Liu Yang: The Civilizational Significance and Practical Path of Building a Community with a Shared Future for Mankind
Volume V of Xi Jinping: The Governance of China (hereinafter referred to as Volume V) proposes a series of original new concepts, thoughts, and strategies for governance, centrally demonstrating the latest achievements in the Sinicization and modernization of Marxism, and scientifically answering the questions of China, the world, the people, and the times. Regarding the answer to the "questions of the world," Volume V clearly points out how to further address global development dilemmas such as the peace deficit, development deficit, security deficit, and governance deficit by building a community with a shared future for humanity. It profoundly understands and answers the major subject of "what kind of world to build and how to build it," highlighting the epochal value and world significance of building a community with a shared future for humanity. Of particular note is the elaboration in Volume V on the significance of building a community with a shared future for humanity: it points out not only that this concept innovates the paradigm of global governance thinking and outlines a future vision for the world order, but more importantly, it emphasizes that it is quietly changing the developmental course of human civilization. Clearly, this further highlights the original aspiration and essence of building a community with a shared future for humanity. That is to say, building a community with a shared future for humanity aims to transcend the modern civilization dominated by Western-centrism and re-undertake a holistic planning [1] of the development process of 21st-century human civilization. This involves important aspects such as the developmental values, connotative nature, paradigmatic structure, rules of engagement, and developmental goals of civilization. Therefore, it is of great significance to grasp the building of a community with a shared future for humanity from the perspective of the renewal and progress of human civilization.
I. Origins and Foundations: The Civilizational Mission and Intellectual Sources of Building a Community with a Shared Future for Humanity
To perceive the origins of the concept of building a community with a shared future for humanity from a civilizational perspective, one must inevitably grasp the contemporary situation of modern civilization. The West took the lead in laying the foundations of modernization through the British Industrial Revolution and the French Revolution, initiating the process of modern human civilization and successfully creating the Western path to modernization and the Western form of human civilization. This allowed "Western-centrism" to exist in the form of hegemony for a long historical period. However, 21st-century human civilization has not developed in the direction envisioned by the West, and history has not reached its "end" within Western-centrism; [2] on the contrary, Western civilization, with Anglo-Saxon civilization as its underlying hue, is facing multiple crises. General Secretary Xi Jinping has pointed out: "At present, changes in the world, in our times, and in history are unfolding in unprecedented ways," and "hegemonic, domineering, and bullying acts such as the strong bullying the weak, predation through trickery or force, and zero-sum games are causing grave harm. The peace deficit, development deficit, security deficit, and governance deficit are intensifying, and human society faces unprecedented challenges." These crises are clearly closely related to the West-dominated human civilization, pointing directly to the failure and disorder of Western civilizational concepts, which constitutes the civilizational background for building a community with a shared future for humanity. Building a community with a shared future for humanity is precisely the Chinese solution for responding to the changes in the world, the times, and history.
The "changes in the world" reflect major transformations in the development of global civilization, containing the fundamental question of "what kind of world to build and how to build it," and constituting the historical context for building a community with a shared future for humanity. The entry of humanity into modern civilization and the transition of history into world history are both closely related to the generation and development of capitalist civilization. Admittedly, this form of civilization once created historical brilliance; Marx and Engels compared its achievements to "miracles which have exerted a totally different effect from that of Egyptian pyramids, Roman aqueducts, and Gothic cathedrals" and "expeditions that have put in the shade all former Exoduses of nations and Crusades." However, today's world and today's civilization both indicate that capitalist civilization is "like the sorcerer who is no longer able to control the powers of the nether world whom he has called up by his spells." From the U.S. subprime mortgage crisis and the Greek sovereign debt crisis to trade wars and tariff wars, the world economic recovery is sluggish. From Al-Qaeda and "ISIS" to the Russia-Ukraine conflict, the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, and the Israel-Iran conflict, international politics is in a state of turbulent change. Non-traditional security issues such as global climate change, cybersecurity, public health crises, nuclear wastewater pollution, and refugee crises are becoming increasingly prominent. With Brexit, the U.S. withdrawal from a series of international organizations, the intensifying tide of nationalism and populism, and the continuous rise of protectionism and isolationism, the wave of deglobalization has shifted from a surging undercurrent to a frantic rampage. These facts all demonstrate that while capitalist civilization continuously assimilates the world, it also continuously divides it. The crisis of modern civilization under the rule of capital has broken through national boundaries, manifesting global characteristics through the interactions between civilizations. Facing global division and shattered civilization, rethinking the direction of the world and civilization has become the most significant and urgent global issue of our time.
The "changes in the times" reflect the vigorous development of the modern power of Chinese civilization, containing the fundamental question of "how China should act, from catching up with the times to leading the times," and constituting the realistic foundation for promoting the building of a community with a shared future for humanity. This era is a historical era in which "the Chinese nation has ushered in a great leap from standing up and becoming prosperous to becoming strong." "Becoming strong" means not only that our comprehensive national strength is continuously increasing but also that we can "continuously make new and greater contributions to humanity." Therefore, facing the contemporary predicament of global civilizational development, Chinese Communists possess both the sentimental commitment and the ability to contribute Chinese wisdom and propose Chinese solutions. On the one hand, the great achievements of socialism with Chinese characteristics since the beginning of reform and opening up over 40 years ago, and especially in the New Era, are our greatest source of confidence in promoting the development of global civilization. Over these 40-plus years, from initiating the new period to entering the New Era, our Party has adhered to seeking truth from facts and liberating the mind, leading the people to boldly experiment and bravely reform, carving out a new world. This has provided an excellent leadership core, scientific theoretical guidance, a stronger political guarantee, a more complete institutional guarantee, a more solid material foundation, and more proactive spiritual strength for realizing the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation. All of these constitute our confidence. On the other hand, in the historical era of "becoming strong," the Communist Party of China upholds the commitment to "continuously make new and greater contributions to humanity," demonstrating a global vision and the responsibility of a major party. Since the 18th CPC National Congress, General Secretary Xi Jinping has always adhered to a global perspective in concerning himself with the future and destiny of humanity. Starting from the major trends of human development, the grand pattern of world change, and the long history of China’s development, he has correctly understood and handled relations with the outside world, proposing the important thesis that "China can only do well when the world does well; when China does well, the world will be even better." Such confidence, sentiment, and responsibility have laid a solid foundation for promoting the building of a community with a shared future for humanity.
The "changes in history" reflect profound shifts in the balance of power between two types of civilization, containing fundamental questions such as "unity or division, openness or seclusion, cooperation or confrontation," and constituting the core agenda for building a community with a shared future for humanity. As socialism with Chinese characteristics enters the New Era, the center of the world socialist movement has shifted to China, and scientific socialism has radiated greater vigor and vitality in the East. We have not only held the great banner of socialism high and steady in the world but have also pushed scientific socialism to a brand-new stage. Meanwhile, socialist countries such as Vietnam, Cuba, Laos, and North Korea continue to explore development models with their own national characteristics, achieving notable results in economic, political, and cultural construction. The left wing has successively taken power in countries such as Mexico, Argentina, Peru, Bolivia, Chile, Honduras, and Colombia, and the "Latin American progressive axis" continues to expand. Some capitalist countries have also begun to draw on socialist elements to varying degrees to resolve their own defects. All of this, from different perspectives, displays the dawn of a world socialist resurgence. A major shift favorable to socialism has occurred in the historical evolution and contest between the two ideologies and social systems of socialism and capitalism. In the future, the problems facing capitalist civilization will continue to increase, while the influence of socialist civilization will continue to expand. How these two systems and two civilizations coexist has become the most core issue in the "changes in history." The world once again stands at a crossroads of history: Unity or division? Peace or conflict? Cooperation or confrontation? People of all nations need to make an important choice.
Only through profound insight into and analysis of the questions of the world, the times, and history can we clarify the necessity of promoting the building of a community with a shared future for humanity, and further grasp its mission and responsibility from the perspective of civilization. Of course, the proposal of the concept of building a community with a shared future for humanity stems not only from a sober recognition of the changing world situation, the pulse of the times, and the general trend of history, but more importantly, from the inheritance and sublimation of one’s own intellectual resources and cultural genes. If the former represents necessity and practical logic, the latter represents possibility and theoretical logic; both are indispensable for the proposal of this concept. Regarding theoretical possibility, the key reason the Communist Party of China has been able to propose the concept of building a community with a shared future for humanity is its adherence to the methodology of the "Two Combinations," [3] unifying the "soul-vein" [4] and the "root-vein," [5] thereby achieving the creative transformation and innovative development of the unique civilizational outlook contained in fine traditional Chinese culture in the New Era.
On the one hand, Marx's thoughts on civilization provide strong theoretical support for the concept of building a community with a shared future for humanity. The civilizational crisis of modern society had already begun to show its first signs during the era of free-competition capitalism in which Marx lived. From the height of historical materialism, Marx analyzed the universal laws of human civilizational development and the specific laws of the operation of capitalist civilization, constructing a brand-new concept of human civilization. Marx's thoughts on civilization profoundly revealed three core questions: How do various regional civilizations with distinct forms "synthesize" into a human civilization of universal significance (world-historical nature)? Why does capitalist civilization provide a "false universality"? And where lies the possibility of building a new type of human civilization with true universality? In Marx's view, "The bourgeoisie has through its exploitation of the world market given a cosmopolitan character to production and consumption in every country," and "by the rapid improvement of all instruments of production... draws all, even the most barbarian, nations into civilization," and "in one word, it creates a world after its own image." At this point, a "universal human civilization" with modern significance, subordinate to the bourgeoisie, began to form. However, Marx adhered to historical dialectics, scrutinized the civilizational paradoxes dominated by the logic of capital, and pointed out that capitalist civilization would inevitably move toward its own demise due to the internal contradictions of its mode of production. Human civilization will then move from "false universality" into a higher stage with "true universality," reaching a civilizational state of "free individuality." Chinese Communists have profoundly grasped the essence of Marx's thoughts on civilization, recognized the history and laws of human civilizational development, clarified the root causes of today’s civilizational disorder, and perceived the trends and goals of civilizational development. All of this provides solid theoretical support for the concept of building a community with a shared future for humanity.
On the other hand, the civilizational outlook contained in fine traditional Chinese culture provides rich cultural nourishment for the concept of building a community with a shared future for humanity. The civilizational outlook in traditional Chinese culture takes "when the Great Way prevails, the world is shared by all" [6] as its core concept and ultimate ideal, encompassing various aspects such as "the benevolent person loves others," [7] "wearing oneself out from head to toe for the benefit of the world," [8] and "harmony and Great Unity." [9] "The benevolent person loves others" embodies the justice of the world [10] and is the basic prerequisite for "when the Great Way prevails, the world is shared by all." It fully demonstrates the wisdom of the ancient Chinese civilizational outlook in dealing with the world, containing concepts such as "do not do unto others what you would not have them do unto you" and "seeking harmony among all nations." [11] "Wearing oneself out from head to toe for the benefit of the world" embodies the interests of the world [12] and is the principled criterion for "when the Great Way prevails, the world is shared by all." It demonstrates that civilizational engagement is for common development; one must achieve one's own development through "enriching the country and strengthening the military," while also upholding the concept of "calculating profit for the benefit of the whole world" to achieve common development. "Harmony and Great Unity" embodies the destination of the world [13] and is the fundamental goal of "when the Great Way prevails, the world is shared by all." It advocates social peace, benevolence toward others, and the idea that "all people are my brothers and sisters, and all things are my companions." [14] It emphasizes selecting the virtuous and capable and pursues common development. This is the description of the ideal social state in fine traditional Chinese culture and is the universal expectation of humanity for a beautiful society. Precisely because Chinese Communists have fully grasped the unique civilizational outlook in fine traditional Chinese culture, they can always adhere to the position and principle of "appreciating the culture of others as one does one's own, and the world will become a grand harmony," [15] which provides deep cultural nourishment for the concept of building a community with a shared future for humanity.
II. Breakthrough and Innovation: The Civilizational Transcendence and Reconstruction of Building a Community with a Shared Future for Humanity
The reason the concept of a community with a shared future for humanity is able to align with the developmental trends of the times and meet the expectations of people across all nations is, fundamentally, because it blazes a new path for the development of human civilization based on a profound insight into the maladies of Western civilization. Driven by interests and aimed at hegemony, Western civilization is dominated by capital; consequently, it manifests characteristics such as being "deconstructive," "universalist," "monolithic," "hierarchical," and "shortsighted" in its nature, values, connotations, interactions, and objectives, respectively. It has become the source [16] of the predicament facing world civilization. The deficiencies of Western civilization serve as the points of breakthrough and innovation for the concept of a community with a shared future for humanity. By promoting new civilizational propositions characterized by a people-centered approach, upholding fundamentals and breaking new ground, mutual learning through exchange, sharing a common destiny, and harmony in diversity [17], this concept achieves the transcendence and reconstruction of Western civilization, thereby becoming a practical solution to break through the global civilizational dilemma.
1. Reconstructing the intrinsic nature of civilization Following the establishment of the capitalist system, Western nations on one hand pursued large-scale industrialization, commodification, and urbanization internally, accumulating vast wealth; on the other hand, they actively expanded externally, dumping goods, exporting capital, and plundering raw materials in pursuit of exclusive development. In this process, the state of isolation and seclusion between different countries and civilizations was thoroughly shattered, and human society began to enter an era of economic globalization dominated by the West. Faced with the intertwining and collision of different civilizations under the tide of economic globalization, Western nations—relying on their first-mover advantage and using capitalism as the civilizational yardstick—proposed a differentiated schema of world civilization centered on binaries such as "traditional vs. modern," "civilized vs. barbaric," "progressive vs. conservative," and "Western vs. non-Western." They presumed to stand at the very apex of the ladder of human civilization, declaring that "civilization" equated to the power to dominate the world, while "barbarism" signified being enslaved or conquered. Driven by this discourse of "civilizational superiority," Western nations, under the guise of opposing tradition and eradicating ignorance, wantonly invaded and colonized other countries. They attempted to use Western civilization to deconstruct all non-Western civilizations, replacing pluralism with monism, thereby incorporating all non-Western countries into the evolutionary path and civilizational genealogy of capitalism. Consequently, the diversity of human civilization was dissolved and replaced by the singularity of capitalist civilization; the "garden of human civilizations" began to wither within the Western deconstructivist civilizational narrative.
In contrast to the "deconstructive" attitude of Western civilization toward the world, what the community with a shared future for humanity advocates is a positive, constructive outlook on civilization. General Secretary Xi Jinping has pointed out: "Promoting the building of a community with a shared future for humanity is not about replacing one system with another, or one civilization with another. Instead, it is about countries with different social systems, different ideologies, different histories and cultures, and different levels of development sharing mutual interests, rights, and responsibilities in international affairs, creating the greatest common denominator for building a better world." [Note]
Clearly, the concept of a community with a shared future for humanity manifests a "constructive" civilizational outlook that is diametrically opposed to that of the West. On one hand, this constructiveness is reflected in the active mitigation of tensions between civilizations. It seeks a new ecosystem of mutual learning and exchange between civilizations, critiquing the Western dissolution of other cultures: "It is stupid to believe that one's race or civilization is superior to others, and it is disastrous to willfully attempt to transform or even replace other civilizations!" [Note] On the other hand, this constructiveness is reflected in the depiction of a future global vision and the elucidation of a program for a better world. Whether it is the construction of the "Five Worlds" [18] covering the fields of politics, security, economy, culture, and ecology, or the characteristics of creativity and peace it embodies, all signify that the concept of a community with a shared future for humanity intends to forge a more beautiful world and a more brilliant civilization. It aims to build a new order of human civilization by promoting the integration and complementarity of different civilizations, thereby achieving a transcendence of the "deconstructive" civilizational orientation of capitalism.
2. Innovating civilizational value concepts Modern Western civilization emerged from the Christian tradition; for a long time, the doctrines of the highest good, universalism, and redemption—based on abstract human nature—have permeated and shaped its mental structure, giving rise to a deep-seated "savior" complex. To realize their specific interests, the bourgeoisie are adept at cloaking their particular interest preferences, developmental orientations, and institutional choices in the garb of "universalism." They generalize these into abstract, absolute value symbols that transcend time, space, history, nations, and ethnicities; "universal values" are the typical representative of this. They export and peddle Western values such as "freedom," "democracy," and "human rights" everywhere, plotting to achieve global hegemony. This "universal value" is, in essence, an ideological facade used by Western civilization to realize its own interests; it has failed to be "universal" for Western civilization itself, let alone for human civilization as a whole. Problems such as racial discrimination, money politics, the antagonism between labor and capital, and the lack of guaranteed human rights have persisted and intensified in Western societies for a long time. Acts of "peaceful evolution" [19] such as "color revolutions" and the "Arab Spring" stand in sharp contrast to the "universal values" preached and flaunted by the West.
In response to the Western discourse of "universal values," the concept of a community with a shared future for humanity opposes the artificial elevation of a specific civilizational form as the sole yardstick of civilization or the packaging of a single civilizational will as a "gospel" for all humanity. It advocates that "we should understand the perceptions of different civilizations regarding value connotations with a broad mind, and not impose our own values and models on others." [Note] It seeks to distill a true consensus on the basic values of all humanity on the basis of seeking common ground while reserving differences, promoting the "common values of humanity" [20]—namely, peace, development, equity, justice, democracy, and freedom. These common values of humanity contain the shared aspirations and universal expectations of different civilizations. Among them, peace is the eternal hope of people in all countries; development is the necessary prerequisite for prosperity; equity and justice are the moral foundations of the international order; and democracy and freedom are the prominent markers of well-rounded human development. By promoting the common values of humanity, a new civilizational value concept, distinct from Western "universal values," is established. On one hand, it gives full understanding to the unique value connotations of different civilizations, fully respects the paths explored by different civilizations to realize their own values, and vigorously supports the rights of different countries to pursue the happiness of their people. On the other hand, it distills the basic value consensus of all humanity, sketches a "concentric circle" of values that transcends differences and disagreements, and finds the greatest common denominator among civilizations. In this way, the community with a shared future for humanity opens up a vast space for the diverse development of civilizations within the unity of commonality and individuality, universality and particularity. Simultaneously, it lays the value foundation for the common prosperity of different civilizations, thereby promoting the transformation of human civilization's development from "taking the West as the standard of beauty" to "each appreciating its own beauty, and appreciating the beauty of others to achieve harmony in diversity" [21].
3. Enriching the connotations of civilizational development In the modern transformation of Western civilization, capital has been the core force; indeed, the history of modern Western civilization's development is essentially a history of the expansion and evolution of capital. Born from capital and thriving because of it, the principles of capital are its primary principles, and the logic of capital deeply saturates its civilizational fabric as an unmistakable base color. For capital, the maximum possible valorization is the supreme goal. This dictates that Western civilization must treat economic rationality—aimed at optimal efficiency and maximum profit—as its paramount criterion, serving as a safeguard for the unlimited growth of capital. From the logic of "compulsory progress" pursued in capitalist production, to the "supremacy of money" implemented in social interaction, and further to the "winner-takes-all" rule reflected in civilizational interaction, everything is weighed and selected on the scales of interest. All must submit and give way to the "supreme" principle of maximizing economic interests. Consequently, Western civilization has degenerated within the whirlpool of economic rationality and growth-centrism into a monolithic civilizational form centered on material modernization. Although it has accumulated vast material wealth, the narrowing of civilization has pushed economic, social, cultural, ecological, and spiritual-moral crises to an extreme point. The so-called "Pareto optimality" ultimately resulted in a "dead end" for its civilizational development, as well as persistent global turmoil and stagnation.
Facing the "prisoner's dilemma" of Western civilization under a singular economic rationality, the concept of a community with a shared future for humanity stands on the ground of sustainable development and lasting prosperity for the world. It clearly points out that human civilization is a complex organism composed of intertwined economic, political, cultural, social, and ecological aspects, the elements of which are interconnected, mutually reinforcing, and inseparable. Only when all civilizational elements advance in tandem and in harmony can they serve as the balancer and stabilizer ensuring sustainable development. Therefore, "the international community must make efforts in terms of partnerships, security patterns, economic development, civilizational exchange, and ecological construction," [Note] so as to build a world of "lasting peace, universal security, common prosperity, openness and inclusiveness, and cleanliness and beauty." [Note] Specifically, this means: politically, adhering to dialogue rather than confrontation and partnership rather than alliance, building a new type of partnership characterized by friendship across generations, high levels of mutual trust, and shared weal and woe; economically, taking into account both the present and the long term, both making the "cake" bigger and dividing it well, and promoting economic globalization toward a more inclusive, balanced, and win-win direction; in terms of security, establishing a new security concept that is common, comprehensive, cooperative, and sustainable to provide a security umbrella for all peoples; in terms of civilization, drawing on each other’s strengths for common progress and building a garden of world civilizations; and ecologically, advocating for green, low-carbon, circular, and sustainable modes of production and life, achieving the organic unity of developed production, affluent life, and a sound ecosystem. The concept of a community with a shared future for humanity greatly broadens the horizons of human civilization and enriches its connotations. With the high-level wisdom of comprehensive, coordinated, and sustainable development, it achieves a thorough sublation (Aufheben) of the singular economic rationality of Western civilization, providing a practical guide for world prosperity and stability.
4. Remodeling the paradigm of civilizational interaction Given the inherent exclusionary nature of Western civilization, the global civilizational interaction paradigm and governance structure dominated by it also exhibit distinct "center-periphery" characteristics, defined by the hegemony of one nation or the joint rule of a few. To ensure that the global political and economic landscape always implements the capitalist will and leans toward the capitalist side, Western nations engage in ideological demarcation and bloc-building. They form "cliques" that are "domineering and arbitrary," distributing power according to the so-called "hierarchy of strength," thereby forming a unidirectional global governance pattern that radiates outward from a core of a few countries. In this pattern, the Western core countries firmly grasp the discourse power over the global political, economic, cultural, and security orders, arbitrarily altering international rules with an extreme pragmatism of "use it if it fits, discard it if it doesn't." The vast "periphery" nations can only unconditionally obey their arrangements and instructions. Any behavior or opinion contrary to the will of the "center" countries is stigmatized as "rebellious" or "heterodox," facing ruthless isolation and sanctions. In this way, the equal relationship between civilizations is utterly destroyed. For a long time, the vast number of late-developing countries have been suppressed within a distorted order of "control-dependency," following the lead of and being manipulated by Western nations, becoming victims of capitalist development.
In response to the practices of hegemony, high-handedness, and bullying in Western civilizational interactions, the concept of a community with a shared future for humanity—with a global perspective and a sense of duty for the world [22] based on mutual interests, shared rights, and shared responsibilities—asserts that although countries differ in size and strength, they are all equal members of the international community and deserve undifferentiated treatment and respect. Any practice of monopolizing international affairs, monopolizing developmental advantages, or dominating the fate of other countries will only lead to global developmental imbalance, security disorder, and governance failure, ultimately causing human civilization to suffer the backlash of bipolar confrontation where "the rich stay rich and the poor stay poor." Therefore, the establishment of the civilizational order "cannot allow whoever has the 'biggest arm' [23] to have the final say." [Note] Different countries and civilizations should replace civilizational suppression with exchange and replace civilizational superiority with mutual learning under the premise of equality in rights, opportunities, and rules. Together, they should write international rules, govern global affairs, master the world's destiny, and share world achievements. Only when global affairs are discussed by everyone, the governance system is built by everyone, and the fruits of governance are shared by everyone can different civilizations move toward mutual learning through exchange; only then can their unique charms and profound heritages shine and complement one another in an integrated symbiosis. At this point, the entire paradigm of civilizational interaction will shift from a "solo performance" by one side to a "symphony" of many sides. Within a new civilizational order of extensive consultation, joint contribution, and shared benefits, all parties will join hands to create a new future for human social development.
5. Defining the goals of civilizational progress
Viewed through the lens of historical materialism, human civilization always moves forward through the contradictory movement between productive forces and relations of production, presenting a process of dynamic evolution. Capitalism, however, eternalizes its own limited civilizational progress. Complacently regarding itself as the "creator of civilization," it proclaims capitalism to be an "eternal law" and an everlasting "millennial kingdom." Especially after the collapse of the Soviet Union at the end of the 20th century, the apologists of capitalism went so far as to launch anti-intellectual rhetoric regarding the "end of history," falsely claiming that capitalist civilization is the "endpoint of mankind's ideological evolution" and the "final form of human government." They asserted that "it is hard for us today to imagine a world that is fundamentally better than our own, or a future that is not essentially democratic and capitalist." [24] Thus, with an extremely distorted mindset of civilizational narcissism, they paint capitalism as a panacea that can "conquer all under heaven" and "cure all diseases," glamouring Western civilization as the supreme goal and state of "ultimate perfection" for the evolution of human civilization. Ironically, it is precisely this so-called "ultimately perfect" form of civilization that, when faced with today’s world of intertwined chaos and rising risks and challenges, manifests deep feelings of inadequacy and obvious strain. It can only manage a meager self-preservation by "building fences and walls," "decoupling and severing supply chains," and "breaking treaties and withdrawing from international groups." The myth of the "end of history" has gone bankrupt.
The paradox of Western civilization proves to us that capitalism is by no means the pinnacle of the development of human civilization; the "end of history" conforms neither to common sense nor, more importantly, to objective laws. Facing a human world undergoing great development and profound transformation, we must never pin our hopes on a declining and decaying Western civilization. Instead, we must stand on the right side of history and on the side of human progress. Supported by the building of a community with a shared future for humanity, we must closely unite countries with different social systems, ideologies, histories, cultures, and levels of development. We must break down barriers to civilizational exchange with a broad mind that "embraces all rivers" [25] and absorb the nutrients of various civilizations with an inclusive attitude. In doing so, we shall establish new ideas for civilizational exchange, condense new wisdom for global governance, open a new order for international interaction, depict a new vision for a beautiful world, and create a new form of human civilization. This new form of human civilization is a great creation based on a profound insight into the general trend of world development, an accurate grasp of the common aspirations of the world's people, and a deep exploration of the laws of economic and social development while persisting in standing on the right side of history. It is the correct path for humanity [26] that conforms to the laws of civilizational development and follows historical trends. Thus, the concept of a community with a shared future for humanity redraws the future blueprint for the development of world civilization and achieves a major innovation in the theory and practice of civilizational development. It provides not only a brand-new choice for the development of all countries but also contributes Chinese wisdom toward breaking through the predicament of human civilization, becoming a distinct banner for China to lead the direction of human civilization in the 21st century.
III. Expansion and Sublimation: Promoting the Building of a Community with a Shared Future for Humanity under the Guidance of a New Form of Human Civilization
As the world undergoes changes unseen in a century at an accelerated pace, humanity once again stands at a crossroads of history. Regarding this, General Secretary Xi Jinping noted: "Facing the test of high winds, rushing water, and even stormy waves, all countries must uphold a correct worldview, historical outlook, and perspective on the overall situation, transforming the concept of building a community with a shared future for humanity into action and its vision into reality." [27] However, in the process of transforming concepts into action and visions into reality, we will inevitably encounter practical difficulties such as value divergences, games of interest, cognitive differences, and misaligned responsibilities. This requires us to use the implementation of the four Global Initiatives [28] as a starting point to promote a systematic update of global consensus on values, the order of development, civilizational concepts, security systems, and the governance landscape, thereby promoting the continuous expansion and sublimation of the great practice of building a community with a shared future for humanity.
First, further grasping new civilizational values to break through the value barriers arising from the differing interests of nation-states, thereby creating a community of ideas based on extensive consultation and consensus. Consolidating a consensus on values and ideas is the basic prerequisite for building a community with a shared future for humanity. Only when there is mutual identification and recognition will people think toward the same goal and work together to build a beautiful world. The deep development of economic globalization has pushed countries toward increasingly close connections, making the international community increasingly a community with a shared future in which "you are in me and I am in you." However, limited by differences in historical and cultural traditions, social system models, and core interest demands, this reality of "symbiosis of interests" has failed to translate into a "universal consensus" at the level of values. This has led to difficulties in cooperation regarding interest coordination and rule-making. Some Western countries consistently fail to face the reality of the diversity of world civilizations, even placing their own value systems above the world’s pluralistic civilizations and attempting to use "universal values" to unify the values of all countries. This is not a genuine consensus on values, but an ideological tool for interfering in the internal affairs of other countries and dominating the international order. To a certain extent, the "September 11" attacks, the war in Afghanistan, the Iraq War, the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, and the Russia-Ukraine conflict are all manifestations of value conflicts. In view of this, the community with a shared future for humanity always upholds the common values of humanity as universal principles and ideal pursuits. At the level of global governance, it uses the Global Development Initiative, the Global Security Initiative, the Global Civilization Initiative, and the Global Governance Initiative to condense a broad consensus on values, providing a fundamental basis for breaking down value barriers between countries. This new civilizational consensus does not attempt to dissolve the specific values of each country with common values; rather, it emphasizes seeking the "greatest common denominator" of the interests of all countries through dialogue and consultation on the basis of respecting value differences. However, for the countries of the world to truly condense a consensus on values and ideas, besides having the common values of humanity that represent the shared pursuit of all people, these values must become a "conscious choice" based on each country's own rational judgment and consideration of interests. Therefore, consolidating a consensus on values and ideas must neither avoid differences nor amplify opposition. We must construct a dialogue mechanism in which multiple subjects participate on an equal footing, promoting exchange and consultation among all countries on their respective core concerns, so that countries with different social systems, ideologies, histories, cultures, and development levels can seek common ground while reserving differences [29] and bridge their divides in international affairs. Only in this way can we break through the value barriers caused by the different interests of nation-states and truly create a community of ideas based on extensive consultation and consensus.
Second, further grasping new civilizational achievements to break through interest barriers arising from the inequality of the global industrial chain division of labor, thereby creating a development community of shared construction and connectivity. A community with a shared future for humanity is committed to narrowing the North-South gap and resolving unbalanced development, ensuring that all countries can participate in and enjoy the fruits of world economic development. Although the current global industrial chain division of labor system has achieved great success in improving efficiency and creating wealth, its inherent inequality has increasingly become the core crux of global development imbalance. In the global division of labor, a small number of developed countries have long occupied the high value-added ends of the "smile curve" [30], grabbing the vast majority of the benefits brought by the division of labor. Meanwhile, most developing countries are at the bottom of the "smile curve," involved in low value-added links such as raw material supply and low-end processing and manufacturing, obtaining only minor gains and falling into the trap of "growth without development." The fundamental reason lies in the extension and intensification of the internal contradictions of capitalist civilization on a global scale. The global community driven by this is essentially a "false community" coerced by the logic of capital, where the "shared nature" of the community is alienated into the "exclusivity" of capital. This causes the global industrial chain division of labor to lose its "mutual benefit and win-win" attribute, degenerating into a channel for the unidirectional plunder of capital. In response, a community with a shared future for humanity must adhere to the civilizational development logic of equality and common progress for all countries. By promoting the Global Development Initiative, it aims to achieve equalization of development opportunities, the universal sharing of development fruits, and the sustainability of development models, "unifying the interests of one's own people with the interests of the people of all countries," [31] so that the global division of labor benefits all people more fairly. On the one hand, we must first make the "cake" bigger, conforming to the general demands for development of all countries, using the global industrial chain division of labor as a link to strengthen international cooperation and promote technology sharing, and jointly cultivating and expanding new quality productive forces to inject lasting momentum into world economic growth. On the other hand, we must divide the "cake" well, prompting countries to take into account the legitimate concerns of others while pursuing their own interests and to promote common development while seeking their own development, so that the dividends of the global division of labor reach all countries. Ultimately, by making the cake bigger and dividing it well, we will realize a vision of civilizational development where everyone applies their strengths, does their best, and gets what they need.
Third, further grasping new civilizational safeguards to break through survival threats caused by traditional and non-traditional security issues, thereby creating a security community of joint governance and coexistence. Security issues concern the future and destiny of the world and the survival of humanity. The community with a shared future for humanity aims to form a balanced, effective, and sustainable security architecture, allowing the people of every country to live and work in peace. Currently, human security faces a grim situation: traditional security issues such as territorial disputes and arms races have not been eradicated, while non-traditional security threats such as terrorism, separatism, religious extremism, and cybersecurity are intertwined. The interweaving of traditional and non-traditional security threats seriously endangers the lives of people in all countries; achieving international common security urgently requires new concepts and methods. However, some developed countries practice the supremacy of power and pursue absolute security, causing the capitalist-led global community to fall into a "security dilemma." Not only can they not form a synergy to jointly deal with new security challenges, but they have also become an important cause of the intensification of the global security deficit. Therefore, the key to escaping the global security dilemma lies in using the Global Security Initiative—aimed at promoting shared destiny in the face of danger—to sublate the national security logic advocated by capitalist civilization and establish a new security concept that is common, comprehensive, cooperative, and sustainable. Specifically, the community with a shared future for humanity must first make all countries establish an awareness of the equality of security interests, respecting and safeguarding the security of every country, ensuring that no country can place its own security above that of others, let alone at the expense of others' security. This will push countries to shift their security strategies from "exclusive defense" to "inclusive co-governance." On this basis, on the one hand, we must coordinate the maintenance of security in traditional and non-traditional fields, building an all-around, multi-level security system. We must be alert to the interweaving and mutual intensification of the two types of security risks, using the stability of traditional security to build a foundation for responding to non-traditional security, while using the governance of non-traditional security to eliminate potential triggers for traditional security. On the other hand, we must promote security governance through dialogue and cooperation, construct multilateral security mechanisms, and give play to the synergistic role of the United Nations and coordination among major powers in security governance, so that all countries can form a synergy to jointly respond to security threats in traditional and non-traditional fields. Only by building a global security governance system that covers both traditional and non-traditional security fields can we promote human society to move from the security dilemma of "each fighting their own battle" to a security pattern of "joint governance and coexistence," providing a solid guarantee for the survival of human civilization.
Fourth, further grasping the new civilizational landscape to break through the contradictions between man and nature caused by traditional views of development, thereby creating an ecological community of symbiosis and shared beauty. The progress of human civilization should not be at the expense of nature, but should achieve sustainable development through the harmonious coexistence of man and nature. The community with a shared future for humanity is about holding the environmental bottom line for nature and striving to build a planetary home where man and nature coexist in harmony. The development model of conquering nature and plundering resources formed since the industrial civilization, although it allowed human society to achieve rapid development in a short period, has led to increasingly severe ecological problems such as global environmental pollution, climate warming, the sharp decline of biodiversity, and shortages of energy and resources, seriously threatening human survival and development. Western developed countries, as the pioneers and greatest beneficiaries of industrial civilization, are the historically responsible parties for the global ecological crisis. However, regarding ecological issues, they have adopted...
The practices of "double standards" and "shifting responsibility" manifest in two ways: on the one hand, grabbing cheap resources from nature and developing countries to sustain one's own development while shifting the ecological costs of high pollution and high emissions onto both; on the other hand, self-styling as "environmental guardians" and imposing harsh environmental standards on developing countries while passively fulfilling their own commitments to emission reduction targets, financial assistance, and technical support. This selfish, traditional outlook on development has exacerbated the contradiction between humanity and nature, becoming the greatest obstacle to global ecological governance. Faced with the predicament of global ecological governance, the international community must jointly fulfill the principle of maintaining harmony between humanity and nature advocated by the Global Development Initiative. Within the framework of a community with a shared future for humanity, we must work together to build a life community for humanity and nature [32] and jointly seek a path for harmonious coexistence.
On one hand, all countries in the world should firmly establish the ecological civilization concept of "respecting, conforming to, and protecting nature." We must transcend traditional outlooks on development through the "New Development Philosophy of innovation, coordination, greenness, openness, and sharing," advocating for "green, low-carbon, circular, and sustainable" modes of production and lifestyle. In doing so, we can continuously expand a path of civilized development characterized by productive development, prosperous lives, and sound ecology, achieving the superposition of economic, social, and ecological benefits. On the other hand, the international community should adhere to the concept of "common but differentiated" global ecological responsibilities [33]. It must actively fulfill international obligations and carry out global actions. In particular, Western developed countries need to face up to the "ecological debt" accumulated during their own processes of industrial civilization. They must honor their commitments to financial aid, technical support, and energy conservation through practical actions, joining hands with developing countries to promote global ecological governance and leave a clean and beautiful world for future generations.
Fifth, we must further grasp new civilizational goals, break through the struggles over global power distribution arising from the diffusion and eastward shift of international power, and forge a cooperative community of mutual benefit and win-win outcomes. Ultimately, the community with a shared future for humanity seeks to create a cooperative community of mutual benefit, realizing the value objective of "symbiosis of interests, sharing of rights, and co-sharing of responsibilities among countries with different social systems, different ideologies, different histories and cultures, and different levels of development." The realization of this goal will inevitably be affected by international power struggles. With the collective rise of emerging market countries and developing countries, the global power structure is exhibiting a trend of general diffusion and an eastward shift. Its essence is a profound adjustment of international power from "monopoly by a few countries" to "participation by multiple subjects." This adjustment touches upon the fundamental architecture and future direction of the international order, breaking the global governance system dominated by the United States and other Western countries that formed after the Second World War. The Western countries, led by the U.S., are unwilling to easily relinquish their dominance over existing rules and attempt to exclude the Global South from the power system. Meanwhile, the Global South, composed of emerging markets and developing countries, is eager to participate in global governance and enhance its representation and voice within the global governance system. The difficulty in reconciling the interests and demands of various parties has led to global power competition and disputes over rules.
Faced with the objective trend of the evolution of the international power structure, we must create a cooperative community of mutual benefit and win-win outcomes, promoting a smooth transition of the global governance system from "Western-dominated" to "multilateral co-governance." On one hand, in the face of common human challenges and global governance dilemmas, we must follow the Global Governance Initiative to actively promote "North-South dialogue," allowing developed and developing countries to resolve differences, build consensus, and reach cooperation through equal communication. This involves deeply integrating the advantages of developed countries with the potential of developing countries to form a "1+1>2" win-win pattern of mutual benefit, thereby transforming the original power game into a driver for collaborative development and weakening the antagonistic nature of power struggles. On the other hand, we must improve the implementation mechanisms of the Global Civilization Initiative, transcending differences in history, culture, geography, and systems. We must allow the Global South to transform from scattered articulators of demands into unified participants in governance. By deepening pragmatic cooperation in regional and specific sectoral governance around common demands, they can form a collective force sufficient to promote the reform of international rules and drive global governance toward a more just and reasonable direction. Ultimately, by building a cooperative community of mutual benefit and win-win outcomes, we can achieve friendly cooperation between countries of different social systems, different stages of development, and different sizes, moving continuously toward the human ideal of the "association of free individuals."
About the Author: Liu Yang is a Professor and Doctoral Supervisor at the School of Marxism, Shanghai University of Finance and Economics.
Source: Marxism Studies (《马克思主义研究》), No. 12, 2025.
Editor: Huihui