Current Developments in Radical Left-Wing Social Movements in Europe and the United States

Since the 1980s, although neoliberal globalization has enabled the wealthy and CEOs of giant multinational corporations in developed countries in Europe and the United States to extract high monopoly profits globally, the gradient transfer of industrial structures to developing countries in the course of capital expansion has created competitors for themselves in labor-intensive industries. This has led to the "industrial hollowing out" and "de-industrialization" of manufacturing in developed countries in Europe and the United States, thereby creating a globalized elite class of the super-rich alongside a locally disadvantaged economic group. Particularly after the outbreak of the international financial crisis, the governments of European and American countries stood on the same side as the financial monopoly capital elite. Government policies tended to bail out financial monopoly capital while shifting the bitter fruits of the financial crisis onto ordinary people. People gradually came to realize that financial monopoly capitalism is a mode of development aimed at enabling a small number of wealthy elite privileged classes who hold market power to amass enormous wealth, at the cost of sacrificing the economic, political, and social rights of the lower and middle classes and the dignity of the poor. Driven by the interests of unfair distribution, many groups whose incomes have fallen have expressed various forms of discontent and resistance towards the elite class. These negative emotions ultimately converged into a mighty wave of citizen protests, thus burying the hypocrisy and lies of capitalism in the torrent of the movement.

20世纪80年代以来，尽管新自由主义全球化使得欧美发达国家的富人和巨型跨国公司CEO（首席执行官）能够在全球范围内攫取高额垄断利润，但资本扩张中产业结构向发展中国家的梯度转移，在劳动密集型产业上为自身造就了竞争对手，导致欧美发达国家制造业“产业空心化”“去工业化”，从而造就全球化的富豪精英阶层和本土经济弱势群体。特别是国际金融危机爆发后，欧美国家政府与金融垄断资本精英站在同一立场，政府的政策倾向于救助金融垄断资本，而把金融危机的苦果转嫁给普通民众。人们逐渐意识到，金融垄断资本主义是以享有市场权力的少数富豪精英特权阶层攫取巨额财富为目的，以牺牲中下层人民的经济、政治、社会权利和穷人的尊严为代价的发展方式。在分配不公的利益驱使下，许多收入下降的群体对精英阶层表现出各种不满、抵触情绪，这种负面情绪最终汇聚成浩浩荡荡的公民抗议浪潮，从而将资本主义的伪善和谎言湮没在运动洪流之中。

I. Explosive Inequality: The Background and Causes of the Activism of Radical Left-Wing Social Movements in Europe and the United States

一、爆炸性不平等：欧美激进左翼社会运动活跃的背景和原因

Inequality has always been an incurable chronic disease and stubborn ailment of capitalist society. Marx and Engels pointed out 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, is the accumulation of misery, agony of labour, slavery, ignorance, brutality, and mental degradation,"[1]1 The drastic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe: Refers to the collapse of communist regimes in the Soviet Union and its Eastern Bloc satellite states between 1989 and 1991, ending the Cold War. and "the strong trample the weak underfoot; a handful of the strong, the capitalists, hold everything, while the great mass of the weak, the poor, can barely keep alive."[2]2 Eurocommunism: A trend within Western European communist parties during the 1970s and 1980s that sought a democratic, non-revolutionary path to socialism, independent of the Soviet Union's influence. Lenin also believed that with the continuous development of capitalism, "vast wealth is concentrated in the hands of a few capitalists, while the masses of the people are reduced to having nothing."[3]3 V. I. Lenin, *Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism*. The boundless wealth and freedom of the bourgeoisie stand in stark contrast to the endless poverty and oppression suffered by the proletariat. This phenomenon of polarization is rooted in the capitalists' uncompensated appropriation of workers' surplus value under the private ownership of the means of production. Economic inequality directly exacerbates inequality in other social spheres such as politics, education, intergenerational mobility, opportunity, and region. Consequently, the monopoly oligarchs who own the means of production become the actual rulers of the national economy, political power, ideology, and social life in capitalist countries.

不平等一直是资本主义社会无法根除的顽疾与痼症。马克思、恩格斯曾指出，在资本主义社会里，“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“强者把弱者踏在脚下，一小撮强者即资本家握有一切，而大批弱者即穷人只能勉强活命”。2列宁也认为，随着资本主义的不断发展，“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”。3资产阶级拥有无限的财富和自由与无产阶级遭受无尽的贫穷和压迫形成了鲜明对比，这种两极分化现象正是根源于生产资料私有制下资本家对工人剩余价值的无偿占有，经济上的不平等又会直接加剧政治、教育、代际、机会、区域等社会其他领域的不平等状况，因而那些占有生产资料的垄断寡头就成为资本主义国家国民经济、政治权力、意识形态和社会生活等各方面的实际统治者。

The United States, as the leading capitalist country, has a level of inequality that consistently ranks highest among developed nations. *Time* magazine even described this extreme inequality as "American pain" in an article. Data from the U.S. Census Bureau and the Federal Reserve show that since 1980, absolute income mobility in the United States has significantly weakened, the degree of wealth inequality has risen sharply, and social wealth has continuously flowed towards the top elite class, while the底层 people at the bottom of society are deeply trapped in a cycle of poverty from which they cannot save themselves. In 2018, the income of the top 20% of earners in the United States accounted for 52% of the total national income, with an average household income of $233,895; the richest among the rich (the top 5% of earners) received 23% of the total national income, with an average household income of $416,520; while the bottom 20% of earners accounted for only 3.1% of the total national income, with an average household income of $13,775.[4]4 Data from U.S. Census Bureau and Federal Reserve reports. In 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic further exacerbated the imbalance in social income and wealth distribution. While tens of millions of unemployed people were applying for unemployment benefits and struggling to get by, the personal fortunes of twelve American super-billionaires, represented by Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg, and Elon Musk, experienced explosive growth, with a total net worth increase of 40%, exceeding $1 trillion. This pandemic verified that the trickle-down effect promoted by neoliberalism is nothing but empty talk. On one side, the stock prices of super business giants soared; on the other side, low-income groups suffered from unemployment, hunger, and death brought about by the pandemic. Yet the government turned a blind eye to the widening gap between rich and poor and was indifferent to the safety and living conditions of the people. This operational mechanism, which prioritizes capital and lacks government intervention, inevitably pushed the social contradictions and profound social inequality accumulated over decades to a critical point, accelerating society's drift towards political polarization and confrontation.

美国作为资本主义国家的领头羊，其不平等程度持续高居发达国家之首，《时代》周刊甚至在文章中将这种极端不平等称作“美式痛苦”。美国人口普查局和美联储的数据显示，自1980年以来，美国绝对收入流动性明显减弱，财富不平等程度急剧攀升，社会财富不断向着社会顶层精英阶层流动，社会底层人民却深陷贫困怪圈难以自救。2018年，美国收入最高的20%人口的收入占美国国民总收入的52%，他们的平均家庭收入为233,895美元；富人中最富有的人（收入最高的5%）获得了美国国民总收入的23%，其平均家庭收入为416,520美元；而收入最低的20%的人仅占美国国民总收入的3.1%，其平均家庭收入为13,775美元。4 2020年，新冠疫情更是加剧了社会收入和财富分配失衡，当数千万失业人口正在申请失业救济、艰难度日时，以杰夫·贝佐斯、马克·扎克伯格、埃隆·马斯克为代表的12位美国超级亿万富豪身价呈爆炸性增长，净资产总额增幅高达40%，财富总额超1万亿美元。此次疫情验证了新自由主义宣扬的涓滴效应不过是一句空话，一边是超级商业巨头股价高歌猛进，一边是低收入群体饱受疫情带来的失业、饥饿和死亡之苦，然而政府却对贫富两极鸿沟视而不见，对人民生命安全和生活状况置若罔闻。这种资本至上、政府缺位的运作机制必然将积累数十年的社会矛盾和深刻的社会不平等推高至临界点，加快社会走向政治极端化与对抗化。

Furthermore, under the ravages of the pandemic, long-standing issues of inequality in life and health, opportunity, and race in American society became more pronounced. Tens of millions of vulnerable groups were forced to confront deteriorating health conditions, scarce job opportunities, poor living conditions, and aggressive racial discrimination, while the super-rich could retreat to private healthcare facilities, luxury bunkers, and remote vacation homes to enjoy the most optimal resources. Low-income groups and ethnic minorities suffered more severe impacts from COVID-19 due to poor baseline health conditions and low insurance coverage rates. However, the U.S. government took no effective measures to provide relief, which caused widespread social discontent and drew severe criticism from public opinion. The role of the bourgeois state is to defend the interests of the entire ruling class, using centralized state power and national finances to protect large monopoly enterprises from the impact of crises and to suppress popular resistance. Reality has shown the masses more clearly that those states which claim to have "no resources" to meet the basic needs of the people do indeed have unlimited resources to "save" big businesses and expand the vast military-industrial complex, regardless of whether the current government calls itself "left" or "right." Chuck Collins, director of the Inequality Research Center at the Institute for Policy Studies in the United States, pointed out that the COVID-19 pandemic has fully revealed that the United States is actually a suffocatingly unequal society, but in fact, this inequality predates the novel coronavirus pandemic and is a long-standing, widespread phenomenon concomitant with the structural system of capitalism.[5]5 Chuck Collins, "The Pandemic Exposes America's Extreme Inequality," Institute for Policy Studies, 2020. The American people, mired in deep suffering, have accumulated a great deal of anger and resentment over years of neoliberal privatization and deregulation policies. Various types of left-wing movements are a form of expression for them to vent their grievances and resentment and to seek fairness and justice.

另外，疫情肆虐之下美国社会长期存在的生命健康不平等、机会不平等、种族不平等等问题愈发凸显，数千万弱势群体被迫直面恶化的健康状况、匮乏的就业岗位、糟糕的生活条件、激进的种族歧视，而超级富豪则可以撤退到私人保健医院、奢侈地堡和偏远的度假屋享用最优渥的资源。低收入群体和少数族裔因原生健康状况差、保险覆盖率低等原因，在新冠肺炎中受到的冲击更为剧烈，然而美国政府对此未采取任何有效措施进行救助，这引起了社会普遍不满，招致了舆论的严厉批评。资产阶级国家的作用是捍卫整个统治阶级的利益，利用中央集权力量和国家财政保护大型垄断企业免受危机的影响并压制人民的反抗。现实向群众更清楚地表明，那些表示“没有资源”来满足人民基本需求的州，确实有无限的资源来“拯救”大企业和扩大庞大军工复合体，无论现任政府是否称自己为“左”或“右”。美国政策研究所不平等研究中心主任查克·柯林斯（Chuck Collins）指出，新冠疫情彻底展露了美国实际上是一个令人窒息的极度不平等的社会，但实际上这种不平等是先于新型冠状病毒大流行而存在的，是与资本主义制度结构相伴相生的一种长期普遍存在的现象。5陷入深重苦难的美国民众在多年的新自由主义私有化、非调控化政策中积攒了大量的怒气和怨恨，各类左翼运动便是他们宣泄愤懑怨憎、寻求公平正义的一种表达方式。

Although the level of inequality in Europe is significantly lower than in the United States, with the spread of neoliberalism, inequality has also been increasing in most European countries. A report released in 2019 by the World Inequality Database showed that between 1980 and 2017, the average income of the poorest 50% of low-income groups in Europe grew by 30% to 40%. The income growth rate of the "European middle-income group" was only slightly more than 10 percentage points higher than that of these poor groups. In stark contrast, the income growth rate of the wealthy groups surged significantly. The income of the top 0.1% of European citizens grew by over 100%, and the income growth rate of the top 0.001% super-rich group even reached as high as 200%, enjoying a standard of living about three times higher than before.[6]6 World Inequality Report 2018, World Inequality Lab. Especially after the international financial crisis and the European debt crisis, European capitalist countries experienced sluggish economic growth, persistently high unemployment rates, frequent refugee crises, and numerous social governance challenges. However, to protect the interests of the monopoly bourgeoisie, governments reduced taxes on large enterprises, cut social welfare spending, and privatized public social services, thereby shifting the costs of the crisis onto the middle class and the working class. A large number of "losers of globalization" subsequently fell into existential difficulties. As of 2018, among the citizens of EU countries alone, 180 million people (23.5% of the EU population) were at risk of poverty or social exclusion, of whom 43 million could not afford a quality meal every other day, a situation described as severe material deprivation.

尽管欧洲的不平等程度明显低于美国，但是随着新自由主义的蔓延，大多数欧洲国家的不平等现象也日益加剧。世界财富与收入数据库2019年发布的一份报告显示，在1980～2017年间，欧洲最贫穷的50%低收入群体的平均收入增长了30%～40%，“欧洲中等收入群体”的收入增长率仅略多于这些贫困群体10个百分点，与之形成鲜明对照的是富裕群体的收入增长率显著飙升，收入最高的0.1%的欧洲公民的收入增长了100%以上，其中0.001%的超级富裕群体收入增长率甚至高达200%，享受着比以往高3倍左右的生活水平。6尤其是在国际金融危机和欧债危机之后，欧洲资本主义国家经济增长乏力、失业率持续走高、难民危机频频出现、社会治理难题丛生，政府却为了保障垄断资产阶级利益而降低大型企业税收、缩减社会福利支出、私有化社会公共服务，从而将危机成本转嫁给中产阶级和工人阶级，大批“全球化中的失败者”相继陷入生存困境。截至2018年，仅欧盟国家的公民中就有1.8亿人（占欧盟人口数的23.5%）面临贫困或被社会排斥的风险，其中有4300万人每隔一天就无法负担优质膳食，这被称为严重的物质剥夺。

Corresponding to this are political disappointment and a sense of insecurity in daily life. The financial monopoly forces that control the economic lifeline and their corrupt political agents whom they have bought off have long manipulated the democratic political system, and the equal conditions for ordinary people to achieve social mobility through talent, education, and hard work have completely vanished. At the same time, Europe itself has increasingly become a place where extremist terrorist organizations operate rampantly. Violent terrorist attacks such as the London "7/7 bombings" and the Manchester suicide bombing have brought enormous threats and losses to the safety of life and property of European people. Staffan I. Lindberg, a professor of political science at the University of Gothenburg in Sweden, points out that inequality can significantly affect the evolution of the political landscape and social ecology, narrowing democratic space, undermining the degree of democracy (e.g., in Croatia, Hungary, Macedonia), and inciting the continuous development of protest movements and populist movements (e.g., in Austria, France, Lithuania, Slovenia, and Sweden).[7]7 Staffan I. Lindberg, "The Democratic Quality of Elections and the Future of Democracy," in *The Future of Democracy*, ed. by Staffan I. Lindberg (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018), pp. 1-30. The anger and anxiety of vulnerable groups ferment and heat up rapidly precisely in this extremely unequal living environment. They strongly desire to fight for fair rights to survival and development, hoping to change the status quo through various left-wing movements.

与之相应的还有政治上的失落感和生活上的不安全感。掌握经济命脉的金融垄断势力及其收买的腐败政治代理人长期操纵民主政治制度，普通民众通过天赋、教育和努力工作带来社会流动性的平等条件荡然无存。与此同时，欧洲本土日益成为极端恐怖组织活动猖獗的场所，伦敦“七七爆炸案”、曼彻斯特自杀式爆炸案等暴力恐怖主义袭击给欧洲民众的生命安全和财产安全带来巨大威胁和损失。瑞典哥德堡大学政治学教授斯塔凡·林德伯格（Staffan I.Lindberg）指出，不平等现象会在相当程度上影响政治格局和社会生态的演变，缩小民主空间、破环民主程度（例如在克罗地亚、匈牙利、马其顿）以及激起抗议活动和民粹主义运动的不断发展（例如在奥地利、法国、立陶宛、斯洛文尼亚和瑞典）。7中弱势群体的愤怒和不安正是在极度不平等的生存环境中迅速发酵升温，其强烈渴望争取公平的生存与发展权利，希冀借助各类左翼运动来改变现状。

II. Surging Waves of Protest: The Current State and Characteristics of Radical Left-Wing Social Movements in Europe and the United States

二、抗议浪潮风起云涌：欧美激进左翼社会运动的现状和特征

Explosive social inequality and the sharp social class contradictions accumulated continuously therefrom indicate that capitalism is deeply mired in a crisis of legitimacy, a crisis of state governance, a crisis of values, and a crisis of faith, and has already entered a dead end from which there is no turning back. The slogans raised by the European and American left, such as "Overthrow bourgeois rule," "Kill capitalism," and "Another world is possible," as well as the massive substantive protest marches and demonstrations they have launched and the successive large-scale mass strike movements, represent a negation of modern financial monopoly capitalism and right-wing populism. Currently, radical left-wing social movements in Europe and the United States exhibit distinct characteristics: protests are massive in scale, the subjects and demands are diversified, and mobilization methods are networked.

爆炸性的社会不平等以及由此持续积累的尖锐社会阶级矛盾预示着资本主义深陷合法性危机、国家治理危机、价值危机、信仰危机，且已经走向无法转圜的死胡同。欧美左翼提出“打倒资产阶级统治”“杀死资本主义”“另一个世界是可能的”等口号以及掀起声势浩大的实质性抗议示威游行、此起彼伏的规模性群众罢工运动是对现代金融垄断资本主义和右翼民粹主义的否定。目前，欧美左翼激进社会运动呈现出抗议活动声势浩大，主体与诉求多元化、动员方式网络化的鲜明特点。

First, radical left-wing social movements in Europe and the United States have a high frequency of outbreaks, large protest scales, and wide-ranging influence. Inspired by Tunisia's "Arab Spring," the United States saw the outbreak of the "Occupy Wall Street Movement" in 2011, which opposed the polarization between rich and poor and quickly spread to Canada, the United Kingdom, Spain, France, and other countries. Because Trump loudly advocated white supremacy, xenophobia, racial discrimination, and hyper-masculinity, this incited explosive growth in anti-capitalist sentiment among oppressed groups such as low-income groups within the working class and ethnic minorities, leading to the large-scale eruption of social resistance movements. They flooded the streets like a tide to protest the neo-fascist characteristics of the Trump administration. In January 2017, tens of thousands of people participated in women's protest marches in Washington, D.C., Los Angeles, New York, and other U.S. cities, protesting Trump's strong misogynistic sentiments and offensive remarks insulting women expressed during his campaign, strongly calling on the government to achieve gender equality, value women's rights, stop ethnic division, and address social injustice. In April of the same year, the "Tax Day March" broke out in the United States, where tens of thousands of protesters gathered in front of the Capitol in Washington, D.C., on Tax Day to hold a protest march, demanding that President Trump release all his deliberately concealed tax returns to the public. In May 2020, large-scale protest demonstrations triggered by the Minneapolis white police officer's violent killing of the unarmed African American man George Floyd intensified in the United States. The protest locations quickly spread from Minneapolis to New York, Detroit, Los Angeles, and many other cities, eventually evolving into a nationwide resistance movement. Protesters in at least 140 cities across the United States poured into the streets, shouting slogans such as "I can't breathe" and "Black Lives Matter" to seek justice for Floyd and to resist the United States' systemic racial discrimination against people of color and police violence. In August 2020, activities called "March for the Dead" broke out in multiple U.S. cities, directly targeting the current U.S. federal government's inadequate response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Furthermore, the Trump administration's "family separation" immigration policy, the new healthcare reform bill, and its money-first approach all led to a continuous stream of protests and demonstrations of various sizes, with no signs of abating. Now, although Joe Biden, who won the 2020 U.S. presidential election, has replaced Trump and entered the White House, his neoliberal-neo-fascist alliance, which reflects the internal interests of the capitalist class, will continue to constitute state power under financial monopoly capital and will continue to implement policies serving the interests of large financial monopoly capital unchanged.[8]8 This refers to the view that the Biden administration, while replacing Trump, continues to represent the interests of financial monopoly capital, maintaining the fundamental capitalist structure and policies. Therefore, this kind of large-scale mass protest will not disappear; instead, it will become more frequent as the structural crisis of capitalism and the crisis of political trust deepen.

首先，欧美左翼激进社会运动爆发频率高、抗议规模大、辐射范围广。受突尼斯的“阿拉伯之春”启迪，美国2011年爆发反抗贫富两极分化的“占领华尔街运动”并迅速蔓延至加拿大、英国、西班牙、法国等其他国家。由于特朗普大肆鼓吹白人至上主义、排外主义、种族歧视、超级男权主义，激起了劳工阶层中的低收入群体、少数族裔等受压迫群体反资本主义情绪的爆发性增长和社会抵抗运动的大规模爆发，他们如潮水般涌上街头抗议特朗普政府的新法西斯主义特征。2017年1月，数万人在美国华盛顿、洛杉矶、纽约等地参与妇女示威游行活动，抗议特朗普在竞选中流露出来的强烈的女性厌恶情绪以及侮辱妇女的冒犯性言论，极力呼吁政府实现男女平等、重视女性权益、停止族群分裂以及解决社会不公。同年4月，美国爆发“税单游行”，上万名抗议者在纳税日（Tax Day）这一天聚集在华盛顿国会山前举行抗议游行，要求总统特朗普向公众发布他刻意隐瞒的全部纳税申报表。2020年5月，由明尼阿波利斯白人警察暴力虐杀手无寸铁的非洲裔黑人乔治·弗洛伊德（George Floyd）所引发的大规模抗议示威活动在美国愈演愈烈，抗议地点从明尼阿波利斯快速蔓延到纽约、底特律、洛杉矶等多个城市，最终演变成全国性抵抗运动。全美至少有140多座城市的抗议者涌向街道高呼“我无法呼吸”“黑人的命也是命”等口号为弗洛伊德伸张正义，反抗美国对有色人种的制度性种族歧视和警察暴力行为。2020年8月，在美国多个城市爆发了名为“死者游行”（March for the Dead）的活动，直指当前美国联邦政府对新冠疫情的应对不力。此外，特朗普政府的“骨肉分离”移民政策、新医疗改革法案、金钱至上主义行径均导致大大小小的抗议示威游行接连不断且毫无减弱平息迹象。如今，赢得2020年美国大选的乔·拜登虽取代特朗普入主白宫，但是其反映资本家阶级内部利益性的新自由主义—新法西斯联盟仍会继续构成金融垄断资本下的国家权力，依然执行为金融垄断大资本利益服务的政策不变。8因此，这种大规模群众抗议并不会销声匿迹，而是随着资本主义结构性危机以及政治信任危机的加深而愈加频繁。

Similar protest marches have also repeatedly erupted on the European continent. Since the international financial crisis and the European debt crisis, the implementation of fiscal austerity policies in many European countries has exacerbated public anxiety and poverty. Europeans in difficult circumstances have frequently held strikes and demonstrations to express their dissatisfaction, sparking the largest pan-European protests against austerity policies to date, including the Spanish "Indignados" movement, the UK general strike, the Italian general strike, and the Greek anti-austerity demonstrations. In 2016 and 2018, France saw the "Nuit Debout" movement, triggered by the government's promulgation of a draft labor law amendment detrimental to workers' rights, and the "Yellow Vests" movement, protesting the French government's increase in fuel taxes. These protest movements strongly expressed the economic and political demands of ordinary people for better social justice and a more reasonable distribution of social wealth, implicitly reflecting the major problems and ills that have long existed in French society. In 2020, influenced by the Floyd incident in the United States, anti-police brutality and anti-racial discrimination protest marches occurred in many European countries, including the United Kingdom, Italy, Germany, and France. Numerous protesters gathered around U.S. embassies, holding signs with slogans such as "No justice, no peace," "White supremacy is a virus," and "White silence is violence" to show solidarity with U.S. demonstrators. Against the backdrop of the increasingly severe COVID-19 pandemic, this anti-discrimination protest escalated continuously, with its scope and scale expanding unprecedentedly. The focus of the protests also shifted from the incident itself to their own internal structural racism and broader inequality.

同样的示威游行运动也屡屡爆发在欧洲大陆。自国际金融危机和欧债危机以来，欧洲多国实施财政紧缩政策加剧了民众的焦虑和贫困，处境艰难的欧洲民众纷纷举行罢工和游行示威表达不满，爆发了包括西班牙“愤怒者”运动、英国大罢工、意大利大罢工、希腊反紧缩示威游行等运动在内的迄今为止规模最大的泛欧抗议紧缩政策运动。2016年和2018年，法国爆发了因政府颁布有损劳工权益的劳动法修改草案而引发的“黑夜站立”运动以及抗议法国政府调高燃油税的“黄背心”运动。这些抗议示威运动强烈地表达了普通民众要求更好地实现社会公正、更合理地分配社会财富等经济政治诉求，其背后暗含的是法国社会长期存在的重大问题和弊病。2020年，受美国弗洛伊德事件影响，英国、意大利、德国、法国等欧洲多个国家发生了反警察暴力执法、反种族歧视的抗议游行，众多抗议者聚集在美国大使馆周围，手持“没有正义，就没有和平”“白人至上是一种病毒”“白人的沉默与暴力无异”等标语声援美国示威者。在新冠疫情愈发严重的背景之下，此次反歧视游行示威不断升级，范围与规模空前扩大，抗议焦点也从事件本身转向各自内部的结构性种族主义以及更广泛意义上的不平等。

Secondly, the participants in European and American radical left-wing movements are diverse, their objectives are broad, and their discourse systems are pluralistic. Since the 1960s, developed capitalist countries have experienced material abundance and domestic political stability, with an increased proportion of the middle class in society. This gave rise to new social movements focusing on human rights issues such as gender equality, racial equality, ecological protection, religious freedom, reproductive rights, and the rights of LGBTQ groups (sexual minorities). These movements significantly deviated from the traditional political movement model centered on class struggle. They no longer focused primarily on material issues such as economic welfare, nor did they rely on the social foundation of the working class or the means of political struggle. Instead, they formed non-violent movements by constructing identity politics among diverse participating groups of different classes, genders, and races. In essence, they were left-wing social movements of the Western middle class that challenged the capitalist system. After the upheavals in Eastern Europe in the 1980s and the collapse of the Soviet Union, left-wing parties in Europe and America distanced themselves from the Soviet and Eastern European models, gradually downplaying leftist ideological colors and further abandoning the traditional path of working-class political struggle. However, following the structural crisis of capitalism in the early 21st century, the elite class received huge benefits from government bailout policies, while a large number of the middle class went bankrupt, causing their living standards and social status to plummet. Their sense of dignity and superiority vanished, and the phenomenon of "re-proletarianization" became increasingly prominent. This led to strong questioning and challenges to the legitimacy of the capitalist economic system, political leadership, and ideology. With the logic of capital penetrating all aspects of society, class contradictions and class conflicts intensified and escalated again. Traditional class consciousness gradually awakened, and demands for economic welfare returned to the public view. However, this does not mean that the diverse movement demands based on identity politics have been replaced by class discourse. Instead, identity discourse and class discourse coexist, making the discourse system of European and American radical left-wing social movements richer and more diverse. This has formed left-wing social resistance movements in which vulnerable groups suffering discrimination or unfair treatment—including industrial workers, gender activists, ethnic minorities, and LGBTQ groups—defend their rights and interests and express demands in economic, political, cultural, and other fields. For example, the Greek strike movement and the US teachers' strike movement mainly used class discourse, while the "Black Lives Matter" movement and the "Me Too" movement mainly used identity politics discourse. In general, 21st-century European and American radical left-wing movements can be seen as a close combination of the real contradictions of neoliberal capitalism with class discourse and identity discourse. They are movements that impact the capitalist society of the wealthy elite, driven by grassroots-led strike movements and protest movements spontaneously formed by various sectors of society.

其次，欧美激进左翼运动参与主体庞杂、目标诉求广泛、话语体系多元。20世纪60年代以来，发达资本主义国家社会物质丰裕且国内政治稳定，中产阶级社会比重增加，出现了关注性别平等、种族平等、生态保护、宗教自由、生殖权力、LGBTQ群体（性少数群体）权利等有关人权问题的新社会运动。该运动大大偏离了传统的以阶级斗争为核心的政治运动模式，不再重点关注诸如经济福祉等物质生活方面的议题，也不依靠工人阶级的社会基础和政治斗争的手段，而是通过构建不同阶层、性别和种族等多元参与群体的身份认同政治而形成的非暴力运动，本质上是西方中产阶级和挑战资本主义制度的左翼社会运动。20世纪80年代东欧剧变、苏联解体后，欧美左翼政党纷纷与苏东划清界限，逐渐淡化左翼意识形态色彩，进一步放弃传统工人阶级政治斗争路径。然而，在21世纪初期的资本主义结构性危机之后，精英阶层得到政府纾困政策的扶持获取巨额利益，中产阶级大量破产而导致生活水准和社会地位一落千丈，尊严感和优越感荡然无存，“再无产阶级化”现象日趋凸显，导致资本主义经济体系、政治领导和意识形态的合法性遭到强烈质疑和挑战。在资本逻辑全方位渗透进整个社会的情况下，阶级矛盾和阶级冲突再次激化升级，传统阶级意识日渐苏醒，经济福利诉求重回大众视野。但是这并不意味着基于身份政治的多元运动诉求被阶级话语取而代之，而是身份话语和阶级话语并存，从而使得欧美激进左翼社会运动的话语体系更加丰富多元，形成了包括产业工人、性别主义者、少数族裔、LGBTQ群体等在内的受到歧视或不公正待遇的弱势群体捍卫自身权益，表达经济、政治、文化等多领域诉求的左翼社会抵抗运动。例如，希腊罢工运动、美国教师罢工运动主要使用的是阶级话语，“黑人的命也是命”运动和“我也是”运动主要使用的是身份政治话语。总的来说，21世纪的欧美激进左翼运动可以被视作新自由主义资本主义的现实矛盾与阶级话语和身份话语的紧密结合，是由基层主导的罢工运动和社会各界自发形成的抗议运动共同冲击权贵资本主义社会的运动。

Finally, in the era of big data, the trend towards networked mobilization and flattened organizational structures in European and American radical left-wing social movements has become increasingly evident. The initiation and maintenance of traditional socialist movements relied on physical organizations using various gatherings as communication platforms. However, the new communication media of the internet era have broken the spatial and temporal constraints that hindered the development and growth of social movements in the pre-digital age, allowing participants to quickly share real-time information during the process of mobilization, organization, and protest activities. This has played an important role in strengthening democratic consultation, expanding participation, and enhancing the influence of current European and American radical left-wing social movements. Manuel Castells pointed out that the organizational structure of the internet can be seen as a special kind of decentralized, leaderless, and polysemous political platform. It allows marginalized individuals ignored in mainstream politics to express their experiences and needs on this organizational platform, and then freely form online alliances with like-minded people.[9]9 Manuel Castells, *Networks of Outrage and Hope: Social Movements in the Internet Age* (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2012). Taking the "Yellow Vests" movement in France as an example, the starting point was a video posted by a woman on Facebook expressing anger over rising fuel taxes and government incompetence and corruption. Subsequently, the video spread virally on social media, resonating with millions of people. Ordinary people from all walks of life expressed their demands on online platforms. Discussion groups on related topics and calls for offline activities sprang up like mushrooms after rain. This led to street protests and demonstrations sweeping across France and spreading to Germany, Italy, Belgium, Greece, the Netherlands, and other European countries, attracting widespread attention from the international community. It is noteworthy that, unlike previous protest activities in France commonly organized by various trade unions, this massive "Yellow Vests" protest wave had neither a fixed mobilization system nor a stable organizational structure, nor a clear initiator or national leader. From the initiation and assembly of the movement to the formulation of strategies and coordination of actions, everything was completed on the discussion pages of social media. There was no obvious hierarchy among participants, and communication tended to be more horizontal. Furthermore, because every ordinary person on social media can become the creator or provider of content for different events, messages, topics, etc., the online platform can serve not only as the initial carrier of the entire event but also as a "catalyst" during its development. In May 2020, after the video of the brutal "knee-on-neck" killing of African American man George Floyd by a white American police officer was exposed on online platforms, it quickly caused an uproar. Overnight, the hashtag "Black Lives Matter" flooded major social networking sites. Within a short time, tens of thousands of protesters gathered and launched a vigorous anti-racism protest march. During the protests, participants used the broad platform of digital technology to promptly update the progress of the movement, engage in heated discussions, adjust struggle strategies, and issue action directives, posing a strong challenge to systemic racism in the United States.

最后，在大数据时代，欧美左翼激进社会运动动员方式网络化、组织方式扁平化的趋势愈加明显。传统社会主义运动的发起和维持都是通过以各种集会为交流平台的实体组织，但是互联网时代的新型传播媒介打破了前数字时代推动社会运动发展壮大的时空限制，使参与者在动员组织和抗议活动的过程中能够快速共享实时信息，这对目前欧美左翼激进社会运动加强民主协商、扩增参与人员、提升影响力发挥了重要作用。曼努埃尔·卡斯特利斯（Manuel Castells）指出，互联网的组织机构可以视作一种特殊的去中心化、无领袖化和具有多义性的政治平台，它允许在主流政治中受到忽视的边缘个体在这个组织机构中表达他们的经历和需要，然后自由地与志同道合的人结成线上联盟。9以法国的“黄马甲”运动为例，事件起点是一位女士在脸书上发布了一段对燃油税上涨、政府低能腐败表示愤怒的视频。随后，该视频在社交媒体上得到核裂变式传播并引发数百万人的强烈共鸣，来自各行各业的普通人在网络平台上表达利益诉求，相关话题的讨论组以及线下活动的召集如雨后春笋般涌现，由此导致街头抗议示威游行席卷法国各地并蔓延至德国、意大利、比利时、希腊、荷兰等其他欧洲国家，引起国际社会的广泛关注。值得注意的是，与以往在法国常见的由各类工会组织的抗议活动不同，此次声势浩大的“黄马甲”抗议浪潮既没有固定的动员系统和稳定的组织结构，也没有一个明确的发起者和全国性领袖。从运动的发起集结、策略制定再到行动协调都是在社交媒体的讨论页面上完成的，参与成员之间没有明显的上下级之分并且交流沟通更趋横向性。另外，由于在社交媒体上每个普通人都可以成为不同事件、消息、话题等内容的创建者或提供者，所以网络平台不仅可以作为整件事情的最初载体，而且还可以在事件发展过程中成为“催化剂”。2020年5月，美国白人警察残忍“跪杀”非裔男子弗洛伊德的相关视频曝光至网络平台后也迅速引起轩然大波，一夜之间带有“黑人的命也是命”的话题充斥在各大社交网站，短时间内数万名抗议者联合集结并掀起轰轰烈烈的反种族歧视示威游行。在抗议过程中，参与者利用数字技术的广阔平台及时更新运动进展状态，开展激烈讨论，调整斗争策略，发布行动指示，给美国制度性种族主义带来强劲挑战。

III. Internal and External Constraints Hard to Break Through: The Realistic Predicament of European and American Radical Left-Wing Social Movements

三、内外制约难以突破：欧美激进左翼社会运动的现实困境

In an era where the ideology of neoliberalism is fraught with crises, the relatively active European and American radical left-wing movements have, to a certain extent, influenced social sentiment and government policy tendencies. However, their actual political achievements and room for development are very limited. Due to the constraints of the current political and economic interest networks in European and American societies, as well as the internal limitations of left-wing organizations, various large-scale left-wing resistance movements have subsided into silence shortly after erupting. Their demands for social fairness and justice and for narrowing the gap between rich and poor have also not been realized. Facts have proven that various left-wing social movements, which do not fundamentally eradicate the financial monopoly capitalist system but merely patch up the riddled capitalist system, find it difficult to change the already solidified pattern of interests.

在新自由主义意识形态危机四伏的时代，相对活跃的欧美激进左翼运动虽然在一定程度上影响了社会情绪和政府政策倾向，但其实际政治作为和发展空间却十分有限。由于当前欧美社会的政治经济利益网的制约以及左翼组织的内部局限性，各类声势浩大的左翼抵抗运动爆发不久后便归于沉寂，其寻求社会公平正义、缩短贫富差距的诉求也未能得到实现。事实证明，各类左翼社会运动不根本铲除金融垄断资本主义制度，而只是对千疮百孔的资本主义进行修修补补，难以改变早已固化的利益格局。

First, as the structural crisis of capitalism deepens further, radical left social movements in Europe and America have shown a higher degree of activity, but at the same time they have encountered strong marginalization and suppression from powerful extreme right-wing forces. Currently, the majority of countries in Europe and America are governed by right-wing populists, while the number of countries ruled by left-wing parties is now near a historic low. The remarkable achievements of European right-wing parties in recent national elections and elections to the European Parliament are clear evidence of this. In the 2019 UK general election, Jeremy Corbyn, the leader of the Labour Party who had long adhered to a left-wing political line and a radical left stance, suffered a crushing defeat at the hands of Conservative Party leader Boris Johnson. After taking office, Johnson promptly set about forming the most right-wing British cabinet since the Thatcher era and purged key figures from the government of former Prime Minister Theresa May. In the same year's Greek general election, the Coalition of the Radical Left (SYRIZA), led by Alexis Tsipras, was ousted from power by the center-right New Democracy party. In the second Spanish general election of 2019, the Spanish Socialist Workers' Party (PSOE) failed to secure an absolute majority and was forced to seek coalition partners to form a government. The "Podemos" party, led by Marxist scholar Pablo Iglesias, saw its vote share drop to 12.8% in this election, its worst result in European elections since its founding. At the same time, the emerging far-right party Vox, which holds political views similar to those of Trump and Le Pen, gained strength, winning 52 seats and leaping to become the third-largest party in parliament. Furthermore, right-wing forces in other European countries such as Hungary, Austria, Estonia, and Finland are also rising rapidly. Even during the 2020 US Democratic Party presidential primary process, the radical left figure Bernie Sanders failed to maintain the strong momentum he had shown four years earlier; instead, he was jointly suppressed by the Democratic Party establishment, eliminated from the race, and forced to end his presidential campaign in disappointment. Concurrently, many urban and educated voters in Western proportional representation systems have successively abandoned the social democratic movements of the Green parties or liberal parties.

首先，随着资本主义结构性危机进一步加深，欧美激进左翼社会运动呈现出更高的活跃度，但与此同时遭到强大的极端右翼势力的排挤和压制。目前，欧美大多数国家都是由右翼民粹主义者掌权，而左翼政党统治的国家数量现在已接近历史最低点。欧洲右翼政党近年在国内选举和欧洲议会选举中所取得的令人瞩目的成绩就是明证。在2019年英国大选中，长期坚持左翼政治路线以及激进左翼立场的工党党魁杰里米·科尔宾（Jeremy Corbyn）惨败给保守党领袖鲍里斯·约翰逊（Boris Johnson），后者上台后随即着手组建了自撒切尔夫人时期以来最右翼的英国内阁，并清除前首相特雷莎·梅政府中的关键人物。在同年的希腊大选中，由阿莱克西斯·齐普拉斯（Alexis Tsipras）领导的激进左翼联盟被中右翼政党新民主党赶下台。在2019年西班牙第二次大选中，社会工人党未能在选举中取得绝对多数席位而不得不寻求盟友党派组建联合政府，由马克思主义学者巴勃罗·伊格莱西亚斯(Pablo Lglesias)领导的“我们能”党在此次大选中的得票率更是下降到12.8%，这是自其成立以来在欧洲选举中最糟糕的结果。与此同时，新兴极右翼政党羽翼渐丰，具有和特朗普、勒庞类似政治主张的呼声党一举拿到52席，跃升为议会第三大党。除此之外，匈牙利、奥地利、爱沙尼亚、芬兰等欧洲其他国家右翼势力也在迅速崛起。即使在美国2020年民主党总统候选人提名过程中，激进左翼人士伯尼·桑德斯（Bernie Sanders）也并未能保持四年前高歌猛进的大好势头，反而遭到民主党建制派的联合绞杀而被横扫出局，黯然终止了他的总统竞选之路。与此同时，西方比例代表制国家中的许多城市选民和受过教育的选民也接连抛弃了绿党或自由党的社会民主运动。

The rapid rise of right-wing populism has squeezed the living space and popular base of socialism and left-wing forces, with a large number of working-class voters having already shifted from left-wing parties to the far-right camp. After the drastic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe [1]1 The drastic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe: Refers to the collapse of communist regimes in the Soviet Union and its Eastern Bloc satellite states between 1989 and 1991, ending the Cold War., under the dual impact of new social movements and neoliberalism, Tony Blair's "New Labour" movement in the UK accepted Anthony Giddens' "Third Way," which proposed "beyond left and right," thereby leading the trend of rightward shift among Western left-wing parties. Western left-wing parties successively abandoned class politics, chose to distance themselves from the needs of labor groups and grassroots strata, and continuously gravitated towards post-materialist values to attract the votes of the middle class. For example, the US Democratic Party, as early as the political realignment after 1968, had already moved away from the white working class and formed a value consensus and organizational alliance with the middle class. The working class and the bottom of society thus lost their traditional political representatives. Meanwhile, in order to win blue-collar votes and shed their status as marginal minor parties, European and American right-wing populist parties actively adjusted their political mobilization strategies. They mixed national issues with class issues, packaging them into a new national populist agenda capable of mobilizing both the working class and the native population. This mobilization had a very broad reach, attracting the votes of most grassroots workers. As things stand, capitalism still dominates the world system, and the pattern of "capitalism being strong while socialism is weak" is unlikely to be fundamentally reversed in the short term. Any left-wing movement challenging the existing economic order and power system will face strong suppression and division from right-wing forces.

右翼民粹主义的快速崛起挤压了社会主义及左翼力量的生存空间和民众基础，大量工人阶级选民已经从左翼政党转向极右翼阵营。苏东剧变后，在新社会运动和新自由主义的双重冲击下，英国布莱尔的“新工党”运动接受了安东尼·吉登斯提出的“超越左与右”的“第三条道路”，从而引领西方左翼政党的右翼化潮流。西方左翼政党纷纷放弃阶级政治，选择远离劳工群体和草根阶层的需要，不断向后物质主义价值观靠拢以吸引中产阶级的选票。例如，美国民主党早在1968年之后的政治重组中，就已经离开白人工人阶级，与中产阶级达成了价值共识和组织上的同盟关系。而工人阶级社会底层失去了传统的政治代言人。与此同时，欧美右翼民粹主义政党为了赢得蓝领选票和摆脱边缘小党的地位，积极调整政治动员策略，将民族议题、阶级议题掺杂一起，将其打包成一个既可以动员劳工阶级，又可以动员本国人民的民族民粹主义新议题，动员范围非常广，吸引了多数底层工人的选票。就目前来看，资本主义在世界体系中仍占主导地位，“资强社弱”的格局在短时间内难以得到根本性扭转，任何对现有经济秩序、权力体系进行挑战的左翼运动都会遭到右翼势力的强烈打压和分化。

Second, the difficulty in bridging internal divisions is a major constraint on the growth and strengthening of radical left forces in Europe and America. The broad participation of groups from different classes, ethnicities, and fields has accumulated social strength for radical left social movements in Europe and America. However, the complex and diverse social backgrounds, pluralistic values and ideologies, and wide-ranging interest demands of the movement's participants also harbor the risk of fragmentation and collapse for radical left organizations. On the one hand, this movement is not a social resistance movement guided by Marxism as its guiding ideology, but rather a social movement encompassing multiple ideologies such as democratic socialism, Trotskyism, and Eurocommunism [2]2 Eurocommunism: A trend within Western European communist parties during the 1970s and 1980s that sought a democratic, non-revolutionary path to socialism, independent of the Soviet Union's influence., which criticizes the ills of capitalism. Participants hold conflicting or even diametrically opposed views and positions on important political issues. On the other hand, the frequently erupting protest marches, demonstrations, and strikes are not based on specific class interests related to changes in economic relations, but merely seek certain adjustments and changes in government policies within the framework of capitalism. These include welfare demands calling for narrowing the gap between rich and poor and improving social security levels, as well as cultural demands emphasizing environmental protection, pacifism, women's rights, and the rights of ethnic minorities. The characteristic of dispersed focal points in the struggle is very evident. The lack of unity in ideological positions and goal demands inevitably leads to divergences in value objectives regarding action strategies, and can even cause splits and opposition within the same protest group. This lack of internal cohesion greatly weakens the overall strength of the radical left movement.

其次，内部分歧难以弥合是欧美激进左翼力量发展壮大的重要掣肘。来自不同阶层、族裔、领域的广泛参与群体为欧美激进左翼社会运动积聚了社会力量，但是运动成员复杂多样的社会背景、多元的价值观和意识形态以及广泛的利益诉求也为激进左翼组织带来了分崩离析的隐患。一方面，该运动并非以马克思主义为指导思想的社会抵抗运动，而是涵盖民主社会主义、托洛茨基主义、欧洲共产主义等多元意识形态的批判资本主义弊端的社会运动，参与人员对重要政治问题的观点立场存在矛盾冲突甚至截然相反。另一方面，频频爆发的抗议示威游行和罢工并非基于经济关系变革的特定阶级利益，而只是为了在资本主义框架内寻求某些政府政策的相应调整和变革，其中既有呼吁缩小贫富悬殊鸿沟、提升社会保障水平的福利诉求，也有强调环境保护、和平主义、妇女权益、少数族裔权益的文化诉求，斗争主题分散化的特征十分明显。思想立场和目标诉求的不统一必然导致行动策略上的价值目标分歧，甚至会导致同一抗议群体之间的对立分裂，这种内部凝聚力的缺失使得激进左翼运动的整体力量被极大地削弱了。

Finally, loose and disorderly organization, weak methods of struggle, and insufficient constructive proposals are clear obstacles to the vigorous development of radical left social movements in Europe and America. In the era of internet technology innovation, while major social networking sites and social media have become important bridges and ties for participants in radical left movements to share information, formulate plans, and coordinate actions, the close integration of virtual networks and social movements also brings many drawbacks. These include causing radical left organizations and movements to lack a fixed mobilization system, a stable organizational structure, loyal participating members, and strong national-level leaders. Moreover, various left-wing movements, protests, demonstrations, and marches all adopt non-violent methods of struggle within the scope of legal struggle under capitalism. No matter how radical the participants' attitudes may be, they have not taken strong actions to fundamentally subvert the capitalist system. This is completely different from working-class political movements that rely on real organizations for connection, possess unified charters and programs, adopt violent revolutionary methods, and have a high degree of organization and discipline. More importantly, although the radical left vehemently condemns the logic of capital monopoly, political hegemonic control, and ideological penetration of neoliberal capitalism, it has failed to propose a constructive alternative social model. For example, some left-wing scholars have proposed the formula "another world is possible," yet their political definition of this "new world" remains vague, their blueprint for an ideal society is overly simplistic, and their practical proposals for transcending neoliberalism mostly remain at a metaphysical level. In general, today's radical left social movements in Europe and America direct the spearhead of their struggle against the various ills of capitalism in practice. However, due to the internal looseness of left-wing organizations, once participating groups are subjected to forceful expulsion and suppression by the police and military, they quickly scatter like "wanderers." Therefore, seemingly surging waves of protest are, in reality, a heap of loose sand that cannot withstand wind and rain, failing to coalesce consensus amidst difficulties and form an irresistible revolutionary political force.

最后，组织松散无序、斗争方式软弱、建设性方案不足是欧美激进左翼社会运动蓬勃发展的明显羁绊。在互联网科技创新时代，各大社交网站和社交媒体虽然成为激进左翼运动参与者共享信息、制定规划和协调行动的重要桥梁和纽带，但虚拟网络和社会运动的紧密结合同样带来诸多弊端，包括导致激进左翼组织和运动缺乏固定的动员系统、稳定的组织结构、忠诚的参与成员以及强有力的全国性领袖。而且，各类左翼运动和抗议示威游行均是在资本主义合法斗争的范围内采用非暴力的抗争方式，无论参与者的态度多么激进，他们都没有采取根本颠覆资本主义制度的有力行动。这完全不同于依靠实体组织联接起来的拥有统一章程纲领、采取暴力流血革命方式和具有高度组织性和纪律性的工人阶级政治运动。更为重要的是，激进左翼虽然极力谴责新自由主义资本主义的资本垄断逻辑、政治霸权控制、意识形态渗透，但是它并未能提出一种有建设性意义的替代性社会模式。例如，有些左翼学者提出了“另一个世界是可能的”方案，却对这个“新世界”的政治定义模糊不清，对理想社会的蓝图构想过于简单，对超越新自由主义的实践方案大多停留在形而上的层面。总的来说，如今的欧美激进左翼社会运动在实践中把斗争矛头指向资本主义的种种弊端，但是由于左翼组织内部松散，参与群体在遭到警察和军队的武力驱逐镇压之后，很快便像“流浪者”一般四散而去。因此，看似汹涌澎湃的抗议浪潮实则是一盘经不起风吹雨打的散沙，未能在困境中凝聚共识形成一股锐不可当的革命性政治力量。

IV. Pan-Left United Front: The Development Trend of Radical Left Social Movements in Europe and America

四、泛左翼联合阵线：欧美激进左翼社会运动的发展趋势

Judging from the current situation, left-wing movements confined to trivial issues or unrelated to changes in the political and economic order are clearly in a weak position. If left-wing movements remain only at the level of theoretical critique or street protests, acting merely as isolated and scattered protest forces without demanding socialism or relying on the overall struggle of the working class, it will be difficult for them to achieve significant results in the struggle to change the existing order.[10]10 The author's footnote numbering begins at 10 in the original text; the preceding notes (1–9) are not included in this excerpt. Therefore, the only strategy capable of overcoming extreme power rule at present is to unite to the greatest extent all classes and progressive social forces whose interests run counter to those of the transnational opposition, forming a pan-left united front led by the working class and joined by various progressive forces, opposing the capitalist system and order, and jointly carrying out organized struggle, transformation, or revolution.

从目前的情况来看，局限于琐细议题或无关政治经济秩序变革的左翼运动明显处于弱势地位。左翼运动如果只停留在理论批判或街头抗议的水平，仅作为孤立分散的抗议力量来行动，不诉求社会主义、不依赖工人阶级的整体斗争，就难以在改变现存秩序的斗争中有大作为。10因此，现在能够战胜极端权力统治的唯一策略就是最大限度地团结与跨国反对派的利益背道而驰的所有阶级和社会进步力量，形成以工人阶级为主导的、各种进步力量参加的反对资本主义体制和秩序的泛左翼联合阵线，一同开展有组织的斗争、变革或革命。

In recent years, the ruling classes in most European and American countries have heavily funded right-wing think tanks and far-right political movements, and have brought religious fundamentalists into the electoral arena, thereby consolidating the position of the big monopoly bourgeoisie. They have vigorously incited racism and sexism to split the working class and render it incapable of struggle, and have widely propagated a cultural atmosphere of cynicism and fatalism to weaken the class consciousness and fighting spirit of the working class. Although workers' movements in European and American countries face an extremely difficult legal and institutional environment, in order to break free from the heavy shackles of capitalism, they must inevitably unite to build consensus and unify their diverse working-class base. The working class in the modern sense refers to the vast group of wage laborers existing in contemporary capitalist society. Following the structural crisis of capitalism in the early 21st century, the phenomenon of the "re-proletarianization of the middle class" has become prominent within European and American capitalist countries, leading to a rapid increase in the size of the proletariat. According to different defining criteria, it can be divided into skilled and unskilled workers, white-collar and blue-collar workers, employed, underemployed, and unemployed workers, organized and unorganized workers, and workers of different genders and age groups. All of them belong to the group of wage laborers who do not own the means of production and live by selling their labor power. At the same time, we must recognize that, given the complex changes in the capitalist economic structure, social structure, and class structure, the composition of the working class has also undergone complex and profound changes. The working class is not a uniform, homogeneous social group with identical interests, as understood in a one-sided and superficial way, but a diverse social group with complex membership, internal stratification, and specific individual interests that are complex and even conflicting.[11]11 The author's footnote numbering continues from the previous note; note 11 is not provided in the original excerpt. This means that only when the working class replaces individualist values with collectivist values and forms a unified sense of class identity and clear class consciousness can it gather strong class strength to carry out effective struggle. Class consciousness and class identity can arise from the miserable living conditions caused by capitalist exploitation and oppression, and can also sprout from the theoretical education on proletarian struggle and the dictatorship of the proletariat actively carried out by socialists. However, the most important thing is that they are formed in the practice of the workers' movement. This shows that workers' movements, such as strikes, demonstrations, product boycotts, and lobbying for pro-labor legislation, play an extremely important role in raising the consciousness of the working class and awakening its class consciousness. When a complete class consciousness and socialist consciousness are established, the working class, as the main force for transforming society, can most thoroughly exert its revolutionary role.

近年来，欧美大多数国家的统治阶级大力资助右翼智囊团和极右翼政治运动，以及将宗教原教旨主义者带入选举领域，以此巩固大垄断资产阶级的地位，极力煽动种族主义、性别歧视来分裂工人阶级并使其丧失斗争能力，大肆渲染犬儒主义、宿命论的文化氛围来削弱工人阶级的阶级意识和斗争精神。欧美国家的工人运动尽管面对着极其艰难的法律环境和制度环境，但是为了挣脱资本主义的沉重枷锁，就势必要团结起来凝聚共识、统一其多样化的工人阶级基础。现代意义上的工人阶级就是指在当代资本主义社会中存在的庞大雇佣劳动者群体。在21世纪初期资本主义结构性危机之后，欧美资本主义国家范围内“中产阶级的再无产阶级化”现象凸显，导致无产阶级群体的数量迅速攀升。按照不同的界定标准，它可以分为熟练的和不熟练的工人，白领和蓝领工人，就业的、就业不足和失业的工人，有组织和无组织的工人，不同性别和年龄阶段的工人，他们均属于不占有生产资料且靠出卖劳动力为生的雇佣劳动者群体。同时，我们必须看到，在资本主义经济结构、社会结构和阶级结构发生复杂变化的情况下，工人阶级的构成也发生了复杂深刻的变化，工人阶级不是那种片面、表象上理解的整齐划一、利益相同、完全均质化的社会群体，而是成员复杂、内部分层、具体个人利益复杂甚至冲突的庞杂的社会群体。11这就意味着只有当工人阶级以集体主义价值观取代个人主义价值观并且形成统一的阶级认同感和明确的阶级意识时，才能凝聚强大的阶级力量开展有效的斗争。阶级意识和阶级认同会从受资本主义剥削压榨而导致的苦不堪言的生活状况中产生，也会从社会主义者积极开展马克思主义关于无产阶级斗争和无产阶级专政的理论教育中萌发，不过最为重要的还是在工人运动实践中形成。这说明，诸如罢工、示威游行、抵制产品、游说支持劳工立法等工人运动对提高工人阶级的觉悟，唤醒工人阶级的阶级意识具有极其重要的作用。当完整的阶级意识和社会主义意识建立起来时，作为变革社会的主要力量的工人阶级才能最彻底地发挥其革命作用。

The working class itself needs to unite, but it cannot be the sole force of struggle in the pan-left alliance. Because the capitalist ruling class wields enormous economic, political, and military power and imposes highly controlling extortion and oppression on its own people, and because trade unions or workers' movements cannot meet all the key needs of workers, the working class needs to form alliances and cooperate with other progressive social movement forces, mutually promoting each other to form a powerful check on capitalism. Lower-level left-wing movements in the form of street protests, "Occupy" squares, and demonstrations can only be transformed into a material force for thoroughly transforming society if they are closely integrated with the workers' movement and gather protest crowds around high-level political goals. The most important allies of the working class are those groups that suffer special oppression due to capitalism. This special oppression is mainly extreme discrimination and over-exploitation based on race, nationality, gender, or age. Women, ethnic minorities, LGBTQ groups, people with disabilities, and the mentally ill all face one or even multiple forms of oppression. This universal experience of oppression lays a broad mass foundation for establishing a unified pan-left alliance. Within this vast pan-left alliance, the working class must also continuously strengthen its political, organizational, and ideological construction, forming a solid and stable main force alliance of socialism. Although expanding the scale of pan-left organizations and improving the revolutionary character and cohesion of the ranks will inevitably require a long and arduous process of exploration, the general historical trend of socialism replacing capitalism will not change.

工人阶级本身需要团结起来，但不能成为泛左翼联盟中的唯一斗争力量。由于资本主义统治阶级掌握着巨大的经济、政治和军事力量并且对本国人民实施控制性极强的勒索和压迫，加之工会或工人运动不能满足工人的所有关键需求，所以工人阶级需要与其他进步社会运动力量结盟联手、彼此促进，共同形成对资本主义的有力钳制。较低水平的街头抗议、广场“占领”、示威游行等形式的左翼运动也只有与工人运动紧密结合，以高层次的政治目标凝聚抗议人群，才能转变为彻底改造社会的物质力量。工人阶级最重要的盟友是那些由于资本主义而遭受特殊压迫的群体。这种特殊压迫主要是基于种族、国籍、性别或年龄形成的极度歧视和过度剥削，妇女、少数族裔、LGBTQ群体、残疾人和精神病患者等群体都面临着一种甚至多种压迫，这种普遍的受压迫经历为建立统一的泛左翼联盟奠定了广泛的群众基础。在这支庞大的泛左翼联盟队伍中，工人阶级还必须不断加强其政治建设、组织建设和思想建设，形成牢固稳定的社会主义主体力量联盟。虽然无论是泛左翼组织的规模扩大，还是队伍的革命性、凝聚力的提高注定还需要一个长期的、艰苦的探索过程，但是社会主义代替资本主义的历史总趋势是不会改变的。

In general, the widespread inequality of neoliberalism is an organized plunder by the ruling elite. It has become an organized form of state violence, giving rise to the seeds of ethnic cleansing, white supremacy, militarism, and a brutal culture. Widespread inequality also fosters the political premise that some people are disposable, that their lives are not valued, and that their existence is a burden, especially for racist elites driven by the pursuit of profit and capital accumulation. Therefore, vulnerable groups such as the elderly, the disabled, undocumented immigrants, and people of color become objects of extreme contempt for financial capital, which promotes class division, ethnic cleansing, mass incarceration, and extreme exclusion mechanisms in a society filled with an atmosphere of death. Amid the rapid spread of the COVID-19 pandemic exacerbating social inequality, protest groups of different identities have become acutely aware of the hypocrisy of neoliberal capitalist society and the necessity of uniting to carry out thorough change.

总的来说，新自由主义的普遍不平等是统治精英进行的一种有组织的掠夺，它已经成为一种有组织的国家暴力形式，萌生出种族清洗、白人至上、军国主义和残酷文化的种子。普遍的不平等也助长了这样一种政治前提，即一些人是可支配的，他们的生命不受重视，他们的存在是一种负担，特别是对于那些受追求利润和积累资本动机驱使的种族主义精英而言。因此，老年人、残疾人、无证件移民和有色人种等弱势群体成为那些在充满死亡氛围的社会中推动阶级分裂、种族清洗、大规模监禁和极端排斥机制的金融资本极度蔑视的对象。在新冠肺炎疫情的快速蔓延加剧社会不平等的情况之下，不同身份的抗议人群已经清醒地意识到新自由主义资本主义社会的虚伪性以及联合起来进行彻底变革的必要性。

Notes

注释

1 *Selected Works of Marx and Engels*, Vol. 2, People's Publishing House, 2012, pp. 289–290.

1《马克思恩格斯选集》第2卷，人民出版社，2012年，第289~290页。

2 *Complete Works of Marx and Engels*, Vol. 2, People's Publishing House, 1957, p. 304.

2《马克思恩格斯全集》第2卷，人民出版社，1957年，第304页。

3 *Complete Works of Lenin*, Vol. 2, People's Publishing House, 2013, p. 75.

3《列宁全集》第2卷，人民出版社，2013年，第75页。

4 Kimberly Amadeo, "The True Cause of Income Inequality in America," https://www.thebalance.com/income-inequality-in-america-3306190. (Accessed: December 16, 2019)

4Kimberly Amadeo,“The True Cause of Income Inequality in America,”https://www. thebalance. com/income-inequality-in-america-3306190.（上网时间：2019年12月16日）

5 Catherine Thorbecke and Arielle Mitropoulos, "Extreme Inequality Was the Preexisting Condition: How COVID-19 Widened America's Wealth Gap," https://abcnews.go.com/Business/extreme-inequality-preexisting-condition-covid-19-widened-americas/story?id=71401975. (Accessed: June 8, 2020)

5Catherine Thorbecke and Arielle Mitropoulos,“Extreme Inequality Was the Preexisting Condition:How COVID-19 Widened America's Wealth Gap,”https://abcnews. go. com/Business/extreme inequality preexistingcondition-covid-19-widened-americas/story?id=71401975.（上网时间：2020年6月8日）

6Thomas Blanchet, Lucas Chancel and Amory Gethin, “How Unequal is Europe?” https://wid.world/europe2019/. (Accessed: 2 April 2019)

6Thomas Blanchet, Lucas Chancel and Amory Gethin,“How Unequal is Europe?”https://wid.world/europe2019/.（上网时间：2019年4 月2日）

7Staffan I. Lindberg, “Are Increasing Inequalities Threatening Democracy in Europe?” https://carnegieeurope.eu/2019/02/04/are-increasing-inequalities-threatening-democracy-in-europe-pub-78270. (Accessed: 4 February 2019)

7Staffan I. Lindberg,“Are Increasing Inequalities Threatening Democracy in Europe?”https://carnegieeurope. eu/2019/02/04/areincreasing-inequalities-threatening-democracy-in-europe-pub-78270.（上网时间：2019年2月4日）

8John Bellamy Foster, “The Renewal of the Socialist Ideal,” https://monthlyreview.org/2020/09/01/the-renewal-of-the-socialist-ideal/. (Accessed: 1 September 2020)

8John Bellamy Foster,“The Renewal of the Socialist Ideal,”https://monthlyreview.org/2020/09/01/the-renewal-of-the-socialist-ideal/.（上网时间：2020年9月1日）

9Sarah J. Jackson, “Progressive Social Movements and the Internet,” in Dana Cloud (ed), Oxford Encyclopedia of Communication and Critical Studies, 2018, Oxford University Press.

9Sarah J. Jackson,“Progressive Social Movements and the Internet,”in Dana Cloud(ed), Oxford Encyclopedia of Communication and Critical Studies, 2018, Oxford University Press.

10(1) Jiang Hui: “Whither the Western Left? — The Situation and Prospects of the Western Left in the 21st Century,” *Social Sciences Abroad*, 2015, Issue 3, p. 8.

10(1)姜辉：“西方左翼何去何从?——21世纪西方左翼的状况与前景”，《国外社会科学》，2015年第3期，第8页。

11Jiang Hui: “On the Actual Conditions and Social Status of the Working Class in Western Countries,” *Teaching and Research*, 2014, Issue 7, p. 49.

11姜辉：“论西方国家工人阶级的现实境况和社会地位”，《教学与研究》，2014年第7期，第49页。

Online editor: Zhang Jian

网络编辑：张剑