The Historical Logic of the Evolution of Chinese-Path Modernization

History is three-dimensional and pluralistic; understanding and grasping history should adopt a multi-dimensional perspective. The history of the People’s Republic of China has multiple facets, which can be examined and scrutinized from different dimensions. The theoretical reflection and practical exploration of Chinese-path modernization constitute one of these important facets, running through the entire history of New China. Looking at the historical development of Chinese-path modernization since the founding of New China, it has undergone a historical evolution from limited modernization to comprehensive modernization, from catch-up modernization to leading modernization, from efficiency-focused modernization to quality-focused modernization, and from the practical exploration of modernization to the theoretical construction of modernization. Recognizing the historical logic of the evolution of Chinese-path modernization holds significant enlightening implications for advancing Chinese-path modernization.

历史是立体的、多元的，认识和把握历史应有多维视角。中华人民共和国历史具有多重面相，可从不同维度进行考察和审视，中国式现代化的理论思考和实践探索是其中重要面相之一，贯穿新中国历史的始终。纵观新中国成立以来中国式现代化的历史发展，经历了从有限现代化到全面现代化、从追赶型现代化到引领型现代化、从注重效率的现代化到注重质量的现代化、从现代化的实践探索到现代化的理论建构的历史演进。认清中国式现代化演进的历史逻辑，对于推进中国式现代化具有重要启迪意义。

I. From Limited Modernization to Comprehensive Modernization

一、从有限现代化到全面现代化

Modernization is a comprehensive social transformation involving the economic, political, cultural, social, and ecological spheres, and is closely related to the all-round development of human beings. Viewed from the historical process of world modernization, economic modernization is the breakthrough point for national modernization, driving modernization in other fields through economic modernization. Chinese-path modernization also started from economic modernization, tracing a historical evolution from limited modernization to comprehensive modernization, from industrialization and the Four Modernizations to comprehensively building a modern socialist country and comprehensively building a great modern socialist country. Industrialization is the foundation of national modernization. In the early days of the founding of New China, the national economy was extremely backward, especially the weak industrial base. When Mao Zedong defined the general line and general tasks for the transition period, he placed industrialization and socialist transformation side by side, and put the task of industrialization at the head of the two major tasks, indicating the high importance attached to industrialization and the important position of industrialization in the transition period. In Mao Zedong’s view, “socialist industrialization means transforming China from a country with underdeveloped industry into a country with developed industry, from non-socialist industry into socialist industry.” That is to say, industrialization in the transition period included both the development of productive forces and the transformation of ownership. Industrialization is the logical starting point of China’s modernization. The proposal of the concept of the Four Modernizations and the establishment of their goals expanded the space and scope of China’s modernization. In September 1954, in the government work report at the First Session of the First National People’s Congress, Zhou Enlai proposed taking modern industry, modern agriculture, modern transportation, and modern national defense as the key points of modernization. Starting and making breakthroughs in key areas is a general law of world modernization. Modern industry, modern agriculture, and modern transportation were primarily economic modernization; given the opposition between the two camps after the end of World War II and the blockade and isolation policies adopted by Western countries toward China, putting modern national defense on China’s modernization agenda was particularly necessary. In the 1950s, world science and technology developed rapidly, competition and rivalry among countries in science and technology intensified, and the role of science and technology in the modernization process became increasingly apparent. When the first-generation central collective leadership with Comrade Mao Zedong at its core planned China’s modernization, it keenly grasped this development trend and began to incorporate the modernization of science and technology into the scope of China’s modernization. In November 1956, when Mao Zedong met the Italian Socialist Party Agricultural Investigation Delegation at the Qinzheng Hall in Zhongnanhai, he pointed out the need to “gradually build modern industry and agriculture, modern culture and science.” Here, the idea of modernizing culture and science was already proposed, with culture and science mentioned together. In December 1959, when reading the *Textbook of Political Economy*, Mao Zedong pointed out, “The original requirements for building socialism were the modernization of industry, the modernization of agriculture, and the modernization of science and culture; now we must add the modernization of national defense.” [1]1 Mao Zedong, “Reading Notes on the Soviet Textbook *Political Economy* (Excerpts),” in *Mao Zedong Anthology*, Vol. 8, p. 116. Compared with the key areas of modernization defined by Zhou Enlai, the modernization of transportation was no longer a key point here; instead, it was replaced by the modernization of science and culture, with science placed before culture. In January 1960, Mao Zedong presided over an enlarged meeting of the Political Bureau of the CPC Central Committee, hearing Li Fuchun’s report on the 1960 national economic plan and the three-year and eight-year projections. Mao Zedong pointed out, “The overall goal for the eight years is to basically realize the Four Modernizations and establish a complete industrial system.” [2]2 Mao Zedong, “Speech at the Enlarged Meeting of the Political Bureau of the CPC Central Committee,” January 7, 1960, in *Chronicle of Mao Zedong’s Life (1949-1976)*, Vol. 4, p. 312. Here, Mao Zedong explicitly used the concept of the “Four Modernizations” and took the establishment of a complete industrial system as the hallmark of basically realizing the Four Modernizations. In December 1964, in the government work report at the First Session of the Third National People’s Congress, Zhou Enlai formally defined the connotation of the Four Modernizations as “modern agriculture, modern industry, modern national defense, and modern science and technology,” and set building a modern “powerful socialist country” as the national development goal. The proposal of the concept of the “Four Modernizations” and the establishment of its connotation reflected the pursuit of a modern country by the Chinese Communists during the period of socialist revolution and construction and the deepening of their understanding of the inherent laws of modernization. The Four Modernizations became a household development goal with mobilizing power and appeal. After reform and opening up, regarding the goal orientation of Chinese-path modernization, on the one hand, the concept of the “Four Modernizations” continued to be used; on the other hand, the concept of “Chinese-style modernization” was proposed. In March 1979, when meeting the delegation of the Executive Committee of the Sino-British Cultural Association, Deng Xiaoping pointed out: “The goal we have set is to realize the Four Modernizations by the end of this century. Our concept is different from the West’s; for the time being, I will use a new term, called Chinese-style Four Modernizations.” [3]3 Deng Xiaoping, “Speech at a Meeting of the Political Bureau of the CPC Central Committee,” March 30, 1979, in *Selected Works of Deng Xiaoping*, Vol. 2, p. 237. At the subsequent meeting of the Political Bureau of the CPC Central Committee, Deng Xiaoping simplified this concept to “Chinese-style modernization.” This concept both continued the connotation of the Four Modernizations and strengthened the Chinese characteristics of modernization based on China’s national conditions. When defining the basic line for building socialism with Chinese characteristics, the report of the 13th National Congress of the CPC established “building China into a prosperous, strong, democratic, culturally advanced, and modern socialist country” as the development goal. [4]4 The 13th National Congress of the CPC was held in 1987; its report formally established the basic line of “one center, two basic points” and set the goal of building a modern socialist country. Compared with the concept of the Four Modernizations, this goal added the dimension of political modernization, forming a three-in-one modernization structure of economy, politics, and culture, and expanding the connotation of Chinese-path modernization. At the same time, the limitations of the concept of the Four Modernizations gradually became apparent, and it faded from mainstream discourse, becoming a historical memory of an era. With the deepening of reform and opening up and the deepening of understanding of the laws of Chinese-path modernization, when defining the connotation of the path of socialism with Chinese characteristics, the report of the 17th National Congress of the CPC took “building a prosperous, strong, democratic, culturally advanced, and harmonious modern socialist country” as the goal orientation of the path of socialism with Chinese characteristics, [5]5 The 17th National Congress of the CPC was held in 2007; its report added “harmonious” to the modernization goal, reflecting the emphasis on social construction. beginning to incorporate social modernization into the scope of Chinese-path modernization, and the connotation of modernization became increasingly rich. When deploying the development goals for the middle of the 21st century, the report of the 19th National Congress of the CPC proposed “building China into a great modern socialist country that is prosperous, strong, democratic, culturally advanced, harmonious, and beautiful.” [6]6 The 19th National Congress of the CPC was held in 2017; its report added “beautiful” to the modernization goal, incorporating ecological civilization into the overall layout. The inclusion of “beautiful” as one of the elements of a great modern socialist country further expanded the connotation of Chinese-path modernization. While expanding the connotation of Chinese-path modernization in the New Era, the historical task of comprehensively building a modern socialist country was proposed. The report of the 19th National Congress of the CPC stated that after completing the building of a moderately prosperous society in all respects and achieving the First Centenary Goal, it was necessary to build on the momentum and “embark on a new journey of comprehensively building a modern socialist country and march towards the Second Centenary Goal.” [7]7 The First Centenary Goal refers to the completion of building a moderately prosperous society in all respects by 2021, the centenary of the founding of the CPC; the Second Centenary Goal refers to building a great modern socialist country by the middle of the 21st century, the centenary of the founding of the People’s Republic of China. The report of the 19th National Congress of the CPC proposed a new “two-step” strategic arrangement for the process of comprehensively building a modern socialist country: from completing the building of a moderately prosperous society in all respects to basically realizing modernization; from basically realizing modernization to comprehensively building a great modern socialist country. This advanced the time for basically realizing modernization, as designed by Deng Xiaoping, by fifteen years. The report of the 20th National Congress of the CPC emphasized: “From now on, the central task of the Communist Party of China is to unite and lead the people of all ethnic groups across the country to comprehensively build a great modern socialist country, achieve the Second Centenary Goal, and comprehensively advance the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation through Chinese-path modernization.” [8]8 The 20th National Congress of the CPC was held in 2022; its report explicitly designated Chinese-path modernization as the central task for achieving national rejuvenation. Comprehensively building a modern socialist country is the process; comprehensively building a great modern socialist country is the result. The report of the 20th National Congress of the CPC linked Chinese-path modernization with comprehensively advancing the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation, endowing Chinese-path modernization with a more lofty and comprehensive historical mission. From limited modernization to comprehensive modernization is not only the process of the evolution of understanding of Chinese-path modernization but also the process of expanding the practice of Chinese-path modernization. It interprets the historical logic of the evolution of Chinese-path modernization from the perspective of the fields and scope involved in modernization.

现代化是全方位的社会变革，涉及经济、政治、文化、社会、生态等领域，与人的全面发展密切相关。从世界现代化的历史进程来看，经济现代化是国家现代化的突破口，通过经济现代化带动其他领域的现代化。中国式现代化也是从经济现代化起步的，从工业化、四个现代化到全面建设社会主义现代化国家、全面建成社会主义现代化强国，勾勒出中国式现代化从有限现代化到全面现代化的历史演进。工业化是国家现代化的基础。新中国成立初期，国民经济十分落后，尤其是工业基础薄弱。毛泽东在界定过渡时期总路线和总任务时，将工业化和社会主义改造并提，并将工业化任务置于两大任务之首，表明对工业化的高度重视和工业化在过渡时期的重要地位。在毛泽东看来，“社会主义工业化就是要使中国由工业不发达的国家变成工业发达的国家，由非社会主义的工业变成社会主义的工业”。这也就是说，过渡时期的工业化包括生产力的发展和所有制的变革两个方面。工业化是中国现代化的逻辑起点。四个现代化概念的提出和目标的确立，拓展了中国现代化的空间和范围。1954年9月，周恩来在一届全国人大一次会议的政府工作报告中，提出将现代化的工业、农业、交通运输业和现代化的国防作为现代化的重点。从重点领域起步和突破，这是世界现代化的一般规律。现代化的工业、农业、交通运输业主要是经济的现代化；鉴于第二次世界大战结束后两大阵营对立和西方国家对中国采取封锁、孤立政策，将现代化的国防提上中国现代化议事日程尤为必要。20世纪50年代，世界科技发展迅速，国家之间的科技竞争和较量加剧，科技在现代化进程中的作用日渐显现出来。以毛泽东同志为核心的第一代中央领导集体在谋划中国现代化时，敏锐地把握了这一发展趋势，开始将科学技术现代化纳入中国现代化的范围。1956年11月，毛泽东在中南海勤政殿会见意大利社会党农业考察团时指出，要“逐步建设现代化的工业和农业，现代化的文化和科学”。这里已经提出文化和科学现代化的设想，且将文化与科学并提。1959年12月，毛泽东在读《政治经济学教科书》时指出，“建设社会主义，原来要求是工业现代化、农业现代化、科学文化现代化，现在要加上国防现代化”。相比周恩来界定的现代化重点领域，这里不再把交通运输业的现代化作为重点，而以科学文化现代化替代，且将科学置于文化之前。1960年1月，毛泽东主持召开中共中央政治局扩大会议，听取李富春关于1960年国民经济计划和今后三年、八年设想的报告。毛泽东指出，“八年的总目标是，基本实现四个现代化，建立起完整的工业体系”。在这里，毛泽东明确使用了“四个现代化”的概念，并将建立完整的工业体系作为基本实现四个现代化的标志。1964年12月，周恩来在三届全国人大一次会议的政府工作报告中，将四个现代化的内涵正式界定为“现代农业、现代工业、现代国防和现代科学技术”，并将建设现代化的“社会主义强国”作为国家发展目标。“四个现代化”概念的提出和内涵的确立，体现了社会主义革命和建设时期中国共产党人对现代化国家的追求和对现代化内在规律认识的深化，四个现代化成为家喻户晓、具有动员力和感召力的发展目标。改革开放之后，围绕中国式现代化的目标定位，一方面继续使用“四个现代化”概念，另一方面提出了“中国式的现代化”概念。1979年3月，邓小平在会见英中文化协会执行委员会代表团时指出：“我们定的目标是在本世纪末实现四个现代化。我们的概念与西方不同，我姑且用个新说法，叫做中国式的四个现代化。”邓小平在随后召开的中央政治局会议上将这一概念简化为“中国式的现代化”。这一概念既沿用了四个现代化的内涵，又依据中国国情强化了现代化的中国特色。党的十三大报告在厘定建设中国特色社会主义的基本路线时，将“把我国建设成为富强、民主、文明的社会主义现代化国家”确立为发展目标。这一目标较之四个现代化的概念，增加了政治现代化的维度，形成了经济、政治、文化三位一体的现代化结构，拓展了中国式现代化的内涵。与此同时，四个现代化概念的局限性日渐显现，并从主流话语中逐渐淡出，成为一个时代的历史记忆。随着改革开放的深入和对中国式现代化规律认识的深化，党的十七大报告在厘定中国特色社会主义道路内涵时，将“建设富强民主文明和谐的社会主义现代化国家”作为中国特色社会主义道路的目标指向，开始将社会现代化纳入中国式现代化的范畴，现代化的内涵日渐丰富。党的十九大报告在部署到21世纪中叶的发展目标时，提出“把我国建成富强民主文明和谐美丽的社会主义现代化强国”。“美丽”一词作为现代化强国的要素之一，使中国式现代化的内涵得到进一步拓展。新时代在拓展中国式现代化内涵的同时，提出了全面建设社会主义现代化的历史任务。党的十九大报告提出，全面建成小康社会、实现第一个百年奋斗目标之后，要乘势而上，“开启全面建设社会主义现代化国家新征程，向第二个百年奋斗目标进军”。党的十九大报告对全面建设社会主义现代化国家的进程提出了新的“两步走”战略安排，即从全面建成小康社会到基本实现现代化；从基本实现现代化到全面建成社会主义现代化强国。将邓小平设计的基本实现现代化的时间提前了十五年。党的二十大报告强调：“从现在起，中国共产党的中心任务就是团结带领全国各族人民全面建成社会主义现代化强国、实现第二个百年奋斗目标，以中国式现代化全面推进中华民族伟大复兴。”全面建设社会主义现代化国家是过程，全面建成社会主义现代化强国是结果。党的二十大报告将中国式现代化与全面推进中华民族伟大复兴联系起来，赋予中国式现代化更为崇高、更为全面的历史使命。从有限现代化到全面现代化，既是中国式现代化认识演进的过程，也是中国式现代化实践拓展的过程，从现代化涉及的领域、范围维度，诠释了中国式现代化演进的历史逻辑。

II. From Catch-Up Modernization to Leading Modernization

二、从追赶型现代化到引领型现代化

Chinese-path modernization is a typical “late-developing, externally induced” type of modernization. This type determined that at its inception, Chinese-path modernization faced the historical task of catching up with Western developed countries and the Soviet socialist state. As China’s economic aggregate has steadily ranked second in the world, Chinese-path modernization has achieved a transformation from catch-up modernization to leading modernization. When Mao Zedong planned China’s modernization, he successively set catching up with or surpassing the Soviet Union, the United States, and Britain as his goals. In August 1954, Mao Zedong, when meeting with the British Labour Party delegation led by Clement Attlee, pointed out, “China is a backward country that is beginning to change its face; it is economically and culturally more backward than Western countries.” Objectively acknowledging the gap in economic and cultural development between China and Western developed countries was the prerequisite for the emergence of catch-up modernization. In the opening address of the First Session of the First National People’s Congress, Mao Zedong clearly stated, “The people of our country should work hard and diligently learn from the advanced experience of the Soviet Union and fraternal countries.” Here, the target of catching up was explicitly designated as the Soviet Union and fraternal countries. In March 1955, Mao Zedong, in the opening address of the National Conference of the Communist Party of China, pointed out, “We must catch up with or surpass the most powerful capitalist countries in the world within about several decades.” Mao Zedong clearly designated the target of catching up as “the most powerful capitalist countries in the world,” which naturally included the United States and Britain, and he realized that the process of catching up and surpassing would encounter many difficulties. As a socialist country, the Soviet Union, after experiencing World War II, rapidly developed its economy and society, becoming a force that could contend with the United States. It was the primary target for China’s modernization to catch up with. Modernization originated in the West. The success of Soviet socialist construction gave human modernization two forms: capitalist modernization and socialist modernization. The diplomatic choice of “leaning to one side” [9]9 “Leaning to one side” (一边倒) was a foreign policy strategy adopted by the newly founded People’s Republic of China in 1949, aligning the country with the Soviet-led socialist bloc against the US-led capitalist camp. and the Soviet Union’s aid to China in the early days of the founding of New China led Mao Zedong, when planning China’s modernization, to first take the Soviet Union as the target of catching up. In February 1956, Mao Zedong, when listening to a report from the Ministry of Heavy Industry, discussed the issue of development speed. He said: “Can our construction surpass the speed of the Soviet Union’s first few Five-Year Plans? I think we can catch up, and industry can also surpass.” Mao Zedong analyzed the reasons why China’s development speed might surpass that of the Soviet Union from four aspects: international conditions, domestic conditions, technological level, population size, and agricultural development. In Mao Zedong’s view, China could also surpass the Soviet Union in the development of modern technology, mainly based on socialist enthusiasm, the mass line, and reducing bureaucracy. The United States was the most developed capitalist country in the world. When planning the development goals of China’s modernization, Mao Zedong also took the United States as a target for catching up. In October 1955, Mao Zedong, when discussing the issue of socialist transformation of private industry and commerce with members of the Executive Committee of the All-China Federation of Industry and Commerce, clearly stated, “Our goal is to catch up with the United States and to surpass the United States. The United States has only a population of over one hundred million, while our country has a population of over six hundred million. We should catch up with the United States.” A large population is both a burden and an asset for modernization. To bring a population of over six hundred million into a modernized society as a whole is an extremely arduous task, and the difficulty is imaginable. However, a large population means a large labor force, which can generate a demographic dividend, and there is a huge market, which is beneficial for modernization. This was the basis for Mao Zedong’s belief that China could catch up with and surpass the United States. In May 1957, Mao Zedong, when meeting with the Burmese delegation led by Speaker of the Chamber of Nationalities Mahn Win Maung, pointed out, “We must work hard for fifty years to build up industry and have as much steel as the United States. The Soviet Union has been building for forty years and has not yet caught up with the United States. We must work hard to catch up, and the United States is also moving forward.” Mao Zedong was well aware that it was difficult to catch up with the United States as a whole in the short term, so he chose the single item of steel output as a breakthrough point for catching up with the United States. After experiencing the setback of the “Great Leap Forward,” [10]10 The “Great Leap Forward” (大跃进) was a campaign launched by the CPC from 1958 to 1961 aimed at rapidly industrializing the country and collectivizing agriculture, which led to severe economic difficulties and a major famine. Mao Zedong gained a clearer understanding of the difficulty of catching up with and surpassing the United States. In January 1962, Mao Zedong, when presiding over the plenary session of the Enlarged Central Work Conference, pointed out that China had a large population, a weak foundation, and a backward economy, and “to catch up with and surpass the most advanced capitalist countries in the world, I think it will not be possible without a period of over one hundred years.” The “most advanced capitalist countries in the world” mentioned here actually referred to the United States, and the time for catching up was set at “over one hundred years.” It should be said that Mao Zedong left some leeway in setting the time for catching up with and surpassing the United States. Britain was the earliest capitalist country to achieve modernization and was also a target for China’s modernization to catch up with after the founding of New China. In November 1957, Mao Zedong, when speaking at the Meeting of Representatives of Communist and Workers’ Parties, stated, “In fifteen years we may be able to catch up with or surpass Britain.” In December of the same year, Mao Zedong, when talking with leaders of democratic parties and non-party democrats, specifically explained the possibility of catching up with Britain in fifteen years. Mao Zedong believed that “it is possible to catch up with or surpass Britain in the output of steel and other important industrial products within fifteen years or a little more time,” and he specifically analyzed the possibility of catching up with or surpassing Britain in electricity, coal, and steel. In January 1958, Mao Zedong, when presiding over the Fourteenth Meeting of the Supreme State Conference, again stated: “Catching up with Britain in fifteen years, I think it is entirely possible.” The “catching up with Britain in fifteen years” mentioned here referred to the output of major industrial products. After the “Great Leap Forward” began, Mao Zedong greatly compressed the time for catching up with or surpassing Britain. In June 1958, Mao Zedong, when reading the summary submitted by Bo Yibo to the Political Bureau of the CPC Central Committee on the national economic situation in 1958 and the outlook for economic development in 1959, wrote an instruction: “Surpassing Britain is not fifteen years, nor seven years, but only two to three years; two years is possible. This mainly refers to steel. As long as we reach 25 million tons in 1959, we will surpass Britain in steel output.” Based on this judgment, “Mao Zedong changed the title of the summary to ‘Surpassing Britain in Two Years (Report to the Political Bureau)’.” The “surpassing Britain in two years” proposed by Mao Zedong referred to surpassing Britain in the output of major industrial products. In August of the same year, Mao Zedong, when meeting with the Cambodian national delegation led by Prince Norodom Sihanouk in Beidaihe, pointed out, “We have made some progress in industry, but to catch up with Britain in per capita output is not so easy; first, catch up in absolute output.” The standard for catching up with Britain proposed here was still the “absolute output” of industrial production, not per capita output. In November of the same year, Mao Zedong, when presiding over the First Zhengzhou Conference, once proposed the idea of catching up with Britain in per capita output of major industrial products. He said, “In the past, we proposed catching up with Britain in total output within fifteen years or a shorter time; now we propose catching up in per capita output.” Catching up with Britain in per capita output, compared to catching up in absolute output, actually significantly raised the measurement standard for catching up with Britain. However, Mao Zedong’s view quickly changed. In June 1959, Mao Zedong, when talking with responsible comrades of the Henan Provincial Party Committee on his special train stopped in Zhengzhou, pointed out, “I think it is still fifteen years or a little less time to surpass Britain in the output of major industrial products; let’s still raise this slogan. Major industrial products are not just steel. The slogan was originally very appropriate, but now it doesn’t work, as if catching up with Britain in fifteen years is not enough.” Mao Zedong here criticized the phenomenon of being too eager to catch up with or surpass Britain, and believed that “the slogan of catching up with and surpassing Britain in the quantity of major industrial products within fifteen years must still be adhered to.” In October of the same year, Mao Zedong, when meeting with the Brazilian Communist Party delegation, explained the reasons for surpassing Britain in per capita output of major industrial products and extended the time for catching up with or surpassing Britain to fifty years. In fact, the Eighth Plenary Session of the Eighth Central Committee of the CPC, held in August 1959, proposed the goal of catching up with Britain in the output of major industrial products within ten years. The communiqué of this plenary session pointed out, “The slogan of ‘catching up with the British level in the output of major industrial products within fifteen years’ can be basically realized within about ten years.” Based on this goal, the *People’s Daily* New Year’s Day editorial in 1960, “Looking Forward to the Sixties,” pointed out, “The goal of the Chinese people’s struggle is to catch up with or surpass Britain in the output of major industrial products within the new decade.” Here, the time for catching up with or surpassing Britain in the output of major industrial products was set at ten years and linked to the basic realization of modernization. In January of the same year, Mao Zedong, when presiding over an enlarged meeting of the Political Bureau of the CPC Central Committee, proposed “realizing the slogan of catching up with Britain in ten years proposed by the Eighth Plenary Session of the Eighth Central Committee five years ahead of schedule” in 1962. Such a goal setting was obviously too hasty and could not achieve the expected results. After reform and opening up, Chinese-path modernization still took catching up with Western developed countries as its goal. In August 1980, Deng Xiaoping, in his speech at an enlarged meeting of the Political Bureau of the CPC Central Committee, pointed out, “In carrying out socialist modernization, we aim to catch up economically with the developed capitalist countries, create a democracy higher and more substantial than that of capitalist countries politically, and produce more and better talents than these countries.” Here, catching up with Western developed capitalist countries was taken as the goal orientation of Chinese-path modernization, using this as a reference to define the connotation of Chinese-path modernization. In his Southern Talks, Deng Xiaoping expressed the hope that Guangdong would “strive to catch up with the ‘Four Asian Tigers’ [11]11 The “Four Asian Tigers” (亚洲四小龙) refers to the highly developed economies of Hong Kong, Singapore, South Korea, and Taiwan, which experienced rapid industrialization and economic growth from the 1960s to the 1990s. within twenty years.” What was reflected here was still a catch-up mode of thinking, taking catching up with the then “Four Asian Tigers” as the goal of Guangdong’s modernization. In the first decade of the 21st century, China’s economic aggregate successively surpassed Italy, France, Britain, Germany, and Japan, ranking second in the world. Entering the New Era, Chinese-path modernization no longer takes catching up with Western developed countries as its goal. The report of the 19th National Congress of the CPC pointed out that socialism with Chinese characteristics has entered a New Era, “which means that the path, theory, system, and culture of socialism with Chinese characteristics have continuously developed, expanding the pathways for developing countries to achieve modernization.” Between the lines, confidence in Chinese-path modernization is revealed. The report of the 20th National Congress of the CPC proposed that “Chinese-path modernization provides a new choice for humanity to achieve modernization.” This means that Chinese-path modernization has shed the state of catching up and “apprenticeship” and entered a historical stage of leading world modernization. The historical evolution from catch-up modernization to leading modernization interprets the mode of thinking and action of Chinese-path modernization, presents the historical process of Chinese-path modernization from passivity to initiative, and highlights the change in the international status of Chinese-path modernization.

中国式现代化是典型的“后发外生型”现代化，这一类型决定了中国式现代化起步之时，就面临追赶西方发达国家和苏联社会主义国家的历史任务。随着中国经济总量稳居世界第二，中国式现代化实现了从追赶型现代化到引领型现代化的转变。毛泽东在谋划中国现代化时，先后把赶上或超过苏联、美国、英国作为目标追求。1954年8月，毛泽东在会见以艾德礼为团长的英国工党代表团时指出，“中国是一个正在开始改变面貌的落后国家，经济上、文化上都比西方国家落后”，客观承认中国和西方发达国家经济文化发展的差距，这是追赶型现代化生成的前提。在一届全国人大一次会议开幕词中，毛泽东明确指出，“我国人民应当努力工作，努力学习苏联和各兄弟国家的先进经验”。这里将追赶的对象明确为苏联和各兄弟国家。1955年3月，毛泽东在中国共产党全国代表会议开幕词中指出，“要在大约几十年内追上或赶过世界上最强大的资本主义国家”。毛泽东将追赶对象明确为“世界上最强大的资本主义国家”，自然包括美国、英国在内，并意识到赶超的过程将会遇到许多困难。苏联作为社会主义国家，经历第二次世界大战之后，经济社会快速发展，一跃成为和美国抗衡的力量，是中国现代化首先追赶的对象。现代化发端于西方，苏联社会主义建设的成功使人类现代化有了资本主义现代化和社会主义现代化两种形态，“一边倒”的外交选择和新中国成立初期苏联对中国的援助，使毛泽东在谋划中国现代化时，首先将苏联作为追赶目标。1956年2月，毛泽东在听取重工业部汇报时，讲到发展速度问题。他说：“我国建设能否超过苏联头几个五年计划的速度？我看是可以赶上的，工业也可以超过。”毛泽东从国际条件、国内条件、技术水平、人口数量和农业发展四个方面，分析了我国发展速度有可能超过苏联的理由。在毛泽东看来，我国现代技术发展方面也可以超过苏联，主要依据在于有社会主义的积极性、群众路线和少搞官僚主义。美国是世界上最发达的资本主义国家，毛泽东在谋划中国现代化发展目标时，也将美国作为追赶对象。1955年10月，毛泽东在与全国工商联执行委员座谈私营工商业社会主义改造问题时明确指出，“我们的目标是要赶上美国，并且要超过美国。美国只有一亿多人口，我国有六亿多人口，我们应该赶上美国。”人口多对于现代化而言，既是包袱也是财富。要使六亿多人口整体迈入现代化社会，任务十分艰巨，难度可想而知，但人多意味着劳动力多，能产生人口红利，且存在巨大的市场，对于现代化来说是有利的，这是毛泽东认为中国可以赶超美国的依据。1957年5月，毛泽东在会见缅甸民族院议长萧恢塔时指出，“我们要好好干五十年，把工业建起来，要有美国那样多的钢铁。苏联建设了四十年还没有赶上美国，我们要好好努力才能赶上，美国也是要前进的”。毛泽东深知短期内从整体上赶上美国比较困难，故而选择单项的钢铁产量作为赶上美国的突破口。经历“大跃进”的挫折后，毛泽东对于赶超美国的艰巨性有了更为清醒的认识。1962年1月，毛泽东在主持扩大的中央工作会议全体会议时指出，中国人口多、底子薄、经济落后，“要赶上和超过世界上最先进的资本主义国家，没有一百多年的时间，我看是不行的”。这里所说的“世界上最先进的资本主义国家”实际上是指美国，并将追赶的时间设定为“一百多年”。应该说，毛泽东对赶超美国的时间设定留有余地。英国是最早实现现代化的资本主义国家，也是新中国成立后中国现代化追赶的对象。1957年11月，毛泽东在各国共产党和工人党代表会议上讲话时表示，“十五年后我们可能赶上或者超过英国”。同年12月，毛泽东在同各民主党派负责人和无党派民主人士谈话时，具体阐释了十五年赶上英国的可能性。毛泽东认为，“以十五年或稍多一些时间，在钢铁和其他重要工业产品的产量方面赶上或超过英国，是可能的”，并对电力、煤、钢赶上或超过英国的可能性进行了具体分析。1958年1月，毛泽东在主持召开最高国务会议第十四次会议时，再次表示：“十五年赶上英国，我看完全可能。”这里所说的“十五年赶上英国”，是就主要工业产品的产量来说的。“大跃进”开始后，毛泽东将赶上或超过英国的时间大大压缩了。1958年6月，毛泽东在阅薄一波向中共中央政治局提交的关于1958年国民经济形势和1959年经济发展展望的提要时，批示道：“超过英国，不是十五年，也不是七年，只需要两年到三年，两年是可能的。这里主要是钢。只要一九五九年达到二千五百万吨，我们就在钢的产量上超过英国了。”基于这一判断，“毛泽东将汇报提要的题目改为《两年超过英国（向政治局的报告）》”。毛泽东提出的“两年超过英国”，是指主要工业产品的产量超过英国。同年8月，毛泽东在北戴河会见由西哈努克亲王率领的柬埔寨国家代表团时指出，“我们工业有一些进步，但要在按人口平均产量上赶上英国，那就不那么容易了，先在绝对产量上赶上英国”。这里提出的赶上英国的标准仍是工业生产的“绝对产量”而非人均产量。同年11月，毛泽东在主持第一次郑州会议时，一度提出主要工业产品人均产量赶上英国的设想。他说，“过去我们提的是十五年或者更短一点时间总产量赶上英国，现在提按人口平均赶上英国”。人均产量赶上英国较之绝对产量赶上英国，实际上是大幅度提高了赶上英国的衡量标准。不过，毛泽东的观点很快发生了变化。1959年6月，毛泽东在停靠郑州的专列上同中共河南省委负责人谈话时指出，“我看还是十五年或者少一点时间在主要工业产品的产量上超过英国，还提这个口号。主要工业产品不只是钢这一项。过去本来很适当的口号，现在不灵了，好像十五年赶上英国不过瘾”。毛泽东在这里批评了急于赶上或超过英国的现象，并认为“十五年内主要工业产品的数量赶上和超过英国的口号还要坚持”。同年10月，毛泽东在会见巴西共产党代表团时，诠释了主要工业品人均产量超过英国的理由，并将赶上或超过英国的时间延展为五十年。其实，1959年8月召开的中共八届八中全会，提出了主要工业产品产量十年赶上英国的目标。这次全会的公报指出，“‘十五年内在主要工业产品产量方面赶上英国水平’的口号，可以争取在十年左右的时间内基本实现”。依据这一目标，《人民日报》1960年元旦社论《展望六十年代》指出，“中国人民的奋斗目标是，在新的十年间，要在主要工业产品的产量方面赶上或者超过英国”。这里将主要工业产品的产量赶上或者超过英国的时间定为十年，并将其与基本实现现代化联系起来。同年1月，毛泽东在主持召开中共中央政治局扩大会议时，提出在1962年“提前五年实现中共八届八中全会提出的十年赶上英国的口号”。这样的目标定位显然操之过急，达不到预期的效果。改革开放后，中国式现代化仍以追赶西方发达国家作为目标。1980年8月，邓小平在中央政治局扩大会议上的讲话指出，“我们进行社会主义现代化建设，是要在经济上赶上发达的资本主义国家，在政治上创造比资本主义国家的民主更高更切实的民主，并且造就比这些国家更多更优秀的人才”。这里以追赶西方发达的资本主义国家作为中国式现代化的目标定位，以此为参照界定中国式现代化的内涵。邓小平在南方谈话中寄望广东，“力争用二十年的时间赶上亚洲‘四小龙’”。这里所体现的仍是追赶型的思维方式，将赶上当时的亚洲“四小龙”作为广东现代化的目标。21世纪头十年，中国经济总量先后超过意大利、法国、英国、德国和日本，位居世界第二位。进入新时代，中国式现代化不再将追赶西方发达国家作为目标。党的十九大报告指出，中国特色社会主义进入新时代，“意味着中国特色社会主义道路、理论、制度、文化不断发展，拓展了发展中国家走向现代化的途径”。字里行间，流露出对中国式现代化的自信。党的二十大报告提出，“中国式现代化为人类实现现代化提供了新的选择”。这意味着中国式现代化摆脱了追赶、“学徒”状态，进入了引领世界现代化的历史阶段。从追赶型现代化到引领型现代化的历史演进，诠释了中国式现代化的思维方式和行动方式，呈现了中国式现代化由被动到主动的历史过程，彰显了中国式现代化国际地位的变化。

III. From a modernization that emphasizes efficiency to a modernization that emphasizes quality

三、从注重效率的现代化到注重质量的现代化

The reality of economic and cultural backwardness and the stark contrast with the developed Western countries meant that for a long period Chinese-path modernization primarily pursued efficiency; catch-up modernization was built on the basis of efficiency, for without efficiency it would be difficult to achieve the goal of catching up. As China’s economy shifted from high-speed growth to high-quality development, Chinese-path modernization began to turn toward a modernization that emphasizes quality. In the early period after the founding of New China, there was an urgent desire to change the backward appearance. In June 1953, when Mao Zedong reviewed Li Weihan’s report “On Several Issues Concerning the Utilization, Restriction and Reorganization of Capitalist Industry and Commerce (Unofficial Draft),” he proposed that “the Party’s task is to basically complete national industrialization and the socialist transformation within ten to fifteen years or a somewhat longer period.” National industrialization involves infrastructure construction, technological innovation, and coordination among various industries; it is a vast project. Setting the time for basically completing national industrialization at ten to fifteen years reflected the strong desire to rapidly change China’s backward appearance, but in fact it was difficult to achieve. Subsequently, Mao Zedong’s conception of the time needed to realize China’s industrialization became slightly more relaxed. When Mao Zedong met with the British Labour Party delegation led by Clement Attlee, he pointed out that “China is an agricultural country; to become an industrial country requires several decades.” Here he defined the time for realizing industrialization as several decades. In his opening address to the First Session of the First National People’s Congress, Mao Zedong stated, “We are prepared, within the space of several five-year plans, to build our country, which is now economically and culturally backward, into a great industrialized country with a high degree of modern culture.” Although Mao Zedong did not specify exactly how many five-year plans would be needed to realize industrialization and cultural modernization, “several five-year plans” was not a short period. In October 1954, when Mao Zedong met with the Polish government delegation led by Bolesław Bierut, he pointed out, “We are prepared to lay the foundation within fifteen years; to achieve genuine industrialization will require even more time.” Here, Mao Zedong divided the realization of national industrialization into two steps—laying the foundation for industrialization and realizing industrialization—and still conceived the time for laying the foundation as fifteen years, but did not specify the concrete time for realizing industrialization. In his opening address to the National Conference of the Communist Party of China, Mao Zedong pointed out: “We may build a socialist society through three five-year plans, but to build a powerful, highly socialist industrialized country will require decades of arduous effort; for example, it will require fifty years, that is, the entire second half of this century.” Here he explicitly set the time for realizing industrialization at fifty years, which still reflected some impatience for success. In March 1957, when Mao Zedong delivered a speech at a meeting of Party cadres in Jiangsu Province, Anhui Province, and the Nanjing Military Region, he pointed out: “How many years will it take to build our country well? I think it will probably take about a hundred years. It must be advanced in several steps: probably in a little over ten years things will be somewhat better; in twenty or thirty years they will be even better; in fifty years we can barely look presentable; in a hundred years we will be remarkable, and then things will be completely different from now.” Mao Zedong designed the realization of China’s modernization in four steps, with the overall time limited to within a hundred years. With the rise of the Great Leap Forward,[12]12 The Great Leap Forward (1958–1961) was a campaign initiated by Mao Zedong aimed at rapid industrialization and collectivization of agriculture, which led to severe economic difficulties and famine. Mao Zedong’s grasp of the time needed to realize modernization became overly hasty and rapid. In November 1958, when Mao Zedong reviewed and revised the “Resolution on Several Issues Concerning the People’s Communes (Third Draft),” he changed the time for “building China into a socialist country with modern industry, modern agriculture, and modern science and culture” from “about fifteen years” to “fifteen years, twenty years, or a somewhat longer period.” In practice, the time for building China into a modernized country was shortened from a hundred years to fifteen years, twenty years, or a bit longer, representing a major change and adjustment compared with the design of March 1957. In June 1959, when Mao Zedong met with a Peruvian parliamentary delegation, he pointed out, “For a big country like ours to raise the economic and cultural level and build modern industry, agriculture, and culture and education requires a process. We have now put forward the slogan ‘more, faster, better, and more economical’ for building the economy and culture. It can be a bit faster, but it cannot be very fast; to think it can be very fast is to brag.” Mao Zedong had already become aware of the problem of impatience for success brought about by the Great Leap Forward and sought to change this situation. In the process of correcting the errors of the Great Leap Forward, Mao Zedong’s conception of the time for China’s modernization returned to the judgment of 1957. In December 1961, when Mao Zedong met with a delegation from the Caracas City Council of Venezuela in Hangzhou, he pointed out, “We are prepared to use fifty to a hundred years to fundamentally solve the problems of industry and agricultural production. Are we not talking about the Great Leap Forward? But we need time; the Great Leap Forward also requires several decades to a hundred years to solve problems, to turn a very poor country into a relatively wealthy one.” Mao Zedong designed the time for realizing modernization as fifty to a hundred years. In December 1962, when Mao Zedong met with Brazilian guests at the Yinian Hall in Zhongnanhai, he pointed out, “China’s industrial foundation is there to some extent, but it is insufficient, and it cannot be established in a very short time, nor can it catch up with the world level; it requires a century. We are prepared to use fifty to a hundred years.” The design of fifty years was somewhat rushed; the design of a hundred years was more relaxed and more in line with the concrete reality of Chinese-path modernization. Although the time nodes Mao Zedong proposed for realizing industrialization and building a modern socialist country varied in length, they all indicated a pursuit of efficiency in China’s modernization, an effort to rapidly change China’s backward appearance and narrow the development gap with the developed Western countries. In the early period of reform and opening up, Chinese-path modernization still primarily pursued efficiency. In March 1978, in his opening speech at the National Science Conference, Deng Xiaoping proposed, “Within the twentieth century, comprehensively realize the modernization of agriculture, industry, national defense, and science and technology, and build our country into a modern socialist powerful nation.” Here the time for comprehensively realizing the Four Modernizations[13]13 The Four Modernizations refer to the goals of modernizing agriculture, industry, national defense, and science and technology, first proposed by Zhou Enlai in 1964 and later advanced by Deng Xiaoping. and building a modern socialist powerful nation was limited to within the twentieth century, basically consistent with Mao Zedong’s conception of fifty years to realize modernization, but in fact it was difficult to achieve. Thereafter, Deng Xiaoping adjusted the conception of the time needed to realize the Four Modernizations. In November 1981, when Deng Xiaoping met with the U.S. Secretary of the Treasury, he pointed out that by the end of the twentieth century, a “moderately prosperous society” modernization would be realized, “striving to reach one thousand dollars per capita, at a minimum eight hundred dollars. On this basis, in the next century, another thirty to fifty years will be needed to approach the level of the West.” This conception was relatively consistent with Mao Zedong’s idea of a hundred years to realize modernization and was more in line with the reality of Chinese-path modernization. In his Southern Talks,[14]14 The Southern Talks refer to a series of speeches delivered by Deng Xiaoping during an inspection tour of southern China in early 1992, which reaffirmed the course of reform and opening up and market-oriented economic reforms. Deng Xiaoping, based on the development experience of Japan, South Korea, and Southeast Asia, as well as domestic conditions, the international environment, and the advantage of concentrating resources to accomplish major tasks, proposed, “In the long process of modernization construction, it is necessary and also possible to have several stages of relatively fast development speed and relatively good results.” Facts have proven that Deng Xiaoping’s prediction was correct. China’s economy maintained high-speed growth for forty years, becoming one of the “two miracles.”[15]15 The “two miracles” refer to China’s rapid economic growth and long-term social stability over several decades. Based on the stage characteristics formed by China’s economic development, the report to the 19th National Congress of the CPC declared that “China’s economy has shifted from a stage of high-speed growth to a stage of high-quality development.” High-quality development is development that implements the new development philosophy, development based on new quality productive forces, and also the development needed to advance Chinese-path modernization. High-quality development does not mean abandoning development speed, but organically unifying economic development with scientific and technological progress, environmental protection, and the satisfaction of the people’s needs. The report to the 20th National Congress of the CPC emphasized that “high-quality development is the primary task in building a modern socialist country in all respects,” highlighting the role of high-quality development in advancing Chinese-path modernization, meaning that Chinese-path modernization is moving toward a modernization that emphasizes quality. The shift from a modernization emphasizing efficiency to a modernization emphasizing quality is an enhancement of the quality of Chinese-path modernization and also a transformation of the path dependence of Chinese-path modernization.

经济文化落后的现实和较之西方发达国家的强烈反差，使中国式现代化较长时间以追求效率为主，追赶型现代化是建立在效率基础之上的，没有效率就难以实现追赶的目标。随着中国经济由高速增长转向高质量发展，中国式现代化开始转向注重质量的现代化。新中国成立初期，急于改变落后面貌。1953年6月，毛泽东在审阅李维汉的报告《关于利用、限制和改组资本主义工商业的若干问题（未定稿）》时提出，“党的任务是在十年至十五年或者更多一些时间内，基本上完成国家工业化和社会主义的改造”。国家工业化涉及基础设施建设、技术创新和各产业之间的协调，是一项浩大的工程；将基本完成国家工业化的时间定在十年至十五年，体现了急于改变中国落后面貌的强烈愿望，事实上难以实现。随后，毛泽东对实现中国工业化的时间设想变得稍微宽松一些。毛泽东在会见以艾德礼为团长的英国工党代表团时指出，“中国是农业国，要变为工业国需要几十年”。这里将实现工业化的时间界定为几十年。在一届全国人大一次会议开幕词中，毛泽东指出，“准备在几个五年计划之内，将我们现在这样一个经济上文化上落后的国家，建设成为一个工业化的具有高度现代文化程度的伟大的国家”。尽管毛泽东没有具体明确经历多少个五年计划才能实现工业化和文化现代化，但几个五年计划不是一个短暂的时间。1954年10月，毛泽东在会见由贝鲁特率领的波兰政府代表团时，指出“我们准备在十五年之内打下基础，要真正的工业化，还需要更多的时间”。在这里，毛泽东将实现国家工业化分为两个步骤，即打下工业化基础与实现工业化，并将打下工业化基础的时间仍设想为十五年，但没有明确实现工业化的具体时间。毛泽东在中国共产党全国代表会议开幕词中指出：“我们可能经过三个五年计划建成社会主义社会，但要建成为一个强大的高度社会主义工业化的国家，就需要有几十年的艰苦努力，比如说，要有五十年的时间，即本世纪的整个下半世纪。”这里将实现工业化的时间明确为五十年，仍有些急于求成。1957年3月，毛泽东在江苏、安徽两省及南京军区党员干部会议上发表讲话时指出：“把我们的国家建设好要多少年呢？我看大概要一百年吧。要分几步来走：大概有十几年会稍微好一点；有个二三十年就更好一点；有个五十年可以勉强像个样子；有一百年那就了不起，就和现在大不相同了。”毛泽东将实现中国现代化设计为四个步骤，总体时间限定在一百年之内。随着“大跃进”的兴起，毛泽东对实现现代化的时间把握变得过急过快。1958年11月，毛泽东在审阅修改《关于人民公社若干问题的决议（第三次草稿）》时，将“把我国建设成一个具有现代工业、现代农业和现代科学文化的社会主义国家”的时间，由十五年左右修改为“十五年、二十年或者更多一些的时间”。实际把我国建成现代化国家的时间由一百年缩短为十五年、二十年或者更长一点，较之1957年3月的设计有较大变化和调整。1959年6月，毛泽东在会见秘鲁议员团时指出，“我们这样一个大国要提高经济、文化水平，建设现代化的工业、农业和文化教育，需要一个过程。我们现在提出了‘多、快、好、省’这个建设经济、文化的口号。可以快一点，但不可能很快，想很快是吹牛皮”。毛泽东已意识到“大跃进”带来的急于求成问题，并力求改变这种状况。在纠正“大跃进”错误的过程中，毛泽东对中国现代化的时间设想又回到了1957年的判断。1961年12月，毛泽东在杭州会见委内瑞拉加拉加斯市议会代表团，指出“准备用五十年至一百年来根本解决工业、农业生产问题。我们不是讲大跃进吗？但是我们需要时间，大跃进也需要几十年到一百年的时间来解决问题，使很穷的国家变成一个比较富裕的国家”。毛泽东将实现现代化的时间设计为五十年至一百年。1962年12月，毛泽东在中南海颐年堂会见巴西客人时指出，“中国的工业基础是有了一些，但不够，并且不是在一个很短的时间里就可以建立起来，可以赶上世界水平的，需要一个世纪。我们准备用五十年到一百年的时间”。五十年的时间设计比较匆忙，一百年的时间设计较为从容，更符合中国式现代化的具体实际。毛泽东提出实现工业化、建成社会主义现代化国家的时间节点，尽管时间有长短，都表明了对中国现代化效率的追求，力求尽快改变中国的落后面貌，缩小与西方发达国家之间的发展差距。改革开放初期，中国式现代化仍以追求效率为主。1978年3月，邓小平在全国科学大会开幕式上的讲话中提出，“在二十世纪内，全面实现农业、工业、国防和科学技术的现代化，把我们的国家建设成为社会主义的现代化强国”。这里将全面实现四个现代化、建成社会主义现代化强国的时间限定在20世纪之内，与毛泽东提出的50年实现现代化的设想基本一致，事实上难以做到。此后，邓小平调整了实现四个现代化的时间设想。1981年11月，邓小平在会见美国财政部部长时指出，至20世纪末，实现一个“小康之家”的现代化，“争取人均达到一千美元，最低达到八百美元。在这个基础上，在下个世纪再花三十年到五十年时间，接近西方的水平”。这一设想与毛泽东提出的一百年实现现代化的设想较为吻合，更符合中国式现代化的实际。在南方谈话中，邓小平依据日本、韩国、东南亚的发展经验和国内条件、国际环境及集中力量办大事的优势提出，“在今后的现代化建设长过程中，出现若干个发展速度比较快、效益比较好的阶段，是必要的，也是能够办到的”。事实证明，邓小平的这一预见是正确的。中国经济保持了40年高速增长，成为“两大奇迹”之一。依据中国经济发展形成的阶段性特征，党的十九大报告宣告“我国经济已由高速增长阶段转向高质量发展阶段”。高质量发展是贯彻新发展理念的发展，是基于新质生产力的发展，也是推进中国式现代化需要的发展。高质量发展不是不要发展速度，而是将经济发展与科技进步、环境保护、人民需要的满足有机统一起来。党的二十大报告强调“高质量发展是全面建设社会主义现代化国家的首要任务”，彰显了高质量发展对推进中国式现代化的作用，意味着中国式现代化走向注重质量的现代化。从注重效率的现代化转向注重质量的现代化，是中国式现代化品质的提升，也是中国式现代化路径依赖的转变。

IV. From Modernization Practice and Exploration to Modernization Theoretical Construction

四、从现代化实践探索到现代化理论建构

From the founding of New China to before the convening of the 18th National Congress of the CPC, Chinese Communists engaged in theoretical reflection and practical exploration of Chinese-path modernization, but lacked systematic theoretical construction. The report of the 20th National Congress of the CPC carried out a systematic theoretical construction of Chinese-path modernization, initially establishing a theoretical system for Chinese-path modernization, which entered a new stage of two-way interaction between theory and practice. After the founding of New China, the concepts of the "Four Modernizations" and "Chinese-style modernization" were successively proposed, and theoretical exploration was conducted on the major relationships that needed to be addressed in China's modernization. After the convening of the 13th National Congress of the CPC, the connotation of a socialist modernized country was clearly defined, and strategic steps for Chinese-path modernization were arranged. This theoretical exploration promoted the practical development of Chinese-path modernization; the implementation of successive Five-Year Plans and programs constituted the concrete practice of Chinese-path modernization. During the period of socialist revolution and construction, an independent and relatively complete industrial system and national economic system were established, laying the material foundation for Chinese-path modernization. During the new period of reform and opening up and socialist modernization, a historic breakthrough was achieved from a state of relatively backward productive forces to becoming the world's second-largest economy, and a historic leap was realized in the people's livelihood from inadequate food and clothing to moderate prosperity overall and then to comprehensive moderate prosperity, providing material conditions for Chinese-path modernization. With the accumulation of practical experience in advancing Chinese-path modernization since the founding of New China, the time was ripe for systematically constructing the theory of Chinese-path modernization. The question of "what kind of socialist modernized power to build and how to build a socialist modernized power" became a major issue of the era that Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era needed to answer. In October 2020, at the second plenary session of the Fifth Plenary Session of the 19th Central Committee of the CPC, Xi Jinping systematically summarized five important characteristics of Chinese-path modernization and interpreted the history of the Party and the history of New China from the perspective of modernization. Xi Jinping pointed out: "In the nearly hundred years since its founding, all the struggles of the Communist Party of China in uniting and leading the Chinese people have been aimed at building China into a modernized power and realizing the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation." This is an interpretation of the history of the Communist Party of China from the dimension of modernization, and it also laid an important foundation for establishing the realization of the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation as the historical theme of the CPC. Regarding the history since the founding of New China, Xi Jinping also explained it from the modernization dimension: "From the First Five-Year Plan to the 14th Five-Year Plan, the consistent theme is to build China into a socialist modernized country." This reveals and summarizes the historical theme of New China, interpreting the history of New China from the modernization dimension. The report of the 20th National Congress of the CPC concentrated on expounding the theory of Chinese-path modernization, systematically explaining its Chinese characteristics, essential requirements, strategic arrangements, and major principles, and initially constructing the theoretical system of Chinese-path modernization. In February 2023, Xi Jinping delivered an important speech at the opening ceremony of the seminar on studying and implementing Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era and the spirit of the 20th National Congress of the CPC, further elaborating on the theory of Chinese-path modernization. He reaffirmed the theoretical explanations of Chinese-path modernization in the report of the 20th National Congress of the CPC and further clarified issues not yet addressed in that report, such as the historical development, major principles, unique implications, and global significance of Chinese-path modernization, enriching the connotation of the theoretical system of Chinese-path modernization. The historic achievements and historic transformations in the New Era are also achievements and transformations in the practice of Chinese-path modernization. The transformative practice and breakthrough progress of Chinese-path modernization have brought landmark achievements, especially the eradication of absolute poverty and the completion of building a moderately prosperous society in all respects, providing a more solid material foundation for Chinese-path modernization. From the practical exploration of Chinese-path modernization to the construction of its theoretical system, the interactive relationship between theory and practice is reflected. The theoretical construction of Chinese-path modernization is based on the accumulation of practical experience, and this theoretical construction will further promote the practical development of Chinese-path modernization, achieving the goal of building a socialist modernized power in all respects. Since the founding of New China, the historical evolution of Chinese-path modernization has its inherent logic. The four aspects mentioned above [16]16 The "four aspects" refer to the theoretical construction, practical exploration, historical achievements, and inherent logic of Chinese-path modernization discussed in the preceding paragraph. reflect both the commonalities of world modernization and the individuality of Chinese-path modernization; they outline the evolutionary process of Chinese-path modernization and reveal its inherent laws. From the historical evolution of Chinese-path modernization, it can be seen that it is a process of gradually improving understanding, progressively expanding practice, and increasingly manifesting results; it contains both the experience and wisdom of Chinese-path modernization and its twists and lessons. The historical evolution of Chinese-path modernization embodies the sense of responsibility, spirit of commitment, global vision, and humanistic feelings of Chinese Communists in pursuing national modernization, becoming an important part of the history of the Communist Party of China and the history of the People's Republic of China.

自新中国成立至党的十八大召开之前，中国共产党人对中国式现代化进行了理论思考和实践探索，但缺乏系统的理论建构。党的二十大报告对中国式现代化进行了系统理论建构，初步建构了中国式现代化理论体系，中国式现代化进入理论与实践双向互动的新阶段。新中国成立之后，先后提出四个现代化、“中国式的现代化”概念，对中国现代化需要处理的重大关系进行了理论探索。党的十三大召开之后，对社会主义现代化国家的内涵进行了清晰定位，并对中国式现代化的战略步骤进行了安排。这种理论探索推动了中国式现代化的实践发展，历次五年计划和规划的实施都是中国式现代化的具体实践。社会主义革命和建设时期，建立起独立的、比较完整的工业体系和国民经济体系，为中国式现代化奠定了物质基础。改革开放和社会主义现代化建设新时期，实现了从生产力相对落后的状况到经济总量跃居世界第二的历史性突破，实现了人民生活从温饱不足到总体小康、奔向全面小康的历史性跨越，为中国式现代化提供了物质条件。随着新中国成立以来推进中国式现代化实践经验的积累，系统建构中国式现代化理论的时机已经成熟，“建设什么样的社会主义现代化强国、怎样建设社会主义现代化强国”成为习近平新时代中国特色社会主义思想需要回答的重大时代课题。2020年10月，习近平在党的十九届五中全会第二次全体会议上，对中国式现代化五个方面的重要特征进行了系统总结，并从现代化视域对党的历史、新中国的历史进行了阐释。习近平指出：“中国共产党建立近百年来，团结带领中国人民所进行的一切奋斗，就是为了把我国建设成为现代化强国，实现中华民族伟大复兴。”这是从现代化维度对中国共产党历史进行的解读，也为将实现中华民族伟大复兴确立为中国共产党历史主题奠定了重要基础。对于新中国成立以来的历史，习近平也从现代化的维度进行了阐释：“从第一个五年计划到第十四个五年规划，一以贯之的主题是把我国建设成为社会主义现代化国家。”这是对新中国历史主题的揭示和概括，从现代化维度诠释了新中国的历史。党的二十大报告集中阐释了中国式现代化理论，对中国式现代化的中国特色、本质要求、战略安排、重大原则进行了系统阐释，初步建构了中国式现代化理论体系。2023年2月，习近平在学习贯彻习近平新时代中国特色社会主义思想和党的二十大精神研讨班开班式上发表重要讲话，对中国式现代化理论作了进一步阐释，既重申了党的二十大报告对中国式现代化的理论阐释，又进一步阐明了党的二十大报告尚未涉及的问题，如中国式现代化的历史发展、重大原则、独特意蕴、世界意义，丰富了中国式现代化理论体系的内涵。新时代取得的历史成就、发生的历史性变革，也是中国式现代化实践的成就和变革。中国式现代化的变革性实践、突破性进展带来了中国式现代化的标志性成果，特别是消除绝对贫困、全面建成小康社会，为中国式现代化提供了更为坚实的物质基础。从中国式现代化实践探索到中国式现代化理论体系建构，体现了理论与实践的互动关系，中国式现代化理论建构以中国式现代化实践经验的积累为基础，中国式现代化理论建构将进一步推动中国式现代化的实践发展，实现全面建成社会主义现代化强国的目标。新中国成立以来，中国式现代化的历史演进有其内在逻辑。上述四个方面既体现了世界现代化的共性，也彰显了中国式现代化的个性；既勾勒了中国式现代化的演进过程，也揭示了中国式现代化的内在规律。从中国式现代化的历史演进可以看出，中国式现代化是一个认识逐步提升、实践逐步拓展、成效逐步显现的过程；既蕴含中国式现代化的经验和智慧，也包含中国式现代化的曲折和教训。中国式现代化的历史演进，体现了中国共产党人谋求国家现代化的责任意识、担当精神和世界眼光、人类情怀，成为中国共产党历史、中华人民共和国历史的重要组成部分。

Source: *Social Science Front*, Issue 9, 2024

文章来源：《社会科学战线》2024年第9期

Online Editor: Jing Mu

网络编辑：静穆