Common Prosperity and Common Survival

Common prosperity is the shared possession and enjoyment of relatively abundant and sufficient social wealth by members of society. In terms of its concept itself, it describes a particular state of common survival among members of society. However, achieving such a state is no easy task. It requires not only a certain degree of efficient production and effective accumulation of material wealth, but also the relevant will and plans of members of society, especially social governors, and even more so, a strong and positive value demand from social ethics for interpersonal equality, universal affluence, and overall harmony. Admittedly, as social beings, humans always survive together in some form, but only under specific economic base and political conditions will people living together choose to achieve common prosperity, thereby realizing high-quality common survival.

共同富裕，是社会成员对于相对丰裕而充足的社会财富的共同占有和分享。就其概念本身而言，它描述的是社会成员之间某种特殊的共同生存状态。不过，要想实现这样的状态，却殊为不易。它不仅需要一定程度的物质财富的高效生产与有效积累，而且需要社会成员尤其是社会治理者具备相关意愿和计划，更需要社会伦理对于人际平等、普遍富足与整体和谐持有一种强烈而积极的价值诉求。诚然，作为一种社会性生物，人类始终通过某种形式而共同生存，但是，只有在特定的经济基础和政治条件下，生活在一起的人们才会选择实现共同富裕，从而成就高质量的共同生存。

Common Prosperity as a Vision

作为愿景的共同富裕

In contemporary China, common prosperity is a glorious vision and a great goal. General Secretary Xi Jinping pointed out that common prosperity is the essential requirement of socialism and the common expectation of the people. The ultimate goal of our promotion of economic and social development is to achieve common prosperity for all the people. Socialist China not only hopes to achieve national prosperity by liberating and developing productive forces, but also expects to realize common prosperity for its citizens by eliminating exploitation and eradicating polarization. However, constrained by the development status of productive forces and the long-term nature of the primary stage of socialism, common prosperity remains a long-term goal that requires a process and cannot be achieved overnight. As a vision, there is still a long way to go to realize common prosperity. This also means that, up to now, the ideal significance and goal value of common prosperity are obviously more real and prominent than its actuality. Therefore, before common prosperity is achieved, and in order to better move towards the stage of common prosperity, we must face and squarely confront the current reality, proceed from the achievements already made, and focus on and emphasize those challenging factors that still affect the realization of common prosperity. Among these, there may not only be certain institutional mechanisms that hinder the rich from driving the poor, but there may even be a deeper crisis of common survival caused by such hindrance. In this sense, common prosperity as a vision has never been easily realized, let alone inevitably realized. If there is a lack of firm confidence in realizing the vision, no suitable and effective path is found, and actions that do not conform to the laws of social development are taken, then common prosperity will be difficult to transform from a vision into reality. Admittedly, common prosperity is first and foremost a description of the socio-economic situation. Therefore, people often think that if there is a sufficient free market and a mature civil society is established, then at least sufficient freedom and prosperity can be obtained at the economic level. However, as Marx pointed out, in civil society, "liberty is the right to do and to engage in anything that does not harm others," it "is not based on the connection of man with man, but on the contrary, on the separation of man from man," "this right of separation is the right of the narrow, self-contained individual," and "this individual freedom and its application constitute the basis of civil society." [1]1 “Drive those who become prosperous later” (带动后富) refers to the policy expectation that individuals or regions that achieve prosperity first under China’s reform and opening up should actively assist others in also becoming prosperous, as part of the broader goal of common prosperity. It can be seen that although civil society endows individuals with rights and allows them to pursue personal wealth through the market, it cannot promise to achieve collective common prosperity through the market alone, and may even lead to the disintegration of common survival due to the antagonistic nature of free competition. There is no doubt that personal wealth requires legitimate rights; however, collective common prosperity requires universal responsibility. In the sense of political philosophy, once common prosperity is set as a vision or goal, it calls for and expects a force that transcends civil society and goes beyond market logic. For this force, common prosperity as a vision is the product of its choice, and the realization of this vision is even more the result of struggle.

在当代中国，共同富裕是一个光辉的愿景和伟大的目标。习近平总书记指出，共同富裕是社会主义的本质要求，是人民群众的共同期盼。我们推动经济社会发展，归根结底是要实现全体人民共同富裕。社会主义中国不仅希望通过解放生产力、发展生产力而实现国家的富强，而且期待通过消灭剥削、消除两极分化而实现国民的共同富裕。然而，受制于生产力的发展状况与社会主义初级阶段的长期性，共同富裕仍然是一个长远目标，需要一个过程，不可能一蹴而就。作为一种愿景，共同富裕的实现还有很长一段路要走。这也意味着，截至目前，共同富裕的理想意义与目标价值显然要比它的现实性更加真实和突出。因此，在共同富裕实现之前，也是为了更好地迈向共同富裕的阶段，我们有必要直面和正视当前的现实状况，实事求是地从目前已经取得的成就出发，关注和强调那些依然影响共同富裕得以实现的挑战因素。其中，不仅可能包含着某些妨碍先富带动后富的体制机制，甚至可能存在因为这种妨碍而带来更深刻的共同生存危机。在这个意义上，作为一种愿景的共同富裕，从来就不是轻松实现的，更不是必然实现的。如果缺乏实现愿景的坚定信心，没有找到合适有效的途径，不能采取符合社会发展规律的做法，那么，共同富裕就难以从愿景变为现实。诚然，共同富裕首先是对社会经济状况的描述。因此，人们常常以为，假如能有充分的自由市场，建立成熟的市民社会，那么，至少就可以在经济层面上获得足够的自由和繁荣。然而，正如马克思指出的那样，在市民社会中，“自由是可以做和可以从事任何不损害他人的事情的权利”，它“不是建立在人与人相结合的基础上，而是相反，建立在人与人相分隔的基础上”，“这种分隔的权利，是狭隘的、局限于自身的个人的权利”，“这种个人自由和对这种自由的应用构成了市民社会的基础”。可见，市民社会虽然赋予个体权利，允许个体通过市场而追求个人的富裕，但它却无法承诺仅凭市场而实现集体的共同富裕，甚至还会因为自由竞争的对抗性本质而导致共同生存的瓦解。毫无疑问，个人的富裕需要正当的权利，然而，集体的共同富裕却需要普遍的责任。在政治哲学的意义上，一旦把共同富裕设定为愿景或目标，它便呼唤和期待着一种超越市民社会、超出市场逻辑的力量。对这种力量来讲，作为愿景的共同富裕是其选择的产物，而这一愿景的实现更是奋斗的结果。

Common Survival as a Norm

作为常态的共同生存

Common prosperity is a special form of common survival. However, common survival does not necessarily appear in the form of common prosperity. Even without achieving common prosperity, people can still live together. It can even be said that because common prosperity is still a vision, up to now, people have always lived in a common survival that has not yet achieved common prosperity. In this regard, common survival is the norm of human life. However, the norm is only a state that appears more frequently in fact, but it is not necessarily a more perfect state in value. Stress response to pressure, fragile internal balance, and the overall survival pattern are all manifestations of common survival. The so-called "stress response to pressure" refers to a situation where society, facing enormous external pressure, has to enhance its internal cohesion and unity, shelving differences and antagonisms among members, thereby forming a more united state of common survival. For example, when facing foreign invasion, various forces within a country or nation may form an alliance to unite against the enemy. For another example, when facing global issues such as extreme climate change, the spread of terrorism, and challenges from emerging technologies, different countries or nations may also shelve disputes, restrain prejudices, and seek cooperative solutions from the perspective of the destiny of all mankind. At this time, people not only live together, but also strengthen the commonality and necessity of their interdependence due to the urgency brought about by pressure. Obviously, as a stress response to external pressure, such common survival is passive, temporary, and even forced. It is not a conscious and voluntary choice of people, but a survival strategy they have to adopt. Although people tend towards common survival due to pressure, it does not eliminate the deep-seated conflicts of interest that have always existed among them. Once the external pressure disappears or eases, mutual antagonism rather than common survival may become their option again. More importantly, such common survival never takes common prosperity as its vision, because under these conditions, people's first priority is to cope with pressure, not to pursue affluence. Compared with the "stress response to pressure," "limited internal balance" may not face serious external challenges, but due to the inconsistency of internal interests, people remain in limited interactions. In order to maintain such interactions and prevent society from falling into worse conflict or disintegration, people often establish systems or norms to mutually constrain each other, forming a balance of interests. It must be acknowledged that most current human societies are in this kind of common survival, and most political philosophies also take acknowledging interest differences and seeking a balance of interests as their theoretical goal. Although such a state of common survival lays a reasonable foundation for the survival of individuals, provides ample space for individuals to maximize their interests, and even provides an effective background for continuous interaction between individuals, it does not promise that individuals need to establish comprehensive relationships and deep mutual recognition, nor does it promise that the affluence of one individual must take the affluence of other individuals as a condition or purpose. On the contrary, this common survival is limited to the maintenance of interest exchange and also supports individuals' exclusive possession of wealth to a certain extent. As long as the balance of interests is not broken, the gap between rich and poor, or even the opposition between rich and poor, is acceptable.

共同富裕是一种特殊的共同生存。但是，共同生存却不一定以共同富裕的形式出现。即便没有实现共同富裕，人们也还是能够生活在一起。甚至可以讲，由于共同富裕仍然是一个愿景，所以，迄今为止，人们始终生活在尚未实现共同富裕的共同生存之中。就此而言，共同生存才是人类生活的常态。不过，常态只是在事实上更多出现的状态，却未必是在价值上更加完善的状态。压力的应激反应、脆弱的内部平衡，以及总体的生存格局，都是共同生存的表现形式。所谓“压力的应激反应”，是指社会因为面临外部的巨大压力而不得不提升内部的凝聚力和统一性，搁置成员之间的差异与对抗，从而形成更加团结的共同生存状态。比如，面对外敌入侵时，一个国家或民族内部的各方力量可能结成联盟，一致对外。又比如，面对极端气候变化、恐怖主义蔓延、新兴科技挑战等全球问题时，不同国家或民族也可能搁置争议、克制偏见，从全人类命运出发，谋求合作方案。此时，人们不仅生活在一起，而且是由于压力带来的紧迫感而强化了彼此依存的共同性和必要性。显然，作为外部压力的应激反应，这样的共同生存是被动的、暂时的甚至牵强的。它并非人们自觉自愿的选择，而是不得不采取的生存策略。尽管人们会因压力而趋向共同生存，但并未消除他们一直以来的深层次的利益冲突。一旦外部压力消失或减缓，彼此对抗而非共同生存，就可能重新成为他们的选项。更重要的是，这样的共同生存从来不会把共同富裕作为其愿景，因为在此条件下，人们的第一要务在于应对压力，而非追求富足。与“压力的应激反应”相比，“有限的内部平衡”也许没有面临严重的外部挑战，却会因为内部利益的不一致，使得人们停留于有限的交往。而为了维系这样的交往，不至于让社会陷入更糟糕的冲突或解体，人们往往建立制度或规范，相互制约，形成利益的平衡。必须承认，当前大多数人类社会都处于这种共同生存中，而大多数政治哲学也以承认利益差异、谋求利益平衡作为自己的理论目标。尽管这样的共同生存状态为个体的生存奠定了合理的基础，也为个体最大化获取利益设置了充分的空间，甚至为个体之间的持续交往提供了有效的背景，但是，它并不承诺个体之间需要建立全面的交往关系和深切的彼此认同，也不承诺个体的富足必须以其他个体的富足作为条件或旨归。相反，这种共同生存仅仅限于利益交换的维系，也支持个体在一定程度上对财富的排他性占有。只要利益平衡不被打破，贫富差距甚至贫富对立都是可以接受的。

Common Prosperity as High-Quality Coexistence

作为高质量共存的共同富裕

Common prosperity is a special form of common existence, and even more so an ideal form of common existence. Taking common prosperity as a vision means that people are not confined to the normal state of common existence, nor are they willing to let the common existence in which they find themselves manifest merely as a stress response, a limited internal balance, or an overall pattern of existence. Common prosperity pursues not only prosperity, but universal prosperity, and even more so the prosperity of each individual; it aspires to achieve a high-quality common existence. Common prosperity does not simply affirm “prosperity,” but affirms “universal prosperity.” The prosperity of only a portion of the people is not common prosperity. Even if the prosperity of this portion does not reach the severity of creating a polarization between rich and poor to the point where the balance of interests collapses, it will still not be accepted by common prosperity. Because common prosperity rejects any form of polarization between rich and poor, what it demands is full equality among people in terms of the qualification for and feasibility of prosperity, rather than any limited balance of interests in any sense. Common prosperity does not permit those who have become prosperous first to forget or shirk their social responsibility to “drive those who become prosperous later,”[1]1 “Drive those who become prosperous later” (带动后富) refers to the policy expectation that individuals or regions that achieve prosperity first under China’s reform and opening up should actively assist others in also becoming prosperous, as part of the broader goal of common prosperity. and even less does it permit this portion of those who have become prosperous first to attempt to solidify the channels of social mobility, turning the existing pattern into vested interests, thereby maintaining existing relations of difference and using an apparently stable institutionalized structure to conceal substantive inequality between ethnic groups or collectives. In contemporary China, common prosperity will not be satisfied with equality among ethnic groups and collectives or the overall affluence of society as a whole, but aspires to realize the prosperity of each individual, fulfilling its solemn pledge that “not a single person will be left behind.”[2]2 “Not a single person will be left behind” (一个也不能少) is a phrase used by the Chinese Communist Party to emphasize the inclusive nature of its poverty alleviation and common prosperity goals, meaning that every individual, without exception, should benefit from the nation’s development. In this sense, common prosperity is no longer the universal prosperity of different groups at the collective level, but universal prosperity at the individual level. As a relationship of coexistence, it is no longer a competitive coexistence among individuals, but a symbiotic coexistence. Compared with the “overall pattern of existence,” common prosperity will not neglect the individual; and compared with the “limited balance of interests,” common prosperity, while acknowledging the individual, will emphasize “each and every” individual. Without a doubt, this is a higher and more difficult vision. However, taking this as a vision precisely reflects the persistence and firmness of socialist China in seeking a better plan for the development of human society. We have reason to believe that maintaining this persistence and firmness will help to cope with the long-term nature, arduousness, and complexity of the process of realizing common prosperity, and to achieve a high-quality common existence for members of society.

共同富裕是一种特殊的共同生存，更是一种理想的共同生存。把共同富裕作为愿景，意味着人们不局限于常态的共同生存，不愿让自己所处的共同生存仅仅呈现为压力的应激反应、有限的内部平衡或总体的生存格局。共同富裕不仅追求富裕，而且追求普遍的富裕，更追求每个人的富裕，它期待成就的是高质量的共同存在。共同富裕不是简单地肯定“富裕”，而是肯定“普遍的富裕”。只有一部分人的富裕不是共同富裕。即便这一部分人的富裕并没有严重到造成贫富对立、以至于利益平衡崩溃的程度，它也不会被共同富裕所接纳。由于共同富裕拒绝任何形式的贫富分化，因此，它所要求的是人们在富裕资格及其可行性上的充分平等，而不是任何意义上的有限的利益平衡。共同富裕不允许一部分先富起来的人遗忘或推卸自己“带动后富”的社会责任，更不会允许这部分先富起来的人试图固化社会流动通道，把既有格局变成既得利益，从而维系现存的差异关系，用一种貌似稳定的制度化结构来掩盖族群或团体之间的实质不平等。在当代中国，共同富裕不会满足于族群团体的平等或社会总体的富足，而是期待实现每个人的富足，兑现其“一个也不能少”的庄严承诺。在这个意义上，共同富裕不再是不同人群在团体层面上的普遍富裕，而是个体层面的普遍富裕。作为一种共存关系，它也不再是个体之间竞争性的共存，而是共生性的共存。与“总体的生存格局”相比，共同富裕不会忽视个体；而与“有限的利益平衡”相比，共同富裕却会在承认个体的同时，强调“每一个”个体。毫无疑问，这是一种更高更难的愿景。但是，以此作为愿景，也恰好反映出社会主义中国在谋求人类社会发展的更佳方案时的执着与坚定。我们有理由相信，保持这份执着与坚定，将有助于应对实现共同富裕过程的长期性、艰巨性和复杂性，成就社会成员的高质量的共同生存。

(The author is a professor at the Center for Moral Education Research, Tsinghua University)

（作者系清华大学高校德育研究中心教授）

Online Editor: Huihui

网络编辑：慧慧