Social Inequality and the Opportunity for a Western Left-Wing Revival

In 2014, the publication of French economist Thomas Piketty’s *Capital in the Twenty-First Century* sparked a global debate on inequality. In May 2020, the death of George Floyd, a Black man, further triggered protests against racial inequality. In fact, inequality has always been a chronic ailment that capitalism cannot resolve. Especially since the 2008 international financial crisis, social inequality in Western societies has been increasingly intensifying, giving rise to serious economic and political problems as well as social unrest, posing enormous challenges and crises to the capitalist system, and also providing an opportunity for a Western left-wing revival. For the left, adjusting their strategies of struggle in response to the current state of inequality in Western societies and its root causes is key to seizing this opportunity to expand their influence.

2014年，法国经济学家托马斯·皮凯蒂的《21世纪资本论》的出版掀起了全球对不平等问题的热议。2020年5月，黑人乔治·弗洛伊德之死更引发了对种族不平等的抗议。实际上，不平等一直是资本主义无法解决的痼疾。尤其是2008年国际金融危机以来，西方社会不平等日益加剧，引发了严重的经济、政治问题和社会动荡，使资本主义制度面临巨大的挑战与危机，也为西方左翼提供了复兴契机。对左翼而言，针对西方社会不平等现状及其产生的根源来调整斗争策略是其抓住这一契机来扩大自身影响力的关键。

I. The Increasingly Intensifying Inequality in the West

一、西方不平等日益加剧

The classical Marxist writers long discussed inequality and polarization in capitalist society, arguing that in capitalist society, “one pole is the accumulation of wealth, while at the opposite pole, in the class that produces its own product as capital, there is the accumulation of misery, agony of labour, slavery, ignorance, brutalization and moral degradation.” [1]1 Karl Marx, *Capital*, Volume 1, Chapter 23, Section 4. “Enormous wealth is concentrated in the hands of a few capitalists, while the mass of the people are reduced to having nothing.” [2]2 This is a paraphrase of a common Marxist formulation; the specific source is not cited in the original text. Although after World War II, Western countries adopted measures such as progressive taxation and the establishment and improvement of social welfare systems, which somewhat alleviated social inequality, they did not fundamentally eradicate the root causes of inequality. In recent years, with the increasing power of capital, inequality in the West has been intensifying day by day.

马克思主义经典作家对于资本主义社会不平等和两极分化早有论述，认为资本主义社会“一极是财富的积累，同时在另一极，即在把自己的产品作为资本来生产的阶级方面，是贫困、劳动折磨、受奴役、无知、粗野和道德堕落的积累”1，“大量财富集中在少数资本家的手里，而人民群众变成了一无所有的人”。2尽管二战后西方国家通过实行累进税、建立和完善社会福利制度等措施使社会不平等有所缓和，但并未从根本上消灭不平等产生的根源。近年来，随着资本力量的愈发强大，西方的不平等状况日益加剧。

The United States, as the leader of the capitalist world, has long had a relatively high degree of inequality, mainly manifested in the following aspects: First, the overall degree of social inequality is worsening. According to a Federal Reserve report, the share of total household wealth held by the wealthiest 1% of U.S. families rose from 23% in 1989 to 32% in 2018, while the net wealth growth for the bottom 50% of families was essentially zero. A report released by JPMorgan Chase also pointed out that the wealthiest 10% of U.S. families hold nearly 75% of household net assets. [3]3 JPMorgan Chase Institute, report cited in the original text. In some regions, the degree of inequality is even higher. For example, data from the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2018 American Community Survey showed that Atlanta, which “won” the title of America’s “inequality capital” with a Gini coefficient of 0.57, had an average annual income for the top 5% of families exceeding $663,000 in 2018, 10.2 times that of the bottom half of the population (with an annual income of less than $65,000). In 2020, under the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, the unemployment rate for ordinary Americans increased dramatically, further widening the income gap with top-tier families. According to statistics from the U.S. Department of Labor, since mid-March 2020, the number of people applying for unemployment benefits in the U.S. reached as high as 22.02 million, with many at the bottom falling into poverty. Second, racial inequality has long persisted. According to the *Systematic Inequality* report by the Center for American Progress, racial inequality has long plagued the United States. Even in 1998, when the racial income gap was at its smallest, the median wealth of African Americans was only 16% of that of whites. Subsequently, racial inequality has worsened. In 2016, the median wealth for Black people was $13,460, while for whites it was $142,180 over the same period, a difference of more than tenfold. In terms of average wealth, the average wealth of Black people was only 11% of that of whites. After the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, the death toll among African Americans was three times that of whites, and their unemployment rate was also much higher than that of whites. For example, in April 2020, the unemployment rate for American women rose to 15%, while the rates for Black women and Hispanic women were higher than this figure, rising to 16.4% and 20.2% respectively. [4]4 Data cited from the U.S. Department of Labor and the Center for American Progress report *Systematic Inequality*.

作为资本主义领头羊的美国，不平等程度一直较高，主要表现为:一是社会总体不平等程度日益恶化。根据美联储报告，美国最富有1%的家庭占有家庭财富总额的比例从1989年的23%上升至2018年的32%，而最底层50%的家庭财富净增长基本为零。摩根大通发布的报告也指出，最富有的10%美国家庭占有近75%的家庭净资产。3在部分地区，不平等的程度更高，如美国人口普查局2018年对美国社区调查的数据显示，以基尼系数0.57而“荣膺”美国“不平等之都”的亚特兰大，2018年顶层5%家庭的平均年收入超过66.3万美元，是底层一半人口(年收入不到6.5万美元)的10.2倍。2020年，在新冠疫情冲击下，美国民众失业率大幅增加，与顶层家庭的收入差距进一步拉大。据美国劳工部统计，2020年3月中旬以来，美国申请失业救济的人数高达2202万，许多底层民众陷入贫困。二是种族不平等长期存在。根据美国进步中心发布的《系统性不平等》报告，种族不平等一直困扰着美国，即使在种族收入差距最小的1998年，非裔美国人的财富中位数也仅为白人的16%。此后，种族不平等状况日益恶化。2016年，黑人财富中位数为13460美元，同期白人财富中位数为142180美元，二者相差10倍多。从平均财富来看，黑人的平均财富仅为白人的11%。2020年新冠疫情爆发后，美国非裔人群的死亡人数是白人的三倍，且失业比例也远高于白人。例如2020年4月，美国妇女失业率上升至15%，而非裔女性和西班牙裔女性的失业率都高于这一数值，分别上升至16.4%和20.2%。4

Even in relatively more equitable Europe, inequality is also intensifying. First, the degree of polarization is worsening. In 2019, the World Wealth and Income Database released a survey report on income inequality in Europe by Thomas Blanchet of the World Inequality Lab, Lucas Chancel of the Institute for Sustainable Development and International Relations in Paris, and French economist Amory Gethin, titled *How Unequal is Europe? — An Empirical Analysis Based on National Distributional Accounts from 1980 to 2017*. The report pointed out that between 1980 and 2017, the income of the poorest 50% of the European population increased by only 30% to 40%. The “European middle class,” whose income falls between the 50th and 90th percentiles, benefited only slightly more from economic growth than the poorer 50% group, with their income growing by 40% to 50%. In stark contrast, the income growth of the top 0.1% of Europeans exceeded 100%, while the top 0.001% now enjoy a standard of living three times higher than in the past. At the same time, almost all European countries have failed to achieve the goal of reducing inequality set by the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. This goal requires progressively achieving and sustaining income growth for the bottom 40% of the population and ensuring that their growth rate is higher than the national average. Looking at European data, inequality has not only not decreased but has intensified. The share of national income held by the richest 10% of Europeans rose from 29% in 1980 to 34% in 2017. Over the same period, the proportion of European citizens living below the poverty line increased from about 20% to 22%. Second, inequality between countries is becoming more severe. According to data released by the World Wealth and Income Database, in 2017, the average per capita income of adults in Eastern Europe was about 35% lower than the European average. The average per capita income of adults in Southern European countries relative to the continental average has been declining since the 1990s, and in 2017 it was 10% lower than the European average. The per capita income level in Northern European countries has relatively risen, being 25% higher than the European average in the mid-1990s and 50% higher in 2017.

即使在相对较为公平的欧洲，不平等也日益加剧。一是两极分化的程度加重。世界财富与收入数据库2019年发布了世界不平等研究机构的托马斯·布兰切特、巴黎可持续发展与国际关系研究所研究员卢卡斯·钱斯尔和法国经济学家阿莫里·格钦对欧洲收入不平等状况的调查报告《欧洲到底有多不平等?———基于1980—2017年国民分配账户的实证分析》。报告指出，1980—2017年间，欧洲最贫穷的50%人口的收入仅增加了30%到40%，收入在50%到90%之间的“欧洲中产阶级”从经济增长中得到的好处仅略高于50%较贫穷的群体，其收入增长了40%到50%。与此形成鲜明对比的是，收入最高的0.1%的欧洲人的收入增长超过了100%，而收入最高的0.001%的人现在享受的生活水平是过去的三倍。与此同时，几乎所有欧洲国家都未能实现联合国可持续发展目标中的减少不平等目标。该目标要求，要逐步实现和维持最底层40%人口的收入增长，并确保其增长率高于全国平均水平。从欧洲的数据来看，不平等不仅没有减少，反而在加剧。最富有的10%的欧洲人在国民收入中所占份额从1980年的29%上升到2017年的34%。同期，生活在贫困线下的欧洲公民则从约20%上升到22%。二是国家间的不平等愈发严重。根据世界财富与收入数据库发布的数据，2017年，东欧成年人人均收入比欧洲平均水平低约35%。南欧国家成年人人均收入相对于欧洲大陆的平均水平自20世纪90年代以来一直在下降，2017年南欧国家人均收入比欧洲平均水平低10%。北欧国家人均收入水平则相对上升，在20世纪90年代中期比欧洲平均水平高25%,2017年则高出50%。

The situation in Europe and the United States shows that the intensification of inequality is a common problem in capitalist societies. As Lucas Chancel pointed out in *Ten Facts about Inequality in Advanced Economies*, since the 1980s, income and wealth inequality in various countries has been rising at different rates, and the occurrence of the 2008 international financial crisis did not reverse this trend.

欧美的情况表明，不平等状况的加剧是资本主义社会的普遍问题。正如卢卡斯·钱斯尔在《发达经济体不平等的十大事实》中所指出的，自20世纪80年代以来，各个国家的收入和财富不平等程度一直在以不同的速度上升，2008年国际金融危机的发生也未扭转这一趋势。

II. Inequality’s Multi-Faceted Impact on the Capitalist System

二、不平等对资本主义制度形成多方面冲击

Although inequality is mainly manifested in the economic sphere, its impact is not limited to the economic field. It has triggered a series of problems in economic, political, social and other aspects, creating obstacles to the stable development of capitalism.

不平等尽管主要表现在经济方面，但其影响却不限于经济领域，而是在经济、政治、社会等多方面都引发了一系列问题，对资本主义的平稳发展形成了阻滞。

1. Economic Depression and Crisis Are Inevitable

1. 经济萧条与危机难以避免

Marx pointed out that in capitalist society, “production is only for capital, and not the reverse, that the means of production are merely a means for the constantly expanding life process of the society of producers. The preservation and valorization of capital value, which is based on the expropriation and impoverishment of the great mass of producers, can only move within certain limits. These limits constantly come into contradiction with the methods of production which capital must use for its own purposes and which are aimed at unlimited increase of production, production for production’s sake, the unconditional development of the social productive forces of labour.” [5]5 Karl Marx, *Capital*, Volume 3, Chapter 15. Keynes also raised the issue of insufficient effective demand. Since the consumption ratio of the lower social strata is higher than that of the upper strata, enormous inequality inevitably leads to weak aggregate social demand. Moreover, enormous inequality can also lead to various problems in the economy. For example, “in such countries, tax and other economic policies are more likely to encourage activities that are more beneficial to the financial sector, rather than productive activities,” and “it is less likely to make public investments in public transport, infrastructure, science and technology, and education.” [6]6 The source of this quotation is not specified in the original text. All of these will cause economic growth to lack strong support, making economic turmoil and crisis inevitable.

马克思曾指出，在资本主义社会，“生产只是为资本而生产，而不是反过来生产资料只是生产者社会的生活过程不断扩大的手段。以广大生产者群众的被剥夺和贫穷化为基础的资本价值的保存和增殖，只能在一定的限制以内运动，这些限制不断与资本为它自身的目的而必须使用的并旨在无限制地增加生产，为生产而生产，无条件地发展劳动社会生产力的生产方法相矛盾。”5凯恩斯也提出了有效需求不足的问题。由于社会底层群体的消费比例高于上层群体，因而巨大的不平等必然会导致社会总需求疲软。不仅如此，巨大的不平等还会导致经济出现多方面问题，比如“在这样的国家中，税收和其它经济政策更可能去鼓励那些对金融部门更有利的活动，而不是生产性活动”，“不太可能在公共交通、基础设施、科技和教育方面开展公共投资”6等等。这些都会导致经济增长缺乏有力支撑，经济动荡与危机必然难以避免。

In order to secure a relatively stable space for capitalist development, Western societies after World War II, guided by Keynesianism, alleviated social inequality through measures such as fiscal and tax policies. However, when neoliberalism became the dominant ideology, inequality increasingly worsened, the social wealth obtained by ordinary people steadily diminished, and household debt gradually increased. In 2007, before the outbreak of the international financial crisis, the ratio of U.S. household debt payments to disposable income was 13.03%, and the ratio of financial obligation payments was 17.91%, laying the groundwork for the financial crisis. French scholar Thomas Piketty pointed out that the real cause of the 2008 international financial crisis lay in the extreme inequality of wealth distribution, where the income growth rate of the high-income group far exceeded the economic growth rate. After the outbreak of the financial crisis, the monopoly financial capital that should have been held responsible for the crisis instead received substantial government assistance. The top social stratum not only suffered no losses but accelerated the pace of wealth accumulation. The extreme inequality thus caused will inevitably bring about even more severe economic turmoil and crises in the future.

为使资本主义获得较稳定的发展空间，二战后西方社会曾在凯恩斯主义指导下通过财政和税收等举措缓解了社会不平等状况。然而，当新自由主义成为主导思潮后，不平等状况日益加剧，普通民众所获得的社会财富愈发减少，家庭债务逐渐增加。在国际金融危机爆发前的2007年，美国居民家庭债务支付占可支配收入比例为13.03%，财务债务支付比例为17.91%，为金融危机的发生埋下了伏笔。法国学者皮凯蒂指出，2008年国际金融危机的真正原因在于财富分配的极度不平等，高收入人群的收入增长速度远远超出了经济增长速度。金融危机爆发后，本应为危机负责的垄断金融资本却得到了政府的大力资助，社会顶层群体不仅未受到损失，反而加快了财富积累的步伐，由此导致的极度不平等必然会在将来带来更为严重的经济动荡与危机。

2. Severe Political Polarization

2. 政治极化严重

In the political sphere, an obvious consequence of intensified inequality is the increasingly severe phenomenon of political polarization.

在政治领域，不平等加剧带来的明显后果就是政治极化现象日益严重。

First, capital’s control over politics is growing ever stronger, and Western political parties are increasingly evolving into “election machines.” Take the United States as an example. In 2016, the total campaign funds spent in the U.S. presidential election exceeded $8 billion, setting a historical record for election costs. Against this backdrop, candidates themselves are fundamentally unable to bear the astronomical election expenses and must rely on external organizations, especially political donations from wealthy individuals and interest groups, to conduct their campaigns.[7]7 This refers to the role of Super PACs (Political Action Committees) and other outside spending groups in U.S. elections, which can raise and spend unlimited sums of money, often from corporations and wealthy individuals, following the 2010 Supreme Court decision Citizens United v. FEC. This determines that the various policies formulated by the government will inevitably be based on the wishes of the wealthy and interest groups. Money politics and elite politics have become important features of the Western democratic system.

一是资本对政治的控制愈发强烈，西方政党日益演变成“选举机器”。以美国为例。2016年，美国大选支出的竞选资金总和超过80亿美元，选举成本之高刷新了历史纪录。在这种背景下，候选人自身根本无力负担天文数字的竞选支出，而不得不依赖于外围组织尤其是富豪和利益集团的政治献金来开展选举。7这也决定了政府制定的各项政策必然会以富豪和利益集团的意愿为考量，金钱政治、精英政治已成为西方民主制度的重要特征。

Second, ordinary people find it difficult to express their will through the existing political system, and political participation rates are increasingly declining. In 2014, the voter turnout in the European Parliament elections was only 42.6%, far lower than the 62% in the first election in 1979. In the 2019 European Parliament elections, although voter turnout reached a new high since 1999, it was still only 50.8%. In the United States, although the voter turnout rate is relatively stable, for people at the bottom of society, especially ethnic minorities and people of color, there are many obstacles to participating in elections. For example, in many parts of the United States, it is difficult for ethnic minority citizens to vote on Election Day. In 2012, the waiting time for African Americans to vote was at least twice that for whites. Some ethnic minority individuals even had to wait 6 to 7 hours.[8]8 This refers to a study by the Brennan Center for Justice and other organizations documenting longer wait times at polling places for minority voters, particularly in the 2012 election. At the same time, the United States also excludes some voters from elections through “voter suppression” tactics such as implementing strict voter identification laws, reducing voting hours, prohibiting registration, and purging voter rolls. According to the report “Systematic Inequality and American Democracy” published on the official website of the Center for American Progress by Danyelle Solomon, Vice President of the Race and Ethnicity Research Project, in 2016, 9.5 million U.S. adults—most of whom were people of color—did not have full voting rights. More than 30 states used “voter suppression” tactics to suppress voters, causing the African American voter turnout rate to plummet by seven percentage points. In 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court, in its ruling in Husted v. A. Philip Randolph Institute, again employed “voter suppression” tactics, removing 846,000 African American voters from the voter rolls for the next six years. This ruling opened the door for the removal of millions of people of color from U.S. voter rolls.

二是普通民众难以通过现行政治制度表达自己意愿，政治参与率日益降低。2014年，欧洲议会选举中民众参与率仅为42.6%，远低于1979年第一次选举时的62%。2019年的欧洲议会选举中，选民参与率虽创下了1999年以来的新高，但也仅为50.8%。在美国，尽管民众投票参与率相对稳定，但对于社会底层的民众尤其是少数族裔和有色人种而言，参与选举有诸多障碍。如在美国很多地方，少数族裔民众很难在选举日当天投票。2012年，非裔投票等待时间是白人的至少2倍。一些少数族裔人群甚至需要等上6—7小时。8同时，美国还通过实施严格的选民身份认证法、减少投票时间、禁止注册、清除选民名单等“选民压制”手段将部分选民排除在选举之外。根据美国进步中心种族研究项目副主席丹耶尔·所罗门等在其官网上发布的《系统性不平等与美国民主》报告，2016年，美国有950万成年人———其中大部分是有色人种———没有完全投票权，有超过30个州用“选民压制”手段打击选民，导致非裔选民投票率暴跌七个百分点。2018年，美国最高法院在赫斯特德诉菲利普·伦道夫研究所的裁决中再次运用“选民压制”手段，将84.6万名非裔选民从未来6年的选民名单中剔除。这一裁定为数百万美国选民名册上的有色人种被除名打开了大门。

Third, political polarization and inequality are mutually causal, forming a vicious cycle. Inequality exacerbates political polarization, and in turn, political polarization further intensifies inequality through government policies and other means. In June 2018, during the 38th session of the United Nations Human Rights Council, Philip Alston, the Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights, explicitly condemned U.S. government policies for exacerbating poverty and inequality. He pointed out that the combination of extreme poverty and inequality had led to the trampling of the human rights of vulnerable groups and even ordinary people in American society, and that the policies proposed after Trump took office would worsen the deeply entrenched poverty and inequality problems in the United States.

三是政治极化和不平等互为因果，形成恶性循环。不平等加剧了政治极化，反过来，政治极化又通过政府政策等方式使不平等状况进一步加剧。2018年6月，在联合国人权理事会第三十八次会议期间，极端贫困与人权问题特别报告员菲利普·阿尔斯顿明确谴责美国政府的政策加剧了贫困和不平等，指出极端贫困和不平等的结合造成了对美国社会弱势群体甚至普通大众人权的践踏，特朗普上台后提出的政策将导致美国存在的根深蒂固的贫困问题、不平等状况变得更糟。

3. The Revival of Populism Greatly Affects the Western Political Ecology

3. 民粹主义复兴极大影响西方政治生态

Populism has shown a revival trend in the West in recent years. Although this is the result of the combined effect of multiple factors, the deepening opposition between elites and the masses caused by intensified inequality is undoubtedly an important factor in the rise of populism. In 2011, David DeGraw, a columnist for the Canadian website “Global Research,” published an article titled “The Economic Elite vs. the People of the United States,” analyzing the dissatisfaction of the American public with the elite. “It is time to mobilize 99% of the American people and change the usual way of political reform. The people are not satisfied with the status quo. They have seen that the Republican and Democratic parties… have been bought by well-organized economic elites.”[9]9 Todd Gitlin, *Occupy Nation: The Roots, the Spirit, and the Promise of Occupy Wall Street* (New York: It Books, 2012). The specific page number is not provided in the original text. As inequality intensifies, the opposition between elites and the masses becomes more apparent, and the rise of populism, characterized mainly by anti-elite and anti-establishment sentiments, becomes inevitable. In February 2017, the annual report released by the Munich Security Conference Foundation listed the prevalence of populism in the Western world as one of the three major challenges currently facing the world.

民粹主义近年来在西方呈现复兴态势，尽管这是多方面因素综合作用的结果，但不平等的加剧所造成的精英与民众之间的对立加深无疑是催生民粹主义兴起的重要因素。2011年，加拿大“全球研究”网站的专栏作家戴维·德格劳发表“经济精英对决美国人民”一文，对美国民众对精英的不满进行了剖析，“是时候动员99%的美国民众，改变政治改革的一贯做派了。民众对现状并不满意，他们看出来了，共和党与民主党……已经被组织有序的经济精英收买了。”9随着不平等的加剧，精英和民众之间的对立愈发明显，以反精英、反建制为主要特征的民粹主义的兴起也就成为必然。2017年2月，慕尼黑安全会议基金会发布的年度报告中，就将西方世界民粹主义盛行列为当前世界面临的三大挑战之一。

In many European and American countries, the support and influence gained by populist parties have further increased, squeezing the living space of traditional parties. For example, the influence of populist parties such as the French National Front, the Italian Five Star Movement, the UK Independence Party, the German Alternative for Germany, and the Dutch Party for Freedom has all grown significantly. In recent general elections, many populist parties have achieved high support rates. For instance, Marine Le Pen, leader of the French National Front, received 33.9% support in the second round of the 2017 presidential election; in Poland, the Law and Justice party, with strong populist overtones, won the parliamentary election in 2015, gaining the qualification to form a government independently; the Italian populist party Five Star Movement received 32% support in the March 2018 parliamentary election, significantly higher than the Democratic Party’s 23% support.

在欧美许多国家中，民粹主义政党所获支持和影响进一步增强，传统政党的生存空间受到挤压。譬如法国国民阵线、意大利五星运动、英国独立党、德国另类选择党、荷兰自由党等民粹主义政党势力都出现明显增长。在近几年的大选中，许多民粹主义政党都获得了较高的支持率。如法国“国民阵线”主席勒庞在2017年大选第二轮投票中获得33.9%的支持;在波兰，带有浓重民粹主义色彩的法律与公正党于2015年赢得议会选举，获得了独立组阁的资格;意大利民粹主义政党五星运动在2018年3月的议会选举中获得32%的支持率，大大高于民主党23%的支持率。

Besides impacting existing Western political parties, populism also affects the political and social ecology of Western countries in many ways. For example, the rise of grassroots movements represented by the American Tea Party, and the “Occupy Wall Street” movement of the 99% against the 1%, all show the influence of populism. At the same time, the wave of deglobalization that has risen internationally in recent years highlights a strong signal of economic nationalism. This is also an important manifestation of the revival of populism in the field of international cooperation.

除对西方既有的政党形成冲击外，民粹主义还在许多方面影响着西方国家的政治社会生态。如以美国茶党为代表的草根运动的兴起，99%对1%的“占领华尔街”运动等，都可以看到民粹主义的影响。同时，近年来国际上兴起的逆全球化浪潮，彰显了强烈的经济国家主义信号。这也是民粹主义复兴在国际合作领域的重要表现。

The revival of populism in the West not only highlights the continuous decline in the governance capacity of Western countries and reveals the defects and shortcomings of Western democratic politics, leading to “the traditional elite politics beginning to move from the center to the periphery, the existing party politics facing challenges, and more and more citizens’ direct actions breaking through the limits of representative government,”[10]10 This is a direct quotation from a Chinese source (likely a journal article or book) analyzing the impact of populism on Western representative democracy. but also indicates that the existing mainstream political ideology in the West has problems and the prevailing standard worldview is collapsing.[9]9 Todd Gitlin, *Occupy Nation: The Roots, the Spirit, and the Promise of Occupy Wall Street* (New York: It Books, 2012). The specific page number is not provided in the original text.

民粹主义在西方的复兴不仅凸显出西方国家治理能力的不断下降，展现了西方民主政治的缺陷与不足，由此导致“传统的精英政治开始由中心向边缘移动，现有的政党政治将接受挑战，越来越多的公民直接行动会冲破代议制的限制”10，也表明西方现有的主流政治意识形态出现了问题，通行的标准世界观在坍塌。9

4. Increasingly Intensified Social Contradictions, Frequent Outbreaks of Labor Movements and Social Movements

4. 社会矛盾日益激化，工人运动和社会运动频繁爆发

As the democratic rights of ordinary people are continuously squeezed, inequality is increasingly intensifying and exacerbating the various contradictions of capitalism. Against this backdrop, workers’ strike movements in Western countries occur one after another, and far-reaching new social movements such as “Occupy Wall Street,” “Nuit Debout,” and the “Yellow Vests” movement frequently erupt, posing enormous impacts and challenges to the capitalist system.

随着普通民众的民主权利不断被挤压，不平等正在日益激化和加剧资本主义的各种矛盾。在这一背景下，西方国家工人罢工运动此起彼伏，影响深远的新社会运动如“占领华尔街”“黑夜站立”“黄马甲”运动等屡屡发生，对资本主义制度构成了巨大冲击与挑战。

These frequently erupting workers’ movements and social movements, although related to the sluggish Western economic recovery and widespread worker unemployment since the financial crisis, are more fundamentally triggered by the extreme exploitation and plunder of the populace by the monopoly bourgeoisie in economic, political, and other spheres after the crisis. Consequently, many movements directly target the extreme inequality between the monopoly bourgeoisie and ordinary people, as well as its root cause—the capitalist system. In the “Occupy Wall Street” movement, protesters raised the slogan “99% vs 1%.” The Occupy Wall Street declaration explicitly states, “We are the workers, we are the 99% of the population, we created the nation’s wealth, and we should be the masters of the country. Yet, we have become modern slaves in a modern world. The 1% live in heaven, the 99% live in hell—where is the equality? All rights are unequal. This is not the arrangement of the United States; this is the arrangement of capital.” The declaration called on the 99% to unite, thereby creating a “glorious tomorrow” for American history. In the “Yellow Vests” movement, which highlighted the intensification of social divisions and class stratification in France, slogans such as “Down with bourgeois rule” were also ubiquitous.

这种频繁爆发的工人运动与社会运动，尽管与金融危机以来西方经济复苏乏力和大量工人失业有关，但更多是由于危机后垄断资产阶级在经济、政治等方面对民众的极度压榨与掠夺所引发，因而许多运动都直接将矛头对准了垄断资产阶级和普通民众间的极度不平等以及造成这种不平等的根源———资本主义制度。在“占领华尔街”运动中，抗议者就提出了“99%VS 1%”的口号。“占领华尔街”宣言更明确指出，“我们是劳动者，我们是人口的99%，我们创造了国家的财富，我们理应是国家的主人。可是，我们却成了现代化世界的现代化奴隶。1%生活在天堂里，99%生活在地狱里，这哪里有平等?一切权利都不平等。这不是合众国的安排，这是资本的安排。”宣言号召99%团结起来，从而创造美国历史的“光辉明天”。在凸显法国社会分歧与阶层分化加剧的“黄马甲”运动中，也随处可见“打倒资产阶级统治”等标语。

This new phenomenon in Western social movements indicates that the “freedom” and “equality” consistently touted by capitalism are increasingly shattered. Extreme inequality leads ordinary people to gradually recognize that the essence of the capitalist system is to serve the capitalists’ pursuit of high profits, and its policies are controlled by the monopoly bourgeoisie. Thus, a welcome change has emerged in current workers’ movements and social movements. Especially for social movements, they are no longer confined to the economic goals of seeking wages and welfare typically set by union-organized strikes, nor are they limited to individual enterprises or industries. Instead, they voice opposition to the unfair phenomena of the entire society, resonating with the public at large. This results in movements with participants spanning all regions and industries nationwide, even spreading to many countries and regions globally, ultimately impacting the capitalist system. The immense influence of the “Occupy Wall Street” movement and the “Yellow Vests” movement, both domestically and worldwide, is based on this. American sociologist Todd Gitlin, in his book *Occupy Nation*, highly praised the demands and popular base of the “Occupy Wall Street” movement. He pointed out, “Unlike American left-wing movements for at least three-quarters of a century, this movement started with a broad popular base from the very beginning… It demands a fairer economy and calls for limiting the power of the rich, which are deeply popular among the people.” [9]9 Todd Gitlin, *Occupy Nation: The Roots, the Spirit, and the Promise of Occupy Wall Street* (New York: It Books, 2012). The specific page number is not provided in the original text.

西方社会运动所出现的这种新现象表明，资本主义一贯标榜的“自由”“平等”正日益破灭，极度不平等使普通民众日益认识到资本主义制度的本质是服务于资本家攫取高额利润的目的，其政策受垄断资产阶级控制。由此，当前的工人运动和社会运动出现了一个可喜变化。尤其是对社会运动而言，不再局限于以往由工会组织的罢工运动所设定的谋求工资和福利等经济目标，也不再仅仅将运动局限于企业或行业内部，而是对整个社会的不公平现象发声，引发全社会公众的共鸣，从而使运动参与者遍布全国各个地区、各个行业，乃至扩散到全球许多国家和地区，最终对资本主义制度形成冲击。“占领华尔街”运动和“黄马甲运动”等之所以能在本国乃至全世界都产生巨大影响正是基于此。美国社会学家托德·吉特林在其《占领国家》一书中，对“占领华尔街”运动的诉求和民众基础进行了高度评价。他指出，“与至少四分之三个世纪的美国左翼运动不同的是，这场运动一开始就拥有广阔的民众基础……它要求更公正的经济，要求限制富人的权力，这些都深受民众欢迎。”9

5. Neoliberalism, as the dominant ideology of capitalism, is increasingly being questioned.

5. 作为资本主义主导思潮的新自由主义日益受到质疑

In the 1970s and 1980s, neoliberalism became the dominant ideology in Western societies. Driven by its emphasis on liberalization, marketization, and privatization, Western countries implemented a series of policies that exacerbated social inequality.

20世纪七八十年代，新自由主义成为西方社会的主导思潮。在其强调自由化、市场化、私有化主张的推动下，西方国家实施了一系列加剧社会不平等的政策。

First, financial deregulation opened the door for the rapid development of financial capital. In the 1980s, driven by neoliberal ideology, the United States passed a series of laws relaxing financial regulations, such as the *Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act* and the *Garn–St. Germain Depository Institutions Act*, allowing banks and other financial institutions to freely pursue maximum profits. The *Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act* passed in 1999 further realized the transition from a separation of banking and securities to a universal banking system, with commercial banks beginning to engage heavily in investment banking activities. Simultaneously, internationally, by forcing developing countries to relax controls on capital and financial markets, financial capital was able to expand rapidly globally.

其一，放松金融管制为金融资本的迅猛发展打开方便之门。20世纪80年代，在新自由主义思潮的推动下，美国通过了一系列放松金融管制的法律，如《存款机构放松管制和货币控制法》、《加恩·圣杰曼存款机构法》等，使银行和其他金融机构可以自由追逐最大利润。1999年通过的《金融服务现代化法案》更是实现了金融业从分业经营到混业经营的转变，商业银行开始大规模从事投资银行活动。同时，在国际上，通过迫使发展中国家放松对资本和金融市场的管制，金融资本得以在全球迅猛扩张。

Second, restrictions and crackdowns on trade unions strengthened the power of capital. Neoliberalism heavily criticized trade unions, arguing that “unions not only harm the interests of the entire society and workers by distorting the normal use of labor, but also make the income of the working class more unequal by reducing the employment opportunities available to the least advantaged workers.” [11]11 This appears to be a citation from a source not fully identified in the original text, likely a critique of trade unions from a neoliberal perspective. The specific source is not provided. Under the influence of neoliberal policies, European and American countries continuously suppressed trade unions, leading to a gradual weakening of their influence and a significant decline in union membership rates. Since 2010, six states controlled by the Republican Party in the United States, including Michigan, Kentucky, and West Virginia, have successively passed new labor laws encouraging workers not to join unions.

其二，对工会的限制与打压强化了资本的力量。新自由主义对工会大加批判，认为“工会不仅通过歪曲劳动的正常使用方式，损害了整个社会和工人的利益，而且还通过减少条件最差工人可能有的就业机会，使工人阶级的收入更加不均等”。11在新自由主义政策影响下，欧美国家对工会不断进行打压，导致其影响力逐渐削弱，工人入会率大幅下降。2010年以来，美国共和党控制的密歇根、肯塔基、西弗吉尼亚等6州陆续通过新劳工法律，鼓励劳工不参与工会。

Third, policies such as tax cuts and cuts in welfare spending protected the interests of the monopoly bourgeoisie, while the economic development dividends received by ordinary people became increasingly smaller.

其三，减税、削减福利开支等政策保障了垄断资产阶级的利益，普通民众所获得的经济发展红利越来越少。

In recent years, the essence of neoliberalism has become increasingly apparent. After the outbreak of the 2008 international financial crisis, capitalist countries implemented a series of measures to stimulate the economy. On the surface, they adopted Keynesian principles to strengthen economic control, but in essence and core, it remained neoliberalism. Whether it was cutting welfare spending or providing massive bailouts to monopoly financial capital, thereby shifting the costs of the crisis onto ordinary people, the ultimate goal was to protect the interests of the monopoly bourgeoisie, while the working class fell into poverty and unemployment. Moreover, during the COVID-19 pandemic, capitalist countries dominated by neoliberal ideology responded poorly to the epidemic, forcing the broad working class not only to face the threat of the virus but also to bear the bitter fruits of economic recession. Faced with this situation, the European and American left engaged in profound reflection and criticism, pointing out that the capitalist system and the neoliberal policies it implements are the root causes of the people’s predicament. For example, Robert Griffiths, General Secretary of the Communist Party of Britain, stated in a declaration on the CPB’s official website, “The Communist Party of Britain strongly condemns neoliberalism’s ‘fatal destruction’ of the emergency management system,” pointing out that for over a decade since the outbreak of the international financial crisis, Britain and even the EU have implemented policies of austerity, tax cuts for the rich and large corporations, and outsourcing and privatization of public services under the guidance of neoliberalism. These profit- and market-oriented policies have severely weakened the ability of public and emergency service departments to respond to the challenge of the novel coronavirus. The Communist Party USA also published an article on its official website on May 22, 2020, titled “The Pandemic and Neoliberalism Are Taking Our Lives,” stating that the time has come to end neoliberalism.

近年来，新自由主义的本质愈益彰显。2008年国际金融危机发生后，资本主义国家推行了一系列刺激经济的举措，从表面上看是采用凯恩斯主义的原则加强对经济的管控，实际上其本质和内核仍是新自由主义。无论是削减福利开支，还是给垄断金融资本以巨额救助，从而将危机成本转嫁给普通民众，其最终目的都是保护垄断资产阶级的利益，工人阶级则陷入贫困与失业中。而在此次新冠疫情中，以新自由主义为主导思潮的资本主义国家应对疫情不力，使广大工人阶级不仅要面临病毒的威胁，更要承受经济衰退带来的苦果。面对上述状况，欧美左翼进行了深刻反思与批判，指出资本主义制度及其所实施的新自由主义政策是造成民众陷入困境的根源。如英共总书记罗伯特·格里菲斯在英国共产党的官网上发表声明“英共严厉谴责新自由主义对应急管理体系的‘致命破坏’”，指出国际金融危机爆发以来的十多年，英国乃至欧盟都在新自由主义指导下实行削减开支、对富人和大企业减税以及公共服务外包和私有化的政策，这种以利润、市场为导向的政策导致公共部门和应急服务部门应对新型冠状病毒挑战的能力被严重削弱。美国共产党也于2020年5月22日在其官网发表“大流行和新自由主义正在夺去我们的生命”的文章，指出当前正是结束新自由主义的时刻。

III. Intensified Inequality Provides an Opportunity for a Left-Wing Revival

三、不平等加剧为左翼复兴提供契机

The intensifying inequality highlights the shortcomings and dilemmas of the capitalist system, and also triggers people’s criticism of the capitalist system and their longing for socialism. This undoubtedly provides a favorable opportunity for a left-wing revival. Of course, to seize this opportunity, the left must adjust its theories and strategies, strengthen its influence on social movements and workers’ movements, and facilitate their transformation into socialist movements.

日益加剧的不平等凸显了资本主义制度的弊端与困境，也引发了人们对资本主义制度的批判和对社会主义的向往。这无疑为左翼的复兴提供了有利契机。当然，要想抓住这一机会，左翼必须调整自己的理论与策略，加强对社会运动和工人运动的影响，使其向社会主义运动转化。

1. Intensified Inequality Highlights the Contradictions and Shortcomings of the Capitalist System

1. 不平等加剧凸显了资本主义制度的矛盾与弊端

Regarding the intensification of inequality in the West, academia offers various explanations. Some scholars view globalization and technological change as the root causes of inequality; others believe it is the weakening of trade unions in recent years that has exacerbated inequality; still others see Western party politics and interest groups as the political roots of inequality, arguing that under the influence of interest groups, the various public policies adopted by Western governments are undoubtedly dominated by the interests of the monopoly bourgeoisie, and “the failure of government regulation of corporations can be said to be the biggest reason why the excessive expansion of top-tier wealth is the main cause of income imbalance.” [12]12 This appears to be a citation from a source not fully identified in the original text, discussing the political roots of inequality. The specific source is not provided.

对于西方不平等的加剧，学界给出了各种解释。有学者将全球化和技术变革视作不平等的根源;也有学者认为是近年来工会力量的削弱加剧了不平等;还有学者将西方的政党政治、利益集团视作不平等的政治根源，认为在利益集团的影响下，西方政府采取的各项公共政策无疑是以垄断资产阶级的利益为主导的，而“政府对公司监管上的失败，可以说提供了顶层财富的过分膨胀是收入失衡加剧的最大的一个原因”。12

The explanations offered by scholars are undoubtedly of some use for understanding the current intensification of social inequality in Western societies. Yet, at root, inequality is a chronic disease of capitalism, and the cause of this state of affairs is precisely the capitalist system itself. Marx and Engels long ago pointed out that “the more wealth the worker produces, the greater the power and scale of his production, the poorer he becomes. The more commodities the worker creates, the cheaper a commodity he becomes” [13], and that “the wretched condition of the working class … is to be sought … in the capitalist system itself.” [13] Lenin also held that “the first change brought about by the growth of capitalism is this: a vast concentration of wealth in the hands of a small number of capitalists, while the mass of the people are reduced to having nothing.” [2]2 This is a paraphrase of a common Marxist formulation; the specific source is not cited in the original text. Under the capitalist system, all policies introduced by the government are necessarily dominated by the interests of monopoly capital. Consequently, after the outbreak of the international financial crisis, Western governments, ignoring the plight of the people who had fallen into unemployment and poverty, lavishly bailed out monopoly capital and cut social welfare; the influence of interest groups over government policy grew by the day; the power of trade unions defending workers’ interests was constantly suppressed; and so-called democratic politics increasingly degenerated into “money politics.” All of the above reasons for the intensification of social inequality are caused by the capitalist system itself. The extreme inequality in contemporary Western society also shows that the basic contradictions and institutional defects of capitalism are deepening daily, and that patching up the capitalist system is increasingly unable to overcome the predicament it faces.

学者们的解释对于理解当前西方社会不平等的加剧无疑有一定作用，然而从根源上讲，不平等是资本主义的痼疾，造成这一现状的正是资本主义制度本身。马克思、恩格斯早就指出，“工人生产的财富越多，他的生产的影响和规模越大，他就越贫穷。工人创造的商品越多，他就越变成廉价的商品”13，而“工人阶级处境悲惨的原因……应当到资本主义制度本身中去寻找”。13列宁也认为，“资本主义增长所引起的第一个变化是:大量财富集中在少数资本家的手里，而人民群众变成了一无所有的人。”2在资本主义制度下，政府所出台的各项政策必然是以垄断资产阶级的利益为主导，于是在国际金融危机发生后，西方政府不顾民众陷入失业、贫困等境地而大肆救助垄断资本、削减社会福利;利益集团对政府政策的影响力与日俱增;维护工人利益的工会组织的权力不断被打压;所谓的民主政治日益蜕化为“金钱政治”等。上述导致社会不平等加剧的原因都是资本主义制度本身所造成的。当前西方社会的极度不平等也表明，资本主义的基本矛盾和制度弊端正在日益深化，对资本主义制度的修修补补已经越来越难以克服其面临的困境。

2. Socialist Values and Marxism Are Increasingly Valued

2. 社会主义价值观和马克思主义日益受到重视

Against the backdrop of intensifying social inequality in the West and the ever more pronounced nature of capitalism, socialist values, along with Marxism – which criticizes the capitalist system and points out its developmental trends and historical destiny – are being accepted by more and more Westerners, especially young people.

在西方社会不平等日益加剧、资本主义本质愈发凸显的背景下，社会主义价值观以及对资本主义制度进行批判并指出其发展趋势和历史命运的马克思主义被越来越多的西方民众尤其是青年人所接受。

As the public grows increasingly disillusioned with social reality, they have begun to seek solutions beyond capitalism. Works such as *Capital* have become bestsellers, and Marxism has become a theoretical weapon for many to understand and explain capitalism. Many mainstream Western media outlets have also given high praise to Marx and his works, and have begun to introduce and explain Marx’s economic theory. For many Westerners, especially young people, Marx’s critique of capitalism and his description of socialism have shown them a new world. Robert Griffiths, General Secretary of the Communist Party of Britain, points out that the reason for the new wave of Marx’s popularity in Britain is “because we find that the current capitalist system cannot solve the many problems that society faces … Therefore, people are searching for an alternative to the capitalist system, looking for a new system, and this also encourages people to read Marx’s classic works more.” [14] In practice, the excellent performance of socialist countries in recent years has also demonstrated the superiority of their system, leading to a renewed appreciation of socialist values and a gradual increase in the number of people who yearn for socialism and believe in it. Even in the United States, where socialism has long been severely demonized, more and more people believe that, compared with capitalism, socialist ideas better embody concepts such as equality and fairness. [15] The cover of the US *Newsweek* magazine in mid-February 2009 even directly declared, “We are all socialists now.” In a 2011 Pew survey, 49% of Americans under 30 viewed socialism positively, while only 47% viewed capitalism positively. In 2016, Bernie Sanders’ participation in the US presidential election stirred up a “socialist whirlwind” in America. Although this “socialism” is not the “scientific socialism” of Marxism, the dissatisfaction with the capitalist system and the pursuit of a fairer, more just social system and values are clearly visible. As some scholars have pointed out, the return of Marx’s thought and the “rediscovery of socialism” have become a historical trend in social development [16]; the world has moved from “another world is possible” to searching for various “alternatives” and “alternative models” to capitalism, and history is once again knocking on the door of socialism. [17]

随着民众对社会现实日益失望，他们开始探寻资本主义之外的解决方法，《资本论》等著作开始热销，马克思主义成为许多人认识和解释资本主义的理论武器。不少西方主流媒体也对马克思及其著作给予了高度评价，并开始介绍和阐释马克思的经济理论。对于许多西方民众尤其是青年人来说，马克思对资本主义的批判和对社会主义的描述使他们看到了一个新的世界。英共总书记罗伯特·格里菲斯指出，现在英国之所以兴起新一轮马克思受欢迎的热潮，是“因为我们发现，当前的资本主义体制并不能解决社会出现的许多问题……因此，人们在探寻一种替代资本主义的制度，寻找一种新的制度，而这也鼓励了人们更多地阅读马克思的经典著作。”14从实践上看，社会主义国家近年来的优异表现也表明了其制度的优越性，从而使社会主义价值观重新受到重视，向往社会主义、相信社会主义的人逐渐增多。即使是在社会主义一直被严重妖魔化的美国，也有越来越多的民众认为，较之资本主义，社会主义主张更能体现平等、公平等理念。15美国《新闻周刊》2009年2月中旬的一期封面上更是直接宣称，“我们现在都是社会主义者了。”在2011年的皮尤调查中，30岁以下的美国人中有49%积极看待社会主义，而对资本主义评价积极的则只占47%。2016年，伯尼·桑德斯参与美国大选更是在美国刮起了“社会主义旋风”。尽管这种“社会主义”并非马克思主义的“科学社会主义”，但对资本主义制度的不满和对一种更为公平、正义的社会制度和价值观的追求却清晰可见。正如有学者指出的，马克思思想的回归和“重新发现社会主义”，成为社会发展的一种历史趋势16;世界已从“另一个世界是可能的”到寻找各种资本主义的“替代方案”“替代模式”，历史再次叩响社会主义。17

3. Adjusting Theory and Struggle Strategies to the Current Situation is an Urgent Task for Expanding Left-Wing Influence

3. 针对现状调整理论和斗争策略是扩大左翼影响力的迫切要务

The various contradictions and crises of capitalism triggered by increasing inequality provide an opportunity for a left-wing revival. However, to seize this opportunity and expand influence, the left must adjust its theory and struggle strategies to the current situation of capitalism.

不平等加剧所引发的资本主义各种矛盾与危机为左翼的复兴提供了契机。然而要抓住这一契机，扩大影响力，左翼必须要针对资本主义的现状调整其理论和斗争策略。

Theoretically, it must provide a scientific explanation for the roots of inequality and propose corresponding solutions, enhancing public acceptance of its theories. After the 2008 international financial crisis, opportunities favorable to a left-wing revival emerged in both Europe and America. However, because the left failed to propose targeted theoretical countermeasures, it ultimately allowed the right to use the crisis to further strengthen the interests of monopoly capital. Faced with the growing global inequality, the left has also offered various explanations and countermeasures, but these countermeasures still largely focus on economic means such as taxation. Although these measures can play a role in mitigating inequality, they cannot eliminate it at its root. Moreover, under the condition of “capital being strong and labor being weak,” tax policies in many countries, such as the United States, are increasingly tilted towards the bourgeoisie, making the policies proposed by the left increasingly difficult to implement. Faced with this situation, the left must provide a scientific explanation for the roots of inequality and the poverty of the working class, rather than merely targeting specific policies.

从理论上看，必须对不平等的根源做出科学解释，并提出相应的解决思路，提升公众对其理论的接受度。2008年国际金融危机发生后，欧美国家都出现了有利于左翼复兴的契机。然而，由于左翼未能在理论上提出有针对性的对策，最终反而使右翼利用危机进一步强化了垄断资产阶级的利益。面对全球不平等的日益加剧，左翼也提出了多方面的解释及对策，但其对策仍多集中于税收等经济手段。尽管这些手段对减缓不平等有一定作用，但并不能从根源上消除不平等。而且在“资强劳弱”的情况下，许多国家如美国的税收政策都越来越向资产阶级倾斜，左翼提出的政策越来越难以实现。面对这种状况，左翼必须对造成不平等和工人阶级贫困的根源作出科学解释，而不只是将目标对准一些具体政策。

In practice, it must adjust its struggle strategies and actively participate in and lead social movements and the workers’ movement. In recent years, with the intensification of inequality, Western workers’ movements and social movements have challenged the capitalist system at different levels. However, overall, these movements are not truly struggles against the capitalist system. During the movements, although participants put forward the idea that “another world is possible,” the political definition of “another world” remains vague. To change this situation, the left must actively participate in these movements. On the one hand, it should propagate its theories within the movements, winning the trust and support of more and more people. On the other hand, through alliances with organizations like trade unions, it should guide the direction of the movements, transforming them into socialist movements, so that the movements can truly impact the capitalist system.

从实践上看，必须要调整斗争策略，积极参与并领导社会运动与工人运动。近年来，随着不平等加剧，西方工人运动和社会运动在不同层面上对资本主义制度提出了挑战。但总体来看，这些运动并不是真正意义上的反对资本主义制度的斗争。在运动过程中，运动参与者虽然提出了“另一个世界是可能的”，但对“另一个世界”的政治定义却模糊不清。要改变上述状况，左翼必须积极参与到运动中去，一方面在运动中宣传其理论，赢得越来越多民众的信赖和支持;另一方面通过与工会等组织的联合引导运动的方向，使其向社会主义运动转变，从而使运动能真正对资本主义制度形成冲击。

In short, to seize the opportunity provided by social inequality, the left must make adjustments in both theory and practice, arm itself with scientific theory, so that it can be recognized and accepted by more and more people, and ultimately play a leading role in the workers’ movement. Only then can it pose a real challenge and impact to the capitalist system.

总之，要抓住社会不平等所提供的契机，左翼必须在理论和实践上都做出调整，用科学的理论武装自己，以使其被越来越多的民众所认可和接受，最终发挥在工人运动中的引领作用。如此，才能对资本主义制度形成真正的挑战与冲击。

Notes

注释

1 *Collected Works of Marx and Engels*, Vol. 5, People’s Publishing House, 2009 edition, pp. 743-744.

1《马克思恩格斯文集》第5卷，人民出版社2009年版，第743-744页。

2 (17) *Lenin’s Collected Works – On the Proletarian Party*, People’s Publishing House, 2009 edition, p. 7.

2(17)《列宁专题文集——论无产阶级政党》，人民出版社2009年版，第7页。

3 Zhong Sheng, “The Cruel Reality of the Gap Between Rich and Poor in America,” *People’s Daily*, March 16, 2020.

3钟声:《美国贫富分化现实如此冷酷》，《人民日报》2020年3月16日。

4 Michael Spence, “The Pandemic Intensifies Inequality in the US, May Bring Social Risks,” *Social Sciences Weekly*, June 24, 2020.

4迈克尔·斯宾塞:《疫情加剧美国不平等，可能带来社会风险》，《社会科学报》2020年6月24日。

5 *Collected Works of Marx and Engels*, Vol. 7, People’s Publishing House, 2009 edition, pp. 278-279.

5《马克思恩格斯文集》第7卷，人民出版社2009年版，第278-279页。

6 Stiglitz, Zhou Jianjun, et al., “Inequality and Economic Growth,” *Comparative Economic & Social Systems*, Issue 1, 2017.

6斯蒂格利茨、周建军等:《不平等与经济增长》，《经济社会体制比较》2017年第1期。

7 Ni Chunna, “Political Contributions and American Electoral Politics,” *Contemporary World and Socialism*, Issue 5, 2018.

7倪春纳:《政治献金与美国的选举政治》，《当代世界与社会主义》2018年第5期。

8 [US] Bernie Sanders, *Our Revolution: A Future to Believe In*, translated by Zhong Shuting and Zhou Zijun, Jiangsu Phoenix Literature and Art Publishing House, 2018 edition, p. 131.

8[美]伯尼·桑德斯著，钟舒婷、周紫君译:《我们的革命:西方的体制困境和美国的社会危机》，江苏凤凰文艺出版社2018年版，第131页。

9 (11) (12) [US] John Judis, *The Populist Explosion: How the Great Recession Transformed American and European Politics*, translated by Ma Lin, CITIC Publishing Group, 2019 edition, pp. 59, viii, 61.

9(11)(12)[美]约翰·朱迪斯著，马霖译:《民粹主义大爆炸:经济大衰退如何改变美国和欧洲政治》，中信出版集团2019年版，第59、ⅷ、61页。

10 Tong Dezhi, “The Predicament of Western Liberal Democracy and the Rise of Populism,” *Beijing Daily*, June 5, 2017.

10佟德志:《西方自由民主的困境与民粹主义的兴起》，《北京日报》2017年6月5日。

11(13) Milton Friedman, *Capitalism and Freedom*, The University of Chicago Press, 1982, p. 124.

11(13) Milton Friedman,Capitalism and Freedom,The University of Chicago Press,1982,p124．

12(14) [US] Matthew Drennan, *Income Inequality: Why It Matters and What Can Be Done*, trans. Han Fuling, China Machine Press, 2017, p. 44.

12(14)[美]马修·德雷南著，韩复龄译:《不平等的收入》，机械工业出版社2017年版，第44页。

13(15)(16) *Collected Works of Marx and Engels*, Vol. 1, People’s Publishing House, 2009, pp. 156, 368.

13(15)(16)《马克思恩格斯文集》第1卷，人民出版社2009年版，第156、368页。

14(18) Luo Junjie and Chen Wenli, “Marxism Has Guiding Significance for Solving Real-World Problems,” *Jing Bao*, May 29, 2018.

14(18)罗俊杰、陈雯莉:《马克思主义对解决现实问题具有指导意义》，《晶报》2018年5月29日。

15(19) Zhou Rongguo, “The Current Real Predicament, Internal Debates, and Future Trends of Capitalism,” *Contemporary World*, No. 1, 2017.

15(19)周荣国:《当前资本主义的现实困境、内部争论和未来走势》，《当代世界》2017年第1期。

16(20) Wei Jianlin, “The World Is Undergoing Profound and Complex Changes,” *Social Sciences in China*, No. 1, 2013.

16(20)卫建林:《世界正在发生深刻复杂变化》，《中国社会科学》2013年第1期。

17(21) Wei Jianlin, “Ten Judgments on the Basic Direction of World History,” *Chinese Social Sciences Today*, November 30, 2012.

17(21)卫建林:《对世界历史基本走向的十个判断》，《中国社会科学报》2012年11月30日。

Online editor: Zhang Jian

网络编辑：张剑