No.1 2024

CONTENTS

Features

The Adaptation of Fundamental Tenets of Marxism to the Best of Traditional Chinese

  Culture and the Cultural Form of Chinese ModernizationHuang Yibing（1）

Research on Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era

Features and Development Trajectories of the New System for Nationwide Resource

  MobilizationXu Xianchun（11）

The Historical Logic behind the Formation of the Second AdaptionFeng Jikang（19）

Reassessing the Theoretical Framework and Significance of the Three Theories

  of CivilizationLiu Tongfang（26）

Implications of Hominology for the Chinese Path to Modernization

Wang Huxue & Chen Wanxin（34）

Global Perspectives on Historic Milestones and Transformations in the New Era

Lin Zi & Liu Mengyao（47）

Research on the Chinese Compilation and Translation of Marxist Classical Works

Preface to Book 2 of Volume 4 in Part II of the Marx-Engels-Gesamtausgabe(MEGA)

  (Principal Manuscripts of the Third Volume of Marx’s Capital)（53）

Research on Fundamental Marxist Theories

The Logical Structure of the Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844:

  The Motivation behind the “Critique of Hegelian Dialectic and Philosophy

   as a Whole”An Qinian（59）

Unity and Distinction: Late Schelling’s Interpretation of Dialectics in Marx’s Capital

Feng Bo（70）

The Historical Nature of Machinery and Its Utilization in Capitalism: A Study

  Based on Marx’s Notes of BeckmannZhang Fugong（78）

Marxist Perspectives on Common Prosperity: A Triple Interpretive Approach

Bao Weijie（86）

The Genesis of Anti-Dühring and Marx-Engels’ Vision of Socialism in It

Rolf Hecker（93）

Dialogue and Interviews

Contemporary Movements of the Latin American Left and Paths to Modernization:

  An Interview with Researcher Xu ShichengWang Linxia（105）

Research on Political Economy with Chinese Characteristics

Analyzing the Political Economy of Co-respective Collaborative Competition

  between State and Private CapitalZhang Zhi & Luo Yuhui（114）

The Collective Force: Logical Foundations of Common Prosperity

Li Fenghua & Yi Xilin（122）

Historical Research on World Socialist Development

Lenin’s Critique of Misconceptions about Cooperatives: Contemporary Relevance

Xu Qin（131）

Features: American Socialist Thought

What is Democratic Socialism in America? Left Ideology in the Age of Populism

Carlo Invernizzi Accetti (Translation by Niu Zhengke)（140）

Reflections on the Latest Wave of Socialist Thought in the United States

Gao Jianming（149）

Research on Marxism Abroad

Investigating the Evolution of Thought in the Study of Dialectics in Marx’s Capital:

  An Analysis of Paul Zarembka’s Key Elements of Social Theory

  Revolutionized by MarxHe Ping（158）

Revisiting Lukács’s Hegelian PhilosophyLiu Zhuohong（166）

Nature’s Intrinsic Value and Eco-Marxism’s Self-Renewal: Centered on Kovel’s Theory

Chen Yiwen（174）

Envisioning Diverse Democracies: Interpreting Rancière’s Radical Democratic Theory

Wang Yonggang（183）

Negativity as the Compass of Revolution: A Marxist Rejection of the No-Alternative Ethos

Saladdin Ahmed (Translation by Liu Yunshan)（190）

Conference Reports

Exploring the Trajectory and Contemporary Evolution of World Socialism: A Review

  of the First Forum on the History of World Socialist Development

Li Jing & He Li（201）

 MAIN ABSTRACTS
 

The Adaptation of Fundamental Tenets of Marxism to the

Best of Traditional Chinese Culture and the Cultural

Form of Chinese Modernization

Huang Yibing

       The significant principle that “the fundamental tenets of Marxism must be adapted to the Chinese context and the best of traditional Chinese culture” encapsulates our Party’s in-depth summary of the historical experiences in adapting Marxism to the Chinese context and the contemporary age. This embodies a profound grasp of the evolution laws of Chinese civilization. Marxism, as a practical and revolutionary theory, not only draws from humanity’s distinguished traditional cultures but also stands as a scientifically advanced theory with a progressive cultural form. The best of traditional Chinese culture, being the cultural DNA and unique spiritual emblem of the Chinese nation, provides abundant cultural nourishment for the people and offers valuable lessons for the governance of China. Its timeless contemporary significance enhances the cultural vitality of Marxism. The seamless alignment between the best of traditional Chinese culture and the values of scientific socialism continuously infuses the Marxist scientific theory with vivid Chinese features. This integration reinforces the historical and popular foundation for the adaptation of Marxism to the Chinese context and the contemporary age, thereby facilitating the revitalization and modernization of Chinese civilization. “Adaptation” represents the heart and essence of fusing the fundamental tenets of Marxism with the best of traditional Chinese culture. We must maintain Marxism’s dominant position, utilize it to invigorate the grand civilization crafted by the Chinese nation, and through a unique national flair and extensive international perspective, foster the creative transformation and innovative growth of the best of traditional Chinese culture. This endeavor aims to incessantly nurture and develop a socialist culture with Chinese characteristics for the New Era.

Features and Development Trajectories of
the New System for Nationwide Resource Mobilization
Xu Xianchun

  Building upon the core principle of the traditional system for nationwide resource mobilization, which is to concentrate resources for major undertakings, the new system for nationwide resource mobilization adapts to the New Era by focusing on pivotal domains and harnessing innovative resources and factors through a novel structural framework and advanced technological support. This system has emerged as a crucial method for organizational implementation and a mechanism for work coordination, reflecting the nation’s will and fulfilling strategic national objectives. In comparison to the traditional system for nationwide resource mobilization prevalent in the planned economy, the new system exhibits significant new features, specifically: a transition in the institutional environment and the way of resource allocation from a predominantly administrative resource allocation to a market-oriented allocation approach; in goal orientation and value pursuit, a shift from an exclusive emphasis on target attainment to a balanced emphasis on both achieving objectives and improving efficiency; and a transformation in organizational operations and execution models from government-centric coordination to a collaborative network among diverse innovative entities. The creation of a new system for nationwide resource mobilization is essential to achieve significant technological self-reliance and capability, and to accelerate the transformation into a nation fortified with strong scientific and technological prowess, and it serves as an effective action for deepening reforms in the scientific and technological framework and enhancing the national innovation system. It is also a critical mission to secure victories in the battle for key core technologies and to safeguard national security. Building on the strengths of the traditional system for nationwide resource mobilization while seeking to improve it, there is a need to concentrate on achieving high-level technological autonomy, to strategically plan and holistically advance scientific and technological innovation, and to quicken the establishment of a collaborative, efficient, and well-organized new system for nationwide resource mobilization. In the present and for the foreseeable future, particular emphasis should be placed on enhancing service support, reinforcing innovation entities, driving tasks forward, and ensuring robust institutional frameworks. Concretely, this involves shifting government functions from managing research and development to providing services for innovation, establishing a systemic national strategic science and technology capability, decisively overcoming challenges in critical core technologies, and creating an institutional system that fosters collaborative innovation.

The Historical Logic behind the Formation
of the Second Adaption
Feng Jikang

 The conceptualization of the Second Adaption did not emerge abruptly but was the culmination of a long and continuous evolution. From the onset of the modern era, the nation faced profound crises. This reality prompted a shift among some progressive intellectuals from a stance of passive acceptance to one of active engagement with Western culture, all the while maintaining the integrity of Chinese cultural identity. Early Marxists in China generally held a critical view of the traditional culture that represented the old system and civilization. Mao Zedong, however, argued for the utilization of the finest elements of the Chinese nation’s historical heritage and traditional culture to enrich the nation’s own ideological and theoretical systems. This stance provided fundamental guidance for our Party’s appropriate engagement with traditional Chinese culture. After the introduction of the reform and opening up policy in the late 1970s, Chinese Communists increasingly recognized the immense value of the best of the nation’s traditional culture in adapting Marxism to the Chinese context and in advancing socialist modernization, leading to a call for the inheritance and promotion of this cultural legacy. Since socialism with Chinese characteristics ushered in a New Era, Xi Jinping has placed a high premium on cultural advancement. He has positioned cultural confidence on par with confidence in China’s path, theories, and system integral to socialism with Chinese characteristics. This conceptual framework has driven China’s cultural advancement, achieving significant historical milestones in dispelling ambiguities and misconceptions, while innovating upon the successes of its heritage. This progressive methodology has ultimately led to the establishment of the Second Adaptation.

Theoretical Conception and Value Review of
the Three Theories of Civilization
Liu Tongfang

  The discourse on civilizations, encompassing the theories of civilizational typology, the clash of civilizations, and the end of history, inherently argues for the universal relevance of capitalist civilization, showcasing a familial resemblance among these theories. The civilizational typology, epitomized by Arnold Toynbee, endeavors to break free from the confines of conventional cognitive paradigms. It champions a symbiotic model of multiculturalism and employs a dialectical framework of “challenge-response” to explore resolutions to the crises facing capitalist civilization. Samuel Huntington’s clash of civilizations posits that the global political order is being reshaped by the tensions and clash of civilizations, a perspective that arguably distorts the authentic interplay between civilization and politico-economic interests. Francis Fukuyama’s end of history postulates that the culmination of world history is the inevitable triumph of liberal democracy, an assertion that essentially seeks to impose capitalist civilization’s hegemony under the guise of Western centrism. The proclaimed victory of liberalism, as suggested by Fukuyama, leads to a disenchantment with its universal concepts. Collectively, these three theories underscore a purported dominance of Western civilization, betraying a biased discourse intent and exhibiting pronounced historical constraints.

Preface to Book 2 of Volume 4 in Part II of theMarx-Engels-Gesamtausgabe 

（Principal Manuscripts of the Third Volume of Marx’s Capital）

  The Marx-Engels Gesamtausgabe（MEGA） is internationally recognized as the most exhaustive collection of Marx and Engels’ works to date. The prefaces of this edition offer a glimpse into the cutting-edge of global scholarly research on Marx and Engels, providing substantial academic insights. Through consultation, the editorial board of MEGA has granted us permission to translate these prefaces into Chinese and to publish them in an appropriate manner. In an effort to further the research of Marx and Engels’ works within China, we plan to periodically release translations of these prefaces for the relevant volumes. This issue features the translated preface to Book 2 of Volume 4 in Part II of MEGA, which includes the principal manuscript of the third volume of Marx’s Capital. The Chinese translation was published in the second Chinese edition of the Marx-Engels Gesamtausgabe, Volume 39, in 2022.

Contemporary Movements of the Latin American Left and Paths

to Modernization: An Interview with Researcher Xu Shicheng

 Wang Linxia

 In recent times, there has been a notable ascendancy of left-wing political parties across Latin America, leading to a significant shift in the political landscape characterized by a “leftward advance and rightward retreat.” This phenomenon has not only garnered extensive international attention but has also taken a pivotal role in the global socialist movement. The governing philosophies of leftist parties in various Latin American nations vary, and in the face of opposition from right-wing entities, these parties confront diverse and formidable challenges to sustain long-term governance. Nevertheless, Latin America’s left has demonstrated resilience and resolve in independently pursuing a path of modernization that is congruent with their national contexts, striving to extricate themselves from US control, and seeking regional integration as well as alternative development strategies. Moreover, Latin America’s distinctive experiences and lessons in modernization offer valuable insights for China’s pursuit of modernization. Concurrently, China’s Belt and Road Initiative and its successful model of Chinese modernization have received broad endorsement and acknowledgment from Latin American countries, offering them access to Chinese strategic wisdom and approaches.

Analyzing the Political Economy of Co-respective Competition

between State-Owned and Private Capital

Zhang Zhi & Luo Yuhui

 The interplay of state-owned and private capital forms the cornerstone of China’s contemporary economy. Investigating the co-respective competition between these two capital forms is crucial for the advancement and refinement of China’s socialist market economy. Drawing upon Marx’s assertion that the division of labor and cooperation enhances labor productivity, and his acknowledgement of the significant role of competition in value and capital theory, and based on China’s current economic context, this paper advocates for a methodical promotion of the collaborative competition between state-owned and private capital in the New Era. Such an approach is posited to foster a beneficial cycle of mutual reinforcement between consumption and investment, to actively engage with international markets, and to enhance the global distribution of capital. It is further suggested that this dynamic can strengthen the real economy, facilitate the optimization and elevation of the industrial chain, build a comprehensive innovation chain framework, thus hastening the creation of novel developmental dynamics, and enhancing the high-quality progression of China’s economy. Regarding practical pathways, the paper posits that a steadfast commitment to a problem-oriented and targeted policy execution is essential. It outlines a tripartite approach: the top-level design by the Party and national leadership, the concerted endeavors of market participants, and the navigation of prospects and hurdles associated with collaborative international expansion. This approach is intended to be deeply rooted in the developmental ethos of co-respective competition between state-owned and private capital, aiming to robustly drive the transformative advancement of Chinese modernization.

Lenin’s Critique of Misconceptions about

Cooperatives: Contemporary Relevance

 Xu Qin
 

  Lenin’s leadership during the Russian revolution and subsequent development period was marked by his incisive critiques of prevalent misunderstandings about the role of cooperatives. He aimed to enable workers and peasants to engage with cooperatives both scientifically and effectively. Lenin first denounced the illusion that cooperatives could lead to a peaceful transition out of capitalist society, cautioning against overvaluing their function under capitalism. He then deconstructed the bourgeois deception that cooperatives could safeguard workers and peasants from poverty within capitalist structures, revealing instead that the Russian bourgeoisie utilized cooperatives as a tool to placate farmers and avert their alliance with the working class. Additionally, he rebuked the disdain for cooperatives held by some Soviet intellectuals, workers, and Communist Party members, advocating that their expansion under the Soviet system was synonymous with the progression of socialism. In light of contemporary historical conditions, re-evaluating Lenin’s criticisms can deepen our grasp of Xi Jinping’s pivotal guidance on cooperative endeavors in the New Era. Such an examination can maximize the beneficial impact of cooperatives in the pursuit of Chinse modernization.