2024 Development Report on Marxist Theoretical Research
Since the 18th CPC National Congress, General Secretary Xi Jinping has delivered a series of important expositions regarding the strengthening of Marxist theoretical research and construction. He has profoundly answered directional and fundamental questions concerning the persistence and development of Marxism, and systematically elucidated the goals, basic principles, fundamental tasks, and key priorities of Marxist theoretical research and construction.
In 2024, Marxist theoretical research conscientiously implemented the spirit of General Secretary Xi Jinping’s important expositions and instructions. Progress in related research was mainly reflected in four areas: first, the continuous deepening of research into Xi Jinping Thought on Culture; second, a focus on research regarding further comprehensively deepening reform; third, the continuous advancement of theoretical innovation facing major practical issues; and fourth, the solid advancement of deeper research into the foundational theories of Marxism.
The Continuous Deepening of Research into Xi Jinping Thought on Culture
As the cultural component of Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era, Xi Jinping Thought on Culture attracted significant attention from theoretical and academic circles as soon as it was proposed.
In 2024, theoretical and academic circles continuously deepened their research into Xi Jinping Thought on Culture. Focusing on major issues such as the relationship between the "Second Combination" [1] and Chinese-path modernization, the question of cultural subjectivity, and the Party’s cultural leadership (hegemony), researchers pushed toward greater academization and systematization. Gao Xiang pointed out that the “Second Combination” has fortified the path-based foundation of Chinese-path modernization. Advancing Chinese-path modernization is a long-term and arduous undertaking; only by adhering to the “Second Combination” can we ensure that our Party always maintains the ideological and cultural initiative and exerts a powerful influence on our path, theory, and system. We must strengthen cultural confidence, uphold openness and inclusiveness, and persist in upholding the fundamentals and breaking new ground. We must truly base the development of the country and the nation on the foundation of our own strength, keep the fate of China’s development and progress firmly in our own hands, and make the Chinese characteristics of Chinese-path modernization more distinct, its advantages more prominent, and its prospects brighter. Yang Geng proposed that we should take the practice of Chinese-path modernization as our cognitive coordinate, distinguish between the excellent and the obsolete aspects of traditional Chinese culture, and subsequently seek out those elements of fine traditional Chinese culture that possess commonalities and points of fit with the basic tenets of Marxism. By subjecting these to creative transformation and innovative development, the two can be organically combined and integrated into a single whole. Wang Bo suggested that the “Second Combination” demonstrates a distinct historical confidence and a profound grasp of the laws governing the development of Chinese civilization. It indicates that our Party’s consciousness in advancing cultural innovation while inheriting fine traditional Chinese culture has reached a new height. Zhen Zhanmin proposed that Xi Jinping Thought on Culture examines and resolves contemporary Chinese cultural issues through a "Macro-View of History," a "Macro-View of Culture," and a "Macro-View of the Era." [2] This endows cultural development with deeper historical grounding, a broader cultural vision, and more distinct era-specific characteristics. It has greatly sublimated our Party’s understanding of the laws of building socialist culture with Chinese characteristics, opened a new realm of Marxist cultural theory, and demonstrated powerful practical force in leading the prosperity and development of Chinese culture.
We must continuously consolidate cultural subjectivity and the Party’s cultural leadership, organically unifying the opening of the correct path, the development of scientific theory, the construction of effective systems, and the development of advanced culture. Within a broader cultural space, we should fully utilize the precious resources of fine traditional Chinese culture to explore future-oriented theoretical and institutional innovations. Zhang Zhigang and Yang Hongyuan suggested that the creation of Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era is the most powerful manifestation of cultural subjectivity. Ai Silin proposed that the establishment of Chinese cultural subjectivity must break through the framework of using "subject-object," "principal-subordinate," or "substance-function" (ti-yong) [3] relationships to explain the relationship between Chinese and Western cultures. Cui Weihang argued that the core of cultural subjectivity lies in adhering to the subject status within cultural activities; achieving spiritual independence and autonomy is an internal requirement of cultural subjectivity and a basic prerequisite for constructing China’s autonomous knowledge system. Xiang Yuqiao proposed that cultural subjectivity is the basis upon which Chinese civilization was created and the source of power for Chinese culture to stand firm and travel far. Liu Zhonghui suggested that the prerequisite for consolidating cultural subjectivity is a high degree of identification with and heartfelt confidence in one’s own national culture, based upon which one consciously and rationally maintains and promotes the core concepts and spiritual values of the national traditional culture. Huang Zhijun pointed out that exchange and mutual learning between different civilizations have formed the experience of human civilizational interaction. In particular, the Silk Road, the introduction of Buddhism, and the "Eastward Spread of Western Learning" [4] during the developmental process of Chinese civilization provide historical paradigms for contemporary people to maintain mutual tolerance amidst civilizational differences. Upholding the historical experience of civilizational exchange and mutual learning helps to carry forward Chinese culture and construct the cultural subjectivity of the Chinese nation. Wang Haifeng suggested that the cultural subjectivity of the Chinese nation possesses a civilizational character that is both national and global; he proposed tracing the historical logic of the origins of the Chinese nation's cultural subjectivity from the perspective of academic history and conducting a philosophical examination of cultural subjectivity.
Li Wentang proposed that cultural leadership, as a form of cultural power, is prominently manifested both as the power of discourse and the power of management. General Secretary Xi Jinping has profoundly elucidated the importance of adhering to and strengthening the Party’s overall leadership over propaganda, ideological, and cultural work. He has unequivocally insisted that the Party manages propaganda, the media, culture, and education, emphasizing the need to strengthen "position awareness" [5] and responsibility awareness to firmly grasp leadership over ideological work. This seizes the cornerstone of the construction of cultural leadership. Tao Wenzhao proposed that the "culture" in Xi Jinping Thought on Culture is culture in the broad sense, of which the most important element is ideology. Cultural leadership is essentially leadership over ideological work. The core task of adhering to the Party’s cultural leadership is to maintain and consolidate the Party’s leadership over ideological work and to consolidate the guiding position of Marxism in the ideological field. Wang Yan suggested that related research should excavate and analyze the "soul-vein" (hunmai) and "root-vein" (genmai) [6] of the CPC’s theory of cultural leadership in the New Era, summarize the Sinicization of Marxist cultural leadership and cultural theory, and explore the CPC's "responsive strategies" for maintaining cultural leadership in the New Era. Kan Daoyuan proposed the active construction of institutional mechanisms for the Party's leadership over cultural reform and innovation. This involves strengthening the Party’s unified leadership and advancement of cultural reform, continuously releasing cultural vitality and charm through deeper reform and innovation, deepening supply-side structural reform in the cultural field, triggering the vitality of cultural innovation and creation at a deep level, and better achieving the unification of social and economic benefits.
Focusing on Research Regarding Further Comprehensively Deepening Reform
The Third Plenary Session of the 20th CPC Central Committee reviewed and adopted the Decision of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China on Further Comprehensively Deepening Reform and Advancing Chinese-path Modernization (hereinafter referred to as the Decision). This is a systematic and comprehensive plan and deployment for further comprehensively deepening reform on the new journey of the New Era, conducted by the CPC Central Committee with Comrade Xi Jinping at its core, centered closely on advancing Chinese-path modernization and implementing the strategic deployments of the 20th CPC National Congress. Theoretical and academic circles have conducted extensive research on the general objectives, fundamental principles, fifteen specific areas of content, and the methodology of reform as outlined in the Decision. Wang Changlin suggested the need to profoundly understand and grasp the theme of further comprehensively deepening reform. The Decision’s proposal to focus closely on advancing Chinese-path modernization is a successful experience and strategic choice of our Party's leadership over reform and opening up, possessing its own profound historical, theoretical, practical, developmental, and reform-oriented logic. At present and for a period in the future, we must focus closely on the general goal of "continuing to improve and develop the system of socialism with Chinese characteristics and advancing the modernization of China’s system and capacity for governance" to further promote comprehensively deepening reform. Bao Xinjian proposed that the general goal of the Decision highlights the "main line" of institutional reform and construction. Its core essence is to take the continuous improvement of the level of institutional modernization as the orientation, further advance institutional innovation, and resolutely break down the deep-seated institutional obstacles and structural contradictions affecting Chinese-path modernization. It emphasizes "simultaneous breaking and establishing, with establishing preceding breaking," [7] fortifying fundamental systems, improving basic systems, and innovating important systems to inject strong impetus and provide a powerful institutional guarantee for Chinese-path modernization.
Zhang Zhongjun pointed out that among the major principles for further comprehensively deepening reform proposed by the Decision, "upholding the Party's overall leadership" ranks first. This is a scientific summation of the valuable experience gained since the start of reform and opening up, and particularly from comprehensively deepening reform in the New Era. It profoundly reveals the fundamental reason for the successful advancement of China's reform and opening up and points out the fundamental guarantee for further comprehensively deepening reform and advancing Chinese-path modernization. To implement this major principle, we must profoundly recognize the great significance of adhering to the Party's overall leadership, grasp the intrinsic link between the Party’s overall leadership and further comprehensively deepening reform, and effectively integrate the Party's leadership into all aspects and the entire process of reform to ensure that reform always advances in the correct political direction. Zhang Yi pointed out that the Decision made it clear that further comprehensively deepening reform must "persist in being people-centered." Reform and opening up is the cause of hundreds of millions of people. Reform has meaning only if it is for the people; reform has momentum only if it relies on the people. Further comprehensively deepening reform must persist in being people-centered, ensuring that reform is for the people, relies on the people, and that its fruits are shared by the people. Li Jie proposed that the Decision’s inclusion of "upholding the fundamentals and breaking new ground" (shouzheng chuangxin) as a major principle for further comprehensively deepening reform profoundly reflects the internal requirements of Marxist thought and work methods. In further comprehensively deepening reform, we must unswervingly adhere to socialism with Chinese characteristics while keeping pace with the times, responding to developments in practice, highlighting a problem-oriented approach, and advancing innovation in theory, practice, systems, culture, and all other aspects from a new starting point. Li Zhongjie proposed that "upholding institutional construction as the main line" is one of the major principles. Valuing and strengthening institutional construction is an important understanding and conclusion drawn from our Party's long-term historical experience. Further comprehensively deepening reform must take institutional construction as the main line, fortifying fundamental systems, improving basic systems, and innovating important systems to ensure new achievements are made in institutional construction. Regarding "upholding the comprehensive rule of law" as a major principle, Zhang Wenxian proposed that deepening reform and advancing Chinese-path modernization on the track of the rule of law emphasizes the role of the law in "fortifying the foundation, stabilizing expectations, and benefiting the long term." To achieve the unification of reform and the rule of law, the key is to handle the important link of "scientific legislation," ensuring that major reforms have a legal basis and that reform achievements are elevated into legal systems in a timely manner. Gu Hailian suggested that "upholding the systems image" [8] as a major principle places higher requirements on the systematic, integrated, and synergistic nature of reform. We must handle major relationships—such as those between the economy and society, the government and the market, efficiency and equity, vitality and order, and development and security—to ensure that reforms in all areas are mutually reinforcing and synergistically efficient.
Hu Changshuan proposed that to master the scientific methodology of comprehensively deepening reform, we must profoundly grasp the methodological requirements of the "Two Combinations." Adhering to the combination of the basic tenets of Marxism with China’s specific realities means basing the measures and advancement of further comprehensively deepening reform on specific domestic and international realities. Adhering to the combination of the basic tenets of Marxism with fine traditional Chinese culture means planning the measures and advancement of reform based on the specific reality of Chinese culture. Dong Zhenhua proposed that comprehensively deepening reform is a profound and comprehensive social change and a complex systemic project involving a series of major relationships: the whole and the part, the present and the long-term, the macro and the micro, principal and secondary contradictions, and the particular and the general. We must increase our ability to use scientific methods to observe and handle problems with global vision, foresight, and resolve, becoming adept at thinking and strategizing from a strategic height to continuously open new horizons for comprehensively deepening reform. Huang Jianjun proposed that to grasp the scientific method of further comprehensively deepening reform, we must coordinate the comprehensive advancement of deep-level reform and institutional opening up. The key to unifying reform and opening up lies in improving the institutional mechanisms for high-level opening up to the outside world, steadily expanding institutional opening up through deep-level reform, and adding internal and external impetus to high-quality development. Xing Ruihua pointed out that the achievements of reform and development have laid a solid material foundation for social stability, while the smooth progress of reform and the healthy development of the economy and society require the creation of a peaceful and stable internal and external environment; the three are mutually safeguarding and reinforcing.
Theoretical Innovation Facing Major Practical Issues
The theory of Chinese-path modernization is a major theoretical innovation of the 20th CPC National Congress and the latest major achievement of scientific socialism. General Secretary Xi Jinping has pointed out that advancing Chinese-path modernization is a long-term task that requires further strengthening of theoretical research and practical exploration. Academic and theoretical circles have continuously deepened their research on Chinese-path modernization. Han Qingxiang proposed the essential characteristics of the theoretical form of Chinese-path modernization, its civilizational form, national character, human essence, social governance, people-centered standards, shared values, the future of humanity, its contribution to the world, and its philosophical foundations. These ten elements and their internal logic systematically construct the theoretical form of Chinese-path modernization from a scholarly perspective. Feng Ziyi argued that Marx had a unique methodology for studying the development of modern society. He suggested activating the intellectual resources of Marx’s theory of social development, strengthening the scholarly interpretation of Chinese-path modernization, promoting the elevation of experience into theory, and advancing dialogue and exchange regarding development theory. Wang Huxue contended that, viewed from the perspective of Marxist philosophical anthropology (humanology), the Chinese characteristics of Chinese-path modernization contain extremely rich and profound anthropological implications: modernization with a huge population highlights the subjectivity of human existence, while modernization characterized by common prosperity for all highlights the sociality of human existence. Yuan Zushe proposed that Chinese-path modernization, in the process of composing a new form of civilization, has established an ecological-practical orientation and opened a new path of modernization featuring the harmonious coexistence of man and nature. Xi Jinping Thought on Ecological Civilization has creatively developed the theory of historical materialism; in leading the ecological practice of Chinese-path modernization, it is committed to building a community of life featuring the harmonious coexistence of man and nature, endowing Chinese-path modernization with distinct characteristics and essential requirements through ecological and "green" development. Wu Zhongmin noted that since the founding of the People's Republic of China, rural China has undergone a series of modern, profound, and historic transformations, which have had a tremendous foundational impact on Chinese-path modernization. An indispensable fundamental reason why Chinese-path modernization differs from other countries and has achieved world-recognized success lies in these historical transformations. Only by deeply understanding the historic changes in the countryside can one truly understand Chinese-path modernization. Xiang Jiuyu proposed that civilizational modernity is an explanatory paradigm for the process of world modernization and a historical understanding of Chinese-path modernization. Civilizational modernity can become a landmark concept in the independent knowledge system of Chinese-path modernization, thereby further deepening rational understanding of the laws governing the development of socialist civilization, Chinese civilization, and human civilization. Zhou Dan proposed that the cultural form of Chinese-path modernization—as a theorized and systematized expression of the state of the socio-cultural sphere—actually represents the basic characteristics and internal relations of the entire society across various domains such as economy and politics. The cultural form represents the social organism in the manner of a cultural living entity.
To deeply study and implement the revised Regulations of the Communist Party of China on Disciplinary Actions (hereafter referred to as the "Regulations"), the entire Party conducted an in-depth campaign of Party discipline study and education from April to July 2024. Academic and theoretical circles conducted intensive research on Party discipline education, the Party's self-revolution, and comprehensively and strictly governing the Party. Hang Yuanxiang proposed that since entering the New Era, the CPC Central Committee with Comrade Xi Jinping at its core has advanced the comprehensive and strict governance of the Party in depth using systems thinking and scientific methods. The valuable experience accumulated for strengthening the Party’s discipline building on the New Journey mainly includes: adhering to the combination of ideological Party building and institutional Party governance; adhering to the combination of strict political discipline and promoting the comprehensive and strict enforcement of all disciplines; adhering to the combination of intensive education and regular education; adhering to the combination of focusing on the "key few" and managing the "vast majority" [9]; adhering to the combination of strict supervision and management with encouraging responsibility and action; and adhering to the combination of consolidating primary responsibility [10] and fulfilling supervisory responsibility. Liu Yuhui proposed that in carrying out Party discipline education, striving to forge "conscious discipline" is an inherent requirement and important content. Through the development of Party discipline education, the vast number of Party members should transform disciplinary requirements into practical consciousness, promoting the unity of the Party and forming a powerful synergy for advancing Chinese-path modernization. Qi Yiming proposed that we must adhere to a problem-oriented approach and strive to improve the timeliness and relevance of discipline building. The Party's discipline building must advance with the times by closely integrating with the development and changes of the era, the changes in the composition of the Party member ranks, and the changes in prominent problems within the Party. Chai Baoyong proposed that the path of development for a self-revolutionary party constitutes—in terms of developmental logic, party functions, party governance practice, and political development models—a political mechanism for the CPC and the Chinese state that can remain great and endure over the long term, providing Chinese wisdom and Chinese solutions for the party building and political development of countries worldwide. Hong Xiaonan proposed that persisting in solving the unique challenges of a large party [11] as the main direction of attack is the practical requirement of the Party's self-revolution. The "Six Hows" [12] persist in problem-awareness and goal-orientation, pointing out the direction and providing a follow-through for solving the unique challenges of a large party. Only by treating the "Six Hows" as an organic whole and applying them holistically can we effectively enhance the overall efficacy of solving these unique challenges.
General Secretary Xi Jinping has pointed out that developing new quality productive forces is an inherent requirement and an important focal point for promoting high-quality development. High-quality development requires a new theory of productive forces for guidance. As new quality productive forces have already taken shape in practice and demonstrated strong momentum and support for high-quality development, we need to summarize and generalize them theoretically to guide new developmental practices. Academic and theoretical circles have conducted in-depth research on major theoretical issues such as the core essence and theoretical connotations of new quality productive forces, as well as the new quality relations of production that are compatible with them. Zhou Wen proposed that new quality productive forces are a major theoretical proposition in the Sinicization and modernization of Marxist political economy. General Secretary Xi Jinping’s important expositions on new quality productive forces affirm the important status and role of science and technology in the formation and development of productive forces, elevating such scientific and technological innovation to a higher level of original and disruptive innovation. This highlights the leading role of scientific and technological innovation in the development of productive forces and opens a new realm for contemporary Chinese Marxist political economy. Huang Hanquan proposed that new quality productive forces are birthed by revolutionary technological breakthroughs, the innovative allocation of factors of production, and deep industrial transformation and upgrading. Their basic connotation is the leap in laborers, means of labor, and objects of labor, as well as their optimized combination. New quality productive forces have already taken shape in practice; we need to further deepen our understanding and vigorously promote the iterative development and qualitative leap of productive forces. Su Yubo proposed that we should use the New Development Philosophy featuring innovation, coordination, green development, openness, and sharing to lead the accelerated formation of new quality productive forces. This is of great significance for promoting China's high-quality economic development, seizing the commanding heights of international competition, and gaining the initiative in modernization. Huang Maoxing proposed that high-quality development is the primary task in building a modern socialist country in all respects. New quality productive forces are an advanced state of productive forces that align with the New Development Philosophy. Developing new quality productive forces is an inherent requirement and an important focal point for promoting high-quality development. We must persist in high-quality development, grasp the direction, focus on key points, and actively cultivate and develop new quality productive forces. Zhang Zhanbin and others proposed that accelerating the development of new quality productive forces will drive the improvement of three economic indicators—"per capita disposable income of residents," "the size of the middle-income group," and "the number of market entities"—making solid strides toward the goal of achieving common prosperity for all. Pang Jinju proposed that to adapt to the requirements of vigorously developing new quality productive forces, we must deepen the reform of the relationship between the government and the market. We should focus on unleashing the vitality of market entities and their enthusiasm and creativity in production and operation. We must accelerate the improvement of basic market economy systems such as property rights protection, market access, fair competition, and social credit. We should establish a high-standard market system, innovate the methods of allocating factors of production, and allow various advanced and high-quality factors of production to flow smoothly toward the development of new quality productive forces. We must strengthen and improve the Party's leadership, deepen the reform of Party and state institutions, and accelerate the transformation of government functions.
Solidly Advancing the Continuous Deepening of Basic Theoretical Research
Facing the New Era and the new journey, General Secretary Xi Jinping has pointed out that we must accelerate the construction of a China-sourced independent knowledge system for philosophy and social sciences, making greater contributions to the Sinicization and modernization of Marxism. Academic and theoretical circles have continued to advance basic theoretical research on hot topics such as the independent knowledge system, classical studies, the developmental trajectory of Marx’s thought, and political philosophy.
Zhao Rui proposed that the fundamental guide for constructing a China-sourced independent knowledge system for philosophy and social sciences is Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era. Its essential characteristics are subjectivity and originality, and its fundamental path is the "Two Combinations" [13]. We must base ourselves on the great practice of Chinese-path modernization, take root in the profound accumulation of Chinese civilization, and accelerate the construction of an independent knowledge system for Chinese philosophy and social sciences with a high degree of academic consciousness. Lin Shangli proposed that we must persist in using the Marxist scientific worldview and methodology to observe Chinese practice, the developments of the era, and human progress. We should systematically generalize, study, and interpret new concepts, categories, values, and theories of China's development, thereby constructing a Chinese independent knowledge system that is valuable to China and meaningful to the world. Sun Zhengyu proposed that building an independent Chinese knowledge system requires facing the great practice of socialism with Chinese characteristics, refining "new theories with scholarly rigor," summarizing "new practices with regularities," and forming "original concepts" and "landmark concepts" with subjectivity and autonomy. Wu Xiaoming rethought the definition of philosophy from the perspective of the fundamental difference between Chinese and Western philosophy. He proposed that the essence of Western philosophy is metaphysics, whereas Chinese philosophy lies outside of metaphysics and, by its very nature, has always been outside of metaphysics. The fact that Western philosophy is directly the substance of metaphysics was once greatly disturbed and obscured; therefore, superficial deliberations over the name "philosophy" did not prevent the coercive abuse of Western standards.
General Secretary Xi Jinping’s congratulatory letter to the first World Congress of Classics pointed out that China is actively committed to promoting the inheritance and development of civilizations, facilitating global civilizational dialogue, and focusing on seeking wisdom and absorbing nutrients from different civilizations. China is willing to work with all parties to practice the Global Civilization Initiative, join hands to address various challenges commonly faced by humanity, and jointly promote the development and progress of human civilization. Zang Fengyu proposed that facing the profound changes unseen in a century, we should promote the dialogue and integration of classical civilizations with a modern consciousness that meets the needs of the era. We should realize mutual learning among diverse civilizations and the development of global civilization, promote comparative civilizational research and exchange, create a new form of human civilization, and establish a civilizational foundation for building a community with a shared future for humanity. Ding Liqun proposed that the diversity and integration of civilizations are not only the accumulation of history but also the foundation for the continuous development of the future world. Our excavation of the resources of classical civilizations does not lie in simply restoring their original appearance, nor in advocating cultural "fundamentalism," but in practicing the Global Civilization Initiative, addressing the challenges faced by humanity, and creating a new form of human civilization.
The academic community proposed a series of new insights regarding the history of the development of Marx’s thought. Yang Haifeng proposed that there was another logical shift in the development of Marx's philosophical thought after 1845, namely the shift from the "logic of production" to the "logic of capital." This was the transition from The German Ideology through the Grundrisse (Economic Manuscripts of 1857–1858) to Capital. In this third transition, Marx's philosophy, economics, and socialist thought were integrated. Liu Enzhi proposed that following the shift to the materialist conception of history in 1845, another intellectual shift occurred in Marx: the 1847 cluster of texts, represented by The Poverty of Philosophy and Wage Labour and Capital, marked the birth of Marx’s "conception of capital as relations of production." Marx thus entered the mature period of his theory of the critique of capital. Zhang Yibing proposed that Marx theoretically shifted from the critique of bourgeois society to the critique of the capitalist mode of production; his scientific understanding of the capitalist mode of production is the so-called "third great discovery." [14]
Since political philosophy became a secondary discipline [15], research around Marxist political philosophy has also become an annual hotspot. Li Dianlai proposed that political philosophy is Marx's "first philosophy," possessing...
Identifying a political philosophy with "holistic" characteristics as Marx’s "first philosophy" [16] serves both to coherently integrate the various components of Marxist philosophy into a system and to help overcome the erroneous tendency of interpreting Marxist philosophy through the lens of positive science or ethical moralism. Xia Ying opposes this view, proposing instead that Marx has no political philosophy, but only a social philosophy. Historical materialism is established upon the foundation of the "civil society" determining the "political" state; within Marx’s "social" context, political forms and their liberation have always been transitional stages awaiting sublation [17], and thus cannot shoulder the heavy responsibility of a "first philosophy." Li Yushu suggests that Marx’s revolution in political philosophy is primarily manifested in the subversion of traditional attitudes toward the political community. By imbuing civil society with political connotations and revealing the political significance and social power inherent in the economy, Marx achieved a mutual attribution of properties between political and economic categories, thereby transforming the mode of political participation. Jiang Chang and others propose that while the birth of Marx and Engels’ political philosophy was marked by the publication of the Manifesto of the Communist Party, its argumentation was only completed with the drafting of Capital. The political philosophy founded by Marx and Engels provided political philosophy with the theoretical foundation of historical materialism.
Reflection and Outlook
In 2024, the academic and theoretical circles commemorated several senior Marxist scholars, including Xiao Qian, Gao Qinghai, Yu Wujin, Chen Xianda, and Qi Zhenhai, organizing, reviewing, and rethinking their scholarly contributions. Contemporary Chinese thought moves toward the future precisely through the continuous inheritance and retrospection of academic lineages. The development of the discipline of Marxist theory in our country must inherit the excellent traditions of these senior scholars. We must persist in taking Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era as our guide and adhere to the "Two Combinations" [18]. We must take root in the land of China, continue the Chinese cultural lineage, and deeply plant our academic foundations. We must conduct in-depth research on major issues in the practice of comprehensively promoting the construction of a strong country and the great cause of national rejuvenation through Chinese-path modernization, making even greater contributions to the promotion of the Sinicization and modernization of Marxism.
(Authors: Department of Marxist Theory, Social Sciences in China Press Writer: Xiao Zhi) Source: Chinese Social Sciences Net – Chinese Social Sciences Today [19] Web Editor: Huihui