An Analysis of the “Global South” and Its Modernization from the Perspective of Foreign Left-Wing Scholars

Since the outbreak of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, Western countries led by the United States have striven to win over Global South countries to condemn and sanction Russia, but with little effect. This reflects the further pursuit of independence in diplomacy by Global South countries and a substantial rise in their status and influence in the world格局. Compared with the concept of the “Third World,” which contains many political implications, and the concept of “developing countries,” which carries a metaphor of linear developmental paths, the concept of the “Global South” is more widely accepted by all parties in the international community. Since then, the concept of the “Global South” has continued to heat up, becoming a major global issue of increasing concern to the international community. Foreign left-wing scholars are also very concerned about the “Global South” and its modernization issues, having conducted research on this relatively early and achieved rich research results. Studying and sorting out the theoretical views of foreign left-wing scholars on the “Global South” and its modernization issues has very important theoretical reference significance. This helps us to comprehensively and accurately understand the formation and origins of the “Global South” and its modernization issues, profoundly reveal the roots and essence of the backwardness of Global South countries, further clarify China’s positioning as a member of the “Global South,” thereby firmly safeguarding the common interests of Global South countries, promoting the resolution of the North-South gap issue, and advancing the building of a community with a shared future for mankind.

俄乌冲突爆发以来，以美国为首的西方国家竭力争取全球南方国家谴责和制裁俄罗斯，但收效甚微。这反映了全球南方国家在外交上进一步追求独立性，在世界格局中的地位和影响力大幅上升。相对于包含许多政治含义的“第三世界”概念、有线性发展道路隐喻的“发展中国家”概念，“全球南方”概念更为国际社会各方所接受。此后，“全球南方”概念不断升温，成为国际社会日益关注的全球性重大问题。国外左翼学者也十分关注“全球南方”及其现代化问题，对此也较早地进行了研究，取得了丰富的研究成果。对国外左翼学者关于“全球南方”及其现代化问题的理论观点进行研究和梳理，具有非常重要的理论借鉴意义。这有利于我们全面准确地理解“全球南方”及其现代化问题的形成、由来，深刻揭示全球南方国家落后的根源与实质，进一步明确中国是“全球南方”一员的定位，从而坚定维护全球南方国家共同利益，促进南北差距问题的解决，推动构建人类命运共同体。

I. The Emergence of the “Global South” and the Manifestation of Its Modernization Issues

一、“全球南方”的出场及其现代化问题的显现

Global South countries emerged during the gradual formation of the capitalist world system. Global South countries faced different historical tasks at different stages of capitalist development. In different periods, Global South countries also had appellations such as “Third World” countries and “developing countries,” which carry different political implications and meanings, and foreign left-wing scholars have analyzed these.

全球南方国家在资本主义世界体系逐步形成时期出现。全球南方国家在资本主义发展的不同阶段面临着不同的历史任务，在不同时期全球南方国家还有着“第三世界”国家、“发展中国家”等称谓，这些称谓有着不同的政治寓意和含义，国外左翼学者对此进行了辨析。

1. The “Global South” Emerged with the Formation of the Capitalist World System

1.“全球南方”随着资本主义世界体系的形成而出现

Capitalism originated in the West, and since then it has initiated the process of humanity moving from a “narrowly local existence” to a “world-historical existence.” Capitalism continued to develop in Western countries, and other countries in the world were passively drawn into the capitalist world system. However, the status and role of the vast number of Asian, African, and Latin American countries in the capitalist world system were as colonies and semi-colonies of Western countries, politically and economically subordinate to them. Compared with feudal society, capitalism created enormous productive forces and demonstrated great historical progress. As Marx and Engels pointed out: “The bourgeoisie, during its rule of scarce one hundred years, has created more massive and more colossal productive forces than have all preceding generations together.” (1) But this was also a history of “blood and fire.” With the opening of new sea routes, from the early 16th century to the mid-to-late 19th century, European capitalism began its early colonial aggression and expansion, carrying out a series of plunder, massacres, conquests, and enslavement of the peoples of the Americas, Asia, and Africa.

资本主义产生于西方，自此开启了人类从“狭隘地域性的存在”到“世界历史性的存在”的发展历程。资本主义在西方国家不断发展，世界上其他国家也被动进入资本主义世界体系。但是，广大亚非拉国家在资本主义世界体系中的地位和角色却是西方国家的殖民地、半殖民地，在政治上和经济上从属于西方国家。与封建社会相比，资本主义创造了巨大的生产力，显示了极大的历史进步性。正如马克思恩格斯指出的：“资产阶级在它的不到一百年的阶级统治中所创造的生产力，比过去一切世代创造的全部生产力还要多，还要大。”(1)但这也是一部“血与火”的历史，随着新航路的开辟，从16世纪初到19世纪中后期，欧洲资本主义开始了早期殖民侵略和扩张的历程，对美洲、亚洲、非洲人民进行了一系列的掠夺、屠杀、征服和奴役。

“The discovery of gold and silver in America, the extirpation, enslavement and entombment in mines of the aboriginal population, the beginning of the conquest and looting of the East Indies, the turning of Africa into a warren for the commercial hunting of black-skins, signalised the rosy dawn of the era of capitalist production.” (2) “The bourgeoisie, by the rapid improvement of all instruments of production, by the immensely facilitated means of communication, draws all, even the most barbarian, nations into civilisation... It compels all nations, on pain of extinction, to adopt the bourgeois mode of production... Just as it has made the country dependent on the town, so it has made barbarian and semi-barbarian countries dependent on the civilised ones, nations of peasants on nations of bourgeois, the East on the West.” (3) This directly points out that Western capitalist countries, through imperialist activities, reduced the vast regions of Asia, Africa, and Latin America to colonized, exploited, and oppressed Global South countries, thereby forming the North-South gap and the “Global South” and its modernization issues. Many foreign left-wing scholars have also inherited and developed this thought of Marx and Engels. American historian L.S. Stavrianos pointed out that the Third World emerged in the early modern period due to the great social transformation that occurred in Northwestern Europe. This great social transformation was the rise of a vibrant capitalist society. It expanded overseas in stages, gradually controlling more and more areas of the globe, and by the 19th century had established its dominance worldwide (4).

“美洲金银产地的发现，土著居民的被剿灭、被奴役和被埋葬于矿井，对东印度开始进行的征服和掠夺，非洲变成商业性地猎获黑人的场所——这一切标志着资本主义生产时代的曙光。”(2)“资产阶级，由于一切生产工具的迅速改进，由于交通的极其便利，把一切民族甚至最野蛮的民族都卷到文明中来了……它迫使一切民族——如果它们不想灭亡的话——采用资产阶级的生产方式……正像它使农村从属于城市一样，它使未开化和半开化的国家从属于文明的国家，使农民的民族从属于资产阶级的民族，使东方从属于西方。”(3)这直接指出了西方资本主义国家通过帝国主义活动使广大亚非拉地区国家沦为被殖民、被剥削、被压迫的全球南方国家，从而形成了南北差距和“全球南方”及其现代化问题。许多国外左翼学者也继承和发展了马克思恩格斯的这一思想，美国历史学者斯塔夫里亚诺斯指出，第三世界是在近代早期由于西北欧发生的巨大社会变异而出现的。这场社会巨变就是生气蓬勃的资本主义社会的崛起。它分阶段向海外不断扩张，逐渐控制了地球的愈来愈广阔的地区，及至19世纪在世界范围内建立起它的统治(4)。

2. An Analysis of Several Concepts Related to Global South Countries

2.与全球南方国家相关的若干概念探析

South and North are first of all geographical concepts. Since most developed capitalist countries are in the Northern Hemisphere and most underdeveloped countries are in the Southern Hemisphere, the international community has the appellations of Southern countries and Northern countries. Corresponding to the North-South concept, there are also concepts of Eastern and Western countries internationally, the concept of the “three worlds,” the concepts of developing countries, underdeveloped countries, and developed countries, and so on. These need to be defined and explained. Eastern countries refer to the socialist camp after World War II, and Western countries refer to the capitalist camp led by the United Kingdom and the United States. In international political and economic research, Southern countries are also called the Third World and developing countries. The concept of the Third World is related to the bipolar structure of the Cold War, the two camps, and the division of the First World and the Second World. In 1952, the term “Third World” was first proposed by French demographer Alfred Sauvy. In February 1974, Mao Zedong put forward the strategic thought of dividing the world into “three worlds.” He pointed out: “In my view, the United States and the Soviet Union are the First World. The middle group, Japan, Europe, Australia, and Canada, are the Second World. We are the Third World.” (5)

南方和北方首先是一个地缘概念。由于大部分发达资本主义国家在北半球，不发达国家大部分在南半球，所以国际上有了南方国家和北方国家这种称谓。与南北概念对应的，国际上还有东西方国家的概念，“三个世界”的概念，发展中国家、不发达国家和发达国家的概念等等。对此，需要给予界定和说明。东方国家是指第二次世界大战后的社会主义阵营，西方国家是指以英美为首的资本主义阵营。在国际政治经济研究中，南方国家也被称作第三世界、发展中国家。第三世界的概念与冷战时期两极格局、两大阵营以及第一世界、第二世界的划分相关。1952年，“第三世界”一词由法国人口学家索维首次提出。1974年2月，毛泽东提出了“三个世界”划分的战略思想，他指出：“我看美国、苏联是第一世界。中间派，日本、欧洲、澳大利亚、加拿大，是第二世界。咱们是第三世界。”(5)

During the Cold War, Western academia believed that Western countries such as the United States, Europe, and Japan belonged to the First World, socialist countries such as the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe belonged to the Second World, and Asian, African, and Latin American countries belonged to the Third World. This differs from Mao Zedong’s division, but they are consistent in the division of the Third World. After the end of the Cold War, the scope of the three worlds changed somewhat. Academia divides the three worlds as follows: the United States is the First World; developed countries such as the European Union, Japan, Russia, Eastern Europe, Canada, and Australia are the Second World; and other countries still belong to the Third World (6). After the dissolution of the Soviet Union, there was a discussion in developed capitalist countries suggesting that the term “Third World” could be erased from the political dictionary, and they widely used the concept of “developing countries.” Many foreign left-wing and Marxist scholars insist on using the concept of the “Third World.” The concept of “developing countries” is also a commonly used concept in modern international politics and economics. After World War II, although most Southern countries achieved national independence in political form, they had not yet completely shaken off the control and exploitation of imperialist countries economically and remained very backward. The North-South gap problem remained very serious after the general independence of Southern countries. Therefore, Southern countries have always faced the common task of developing their national economies, hence the appellation “developing countries.” In short, whether it is Global South countries, or “developing countries” and the “Third World,” they all generally refer to those countries that historically suffered colonial aggression from imperialist countries, gained independence from the old colonial system, have a significant development gap compared with Western developed capitalist countries, and are striving to achieve modernization.

冷战期间，西方学术界认为，美欧日等西方国家属于第一世界，苏联东欧等社会主义国家属于第二世界，亚非拉国家属于第三世界。这与毛泽东的划分不相同，但在第三世界的划分上是一致的。冷战结束后，三个世界的范围有所变化，学术界这样划分三个世界：美国为第一世界，欧盟、日本、俄罗斯、东欧、加拿大、澳大利亚等发达国家为第二世界，其他国家仍属第三世界(6)。苏联解体以后，发达资本主义国家有一种议论，认为可以把“第三世界”这个术语从政治词典中一笔勾销，他们到处使用“发展中国家”的概念。国外许多左翼和马克思主义学者坚持使用“第三世界”的概念。“发展中国家”的概念也是现代国际政治经济中常用的概念。第二次世界大战后，大多数南方国家虽然在政治形式上获得了民族独立，但在经济上还没有完全摆脱帝国主义国家的控制与剥削，仍然十分落后。南北差距问题在南方国家普遍独立之后依然十分严重。因此，南方国家始终面临着发展民族经济的共同任务，便有了“发展中国家”的称谓。总之，无论是全球南方国家，还是“发展中国家”“第三世界”,都泛指那些历史上曾经遭受过帝国主义国家殖民侵略、从旧殖民主义体系中独立出来、在发展程度上与西方发达资本主义国家存在较大差距、正在努力实现现代化的国家。

3. The Emergence of the “Global South” and Its Modernization Issues and Analysis of Related Concepts

3.“全球南方”及其现代化问题的浮现与有关概念辨析

Once the countries of the Global South emerged, the “Global South” issue came into being. Foreign left-wing scholars’ definition of the “North-South” concept itself implies that the status of the two sides is unequal, and that the independence and development of the “Global South” are constrained and conditioned by the “Global North.” The “Global South” issue refers to the historical tasks that Global South countries urgently need to resolve at different historical stages. Western developed capitalist countries pursued colonialist policies, carrying out colonial aggression and exploitation of Southern countries through conquest, plunder, and other means, which is the historical root of the poverty and backwardness of Southern countries. Therefore, the primary historical task facing Southern countries before World War II was national independence, which is the political prerequisite for economic and social development. Indian scholar Vijay Prashad points out that before World War II and the period of decolonization, the idea of global social development was not taken seriously. The imperialist powers denied the potential of colonial peoples as human beings, meaning that the imperialist core countries at that time had no theory of development. The only emerging development theory came from the anti-colonial movement, which held that without decolonization, development was impossible, because imperialism drained the economies of the colonies.[4]4 Vijay Prashad, *The Poorer Nations: A Possible History of the Global South* (London: Verso, 2012), p. 7. After World War II, the “Global South” issue became concentrated on the problems of development and modernization. Hence, the concept of “developing countries” became a popular designation for Southern countries.

全球南方国家出现以后，就有了“全球南方”问题。国外左翼学者对“南北”概念的定义本身就包含着双方的地位是不平等的，“全球南方”的独立与发展受“全球北方”的限制与制约等含义。“全球南方”问题即全球南方国家在不同的历史阶段亟须解决的历史任务。西方发达资本主义国家推行殖民主义政策，通过征服、掠夺等方式对南方国家进行殖民侵略和剥削，这是南方国家贫穷落后的历史根源。因此，南方国家在第二次世界大战前面临的首要历史任务就是民族独立，这是经济社会发展的政治前提。印度学者维杰·普拉沙德指出，在第二次世界大战以及去殖民化时期之前，全球社会发展的思想并没有受到重视。帝国主义列强否认殖民地人民作为人的潜力，这意味着当时的帝国主义核心国家没有关于发展的理论。唯一的新兴发展理论来自反殖民运动，认为不进行去殖民化，就没有发展的可能，因为帝国主义榨干了殖民地的经济(7)。第二次世界大战后，“全球南方”问题集中表现为发展和现代化问题。因此，“发展中国家”概念成为南方国家的流行称谓。

Compared with the concept of “Third World” countries, many foreign left-wing scholars have questioned the concept of “developing countries.” American scholar Stavrianos points out: “Before World War II, most of what is now called the Third World was classified as colonies of the European powers. At that time, the adjective used to modify these colonies was usually ‘backward,’ rather than the diplomatic term used today: ‘underdeveloped.’ In the United Nations, the even more euphemistic term ‘developing’ is increasingly used—although this usage is easily misleading.”[5]5 L. S. Stavrianos, *Global Rift: The Third World Comes of Age* (New York: William Morrow and Company, 1981), p. 17. The concept of “developing” carries the implication and expectation of moving toward “developed.” Foreign left-wing scholars believe that the concept of “developing countries” does not reveal, or easily leads people to overlook, the root causes of the backwardness of Southern countries and the unequal relationship between North and South. The renowned German left-wing scholar Andre Gunder Frank points out: “It is also widely believed that a country’s current state of underdevelopment can be fully understood as the product and reflection of its own economic, political, social, and cultural characteristics or structures. However, historical research shows that contemporary underdevelopment is largely the historical product of past and current economic and other relations between the underdeveloped satellite countries and the now-developed metropolitan countries. Moreover, these relations are a major component of the overall structure and development of the global capitalist system.”[6]6 Andre Gunder Frank, *Capitalism and Underdevelopment in Latin America: Historical Studies of Chile and Brazil* (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1967), p. 3. Many foreign left-wing scholars believe that “underdevelopment” refers to a state of distortion and stagnation in the economic and social development of a country or region, akin to stunted growth in biological development, and not merely a condition of “non-development.” “Developed” and “underdeveloped” are like two sides of the same coin; it is the capitalist world system that has caused the “underdevelopment” of backward countries, and the underdevelopment of backward countries is a product of history. Under the capitalist world system, the “underdevelopment” of backward countries is a product of “development”; “development” simultaneously creates “underdevelopment.” Therefore, when using the concept of “developing countries,” one must constantly pay attention to the historical roots and current situation of the underdevelopment of Global South countries, and carry out a relatively thorough reform of the unequal international political and economic system. Only then can a true path of development for Southern countries be found. Regarding the concept of the “Third World,” foreign left-wing scholars similarly believe it reflects an unequal relationship. Stavrianos points out: “The so-called Third World is neither a set of countries nor a set of statistical standards, but a set of relations—an unequal relationship between a dominant metropolitan center and dependent peripheral regions, which were colonies in the past and are neocolonial-style ‘independent’ countries today.”[7]7 Stavrianos, *Global Rift*, p. 34. In view of this, this is also the reason many foreign left-wing and Marxist scholars insist on using the concept of the “Third World.” The renowned Slovenian left-wing scholar and philosopher Slavoj Žižek still used the concept of the “Third World” in a recent interview.[8]8 Slavoj Žižek, “The Third World is the True Revolutionary Subject Today,” interview, *Jacobin*, 2021. Indian economist Paramjit Singh believes that contemporary imperialism transfers capital from new imperialist countries to Third World countries in order to strengthen control over these countries.[9]9 Paramjit Singh, “Imperialism and the Third World,” *Economic and Political Weekly*, vol. 55, no. 12, 2020.

相对于“第三世界”国家的概念，许多国外左翼学者对“发展中国家”的概念有质疑。美国学者斯塔夫里亚诺斯指出：“第二次世界大战前，今天被称为第三世界的大部分地区被划为欧洲列强的殖民地。那时，用来修饰这些殖民地的形容词通常是‘落后的’,而不像今天这样带有外交辞令的术语：‘欠发达的’,在联合国，甚至越来越经常使用更为委婉的说法：‘发展中的’,——尽管这个用法容易使人产生误解。”(8)“发展中的”概念有正在走向“发达”的意味和期许，国外左翼学者认为“发展中国家”这个概念没有揭示出或者说容易使人忽略南方国家落后的根源和南北之间不平等的关系。德国著名左翼学者安德烈·冈德·弗兰克指出：“人们也普遍认为，一个国家当前的不发达状态可以完全理解为该国自身经济政治、社会和文化特点或结构的产物和反映。然而历史研究表明，当代的不发达状态大部分是不发达的卫星国和现在发达的宗主国之间过去和当前经济等关系的历史产物。而且，这些关系正是全世界资本主义制度整个结构和发展的一个主要组成部分。”(9)许多国外左翼学者认为，“不发达”指的是一国或一地区经济社会发展扭曲与滞后的状态，犹如生物成长的发育不良，而不仅仅是“未发展”的状况。“发达”与“不发达”如同硬币的两面，正是资本主义世界体系造成了落后国家的“不发达”,落后国家的不发达是历史的产物。在资本主义世界体系下，落后国家的“不发达”是“发达”的产物，“发达”在出现的同时也制造了“不发达”。因此，使用“发展中国家”这个概念的时候，要时刻关注全球南方国家不发达的历史根源及现状，要对国际不平等政治经济体系进行较为彻底的改革，如此，才能找到南方国家的真正发展道路。对于“第三世界”的概念，国外左翼学者同样认为这反映了一种不平等的关系。斯塔夫里亚诺斯指出：“所谓第三世界，既不是一组国家，也不是一组统计标准，而是一组关系——一种支配的宗主国中心与依附的外缘地区之间的不平等关系，这些地区在过去是殖民地，今天是新殖民地式的‘独立’国。”(10)鉴于此，这也是许多国外左翼和马克思主义学者坚持使用“第三世界”概念的原因。斯洛文尼亚著名左翼学者、哲学家斯拉沃热·齐泽克近年在一篇访谈中仍然使用“第三世界”概念(11)。印度经济学者帕拉玛基特·辛格认为，当代帝国主义将资本从新的帝国主义国家转向第三世界国家，以加强对这些国家的控制(12)。

II. Foreign Left-Wing Scholars’ Reflections and Interpretations on the Modernization of the “Global South”

二、国外左翼学者对“全球南方”现代化问题的思考与解读

Foreign left-wing scholars believe that the development and modernization of Global South countries are constrained by a systemic Western hegemony, with financial hegemony at its core. The modernization of Global South countries has always faced the major challenge of breaking free from a dependent position and achieving autonomous, centered development.

国外左翼学者认为全球南方国家的发展和现代化问题受到西方国家体系性的霸权制约，这种霸权以金融霸权为核心。全球南方国家的现代化始终面临着摆脱依附性地位、实现自主中心式发展的重大挑战。

1. The Modernization of the “Global South” is Constrained by the Monetary and Financial Hegemony of Western Countries

1.“全球南方”的现代化受制于西方国家的货币金融霸权

After capitalism entered the imperialist stage, financial monopoly capital came to dominate capitalist economic and political life. After World War II, with the continuous development of financial monopoly capital, global financial monopoly capital, or international financial monopoly capital, gradually took shape. Paramjit Singh believes that modern imperialism is ruled by global monopoly capital in the form of transnational corporations and international finance.[10]10 Singh, “Imperialism and the Third World.” International financial monopoly capital established an international monetary and financial system dominated by dollar hegemony. American left-wing scholar Hudson believes that the current world economic and financial system is built on a cycle of dollar debt. He points out that in the 1960s and 1970s, the United States changed its strategy for controlling the world economy, shifting from a creditor-nation strategy to a debtor-nation strategy; since the 1960s, it has been the U.S. balance-of-payments deficit that has held the world economy hostage.[11]11 Michael Hudson, *Super Imperialism: The Economic Strategy of American Empire* (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1972), p. 265. The United States exploits the world through the international monetary and financial system, deeply constraining the modernization development of Global South countries. The U.S. dollar is the most important international reserve currency in the world. The United States can exploit the special status of the dollar to overissue currency to pay its balance-of-payments deficits, reaping seigniorage revenue. Therefore, Hudson believes that the new feature of the American financial empire is the unique monetary hegemony of the United States. On the one hand, the United States uses its balance-of-payments deficit to massively export dollars to the world, absorbing foreign material exports and almost gratuitously appropriating the economic resources of other countries. On the other hand, other countries, especially Global South countries, obtain large amounts of dollars by exporting goods and services to the United States, but at the same time, dollars also flow back to the United States. To this end, the United States has controlled the repatriation of dollars; otherwise, they would enter the U.S. commercial sector, causing severe inflation and impacting the U.S. economy. Therefore, U.S. Treasury bonds have become the most important tool for absorbing repatriated dollars. However, this also creates another unbearable consequence: Treasury bonds require interest payments. The massive repatriated dollars used to buy U.S. Treasury bonds mean the interest the United States must pay is also enormous.

资本主义进入帝国主义阶段后，金融垄断资本在资本主义经济政治生活中占据主导地位。第二次世界大战后，随着金融垄断资本的不断发展，逐渐形成了全球金融垄断资本或国际金融垄断资本。帕拉玛基特·辛格认为，现代帝国主义是由跨国公司和国际金融形式的全球垄断资本统治的(13)。国际金融垄断资本建立了以美元霸权为主导的国际货币金融体系。美国左翼学者赫德森认为当前的世界经济和金融体系是建立在美元债务循环基础上的。他指出，20世纪六七十年代，美国改变了其控制世界经济的战略，从债权国战略转变为债务国战略；自20世纪60年代以来，一直是美国的国际收支逆差绑架了世界经济(14)。美国通过国际货币金融体系剥削世界，深深制约着全球南方国家的现代化发展。美元是世界上最重要的国际储备货币，美国可以利用美元的特殊地位超发货币来支付国际收支差额，取得铸币税的收益。因而，赫德森认为，美国金融帝国的新特征是美国独一无二的货币霸权。一方面，美国利用国际收支逆差向世界大量输出美元，吸收外国的物资输出，几乎无偿占有其他国家经济资源；另一方面，其他国家特别是全球南方国家靠出口美国的商品和劳务获得了大量美元，但同时美元也会出现回流美国的现象。为此，美国对回流美元进行了控制，否则就会进入美国商贸领域，造成严重通货膨胀，使美国经济受到冲击。因此，美国的国债就成了最重要的吸纳回流美元的工具，可是这也造成了另一个难以承受的后果：国债是需要支付利息的，巨额的回流美元购买美国国债，美国要支付的利息也是巨大的。

Therefore, the United States will exploit the cyclical fluctuations of the economy and finance to fan the flames, creating economic and financial turmoil in relevant countries and regions, conducting financial harvesting and plunder and promoting the回流 of the US dollar, reducing the foreign-held US dollars and US Treasury bonds, so that this debt cycle can continue indefinitely, thereby maintaining the hegemonic status of the US dollar. This is also the deep-seated reason why the United States frequently creates economic and financial crises in Global South countries. To coordinate this mechanism of plunder through the US dollar debt cycle and to facilitate the export of US dollar capital, international exploitation, and financial attacks, international monopoly capital has also promoted neoliberalism internationally, inducing or forcing Global South countries to implement financial liberalization reforms, relaxing the management, supervision, and restrictions on finance. After a financial crisis occurs, international monopoly capital also demands that Global South countries maintain high interest rates and exchange rate stability, even if it exhausts the foreign exchange reserves of Global South countries, in order to maintain so-called currency value stability, further exacerbating the economic and financial crises of Global South countries. The American economist Joseph Stiglitz once pointed out that the International Monetary Fund had required Global South countries experiencing financial crises to raise interest rates to 30%, 50%, or even 80%. The result is predictable: such high interest rates distorted the value of capital, crippled industrial production, and drained national wealth.[12]12 Joseph E. Stiglitz, *Globalization and Its Discontents* (New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2002), p. 97. Due to the loss of financial sovereignty in Global South countries during financial liberalization reforms, their ability to safeguard economic and financial security has been greatly weakened. In the economic and financial crises created by Western countries, their domestic development achievements and national wealth have been extensively looted and plundered, many high-quality national assets have been “bottom-fished” and captured by international monopoly capital, and the economy and finance of Global South countries have been further controlled.

因此，美国就会利用经济金融的周期性波动推波助澜，制造相关国家和地区的经济金融动荡，进行金融收割掠夺和促进美元回流，对国外持有的美元和美国国债进行削减，使这种债务循环能够不断进行下去，以维护美元的霸权地位。这也是美国经常制造全球南方国家经济金融危机的深层原因。为了配合这种美元债务循环掠夺机制，方便美元资本输出、国际剥削和金融攻击，国际垄断资本还在国际上推行新自由主义，诱导或迫使全球南方国家实行金融自由化改革，放松了对金融的管理、监督和限制。发生金融危机之后，国际垄断资本还要求全球南方国家保持高利率和汇率稳定，哪怕耗尽全球南方国家的外汇储备也在所不惜，以维持所谓的币值稳定，进一步加剧了全球南方国家的经济金融危机。美国经济学家斯蒂格利茨曾指出，国际货币基金组织曾要求发生金融危机的全球南方国家把利率提高至30%、50%甚至80%。结果可想而知，如此高的利率扭曲了资本的价值，打击了工业生产并耗光了国家财富(15)。由于金融自由化改革中全球南方国家的金融主权丧失，维护经济金融安全的能力被大大削弱，在西方国家制造的经济金融危机中本国经济发展成果、国民财富被大量洗劫和掠夺，许多优质的民族资产也被国际垄断资本“抄底”和猎获，全球南方国家的经济金融也被进一步控制。

2. The modernization of the “Global South” is constrained by the neocolonialist system of Western countries

2.“全球南方”的现代化受制于西方国家的新殖民主义体系

Before World War II, Northern countries relied mainly on the old colonial system to directly occupy and rule Global South countries, making them serve as their commodity markets, sources of raw materials, and investment venues. After World War II, national liberation movements flourished, and the old capitalist world colonial system collapsed. During the colonial withdrawal, Northern countries made every effort to transform old colonialism into neocolonialism, forming a neocolonialist system. The continuous struggles of the broad masses of colonial and semi-colonial peoples prompted the end of old colonialism. However, the vast Global South countries and the world’s progressive forces were not yet particularly strong. The former colonies and semi-colonial countries that gained independence after World War II still occupied a relatively backward position, which provided conditions for the former great powers to implement neocolonialism.

第二次世界大战前，北方国家主要依赖旧的殖民体系对全球南方国家进行直接的占领和统治，以使这些国家充当其商品市场、原料产地和投资场所。第二次世界大战后，民族解放运动蓬勃发展，资本主义旧的世界殖民体系土崩瓦解。在殖民撤退中，北方国家千方百计把旧殖民主义向新殖民主义转化，以形成新殖民主义体系。广大殖民地半殖民地人民的不断斗争促使了旧殖民主义的终结。但是广大全球南方国家和世界进步力量还不是特别强大，第二次世界大战后独立的原殖民地、半殖民地国家仍处于相对落后的地位，这就为昔日列强推行新殖民主义提供了条件。

Neocolonialism does not involve direct military conquest and colonial rule but rather acknowledges political independence while adopting various means, especially covert methods, to achieve indirect domination, with the aim of controlling, interfering with, and plundering backward countries and regions. Stavrianos believed that monopoly capitalism has continued to this day, but now it must deal with the nationalist and social revolutionary movements shaking the peripheral regions. Direct colonial rule has become both militarily impractical and financially unsustainable. Hence, there has been large-scale decolonization and the transformation from colonialism to neocolonialism. If old colonialism was a system of direct rule by force, then neocolonialism is a system of indirect rule that grants political independence in exchange for economic plunder and exploitation.[13]13 L. S. Stavrianos, *Global Rift: The Third World Comes of Age* (New York: William Morrow and Company, 1981), p. 17. The neocolonialist system is a structural hegemonic system, with financial hegemony at its core, supplemented by military, political, economic, and cultural hegemony, carrying out political, economic, and cultural penetration (and, when necessary, military means) and control over Global South countries. The famous Egyptian left-wing scholar Samir Amin pointed out that the “collective” nature of imperialism is manifested in the following aspects: in the economic field, the three sides have common tools for managing the world system, namely the WTO (the colonial department of the trilateral world), the IMF (the collective colonial currency organization), the World Bank (the propaganda department of the trilateral world), the OECD, and the EU; in the political field, there are the G7 or G8, the armed forces of the United States, and the subordinate tools led by NATO.[14]14 Samir Amin, *The Liberal Virus: Permanent War and the Americanization of the World* (New York: Monthly Review Press, 2004), p. 18.

新殖民主义不是进行直接的武力征服和殖民统治，而是承认政治独立，采取各种方式尤其是隐蔽的方式进行间接支配，以达到控制、干涉与掠夺落后国家和地区的目的。斯塔夫里亚诺斯认为，垄断资本主义一直持续到今天，但是现在它必须应付震动着外缘地区的民族主义和社会革命运动。直接的殖民统治既在军事上变得不切实际，又在财政上无能为力。于是，便有了大规模的非殖民化运动以及从殖民主义转变为新殖民主义。如果说旧殖民主义是一种凭借强权来直接进行统治的制度，那么新殖民主义就是一种以让予政治独立来换取经济上的掠夺和剥削的间接统治制度(16)。新殖民主义体系是一种结构性的霸权体系，它以金融霸权为核心，辅之以军事、政治、经济、文化霸权，对全球南方国家进行政治、经济、文化渗透(必要时也使用军事手段)和控制。埃及著名左翼学者萨米尔·阿明指出，帝国主义的“集体性”体现在以下几个方面：在经济领域，三方有共同的世界体系管理工具，即世贸组织(三边世界的殖民部)、国际货币基金组织(集体殖民货币组织)、世界银行(三边世界的宣传部)、经合组织和欧盟；在政治领域，有七国集团或八国集团、美国武装力量以及以北约为首的附庸工具(17)。

Therefore, although the capitalist powers have abandoned direct political rule over their former colonies, the neocolonialism they promote is “in the same line” as old colonialism. Neocolonialism, by dominating and controlling international political and economic organizations and rules, through unfair and unequal international division of labor systems and international political and economic orders, and through value penetration and public opinion manipulation, makes the sovereignty of Global South countries “illusory,” continuing to control, interfere with, and plunder countries that have gained political independence, maintaining the dependency of newly independent countries on their former suzerains, so as to preserve the international unequal relations of the old capitalist world system. The development of Global South countries is constrained by the neocolonialist hegemonic system, and they continue to have their wealth plundered to the maximum extent.

因此，资本主义大国虽然放弃了对原殖民地的直接政治统治，但它们推行的新殖民主义与旧殖民主义“一脉相承”。新殖民主义通过主导和控制国际政治经济组织和规则，通过不公平、不平等的国际分工体系和国际政治经济秩序，通过价值观渗透和舆论诱导，使全球南方国家的主权“虚幻化”,对获得政治独立的国家继续进行控制、干涉与掠夺，保持新生国家对原宗主国的依附性，以维持旧的资本主义世界体系的国际不平等关系。全球南方国家的发展受新殖民主义霸权体系的制约，依然被最大限度地掠夺财富。

3. The modernization of the “Global South” is constrained by the international unequal division of labor system

3.“全球南方”的现代化受制于国际不平等的分工体系

Foreign left-wing scholars generally believe that the international unequal division of labor system is an important reason for the backward economic and social development of Global South countries. Historically, because Western countries took the lead in industrialization, they created an international unequal division of labor system between industrial and agricultural countries. This unequal pattern of international division of labor has not fundamentally changed to this day. After World War II, with the development of economic globalization and the capital export and industrial transfer of Western countries, some Global South countries acquired the capacity for low-end manufacturing and primary product processing. The traditional vertical division of labor system gradually transformed into a vertical-mixed division of labor system. However, this remains an unequal division of labor system. Global South countries are still in a low-end and disadvantaged position in the division of labor system, and the dependency relationship between the North and the South remains very strong. This is a new type of dependency relationship formed through the high-tech monopoly of Western countries. The Brazilian economist Theotonio Dos Santos called it “industrial-technological dependency”: “Thus we can see the third structural limitation that dependency relations impose on development, namely, that industrial development is decisively constrained by the technological monopoly exercised by the imperialist centers.” “Foreign capital seeks to incorporate countries into a new division of labor, which will assign the current centers of domination the production of products related to the most advanced technology and the development of scientific and technological knowledge. This development of scientific and technological knowledge enables the centers of domination to control technology through the monopoly of ownership, allowing them to maintain their domination over the world and control over the service sector and parasitic activity sectors.”[15]15 Theotonio Dos Santos, *The Structure of Dependence*, in *The Political Economy of Development and Underdevelopment*, ed. Charles K. Wilber (New York: Random House, 1973), p. 117.

国外左翼学者普遍认为，国际不平等劳动分工体系是全球南方国家经济社会发展落后的重要原因。历史上，由于西方国家率先实现了工业化，因而造成了工业国与农业国的国际不平等分工体系，这种不平等的国际分工格局直至今日仍未得到根本改观。第二次世界大战后，随着经济全球化的发展和西方国家的资本输出与产业转移，一些全球南方国家拥有了低端制造业和初级产品加工能力，传统的垂直分工体系逐渐转变为垂直混合分工体系。但是，这依然是一种不平等分工体系，全球南方国家在分工体系中依然处于低端不利地位，南北之间的依附关系依然很牢固。这是一种西方国家通过高技术垄断形成的新型依附关系，巴西经济学家特奥托尼奥·多斯桑托斯称之为“工业-技术依附”:“我们就可看到依附性关系给发展带来的第三种结构性限制，即工业发展决定性地受制于帝国主义中心实施的技术垄断。”“外国资本谋求把各国纳入新的分工，这种分工将让现在的统治中心负责生产同最尖端技术和科技知识开发有关的产品。这种科技知识的开发使统治中心通过垄断所有权而对技术进行控制，使它们得以维持对世界的统治以及对服务部门和寄生性活动部门的控制。”(18)

In this new vertical hybrid division of labor system, Western countries control the high-value-added links in the global industrial chain, while Global South countries, lacking core technologies, are mainly engaged in processing and manufacturing. Many Global South countries in their modernization process face not only the task of upgrading from labor-intensive industries to capital- and technology-intensive industries, but also the need to move up the industrial chain from labor-intensive links to capital-intensive and technology-intensive links. Transnational corporations are an important vehicle of current production globalization, and the global vertical hybrid division of labor system is mainly based on the intra-product division of labor within the global production networks of transnational corporations. The headquarters of most transnational corporations are located in Western countries; their parent companies control the high-value-added links, while the general processing and production processes are completed by subsidiaries located in Global South countries or outsourced to companies in Global South countries. Mexican scholar Clemente Ruiz Durán points out: “Companies that coordinate global value chains are generally located in developed countries, while their suppliers are built in developing countries. The international division of economic activities or economic tasks between these two groups of countries reflects the asymmetry in their levels of technology. Those production stages with relatively high added value (such as product concept, design, research and development, marketing, and after-sales service) are retained in the central economies, while other links (the production process) are outsourced to developing countries.”(19) Through this new type of division of labor system, developed countries, relying on their monopolistic advantages in technology and capital, obtain excess monopoly profits.

在这种新的垂直混合分工体系中，西方国家控制着全球产业链条中的高附加值环节，全球南方国家由于缺少核心技术，主要从事加工制造环节。许多全球南方国家在现代化进程中不仅面临着由劳动密集型产业升级转换为资本、技术密集型产业的任务，还需要在产业链上由劳动密集型环节向资本密集型和技术密集型环节升级。跨国公司是当前生产全球化的重要载体，全球垂直混合分工体系主要建立在跨国公司全球生产网络的产品内部分工基础上。跨国公司的总部大多位于西方国家，其母公司掌握着高附加值环节，一般加工生产过程由位于全球南方国家的子公司完成或外包给全球南方国家的公司。墨西哥学者克莱门特·鲁伊斯·杜兰指出：“协调全球价值链的公司一般都设在发达国家，而它的供应商建在发展中国家，这两类国家集团之间经济活动或经济任务的国际分工，反映出它们之间拥有技术水平的不对称。那些附加值相对高的生产阶段(譬如产品概念、设计、研究开发、市场营销和售后服务)被保留在中心经济体，其他环节(生产过程)外包给发展中国家。”(19)通过这种新型分工体系，发达国家凭借技术、资本等垄断优势地位，获得了超额垄断利润。

4. The modernization of the “Global South” is constrained by the dependent and unequal position within the world capitalist accumulation mechanism

4.“全球南方”的现代化受制于世界资本主义积累机制中的依附性不平等地位

Sustained capital accumulation is the fundamental driving force of capitalist production and development. Foreign left-wing scholars believe that the root cause of the global North-South gap lies in the fundamentally different modes of capital accumulation between developed and underdeveloped countries: one is “autocentric accumulation,” and the other is “dependent accumulation.” Theotonio Dos Santos points out that dependence is a situation in which the economy of certain countries is conditioned by the development and expansion of another economy to which the former is subjected. The relation of interdependence between two or more economies, and between these and world trade, assumes the form of dependence when some countries (the dominant ones) can expand and can be self-sustaining, while other countries (the dependent ones) can do this only as a reflection of that expansion, which may have either a positive or a negative effect on their immediate development. In any case, the state of dependence leads to a situation in which the dependent countries are backward and exploited by the dominant countries.(20)

持续的资本积累是资本主义生产和发展的根本驱动力。国外左翼学者认为，全球南北差距问题的产生在于发达国家与不发达国家的资本积累方式有着根本的不同，一方是“自主中心式积累”,另一方是“依附式积累”。特奥托尼奥·多斯桑托斯指出，依附是这样一种状况，即一些国家的经济受制于它所依附的另一国经济的发展和扩张。两个或更多国家的经济之间以及这些国家的经济与世界贸易之间存在着互相依赖的关系，但是结果某些国家(统治国)能够扩展和加强自己，而另外一些国家(依附国)的扩展和自身的加强则仅是前者扩展——对后者的近期发展可以产生积极的或消极的影响——的反映，这种相互依赖关系就呈现依附的形式。不管怎样，依附状态导致依附国处于落后和受统治国剥削这样一种局面(20)。

Due to the development of economic globalization, some Global South countries, by taking advantage of a favorable international environment, have accepted investment and industrial transfers from Western countries, or have relied on their own resource endowment advantages and the export of natural resources and primary products, achieving relatively good results in modernization development, approaching or even reaching the level of developed countries in indicators such as per capita GDP. However, foreign left-wing scholars believe that their economic growth and development are not autocentric, independent development; they remain constrained by Western countries in terms of technology, politics, and international rules, and still occupy a dependent and unequal position in accumulation internationally. Their growth or development is often interfered with, obstructed, and disrupted by developed countries, and they constantly face the challenge of sustained autonomous development. Moreover, this “development” of Global South countries is “the development of underdevelopment,” a dependent development. The limited economic growth of Global South countries creates conditions for the development of developed countries, or in other words, serves and consolidates the development of developed countries. The temporary improvement of certain development indicators actually weakens their own long-term autonomous development capacity. Therefore, Amin points out that Global South countries occupy an unequal position within the “worldwide capitalist accumulation mechanism,” and their “underdevelopment” is entirely the result of the deepening of the phenomenon of “primitive accumulation favorable to the center.”(21) American economist Mariko Frame believes that traditional colonialism has evolved into neoliberalism, which forces the Global South to adjust its economic, political, and social systems to meet the needs of capital accumulation in the Global North.(22)

由于经济全球化的发展，一些全球南方国家借助于有利的国际环境，承接西方国家的投资和产业转移，或利用自身的资源禀赋优势，依靠出口自然资源和初级产品，取得了较好的现代化发展成绩，在人均GDP等指标上接近乃至达到发达国家水平。但是，国外左翼学者认为，它们的经济增长和发展不是自主中心式的独立自主发展，在科技、政治、国际规则等方面依然受制于西方国家，在国际上依然处于依附性的不平等积累地位。它们的增长或发展时常被发达国家干涉、阻挠和破坏，始终面临着持续自主发展的挑战。而且，全球南方国家的这种“发展”是“欠发达的发展”,是依附性的发展。全球南方国家有限度的经济增长为发达国家的发展创造了条件，或者说是服务于、巩固了发达国家的发展，其一时的某些发展指标的提高反倒削弱了自身长远的自主发展能力。所以，阿明指出，全球南方国家处在“世界范围内的资本主义积累机制”中的不平等地位，其“欠发达”现象完全是“有利于中心的原始积累”现象深化的结果(21)。美国经济学者马里科·弗雷姆认为，传统殖民主义已经演变为新自由主义，这迫使全球南方调整其经济、政治和社会制度，以便适应全球北方资本积累的需要(22)。

III. Solutions to the Modernization Problems of the “Global South” and the Great Significance of Socialism

三、“全球南方”现代化问题的解决对策与社会主义的重大意义

Regarding the solution to the modernization problems of the “Global South,” foreign left-wing scholars believe that the primary task for Global South countries is to break free from their dependent and unequal development status. They also discuss the significant role of socialism in promoting the development of Global South countries, as well as the positive significance of the Chinese-path modernization.

对于“全球南方”现代化问题的解决，国外左翼学者认为，全球南方国家首要的是要摆脱依附性的不平等发展地位。他们还探讨了社会主义对全球南方国家发展的重大促进作用，以及中国式现代化道路的积极意义。

1. Global South countries need to break free from their dependent and unequal status and achieve autocentric development

1.全球南方国家需要摆脱依附性的不平等地位，实现自主中心式发展

Foreign left-wing scholars believe that the important root and cause of the underdevelopment of Global South countries is not traditional modes of production, but the unequal capitalist world system. Faced with the constraints of the capitalist world system on the development of Global South countries, foreign left-wing scholars have conducted relatively in-depth research on capital accumulation and imperialism, the operational mechanisms and contradictions of the unequal capitalist world system, global exploitation relations and the transfer of surplus value, the impact of dollar hegemony on the economic and financial security of Global South countries, and world-class relations and class conflicts. They have profoundly revealed the roots and essence of the backwardness of Global South countries, arguing that to achieve genuine modernization, Global South countries must oppose the modernization model centered on Europe and America and achieve sustained autocentric development. Some radical foreign left-wing scholars also advocate that Global South countries should “delink” from the developed countries of the North to break free from their dependent status.

国外左翼学者认为，全球南方国家不发达的重要根源和原因不是传统的生产方式，而是不平等的资本主义世界体系。面对资本主义世界体系对全球南方国家发展的制约，国外左翼学者对资本积累和帝国主义、资本主义不平等世界体系的运转机制及其矛盾、全球剥削关系和剩余价值的转移、美元霸权对全球南方国家经济金融安全的影响、世界性的阶级关系和阶级冲突等进行了较为深入的研究，深刻揭示了全球南方国家落后的根源和实质，认为全球南方国家要实现真正的现代化发展，必须反对以欧美为中心的现代化模式，实现持续自主中心式的发展。一些激进的国外左翼学者还主张全球南方国家应该与北方发达国家“脱钩”,摆脱依附地位。

Since the 1970s, with the deepening of economic globalization, on the one hand, the dependence of many Global South countries on the capitalist center countries has deepened; on the other hand, some Global South countries, especially the newly industrialized countries and regions in East Asia, have absorbed investment from the transfer of industrial capital from developed countries, leading to rapid economic development and the emergence of the “East Asian miracle.” Consequently, some theoretical viewpoints of foreign left-wing “dependency theory” scholars have attracted much criticism. In the reflection on some theoretical viewpoints of “dependency theory,” some dependency theorists, represented by Brazilian economist Fernando Henrique Cardoso, revised their views and proposed the concept of “associated-dependent development,” arguing that while it is temporarily impossible for peripheral countries to break free from their dependent state, it is possible to achieve some development under specific circumstances. Influenced by Cardoso, many dependency theorists revised their theoretical views in the late 1980s. Amin also explained the reasons for the industrialization achievements of East Asian countries and the true meaning of “delinking.” He pointed out that the reason East Asian countries succeeded was precisely because they subordinated their external relations to internal development—in other words, they refused to “adapt” to the dominant tendencies of the world. This is, in fact, the definition of delinking, which some impatient readers confuse with autarky.(23) Therefore, the “delinking” advocated by foreign left-wing scholars is not equivalent to closing off and severing ties, but rather emphasizes the need for a relatively thorough reform of the unequal international political and economic relations, or in other words, to utilize specific international political and economic conditions to serve their own development.

20世纪70年代以来，随着经济全球化的深入发展，一方面，许多全球南方国家对资本主义中心国家的依附性日益加深；另一方面，一部分全球南方国家特别是东亚新兴工业化国家和地区吸纳发达国家工业资本的转移投资，经济迅速发展，出现了“东亚奇迹”。因而，国外左翼“依附论”学者的一些理论观点引起了众多非议。在对“依附论”一些理论观点的反思中，以巴西经济学家费尔南德·卡多佐为代表的部分依附论者修改了自己的观点，提出了“联系性依附发展”的观点，认为在外围国家暂时不可能摆脱依附状态的情况下，在特定情况下，实现一定的发展是有可能的。在卡多佐的影响下，许多依附论者在20世纪80年代后期都修正了自己的理论观点。阿明也解释了东亚国家工业化成就的原因和“脱钩”的真正含义。他指出，东亚国家之所以成功，正是由于它们使对外关系从属于内部发展——换言之，它们拒绝“适应”世界范围的主导倾向。事实上，这就是脱钩的定义，有些性急的读者把它混同于闭关锁国(23)。因而，国外左翼学者主张的“脱钩”,并不等同于封闭断联，而是强调要对不平等的国际政治经济关系进行较为彻底的改革，或者说要利用特定的国际政治经济条件使之服务于自身的发展。

2. Socialism has promoted the national independence movements and modernization processes of Global South countries, winning them a certain space for international development

2.社会主义推动了全球南方国家的民族独立运动与现代化进程，为全球南方国家赢得了一定的国际发展空间

The October Revolution broke the situation of capitalist domination of the world and realized the leap of socialism from theory to reality. The emergence and growth of socialist states strengthened the confidence of the broad masses of colonial and semi-colonial peoples in resisting colonial oppression, became a catalyst for the world’s national liberation struggles, and promoted the anti-imperialist and anti-feudal national-democratic revolutionary movements in countries such as China. The strong support of the Soviet Union and other socialist states for revolutions in various countries and for the progressive cause of humanity’s struggle against capitalist hegemonism effectively curbed imperialist colonial expansion across the globe, accelerated the collapse of the colonial system, and enabled the vast number of Global South countries to win independence and development. Foreign left-wing scholars have pointed out the significant inspirational role of the establishment of the Soviet socialist system for the independence and development of Global South countries. Hungarian history professor Krausz Tamás pointed out that, all over the world, the Russian Revolution brought hope, especially for the lower social classes, turning many nearly utopian ideals into reality. It was as if overnight, tens of thousands of people dared to believe that they could build a more humane society, free from oppression and free from the bonds of wage labor. In terms of its global impact, the October Revolution brought decisive inspiration to the national liberation movements and the struggle against colonialism[19]19 Krausz Tamás, “The October Revolution and the National Liberation Movements,” *World Review of Political Economy*, Vol. 8, No. 4, 2017, p. 462..

十月革命打破了资本主义一统天下的局面，实现了社会主义从理论到现实的飞跃。社会主义国家的产生和壮大，增强了广大殖民地、半殖民地人民反抗殖民压迫的信心，成为世界民族解放斗争的催化剂，推动了中国等国家反帝反封建的民族民主革命运动。苏联等社会主义国家对各国革命和人类反对资本主义霸权主义进步事业的大力支持，有力遏制了帝国主义在全球的殖民扩张，加速了殖民体系的崩溃，使广大全球南方国家赢得了独立和发展。国外左翼学者指出了苏联社会主义制度的建立对全球南方国家独立和发展的重大鼓舞作用。匈牙利历史学教授克劳斯·塔马什指出，在世界各地，俄国革命带来了希望，特别是对于下层社会阶级，这使许多近乎乌托邦的理想变成了现实。就好像一夜之间，成千上万的人有胆量相信他们可以建立一个更人道的社会，不受压迫，不受雇佣劳动的束缚。就其全球影响而言，十月革命给民族解放运动和反对殖民主义的斗争带来了决定性的鼓舞(24)。

In the World Anti-Fascist War, the Soviet Union became the main force opposing the world war launched by imperialism and fascism. The victory in the World Anti-Fascist War greatly promoted the development of the world socialist movement and the national liberation movement, leading to the establishment of a large number of socialist states and nationally independent states. Apart from the newly established socialist states, most of these countries embarked on some form of capitalist path. From an objective historical perspective, it was a huge progress for these backward former colonial countries to take the capitalist path and gradually develop their national economies. From colonial and semi-colonial countries to independent nation-states, this was a historical leap. Therefore, without the existence of socialism, the colonial policies of imperialism would have lasted much longer, and the North-South gap would have been even greater. After the Second World War, the emergence of the socialist camp and the formation of the bipolar structure ended the history of Western powers dominating global affairs alone. Socialist states supported and united with Global South countries to continuously carry out struggles against capitalist power politics and hegemonism, which was conducive to opposing the systemic hegemonic constraints of Western countries and created relatively favorable international conditions for the development of Global South countries. American scholar Thomas E. Weisskopf believed that a major difference between the post-war period and past historical periods is that there now exists a large group of socialist states competing with capitalist powers to exert influence on the Third World. Some socialist states were also able to provide direct material aid as well as political and ideological support to revolutionary movements in peripheral regions resisting capitalist rule[20]20 Thomas E. Weisskopf, “Capitalism, Socialism, and the Sources of Imperialism,” in *The Capitalist System: A Radical Analysis of American Society*, ed. Richard C. Edwards, Michael Reich, and Thomas E. Weisskopf (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1972), p. 432.. Meanwhile, the United States and Western countries, out of considerations for their capitalist international strategy, in order to foster development models to compete with socialism, also provided substantial aid and support to countries such as South Korea, and were relatively tolerant of nationalist behaviors in the economic development of these countries, enabling South Korea and others to achieve considerable results in modernization and industrialization. After the dissolution of the Soviet Union and the upheavals in Eastern Europe, China became the largest socialist state in the world. The successful exploration and advancement of the Chinese-path modernization path have achieved tremendous development accomplishments, making important contributions to maintaining world peace and promoting common development. For example, in terms of loans to Global South countries, Western countries often attach harsh political and economic conditions to their loans, facilitating control over the borrowing countries’ political and economic development, and causing heavy debt burdens for Global South countries, severely restricting and affecting their development. China’s loans to Global South countries do not attach any unequal political or economic conditions, which is conducive to achieving mutual benefit and win-win outcomes. Furthermore, in recent years, China has promoted the joint construction of the Belt and Road Initiative, leveraging the roles of institutions such as the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, the New Development Bank of the BRICS, and the Silk Road Fund, thereby promoting the economic and social development of Global South countries and helping to break through the systemic hegemonic constraints of the West and establish a just and reasonable new international political and economic order. In summary, due to the support and impetus of socialism, Global South countries have emerged as a new international political and economic force on the world stage. They oppose hegemonism, power politics, and the unequal old international political and economic order, promoting the growth and strengthening of world peace forces, thereby gradually changing the international political and economic landscape, promoting the development of the world pattern towards multipolarity, and winning a relatively favorable development environment for Global South countries.

在世界反法西斯战争中，苏联成为反对由帝国主义和法西斯主义发动的世界大战的主力军。世界反法西斯战争的胜利，极大地推动了世界社会主义运动、民族解放运动的发展，使一大批社会主义国家、民族独立国家建立起来。除却新建立的社会主义国家，其中大多数国家走上了某种形式的资本主义道路。从客观历史的角度来看，这些落后的前殖民地国家走上资本主义道路，逐步发展民族经济，是一种巨大的进步。从殖民地、半殖民地国家到独立自主的民族国家，这是历史的飞跃。所以说，没有社会主义的存在，帝国主义的殖民政策还会持续更长的时间，南北差距还会更大。第二次世界大战后，社会主义阵营的出现，两极格局的形成，结束了西方列强独霸全球事务的历史。社会主义国家支持和联合全球南方国家持续开展反对资本主义强权政治和霸权主义的斗争，有利于反对西方国家体系性的霸权制约，为全球南方国家的发展创造了较为有利的国际条件。美国学者托马斯·E.韦斯科夫认为，战后时期和过去历史时期之间的一个重大区别是：现在存在着很大一批社会主义国家同资本主义大国竞相对第三世界施加影响。一些社会主义国家还能够向外围地区反资本主义统治的革命运动提供直接的物质援助以及政治的和意识形态的支持(25)。而美国及西方国家出于资本主义国际战略的考虑，为了扶植发展样本与社会主义竞争，也给予韩国等国家大量援助和支持，对这些国家经济发展方面的民族主义行为也较为容忍，使韩国等国家的现代化与工业化发展成效较大。苏联解体、东欧剧变之后，中国成为世界上最大的社会主义国家。中国式现代化道路的成功探索和推进拓展，取得了巨大的发展成就，为维护世界和平、促进共同发展作出了重要贡献。比如在对全球南方国家贷款方面，西方国家提供的贷款往往附加苛刻的政治、经济条件，以便于控制借贷国政治经济发展，并造成了全球南方国家沉重的债务负担，严重制约和影响着南方国家的发展。中国对全球南方国家的贷款，不附加任何不平等的政治经济条件，有利于实现互利共赢。此外，近年来中国推动共建“一带一路”,发挥亚投行、金砖国家新开发银行、丝路基金等机构的作用，促进了全球南方国家经济社会发展，有利于突破西方的体系性霸权制约，建立公正合理的国际政治经济新秩序。总之，由于社会主义的支持和推动，使全球南方国家作为一种新兴的国际政治经济力量出现在国际舞台上，它们反对霸权主义、强权政治，反对不平等的国际政治经济旧秩序，促进了世界和平力量的发展和壮大，从而逐渐改变了国际政治经济格局，促进了世界格局向多极化发展，为全球南方国家赢得了较为有利的发展环境。

3. Socialism provides Global South countries with institutional tools and development paths for their development and modernization that can serve as references

3.社会主义为全球南方国家的发展与现代化提供了可供借鉴的制度工具和发展道路

The socialist system and modernization development model first explored and established by the Soviet Union demonstrated unique superiority during the crisis years of Western capitalist countries, thus exerting a demonstration effect on Global South countries and even the entire world, providing these countries with institutional tools, development models, and development path references, thereby influencing their modernization processes. Stavrianos pointed out that until 1917, the only social model the Third World could emulate was Western capitalism. After the Bolshevik Revolution and several Five-Year Plans, Soviet society offered a second option, and it was a particularly striking model during the Great Depression and the Second World War[21]21 L. S. Stavrianos, *Global Rift: The Third World Comes of Age* (New York: William Morrow and Company, 1981), p. 583.. American scholar Thomas E. Weisskopf also pointed out that the very existence of socialist states is important because it breaks the conservative myth that there is no alternative to capitalism for improving economic conditions[22]22 Thomas E. Weisskopf, “Capitalism, Socialism, and the Sources of Imperialism,” p. 432.. In the 1930s, when Western developed capitalist countries were suffering from the Great Economic Crisis, the Soviet Union’s socialist industrialization advanced by leaps and bounds, and the superiority of the socialist system was fully displayed before the world. Western countries began to learn from the practices of socialist states in developing their economies and stabilizing society. Immediately upon taking office, U.S. President Roosevelt announced the implementation of the “New Deal,” adopting a series of measures such as expanding government spending, implementing public works programs, and enacting anti-inflation decrees. After these New Deal measures proved effective in the United States, Western European countries followed suit one after another. After the Second World War, capitalist countries further borrowed from the practices of socialist states to adjust and reform capitalism. These measures included: strengthening economic regulation and intervention, redistributing national income to varying degrees, and establishing social welfare systems to protect the interests of the middle and lower classes. If even the developed capitalist countries of the West did this, Global South countries were even more active in adopting and learning from the practices of socialist states in developing their economies. After the war, besides the newly established socialist states, a considerable number of Global South countries declared that they were taking the socialist path. Global South countries that took the capitalist path also accepted, to varying degrees, some practices and institutional choices of socialist states in developing their economies. For example, the East Asian “developmental states” represented by South Korea and Singapore had an important characteristic of their economic development model: comprehensive state intervention in political, economic, and social life. The government not only assumed general public management functions but also dominated socio-economic development, taking it as its duty to support and promote economic development, and effectively promoted economic growth.

由苏联首先探索建立起来的社会主义制度和现代化发展模式在西方资本主义国家的危机年代中显示了独特的优越性，因此对全球南方国家乃至全世界产生了示范效应，为这些国家提供了发展的制度工具和发展模式、发展道路借鉴，进而影响了这些国家的现代化进程。斯塔夫里亚诺斯指出，直至1917年以前第三世界可以效仿的社会模式只有西方的资本主义。在布尔什维克革命和几个五年计划以后，苏维埃社会提供了第二种选择，而且在大萧条和第二次世界大战期间是一种特别引人注目的模式(26)。美国学者托马斯·E.韦斯科夫也指出，社会主义国家之存在本身的重要性在于它打破了那种除了资本主义外根本没有其他出路可以改善经济状况的保守神话(27)。在20世纪30年代，当西方发达资本主义国家遭受经济大危机时，苏联的社会主义工业化却大踏步前进，社会主义制度的优越性极其充分地展现在世界面前。西方国家开始借鉴社会主义国家发展经济、稳定社会的做法。美国总统罗斯福一上台就立即宣布实施“新政”,采取了扩大政府开支、推行公共工程计划、实施反通货膨胀法令等一系列措施。这些新政措施在美国见效后，西欧国家纷纷效仿。第二次世界大战后，资本主义国家更是借鉴社会主义国家的做法，对资本主义进行调整和改革。这些措施包括：加强对经济的调控和干预，对国民收入进行不同程度的再分配，建立保障中下阶层利益的社会福利制度等。西方发达资本主义国家尚且如此，全球南方国家更是积极采用和借鉴社会主义国家发展经济的做法。战后除了新建立的社会主义国家，有相当多的全球南方国家宣布走社会主义道路。走资本主义道路的全球南方国家，也都不同程度地接受了社会主义国家发展经济的一些做法和制度选择。如以韩国、新加坡为代表的东亚“发展型国家”,其经济发展模式的重要特点就是国家对政治、经济、社会生活进行了全面的干预。政府不仅承担着一般的公共管理职能，而且主导着社会经济发展，以扶持和推动经济发展为己任，并有力地促进了经济的发展。

Therefore, although the Soviet model had many defects, under the historical conditions of the time this model indeed played an important role and exerted a major influence. Practice tells people that socialist modernization, as an alternative to capitalist modernization, is not only feasible but also possesses advantages that the capitalist modernization model cannot match. In particular, the successful exploration and practice of Chinese-path modernization has further enriched and perfected the path of socialist modernization, presenting a new picture different from the Western modernization model and expanding the choices of paths for developing countries to achieve modernization. Ronnie Lins, director of the Brazil Center for China Studies, stated that under the leadership of the Communist Party of China, China has successfully pioneered a path of Chinese-path modernization suited to its national conditions, bringing many new inspirations to humanity’s exploration of modernization paths.[28] China advocates building a community with a shared future for mankind and promoting the establishment of a new type of international relations; it adheres to the global governance concept of extensive consultation, joint contribution, and shared benefits, and actively promotes the reform of the global governance system. This has also contributed Chinese wisdom, Chinese solutions, and Chinese strength to the Global South countries’ achievement of independent development and their escape from the constraints of an unequal international system.

因此，虽然苏联模式存在着众多缺陷，但在当时的历史条件下，这种模式的确发挥了重要作用并产生过重大影响。实践告诉人们，社会主义现代化作为资本主义现代化的替代方案不仅是可行的，而且具有资本主义现代化模式无法比拟的优越性。特别是中国式现代化的成功探索与实践，使社会主义现代化道路进一步丰富和完善，展现了不同于西方现代化模式的新图景，拓展了发展中国家走向现代化的路径选择。巴西中国问题研究中心主任罗尼·林斯表示，在中国共产党领导下，中国成功开创了一条适合本国国情的中国式现代化道路，为人类探索现代化道路带来许多新的启示(28)。中国倡导构建人类命运共同体，推动建设新型国际关系；坚持共商共建共享的全球治理观，积极推进全球治理体系变革，也为全球南方国家实现自主发展，摆脱不平等的国际体系的制约，贡献了中国智慧、中国方案、中国力量。

Conclusion

结 语

The world is currently undergoing changes unseen in a century. The overall strength of Global South countries is continuously rising, and they are playing an increasingly important role in promoting world peace and development. Faced with Global South countries whose international influence is growing, the United States and the West are manipulating the interpretation of the concept of the “Global South” with ulterior motives, intending to exclude countries such as China and attempting to achieve control over the “Global South.” As the world’s largest developing country and a natural member of the “Global South,” China has always shared the same breath and same fate with the vast number of developing countries. Absorbing and drawing on the research results of foreign left-wing scholars on the “Global South” and its modernization issues has important theoretical value and practical significance for profoundly revealing the roots and essence of the backwardness of Global South countries, enriching and perfecting the Chinese solution for global governance, uniting Southern countries to establish a more just and reasonable new international order, promoting the resolution of the North-South gap issue, and advancing the building of a community with a shared future for mankind. (References omitted)

当前世界正在经历百年未有之大变局，全球南方国家的整体力量不断上升，在促进世界和平与发展方面发挥着日益重要的作用。面对国际影响力不断提升的全球南方国家，美西方别有用心地操控对“全球南方”概念的解读，意图将中国等国家排除在外，并企图实现对“全球南方”的控制。作为世界上最大的发展中国家、“全球南方”的天然成员，中国始终同广大发展中国家同呼吸、共命运。吸收借鉴国外左翼关于“全球南方”及其现代化问题的研究成果，对于深刻揭示全球南方国家落后的根源与实质，丰富与完善全球治理的中国方案，团结南方国家建立更加公正合理的国际新秩序，推动南北差距问题的解决，推动构建人类命运共同体，具有重要的理论价值和现实意义。（参考文献略）

(The author is a professor at the School of Marxism, University of Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, and a research fellow at the Institute of Marxism, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences.)

（作者系中国社会科学院大学马克思主义学院教授，中国社会科学院马克思主义研究院研究员）

Online editor: Zhang Jian

网络编辑：张剑