Ren Jie: The Dialectical Thinking in Xi Jinping’s Important Expositions on Upholding and Improving the System of Socialism with Chinese Characteristics
Editor's Note: To fully leverage the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences' (CASS) function as a national-level research institution—serving as a stronghold for Marxist theory, a decision-making think tank, and an academic sanctuary—and to accelerate the construction of a philosophy and social sciences with Chinese characteristics, CASS launched the 2020 "Excellent Articles in Marxist Theoretical Publicity" selection activity in 2021. After three rounds of rigorous selection by experts from both within and outside the Academy, 50 "Excellent Articles" were chosen from 216 candidate works published in 2020 by active staff across internal units. The "Marxist Research Network" WeChat public account, in collaboration with the accounts for "New Era and New Thought Research," "Marxist Studies," "World Socialist Studies," "International Ideological Review," "Science and Atheism," "Ideological Torch," and "Marxist Economics Youth," will release these 50 "Excellent Articles" in installments for the benefit of our readers.
Abstract:
Upholding and perfecting the system of Chinese-path socialism and promoting the modernization of the national governance system and governance capacity is a major strategic task for the entire Party in the New Era. Fulfilling this strategic task requires scientific work methods and modes of thought, especially the scientific thinking of materialist dialectics. Centering on the contemporary theme of "upholding and perfecting the system of Chinese-path socialism," Xi Jinping’s important discourses on the system of Chinese-path socialism contain a wealth of dialectical thinking. This is reflected in a series of new concepts and judgments regarding institutional epistemology, institutional construction, institutional execution, and institutional confidence. These provide a theoretical foundation and a guide to action for further understanding the system correctly, promoting institutional refinement, improving institutional efficacy, and strengthening institutional confidence.
Keywords: system of Chinese-path socialism; institutional construction; institutional execution; institutional confidence; dialectical thinking
Dialectical thinking is the use of the worldview and methodology of dialectical materialism to observe objects, analyze contradictions, and solve problems. This mode of thought requires understanding problems and handling relationships objectively rather than subjectively, developmentally rather than statically, comprehensively rather than one-sidedly, systemically rather than fragmentarily, and through universal connections rather than in isolation. In the "Afterword to the Second Edition" of Capital, Volume I, Marx specified the essence and characteristics of dialectical thinking: "In its rational form, [dialectics] is a scandal and abomination to bourgeoisdom and its doctrinaire professors... because it includes in its comprehension and affirmative recognition of the existing state of things, at the same time also, the recognition of the negation of that state... because it regards every historically developed social form as in fluid movement, and therefore takes into account its transient nature not less than its momentary existence; because it lets nothing impose upon it, and is in its essence critical and revolutionary." In his article "Strategic Problems of China's Revolutionary War," Mao Zedong vividly referred to materialist dialectics as our "telescope" and "microscope" for understanding the world. Xi Jinping has called upon the vast ranks of Party members and cadres to "study and master the fundamental methods of materialist dialectics, continuously strengthen the capacity for dialectical thinking, and improve the ability to navigate complex situations and handle complex problems."
The adept use of dialectical thinking to grasp the complex relationships among various undertakings in the process of revolution, construction, and reform—and to coordinate the planning of various tasks in national economic and social development—enhances the adherence to principle, systematicity, foresight, and creativity of all endeavors. This constitutes an important intellectual method and valuable experience formed by the Communist Party of China (CPC) during its long-term revolutionary practice and governance of the country. The Fourth Plenary Session of the 19th CPC Central Committee proposed that "upholding and perfecting the system of Chinese-path socialism and promoting the modernization of the national governance system and governance capacity" is a major strategic task for the entire Party. The CPC Central Committee with Comrade Xi Jinping at its core, possessing high vision and the courage to take responsibility, has proposed a series of new concepts and judgments for upholding and perfecting the system of Chinese-path socialism. These new concepts and judgments exhibit distinct characteristics of dialectical thinking in the exposition of institutional essence, formation, function, construction, execution, and confidence. They provide a theoretical foundation and a guide to action for further understanding the system correctly, promoting institutional refinement, improving institutional efficacy, and strengthening institutional confidence.
I. Dialectical Thinking in Institutional Epistemology
Institutions play an increasingly important role in both international and domestic governance. In a certain sense, competition between modern states is primarily a competition over the power to set rules. Institutional competitiveness has become one of the core variables for measuring a nation’s comprehensive strength. This highlighting of the importance of institutions has triggered a surge in institutional research. Philosophy, economics, sociology, political science, and other disciplines have all researched institutions according to their own theoretical needs and research preferences. This has even given rise to many interdisciplinary studies, such as the philosophy of institutions, institutional economics, and institutional sociology. Although these research perspectives vary, they inevitably involve questions regarding the essence, formation, and function of institutions. How one views these issues constitutes the basic questions of institutional epistemology. It should be noted that the epistemological issues to be expounded here are not epistemological in the purely philosophical sense—exploring the nature, origin, and laws of development of knowledge—but rather concern views and perspectives in a narrower sense regarding what institutions are, how they are formed, and what their functions are. If one can analyze these issues using a comprehensive, developmental, systemic, and relational mode of thought, one can dialectically view the essence, formation, and function of institutions. Xi Jinping’s important discourses on the understanding of institutions contain rich dialectical thinking.
First, understanding the essence of institutions dialectically and adhering to the "theory of development" regarding institutional issues. According to the perspective of historical materialism, "the existing system is merely the product of the intercourse that has existed between individuals until now." In order to survive, people must engage in the production of material goods, and production must be carried out in a certain way—that is, predicated on intercourse between individuals. In the process of production, producers form specific relationships with each other through the medium of the means of production, beginning with ownership relations, followed by the social status of people in production and the distribution relations of products. Relations of production are the social form through which production is carried out. Derivative of the relations of production are the relations of intercourse in the sphere of social life. The process of intercourse is the activity through which people establish and handle mutual relationships to achieve certain goals, which we call intercourse in its relational form. This level of intercourse more fully reflects the fact that human beings are social beings. Whether in productive intercourse or social intercourse, humans, as relational beings, necessarily engage in various relationships with others. Due to differences in social status, social relations, and social positions, the interests pursued by individuals also differ. When the behaviors of people pursuing different interests interact in reality, conflicts inevitably arise. Institutions are the certain rules generated through the distribution and coordination of interests to reduce conflicts between people and restrict those conflicts within certain bounds. It must be emphasized that intercourse between people involves both conflict and space for cooperation. For the social organism to operate effectively, a series of rules of conduct must be artificially set or negotiated through strategic interaction to regulate relations. From this, we can conclude: the essence of an institution is a set of rules of behavior that constrain and standardize human conduct.
Once an institution is formed, it possesses relative stability. Institutions, as rules constraining human behavior, cannot be changed overnight; otherwise, their role in constraining behavior, coordinating relationships, and maintaining order cannot be realized. However, institutions also need to develop and improve continuously, remaining in a state of flux. The "developmental" nature of institutions is rooted in the productive practice of human beings. As productive forces develop, the economic base, modes of production, activities of intercourse, and social relations all change, and the institutions must inevitably change accordingly. Xi Jinping has pointed out: "In the process of understanding and transforming the world, as old problems are solved, new problems will arise. Institutions always need continuous improvement; thus, reform can neither be accomplished in one stroke nor once and for all." The development and improvement of institutions are generally achieved through two methods: one is reforming old systems that do not adapt to social development, and the other is constructing new systems that meet the needs of social development—that is, removing the old and establishing the new. Xi Jinping emphasizes that, on the one hand, while upholding and perfecting existing systems, we must reform the structures, mechanisms, laws, and regulations that do not meet the requirements of practical development; on the other hand, we must follow the requirements of development and the trends of the times to "formulate institutions urgently needed for the modernization of the national governance system and governance capacity, and institutions essential to satisfy the people’s new expectations for a better life."
Second, dialectically understanding the formation of institutions and adhering to the "theory of transformation" regarding institutional evolution. There are generally two ways institutions are formed: one is gradual evolution from customs, conventions, and cultural traditions, and the other is top-down design by leadership. The evolution of institutions from customs and conventions is a gradual, endogenous mode of evolution. Engels once pointed out: "At a very early stage of social development, the need arises to subject the daily recurring production, distribution, and exchange of products to a common rule, to invest the individual with the common conditions of production and exchange. This rule, which at first is custom, soon becomes law." Xi Jinping, in connection with specific intra-Party rules, has explained the complementary and transformational relationship between institutions, traditions, and conventions. He proposed that the Party’s rules generally include four categories: the Party Constitution, Party discipline, national laws, and the fine traditions and work conventions formed by the Party in long-term practice. He particularly emphasized that the fine traditions and work conventions formed during long-term practice are extremely important intra-Party rules. Although these rules are not explicitly written in black and white, they are "a tradition, a paradigm, and a requirement [1]." "Discipline consists of written rules, while some rules not explicitly listed in the disciplines are unwritten disciplines; discipline is a rigid rule, while some rules not explicitly listed in the disciplines are self-binding disciplines." As intra-Party rules, these fine traditions and work conventions, together with the Party Constitution, Party discipline, and national laws, standardize and guide the behavior of Party members. In the future, based on practical needs, they may become explicit regulations, completing the transformation from tradition and convention to institution. In expounding the dialectical unity between the rule of law and the rule of virtue, Xi Jinping proposed that "we must promptly elevate moral requirements that are widely recognized, relatively mature, and highly operable in practice into legal norms, guiding the whole society toward virtue and goodness." This reflects the "theory of transformation" in the evolution of institutions.
Third, dialectically understanding the function of institutions and adhering to the "dichotomy" [2] regarding institutional utility. As formal rules that standardize behavior and adjust relationships, institutions play an important role in guiding behavior, coordinating relations, and stabilizing order. Ancient Chinese thinkers said, "Whenever one is to establish a state, the institutions must be scrutinized [3]," and "When institutions are appropriate, national customs can be transformed, and the people will follow the system [4]." The history of governing a country through institutions is long. Regarding the important status and role of institutions, Xi Jinping has also made many expositions: "Those of lesser wisdom manage affairs, those of middle wisdom manage people, and those of great wisdom establish laws [5]. To govern a country or a society, the key is to set rules, talk about rules, and keep to rules. Law is the largest and most important rule for governing the country. To promote the modernization of the national governance system and governance capacity, we must adhere to the rule of law and provide a fundamental, overall, and long-term institutional guarantee for the development of the Party and the state’s undertakings." Specific to the issue of "the Party governing the Party," he said: "When the Party manages the Party and governs itself strictly, what does it rely on to manage, and by what does it govern? It must rely on strict discipline." At the same time, he also emphasizes the limits of institutional status and function. For example, on the issue of Party governance, he emphasizes both "confining power within the cage of institutions" and "building a solid ideological and moral defense line against corruption and degeneration," adhering to the mutual and simultaneous application of ideological Party building and institutional Party governance. On the relationship between the rule of law and the rule of virtue, he proposed that "law secures the world, while virtue nourishes the people's hearts," emphasizing that the rule of law and the rule of virtue complement, promote, and enhance each other. These ideas fully demonstrate that while Xi Jinping emphasizes that institutions have fundamental, overall, and long-term significance in governance, he possesses a dialectical understanding of the scope, limits, and effects of institutional influence. Institutions are not omnipotent; the extent to which they function is restricted by specific structures and mechanisms, and their effectiveness is constrained by factors such as cultural tradition, intellectual level, moral quality, and value positions.
II. Dialectical Thinking in Institutional Construction
As formal rules for standardizing behavior, coordinating social relations, and maintaining social order, institutions necessarily change alongside the development of social practice and changes in social relations. Institutional construction is a process that is always in—
a "present-tense" task. Chinese-path socialism is the product of combining the basic principles of scientific socialism with China’s specific realities. The system of Chinese-path socialism is a significant achievement of the development of Chinese-path socialism, representing the consolidation of the fruits of socialist construction in institutional form. After decades of relay-style construction, development, and improvement, the system of Chinese-path socialism has been proven by practice to be a system possessed of strong vitality and immense superiority. However, such an institutional system "is not perfect, mature, or finalized," and as "the cause of Chinese-path socialism continues to develop, the system of Chinese-path socialism also needs continuous improvement." Xi Jinping emphasizes that in the process of advancing the construction of the system of Chinese-path socialism, we must persist in using the methodology of dialectical materialism to guide all work in an orderly manner, thereby providing a scientific method and spiritual guidance for promoting the refinement, maturity, and finalization of the system of Chinese-path socialism.
First, persist in the dialectical unity of maintaining strategic resolve and reform-driven innovation. Institutional construction possesses propositions, resolve, and direction. Xi Jinping emphasized: "Our national governance system needs improvement and refinement, but regarding how to change and how to improve, we must have our own propositions and resolve." This proposition and resolve refer to persisting in the socialist direction without change. He clearly pointed out: "Chinese-path socialism is socialism and not any other 'ism'"; "persisting in and developing Chinese-path socialism is a great article [6]"; and "the task of our generation of Communists is to continue writing this great article." The primary and fundamental principle of persisting in and improving the system of Chinese-path socialism is also the persistence in and development of Chinese-path socialism. Centering on this primary and fundamental principle, the Third Plenary Session of the 18th CPC Central Committee emphasized the need to comprehensively understand and grasp the general goal of comprehensively deepening reform, namely, "to improve and develop the system of Chinese-path socialism and promote the modernization of the national governance system and governance capacity. Our direction is the path of Chinese-path socialism." The Fourth Plenary Session of the 19th CPC Central Committee highlighted the major political question of "what to persist in and consolidate, and what to improve and develop," elucidating the major institutions and principles that must be firmly upheld in persisting in and improving the system of Chinese-path socialism.
Second, persist in the dialectical unity of institutional systems-theory and the "theory of priority" [7]. Institutional construction is a major systematic project; one must consider the completeness, systematicity, and synergy of the entire institutional system while also grasping the key points, the critical links, and the fundamentals. In the "Explanation" regarding the Decision of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China on Several Major Issues Concerning Persisting in and Improving the System of Chinese-path Socialism and Promoting the Modernization of the National Governance System and Governance Capacity, Xi Jinping pointed out: "Reform and opening up in the New Era possess many new connotations and characteristics, one very important point being that institutional construction carries more weight. Reform faces more deep-seated institutional and mechanistic problems, requirements for the top-level design of reform are higher, and requirements for the systematicity, integrity, and synergy of reform are stronger. Correspondingly, the tasks of establishing rules, enacting laws, and constructing systems are heavier." From the perspective of institutional systems-theory, strengthening the top-level design of institutional construction is intended to enhance the integrity, systematicity, and synergy of the system; to coordinate the connection and integration between the country’s fundamental, basic, and important institutions; and to coordinate the matching and harmonization between institutions in different fields and at different levels, achieving a systematic, complete, interconnected, and organically unified institutional system. Adhering to the principles of institutional systems-theory, in the process of formulating and advancing institutional construction, attention must be paid to the synergy of institutional construction plans, the synergy of implementation, and the synergy of execution effects. This promotes mutual coordination in policy orientation, mutual reinforcement in implementation, and mutual enhancement in execution results, focusing strength toward the goal of persisting in and improving the system of Chinese-path socialism and promoting the modernization of the national governance system and governance capacity.
Emphasizing the systematic and holistic advancement of institutional construction does not mean "grabbing the eyebrows and the beard all at once" [8]—that is, having no focus or failing to distinguish between the primary and the secondary. The Decision of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China on Several Major Issues Concerning Persisting in and Improving the System of Chinese-path Socialism and Promoting the Modernization of the National Governance System and Governance Capacity clarified the fundamental points that 13 systems must persist in and consolidate, as well as the directions for their improvement and development. Among these, "persisting in and improving the system of Party leadership and improving the Party's level of scientific, democratic, and law-based governance" was placed as the first system to be persisted in and improved, highlighting the important status of the Party leadership system. Xi Jinping proposed that in our country's institutional reform and governance system reform, "the most core element is persisting in and improving Party leadership and persisting in and improving the system of Chinese-path socialism." This principle is both a core requirement for comprehensively and strictly governing the Party and a basic principle and core requirement for persisting in and improving the system of Chinese-path socialism. In the "Explanation" of the aforementioned Decision, Xi Jinping further emphasized: "The draft Decision accurately grasps the evolutionary direction and laws of our national system and national governance system, highlights persisting in and improving the Party leadership system, and seizes the key and the fundamental of national governance."
Third, persist in the dialectical unity of a problem-oriented approach and a goal-oriented approach. The Third Plenary Session of the 18th CPC Central Committee clearly proposed that the general goal of comprehensively deepening reform is to improve and develop the system of Chinese-path socialism and promote the modernization of the national governance system and governance capacity. Proceeding from the strategic goals and major tasks established by the 19th CPC National Congress, the Fourth Plenary Session of the 19th CPC Central Committee further proposed the overall goal for persisting in and improving the system of Chinese-path socialism and promoting the modernization of the national governance system and governance capacity: "By the time our Party celebrates its centenary, to achieve significant results in making the systems in all respects more mature and more finalized; by 2035, to further improve the systems in all respects and basically realize the modernization of the national governance system and governance capacity; and by the time the People’s Republic of China celebrates its centenary, to fully realize the modernization of the national governance system and governance capacity, making the system of Chinese-path socialism more consolidated and its superiority fully displayed."
Guided by this general goal, our institutional construction advances primarily by solving realistic problems. Surveying the history of China’s reform and opening up over the past 40-plus years, one can find that a "logic of problems" runs through the entire process. Xi Jinping pointed out: "Reform is generated by being 'forced' by problems, and it is deepened through the continuous resolution of problems." In January 2016, during a research trip to Chongqing, Xi Jinping emphasized the need to make reform take root, proposing that we must "thoroughly understand the key reform plans formulated by the Central Committee while improving the implementation mechanism; proceed from reality and start with specific problems; see both the 'things' and the 'people' [9]; focus on solving whatever problems are prominent; and ensure reform takes root." Over the 40-plus years of reform and opening up, China's development achievements have attracted worldwide attention, but problems in development have also continuously emerged—such as unbalanced and uncoordinated development, issues with development momentum, modes of development, resources and energy, social security, people's livelihoods, ecological protection, and issues regarding anti-corruption and Party building. Contradictions and problems always exist; once old contradictions are resolved, new ones will arise, which determines that reform will never be finished and will always be "in the present tense." Resolving the problems and contradictions that emerge in reform and development can only be achieved through further reform and development. Xi Jinping pointed out: "We must, through comprehensively deepening reform, focus on solving a series of prominent contradictions and problems facing our country’s development, and continuously promote the self-improvement and development of the system of Chinese-path socialism." It is precisely in the process of responding to and solving realistic problems that the system is gradually improved; and it is precisely through the process and effects of solving realistic problems that the system’s characteristics, advantages, deficiencies, and governance capacities are highlighted.
III. Dialectical Thinking in the Theory of Institutional Execution
The Fourth Plenary Session of the 19th CPC Central Committee proposed to "construct an institutional system that is systematically complete, scientifically standardized, and effective in operation," and to "better transform our country’s institutional advantages into national governance efficacy." Effective operation and governance efficacy concern the issue of institutional execution. Whether one has a systematically complete and scientifically standardized institutional system is one thing; whether that institutional system can exert governance efficacy and be effectively executed is another. Only based on this understanding can we more deeply comprehend that the goal of "promoting the modernization of the national governance system and governance capacity" is a comprehensive goal including two aspects: the national governance system and governance capacity. In 2013, at the Second Plenary Session of the 18th CPC Central Committee, Xi Jinping delivered an important speech centered on the question of "how to govern a completely new society like a socialist society." Combining the practice of world socialist construction, based on the results and experience of our country’s national governance, and contrasting "China's Governance" with "Western Chaos," he made a general judgment on our country's national governance: "Our national governance system and governance capacity are generally good and adapted to our national conditions and development requirements." He added, "We must pay more attention to the construction of governance capacity, enhance the consciousness of acting according to the system and according to the law, be adept at using the system and the law to govern the country, transform the institutional advantages of all aspects into the efficacy of managing the country, and improve the Party's level of scientific, democratic, and law-based governance." The essence of improving national governance capacity is to improve the efficacy of using the system to govern the country and to enhance the executive power of the system. The Fourth Plenary Session of the 19th CPC Central Committee comprehensively summarized the significant advantages of the system of Chinese-path socialism, but simultaneously emphasized the issue of institutional execution, requiring us to start by strengthening institutional consciousness and maintaining institutional authority, creating an atmosphere in the whole Party and society of consciously respecting, strictly executing, and resolutely defending the system.
First, persist in the dialectical unity of improving the system and strengthening execution. The goal of achieving the modernization of national governance must be understood completely from two aspects: on one hand, persisting in and improving the system of Chinese-path socialism; on the other hand, promoting the modernization of national governance systems and governance capacities. The former emphasizes the importance of formulating necessary new systems and reforming old systems that do not meet the requirements of practical development; the latter emphasizes the importance of exerting institutional governance efficacy and enhancing institutional execution. Under the premise of fully affirming that the system of Chinese-path socialism possesses superiority, and under the resolve of "keeping the direction unchanged, the path unswerving, and the intensity undiminished," the questions of whether a system is executable, whether it is being executed, and the effects of that execution require the most attention. Xi Jinping pointed out: "The formulation of discipline is for the purpose of execution." "Formulating a system is important, but what is more important is grasping implementation; ninety percent of one's effort should be spent on this." "We have many systems; one could say they are basically formed, but we must not let them exist in name only, becoming 'scarecrows' [10] or creating a 'broken window effect'." "If we have good systems but do not grasp implementation—if they are merely written on paper, pasted on the wall, or locked in a drawer—the systems will become scarecrows and paper tigers. We must strengthen institutional execution, enhance supervision and inspection, and ensure that every system issued is well-executed and implemented. We must persist in the principle that there are no exceptions in executing the system; for those who violate institutional regulations, stepping on 'red lines' or rushing into 'minefields,' there must be zero tolerance—every case found must be resolutely investigated and handled." "We must improve institutional execution, making systems and discipline into 'live high-voltage wires,' making the investigation and handling of disciplinary and legal violations institutionalized and regularized, so that Party members and cadres harbor awe in their hearts, exercise restraint in their words, and set boundaries for their actions." Under the premise of persisting in and improving the system of Chinese-path socialism, the executive capacity and effects of the system are the more important issues. This also reflects from another angle that on the question of systems, we oppose "institutional-only theory" (system-determinism) and oppose discussing systems for their own sake; rather, we emphasize effectively exerting the utility of the system and enhancing the capacity to govern the country by relying on the system.
Second, persist in the mutual reinforcement of governing the country according to law and governing the country through virtue. Establishing "governing the country according to law" as the basic strategy for governance was formed on the basis of deeply summarizing the successful experiences and profound lessons of our country’s socialist rule-of-law construction. However, persisting in governing according to law does not mean neglecting governing through virtue; rather, it means combining the two, so that the rule of law and the rule of virtue complement, promote, and reinforce each other in national governance. This has already become a distinctive feature of the socialist path of the rule of law with Chinese characteristics. First, there is a clear boundary between law and morality. Law exerts a rigid constraint on human behavior, belonging to external constraint; violating the law entails hard punishment, with specific penalties determined by the facts of the violation. Morality exerts a flexible constraint on human behavior, belonging to internal constraint; violating morality leads to the punishment of conscience but does not necessarily constitute a violation of the law. Second, law and morality support each other. Although law and morality each have their own status and role in national governance, a relationship of mutual support exists between them. From the perspective of law, the law requires the edifying role of morality, as morality can provide a favorable civilized environment for the law to better exert its role; the law requires the nourishment of morality, and legal norms must connect with, coordinate with, and promote the moral system to function better. From the perspective of morality...
"The law is a bottom line for morality, as well as a guarantee for it." Moral education must possess the connotations of the rule of law. Strengthening moral education requires "cultivating people's faith in the law, their concepts regarding the rule of law, and their awareness of rules, guiding people to consciously fulfill their legal obligations, social responsibilities, and family responsibilities, and creating a cultural environment across the whole of society where everyone speaks of and abides by the rule of law." Moral cultivation requires institutional support; it is necessary to strengthen the moral guidance provided by institutional construction, reflecting the requirements of socialist morality within the construction of the rule of law, so that socialist rule of law becomes "good law and good governance."
On the question of the relationship between governing the country according to law and governing the country by virtue, Xi Jinping points out that the two share a dialectically unified relationship of mutual support and complementarity, emphasizing that "both hands must be grasped, and both hands must be firm." He states:
"Law is written morality, and morality is the law within one's heart. Both law and morality function to regulate social behavior, adjust social relations, and maintain social order; both have their place and function in national governance. Law secures the world, while virtue moistens the hearts of the people. The effective implementation of law relies on moral support, and the practice of morality cannot be separated from legal constraints. The rule of law and the rule of virtue are inseparable and neither should be neglected; national governance requires law and morality to exert force in coordination."
Third, persist in ensuring that ideological Party building and institutional Party governance exert force in the same direction. Reviewing the nearly century-long history of our Party's construction, focusing on building the Party ideologically is an important advantage of our Party, while focusing on institutional Party governance is a valuable piece of experience we have gained from summarizing past lessons in managing and governing the Party. Since the 18th National Congress, the CPC Central Committee with Comrade Xi Jinping at its core has taken "comprehensively and strictly governing the Party" as an important component of the "Four Comprehensives" strategic layout. The 19th National Congress took "persisting in comprehensively and strictly governing the Party" as one of the "fourteen basic policies," proposing that "we must take the Party Constitution as the fundamental followed [reference], place the Party's political construction at the fore, ensure that ideological Party building and institutional Party governance exert force in the same direction, and coordinate the advancement of all aspects of Party building." Proposing that "ideological Party building and institutional Party governance exert force in the same direction" is an important innovation in the theory of Party building, reflecting Xi Jinping's profound understanding of the dialectical relationship between the two. "Governing the Party strictly relies on education and also on institutions; the two are the soft and the hard, and they must exert force in the same direction and at the same time."
As important contents of comprehensively and strictly governing the Party, ideological Party building and institutional Party governance are both indispensable and complementary. "Ideological construction is the foundational construction of the Party," involving spiritual domains such as Party members forging revolutionary ideals, lofty ideals, and common ideals, and establishing correct worldviews, outlooks on life, and values. By continuously carrying out "self-revolution" in the ideological sphere to firm up ideals and beliefs, straighten the spiritual spine, and temper the political soul, it acts as a flexible "soft constraint" providing ideological support and theoretical guidance for institutional Party governance. Institutional Party governance is the "strategy for addressing the root causes of comprehensively and strictly governing the Party," running through the entire process and all fields of the Party's political, ideological, organizational, style, and disciplinary construction. By continuously improving and perfecting internal Party discipline and regulations to standardize, constrain, and guide the behavior of Party members, it provides institutional norms and guarantees for ideological Party building, determining its degree of standardization and its level.
IV. Dialectical Thinking in the Theory of Institutional Confidence
The Fourth Plenary Session of the 19th CPC Central Committee proposed:
"The system of socialism with Chinese characteristics and the system for state governance are a system of institutions and governance guided by Marxism, rooted in Chinese soil, possessing deep foundations in Chinese culture, and deeply supported by the people. They are a system of institutions and governance with strong vitality and immense superiority, capable of continuously promoting the progress and development of a major power with nearly 1.4 billion people, and ensuring that the Chinese nation, with its history of over 5,000 years of civilization, achieves the 'Two Centenaries' goals and further realizes the great rejuvenation."
This is our institutional confidence. Taking Marxism as our guide fundamentally determines that the system of socialism with Chinese characteristics occupies the moral high ground of human institutional systems. Never in the history of human thought has there been a theory like Marxism that seeks no private gain for oneself, one party, or one country, and acts not as a representative of the interests of any one group or class, but rather represents the fundamental interests of the oppressed and exploited of the whole world, possessing the widest possible people-centered character. Guided by Marxism and established in integration with China’s specific realities, the system of socialism with Chinese characteristics thereby occupies the moral heights of human institutions. This is the most fundamental reason for our institutional confidence in socialism with Chinese characteristics.
At any rate, our institutional confidence also has deep foundations and sufficient reasons: the correct choice of history and the people determines our confidence in the system of socialism with Chinese characteristics; the foundations of excellent traditional Chinese culture nurture this confidence; the miracles of economic development and social stability created by China demonstrate this confidence; the solutions and wisdom contributed by China to global governance expand this confidence; and the global comparison between "China’s governance" and "Western chaos" enhances this confidence. The institutional confidence we possess is not a blind arrogance that ignores innovation or gets stuck in its ways [11], but is a rational cognition built upon the foundation of institutional consciousness. Xi Jinping’s series of important discourses on why and how we must remain firm in our institutional confidence reflect profound dialectical thinking.
First, persist in the dialectical unity of institutional confidence and continuous reform and innovation. Our Party has always maintained full confidence in our national system and the governance capacity it displays. The Fourth Plenary Session of the 19th CPC Central Committee clearly pointed out: "All work and activities of our national governance are carried out in accordance with the system of socialism with Chinese characteristics; our national governance system and governance capacity are the concentrated expression of the system of socialism with Chinese characteristics and its implementation capacity." Over the 70-plus years since the founding of the People's Republic, the "two miracles" of rapid economic development and long-term social stability created by China have fully proven the characteristics and advantages of our national system, governance system, and governance capacity.
This system and its governance capacity are even more prominently displayed when handling major crisis events. The COVID-19 pandemic was a major public health emergency with the fastest transmission, widest range of infection, and greatest difficulty in prevention and control since the founding of the PRC; it was also declared a "Public Health Emergency of International Concern" by the World Health Organization. In this war of epidemic prevention and control, China fully utilized the institutional advantage of "concentrating resources to accomplish major tasks" [12] and difficult tasks, taking timely measures for joint prevention and control, and mass prevention and control, effectively curbing the further transmission of the virus and basically blocking the development of the domestic epidemic. Leaders of international organizations such as the United Nations and the WHO, as well as leaders from over 170 countries, fully affirmed the effective measures taken by China to curb the spread of the pandemic, marveling at the outstanding leadership, responsiveness, organization, mobilization, and execution capacity China displayed, praising China for "contributing to all of humanity" and stating that China's performance "reached an unattainable level." Having gone through this sudden pandemic, the Chinese people have experienced the superiority of the Chinese system even more personally and have become even firmer in their institutional confidence.
While strengthening institutional confidence, Xi Jinping specifically noted that institutional confidence is diametrically opposed to the mindsets of institutional conceit or institutional arrogance, emphasizing the need for a dialectical understanding of the relationship between institutional confidence and reform and innovation. He stated:
"Institutional confidence is not self-importance or self-satisfaction, and even less is it standing still or getting stuck in one's ways. Rather, it is the unification of firming up institutional confidence with continuous reform and innovation, based on persisting in the fundamental political system and basic political systems, to continuously promote the perfection and development of the institutional system."
The system of socialism with Chinese characteristics is distinct and efficient, but like any other system, it is not perfect and still requires further development, improvement, and maturation. Future institutional construction in China must, under the prerequisite of firming up institutional confidence, break down all ideological concepts and institutional drawbacks that hinder scientific development, continuously deepen reforms of systems and mechanisms in all fields and aspects, promote the maturation and fixation of the system, and realize the goal of modernizing the national governance system and governance capacity.
Second, persist in the dialectical unity of institutional particularity and institutional universality. Particularity and universality share a dialectically unified relationship: on the one hand, particularity is a particularity that contains universality, for a particularity without universality does not exist; on the other hand, universality resides within particularity and is expressed through it. On the question of institutions, we must likewise use dialectical thinking to understand the relationship between institutional particularity and institutional universality. The current national political systems in the world are all unique, possessing distinct individual characteristics. Even if the political systems generally practiced in Western countries are all called democratic systems, they differ in their details—for example, Japan is a constitutional monarchy, the United States is a democratic republic, and the United Kingdom is a representative democracy. Regarding institutional particularity and its formation, Xi Jinping said:
"There is no political system in the world that is exactly the same, nor is there a political system model that applies to all countries. 'Things are unequal; such is the nature of things.' [13] National conditions differ; every country's political system is unique, decided by that country's people, and is the result of long-term development, gradual improvement, and endogenous evolution based on that country's historical heritage, cultural traditions, and economic and social development."
Our institutional confidence is first built upon the affirmation and recognition of institutional particularity. If one does not even recognize the historical sources of one's own system, identify with its cultural traditions, or respect the national conditions of its economic and social development, then establishing and firming up institutional confidence is out of the question.
At the same time, different systems in various countries also possess commonalities. From the perspective of institutional essence, the systems established by all countries are tools for governing the state. Expanding to the international level, sovereign states cede portions of their power to form international organizations, conventions, and agreements with international binding force to jointly manage international affairs, achieving the goal of maintaining international order and realizing global good governance. The fact that consensus can be reached on an institutional level internationally, forming a "greatest common denominator" of rules recognized and observed by the international community, in itself demonstrates that institutions possess universality. The system of socialism with Chinese characteristics contributes Chinese wisdom and Chinese solutions to the international community, which are recognized by the international community. For instance, the "Belt and Road" Initiative and the concept of a community with a shared future for humanity proposed by our country have been written into UN resolutions, reflecting the consensus of the international community. This indicates that these global governance solutions possess the characteristics of the Chinese system while also containing elements that can be shared by the world, embodying the dialectical unity of institutional individuality and commonality.
Third, persist in the dialectical unity of basing oneself on one’s own foundations and strengthening mutual learning. Institutional confidence does not mean self-closure or stagnation. Institutions need continuous development and perfection, and engaging in exchanges and mutual learning with other institutional civilizations is one of the paths to developing and perfecting a system. Regarding the necessity and principles of learning from and borrowing from other institutional civilizations, Xi Jinping pointed out:
"Toward a diverse and colorful world, we should maintain an attitude of inclusiveness, modestly learning the good things of others, and on the standpoint of independence and autonomy, digest and absorb the good things of others to turn them into our own good things. But we must never swallow things whole without digesting them, nor should we 'imitate the gait of others in Handan' [14]."
Persisting in the fundamental, basic, and important systems of socialism with Chinese characteristics without change and firming up our institutional confidence—this is the "uprightness" [fundamentals] we must guard and the "root" we must establish. Only under this prerequisite can we speak of learning from the institutional civilization achievements of foreign countries. Otherwise, it would be "putting the cart before the horse," eventually leading to "failing to adapt to the local soil" or "drawing a cat to look like a dog," and even the catastrophic consequence of ruining the country's future and destiny.
Learning from the institutional civilization achievements of foreign countries is both necessary and possible, but copying and completely replicating them is neither possible nor feasible. "Only a system rooted in its own soil and drawing abundant nutrients is the most reliable and effective." In the process of learning from and borrowing from institutional civilizations, it is especially necessary to be vigilant against and oppose others "pointing fingers." Xi Jinping emphasized: "We need to learn from the beneficial results of foreign political civilizations, but we must never give up the fundamentals of the Chinese political system. China has more than 9.6 million square kilometers of land and 56 ethnic groups—whose model could we possibly follow? And who has the right to point fingers and tell us what to do?" "We must modestly learn from all the civilization achievements created by human society, but we cannot forget our ancestors [15], we cannot copy the development models of other countries, and we will certainly not accept any bossy sermons from foreigners."