion. Research content should not be limited solely to the second-level disciplines. Dividing the research content requires both extracting the "common denominator" of its own sub-disciplines and leaving academic space for the expansion of research topics. Therefore, the research content of CPC History and Party Building consists of the theoretical, historical, and practical issues of the Chinese Communist Party.
Ouyang Junxi: Disciplines are products of history and society, and their research scope will inevitably change alongside changes in the era and society. For instance, from the perspective of academic history, the development of the CPC History discipline has been a process of continuous expansion. It has moved from focusing on the history of the political and military struggles led by the Party to gradually including important historical phenomena related to the Party, extending beyond politics and military affairs to economy, thought and culture, social life, and foreign affairs. On one hand, this is because the development of socialist practice—especially the great practice since the Reform and Opening-up and the various changes it brought—promoted the deepening and expansion of the field. On the other hand, it is due to shifts in academic trends. For example, with the rise of New Social History and New Cultural History, the Party history academic community began a "social history turn," and new fields entered the field of vision of researchers.
Of course, while "expanding its territory," the discipline must also take care to maintain its academic stance and value orientation. Interdisciplinary research has opened new perspectives for Party history research, but it may also blur the boundaries between Party history and other disciplines. In the current era of disciplinary openness, research should still have relatively clear boundaries, maintaining its significance and value as an independent discipline by always centering on and serving the central work [7] of the Party and the state.
Reporter: The discipline of CPC History and Party Building possesses both distinct political and academic attributes. On what theoretical foundation should it be built, and what basic methods should be used to form an academic mechanism that connects theoretical construction, historical interpretation, and practical response?
Wang Binglin: The discipline was born because of the Party and flourishes because of the Party, with the Party's history and construction as its main research content. Marxist party theory, the theoretical system of Sinicized Marxist party building, Marxist historiography, and the important discourses of Party leaders on Party history and construction constitute the important theoretical foundations of the discipline.
Marxist party theory is the theoretical source and ideological cornerstone, the theoretical basis for the CPC to strengthen its leadership and self-construction. The CPC is a proletarian party armed with Marxism; Marxist thoughts on the nature, purpose, role, goals, organizational principles, discipline, and unity of the Party determine the essential attributes and value orientation of the discipline. The theoretical system of Sinicized Marxist party building is the product of the CPC combining Marxist party theory with the reality of its own construction; it is the scientific guiding ideology for comprehensively strengthening Party leadership and advancing the "Great Project of Party Building." Deeply researching the historical background, theoretical origins, development process, internal logic, and scientific connotation of this system is an important content of the discipline. Marxist historiography provides scientific methodological guidance. The important principles and methods proposed by Party leaders for studying the Party’s history enrich and develop Marxist historiography. Since the 18th National Congress, General Secretary Xi Jinping has attached great importance to the study, education, and research of Party history, publishing a series of important discourses that have enriched and developed Marxist historiography.
The methodology of CPC History and Party Building is a systematic understanding of the theoretical principles and methods guiding the research. First are the guiding principles: Dialectical materialism and historical materialism are the Marxist worldview and methodology, serving as the fundamental guiding principles and methods. Seeking truth from facts, the mass line, and independence are the positions, viewpoints, and methods with distinct CPC characteristics. The "Six Musts" [8] profoundly manifest the worldview and methodology of Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era. Adhering to a correct view of Party history and a "Big Picture View of History" [9], seeking truth from facts, and maintaining the principle of holism are the guiding principles the discipline should follow. Second are the specific research methods, including investigation and research, the unity of logic and history, comparative research, and documentary analysis.
Zhou Liangshu:
The theoretical foundation and methodology of the discipline of CPC History and Party Building exist in a relationship of dialectical unity and mutual support. The theoretical foundation provides value orientation and theoretical backing for the methodology, while the methodology offers specific tools and practical paths for applying that foundation. Together, they constitute the core elements of the knowledge system of CPC History and Party Building. Conducting research on CPC History and Party Building under the guidance of historical materialism requires establishing a mediating theoretical system between the two. For example, one might use modern social history as a foundation, with the liberation and development of productive forces and the realization of social modernization as the main thread; or use social evolution as the foundation, with social transformation as the driving force, and so on. Conducting research under the guidance of dialectical materialism requires forming a knowledge system based on the law of the unity of opposites, consisting of a series of basic categories: necessity and contingency, universality and particularity, dynamics and statics, history and logic, possibility and reality, appearance and essence, the part and the whole, and cause and effect. Its essence lies in analyzing Party history and Party building through a connected, developing, and comprehensive lens, while opposing metaphysics and one-sidedness.
Naturally, beneath the methodology, there must be a series of specific research methods. First is the historical comparative method, which analyzes the similarities and differences between events and figures to seek general laws within unity and specific characteristics within difference. Second is the retrospective investigation method, looking back from the endpoint to the starting point and reflecting on history from the perspective of reality. This emphasizes the shaping of theory by practice and focuses on dynamic processes rather than static designs to understand complex political phenomena and historical processes. Third is the method of class analysis, adhering to a people-centered stance to scientifically analyze the economic positions, political attitudes, and roles of various social classes in social development. Fourth is the method of contradiction analysis, which includes viewing problems through the principle of "one dividing into two" [10], analyzing specific problems in their specific contexts, grasping the priorities and the mainstream, and adhering to the unity of the "two-point theory" and the "point-of-focus theory" [11]. This method holds unique value, especially for researching complex political phenomena and historical issues.
Reporter: With a view toward forming distinct characteristics and advantages, how should the discipline of CPC History and Party Building construct a disciplinary system, academic system, and discourse system with its own unique traits?
Ouyang Junxi: The construction of the "three systems" for CPC History and Party Building should revolve closely around the "meta-question" of "What is the Chinese Communist Party?" Understanding the nature, purpose, characteristics, and mission of the CPC is the prerequisite for constructing its disciplinary, academic, and discourse systems.
The Constitution of the Communist Party of China stipulates: "The Communist Party of China is the vanguard of the Chinese working class, and at the same time, the vanguard of the Chinese people and the Chinese nation. It is the leadership core for the cause of socialism with Chinese characteristics and represents the developmental requirements of China’s advanced productive forces, the orientation of China’s advanced culture, and the fundamental interests of the overwhelming majority of the Chinese people." This formulation clarifies the nature and purpose of the CPC. From a global and comparative perspective, the CPC also possesses the following characteristics: First, the CPC is China’s Marxist party. In constructing the "three systems" of the discipline, we must never mechanically copy Western party theories or simply apply the historical experiences of Communist parties in other countries. We must be grounded in Chinese realities and the reality of the CPC. Second, the CPC is the world’s largest political party, with over 100 million members. It has established a rigorous organizational system including central, local, and primary-level organizations, a powerful advantage not possessed by any other party in the world. At the same time, the CPC constantly faces the issue of how to solve the unique challenges of a large party. To have the courage for self-revolution is the most distinctive political character of the CPC. Therefore, the construction of the "three systems" should address the questions of history and the questions of our times. Third, the CPC is the highest force for political leadership in the country. The party system practiced in China is the system of multi-party cooperation and political consultation under the leadership of the CPC. This new type of party system is not only essentially different from the "two-party" or "multi-party" systems of Western countries but also formally different from the party systems of other socialist countries. The construction of the "three systems" for the discipline should highlight the Chinese path, Chinese governance, and Chinese theory.
Zhou Liangshu: The center of the "three systems" is the disciplinary system, and its key lies in the issue of disciplinary integration. In fact, the discipline of CPC History and Party Building is itself the result of disciplinary integration. Although the discipline has now been established, the construction of its system is far from complete. Therefore, it must adopt an even more open posture to accept, absorb, and digest new knowledge, continuing to develop in the direction of disciplinary cross-pollination. First is "macro-integration," mainly referring to the cross-integration of this discipline with the natural sciences. Introducing natural science research methods into CPC history and Party building research can promote the scientific rigour, quantification, and precision of academic research, achieving an organic unity of multi-factor, multi-thread, multi-perspective, and multi-level research. Second is "micro-integration," mainly referring to the cross-integration of this discipline with other social sciences. Introducing other social science knowledge can promote a shift in academic research from single narratives to multiple fields such as culture, economy, society, and mentality, which is conducive to exploring micro-topics such as ordinary Party members, primary-level practices, and policy effects.
Of course, the most important is the internal integration of the discipline. The integrated development of CPC history and Party building is an inevitable requirement for healthy interaction and, in turn, high-quality development. Research on CPC history focuses on the longitudinal exploration of the Party's historical process, while research on Party building focuses on the lateral exploration of the laws of Party building. Studying the Party's historical development necessarily involves content such as Party leadership and the Party's own development; studying Party building also requires drawing wisdom and strength from the Party's history to summarize historical laws. This intersection of research content provides broad space for disciplinary integration.
It must be pointed out that although disciplinary integration involves the participation of elements from different disciplines, it is not a simple summation of various disciplines. Rather, it is the systematic and step-by-step integration of knowledge from multiple disciplines while maintaining the individuality and characteristics of this discipline. This requires both identifying the "points of interaction" between different disciplines and discovering the "points of difference" to conduct deep disciplinary integration.
Reporter: Currently, the discipline of CPC History and Party Building has entered a critical development period for system construction and theoretical innovation. How can its knowledge system be better constructed?
Zhou Liangshu: In building the knowledge system of CPC History and Party Building, we must both "reach the heavens and touch the earth"—adhering to the guidance of Marxist theory and following the facts of the CPC's growth—and be "open in all directions," ensuring the internal consistency of logic and facts to reach every possible corner. The first is "longitudinal connection," seeing the links between past and present and researching the past based on the present. We cannot be satisfied with isolated research on a single period or stage; we must connect the preceding and the following to make historical analyses and judgments. The second is "lateral connection," seeing internal and external links and observing the Party from the outside. On one hand, we explore the evolution of the relationship between the Party and the nation and state. The Party's development is not isolated but is inseparably linked to economic, political, cultural, and social conditions. In researching CPC history, we must seek regularities from these connections. On the other hand, we explore the relationships between various parts, links, and elements within the Party. The Party is an organism; researching Party building must break through the fragmentation of various sections and grasp the Party's condition as a whole. The third is "internal mastery," being proficient in the theories and methods of this discipline. One must be proficient in the history of this learning; without longitudinal inheritance, scholarship loses its foundation. One must be proficient in various schools of thought; without lateral reference, scholarship cannot reach the frontier. The fourth is "external mastery," understanding the theories and methods of other disciplines. In addition to essential disciplinary knowledge such as history and political science, one must also be equipped with auxiliary knowledge from economics, sociology, psychology, anthropology, and more.
Ouyang Junxi: In constructing the knowledge system of CPC History and Party Building, we should first "not forget our origins." The discipline of CPC History and Party Building was established on the foundation of the sub-discipline "History of the CPC" (formerly under the first-level discipline of Political Science) and the sub-discipline "Party Building" (formerly under the first-level discipline of Marxist Theory). In reality, there has already been long-term accumulation and a relatively systematic body of disciplinary knowledge. From Thirty Years of the Communist Party of China to the Seventy Years, Ninety Years, and One Hundred Years of the Communist Party of China, CPC history research has formed a solid tradition; its core content, identifying concepts, basic theories, and research methods have basically taken shape. The Party’s three historical resolutions [12] systematically and comprehensively summarized the Party’s course of struggle and historical experience, providing the fundamental compliance for building the knowledge system of CPC History and Party Building. Therefore, we should first fully sort through the course of research on CPC history and Party building, summarize historical experience, inherit fine traditions, and innovate on the basis of upholding the fundamentals.
Research on CPC history and Party building is also a world-class field of study. What we want to build is a knowledge system for CPC History and Party Building with Chinese characteristics, Chinese style, and Chinese spirit. Only by being grounded in China, proceeding from "Chinese problems," and elevating Chinese experience into Chinese theory can we form an original and systematic knowledge system for the discipline.
Reporter: As a discipline with a profound function for providing administrative counsel and educating people, CPC History and Party Building is closely related to ideological and political theory courses ("Sizheng" courses). What are the current ways to better integrate the two?
宋学勤 (Song Xueqin): Deepening the disciplinary construction of CPC History and Party Building is a vivid practice in implementing the fundamental task of fostering virtue through education [13] and strengthening the research and dissemination of the Party's innovative theories. The discipline has unique advantages and a foundation in the construction of Sizheng courses and must maintain a self-awareness of serving the teaching and research of these courses. At the same time, by relying on the construction of the knowledge system of CPC History and Party Building, and by effectively connecting, integrating, and incorporating research results into the practice of Sizheng teaching, we can build a new pattern of healthy interaction between CPC history research and Sizheng teaching. This is both a key measure for enhancing the effectiveness of fostering virtue in Sizheng courses and an inevitable requirement for promoting CPC history research to serves practical needs.
The construction of the knowledge system for the discipline can effectively expand and deepen the content of Sizheng teaching and research. Reflecting the research results of the CPC History and Party Building knowledge system in Sizheng courses—providing them with strong support from rich historical facts, vivid historical figures, and diverse historical elements—will greatly enhance the historical depth and expand the connotations of these courses. Strengthening the problem-orientation of Sizheng teaching through the construction of the CPC History and Party Building knowledge system is the core path for promoting the high-quality development of these courses. Whether it is the deep logic of historical events, the practical foundation of theoretical innovation, or the historical origin of realistic problems, academic support can be found in CPC history and Party building research. Therefore, we must attach great importance to the deep integration and mutual communication of the "problem consciousness" between the two, transforming the frontier results of the discipline into vivid teaching materials for Sizheng courses. This will not only inject profound academic foundations into Sizheng courses but also guide students to establish a correct view of Party history and strengthen historical confidence in the process of facing, analyzing, and solving problems, ultimately realizing the educational value of Sizheng courses in communicating with hearts, enlightening minds, and inspiring morale.
王炳林 (Wang Binglin): Regardless of how Sizheng courses are adjusted or reformed, the Party's history and its innovative theories will always be the core content, and those engaged in CPC history and Party building research will always be the main providers of these courses. The key to running Sizheng courses well lies in the teachers. We must strengthen the building of the teaching faculty for the discipline, reasonably allocate teaching resources, and improve the overall level of the faculty. Currently, significant achievements have been made in the construction of Sizheng courses in universities, but challenges such as overlapping course content remain, necessitating essential reforms and adjustments in line with the times. We must deepen academic research in CPC history and Party building and continuously produce innovative results to provide support for answering questions and resolving doubts in Sizheng courses. We should deepen academic research on deep-level theoretical and practical issues involving the development of the Party and the state, organically combining historical development with current conditions. By strengthening the combination of history and theory, and by clearly explaining the origins and internal logic of relevant issues, we can effectively guide students to grasp laws, clarify directions, and firm up their beliefs. Research on major historical events and figures within the discipline can provide a theoretical basis and practical guidance for the specialized excavation of "red resources" [14]. We should systematically summarize historical laws and experiences, identify key nodes and core values within red resources, and construct a resource system with clear logic and distinct themes. This will allow better integration into university Sizheng teaching, fulfilling the value and function of fostering virtue and soul-building through education.
Source: Qiushi Journal (Red Flag Manuscript), Issue 24, 2024 Editor: Huihui