“Telling the CPC’s Human Rights Stories in the New Era and Strengthening the International Human Rights Opinion Struggle” Thematic Seminar Held in Beijing

On the morning of October 9, the thematic seminar “Telling the CPC’s Human Rights Stories in the New Era and Strengthening the International Human Rights Opinion Struggle,” hosted by the Research Center for Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, was held in Beijing. Gong Yun, Vice President of the Academy of Marxism of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, Executive Deputy Director and Researcher of the Xi Jinping Thought Research Center, chaired the meeting. Researchers attending included Huang Chengliang from the Institute of Eco-civilization Studies, Wang Qiaorong from the Institute of Contemporary China Studies, Xu Liping from the Institute of Global Studies, Xu Xiujun from the Institute of World Economics and Politics, Zhi Zhenfeng and Liu Xiaomei from the Institute of Law, Fan Peng from the Institute of Political Science, Wei Nanzhi from the Institute of American Studies, Hou Bo from the Finance and Accounting Bureau, and Ye Jun, Associate Researcher from the Institute of Journalism and Communication.

10月9日上午，中国社会科学院习近平新时代中国特色社会主义思想研究中心主办的“讲好新时代中国共产党的人权故事，加强国际人权舆论斗争”专题研讨会在京举行。中国社会科学院马克思主义研究院副院长、习研中心执行副主任、研究员龚云主持会议。中国社会科学院生态文明所研究员黄承梁、当代所研究员王巧荣、全球院研究员许利平、世经政所研究员徐秀军、法学所研究员支振锋、法学所研究员刘小妹、政治学所研究员樊鹏、美国所研究员魏南枝、财计局研究员侯波、新闻所副研究员叶俊参会。

Gong Yun pointed out that the current international ideological struggle is extremely intense. Holding this thematic seminar is a concrete measure to implement the work of the international human rights ideological struggle, aimed at cooperating with the relevant requirements put forward by the Party Central Committee to strengthen the construction of international communication capacity and tell China’s stories well. On the basis of publishing articles in the “three newspapers and one journal,”[1]1 “Destroying the old to establish the new” (不破不立): a Chinese idiom meaning that one cannot establish something new without first breaking down the old; here used as a rhetorical principle for discourse struggle. the Xi Jinping Thought Research Center must strengthen its tracking and attention to the progress of foreign research on Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era, grasp the progress of foreign research, focus on foreign research trends, and do a good job of externally disseminating Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era. The Xi Jinping Thought Research Center must strengthen its connection with relevant departments, and around important theoretical issues and major formulations, by holding thematic meetings, internal reports, thematic articles, public account pushes, and other forms, it should be the first to speak out, build a “rapid reaction force” for researching issues and interpreting policies, provide forward-looking in-depth interpretations, and fully leverage the research functions of the center.

龚云指出，当前国际意识形态斗争十分激烈，举办此次专题研讨会是落实国际人权意识形态斗争工作的具体举措，旨在配合中央提出的加强国际传播能力建设的相关要求，讲好中国故事。习研中心在发表“三报一刊”文章的基础上，要加强对国外习近平新时代中国特色社会主义思想研究进展的跟踪关注，掌握国外研究进展，聚焦国外研究动态，做好习近平新时代中国特色社会主义思想的对外传播。习研中心要加强与相关部门联系，围绕重要理论问题和重大提法，通过举办专题会议、要报、专题文章、公众号推送等多种形式第一时间发声，构建研究问题、解读政策的“快速反应部队”，提供具有前瞻性的深度解读，充分发挥中心的研究职能。

Zhi Zhenfeng expressed his views on “the human rights discourse of the CPC.” He believes that China’s human rights work has achieved remarkable results, mainly reflected in two aspects: the miracle of economic growth and the miracle of stability. Among these, the long-term miracle of economic growth has solved the people’s rights to subsistence and development, while the miracle of stability has solved the issue of security, ensuring the people’s personal safety, thereby demonstrating the all-round progress of China’s human rights work. However, it should be clearly recognized that, compared with the achievements in human rights practice, the progress of the external dissemination of China’s human rights discourse needs significant improvement. This can be mainly attributed to the following three reasons. First, China and the West have different understandings of human rights. Contemporary Western human rights are mainly reflected in political rights, while we place greater emphasis on the rights to subsistence and development. This is determined by the specific historical circumstances in which China and the West proposed human rights. Second, the differences between Eastern and Western civilizations are relatively large, making it difficult for the West to understand Eastern culture, traditions, systems, and practices. Third, the purpose of human rights discourse is unclear, which has an important impact on the development of work related to human rights discourse. In response to these three issues, Zhi Zhenfeng suggested improvements from the following three aspects. First, strengthen theoretical research work, theoretically clarify the connotation of human rights, the commonalities and differences between different human rights theories, promote a clearer human rights theory, thereby better compete for discursive power, and better reflect the progress made in China’s human rights work in practice. Second, against the backdrop of the decline of traditional media, pay attention to new communication channels and pathways, focus on the development of self-media and new media platforms, and build one’s own communication platforms. Third, pay attention to the construction of talent teams and talent mechanisms, discover a group of self-media talents who understand both human rights theory and the laws of communication, fully utilize the laws of information dissemination in the new media environment of the New Era, and tell the human rights discourse well.

支振锋围绕“中国共产党的人权话语”发表了意见。他认为，我国人权工作取得显著成效，主要体现在经济增长奇迹和稳定奇迹两个方面，其中长期的经济增长奇迹解决了人民的生存权和发展权，而稳定奇迹解决了安全问题，保障了人民的人身安全，由此体现了我国人权工作全方位的进展。但同时应该清醒看到，相比人权实践的成就，我国人权话语对外传播工作的进展需要大大改进，主要可以归结为以下三方面的原因。第一，中国和西方对人权的认识不同，西方当代人权主要体现在政治权力上，而我们更强调生存权和发展权，这是由中西方提出人权的特殊历史场景决定的。第二，东方文明和西方文明差异较大，导致西方难以理解东方的文化、传统、制度和实践。第三，人权话语的目的不明确，对人权话语相关工作的展开具有重要影响。针对这三方面的问题，支振锋建议从以下三个方面进行完善。一是加强理论研究工作，从理论上廓清人权的内涵、不同人权理论的共同点和差异，推动人权理论更加清晰，从而更好地争夺话语权，更好地反映我国人权工作在实践中取得的进展。二是在传统媒体式微的背景下，关注新的传播途径和传播渠道，关注自媒体和新媒体平台的发展，构建自己的传播平台。三是关注人才队伍和人才机制的建设，发掘一批既了解人权理论，又掌握传播规律的自媒体人才，充分利用新时代新媒体环境下信息传播规律，讲好人权话语。

Fan Peng believes that within the connotation of Western human rights concepts, human rights are more of a political right, a right of a political group or individual to be free from persecution, a right of political choice. This is determined by its unique historical experience and collective feelings. The Western view of human rights has gradually developed from a collective experience and historical memory into an abstract moral principle. This transformation, on the internal side, has affected the West’s own political construction practices and historical direction; on the external side, it has resulted in continuous human rights export and using this as a pretext to interfere in the politics of other countries. This view of human rights has not transcended the human rights view of historical experience. For the vast majority of developing countries, the primary and greatest human rights are the rights to subsistence and development. Few countries have a history and culture that understands human rights and politics from the perspective of political persecution. The CPC and the Chinese government have always respected and safegu

樊鹏认为，在西方人权观念的内涵中，人权更多是一种政治权利，是一个政治群体或个人免于受迫害的权利，是政治上的选择权，这是由其独特的历史经验和集体感受决定的。西方的人权观，已经从一种集体经验和历史记忆逐渐发展成了一种抽象的道德法则，这个转变在对内方面，影响了西方自己的政治建构实践和历史走向，在对外方面，则是持续的人权输出以及以此为口实对别国政治指手画脚，这种人权观没有超越历史经验的人权观。而对绝大多数发展中国家来说，首要的和最大的人权就是生存权和发展权，很少有国家的历史文化从政治迫害的角度理解人权和政治。中国共产党和中国政府始终尊重和保障人权，一贯坚持以人民为中心的人权理念。在中国，人民的幸福生活就是最大的人权，并且在实践中不断丰富人权内涵。

Xu Liping believes that a prominent problem in current human rights discourse work is the loss of voice in international public opinion, which is specifically manifested in three aspects: first, a pronounced center-oriented perspective, a lack of empathy, and a failure to achieve complete inclusiveness; second, scholars’ research space needs further expansion; third, discourse dissemination needs to be more professional. In response, he argues that it is currently necessary to fully recognize the complexity and uncertainty of world human rights public opinion, pay further attention to country-specific differences, gain a deeper understanding of foreign conditions, adopt a "one country, one policy" strategy to tell China's story, and better integrate Chinese and foreign discourse in discourse construction to achieve the goal of enhancing consensus.

许利平认为，当前人权话语工作中存在的显著问题是在国际舆论中的失声问题，具体体现在三个方面：一是中心化视角明显，缺乏换位思考，没有做到完全的兼收并蓄；二是学者的研究空间需要有进一步拓展；三是话语传播有待更加专业化。对此，他认为，当前需要充分认识世界人权舆论的复杂性和不确定性，进一步关注国别差异，更深入地了解国外状况，采取“一国一策”的策略来讲述中国故事，在话语构建中要更好地融通中外话语，达到增强共识的目的。

Wang Qiaorong, addressing the problems existing in current human rights discourse, put forward her suggestions based on her own work practice. She believes that current work can be carried out from two aspects: first, systematically sort out the differences between Eastern and Western human rights theories to make propaganda more targeted; second, further smooth Eastern-Western non-governmental exchanges, and fully recognize the value of people-to-people diplomacy for telling China's story well.

王巧荣针对当前人权话语中存在的问题，结合自身的工作实践提出了她的建议。她认为，当前的工作可以从两个方面展开，一是对东西方人权理论的差别进行系统梳理，使宣传更有针对性；二是进一步畅通东西方民间交流，充分认识民间外交对于讲好中国故事的价值。

Huang Chengliang expressed his views on "telling China's story well." He believes that the human rights cause is a fruit and symbol of the progress of human civilization, that respecting and protecting human rights is the basic spirit of modern civilization and the unremitting pursuit of Chinese Communists, and that the mutual promotion of ecological civilization construction and the human rights cause reveals the multi-dimensional and multi-level achievements of the Chinese Communist Party in the human rights cause. Specifically, he suggests: first, pay attention to establishing a grand historical perspective and directly confront the historical proposition of why China is China; second, seek common ground while reserving differences and unite more forces; third, have confidence in the theory, return to the source, improve research standards, and tell China's story well.

黄承梁围绕“讲好中国故事”发表意见。他认为，人权事业是人类文明进步的成果和标志，尊重和保障人权是现代文明的基本精神，也是中国共产党人的不懈追求，生态文明建设和人权事业相互促进揭示出中国共产党在人权事业取得的多维度多层次的成就。具体而言，他建议：一是要注意建立宏大的历史视角，直面中国何以是中国的历史命题；二是要求同存异，团结更多的力量；三是要理论自信，回归本源，提高研究水平，讲好中国故事。

Xu Xiujun presented his views on the international human rights theoretical struggle. He believes that China's current international discourse power has significantly improved compared to the past, and the world pays attention to China and listens to China's voice. Improvements can be made in the following aspects: first, emphasize the methods of struggle, which can be specifically divided into three points: (a) struggle on the same track, directly confronting issues on the basis of recognizing basic theories and connotations; (b) competition in a mismatched position, understanding the multi-dimensional connotations of human rights in terms of values, institutions, and actions, and competing on this basis; (c) differentiated struggle, which can be carried out at two levels: "one country, one policy" and "differentiated targets." Second, establish channels for struggle, fully utilize diversified foreign-related channels, and fully leverage non-governmental forces. Third, build a team for struggle, strengthen guidance, and increase flexibility.

徐秀军围绕国际人权理论斗争提出了自己的观点。他认为当前中国的国际话语权比过去有了明显的提升，世界关注中国，关注中国的声音，可以从以下几个方面进一步完善：第一，重视斗争的方法，具体可以分为三点：一是同轨斗争，在认同基本理论和内涵的基础上，直面问题；二是错位竞争，理解人权在价值理念、人权制度、人权行动上的多维内涵，在此基础上展开竞争；三是差异化斗争，可以从“一国一策”和“差异化对象”两个层面展开。第二，建立斗争的渠道，充分利用多元化的涉外渠道，充分利用民间的力量。第三，建设斗争的队伍，加强疏导，增加灵活性。

Liu Xiaomei analyzed international human rights discourse from the perspective of legal research. She points out that compared with China's great achievements in human rights protection, there is currently a phenomenon of aphasia in international public opinion, which can be improved from three aspects. First, further study and interpret the connotation of human rights, based on the Chinese context, Chinese culture, and modernization goals, excavate commonalities, and develop local characteristics and local experience on the basis of recognizing consensus, thereby breaking the Western single model. Second, be adept at utilizing the existing human rights legal framework system, simplify current communication procedures, actively encourage theoretical workers to participate in existing international institutions and platforms, actively voice opinions, and provide theoretical support for practical work. Third, properly handle relationships such as right and wrong, internal and external, etc., by upholding fundamental principles and breaking new ground, talent training, and broadening channels.

刘小妹从法学研究的角度对国际人权话语进行了分析。她指出与我国人权保障的伟大成就相比，当前存在国际舆论失语现象，可以从三个方面进一步提升。第一，进一步研究、解读人权的内涵，立足中国的语境，立足中国文化和现代化目标，挖掘共识性的东西，在承认共识的基础上发展地方特色地方经验，从而破除西方的单一模式。第二，善于利用现有的人权法律框架体系，简化当前的交流程序，积极鼓励理论工作者参与现有的国际机构、平台，积极发声，为实践工作提供理论支撑。第三，处理好对与错、内与外等关系，通过守正创新、人才培训、扩宽渠道等方式展开。

Wei Nanzhi, drawing on her research on the United States, put forward constructive views from three aspects. First, it is necessary to follow historical materialism and fully recognize that the shift in international discourse power requires practice and process; it is “neither to be rushed” nor “to be waited for.” Second, attention must be paid to not being dominated by agendas set by the West. Third, one must insist on “destroying the old to establish the new” in the international discourse struggle, uniting more young forces through methods such as analyzing essences and differentiating and winning over.

魏南枝联系对美国的研究从三个方面提出了建设性的观点。第一是要遵循历史唯物主义，充分认识到国际话语权的转移需要实践和过程，既“急不得”，也“等不得”；二是要注意不要被西方设置的议题主导；三是坚持在国际舆论斗争中不破不立，通过分析本质，分化争取等方式团结更多年轻力量。

Hou Bo offered suggestions on how to resolve current problems: first, be targeted and precise, actively setting agendas in conjunction with China’s development experience; second, hold small-scale thematic meetings to seek consensus through analysis and discussion; third, establish platforms to unify political logic, theoretical logic, practical logic, and communication logic; fourth, build a talent echelon and cultivate specialized personnel.

侯波围绕如何解决当前的问题提出了建议：一是有针对性和精准性，结合中国的发展经验主动设置议题；二是举办小规模主题会议，在分析讨论中寻求共识；三是通过建立平台，把政治逻辑、理论逻辑、实践逻辑、传播逻辑统一起来；四是建立人才梯队，培养专业人才。

Ye Jun, from the perspective of journalism and communication, analyzed problems in international human rights discourse. He pointed out that common Western tactics include fabricating rumors, creating labels, manufacturing issues, tailoring facts, politicizing academic discourse, shifting focus, and linking to history. In response, China’s theoretical workers need to actively counter and argue, broaden discursive flexibility, reconstruct multiple discourse subjects, and proactively set problem scenarios as countermeasures.

叶俊从新闻传播的角度，分析了国际人权话语中的问题。他指出西方惯用的手法有制造谣言、制造标签、制造议题、剪裁事实、学术话语政治化、转移焦点和勾连历史等方法，对此，中国的理论工作者需要积极反驳论证、扩宽话语弹性、重构多重话语主体、主动设置问题情景等方面进行反制。

Gong Yun offered in-depth commentary on the views of the participating experts. He pointed out that, first, information asymmetry still exists in the internet age; regarding various problems in human rights discourse, theoretical workers must deeply understand history and excavate history; interpreting China’s practice from a historical perspective is more persuasive. Second, theoretical research must more systematically understand the overall design of policies; superficial research and interpretation of policies easily lead to homogenized voices. Third, the evaluation system should be gradually adjusted to better mobilize the enthusiasm of researchers and guide them toward forward-looking thinking.

龚云对各位与会专家的看法进行了深入点评。他指出，首先，互联网时代信息不对称仍然存在，针对人权话语中存在的各种问题，理论工作者要深入了解历史，挖掘历史，从历史的角度解读中国的实践更有说服力。其次，理论研究要更系统地了解政策的整体设计，对政策的研究解读不深入容易导致同质化的声音。第三，评价体系要逐步调整以更好地调动研究人员的积极性，引导研究人员进行前瞻性思考。

(Contributed by Li Bin, Institute of Marxism, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences)

（中国社会科学院马克思主义研究院 李彬/供稿）