“The Masses” and “the Spirit”

The question of the relationship between “the masses” and “the spirit” is a question of principle in historical materialism, and it is also a premise question that should be grasped with emphasis in promoting the common prosperity of the people’s spiritual life in the New Era. General Secretary Xi Jinping emphasized in his report to the 20th National Congress of the CPC that “enriching the people’s spiritual world and achieving common prosperity for all the people” is one of the essential requirements of Chinese-path modernization. At the tenth meeting of the Central Committee for Financial and Economic Affairs, General Secretary Xi Jinping further pointed out that “common prosperity is common prosperity for all the people, and it is common prosperity in which the people’s material life and spiritual life are both prosperous.” That is to say, “common prosperity of spiritual life” is common prosperity of spiritual life with the masses of the people as its subject, and it is common prosperity of spiritual life that is dialectically unified with material life, mutually integrating and mutually promoting. The principle support behind this concept is precisely the historical materialist view of the masses and the view of spiritual life, namely Marx and Engels’ basic views on “the masses” and “the spirit.”

“群众”和“精神”的关系问题是唯物史观的原理性问题，也是新时代推动人民群众精神生活共同富裕应当着重把握的前提性问题。习近平总书记在党的二十大报告中强调，“丰富人民精神世界，实现全体人民共同富裕”是中国式现代化的本质要求之一。在中央财经委员会第十次会议上，习近平总书记进一步指出，“共同富裕是全体人民共同富裕，是人民群众物质生活和精神生活都富裕”。这就是说，“精神生活共同富裕”是以人民群众为主体的精神生活共同富裕，是与物质生活辩证统一、融合互促的精神生活共同富裕。这一理念背后的原理支撑正是历史唯物主义的群众史观和精神生活观，是马克思恩格斯关于“群众”和“精神”的基本观点。

I. Marx and Engels’ Critique of the Theory of the Opposition between “the Spirit” and “the Masses”

一、马克思恩格斯对“精神”和“群众”对立论的批判

Marx and Engels pointed out: “The relation between ‘spirit’ and ‘masses’ discovered by Herr Bruno is in fact nothing but a critical caricature of the Hegelian conception of history, which in turn is only the speculative expression of the Christian-Germanic dogma of the opposition between spirit and matter, God and the world.” The speculative philosophers’ inverted conception of history is but the concrete expression of their inverted worldview. Just as in the natural sphere they inverted matter and spirit, so in the sphere of social history they also inverted the masses and the spirit, holding that the spirit dominates the masses and that the masses need to follow the spirit.

马克思恩格斯指出：“布鲁诺先生所发现的‘精神’和‘群众’的关系，事实上不过是黑格尔历史观的批判的漫画式的完成，而黑格尔的历史观又不过是关于精神和物质、上帝和世界相对立的基督教日耳曼教条的思辨表现。”思辨哲学家颠倒的历史观不过是其颠倒的世界观的具体体现，如同在自然领域将物质和精神颠倒过来那样，他们在社会历史领域也将群众和精神颠倒过来，认为精神支配着群众、群众需要追随精神。

(1) Marx and Engels criticized the starting point of Hegel and the Young Hegelians, namely, separating “the spirit” from “the masses,” holding that the spirit exists outside the masses and that the masses are merely the bearers of the spirit

（一）马克思恩格斯批判了黑格尔及青年黑格尔派的出发点，即把“精神”和“群众”相分离，认为精神存在于群众之外，群众只是精神的承担者

On the one hand, they separated the spirit from the masses, holding that the spirit exists outside the masses. Marx and Engels pointed out: “Absolute criticism proceeds from the dogma of the absolute rationality of spirit. It proceeds, secondly, from the dogma that spirit exists outside the world, that is, outside the human masses.” In the view of the speculative philosophers, the “absolute spirit” is the origin and essence that precedes and is higher than the real world; it is a supra-real existence independent of human beings and higher than the human masses. On the other hand, they separated the masses from the spirit, holding that the masses are merely the bearers of the spirit. Marx and Engels pointed out: “Hegel’s conception of history presupposes an abstract or absolute spirit, which develops in such a way that humanity is only the unconscious or conscious bearer of this spirit, that is, the masses.” The masses are only a finite material carrier; the masses’ own sensations, consciousness, emotions, thoughts, will, and so on are merely the projection and manifestation of the “absolute spirit” upon them. The masses can only rely on their own finite reason to understand the “absolute spirit” as far as possible and cooperate with the “absolute spirit” in completing its self-realization and self-return. The mutual separation of “the spirit” and “the masses” is in essence a deprivation of the masses’ spiritual power and a negation of the masses’ subjectivity, initiative, and agency.

一方面，他们将精神从群众中分离出去，认为精神存在于群众之外。马克思恩格斯指出：“绝对的批判是从‘精神’的绝对合理性的信条出发的。其次，它是从精神存在于世界以外即精神存在于人类群众以外的信条出发的。”在思辨哲学家看来，“绝对精神”是先于且高于现实世界的本原和本质，是超现实的、独立于人的、高于人类群众的存在。另一方面，他们将群众从精神中分离出去，认为群众只是精神的承担者。马克思恩格斯指出：“黑格尔的历史观以抽象的或绝对的精神为前提，这种精神是这样发展的：人类只是这种精神的无意识或有意识的承担者，即群众。”群众只是有限的物质载体，群众本身的感觉、意识、情感、思想、意志等等，只不过是“绝对精神”在其身上的投射与显现。群众只能依靠自己有限的理性，尽可能地理解“绝对精神”，并且配合“绝对精神”完成自我的实现与复归。“精神”和“群众”的相互分离，本质上是对群众精神力量的剥夺，是对群众主体性、主动性和能动性的否定。

(2) Marx and Engels criticized the core view of Hegel and the Young Hegelians, namely, opposing “the spirit” to “the masses” and degrading the masses to “the true enemies of the spirit”

（二）马克思恩格斯批判了黑格尔及青年黑格尔派的核心观点，即把“精神”和“群众”相对立，将群众贬低为“精神的真正敌人”

In the view of the speculative philosophers, “the spirit is absolute, but unfortunately the spirit at the same time constantly becomes the emptiness of the spirit.” The bankruptcy of the spirit is due to the fact that the masses, as bearers of the spirit, have not submitted to the spirit’s instruction and cannot realize the spirit’s demands in reality. Marx and Engels pointed out: “Absolute criticism declares ‘the masses’ to be the true enemies of the spirit... On the one hand it makes ‘spirit,’ ‘progress,’ and on the other hand ‘the masses’ into fixed, immutable essences, that is, concepts, and then opposes the two to each other as permanent, immutable poles.” This fully shows the contempt and distrust of Hegel and the Young Hegelians toward the masses. They saw only the low level of the masses’ spiritual power in capitalist society, but did not see that it was because the masses, oppressed by the bourgeoisie and chained to the production machine, lacked the means, time, and energy for spiritual production. They “defined the masses as merely the ‘opposite’ of the spirit, as the emptiness of the spirit, as the more detailed definition of the emptiness of the spirit, namely ‘laziness,’ ‘superficiality,’ ‘self-complacency.’” “The masses” thus became a byword for spiritual emptiness; all people and things bearing the qualities of the masses were incarnations of laziness, superficiality, and self-complacency, and were all “enemies of the spirit.”

在思辨哲学家看来，“精神是绝对的，然而遗憾的是，精神同时不断地变为精神的空虚”。精神的破产，是由于作为精神承担者的群众没有服从精神的教导，无法在现实中实现精神的要求。马克思恩格斯指出：“绝对的批判宣布‘群众’是精神的真正敌人……它一方面把‘精神’、‘进步’，另一方面又把‘群众’变成固定不变的本质，即概念，然后又把双方当做这种永久不变的两极彼此对立起来。”这充分表明了黑格尔及青年黑格尔派对群众的蔑视和不信任，他们只看到了资本主义社会中群众精神力量的低下，却没有看到群众是因为受到资产阶级的压迫，被禁锢在生产机器上，才缺乏从事精神生产的资料、时间和精力。他们“把群众规定为只是精神的‘对立物’，只是精神的空虚，只是精神空虚的更详细的定义，也就是‘懒惰’、‘肤浅’、‘自满’”。“群众”就成为了精神空虚的代名词，一切带有群众性品质的人和物都是懒惰、肤浅、自满的化身，都是“精神的敌人”。

(3) Marx and Engels criticized the final point of Hegel and the Young Hegelians, namely, excluding the masses from the spirit and excluding them from history

（三）马克思恩格斯批判了黑格尔及青年黑格尔派的落脚点，即把群众排除在精神之外、排除在历史之外

In the opposition between “the spirit” and “the masses,” the masses are a passive, inert, non-historical factor, and the cause of transforming society naturally has nothing to do with the masses. Hegel held that “the real movement is accomplished unconsciously by the absolute spirit.” The Young Hegelians held that the “absolute spirit” obtained a fully displayed manifestation in a few individuals, and that the cause of transforming society ultimately came down to the spiritual creative activity of a “few outstanding individuals.” Thus, the “absolute spirit” acquired a concrete incarnation in the human world, and the opposition between “the spirit” and “the masses” also acquired a more realistic expression. Marx and Engels pointed out: “This opposition is expressed as the opposition between a few outstanding individuals as the active spirit and the masses as the spirit-emptied, material remainder of humanity.” In this way, the “history of the abstract spirit” became the history of a “few outstanding individuals”; the masses were excluded not only from the spirit but also from history. Marx and Engels saw the real problems concealed behind the theory of the opposition between spirit and masses, and their critique of the “inverted worldview” step by step moved toward a critique of the “inverted world” behind it. Their critique of the theory of the opposition between spirit and masses is in essence a critique of the real world in which a few oppress the many and the bourgeoisie exploits the proletariat.

在“精神”和“群众”的对立中，群众是消极的、被动的、非历史的因素，改造社会的事业自然也就与群众无关。黑格尔认为，“现实的运动是由绝对精神无意识地完成的”。青年黑格尔派则认为，“绝对精神”在少数个体身上获得了展示无遗的表现，改造社会的事业最终归结为“少数杰出个人”的精神创造活动。于是，“绝对精神”在人世间就有了具体的化身，“精神”和“群众”的对立也有了更为现实的表现。马克思恩格斯指出：“这种对立表现为：作为积极的精神的少数杰出个人与作为精神空虚的群众、作为物质的人类其余部分相对立。”如此一来，“抽象精神的历史”就变成了“少数杰出个人”的历史，群众不仅被排除在精神之外，而且也被排除在历史之外。马克思恩格斯看到了精神群众对立论背后掩盖的现实问题，他们对“颠倒的世界观”的批判也一步步走向了对其背后“颠倒的世界”的批判。他们对精神群众对立论的批判，本质上是对少数人压迫多数人、资产阶级剥削无产阶级的现实世界的批判。

II. Marx and Engels’ Exposition of the Dialectical Unity between “the Masses” and “the Spirit”

二、马克思恩格斯关于“群众”和“精神”辩证统一关系的论述

On the basis of criticizing the theory of the opposition between spirit and masses of Hegel and the Young Hegelians, Marx and Engels, from the perspective of historical materialism, rigorously demonstrated the dialectical unity between “the masses” and “the spirit,” and clarified the path of realization by which the spirit reaches reality through the practical power of the masses.

在批判黑格尔及青年黑格尔派的精神群众对立论的基础上，马克思恩格斯以唯物史观的视角，严密论证了“群众”和“精神”的辩证统一关系，明确了精神通过群众的实践力量通达现实的实现路径。

(1) The activities and thoughts of history are the thoughts and activities of the masses

（一）历史的活动和思想就是群众的思想和活动

In speculative logic, the masses’ material production is merely “something single and ordinary for the satisfaction of their own needs, ordinary work.” Marx and Engels, by contrast, emphasized that the masses are the subject of “historical activity” and also the subject of “historical thought.” On the one hand, Marx and Engels rehabilitated the masses’ material production. The “rough material production” in which the masses engage is the “birthplace of history”; “even the time and means needed for purely ‘theoretical’ research must be obtained through material, practical transformation.” On the other hand, Marx and Engels highly affirmed the masses’ spiritual creation. They pointed out: “Critical criticism has created nothing; the workers create everything, and even their spiritual creation would put the whole of criticism to shame.” The conditions of production and life under oppression and exploitation in capitalist society gave the masses a kind of “practical education,” so that the masses’ spiritual creation necessarily contains within it the demand to transform the existing society and necessarily embodies the longing for the liberation and freedom of humanity.

在思辨逻辑中，群众的物质生产只是“为了满足他们自己的需要的某种单一的东西，是平凡的工作”。马克思恩格斯则强调，群众是“历史的活动”的主体，也是“历史的思想”的主体。一方面，马克思恩格斯在为群众的物质生产正名。群众从事的“粗糙的物质生产”才是“历史的诞生地”，“仅仅为从事‘理论’研究所需要的时间和资金，也必须进行物质的、实际的变革”。另一方面，马克思恩格斯高度肯定了群众的精神创造。他们指出：“批判的批判什么都没有创造，工人才创造一切，甚至就以他们的精神创造来说，也会使得整个批判感到羞愧。”资本主义社会中饱受压迫剥削的生产生活状况给了他们一种“实际的教育”，使得群众的精神创造之中必然内蕴着变革现存社会的要求、必然饱含着实现人类自由解放的渴望。

(2) Once “thought” leaves “interest,” it will certainly make itself look ridiculous

（二）“思想”一旦离开“利益”，就一定会使自己出丑

“Historical activity is the activity of the masses, and as historical activity deepens, the ranks of the masses will inevitably expand.” This is the general law of the development of human social history. A law implies necessity, but necessity does not mean that things happen of their own accord. To expand the ranks of the masses and to gather the strength of the masses, an abstract “absolute spirit” alone is of no use. Marx and Engels pointed out: “It is natural necessity, the essential characteristics of human beings—however alienated they may appear—and interest that bind together the members of civil society.” Interest is the real bond that links and unites all members of society, and it is the key factor driving the thinking and action of the masses. “Any mass ‘interest’ that can be realized in history, when it first appears on the world stage, far exceeds its real limits in ‘thought’ or ‘idea’ and is confused with the interests of human beings in general.” But this “confusion” is, after all, only an artificial disguise. When these “interests of human beings in general” that exist in ideas reach the point where the masses demand that they be honored and the bourgeoisie is unable to honor them, those “ideas” that appear superficially universal are bound to fall into the embarrassing position of being “out of date.” Only those ideas that not only represent the interests of the masses on the surface but can also, in practice, guide the masses in winning real interests can be internalized as the thought of the masses, externalized as the activity of the masses, and advance the development of history.

“历史活动是群众的活动，随着历史活动的深入，必将是群众队伍的扩大。”这是人类社会历史发展的一般规律，规律意味着必然，但必然并不意味着自然而然。要扩大群众队伍、凝聚群众力量，光靠抽象的“绝对精神”是不管用的。马克思恩格斯指出：“正是自然必然性、人的本质特性（不管它们是以怎样的异化形式表现出来）、利益把市民社会的成员联合起来。”利益是链接和联合全体社会成员的现实的纽带，是驱动人民群众思想和行动的关键因素。“任何在历史上能够实现的群众性的‘利益’，在最初出现于世界舞台时，在‘思想’或‘观念’中都会远远超出自己的现实界限，而同一般的人的利益混淆起来。”但这种“混淆”毕竟只是人为的伪装，当这些存在于观念中的“一般的人的利益”到了人民群众要求兑现而资产阶级又无法兑现的时候，那些表面上具有普遍性的“思想”也就要陷入“不合时宜”的出丑境地。只有那些不仅在表面上代表着群众利益，而且能够在实际上指引群众争取到现实利益的思想，才能内化为群众的思想，外化为群众的活动，推动历史的发展。

(3) For thought to be realized, it must have people who use practical force

（三）思想要得到实现，就要有使用实践力量的人

Genuinely representing the interests of the masses is the necessary condition for thought to become “the thought and activity of the masses” and thereby “historical activity and thought.” But can any thought that represents the interests of the masses automatically become the thought and activity of the masses? Can it automatically transform the old world and create a new one? Marx and Engels pointed out: “Thought can never go beyond the limits of the old world order; in any case, all thought can go beyond is the limits of the thought of the old world order. Thought as such cannot realize anything.” Even if it produces “thought that goes beyond the limits of the thought of the entire old world order,” that only refutes the old world in thought, without actually changing the old world in reality. Marx and Engels emphasized: “For thought to be realized, it must have people who use practical force.” On the one hand, it is necessary to shape the thought of the masses through “people who use practical force,” helping the masses fully grasp “the thought of the new world order.” On the other hand, it is necessary to lead the masses, as “people who use practical force,” to fully realize “the thought of the new world order” in reality. Only by internalizing “the thought of the new world order” not only as “the thought of the masses” but also externalizing it as “the activity of the masses” can the masses truly stand up not only in thought but also in reality, and create a new world order not only in thought but also in reality.

真正代表群众利益，这是思想成为“群众的思想和活动”，进而成为“历史的活动和思想”的必要条件。但是，某种思想只要代表群众的利益，就能自动成为群众的思想和活动吗？就能自动改变旧世界、创造新世界吗？马克思恩格斯指出：“思想永远不能超出旧世界秩序的范围，在任何情况下，思想所能超出的只是旧世界秩序的思想范围。思想本身根本不能实现什么东西。”纵然是“产生了超出整个旧世界秩序的思想范围的思想”，那也只是在思想中驳倒了旧世界，却没有在现实中真正改变旧世界。马克思恩格斯强调：“思想要想得到实现，就要有使用实践力量的人。”一方面，要通过“使用实践力量的人”塑造群众思想，帮助群众彻底掌握“新世界秩序的思想”。另一方面，要引领群众作为“使用实践力量的人”，在现实中彻底实现“新世界秩序的思想”。只有把“新世界秩序的思想”不仅内化为“群众的思想”，而且外化为“群众的活动”，群众才能不仅在思想中而且在现实中真正站起来，不仅在思想中而且在现实中创造出新的世界秩序。

III. The Contemporary Significance of the Dialectical Unity of “the Masses” and “the Spirit”

三、“群众”和“精神”辩证统一论的时代意蕴

The Marx-Engels theory of the dialectical unity of “the masses” and “the spirit” is a concentrated expression of the Marxist materialist conception of history and an important theoretical guide for the Party and the state in the New Era to promote common prosperity in the spiritual life of the people. Excavating the contemporary significance of the theory of the dialectical unity of “the masses” and “the spirit” requires not only a deep reading of the texts to clarify its basic principles, but also a grounding in the times to promote theoretical transformation, deepen the understanding of the laws of spiritual life, and clarify the foothold, entry point, and focus of efforts for promoting common prosperity in the spiritual life of the people in the New Era.

马克思恩格斯的“群众”和“精神”辩证统一论是马克思主义唯物史观的集中体现，也是新时代党和国家推动人民群众精神生活共同富裕的重要理论指导。挖掘“群众”和“精神”辩证统一论的时代意蕴，不仅需要深入文本澄明基本原理，更需要立足时代推动理论转化，深化对精神生活的规律性认识，明确新时代推进人民群众精神生活共同富裕的立足点、切入点和着力点。

(1) The unity of material life and spiritual life is the foothold for promoting common prosperity in the spiritual life of the people in the New Era

（一）物质生活与精神生活相统一，是新时代推进人民群众精神生活共同富裕的立足点

On the one hand, “the mode of production of material life conditions the whole process of social, political, and spiritual life”

一方面，“物质生活的生产方式制约着整个社会生活、政治生活和精神生活的全过程”

Material life plays a foundational, constraining, and supporting role for spiritual life, and only through the practical exercise of transforming existing society can the masses continuously expand the depth, breadth, and height of their spiritual world. On the other hand, “although the mode of material existence is the primary cause, this does not exclude the ideological sphere from reacting in turn upon the mode of material existence.” The progress of the masses’ ideas and concepts can not only be transformed into concrete material productive forces, but can also promote changes in relations of production and even social relations, providing spiritual impetus and ideological guidance for human society to develop toward a higher stage. In the New Era, advancing the social revolution of deepening reform comprehensively requires us to correctly grasp the relationship between material life and spiritual life as two sides of one whole—they complement each other, are inseparable, and neither can be neglected.

物质生活对精神生活具有基础性、制约性和支撑性作用，人民群众也只有在变革现存社会的实践锻炼中，才能不断拓展自己精神世界的深度、广度和高度。另一方面，“物质存在方式虽然是始因，但是这并不排斥思想领域也反过来对物质存在方式起作用”。人民群众思想观念的进步，不仅能够转化为具体的物质生产力，而且能够推动生产关系乃至社会关系的变革，为人类社会向更高阶段发展提供精神动力和思想引领。新时代推进全面深化改革的社会革命，要求我们正确把握物质生活与精神生活一体两面的关系，二者相辅相成、不可分割、不可偏废。

(2) The coordination of spiritual production and spiritual needs is the entry point for promoting common prosperity in the spiritual life of the people in the New Era

（二）精神生产和精神需要相协调，是新时代推进人民群众精神生活共同富裕的切入点

Marx pointed out: “Without need, there is no production.”

马克思指出：“没有需要，就没有生产。”

Need plays a guiding role in production, but the question is around whom production should be centered and whose needs it should satisfy. “The degree to which a theory is realized in a country always depends on the degree to which the theory satisfies the needs of that country.” National needs are not eternal, abstract, purely theoretical needs, but historical, concrete, and real human needs. Only when spiritual production takes the real needs of people as its target can it mobilize and lead the masses to put ideas into practice and realize theory. However, there is often a “striking inconsistency” between “the demands of thought” and “the answers reality gives to these demands.” This is because the direct needs of the masses that arise from reality have not yet grown into true “thoroughgoing needs.” Therefore, spiritual production bears not only the mission of attending to and satisfying the spiritual needs of the masses, but also the responsibility of leading and elevating the spiritual needs of the masses. It is necessary to use advanced thought and theory to enlighten, awaken, and educate the broad masses of the people, elevating their spiritual needs to the height of proletarian consciousness.

需要对生产具有导向作用，但问题在于生产要以谁为中心，要满足谁的需要。“理论在一个国家实现的程度，总是取决于理论满足于这个国家的需要的程度。”国家需要不是永恒的、抽象的、纯粹理论的需要，而是历史的、具体的、现实的人的需要。精神生产只有以现实的人的需要为标的，才能调动和引领人民群众去践行思想、实现理论。但是，“思想的要求”和“现实对这些要求的回答”之间往往存在着“惊人的不一致”。这是因为生发于现实的、直接的群众需要尚未成长为真正的“彻底需要”。因此，精神生产不光承担着关照和满足群众精神需要的使命，而且肩负着引领和提升群众精神需要的职责。要以先进的思想理论来启发、唤醒和教育广大人民群众，把人民群众的精神需要提升到无产阶级觉悟的高度上来。

(3) The mutual promotion of the spiritual-cultural undertaking and the spiritual-cultural industry is the focus of efforts for promoting common prosperity in the spiritual life of the people in the New Era

（三）精神文化事业和精神文化产业相促进，是新时代推进人民群众精神生活共同富裕的着力点

In criticizing the logic of capital, Marx and Engels pointed out: “Even the highest spiritual production is recognized, and becomes forgivable in the eyes of the bourgeois, only because it is depicted and misinterpreted as a direct producer of material wealth.” Capitalist society turns those engaged in spiritual production into wage laborers, turns spiritual-cultural products into commodities, and turns spiritual production into an industrial and commercial activity aimed at material gain. To liberate the spiritual world of the masses, it is necessary to break the stranglehold and alienation of capital over the spirit in reality, and to transcend the narrow interest orientation of spiritual production in capitalist society. It is necessary both to adhere unswervingly to the people-centered value orientation and to give full play to the positive role of the capital factor in the field of spiritual production; both to bring into play the public-welfare nature of the cultural undertaking, promoting the equalization, universalization, and convenience of public cultural services; and to bring into play the market advantages of the cultural industry, stimulating innovation and creativity in the spiritual-cultural field.

马克思恩格斯在批判资本逻辑时曾指出：“连最高的精神生产，也只是由于被描绘为、被错误地解释为物质财富的直接生产者，才得到承认，在资产者眼中才成为可以原谅的。”资本主义社会把从事精神生产的人变成雇佣劳动者，把精神文化产品变成商品，把精神生产变成了以物质利益为目的的产业经营活动。要解放人民群众的精神世界，就必须在现实中破除资本对精神的钳制和异化，超越资本主义社会精神生产狭隘的利益取向。既要始终坚持以人民为中心的价值取向，又要充分发挥资本要素在精神生产领域中的积极作用，既要发挥文化事业的公益属性，促进公共文化服务均等化、普惠化、便捷化；又要发挥文化产业的市场优势，激发精神文化领域的创新创造活力。

IV. Practical Requirements for Upholding the Dialectical Unity of “the Masses” and “the Spirit”

四、坚持“群众”和“精神”辩证统一论的现实要求

Connecting the development of the times through classical texts requires not only examining reality from the standpoint of principles, but also finding the ideas and levers for implementing and carrying out this thought and theory, transforming the understanding of laws into practical requirements for solving problems. In the echo and interconnection between the basic principles of Marxism and the Party’s theoretical innovation achievements, we must respond to and resolve the major theoretical and practical issue of promoting common prosperity in the spiritual life of the people.

由经典文本链接时代发展，不仅要从原理出发审视现实，更要找到贯彻落实这一思想理论的思路和抓手，把规律性认识转化为解决问题的现实要求。在马克思主义基本原理与党的理论创新成果的呼应与贯通之中，回应和解决推动人民群众精神生活共同富裕这一重大理论和实践课题。

(1) Uphold a people-centered approach

（一）坚持以人民为中心

The debate between Marx and Engels and the speculative philosophers over the relationship between “the masses” and “spirit” appears on the surface to be a difference in their views of spiritual life, but in essence it is a divergence between the historical view of the masses and the historical view of heroes. General Secretary Xi Jinping points out: “The people are the creators of history, and the masses are the true heroes. The people are the source of our strength.” On the one hand, we must uphold the principal position of the people. Only by centering on the masses, going deep among the masses, and serving the masses, by heeding the voices of the masses, reflecting their aspirations, and promptly resolving their ideological perplexities and practical difficulties, can we win the support and endorsement of the masses and unify “the thoughts and activities of the masses” into the great cause of building socialism with Chinese characteristics. On the other hand, we must give play to the principal role of the people. To comprehensively advance the modernization of socialism with Chinese characteristics, we must continuously cultivate and stimulate the historical initiative and sense of ownership of the masses, continuously mobilize and organize the masses to participate extensively in the various undertakings of the Party and the state, and to the greatest extent pool the wisdom of the people, gather the hearts of the people, and assemble the strength of the people, jointly composing a new chapter in the great cause of the times.

马克思恩格斯同思辨哲学家在“群众”和“精神”关系问题上的争论，表面上看是精神生活观的差异，实质上是群众史观与英雄史观的分歧。习近平总书记指出：“人民是历史的创造者，群众是真正的英雄。人民群众是我们的力量源泉。”一方面，要坚持人民主体地位。只有坚持围绕群众、深入群众、服务群众，倾听群众呼声、反映群众愿望、及时解决群众的思想困惑与现实难题，才能赢得群众的拥护和支持，把“群众的思想和活动”统一到建设中国特色社会主义的伟大事业当中来。另一方面，要发挥人民主体作用。全面推进中国特色社会主义现代化建设，必须不断培养和激发人民群众的历史主动精神和主人翁意识，不断动员和组织人民群众广泛参与到党和国家的各项事业当中来，最大程度地集民智、聚民心、汇民力，共同谱写时代伟业新篇章。

(2) Persist in arming the masses with advanced theory

（二）坚持用先进理论武装人民群众

What Marx and Engels and the speculative philosophers have in common is that they all attempted to use some kind of spirit to occupy minds, win over hearts, and persuade the masses. The only difference is that the speculative philosophers used the “absolute spirit” to belittle and dominate the masses, whereas Marx and Engels demanded the unity of “the masses” and “spirit” through the method of theoretical arming, requiring that through the key link whereby “theory, once it grasps the masses, also becomes material force,” the unity of material life and spiritual life be achieved. It can be said that arming the masses with theory is the fundamental method and fine tradition, initiated by Marx and Engels, for enriching and developing the spiritual life of the masses. In his report to the 20th National Congress of the CPC, General Secretary Xi Jinping pointed out that “arming the whole Party with the Party’s innovative theory is the fundamental task of the Party’s ideological development,” and emphasized the need to “improve the working system for arming the whole Party, educating the people, and guiding practice with the Party’s innovative theory.” In the New Era, the most crucial aspect of arming the masses with theory is to use Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era to forge souls and educate people, to internalize it as “the thoughts of the masses” and externalize it as “the activities of the masses,” and to promote the entry of scientific theory into minds and hearts and its visible and effective implementation.

马克思恩格斯和思辨哲学家的共同之处在于，他们都试图用某种精神来占领头脑、争夺人心、说服群众。只不过思辨哲学家是以“绝对精神”来贬低群众、支配群众，马克思恩格斯则要求用理论武装的方式实现“群众”和“精神”的统一，要求通过“理论一经掌握群众，也会变成物质力量”这一关键环节，实现物质生活与精神生活的统一。可以说，理论武装群众，就是马克思恩格斯开创的丰富发展人民群众精神生活的根本方法和优良传统。习近平总书记在党的二十大报告中指出“用党的创新理论武装全党是党的思想建设的根本任务”，强调要“健全用党的创新理论武装全党、教育人民、指导实践工作体系”。新时代坚持理论武装群众，最关键的就是要用习近平新时代中国特色社会主义思想铸魂育人，使之内化为“群众的思想”，外化为“群众的活动”，推动科学理论入脑入心、见行见效。

(3) Persist in advancing material abundance and spiritual enrichment in an integrated manner

（三）坚持物质富足和精神富有一体推进

The masses are not only the creators of material and spiritual wealth, but should also be the enjoyers of material and spiritual life. In his report to the 20th National Congress of the CPC, General Secretary Xi Jinping pointed out that “Chinese-path modernization is the modernization of common prosperity for all the people,” and that “material abundance and spiritual enrichment are the fundamental requirements of socialist modernization. Material poverty is not socialism, nor is spiritual impoverishment.” Only by correctly handling the dialectical relationship between material life and spiritual life, and by promoting the integrated planning, scientific layout, and coordinated development of material civilization and cultural-ethical progress, can Chinese-path modernization advance steadily. Only by continuously promoting the joint construction and mutual promotion of the material production and spiritual production of the masses, by consolidating the material foundation and spiritual conditions for common prosperity, and by promoting the enrichment of both the material life and spiritual life of the masses, can we continuously push the modernization of socialism with Chinese characteristics to new heights and new realms.

人民群众不仅是物质财富和精神财富的创造者，同时也应当是物质生活和精神生活的享有者。习近平总书记在党的二十大报告中指出，“中国式现代化是全体人民共同富裕的现代化”，“物质富足、精神富有是社会主义现代化的根本要求。物质贫困不是社会主义，精神贫乏也不是社会主义。”只有正确处理好物质生活与精神生活之间的辩证关系，推动物质文明建设与精神文明建设一体谋划、科学布局、协调发展，中国式现代化才能稳步推进。只有不断推动人民群众物质生产和精神生产的齐抓共建、融合互促，夯实共同富裕的物质基础和精神条件，促进人民群众物质生活和精神生活都富裕起来，才能将中国特色社会主义现代化建设不断推向新高度、新境界。

Source: Teaching and Research, Issue 11, 2024

文章来源：《教学与研究》2024年第11期

Online editor: Jing Mu

网络编辑：静穆