The Contemporary Value of the Marxist Thought on Integrated Urban-Rural Development

In the chapter “The Process of Accumulation of Capital” in *Capital*, Marx discusses the historical process by which industrial capital, through the expropriation and violent expulsion of the rural population, forces agricultural laborers to separate from the land and flow into cities and factories, constantly freeing up for itself workers along with their means of subsistence and materials of labor, and establishing the domestic market. Marx profoundly points out that “the expropriation of the mass of the people from the soil forms the basis of the capitalist mode of production.” [1]1 Karl Marx, *Capital*, Vol. 1, Chapter 27, “Expropriation of the Agricultural Population from the Land.” Beginning in the 16th century, when Europe entered the period of manufacture, the capitalist mode of production increasingly spread across Europe and the world, seeking to achieve dominance—a process that has now continued for over 500 years. Although the capitalist system provided conditions for the leapfrog development of modern industry and agriculture, promoted urbanization in various countries, and opened broad channels for the development of human civilization, since the advent of modern society, problems such as urban-rural differentiation, urban-rural opposition, and the polarization of wealth between industrial and agricultural populations have become increasingly severe in both Eastern and Western countries, making them one of the common concerns of political economists worldwide.

马克思在《资本论》“资本的积累过程”章中论述了工业资本通过对农村居民的剥夺和暴力驱逐，迫使农业劳动者同土地分离而流向城市和工厂，不断为自身游离出工人及其生活资料和劳动材料，并建立国内市场的历史过程。马克思深刻地指出，“剥夺人民群众的土地是资本主义生产方式的基础”。自16世纪欧洲进入工场手工业时期开始，资本主义生产方式日益在欧洲和全世界蔓延并谋求占据统治地位，这一进程至今已500年有余。虽然资本主义制度为近现代工农业生产的飞跃发展提供了条件，推动了各国的城市化进程，为人类文明的发展开辟了广阔通道，但进入现代社会以来，东西方国家面临的城乡分化、城乡对立、工农业人口的贫富分化等问题也愈发严重，成为各国政治经济学家普遍关心的问题之一。

The Practice of Western Economics Leads to Urban-Rural Separation and Urban-Rural Opposition

西方经济学实践导致城乡分离和城乡对立

Western economic theories—whether Lewis’s dual economy theory, Perroux’s growth pole theory, or Friedman’s “core-periphery” theory—cannot escape their deeply entrenched academic stance of urban-centrism, that is, the allocation of various resource elements centered on cities, with the hope that cities will drive rural development. On the relationship between traditional agriculture and modern industry, they advocate “industrial dominance”; on the issue of uneven urban-rural development, they emphasize that limited resources should be invested in urban economic sectors with high potential, large scale, and high returns on investment. Friedman’s “core-periphery” theory even holds that the relationship between city and countryside is one of core area and peripheral area, of dominant and subordinate positions. Therefore, from the perspective of Western economics, real-world problems such as urban-rural differentiation, urban-rural opposition, and the polarization of wealth between industrial and agricultural populations are the natural and inevitable results of economic and productive force development; industrial development must take the expropriation of agricultural surplus and the sacrifice of farmers’ interests as preconditions, with the hope that after urban economies have reached a high level of development, urban-rural opposition can be bridged through cities subsidizing the countryside.

西方经济学理论，无论是刘易斯的二元经济理论、佩鲁的增长极理论，还是弗里德曼的“中心—外围”理论，都无法摆脱其根深蒂固的城市中心论的学术立场，即以城市为中心配置各种资源要素，冀望于以城市带动农村发展。在传统农业和现代工业的关系问题上，他们主张“工业主导性”；在城乡发展不均衡问题上，他们强调应将有限资源投入到潜力大、规模大、投资回报率高的城市经济部门。弗里德曼的“中心—外围”理论更是认为，城市和农村的关系就是核心区和边缘区、支配地位和从属地位的关系。因此，在西方经济学视野中，城乡分化、城乡对立和工农业人口贫富分化等现实问题是经济和生产力发展的应然和必然结果，工业发展必须要以剥夺农业剩余和牺牲农民利益为先决条件，冀望于待城市经济高度发展后，通过城市反哺农村的方式弥合城乡对立。

In reality, this theory has led, over a considerable period, to the neglect of agricultural and rural development, allowing the urban-rural gap and the disparity in residents’ wealth to widen continuously, thereby undermining the long-term stability of society and national governance. The most typical example is that after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, Russia implemented the principles of marketization, privatization, and liberalization through “shock therapy” in accordance with Western liberal economic theory, subsequently falling into over two decades of economic collapse, developmental stagnation, and social governance crisis. Research has found that since the dissolution of the Soviet Union, Russia’s rural areas have experienced comprehensive degradation in economic, demographic, social, and ecological terms. In 2019, then-Russian Prime Minister Medvedev stated that while one-quarter of Russia’s population lived in rural areas, only 40% of settlements had running water, only one-third of villages had asphalt roads, and large numbers of rural residents had migrated out or remained in long-term poverty, posing a substantive threat to Russia’s food security, natural resource development, agricultural production recovery, and social stability.

在现实中，这种理论造成了在相当长的时期内忽视农业、农村发展，放任城乡鸿沟和居民贫富差距不断扩大，从而破坏社会和国家治理长期稳定的结果。最典型的例子是苏联解体后，俄罗斯按照西方自由主义经济理论以“休克疗法”的方式落实市场化、私有化、自由化原则，而后陷入长达二十多年的经济崩溃、发展停滞和社会治理危机。研究发现，自苏联解体以来，俄罗斯农村地区经历了经济、人口、社会和生态环境的全面退化。2019年，时任俄罗斯总理梅德韦杰夫表示，俄罗斯1/4人口生活在农村，却只有40%的居民点有自来水，只有1/3的村庄有柏油公路，大量农村人口外流或长期处于贫困状态，对俄罗斯粮食安全、自然资源开发、农业生产恢复和社会稳定产生了实质威胁。

Marxism Points Out the Historical Necessity of Integrated Urban-Rural Development

马克思主义指明城乡融合发展的历史必然性

Marxism not only discusses the inevitability of urban-rural separation from the perspective of historical materialism regarding the division of labor and the development of productive forces—“the foundation of every division of labor that is well-developed and brought about by the exchange of commodities is the separation of town from country” [2]2 Karl Marx, *Capital*, Vol. 1, Chapter 14, “Division of Labour and Manufacture.”—affirming the rationality and progressiveness of capitalism in promoting the division of labor and the agglomeration effect of cities, but also, with theoretical foresight, points out the historical necessity of integrated urban-rural development from the contradictory movement of productive forces and relations of production. In *Principles of Communism*, Engels states that “by the fusion of town and country, the members of society will be enabled to develop their capacities in all directions.” [3]3 Friedrich Engels, *Principles of Communism* (1847), Question 18. In *Anti-Dühring*, Engels further states that “the abolition of the antithesis between town and country is not only possible. It has become a direct necessity of industrial production itself, and just as much of agricultural production and of public health. Only by the fusion of town and country can the present pollution of the air, water and land be eliminated.” [4]4 Friedrich Engels, *Anti-Dühring* (1878), Part III, Section IV, “Distribution.” For the first time, Marxism linked integrated urban-rural development with the ecological environment, demonstrating from the height of dialectical materialism that the ecological problems caused by urban-rural opposition would hinder the progress of industrial civilization.

马克思主义不仅从社会分工和生产力发展的历史唯物主义角度论述了城乡分离的必然性——“一切发达的、以商品交换为媒介的分工的基础，都是城乡的分离”，肯定了资本主义在推动社会分工发展、城市集聚效应方面的合理性和进步性，而且从生产力和生产关系的矛盾运动中具有理论前瞻性地指出城乡融合发展的历史必然性。恩格斯在《共产主义原理》中指出，“通过城乡的融合，使社会全体成员的才能得到全面发展”。在《反杜林论》中，恩格斯进一步指出，“城市和乡村的对立的消灭不仅是可能的，而且已经成为工业生产本身的直接需要，同样也已经成为农业生产和公共卫生事业的需要。只有通过城市和乡村的融合，现在的空气、水和土地的污染才能排除”。马克思主义第一次将城乡融合同生态环境联系起来，从辩证唯物主义的高度论证了城乡对立引发的生态问题将阻碍工业文明的进步。

Marxism holds that integrated urban-rural development is a long historical process. The small-peasant mode of production has inherent defects such as dispersion, isolation, closure, conservatism, stagnation, and backwardness. Since the process by which peasants obtain the means of subsistence is mostly through exchange with nature rather than participation in social intercourse, small-peasant production is a declining and outdated form of production organization. It cannot overcome its own historical limitations, and therefore it will inevitably “irretrievably go to ruin.” [5]5 Friedrich Engels, *The Peasant Question in France and Germany* (1894), Section II. However, in *The Peasant Question in France and Germany*, Engels also clearly states, “We foresee the inevitable doom of the small peasant, but we are not called upon to hasten it by any interference on our part.” [6]6 Ibid. Moreover, “when we are in possession of state power we shall not even think of forcibly expropriating the small peasants (regardless of whether compensation is given or not),” [7]7 Ibid. but rather, without violating the will of the small peasants, guide them onto the path of cooperation. The state should provide cooperatives with preferential support and conveniences in terms of funds, technology, and policy, and should “deal very generously with the peasants.” [8]8 Ibid. Thus, although Marxism made the scientific judgment that the small-peasant economy would inevitably decline, it also very clearly pointed out the objective conditions and long-term nature of that decline.

马克思主义认为，城乡融合发展是一个长期的历史过程。小农生产方式具有分散孤立、封闭保守、停滞落后等天然缺陷，由于农民取得生活资料的过程大多是与自然交换而不是参与社会交往，小农生产是一种没落的、过时的生产组织形式，它无法克服自身的历史局限性，因此必然“不可挽回地走向灭亡”。但是，恩格斯在《法德农民问题》中也明确指出，“我们预见到小农必然灭亡，但是我们无论如何不要以自己的干预去加速其灭亡”。并且，“当我们掌握了国家政权的时候，我们决不会考虑用暴力去剥夺小农（不论有无赔偿，都是一样）”，而是要在不违背小农意志的前提下，引导他们走合作化道路，国家要给合作社发展提供资金、技术、政策等优惠帮扶和便利，要“很慷慨地对待农民”。可见，马克思主义虽然作出了小农经济必然衰亡的科学判断，但也非常明确地指出其灭亡的客观条件和长期性。

Rural Revitalization Is a New Practice for Solving the Problem of Urban-Rural Opposition

乡村振兴是解决城乡对立问题的崭新实践

Limited by the social practice and historical conditions of their time, Marx and Engels did not elaborate extensively on the specific paths, timeframes, or other details of integrated urban-rural development; they only raised, from a theoretical height, the state that urban-rural relations should assume after humanity abolishes private property and enters communist society. However, based on the specific practical experience of urban-rural economic and social development in various countries today, integrated urban-rural development should not only be the result of humanity entering a higher form of social organization but should also become a procedural and principled requirement of socialist state governance.

受限于当时社会实践和历史条件，马克思和恩格斯并没有过多论述城乡融合发展的具体路径、时间周期等内容，他们只是从理论高度提出了人类废除私有制进入共产主义社会后城乡关系的应然状态。但以今天世界各国城乡经济社会发展的具体实践经验来看，城乡融合发展不仅应是人类进入更高级社会形态的结果，更应成为社会主义国家治理的过程性和原则性要求。

China’s implementation of the rural revitalization strategy is a new practice combining the basic principles of Marxism with the concrete realities of China’s urban-rural economic development and with the excellent traditional Chinese culture. Compared with other countries in the world, China has three significant advantages in solving urban-rural opposition and achieving integrated urban-rural development.

中国实施乡村振兴战略是马克思主义基本原理同中国城乡经济发展具体实际和中华优秀传统文化相结合的崭新实践。相较于世界上其他国家，中国解决城乡对立、实现城乡融合发展有三个显著优势。

First, China has already resolved the issue of private land ownership, which is the most important institutional prerequisite for rural revitalization. That is, it has fundamentally eliminated the chronic problem, long existing in capitalist countries, of industry expropriating agriculture and cities expropriating the countryside, creating conditions for harmonious and orderly development between urban and rural areas. According to the Marxist judgment of the three historical stages of urban-rural relations—urban-rural unity, urban-rural opposition, and urban-rural integration—China, having resolved the issue of private land ownership, can minimize the period of urban-rural opposition to the greatest extent and enter the developmental stage of urban-rural integration more quickly.

第一，中国已经解决了土地私有制问题，这是乡村振兴最重要的制度前提，即从根本上消除了资本主义国家长期存在的工业剥夺农业、城市剥夺乡村的顽疾，为城乡之间和谐有序的发展创造了条件。根据马克思主义对城乡关系演变的三个历史时期的判断，即城乡一体、城乡对立和城乡融合，解决了土地私有制问题的中国，能够最大限度缩短城乡对立的时间，更快地进入城乡融合的发展时期。

Second, China has long adhered to a strategy of prioritizing agricultural and rural development, providing the necessary material prerequisites for eliminating urban-rural opposition at the present stage. Marx and Engels clearly state in *The German Ideology*: “The abolition of the antithesis between town and country… depends on many material premises,” [9]9 Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, *The German Ideology* (1845-46), Part I, “Feuerbach.” and cannot be achieved by will alone. The development path traversed, the political experience accumulated, and the political principles formed by the Communist Party of China over its century-long struggle are all imbued with the basic logic of attaching importance to agricultural and rural development. General Secretary Xi Jinping points out, “Without agricultural and rural modernization, there can be no modernization of the entire country.” [10]10 Xi Jinping, speech at the Central Rural Work Conference, December 2017. After decades of development, China has won the battle against poverty and built a moderately prosperous society in all respects. It has not only established the institutional and policy guarantees for implementing the rural revitalization strategy but also initially constructed a public service and competitive environment that is equal between urban and rural areas, achieving significant progress in agricultural science and technology and talent cultivation. With the continued promotion of the rural revitalization strategy, the grand pattern of integrated urban-rural development will be fully formed.

第二，我国长期坚持农业农村优先发展战略，为现阶段消灭城乡对立提供了必要的物质前提。马克思恩格斯在《德意志意识形态》中明确指出：“消灭城乡之间的对立……取决于许多物质前提”，单靠意志是不行的。中国共产党百年奋斗走过的发展道路、积累的政治经验、形成的政治原则，都饱含重视农业农村发展的基本逻辑。习近平总书记指出，“没有农业农村现代化，就没有整个国家现代化”，经过数十年的发展，我国已经打赢了脱贫攻坚战、全面建成小康社会，不仅构建起实施乡村振兴战略的制度和政策保障，也初步构建了城乡均等的公共服务和竞争环境，农业科技和人才培养取得长足进步。随着乡村振兴战略的持续推动，城乡融合发展的大格局将彻底形成。

Third, the strong leadership of the Communist Party of China is the fundamental guarantee for resolving the urban-rural opposition through rural revitalization in our country. The Communist Party of China is a Marxist political party, and promoting agricultural and rural development with the Marxist concept of integrated urban-rural development possesses theoretical advantages, leadership advantages, institutional advantages, and organizational advantages. Party leadership is the fundamental advantage of our country's national governance. Rural revitalization, which focuses on thriving industries, livable ecosystems, effective governance, cultural-ethical progress, and prosperous living, is a vivid manifestation of the Party's consistent adherence to the working line of "everything for the masses, relying on the masses in everything." Only under the leadership of a strong proletarian political party can high-quality rural revitalization be ultimately realized, guided by the goal of "common prosperity."

第三，中国共产党的坚强领导，是我国通过乡村振兴解决城乡对立的根本保证。中国共产党是马克思主义政党，以马克思主义城乡融合发展理念推动农业农村发展具有理论优势、领导优势、制度优势和组织优势。党的领导是我国国家治理的根本优势所在，乡村振兴聚焦产业兴旺、生态宜居、治理有效、乡风文明、生活富裕，是党始终遵循“一切为了群众，一切依靠群众”工作路线的生动体现。只有强大的无产阶级政党领导，才能以“共同富裕”为目标引领高质量乡村振兴的最终实现。

Rural revitalization is a strategic first move [11]11 "A strategic first move" (先手棋, xiān shǒu qí) is a term from the game of Go, used metaphorically in Chinese political discourse to denote a decisive initial action that secures an advantageous position for subsequent steps. in achieving common prosperity. Once the modernization of agriculture is resolved, the goal of building a modern socialist country in all respects can be achieved; once the prosperity of farmers is resolved, the grand goal of "common prosperity" can be accomplished. Only by effectively promoting rural revitalization can the urban-rural opposition be fundamentally resolved, the grand pattern of integrated urban-rural development envisioned by Marxism be realized, and a solid material foundation be laid for humanity to enter a higher and more rational social form.

乡村振兴是共同富裕的一盘先手棋，解决了农业的现代化问题，全面建设社会主义现代化国家的目标就能实现；解决了农民的富裕问题，“共同富裕”的宏伟目标就可以完成。只有高效推动乡村振兴，才能从根本上解决城乡对立，实现马克思主义所设想的城乡融合发展的大格局，才能为人类进入更高、更合理的社会形态奠定坚实的物质基础。

Online editor: Paul

网络编辑：保罗