An Analytical Discussion of the Historical Starting Point of the Modern Transformation of Chinese Civilization

In May 2022, when presiding over the 39th group study session of the Political Bureau of the CPC Central Committee, General Secretary Xi Jinping stressed that Chinese civilization, as the unique spiritual symbol of the Chinese nation and the foundation of contemporary Chinese culture, is “a treasure trove for Chinese cultural innovation,” and that through in-depth study of the history of Chinese civilization, we must “promote the entire Party and the whole society to enhance historical consciousness, strengthen cultural confidence, unswervingly follow the path of socialism with Chinese characteristics, and strive in unity to build a modern socialist country in all respects and realize the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation.” In June 2023, at the Symposium on Cultural Heritage and Development, General Secretary Xi Jinping pointed out that only by fully understanding the history of Chinese civilization can we better promote the creative transformation and innovative development of fine traditional Chinese culture, and thereby “more forcefully advance the construction of a socialist culture with Chinese characteristics and build the modern civilization of the Chinese nation.” Chinese civilization has a long, extensive, and profound history, but after entering the modern era, the severe national crisis triggered by Western colonial expansion subjected Chinese civilization to unprecedented shocks. This civilizational crisis in fact reflects the objective reality that Chinese civilization urgently needed to transform in order to adapt to the changes of its times. However, on the question of exactly when the modern transformation of Chinese civilization began, the academic community has long held differing scholarly views. In light of this, by drawing on the theoretical perspective of the Second Integration [1]1 The Second Integration (第二个结合) refers to the integration of the basic tenets of Marxism with China’s fine traditional culture, as distinct from the First Integration, which was the integration of Marxism with China’s specific realities. This concept was formally articulated by Xi Jinping in 2021., clarifying the spatiotemporal field, logical mechanism, and multiple contexts involved in the modern transformation of Chinese civilization, and on this basis defining the historical starting point of that transformation, we can provide a new historical horizon for understanding how Chinese civilization, through the interactive integration of Marxism and fine traditional Chinese culture, initiated its own process of modern reconstruction. This will, in turn, enable us to more consciously regard the mutual compatibility and mutual achievement of Marxism and fine traditional Chinese culture as the theoretical basis and fundamental guideline for building the modern civilization of the Chinese nation in the New Era.

2022年5月，习近平总书记在主持中共中央政治局第三十九次集中学习时强调，作为中华民族独特精神标识和当代中国文化根基的中华文明“是中国文化创新的宝藏”，要通过深入研究中华文明历史，“推动全党全社会增强历史自觉、坚定文化自信，坚定不移走中国特色社会主义道路，为全面建设社会主义现代化国家、实现中华民族伟大复兴而团结奋斗”。2023年6月，习近平总书记在文化传承发展座谈会上指出，只有全面了解中华文明的历史，才能更好地推动中华优秀传统文化创造性转化和创新性发展，进而“更有力地推进中国特色社会主义文化建设，建设中华民族现代文明”。中华文明源远流长、博大精深，但步入近代以后，由西方殖民扩张引发的严重民族危机，致使中华文明遭受到前所未有的冲击。文明危机实则反映出中华文明亟待转型以适应所处时代变化的客观事实。但就中华文明现代转型究竟发端于何时这一问题，学界长期存有不同的学术观点。有鉴于此，借助“第二个结合”理论视域，厘清中华文明现代转型涉及的时空场域、逻辑机理、多重情境，在此基础上界定中华文明现代转型的历史起点，可以为我们认识中华文明在马克思主义与中华优秀传统文化交互融通中，开启自身现代重构历程提供崭新的历史视野，进而更加自觉地将马克思主义与中华优秀传统文化相互契合、彼此成就作为新时代建设中华民族现代文明的理论依据和基本遵循。

I. Different Scholarly Views on the Historical Starting Point of the Modern Transformation of Chinese Civilization

一、学界关于中华文明现代转型历史起点的不同观点

The question of the historical starting point of the modern transformation of Chinese civilization is a meta-question that reveals the morphological evolution and developmental trajectory of Chinese civilization since the modern era. The academic community has not yet reached a consensus on this issue, giving rise to numerous scholarly views. These views generally take the nature and impact of important historical events during the periods of the old-democratic revolution and the new-democratic revolution as their basis, offering corresponding theoretical explanations and academic responses to the question of the historical starting point of the modern transformation of Chinese civilization.

中华文明现代转型历史起点问题是揭示中华文明自近代以来形态演变和发展脉络的元问题，学界目前对此尚未取得共识，形成了诸多的学术观点，这些观点普遍以新旧民主主义革命时期重要历史事件的属性及影响作为依据，就中华文明现代转型的历史起点问题作出相应的理论阐释与学理回应。

First, determining the historical starting point based on important historical events of the old-democratic revolution period. The old-democratic revolution period was the initial stage of intense upheaval in modern Chinese political affairs and the clash of old and new currents of thought. Major social issues, including the transformation of Chinese civilization, were raised and discussed during this period. Based on this, the academic community has formed the following views: (1) The “Opium War thesis.” This view holds that the modern transformation of Chinese civilization “was triggered by the impact of Western civilization and was carried out in the conflict with Western civilization.” The modern transformation of Chinese civilization is essentially a state of “endogenous” change induced by external impact. The Opium War, as the landmark event of external impact on modern China, was likewise the landmark event of Chinese civilization encountering the challenge of Western civilization, and it was precisely at this juncture that Chinese civilization “began its modern transformation.” (2) The “Xinhai Revolution thesis.” Scholars holding this view argue that the Xinhai Revolution [2]2 The Xinhai Revolution (辛亥革命) of 1911 overthrew the Qing dynasty and ended over two thousand years of imperial rule in China, establishing the Republic of China., which constitutes the dividing line between traditional China and modern China, simultaneously played the historical role of promoting the modern transformation of civilizational forms. The two-dimensional transformation process of Chinese civilization and the Chinese nation triggered by the Xinhai Revolution reflects the “modern processing and cultural innovation of the civilizational form” of traditional China by the “‘revolution’ of modern China.” (3) The “World War I thesis.” Scholars holding this view propose that World War I constituted a “watershed” in which Chinese and Western civilizations re-examined each other and sought out each other’s civilizational deficiencies. World War I, together with the New Culture Movement that arose domestically during the same period, intensified the inner tension within Chinese intellectual circles as they oscillated between “the world” and “China.” Amid the screening and selection of various currents of thought, the modern transformation of Chinese civilization, as an important topic, began to be mentioned by people of the time. The above views determine the historical starting point of the modern transformation of Chinese civilization based on historical events of the old-democratic revolution period, but due to the specific nature of the particular events, they diverge in their perspectives.

一是依据旧民主主义革命时期重要历史事件判定历史起点。旧民主主义革命时期，是近代中国时局激荡与新旧思潮交锋的肇始期，包括中华文明转型在内的重大社会问题都在这一时期被提出讨论。学界基于此形成了以下几种观点：其一，“鸦片战争说”。这种观点认为，中华文明向现代转型“是由西方文明的冲击所引发的，是在与西方文明的冲突中进行的”。中华文明现代转型实质是一种外力冲击引发的“内生”状态。作为近代中国受到外力冲击标志性事件的鸦片战争同样是中华文明遭遇西方文明挑战的标志性事件，中华文明也正是在此节点“开始了现代转型”。其二，“辛亥革命说”。持这一观点的学者认为，构成传统中国与现代中国分界点的辛亥革命，同时扮演着推动文明形态现代转型的历史角色。辛亥革命引发的中华文明与中华民族二维转换过程反映出“现代中国的‘革命’”对传统中国“文明形态的现代加工与文化创新”。其三，“‘一战’说”。持这种观点的学者提出，“一战”构成了中西文明重新审视彼此、找寻各自文明不足的“分水岭”。“一战”与同时期国内兴起的新文化运动，加剧了中国思想界在“世界”与“中国”间徘徊的内在张力，在对各类思潮的甄别与选择中，中华文明现代转型作为重要议题开始为时人所提及。以上说法从旧民主主义时期历史事件对中华文明现代转型的历史起点问题作出了判定，但由于具体事件特定性质不同产生了观点分野。

Second, determining the historical starting point based on important historical events of the new-democratic revolution period. During the new-democratic revolution period, the spread of Marxism and the founding of the Communist Party of China shaped a new ideological and political party landscape, while the founding of the People’s Republic of China marked the victory of the new-democratic revolution. The academic community has linked these important historical facts to the historical starting point of the modern transformation of Chinese civilization, forming three new views: (1) The “Marxist dissemination thesis.” Scholars holding this view argue that it was only after Chinese traditional civilization connected with Marxism that Chinese civilization could achieve modern rebirth. Therefore, “the self-renewal of Chinese civilization is based on its integration with the scientific socialism represented by Marxism-Leninism.” (2) The “Party founding thesis.” This view points out that after the founding of the Communist Party of China, guided by Marxism, it provided the “correct direction, theoretical weapon, and bright prospects” for the rejuvenation of Chinese civilization. The CPC’s dissemination and application of Marxism broke out of the modern “predicament of blindly copying Western civilization” and opened “a new chapter of actively creating a more civilized modern China.” (3) The “founding of the PRC thesis.” Scholars holding this view point out that after the founding of the People’s Republic of China, the Party led the people of the whole country in carrying out large-scale social transformation and construction activities, “promoting Chinese civilization to achieve traditional inheritance and modern transformation,” and Chinese civilization has since embarked on the historical journey of civilizational rejuvenation. The above views all take the unique impact of important events during the new-democratic revolution period as their dimension of investigation, making corresponding judgments on the question of the historical starting point of the modern transformation of Chinese civilization.

二是根据新民主主义革命时期重要历史事件判定历史起点。新民主主义革命时期，马克思主义传播、中国共产党成立，塑造出新的意识形态和政党格局，新中国的成立则标志着新民主主义革命的胜利，学界将这些重要史实同中华文明现代转型历史起点相关联形成三种新的观点：其一，“马克思主义传播说”。持这一观点的学者认为，中华传统文明与马克思主义相联结后，中华文明才得以实现现代新生，因此“中华文明的自新乃是基于自身与马克思列宁主义所代表的科学社会主义的交融”。其二，“党的成立说”。这种观点指出，中国共产党成立后以马克思主义为指导，为复兴中华文明提供了“正确方向、理论武器和光明前景”。中国共产党对马克思主义的传播和运用，走出了近代“照搬西方文明的困境”，翻开了“主动创造更加文明的现代中国的新篇章”。其三，“新中国成立说”。持这一观点的学者指出，新中国成立后，党领导全国人民开展大规模社会改造和建设活动，“推动中华文明实现了传统继承与现代转型”，中华文明由此迈向文明复兴的历史征程。以上说法均以新民主主义时期重要事件的独特影响作为考察维度，就中华文明现代转型的历史起点问题作出了相应判断。

A comprehensive overview of the many scholarly views on the historical starting point of the modern transformation of Chinese civilization reveals that no academic consensus has yet been reached on this issue. Although the logical rationale, evolutionary trajectory, and contextual circumstances of the modern transformation of Chinese civilization have been touched upon to some extent, they have not been effectively synthesized into a systematic attribution of the proposition, and thus cannot further respond to the long-standing debates and concerns surrounding this question.

综观学界关于中华文明现代转型历史起点的诸多观点，可以发现目前对于这一问题尚未形成学术共识。关于中华文明现代转型的逻辑理路、演进脉络及发生情境尽管有所涉及，但未能有效凝合成系统的命题归因，无法进一步回应这一问题长久存在的论争与关切。

Surveying the main views currently held in academic circles, the “Opium War theory” is in fact a continuation of the earlier scholarly view that the loss of political order in the late Qing dynasty led to a crisis of the orthodox tradition [1]1 The Second Integration (第二个结合) refers to the integration of the basic tenets of Marxism with China’s fine traditional culture, as distinct from the First Integration, which was the integration of Marxism with China’s specific realities. This concept was formally articulated by Xi Jinping in 2021., holding that the national question is the crux and origin of the civilizational question, and that the civilizational question is a reverse reflection of the national question. However, taking the Opium War alone as the starting point of the modern transformation of Chinese civilization is open to debate. Needless to say, the Opium War did trigger the predicament of “civilization being sullied” [2]2 The Xinhai Revolution (辛亥革命) of 1911 overthrew the Qing dynasty and ended over two thousand years of imperial rule in China, establishing the Republic of China., but it had not yet exerted a deeper impact on traditional Chinese cultural concepts, ethical thought, or value systems. The “Xinhai Revolution theory” holds that after the revolution, the provisional government of the Republic of China implemented a series of reforms in the social sphere, heralding a new civilizational atmosphere. However, it must be pointed out that the fruits of the Xinhai Revolution were ultimately usurped by Yuan Shikai, and after Yuan came to power, the trend of restoration was rampant for a time; thus the Xinhai Revolution in fact failed to open the sluice gate of the modern transformation of Chinese civilization. The “World War I theory” is based on the fact that World War I shattered the previous civilizational filter through which Chinese society viewed the Western world, providing an opportunity for the revaluation of traditional Chinese culture. Yet this turning point did not show signs of a modern transformation of Chinese civilization. The “dissemination of Marxism theory” is also open to debate. There is no doubt that the dissemination of Marxism is an indispensable theoretical prerequisite for the modern transformation of Chinese civilization. However, the periodization of the history of Marxism’s dissemination in China has long been controversial. Therefore, the claim that the dissemination of Marxism is the historical starting point of the modern transformation of Chinese civilization requires further scrutiny. The “founding of the Party theory” holds that the Communist Party of China, which bore the mission of national salvation, simultaneously undertook the mission of civilizational rejuvenation. It must be pointed out that from its inception, the Party’s focus was on uniting the working class to carry out class struggle and thereby strive for the dictatorship of the proletariat, a point directly reflected in the Party’s First Congress program. Hence, the founding of the Party cannot be simply equated with the historical starting point of the modern transformation of Chinese civilization. The “founding of New China theory” is also worth discussing. The founding of New China marked the resolution of the crisis of the Chinese nation’s survival, and Chinese civilization had already been preserved and continued. Furthermore, the central task of New China in the field of cultural construction was to concentrate efforts on developing an advanced socialist culture and building a new form of Chinese civilization suited to a socialist state. Consequently, the founding of New China signified that the modern transformation of Chinese civilization had entered a new stage, and therefore it can no longer be regarded as the historical starting point of that transformation.

揆诸学界当前的主要观点，“鸦片战争说”实际是以往学界所持晚清政统失序招致道统危机观点的延续，认为民族问题是文明问题的症结源起，文明问题是民族问题的反向折射。但仅以此将鸦片战争作为中华文明现代转型发生起点值得商榷。毋庸讳言，鸦片战争的确引发了“文明蒙尘”困境的出现，但尚未对中国传统文化观念、伦理思想、价值体系造成更深层次的影响。“辛亥革命”说认为革命后成立的中华民国临时政府，在社会领域实施一系列改革，昭示出一片文明新气象。但需指出的是，辛亥革命成果终为袁世凯所窃取，袁氏上台后复辟之风一时甚嚣尘上，因而辛亥革命实际上未能开启中华文明现代转型的闸门。“‘一战’说”依据在于“一战”打破了以往中国社会对西方世界的文明滤镜，使中国传统文化得到价值重估的契机。但这一转折并未展现中华文明发生现代转型的迹象。“马克思主义传播”说同样值得商榷。毋庸置疑，马克思主义传播是中华文明现代转型不可或缺的理论前提。但马克思主义在中国传播历史分期长期存在争议。因此，将马克思主义传播视作中华文明现代转型历史起点的说法有待推敲。“党的成立说”认为担负民族救亡使命的中国共产党同时承担文明复兴使命。需要指明的是，党诞生伊始关注焦点在于联合工人阶级开展阶级斗争进而争取实现无产阶级专政，这一点在党的“一大”纲领中有直接体现。故而，不能将党的成立简单等同于中华文明现代转型的历史起点。“新中国成立说”同样值得商讨。新中国成立标示中华民族存亡危机解除，中华文明已然得到保存延续。另外，新中国在文化建设领域的中心任务是聚力发展社会主义先进文化，建设与社会主义国家相适应的中华民族文明新形态。因而，新中国成立标志中华文明现代转型已进入新阶段，故而不能再将其视作中华文明现代转型的历史起点。

In summary, why the question of the modern transformation of Chinese civilization is raised, what specific role Marxism plays in this transformation, and how the logical theoretical framework of the modern transformation of Chinese civilization is propelled into reality through practical subjects on the ground—these form a logical closed loop for exploring the historical starting point of the modern transformation of Chinese civilization. Only by returning to the original source of the question of the historical starting point of the modern transformation of Chinese civilization, clarifying the internal structure and external extension of the question itself, and, by drawing on a broader theoretical space of thought, clarifying the objective field of the question, analyzing its logical structure, and focusing on the context in which the question arises, can we better respond to this major issue.

总而言之，为什么提出中华文明现代转型的问题，马克思主义在中华文明现代转型中具体发挥何种效用，中华文明现代转型在逻辑层面的理论架构何以在现实层面通过实践主体推动得以呈现，形成了探究中华文明现代转型历史起点问题的逻辑闭环。只有回归中华文明现代转型历史起点的问题本源，厘清问题本身的内在结构与外在延展，借助更广阔的理论思维空间，明晰问题客观场域、解析问题逻辑结构、聚焦问题生发情境，才能更好地回应这一重大问题。

II. A Logical Examination of the Modern Transformation of Chinese Civilization from the Perspective of the “Second Integration” [3]3 The “Second Integration” (第二个结合) refers to the integration of the basic tenets of Marxism with China’s fine traditional culture, as distinct from the first integration of Marxism with China’s concrete realities. It was formally articulated by Xi Jinping in 2023.

二、“第二个结合”视域下中华文明现代转型的逻辑审视

To explore the historical starting point of the modern transformation of Chinese civilization, the inherent logic of the question itself must be clarified. As the latest theoretical achievement of adapting Marxism to the Chinese context and the needs of the times, the “Second Integration,” through its theoretical perspective and methodological principles, helps to expand the research horizon regarding the historical starting point of the modern transformation of Chinese civilization and to reveal the logical paradigm by which previous academic circles have sought this question from a single domain.

探寻中华文明现代转型历史起点，必须厘清问题自身的内蕴逻辑。“第二个结合”作为马克思主义中国化时代化的最新理论成果，借助其理论视野与方法论原则，有助于拓展关于中华文明现代转型历史起点的研究视域，解蔽以往学界从单一论域索隐这一问题的逻辑范式。

1. The Spatiotemporal Positioning of the Modern Transformation of Chinese Civilization

1.中华文明现代转型的时空定位

Why was the proposition of the modern transformation of Chinese civilization raised after the modern period? This is the primary question in exploring the historical starting point of the modern transformation of Chinese civilization. The outbreak of the Opium War constitutes the antecedent event for understanding this question; the national crisis caused by this war directly raised the question of how Chinese civilization could survive. On the one hand, after attempts by different classes in Chinese society to save the nation by imitating Western implements, technology, and institutions all ended in failure, the ideological and cultural issues hidden in the depths of history increasingly emerged. On the other hand, the question of civilizational transformation triggered by the national crisis also constituted a direct reflection in the ideological and cultural sphere of changes in the mode of production. Engels pointed out: “If our legal, philosophical, and religious ideas are the more or less distant offshoots of the economic relations prevailing in a given society, these ideas cannot in the long run withstand the effects of a complete change in these economic relations.” [4]4 Friedrich Engels, *Anti-Dühring*, Part One: Philosophy, Chapter IX. The reason Chinese civilization stood tall in the ancient world for so long is directly related to the small-scale peasant mode of production in which it was rooted. However, after the Opium War, Western industrial civilization, based on the capitalist mode of production, rapidly gained absolute superiority, subjecting Chinese civilization, rooted in the agricultural mode of production, to unprecedented pressure for transformation.

为什么近代以后提出中华文明现代转型的命题？这是探究中华文明现代转型历史起点的首要问题。鸦片战争的发生是构成理解这一问题的前置性事件，这场战争造成的民族危机直接引出了中华文明何以存续的问题。一方面，在中国社会不同阶级希冀通过效仿西方器物、技术、制度以挽救国运的尝试皆以失败告终后，隐匿于历史深处的思想文化问题日益浮现。另一方面，由民族危机引发的文明转型问题，同样构成生产方式变革在思想文化领域的直观映照。恩格斯指出：“如果说我们的法律的、哲学的和宗教的观念，都是一定社会内占统治地位的经济关系的近枝或远蔓，那么，这些观念终究不能抵抗因这种经济关系的完全改变所产生的影响。”中华文明之所以长期巍然耸立在古代世界，与其所扎根的小农生产方式直接相关，但鸦片战争后立足资本主义生产方式之上的西方工业文明迅速取得绝对优势，致使植根农业生产方式的中华文明面临空前的转型压力。

Furthermore, the global tide of modernization surging since modern times has driven the transformation of Chinese civilization toward modernity. With the opening of new sea routes and the occurrence of the Industrial Revolution, a wave of modernization led by the Western bourgeoisie gradually spread across the globe. “It compels all nations, on pain of extinction, to adopt the bourgeois mode of production; it compels them to introduce what it calls civilization into their midst, i.e., to become bourgeois themselves. In a word, it creates a world after its own image.” [5]5 Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, *The Communist Manifesto*, Chapter I. The development of the world modernization trend caused Western civilization, shaped by industrialization, to undergo rapid, profound, and thorough changes in degree, breadth, and depth. Western civilization, which poured into Chinese society along with the tide of modernization, forced Chinese civilization, which had endured for thousands of years, to face enormous pressure for transformation for the first time. As Marx said: “A house may be large or small; as long as the surrounding houses are equally small, it satisfies all social requirements for a dwelling. But let a palace arise beside the little house, and the little house shrinks into a hut.” [6]6 Karl Marx, *Wage Labour and Capital*, Chapter VI. In this situation, “no matter how much the size of the little house may increase with the progress of civilization, as long as the neighboring palace expands to the same or a greater extent, the occupant of the relatively small house will feel more and more uncomfortable, dissatisfied, and cramped within its four walls.” [7]7 Ibid. Thus it can be seen that the raising of the question of the modern transformation of Chinese civilization is not only an objective result of the chain reaction caused by the national crisis in the cultural field, but is also directly influenced by changes in the mode of production and the surge of the modernization trend.

此外，近代以来全球涌动的现代化潮流驱使着中华文明向现代转型。随着新航路的开辟与工业革命的发生，一个以西方资产阶级为主导的现代化浪潮逐渐蔓延全球。“它迫使一切民族——如果它们不想灭亡的话——采用资产阶级的生产方式；它迫使它们在自己那里推行所谓的文明，即变成资产者。一句话，它按照自己的面貌为自己创造出一个世界。”世界现代化潮流的发展，使工业化形塑出的西方文明，在程度、广度和深度方面发生迅猛、深刻、彻底的变化。随着现代化潮流一并涌入中国社会的西方文明，迫使存续数千年的中华文明首次面临巨大的转型压力。诚如马克思所言：“一座房子不管怎样小，在周围的房屋都是这样小的时候，它是能满足社会对住房的一切要求的。但是，一旦在这座小房子近旁耸立起一座宫殿，这座小房子就缩成茅舍模样了。”在这种情况下，“不管小房子的规模怎样随着文明的进步而扩大起来，只要近旁的宫殿以同样的或更大的程度扩大起来，那座较小房子的居住者就会在那囚壁之内越发觉得不舒适，越发不满意，越发感到受压抑”。由此可见，中华文明现代转型问题的提出，不仅是民族危机在文化领域引起连锁反应的客观结果呈现，同样受到生产方式变革与现代化潮流涌动的直接影响。

2. The Concrete Manifestation of the Modern Transformation of Chinese Civilization

2.中华文明现代转型的具象体现

If the occurrence of the national crisis is a concentrated reflection of the accumulated ills of the era, then the civilizational predicament triggered by the national crisis is a metaphorical manifestation of another form of those accumulated problems of the era. Modern history confirms that the cultural heritage of traditional China could only appear in a marginal state at the time of the Qing dynasty’s collapse, until the injection of new ideas stripped away the decaying remnants of the old world mixed in with it, allowing it to be reborn. The modern emergence of Marxism undoubtedly provided a theoretical prerequisite for the modern transformation of Chinese civilization, but the crux of the question lies in whether it can be confirmed that there is a space for correspondence and integration between this foreign doctrine and indigenous culture.

如果说民族危机的发生是对所处时代积弊的集中反映，那么由民族危机引发的文明困境则是时代积存问题的另一种形式的症结隐喻。近代历史印证了传统中国文化遗产在清王朝倾塌之际只能以边缘状态呈现，直至新思想注入并剥离其所夹杂的旧世界陈腐遗迹而重获新生。马克思主义的近代出场无疑为中华文明现代转型提供了理论前提，但问题的关键在于能否确证外来主义与本土文化存在契合与融通的空间。

“Civilization, and especially ideology and culture, is the soul of a country and a nation.” Chinese traditional culture, as the mainstay of Chinese civilization, centrally reflects the spiritual traits and ideological features of the Chinese nation. As the national crisis deepened, Chinese traditional culture, represented by Confucianism, was subjected to fierce criticism because of its passive entanglement with realpolitik. How to resolve the inherent tension between traditional culture and modern civilization became the key factor constraining the initiation of the modern transformation of Chinese civilization. Marxism holds: “As soon as the rule of a class is no longer the form of the social system, that is, as soon as it is no longer necessary to represent a particular interest as the general interest, or the ‘general interest’ as the ruling interest, the whole illusion that the rule of a particular class is merely the rule of certain ideas naturally disappears of itself.” [1]1 The Second Integration (第二个结合) refers to the integration of the basic tenets of Marxism with China’s fine traditional culture, as distinct from the First Integration, which was the integration of Marxism with China’s specific realities. This concept was formally articulated by Xi Jinping in 2021. The contradiction and tension between Chinese traditional culture and the system of modern civilization are directly related to its dual character. On the one hand, Chinese traditional culture centrally displays the Chinese people’s worldview, view of the world order, view of society, and view of morality, reflecting the unique cultural attributes and spiritual outlook of the Chinese people. On the other hand, Chinese traditional culture is draped in the ideological mantle long shaped by the feudal ruling class, causing the boundary between it as the mainstay of Chinese civilization and feudal ideology to become increasingly blurred. When the environment is stable or no more powerful culture emerges, Chinese traditional culture can operate smoothly along its established track. But when it encounters a serious external crisis, the internal tension caused by its dual character immediately manifests itself. However, as Engels said, philosophical ideas that have a significant impact on a nation “cannot be disposed of by simply ignoring them”; rather, “they must be ‘sublated’ in their own sense, that is, their form must be critically destroyed, but the new content that has been gained through this form must be rescued.” [2]2 The Xinhai Revolution (辛亥革命) of 1911 overthrew the Qing dynasty and ended over two thousand years of imperial rule in China, establishing the Republic of China. Under these circumstances, criticizing the part of Chinese traditional culture that long served as the ideology of feudal society, and promoting its transformation into a higher form of civilization through “negation of the negation,” became an inevitable trend.

“文明特别是思想文化是一个国家，一个民族的灵魂。”中国传统文化作为中华文明主干所在，集中反映着中华民族的精神特质和思想风貌。伴随民族危机日益加重，以儒学为代表的中国传统文化，因其与现实政治的被动勾连，随即遭受猛烈批判。如何化解传统文化与现代文明间的内在张力，成为制约中华文明现代转型启动的关键所在。马克思主义认为：“只要阶级的统治完全不再是社会制度的形式，也就是说，只要不再有必要把特殊利益说成是普遍利益，或者把‘普遍的东西’说成是占统治地位的东西，那么，一定阶级的统治似乎只是某种思想的统治这整个假象当然就会自行消失。”中国传统文化与现代文明体系的矛盾与张力，同其所具有的二重性直接相关。一方面，中国传统文化集中展现了中国人的宇宙观、天下观、社会观和道德观，反映出中国人的独特文化属性与精神风貌。另一方面，中国传统文化又披戴着封建统治阶级所长期形塑的意识形态外衣，导致其作为中华文明主干与封建意识形态间界限日益模糊。当环境稳定或无更强势文化出现时，中国传统文化能沿其既定轨道平稳运行，但当其遭遇严重外部危机之际，旋即显现因其二重性所造成的内在紧张性。但正如恩格斯所言，那些对民族产生重要影响的哲学思想，“是不能用干脆置之不理的办法来消除的”，而是“必须从它的本来意义上‘扬弃’它，就是说，要批判地消灭它的形式，但是要救出通过这个形式获得的新内容”。在这种情况下，对中国传统文化长期充当封建社会意识形态部分的批判，通过“否定之否定”的方式推动其转化为更高层次的文明形态成为必然趋势。

How to enable Chinese traditional culture to establish itself in the modern world is a major proposition determining whether Chinese civilization can embark on the path of transformation. The modern emergence of Marxism provided a key to solving this problem. The connection between Marxism and the excellent elements of Chinese traditional culture allowed Chinese traditional culture to be reborn through the integration of “doctrine” and culture. “The Chinese nation has a profound cultural tradition and has formed a distinctive ideological system, reflecting the knowledge, wisdom, and rational speculation accumulated by the Chinese people over thousands of years.” [3]3 The “Second Integration” (第二个结合) refers to the integration of the basic tenets of Marxism with China’s fine traditional culture, as distinct from the first integration of Marxism with China’s concrete realities. It was formally articulated by Xi Jinping in 2023. Chinese civilization, after long historical tempering and morphological extension, has long “crystallized into a deep sense of family-country sentiment and a profound historical consciousness.” [4]4 Friedrich Engels, *Anti-Dühring*, Part One: Philosophy, Chapter IX. As its mainstay, Chinese traditional culture has accumulated thousands of years of national spirit, ethical thought, and moral customs, nourishing the cultural foundation, spiritual world, and moral sentiments of the Chinese people. The view of the state that “the people are the foundation of the state, and when the foundation is firm, the state is at peace,” the view of society that “helping each other in and out, and looking out for one another,” and the view of citizenship that “everyone is responsible for the rise and fall of the world” have traversed millennia and remain deeply rooted in the fertile soil of Chinese national culture, manifesting the profound cultural subjectivity of the Chinese nation. The ideas, moral standards, and ethical spirit formed through the long-term labor practices of the Chinese people share a common value foundation of two-way alignment and mutual integration with the basic principles of Marxism, and can provide philosophical basis and cultural nourishment for the rooting of Marxism in Chinese society. It can be said that Marxism and Chinese traditional culture, through mutual connection and integration, achieve a “homology at the level of the ‘universal-particular’ relationship,” [5]5 Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, *The Communist Manifesto*, Chapter I. providing theoretical support for the modern innovation of Chinese civilization at the cultural level.

何以推动中国传统文化在现代世界安身立命，是中华文明能否启动转型之路的重要命题。马克思主义的近代出场为解答这一问题提供了关键锁钥。马克思主义与中国传统文化优秀要素的联结，使中国传统文化得以在“主义”与文化的融通中重获新生。“中华民族有着深厚文化传统，形成了富有特色的思想体系，体现了中国人几千年来积累的知识智慧和理性思辨。”经过长期历史淬炼与形态延展的中华文明早已“结晶为深厚的家国情怀与深沉的历史意识”，作为其主干部分的中国传统文化积淀着数千年的民族精神、伦理思想与道德风尚，滋养着中国人的文化根基、精神世界与道德情操。民为邦本、本固邦宁的国家观，出入相友、守望相助的社会观，天下兴亡、匹夫有责的公民观，穿越千年而依旧深深植根于中华民族文化沃土，彰显着中华民族厚重的文化主体性。经中国人民长期劳动实践形成的思想观念、道德准则、伦理精神，同马克思主义基本原理存在双向契合、彼此融通的共同价值基础，能够为马克思主义在中国社会植根提供哲学依据与文化涵养。可以说，马克思主义与中国传统文化在相互联结会通中实现彼此在“‘普遍—特殊’关系层面上的同构”，为中华文明在文化形态层面的现代革新提供了理论支撑。

3. The Confirmation of the Subject of the Modern Transformation of Chinese Civilization

3.中华文明现代转型的主体确认

Under the impact of external forces and the impetus of the modernization trend, Chinese civilization faces transformation. What kind of subject should lead the alignment between Marxism and Chinese traditional culture, thereby initiating the transformation of Chinese civilization?

在外力冲击与现代化潮流推动下，中华文明面临转型。马克思主义与中国传统文化实现契合应由什么样的主体来引领，从而开启中华文明的转型？

The Communist Party of China is not only an action team shouldering the mission of national rejuvenation, but also “an outstanding representative of Chinese civilization.” [6]6 Karl Marx, *Wage Labour and Capital*, Chapter VI. Looking back at modern Chinese history, only the Communist Party of China, which exists as “a powerful cultural and spiritual entity” and is deeply “rooted in the process of integrating Marxism with China’s excellent traditional culture,” [7]7 Ibid. can guide Chinese civilization toward modern transformation. Mao Zedong clearly described this: “After the May Fourth Movement, a completely new cultural force emerged in China, that is, the communist cultural ideology led by the Chinese Communists, that is, the communist worldview and social revolutionary theory… Over the past twenty years, wherever this new cultural army has directed its edge, from thought to form (including writing), it has brought about a great revolution.” [8]8 Mao Zedong, “On New Democracy,” *Selected Works of Mao Zedong*, Vol. 2, p. 697. The Communist Party of China, as the bearer of the mission of the rejuvenation of the Chinese nation, is not only committed to leading the Chinese people out of the mire of the old society with new ideological weapons, but also to inheriting and developing the excellent traditional culture of the nation, enabling Chinese civilization to be reborn. The modern presence of the Communist Party of China not only heralds the practical extension of Marxism in China, which represents the true understanding of humanity and seeks the liberation of the oppressed classes and nations, demonstrating the historical inevitability of the Chinese nation’s salvation movement entering a new stage, but also signals that the rejuvenation of Chinese civilization has found its subjective choice.

中国共产党不仅是肩负民族复兴使命的行动队，同样“是中华文明的优秀代表”。回溯近代中国历史，只有“作为文化性和精神性的强大存在”，且深度“植根于马克思主义与中华优秀传统文化”结合过程中的中国共产党才能引导中华文明向现代转型。毛泽东对此有过清晰描绘：“在‘五四’以后，中国产生了完全崭新的文化生力军，这就是中国共产党人所领导的共产主义的文化思想，即共产主义的宇宙观和社会革命论……二十年来，这个文化新军的锋芒所向，从思想到形式（文字等），无不起了极大的革命。”中国共产党作为中华民族复兴的使命承担者，不仅致力于以新的思想武器带领中国人民走出旧社会泥淖，而且传承发展本民族优秀传统文化，使中华文明能够重获新生。中国共产党的近代在场不仅预示着代表人类真理性认识、寻求被压迫阶级和民族解放的马克思主义在中国的实践性延展，展现出近代以来中华民族救亡运动进入新阶段的历史必然性，同时昭示着中华文明复兴迎来了主体性选择。

“The Communists fight for the attainment of the immediate aims, for the enforcement of the momentary interests of the working class; but in the movement of the present, they also represent and take care of the future of that movement.” [9]9 Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, *Manifesto of the Communist Party*, *Selected Works of Marx and Engels*, Vol. 1, p. 434. The Communist Party of China is not only committed to sweeping away the old ruling order, but also to building a new national civilization on the traditional foundation. Facing the civilizational crisis of “historical deconstruction” that Chinese civilization has encountered since the Opium War, the Communist Party of China seeks Marxist concepts analogous to those in Chinese traditional culture, seeks formal carriers of Chinese traditional culture from the basic principles of scientific socialism, and explores the integration and alignment of the two at the content level through Chinese-style expression. Furthermore, starting from the actual conditions of the Chinese revolution, the Communist Party of China clarifies that the proletariat is the main force of Chinese cultural rejuvenation, thereby confirming the real leading force of the modern transformation of Chinese civilization.

“共产党人为工人阶级的最近的目的和利益而斗争，但是他们在当前的运动中同时代表运动的未来。”中国共产党不仅致力于扫除旧式统治秩序，更要在传统根基上构筑民族新文明。面对鸦片战争以来中华文明面临“历史性解构”的文明危机，中国共产党到中国传统文化中找寻马克思主义同类概念，从科学社会主义基本原理中寻求中国传统文化形式载体，以中国式表达发掘二者在内容层面的融通性与契合性。此外，中国共产党从中国革命实际出发阐明无产阶级是中华文化复兴主力军，由此确证了中华文明现代转型的现实主导力量。

3. An Exploration of the Context of the Modern Transformation of Chinese Civilization from the Perspective of the “Second Integration”

三、“第二个结合”视域下中华文明现代转型的情境探源

Examining the historical context in which the Communist Party of China responded to the transformation of civilization through the “Second Integration,” exploring the cultural context of the linkage between Marxism and Chinese traditional culture, and pointing out the realistic context of the proletariat’s cultural mission, will help to more clearly anchor the historical starting point of the modern transformation of Chinese civilization.

经由“第二个结合”考察中国共产党回应文明转型的历史情境，探索马克思主义与中华传统文化联动的文化情境，指明无产阶级文化使命的现实情境，有助于更为清晰地锚定中华文明现代转型的历史起点。

1. The Historical Context of the Modern Transformation of Chinese Civilization

1.中华文明现代转型的历史情境

Through the turbulent historical situation of modern times, the Communist Party of China, starting from the level of social change, points out the inevitability of civilizational transformation; based on the trend of world modernization, it demonstrates the necessity of civilizational transformation; and according to the objective laws of economic structural change, it clarifies the actuality of civilizational transformation.

透过近代风云变幻的历史时局，中国共产党从社会变革层面出发，指明文明转型的必然；依据世界现代化潮流趋势，论证文明转型的应然；根据经济结构变动客观规律，阐明文明转型的实然。

First, pointing out the inevitability of the transformation of Chinese civilization based on the level of social change. Mao Zedong pointed out: “A given culture is the ideological reflection of the politics and economy of a given society.” [10]10 Mao Zedong, “On New Democracy,” *Selected Works of Mao Zedong*, Vol. 2, p. 694. The modern national crisis was directly manifested in the drastic social changes caused by external shocks, and changes in social structure subsequently led to changes in social ideology and culture. Qu Qiubai published an article on this, arguing that Eastern culture, characterized by patriarchal ethics, had once played a role in maintaining the order of social production, but its growing incompatibility with modern society proved that it had become “an obstacle to the social progress of Eastern peoples.” [11]11 Qu Qiubai, “The Future of Eastern Culture and the Responsibility of the Proletariat,” *Collected Works of Qu Qiubai*, Political Theory Edition, Vol. 2, p. 23. In Qu Qiubai’s view, the incompatibility between Eastern culture, including Chinese civilization, and actual society stemmed from the changes that had already occurred in the traditional social structure on which it depended. Li Da further elaborated on this: “However, once the social organization changes, the psychological state of each individual in society also changes accordingly. The forms of expression of the spiritual culture of the new society are also vastly different from those of the old society.” [12]12 Li Da, “An Outline of Sociology,” *Collected Works of Li Da*, Vol. 2, p. 56. This indicates that when society undergoes change, community psychology also changes accordingly; therefore, after the establishment of a new society, a new form of civilization that adapts to it will inevitably be formed.

第一，基于社会变革层面指明中华文明转型的必然。毛泽东指出：“一定的文化是一定社会的政治和经济在观念形态上的反映。”近代民族危机直接表现于外力冲击所导致的社会剧烈变动，社会结构变化又随之引起社会思想文化衍变。瞿秋白就此发文提出，以宗法伦理为表征的东方文化也曾起到维持社会生产秩序的作用，但其同现代社会日渐龃龉的事实，证明其已然成为“东方民族之社会进步的障碍”。在瞿秋白看来，包含中华文明在内的东方文化同现实社会的不相适应，源于其所依存的传统社会结构已发生改变。李达对此有过进一步阐释：“然社会组织一旦变革，则社会中各个人之心理状态，亦随而发生变化。新社会精神文化之表现形式，亦与旧社会大不相同。”这表明当社会发生变革后，社群心理也会随之产生变动，因此新社会建立后必定会形成与之相适应的新文明形态。

Second, it expounds what the transformation of Chinese civilization ought to be, based on the global tide of modernization. The worldwide surge of the modern tide of modernization was the epochal driving force behind the transformation of Chinese civilization. As early as May 1915, Chen Duxiu pointed out that China’s traditional ethical customs and academic laws could no longer meet the needs of the times, and that the global trend China faced was “advancing swiftly without cease” (骎骎未有已焉); if one “cannot adeptly change and keep pace with it,” one would inevitably be eliminated by this tide. In Chen Duxiu’s view, the new global developmental trend compelled China’s inherent civilization to change in a timely manner. Zhou Enlai also proposed: “World culture advances and never retreats; the era of manual labor advances into the era of commanding things. What ten fingers toil at, what a lifetime traverses, is what instinct possesses.” From the mighty tide of modernization, Zhou Enlai perceived that his country’s culture had fallen behind the global developmental trend, and that the leap from agricultural civilization to industrial civilization was an objective trend in the development of the modernization tide.

第二，立足世界现代化潮流阐述中华文明转型的应然。近代现代化潮流的全球涌动，是中华文明转型的时代动力。陈独秀在1915年5月就指出，中国传统伦理习俗与学术律法已难以适应时代所需，中国所面对的世界潮流，“骎骎未有已焉”，若“不能善变而与之俱进者”则必将为这一潮流所淘汰。在陈独秀看来，新的世界发展潮流驱使中国固有文明必须适时而变。周恩来也提出：“盖世界文化，有进无退，人工之时代，进而为役物之时代。十指所勤，毕生所经，本能所具有也。”从浩浩荡荡的现代化潮流中，周恩来感受到本国文化已落后于世界发展趋势，农业文明向工业文明跃迁是现代化潮流发展的客观趋势。

Third, it elucidates what the transformation of Chinese civilization actually is, based on the objective laws of changes in economic structure. The root of the question of modern civilizational transformation lies in the structural changes in the economic base in which traditional Chinese culture was embedded. After the capitalist mode of production entered modern Chinese society, the foundations of the traditional Chinese economy gradually disintegrated, and traditional Chinese culture, rooted in the agrarian economy and concentratedly manifested as the form of ancient Chinese agricultural civilization, underwent corresponding changes along with the transformation of the old economic structure. In April 1922, Chen Duxiu pointed out: “All institutions, artifacts, and the structure of the spirit of the times change with changes in the structure of the economy, and the structure of the economy changes with changes in the methods of producing the means of subsistence.” Chen Duxiu indicated that all forms of spiritual culture, including civilization, would inevitably change with changes in productive forces and relations of production. Qu Qiubai proposed that the inception of human production of tools in primitive times was the embryonic form of technology or civilization; with the development of production tools, “new vitality for transferring civilization unexpectedly emerged in society,” until, after geopolitical and inter-ethnic factors gradually increased, “the drastic changes in the social economy at that time could cause the ruled, on the one hand, to be trained in new technology and thus grow strong, and on the other hand, to gradually occupy a pivotal position in society, thereby breaking out of the scope of the old social relations and creating a new civilization.” This indicates that the origin of the question of modern civilizational transformation lies precisely in the changes in the objective economic structure, which impel all forms of thought and culture, including civilization, toward innovation.

第三，依据经济结构变动的客观规律阐明中华文明转型的实然。近代文明转型问题提出的根源在于中国传统文化所根植的经济基础发生结构性变动。在资本主义生产方式进入近代中国社会后，传统中国经济根基渐趋解体，而植根农耕经济之上的中国传统文化，作为古代中国农业文明形态的集中呈现，伴随着旧式经济结构的嬗变随即发生相应的变迁。1922年4月，陈独秀指出：“一切制度、文物、时代精神的构造都是跟着经济的构造变化而变化的，经济的构造是跟着生活资料之生产方法变化而变化的。”陈独秀表明，包括文明在内的各种精神文化形态，必将随着生产力和生产关系的变动发生变更。瞿秋白则提出，原始时期人类制作生产工具的肇始便是技术或文明出现的雏形，随着生产工具的发展，“社会里才不期然而然又有转移文明的新活力发现”，直至地缘政治和民族交往因素日渐增多后，“那时社会经济的激变能令受治者一面受新技术的训练而强盛，一面渐占社会里举足可以轻重的地位，于是突出当时旧社会关系的范围，而创造新文明”。这即指明，近代文明转型问题的渊源就在于客观经济结构变动，促使包括文明在内的各种思想文化形态趋向革新。

2. The Cultural Context of the Modern Transformation of Chinese Civilization

2.中华文明现代转型的文化情境

From the different perspectives of social transformation, the surging tide of modernization, and changes in economic structure, the Communist Party of China theoretically explained the historical origins of the urgent need for the transformation of Chinese civilization. However, the key to the modern transformation of Chinese civilization lies in how to achieve a connection between Marxism and traditional Chinese culture at the level of cultural elements.

立足社会变革、现代化潮流涌动、经济结构变动的不同视角，中国共产党从理论层面阐释了中华文明亟待转型的历史缘起。但中华文明现代转型关键在于如何使马克思主义与中国传统文化实现文化要素层面的联结。

On the basis of “breaking the old” to strip away the stale remnants of traditional culture and prompt it to return to its cultural self, the process of “establishing the new” to re-examine traditional culture and promote the germination of its modern form was an important line of thought for the early Communist Party of China in seeking the integration of Marxism with traditional Chinese culture. In July 1920, Chen Duxiu said in a speech: “What I call the new does not mean absolutely discarding all classics, histories, poetry, books, textual criticism… but rather knowing the way to become new. For example, studying the classics and histories, and being able to know the rule of becoming new, then reading the sacred scriptures, examining glosses, and lecturing on the Way in the past are still new.” In January 1922, Li Dazhao also mentioned: “History is created by people; ancient times were created by the ancients, and the present age is created by people of today. Ancient art is certainly not bad, but we can also create our own art.” In the view of Chen Duxiu and Li Dazhao, the classics, histories, philosophical works, literary works, and humanities history of traditional China were created by the ancients, but they could also be continued and recreated by people of today in a new environment.

在以“破旧”方式剥离传统文化陈腐遗存促使其复归文化本我基础上，以“立新”方法重新审视传统文化推动其现代形态萌发的过程，是中国共产党早期找寻马克思主义与中国传统文化相结合的重要理路。1920年7月，陈独秀在演讲中谈及：“我所谓新，非绝对除去一切经史诗书考据……之谓，更在知其所以新之之道耳。譬如研究经史，而能知其新之之法则，则昔日读圣经，考训诂，讲道学，仍然是新。”1922年1月，李大钊也提到：“历史是人创造的，古时是古人创造的，今世是今人创造的。古时的艺术，固不为坏，但是我们也可以创造我们的艺术。”在陈独秀与李大钊看来，传统中国的经史子集、文艺作品、人文历史为古人所创造，但其同样也能在新环境下为今人所接续再造。

From the perspective of the Second Integration [n], the key to the modern transformation of Chinese civilization lies not only in changing the perspective to re-examine traditional Chinese culture, but also in seeking the internal integration of Marxism with traditional Chinese culture at the level of cultural elements. The Communist Party of China has conducted beneficial explorations in this regard. For example, in terms of material civilization, Qu Qiubai proposed that the starting point of socialist civilization is the widespread application of science and technology; after full application of technology brings development, “spiritual civilization can naturally be truly improved, even reaching ‘Great Harmony’ (大同).” The new socialist civilization must necessarily be built on a highly developed technological civilization, and the full development of technological civilization will in turn promote a leap in spiritual civilization. Qu Qiubai specifically borrowed the concept of “Great Harmony” from traditional Chinese culture to indicate that the new socialist civilization guided by Marxism is consistent with the ideal social conception in traditional Chinese culture. In terms of cultural-ethical progress, Li Da proposed that, unlike bourgeois civilization, which whitewashes and eulogizes the possessing classes, the new socialist civilization seeks the perfect fusion of labor and art, that is, “the artisticization of life, the living of art.” In a socialist country, laborers and artists are a unified community, and art is integrated with life itself. The new socialist civilization must necessarily be a civilization belonging to the laboring classes, a combination of labor production and artistic activity. The laboring people, as the main subjects of artistic creation, are the creators and providers of the materials of cultural-ethical progress, but, constrained by the feudal system, the masses were long not regarded as the subjects of spiritual production activities. Only under the socialist system can the civilizational practice activities of the common people truly become an Eastern aesthetic lifestyle in which the subject of civilizational creation blends with the context of real life.

从“第二个结合”视角看，中华文明现代转型的关键不仅在于转换视角重新审视中国传统文化，更在于寻求马克思主义与中国传统文化实现文化要素层面的内在融通。中国共产党对此进行了有益探索。比如，在物质文明方面，瞿秋白提出社会主义文明起点是科学技术的广泛应用，经技术充分应用带来发展后，“精神文明自然也能真正改善，以至于‘大同’”。社会主义新文明必然建筑在高度发达的技术文明之上，技术文明充分发展后又将推动精神文明的跃迁。瞿秋白特别借用中国传统文化中的“大同”概念，表明以马克思主义为指导的社会主义新文明与中国传统文化中的理想社会构想存在一致性。在精神文明方面，李达提出，不同于粉饰和讴歌有产阶级的资产阶级文明，社会主义新文明寻求的是劳动和艺术的完美融合，即“生活底艺术化，艺术底生活化”，在社会主义国家中，劳动者与艺术家是合二为一的共同体，艺术是同生活本身的融通。社会主义新文明必定是属于劳动阶级的文明，是劳动生产与艺术活动的结合。作为文艺活动创作主体的劳动人民，是精神文明资料的创造者和提供者，但受制于封建主义制度挟制，人民大众长期不被视作精神生产活动的主体，只有在社会主义制度之下，普罗大众的文明实践活动才能真正成为文明创造主体与现实生活情境交融的东方美学生活方式。

3. The Realistic Context of the Modern Transformation of Chinese Civilization

3.中华文明现代转型的现实情境

The Second Integration highlights at the theoretical level the crucial role of Marxism for Chinese civilization; it “activates the genes of Chinese civilization with the light of truth, leads China into the modern world, and promotes the renewal of life and modern transformation of Chinese civilization.” However, the reason Marxism was able to interact with Chinese civilization cannot be separated from the practical confirmation by the subject of practice of the leading force of civilizational transformation and its cultural mission.

“第二个结合”在理论层面凸显了马克思主义之于中华文明的至要作用，其“以真理之光激活了中华文明的基因，引领中国走进现代世界，推动了中华文明的生命更新和现代转型”。但马克思主义之所以能够实现与中华文明的交互，离不开实践主体对文明转型主导力量及其文化使命的现实确证。

Based on an understanding of the modern basic national conditions and the principal social contradiction, the Communist Party of China became convinced that only the proletariat could respond to the modern civilizational crisis, and that only this class could reshape the form of Chinese civilization. In August 1922, Zhou Enlai proposed: “To hope for future social transformation to produce freely developing groups of people, it is naturally necessary first to free present-day humanity from material shackles; to hope that the current world’s economic chaos, class antagonism, and cultural crisis will not persist, it is naturally necessary first to make present-day humanity entirely proletarianized, so as to eliminate this greatest source of chaos.” In June 1923, Chen Duyiu called for mobilizing the most conscious and revolutionary elements of the proletariat to form a proletarian political party and win the victory of the proletarian revolution, so as to establish a state of the dictatorship of the proletariat, “and then gradually extinguish the private ownership system of the bourgeoisie and the habits and psychology attached to it, build the industry and culture of the proletariat, and finally achieve a communist society that abolishes all classes and the state.” After the completion of the social transformation, only by immediately implementing the dictatorship of the proletariat and sweeping away private ownership and the behavioral habits and modes of thinking attached to it could the economic foundation and cultural undertakings of the proletarian state be established. The Communist Party of China regarded the proletariat as the new force for the modern transformation of Chinese civilization. On the one hand, the Communist Party of China had recognized that the existing political forces in Chinese society could not bear the mission of rejuvenating national culture; on the other hand, it stemmed from the advanced nature of the proletariat itself, which enabled this class, after seizing political power, to devote itself to building a new civilization suited to the new society, thereby completing the historical task of the modern transformation of Chinese civilization. Thus, the practical confirmation by the Communist Party of China, as the vanguard of the proletariat, of the cultural mission of the proletariat enabled the logical framework of the modern transformation of Chinese civilization at the theoretical level to find a supporting force at the practical level.

基于对近代基本国情和社会主要矛盾的体认，中国共产党确信只有无产阶级才能因应近代文明危机，唯有这一阶级方能重塑中华文明的形态。1922年8月，周恩来提出：“欲期未来社会改造出自由发展的人群，自不能不先使现今的人类脱去物质上的梏械；欲期今日世界的经济乱象、阶级对抗情势、文化颓机不再长久下去，自不能不先使现今的人类全无产化了，好绝灭这个最大的乱源。”1923年6月，陈独秀呼吁，只有发动无产阶级中最具觉悟性和革命性的群众，组建无产阶级政党夺取无产阶级革命的胜利，才能建立起无产阶级专政的国家，“然后渐渐灭绝资产阶级的私有制度及私有习惯与心理，建设无产阶级的工业与文化，最后达到废除一切阶级无国家的共产社会”。社会改造事业完成后，唯有立即实行无产阶级专政，扫除私有制及依附其形成的行为习惯和思维模式，方能建立起无产阶级国家的经济基础和文化事业。中国共产党将无产阶级视作中华文明现代转型的生力军，一方面是中国共产党已认识到中国社会既有政治力量无法承担复兴民族文化的使命，另一方面源于无产阶级自身具备的先进性，使这一阶级在取得政权后，能够致力于建设与新社会相适应的新文明，进而完成中华文明现代转型的历史重任。可见，作为无产阶级先锋队的中国共产党对无产阶级文化使命的现实确证，使中华文明现代转型理论层面的逻辑架构得以在实践层面找到支撑力量。

IV. The Final Determination of the Historical Starting Point of the Modern Transformation of Chinese Civilization

四、中华文明现代转型历史起点的最终判定

Clarifying the logical implications and overlapping circumstances that initiated the modern transformation of Chinese civilization can confirm that the judgment of its historical starting point cannot be determined solely by a single special event or a solitary historical node. The historical starting point of the modern transformation of Chinese civilization should be a multi-dimensional historical period: first, the dimension of historical time and space, namely the intensification of national crisis, changes in the mode of production, and the surging tide of modernization; second, the dimension of concrete culture, namely the linkage of elements between Marxism and traditional Chinese culture; third, the dimension of the real subject, namely the historical emergence of the proletariat and the confirmation of its cultural mission by the Communist Party of China. In summary, the modern transformation of Chinese civilization should rightly begin in the period from the May Fourth Movement to the founding of the Party [n14]. First, from the dimension of historical time and space, during this period China’s internal governance was plagued by frequent chaos, the external situation was deteriorating day by day, and the structure of social production methods was undergoing drastic changes under the influence of the modernization tide. Second, from the dimension of concrete culture, the convergence of Marxism with existing Chinese cultural elements was not only a historical choice of traditional Chinese culture seeking modern rebirth, but also a manifestation of the law governing the spread and development of Marxism in Chinese society. The fact that during the period from the May Fourth Movement to the founding of the Party, Marxism, widely disseminated in China and promoted by the Communist Party of China, quickly “developed by combining with existing conceptual materials and further processing these materials” [n15] serves as proof. Finally, from the dimension of the real subject, during this period the Chinese working class for the first time stepped onto the political stage as a class-for-itself [n16]; the Communist Party of China, as the practical subject of civilizational transformation, confirmed on the basis of this fact that only the proletariat could serve as the real leading force of civilizational transformation.

厘清中华文明现代转型开启的逻辑意蕴与情境叠加，可以确证中华文明现代转型历史起点的判定，不能仅依据某一特殊事件或单一历史节点给予定论。中华文明现代转型历史起点应是多维聚合的历史时段：第一，历史时空之维，即民族危机加剧、生产方式变革以及现代化潮流涌动；第二，具象文化之维，即马克思主义与中国传统文化的要素联结；第三，现实主体之维，即无产阶级的历史出场及中国共产党对其文化使命的确证。综上，中华文明现代转型理应肇始于“五四运动”至建党时期。首先，从历史时空维度看，这一时期中国内政乱象频发，外部局势日益恶化，社会生产方式结构也在现代化潮流裹挟下发生剧烈变动。其次，从具象文化维度看，马克思主义与中国既有文化元素的会通，不仅是中国传统文化寻求现代新生的历史选择，同样是马克思主义在中国社会发展传播的规律呈现。“五四运动”至建党时期，在中国广泛传播的马克思主义在中国共产党的推动下，很快“就同现有的观念材料相结合而发展起来，并对这些材料作进一步的加工”即是证明。最后，从现实主体维度看，中国工人阶级在此期间作为自为阶级首登政治舞台，作为文明转型实践主体的中国共产党基于这一事实确证，只有无产阶级才能充当文明转型的现实主导力量。

Examining the temporal-spatial field, logical mechanism, and specific circumstances of the historical starting point of the modern transformation of Chinese civilization reveals that the historical initiation of this transformation was extremely arduous and complex. General Secretary Xi Jinping pointed out: “The Chinese nation has created a long-standing and profound Chinese culture, and the Chinese nation will certainly be able to create new brilliance in Chinese culture. Unique cultural traditions, unique historical destinies, and unique basic national conditions determine that we must inevitably take a development path suited to our own characteristics.” [n17] The purpose of re-examining the issue of the historical starting point of the modern transformation of Chinese civilization is not only to respond to the divergent views that still exist in academic circles on this issue, and to help clarify the development脉络 [n18] and historical origins of building the modern civilization of the Chinese nation, but also, through discussion of this topic, to elucidate the logical mechanism and overlapping circumstances behind the modern transformation of Chinese civilization. In particular, taking the proposal of the “Second Integration” [n19] as an opportunity, theoretical issues of cultural space are placed within the corresponding historical perspective for discussion. Based on the evolutionary thread of the integration of Marxism with fine traditional Chinese culture, and centering on the historical main line of the modern transformation of Chinese civilization, it clarifies how, under the dual circumstances of national crisis and civilizational predicament, the linkage between Marxism and traditional Chinese culture, and between the Communist Party of China and Chinese civilization, at the historical and practical levels, jointly promoted the historical initiation of the modern transformation of Chinese civilization.

考察中华文明现代转型历史起点的时空场域、逻辑机理与具体情境，反映出中华文明现代转型的历史开启极具艰巨性与复杂性。习近平总书记指出：“中华民族创造了源远流长的中华文化，中华民族也一定能够创造出中华文化新的辉煌。独特的文化传统，独特的历史命运，独特的基本国情，注定了我们必然要走适合自己特点的发展道路。”重新探究中华文明现代转型历史起点这一问题，目的不仅在于回应学界关于该问题尚存在的观点分歧，助力厘清建设中华民族现代文明的发展脉络与历史本源，同样希望借助这一话题的讨论阐明中华文明现代转型背后的逻辑机理与情境叠加，尤其是以“第二个结合”的提出为契机，将文化空间的理论问题置于相应历史视域中加以探讨，基于马克思主义与中华优秀传统文化结合的演进脉络，围绕中华文明现代转型这一历史主线，明晰在民族危机与文明困境的双重情境下，马克思主义同中国传统文化、中国共产党与中华文明在历史与现实层面的联动，如何共同推动中华文明现代转型的历史开启。

In summary, from the theoretical perspective of the “Second Integration,” the historical initiation of the modern transformation of Chinese civilization is the result of the mutual interconnection between cultural forms and civilizational subjects in the realms of ideology, culture, and real historical circumstances. On the one hand, the basic principles of Marxism and fine traditional Chinese culture are mutually compatible and interpenetrating in terms of value compatibility, ideological correspondence, and conceptual resonance. The Communist Party of China, as “the active leader and practitioner of China’s advanced culture” and “the faithful inheritor and promoter of fine traditional Chinese culture,” [n20] by raising high the banner of “doctrine” [n21] in practical exploration, activated fine traditional Chinese culture, allowing the light of Marxist truth to shine upon the value concepts that Chinese people have long used without conscious awareness [n22], thereby providing the basic prerequisite for the initiation of the modern form of Chinese civilization. On the other hand, the Communist Party of China, as the vanguard of the proletariat, based on the actual national conditions and class situation of modern China, confirmed that the proletariat is the true main force of the cultural rejuvenation of the Chinese nation, thereby pointing out the real force for the initiation of the modern transformation of Chinese civilization. “A nation without a spiritual force cannot stand on its own or become strong; a cause without cultural support cannot last long.” [n23] Based on the construction of a socialist cultural power with Chinese characteristics in the new journey of the New Era, using the thinking method of the “Second Integration” to explore the historical starting point of the modern transformation of Chinese civilization can provide historical mirroring and experiential inspiration for building the modern civilization of the Chinese nation, scientifically promote the internal integration of the basic principles of Marxism and fine traditional Chinese culture, work together with one heart and one mind to build the modern civilization of the Chinese nation, and thereby lay a solid ideological and cultural foundation for realizing the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation.

总之，根据“第二个结合”理论视域，中华文明现代转型的历史开启是文化形态与文明主体在思想文化领域与现实历史情境中达成交互联结的结果呈现。一方面，马克思主义基本原理与中华优秀传统文化，在价值互适性、思想相通性、观念共振性等方面彼此契合、相互融通。作为“中国先进文化的积极引领者和践行者”与“中华优秀传统文化的忠实传承者和弘扬者”的中国共产党，通过在实践探索中高扬“主义”旗帜激活中华优秀传统文化，使马克思主义真理之光普照在中国人长期日用而不觉的价值理念之上，进而为中华文明现代形态开启提供了基本前提。另一方面，作为无产阶级先锋队的中国共产党，依据近代中国现实国情与阶级状况，确证无产阶级是中华民族文化复兴事业的真正主力军，从而为中华文明现代转型开启指明了现实力量。“一个没有精神力量的民族难以自立自强，一项没有文化支撑的事业难以持续长久。”立足新时代新征程中国特色社会主义文化强国建设，借助“第二个结合”的思维方法探究中华文明现代转型的历史起点，能够为建设中华民族现代文明提供历史镜鉴与经验启示，科学推进马克思主义基本原理和中华优秀传统文化的内在融通，勠力同心建设中华民族现代文明，进而为实现中华民族伟大复兴筑牢思想文化根基。

Source: *Ideological and Theoretical Education*, Issue 12, 2024

文章来源：《思想理论教育》2024年第12期

Online Editor: Jing Mu

网络编辑：静穆