No.6 2023


The Marxist Classical Authors’ Epochal Transformation and Historical Contributions

  in the Field of Literary and Artistic TheoryWei Jianhua(1)

Celebrating the 130th Anniversary of Mao Zedong’s Birth

An Initial Examination of Mao Zedong’s Views on Science and Culture Modernization

Shi Zhongquan(14)

A Historical Analysis of Mao Zedong’s Concept of Standing with the People

Xu Junzhong & Lü Xiaolin(25)

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

Law Governing the Innovation and Development of Marxism: A Scientific Revealing

  in the New EraLiu Jianjun & Qiu Anqi(37)

The Paradox of Modernity and the Historic Transcendence of Chinese Modernization

Xiang Jiuyu(43)

Theoretical Opposition to Historical Nihilism in the New Era

Chen Mingfan & Liu Lanwei(49)

Theoretical Implications, Foundational Logic, and Practical Imperatives of

  Intellectual IndependenceTian Xuming(57)

Research on Fundamental Marxist Theories

Engels’ Critique of Schelling: A Historical PerspectiveLiu Senlin(65)

Lenin’s Disproportion Theory: Modern Perspectives on Its Application

Hao Lixin & Sun Daixuan(75)

The Applicability of Marx’s Theory of Ideological Influence Today

Zhang Zhidan(82)

The Worker as Embodied Labor-Time: A Discussion on the Dominance and

  Transcendence of Labor-Time in Marx’s Critique of Capital

Wang Hongbo & Zhang Chaoyang(90)

Marx’s Answer to the Kantian Question and His Political-Philosophical Understanding

  of Global OrderLan Yang(100)

Marx’s Concept of Shared Wealth in Upcoming Societies and Its Applicability Today

Liu Fangping(107)

Research on Political Economy with Chinese Characteristics

Maintaining the Correct Political Path Is the Party Committee’s Primary Responsibility

  in Rural RevitalizationXu Xianglin(116)

Central Government Businesses at the Leading Edge of High-Tech Self-Sufficiency and

  Self-Improvement: Internal Foundation, Creative Process, and Practical Path

Xie Wenshuai & Song Donglin(124)

Creation and Advancement of the Marxist Theoretical Discipline

The Current Development, Communication Features, and Improvement Path for the

  WeChat Official Accounts of Premier Schools of Marxism in China

Deng Zhe & Lü Chudi(134)

Research on Political Communication

Political Communication Education Visualization: Its Significance, Difficulties,

  and ApproachesLuan Chunyu(141)

Research on Marxism Abroad

Analyzing the New Psychological Interpretation of Marxism by Rudi Supek

Fu Qilin(149)

Way to “Concrete Analysis”: Going Back to Althusser via Que faire?

Chen Yue(160)

Examining the Agnes Heller’s Analysis of the Paradigm of Marx’s Works: From

  Production to NeedWang Xiumin(170)

The Reproduction of Labor Subjectivity under the Logic of Capital: A Contemporary

  Aspect of Western Marxists’ Critique of CapitalNiu Ziniu(178)

Reification, Revolutionizing Praxis, and Party Politics in Georg Lukács’s

  History and Class Consciousness

Konstantinos Kavoulakos(Translated by Ye Jiabin & Chen Sijing)(187)


The Marxist Classical Authors’ Epochal Transformation

and Historical Contributions in the Field of

Literary and Artistic Theory

Wei Jianhua

  This introduction is from the book Marx, Engels, Lenin on Literature and Art. This book, the most recent addition to the Library of Marxist Classical Authors, will soon be published by People’s Publishing House. The book is intended to satisfy the growing interest in learning about and researching Marxist literature and art theory. It features a carefully chosen collection of works, articles, manuscripts, speeches, and letters by classical authors discussing literary and artistic theory and practice. In addition, the collection includes quotes on literature, aesthetics, and cultural concerns from a wide range of classical works of literature. These have been carefully selected and curated to help readers fully understand the deep and perceptive viewpoints of these classical writers in this crucial area. With a comprehensive examination of the classical Marxist writings, the goal of this work is to elucidate the logical foundations and historical setting of Marxist literary and artistic philosophy. It provides a methodical overview of the revolutionary changes and historical contributions made by Marx, Engels, and Lenin to the fields of literary theory and aesthetics. It emphasizes how they used historical materialism and dialectical materialism as a worldview and methodology, summarized rich experiences in literature and art scientifically, critically carried on the tradition of exemplary literary and artistic theories and aesthetics, and elucidated the fundamental qualities, rules of evolution, social roles, and standards of evaluation of literature and art. The result is a painstakingly constructed, comprehensive, all-encompassing, and dynamic scientific framework that directs and inspires the proletariat and people’s literary and artistic endeavors.

An Initial Examination of Mao Zedong’s

Views on Science and Culture Modernization

Shi Zhongquan

  This article encapsulates Mao Zedong’s extensive cultural thoughts through his perspective on the modernization of science and culture, identifying five key aspects in Mao’s view. Firstly, Mao established a new cultural theory for the Communist Party of China, with “On New Democracy” serving as the foundational text of our Party’s new cultural theory. This seminal work comprehensively and systematically outlined the interplay between new-democratic politics, economy, and culture, defining the new culture as one that is national, scientific, and popular. Secondly, Mao promoted a new literary and artistic style that resonates with the Chinese people, advocating the preservation and enhancement of the national characteristics of traditional culture, deeply rooted in China’s reality, and portraying the revolutionary spirit of the people. Thirdly, Mao proposed the policy of “letting a hundred flowers bloom, letting a hundred schools of thought contend,” and introduced the concept of scientific and cultural modernization. Fourthly, Mao adhered to the principle of “applying the old for present-day use, and the foreign for China’s use,” emphasizing the proper treatment of both Chinese traditional culture and foreign cultures. Fifthly, Mao advanced the modernization of science and culture in the understanding and policies regarding intellectuals, addressing issues such as the status, role, and class nature of intellectuals, and calling for the cultivation of a team of proletarian intellectuals. In order to inspire us to rejuvenate China and make it a highly cultured nation, it is helpful to study Mao Zedong’s viewpoint on the modernization of science and culture.


A Historical Analysis of Mao Zedong’s

Concept of Standing with the People

Xu Junzhong & Lü Xiaolin

  Based on the methodological tenet that “historical analysis is the first step in research,” this paper explores the evolution and expression of Mao Zedong’s concept of standing with the people. It makes the case that this concept, which developed from the notion of a “broad union of the people,” first appeared during the turbulent time of the Chinese people’s struggle for survival. It developed during the major conflict of the all-out War of Resistance against Japanese Aggression, grew and changed in the practice to establish the People’s Republic of China, and underwent more refinement during the socialist revolution and development. The idea views the populace as a heterogeneous collective bound together by shared values, and it provides an essential theoretical framework for forging a revolutionary united front and correctly handling the contradiction among the people. This concept incorporates crucial components for reducing populist inclinations and involves striking a balance between “common interests” and “specific interests.” China’s revolutionary and construction endeavors have relied heavily on the theoretical cornerstone of upholding and propagating Mao Zedong’s concept of standing with the people. This concept remains an important theoretical legacy that must be continued in the grand context of the New Era under Xi Jinping.

Law Governing the Innovation and Development of

Marxism: A Scientific Revealing in the New Era

Liu Jianjun & Qiu Anqi

  Marxism has an inbuilt regularity in its creative evolution as a scientific theoretical framework that is always changing. Post the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China, Xi Jinping has further explained the fundamental ideas controlling Marxism’s inventive progress. This has been made possible by a thorough analysis of the fundamental tenets, the development of Marxism throughout history, and its modern interpretations. The following core principles have been identified: the law governing the dialectical law of unity between building on past successes and making innovations; the law of synergy between localization and modernization; the principle of an organic blend of diversified and integrative development; and the law governing the positive interaction between theoretical and practical innovation. These ideas have been present throughout the growth of Marxism, especially in the Party’s theoretical innovations in the New Era. On the new journey in the New Era, Chinese Communists must fully comprehend and skillfully implement these ideas, always breaking new ground in adapting Marxism to China’s particular situation and the needs of the contemporary world.

The Paradox of Modernity and the Historic
Transcendence of Chinese Modernization
Xiang Jiuyu

  Using capitalism as its cornerstone, the Western model has led the way in modernization, bringing about profound changes in ways of production, living, and development. Modernity is defined by rationalization at its core. However, there is a deep paradox associated with this modernity, which is characterized by a conflict between modernization’s material and human components. This frequently leads to an increase in the value of the material world at the price of human worth and dignity. Chinese modernization mixes value rationality with instrumental, historical, theoretical, and practical rationality in a way that is distinctive, reflecting on the tensions inherent in capitalist modernity. In the larger context of historical materialism, this strategy upholds the people-centered ethos while also working to enhance societal well-being. This value rationality is supported by the developing contemporary Chinese Marxism and 21st-century Marxism, which provide a solid theoretical framework. This makes it possible to find workable solutions to the moral conundrums that arise while promoting universal prosperity and the well-rounded development of individuals, leading to a historic transcendence beyond the modernization paradigm driven by capitalism.


Engels’ Critique of Schelling: A Historical Perspective

Liu Senlin

Engels’s preference for negative philosophy over positive philosophy during the years 1841–1842, as demonstrated by his preference for Hegel’s philosophy over Schelling’s subsequent work, is evident. This tendency resulted from his analysis of the Enlightenment in terms of a philosophical reason versus a theological revelation dualism. Engels had not yet engaged experience, sensibility, interests, or affections; instead, he was concentrating on reason’s break from divine connection at this point. When considering this from the standpoint of political enlightenment, Engels’ criticism was further stoked by the late Schelling’s ambiguous position on enlightenment. Feuerbach, who had read Schelling’s writings for a long time, attacked Schelling’s positive philosophy first from a philosophical standpoint and then turned to a political one that affected both Marx and Engels. Engels moved his emphasis from The Holy Family to The German Ideology, where he critiqued Hegel’s conventional philosophy, which placed a premium on abstract speech and logic. He promoted “positive science” that was based on truth, experience, and sensibility. Engels and Marx were confronted with the critical challenge of comprehending the relationship between essence and existence, abstraction and concreteness, after Stirner’s daring suggestion to replace universal essence with real existence. Engels’s analysis of late Schelling was not limited to the years 1841-1842, but it developed over time, becoming more sharp, complex, and subtle.