The Origins and Practice of Mao Zedong’s Thought on “Proletarian Revolutionary Utilitarianism”

In his speech at the symposium commemorating the 130th anniversary of Comrade Mao Zedong’s birth, General Secretary Xi Jinping pointed out: “In his youth, Comrade Mao Zedong, with the lofty ambition of ‘Confident that I could live two hundred years, I would surely strike the water for three thousand li,’[1]1 A line from a poem by Mao Zedong, expressing youthful ambition and confidence. set the far-reaching aspiration of saving the nation from peril and devoted himself to the great cause of rescuing the country and the people. To find China’s way out, Comrade Mao Zedong ‘probed into the great foundation and great origin,’[2]2 A phrase from Mao’s early writings, indicating his search for the fundamental principles of truth and social transformation. and after repeated comparisons and assessments, resolutely chose Marxism-Leninism, chose the lofty ideal of striving for communism, and from then on pursued it throughout his life, unwavering. Comrade Mao Zedong’s life was one of unremitting struggle for national prosperity, national rejuvenation, and the people’s happiness… In decades of arduous yet glorious combat, Comrade Mao Zedong made indelible historical contributions to the Chinese nation and the Chinese people, contributions that shine through the ages.” General Secretary Xi Jinping’s speech, on the one hand, praises Mao Zedong’s far-reaching aspiration to save the nation from peril already in his youth, and on the other hand, affirms that the young Mao Zedong combined this far-reaching aspiration with a firm faith in Marxism and a belief in the lofty ideal of communism, thereby making historical contributions that shine through the ages in the historical process of China’s revolution and construction.

习近平总书记在纪念毛泽东同志诞辰130周年座谈会上的讲话中指出：“青年时代，毛泽东同志就以‘自信人生二百年，会当水击三千里’的壮志豪情，立下拯救民族于危难的远大志向，投身救国救民的伟大事业。为了找到中国的出路，毛泽东同志‘向大本大源处探讨’，在反复比较和鉴别中，毅然选择了马克思列宁主义，选择了为实现共产主义而奋斗的崇高理想，从此一生追寻，矢志不移。毛泽东同志的一生是为国家富强、民族振兴、人民幸福而不懈奋斗的一生……在几十年艰难而辉煌的战斗生涯中，毛泽东同志为中华民族、中国人民建立了不可磨灭的历史功勋，作出了光耀千秋的历史贡献。”习近平总书记的讲话，一方面赞颂了毛泽东在青年时期就已胸怀拯救民族于危难的远大志向，另一方面也肯定了青年毛泽东把这一远大志向与坚定对马克思主义的信仰、共产主义崇高理想的信念相结合，在中国革命与建设的历史进程中作出了光耀千秋的历史贡献。

Mao Zedong’s contributions that shine through the ages are first embodied in his contribution to adapting Marxism to the Chinese context. General Secretary Xi Jinping pointed out: “Comrade Mao Zedong led the people in opening the historical process of adapting Marxism to the Chinese context. Without revolutionary theory, there can be no revolutionary practice. The basic principles of Marxism have universal applicability; only when combined with the concrete conditions of each country can they demonstrate their powerful truth.” At the critical moment when the Chinese Communist Party led the people in the arduous and extraordinary great War of Resistance Against Japan, in order to secure final victory, Mao Zedong unremittingly advanced the adaptation of Marxism to the Chinese context, combining the basic principles of Marxism with the reality of the Chinese revolution and with outstanding domestic and foreign cultures. In his speech at the Yan’an Forum on Literature and Art convened in May 1942, he explicitly put forward the thought of “proletarian revolutionary utilitarianism.” Mao Zedong pointed out that the liberation of the Chinese people required the mutual integration of two fronts and two armies: the military front needed “an army with guns,” and the cultural front needed “a cultural army.” Addressing issues among the “cultural army” concerning the stance, attitude, objects of work, how to work, and how to learn of literary and art workers, Mao Zedong clearly stated that the central or basic problem was the problem of serving the masses and the problem of how to serve the masses, that is, the problem of “literature and art for whom” and “how literature and art serve the people.” Regarding the problem of “literature and art for whom,” Mao Zedong pointed out that our literature and art are all for the masses of the people, created for the workers, peasants, and soldiers, and utilized by the workers, peasants, and soldiers. Regarding the problem of “how literature and art serve the people,” Mao Zedong pointed out that literary and art workers, in the process of going deep among the masses and learning from the masses, carry out the popularization and elevation of literature and art among the masses. After answering these basic questions, Mao Zedong immediately raised the following question: “Is this attitude of ours utilitarian?” To this, Mao Zedong immediately stated that materialists do not oppose utilitarianism in general, but oppose the utilitarianism of the feudal class, the bourgeoisie, and the petty bourgeoisie, as well as the hypocrites who oppose utilitarianism in words but are in fact the most selfish and short-sighted utilitarians. Thus, Mao Zedong explicitly made the following judgment: “We are proletarian revolutionary utilitarians, taking as our starting point the unity of the present and future interests of the broadest masses, who constitute over ninety percent of the population; therefore, we are revolutionary utilitarians aiming at the broadest and most long-range goals, not narrow utilitarians who see only the partial and the immediate.” This judgment of Mao Zedong contains a rich thought of “proletarian revolutionary utilitarianism,” the basic connotations of which are as follows:

毛泽东作出的光耀千秋的历史贡献首先体现在对马克思主义中国化的贡献上。习近平总书记指出：“毛泽东同志带领人民开创了马克思主义中国化的历史进程。没有革命的理论，就没有革命的实践。马克思主义基本原理具有普遍适用性，只有同各国实际相结合才能显示出强大的真理力量。”在中国共产党领导人民进行艰苦卓绝的伟大抗日战争的关键时刻，为夺取最后胜利，毛泽东坚持不懈地推进马克思主义中国化，把马克思主义基本原理与中国革命的实际以及国内外优秀文化相结合，在1942年5月召开的延安文艺座谈会上的讲话中明确提出了“无产阶级的革命的功利主义”思想。毛泽东指出，中国人民的解放需要文武两个战线、两个军队的相互结合，军事战线需要“拿枪的军队”，文化战线需要“文化的军队”。针对“文化的军队”中出现的文艺工作者的立场、态度、工作对象、怎样工作、怎样学习等问题，毛泽东明确指出中心问题或基本问题是为群众的问题和如何为群众的问题，也就是“文艺为什么人”与“文艺如何为人”的问题。对于“文艺为什么人”的问题，毛泽东指出，我们的文学艺术都是为人民大众的，为工农兵而创作，为工农兵所利用。对于“文艺如何为人”的问题，毛泽东指出，文艺工作者是在深入群众并在向群众学习的过程中对群众进行文艺的普及与提高。在回答了上述基本问题后，毛泽东随即提出如下问题：“我们的这种态度是不是功利主义的？”对此，毛泽东紧接着讲道，唯物主义者并不一般地反对功利主义，而是反对封建阶级、资产阶级以及小资产阶级的功利主义，以及口头上反对功利主义、实际上是最自私最短视的功利主义的伪善者。由此，毛泽东明确地作出如下论断：“我们是无产阶级的革命的功利主义者，我们是以占全人口百分之九十以上最广大群众的目前利益和将来利益的统一为出发点，所以我们是以最广和最远为目标的革命功利主义者，而不是只看到局部和目前的狭隘的功利主义者。”毛泽东的这一论断，蕴含着丰富的“无产阶级的革命的功利主义”思想，这一思想基本内涵如下：

First, it resolves the problems of “literature and art for whom” and “how literature and art serve the people,” that is, literature and art must serve the interests of the masses of the people, such as the workers, peasants, and soldiers, under the leadership of the Chinese proletariat and its political party—the Chinese Communist Party—by literary and art workers; this is a question of stance. This service must be carried out by popularizing and elevating literature and art among the masses while adhering to the mass line; this is a question of method. Second, the question of stance and method in literary and art work is equally applicable to revolutionary work. That is to say, the liberation of the Chinese people requires not only a “cultural army” but also an “army with guns”; revolutionary work must also be carried out by the people’s army, under the leadership of the Chinese proletariat and its political party—the Chinese Communist Party—in military struggle against the enemy for the interests of the workers, peasants, and masses, while adhering to the mass line. Communists, as proletarian revolutionary utilitarians, must struggle for the greatest interests of the broadest masses of the people, and in struggle must uphold the dialectical unity of the present and long-term interests, and the partial and overall interests, of the broadest masses. Finally, proletarian revolutionary utilitarianism is essentially different from the utilitarianism of the feudal class, the bourgeoisie, and the petty bourgeoisie; the former advocates that Communists struggle for the universal interests of the masses of the people, while the latter advocates the utilitarianism of the exploiting classes or of individuals. All words and actions of Chinese Communists must take as the highest standard whether they conform to the greatest interests of the broadest masses of the people and are supported by the broadest masses of the people.

首先，解决的是“文艺为什么人”与“文艺如何为人”的问题，也就是文艺必须是中国无产阶级及其政党——中国共产党——领导的文艺工作者为工农兵等人民大众的利益服务的，这是立场问题。这种服务必须是在坚持群众路线中对人民大众进行文艺的普及与提高的，这是方法问题。其次，文艺工作的立场与方法问题同样也适用于革命工作，即是说，中国人民的解放不仅需要“文化军队”，而且需要“拿枪的军队”，革命工作也须是中国无产阶级及其政党——中国共产党——领导人民军队，在坚持群众路线中为了工农大众的利益而对敌进行军事斗争，共产党人作为无产阶级的革命的功利主义者必须是为了最广大人民群众的最大利益而斗争的，在斗争中必须坚持最广大人民群众的目前利益和长远利益、局部利益与整体利益的辩证统一。最后，无产阶级的革命的功利主义是与封建阶级、资产阶级以及小资产阶级的功利主义有着本质区别的，前者主张的是共产党人为人民大众的普遍利益而奋斗，后者主张的是剥削阶级的或个体的功利主义。中国共产党人的一切言论行动必须是以合乎最广大人民群众的最大利益，为最广大人民群众所拥护为最高标准的。

Mao Zedong’s thought on “proletarian revolutionary utilitarianism” has both its rich theoretical origins and its vigorous practical following in the New Democratic Revolution led by the Chinese Communist Party. This article discusses this in detail, in the hope that it will benefit our overall grasp of this thought.

毛泽东“无产阶级的革命的功利主义”思想既有其丰富的理论源头，也有其轰轰烈烈的中国共产党领导的新民主主义革命的实践遵循。本文对此加以详细探讨，以期对我们从整体上把握这一思想有所裨益。

I

一

The thought of “proletarian revolutionary utilitarianism” proposed by Mao Zedong originated in the teleological individual self-realization theory of the 19th-century German Friedrich Paulsen, which he studied deeply while studying at the Hunan Provincial First Normal School, and which was based on a transformation of the utilitarianism of Bentham and Mill.[3]3 Friedrich Paulsen (1846–1908), a German philosopher and educator, whose work on ethics influenced Mao’s early thinking. Jeremy Bentham (1748–1832) and John Stuart Mill (1806–1873) were British philosophers associated with classical utilitarianism.

毛泽东提出的“无产阶级的革命的功利主义”思想，肇端于他在湖南省立第一师范学校求学时研读颇深的19世纪德国人包尔生在改造边沁、密尔的功利主义基础上所倡导的目的论的个体自我实现论。

During his studies at the Hunan First Provincial Normal School, the young Mao Zedong, in a letter dated 23 August 1917 to his mentor and friend Li Jinxi, pointed out: “In the present age, there should be persons of great breadth of mind who, starting from philosophy and ethics, transform philosophy and transform ethics, and fundamentally change the thought of the entire nation. This is like raising a great banner, and ten thousand men will gather; like a thunderclap that clears the dark clouds, and then nothing can stop it.” [4]4 Li Jinxi (1890–1978) was a Chinese linguist and educator, and a friend and correspondent of Mao Zedong during his youth. Only in this way could one avoid blindly imitating the thoughts of others and instead seek truth, using this as a criterion for words and deeds and acting with purpose, thereby achieving the goal of “transforming China and the world” (the purpose of the New People’s Study Society) on the basis of changing the thought of the entire nation. The Chinese and Western philosophy and ethics that the young Mao Zedong studied deeply were, first and foremost, the “School of Mind” of Lu Jiuyuan and Wang Yangming, as well as the teleological individual self-realization theory advocated by the 19th-century German Friedrich Paulsen in his *System of Ethics*. [5]5 Lu Jiuyuan (1139–1193) and Wang Yangming (1472–1529) were Neo-Confucian philosophers of the Song and Ming dynasties respectively, who founded the “School of Mind” (xinxue), emphasizing innate moral knowledge and the primacy of the mind. The transformation and integration of these two currents led the young Mao Zedong to develop in his thought a special theory of individual self-realization of the “heroic personage” (haojie zhi shi), dedicated to the purpose of “transforming China and the world.” The essay “The Power of the Mind” (Xin zhi li), written by the young Mao Zedong in the second half of 1917, was the quintessential embodiment of this theory of individual self-realization of the “heroic personage.” It was highly praised by his beloved teacher Yang Changji, who gave it a perfect score. [6]6 Yang Changji (1871–1920) was a Chinese educator and philosopher, and Mao Zedong’s teacher and future father-in-law. Opening with the line “The universe is my mind, and my mind is the universe,” Mao argued that the world, the universe, and even all things are driven by the power of thought and mind. However, at that time, the mental power of the nation’s people was deeply ill and weak, barbarian enemies wantonly divided and annexed China, the myriad people were enslaved, and the nation’s resources were exhausted. Therefore, to save the people and govern the country, it was necessary to strengthen the mental power of the nation’s people and advocate new learning; without the rise of new learning, resisting foreign enemies could not succeed. “The Power of the Mind” was directly inspired by Tan Sitong’s theory of “mental power” (xinli) and was written after Mao read *The Principles of Ethics* (Lunlixue yuanli), which was translated into classical Chinese from Japanese by Cai Yuanpei based on the second part of the 19th-century German Friedrich Paulsen’s *System of Ethics*. [7]7 Tan Sitong (1865–1898) was a late Qing reformer and thinker whose work *On Benevolence* (Renxue) developed the concept of “mental power” (xinli) as a cosmic force for change. Cai Yuanpei (1868–1940) was a Chinese educator and intellectual who served as president of Peking University. *The Principles of Ethics* was about 100,000 characters long, and Professor Yang Changji used it as a textbook. In the second half of 1917, the young Mao Zedong wrote 12,100 characters of commentary on *The Principles of Ethics*, which sufficiently demonstrates the profound influence of Paulsen’s teleological individual self-realization theory on him.

在湖南省立第一师范学校求学期间，青年毛泽东在1917年8月23日致亦师亦友的黎锦熙的信中指出：“当今之世，宜有大气量人，从哲学、伦理学入手，改造哲学，改造伦理学，根本上变换全国之思想。此如大纛一张，万夫走集；雷电一震，阴曀皆开，则沛乎不可御矣。”唯有如此，方能不盲从模仿他人思想而求得真理，以此作为言行准则并有目的地做事，在变换全国之思想的基础上达到“改造中国与世界”（新民学会的宗旨）的目的。青年毛泽东研读颇深的中西方哲学与伦理学，首推陆九渊、王阳明的“心学”，以及19世纪德国人包尔生在《伦理学体系》中所倡导的目的论的个体自我实现论。对这两者的改造与融通使得青年毛泽东在思想上养成了以致力于“改造中国与世界”为目的的一种特殊的“豪杰之士”的个性自我实现论。青年毛泽东于1917年下半年撰写的作文《心之力》就是这种“豪杰之士”个性自我实现论的精华体现，极受恩师杨昌济赞赏，并被打了满分。他以“宇宙即我心，我心即宇宙”为开篇，认为世界、宇宙乃至万物皆为思维心力所驱使，但彼时国民心力沉疴羸弱，蛮夷恶敌肆意分割吞并华夏，万民为奴，国资殆尽。因此，若欲救民治国须要自强国民心力，倡导新学，新学不兴则御敌难成。《心之力》是毛泽东受谭嗣同的“心力”说的直接启发，并在阅读了由蔡元培根据19世纪德国人包尔生的《伦理学体系》的第二篇内容从日文转译成文言文的《伦理学原理》后而撰写的。《伦理学原理》约10万字，杨昌济教授把它作为教材来讲授。青年毛泽东在1917年下半年对《伦理学原理》作了12100字的评注，这足以说明包尔生所倡导的目的论的个体自我实现论对其影响至深。

In his *System of Ethics*, Paulsen not only distinguished between the rational formalist deontology represented by Kant and the empirical utilitarian teleology represented by Bentham and Mill, but also transformed and reconciled the two. Specifically, on the one hand, Paulsen classified theories of the moral distinction between good and evil into teleology and formalism: “The former explains the distinction between good and evil based on the natural effects of types of action and acts of will on the life of the agent and those around him, calling actions that tend to preserve and promote human happiness good, and actions that tend to disturb and destroy human happiness evil. On the other hand, formalist ethics insists that the concepts of good and evil mark an absolute quality of the will that does not require reference to the effects of actions or types of action; this absolute quality cannot be further explained but must be accepted as a fact.” In response, the young Mao Zedong clearly pointed out in his annotations: “What is the standard for distinguishing good and evil? One theory only considers motives, another considers both motives and effects.” Formalism is the theory of motives, and teleology is the theory of effects. Regarding the relationship between motive and effect, Mao Zedong provided a dialectical materialist explanation from the perspective of literary and artistic criticism, clearly stating that literary and artistic criticism, in terms of its practice of resisting Japan and uniting the masses, has a distinction between good and bad: “The good and bad spoken of here—is it determined by the motive (subjective intention) or by the effect (social practice)? Idealists emphasize motive and deny effect; mechanical materialists emphasize effect and deny motive. We are the opposite of both; we are dialectical materialists who unify motive and effect. The motive of serving the masses and the effect of being welcomed by the masses are inseparable; the two must be unified.” [8]8 This passage is a paraphrase of Mao Zedong’s views on literary and artistic criticism, as expressed in his 1942 “Talks at the Yan’an Forum on Literature and Art.” The basis for the unity of motive and effect is practice; social practice and its effects are the standard for testing subjective intentions or motives.

包尔生在《伦理学体系》中既对以康德为代表的理性的形式主义的义务论与以边沁、密尔为代表的经验的功利主义的目的论进行了区别，又对二者进行改造并作了调和。具体地讲，一方面，包尔生把道德上对善与恶进行区别的理论归结为目的论与形式论，“前者根据行为类型和意志行为对行为者及周围人的生活自然产生的效果来说明善恶的区别，把倾向于保存和推进人的幸福的行为称作善的，倾向于扰乱和毁灭人的幸福的行为称作恶的。另一方面，形式论的伦理学则坚持善恶的概念标志着一种意志的绝对性质而无需涉及行动或行为类型的效果；这种绝对性质不可能得到进一步的解释，而是必须把它作为一个事实来接受”。对此，青年毛泽东在批注中明确地指出：“善恶之区别以何为标准——一说只论动机，一说兼论效果。”形式论就是动机论，目的论就是效果论。对于动机与效果的关系，毛泽东从文艺批评的角度进行了辩证唯物主义的阐释，明确指出文艺批评对于践行抗日与团结群众有好坏之分，“这里所说的好坏，究竟是看动机（主观愿望），还是看效果（社会实践）呢？唯心论者是强调动机否认效果的，机械唯物论者是强调效果否认动机的，我们和这两者相反，我们是辩证唯物主义的动机和效果的统一论者。为大众的动机和被大众欢迎的效果，是分不开的，必须使二者统一起来。”而动机和效果统一的基础就是实践，社会实践及其效果是检验主观愿望或动机的标准。

On the other hand, on the basis of drawing on Aristotle’s “four causes” theory concerning the final cause and efficient cause of things’ existence, Paulsen transformed and reconciled Bentham and Mill’s hedonistic utilitarian doctrine with Kant’s formal theory of the highest good, combining utilitarian teleology with the theory of self-realization as the perfect action of spiritual power, thereby proposing a teleological theory of self-realization. Paulsen “used the term ‘teleology’ to replace ‘utilitarianism,’” and at the same time “coined the term ‘self-realization theory’ to contrast my view sharply with hedonism—that is, the purpose of the will lies not in feeling but in action.” He stated: “My view can be expressed as teleological self-realization theory. Thus our principle is: those types of action and acts of will that tend to realize the highest goal of the will—which can be called happiness (well-being)—are good. By happiness I mean here the perfection of our existence and the perfect movement of life.” Therefore, “a perfect life, that is, a life in which all of a person’s physical and spiritual capacities are fully developed and exercised, is the individual’s highest good.” From this we can see that Paulsen endowed Kant’s formal theory of the highest good with the living, self-realizing life of the individual, thereby merging it with utilitarian eudaimonism. Regarding Paulsen’s proposition of the perfect life, the young Mao Zedong expressed it as: “The purpose of humanity is nothing other than the realization of the self. The realization of the self means fully developing our physical and spiritual capacities to the highest degree.” When he read Paulsen’s criticism that Kant exaggerated the role of the sense of duty in life, replacing natural impulses with respect for the moral law, and thus emphasized that “the feeling of duty may have prevented much evil in the world, but what is beautiful and good does not arise from the feeling of duty, but from the lively impulses of the heart,” the young Mao Zedong strongly agreed, appreciated it, and annotated: “Heroic personages develop the nature endowed by heaven, extend the greatest and most powerful force within that nature, and thereby become heroic personages… Generally speaking, when heroes and heroic personages act on their own behalf, they unleash their driving force, advance with vigor and determination, and press forward without hesitation… Is it not true, as Paulsen says, that great men and gentlemen cannot be formed by the feeling of duty, but are forged by lively emotional impulses? Is it not so, is it not so!” At this point, the young Mao Zedong’s theory of individual self-realization of the “heroic personage” began to emerge.

另一方面，包尔生在汲取亚里士多德哲学中关于事物存在的目的因与动力因等“四因说”的基础上，对边沁、密尔的快乐主义的功利主义学说与康德的形式至善论进行了改造并作了调和，把功利主义的目的论与追求精神力量完美行动的自我实现论结合起来，提出了目的论的自我实现论。包尔生“用‘目的论’一词来代替‘功利主义’”，与此同时，“创造了自我实现论这一个词，以使我的观点与快乐主义形成鲜明的对照——亦即意志的目的不在感情，而在行动”。他讲道：“我的观点可以表示为目的论的自我实现论。这样我们的原则就是：倾向于实现意志的最高目标——它可以被称之为幸福（福祉）的行为类型和意志是善的。我在此所说的幸福是指我们存在的完善和生命的完美运动。”因此，“一个完善的人生即一个人的所有身体的和精神的能力都在其中得到充分发展和锻炼的生活，它是个人的至善”。由此我们看出，包尔生把康德的形式至善论赋以人活生生的自我实现的生活，从而使其与功利主义的幸福论相融合。对于包尔生的关于完善的人生的主张，青年毛泽东把它表述为：“人类之目的，在实现自我而已，实现自我者，即充分发达吾人身体及精神的能力至于最高之谓。”当读到包尔生批评康德夸大了义务意识在生活中的作用，用对道德律的尊重来取代自然的冲动，从而强调“义务的感情可能防止了世界上许多恶的产生，但美好和善良的东西却不是从义务的感情萌生的，而是从心灵的生气勃勃的冲动中萌生的”的主张的时候，青年毛泽东极为认同、欣赏并批注道：“豪杰之士发展其所得于天之本性，伸展其本性中至伟至大之力，因以成其为豪杰焉……大凡英雄豪杰之行其自己也，发其动力，奋发踔厉，一往无前……泡尔生所谓大人君子非能以义务感情实现，由活泼之地感情冲动而陶铸之，岂不然哉，岂不然哉！”此时，青年毛泽东的“豪杰之士”个性自我实现论初露端倪。

To go further, Paulsen’s perfectionism of individual self-realization absorbed from Bentham’s and Mill’s utilitarianism the idea of the unity of individual happiness and social happiness, emphasizing that the perfection of individual self-realization is unified with promoting the happiness or perfection of others. He wrote: “An action is morally good when it tends to promote the happiness or perfection of the agent and those around him, when it is accompanied by a consciousness of duty. On the other hand, when it lacks these two characteristics of goodness, or lacks only one of them, it is morally reprehensible… We call a person good when the shaping of his own life conforms to the ideal of human perfection and at the same time promotes the happiness of those around him. We call a person evil when he has neither the desire nor the ability to do anything for himself or others, but on the contrary disturbs and harms those around him.” [9]9 Friedrich Paulsen (1846–1908), German philosopher and educator, whose *System of Ethics* was annotated by the young Mao Zedong. In this way, for Paulsen, the teleological concept of “happiness” and the formal concept of “perfection” are unified in the action of the perfect realization of the individual’s will and spirit. The individual, while achieving self-perfection, simultaneously promotes the happiness of others; this life is happy, is good both in action and in will, is accompanied by pleasure, contains pleasure, but is not equal to pleasure. This clearly distinguishes it from the hedonism of Bentham’s and Mill’s utilitarianism. Regarding this, the young Mao Zedong believed this was the true face of Paulsenism. Therefore, when Paulsen criticized the argument that teleological moral philosophy could not explain self-sacrifice, and praised the exemplary role of Regulus, the Roman consul in legend, who bravely led cavalry to fight the Gauls for the sake of public happiness and sacrificed personal interests, the young Mao Zedong annotated: “The doctrine of the correct goal, scholars have long called it utilitarianism, because it weighs the effects of actions… To seek a certain effect, one must perform actions containing that effect. Therefore, the matter of sacrificing oneself to achieve benevolence is also honored by the ethics of the doctrine of the correct goal.” [10]10 “Sacrificing oneself to achieve benevolence” (杀身成仁) is a classical Confucian ideal from the *Analects*, meaning to die for a righteous cause. When Paulsen further pointed out that “every genuine sacrifice is also self-preservation, that is, the preservation of the ideal self,” the young Mao Zedong again annotated: “This saying is very refined. From this saying, I realize that Paulsen is also based on individualism, but this individualism is spiritual; it can be called spiritual individualism. The individual has supreme value; all kinds of value depend on the individual for their existence. If there were no individual (or individuals), there would be no universe. Therefore, it can be said that the value of the individual is greater than the value of the universe. Hence, anything that suppresses the individual or violates individuality is the greatest crime.” The young Mao Zedong absorbed the essence of Paulsen’s spiritual individualism and, together with realism, regarded them as the two isms of his own ethical outlook. Thus, “Inwardly in my thinking and outwardly in my actions, I all reach the correct goal.”

进一步讲，包尔生的个体自我实现的至善论汲取了边沁与密尔的功利主义中个体幸福与社会幸福相统一的思想，强调个人自我实现的至善是与推进他人的幸福或完善相统一的。他讲道：“一个人的行为在道德上是善的是当它倾向于推进行为者和他周围人的幸福或完善的时候，是当它伴有义务意识的时候。而另一方面，当它缺少善性的这两个特征时，或只缺少其中一个时，它在道德上就是应受谴责的……我们称一个人为善的，是当他对自己生命的塑造符合人的完善的理想、同时推进他周围人的幸福的时候。我们称一个人为恶的，是当他既无心愿也无能力为自己或他人做任何事情、相反却扰乱和损害他周围人的时候。”这样一来，在包尔生那里，作为目的论的“幸福”概念与作为形式论的“至善”概念在自我的意志精神的完美实现的行动中得到了统一，个体在实现自我完善的同时推进他人幸福的生活是幸福的，无论是在行为上还是在意志上都是善的，它伴随着快乐，包含着快乐，但不等于快乐。这就与边沁、密尔的功利主义的快乐主义明显地区分开来。对此，青年毛泽东认为，这是包尔生主义的真面目。因此，当包尔生批评那种认为目的论的道德哲学不可能解释自我牺牲的论点，而盛赞罗马传说中的执政官雷古拉斯为了公共幸福的目的勇敢地率骑兵与高卢人作战而牺牲个人利益的榜样作用时，青年毛泽东批注道：“正鹄论，自昔学者恒称为功利论，以其较量行为之效果也……欲求某种效果，必行含有某种效果之行为，故杀身成仁之事，正鹄论之伦理学亦尊贵也。”当包尔生继而指出“每一种真正的牺牲同时也是自我保存，即保存理想的自我”时，青年毛泽东又批注道：“此语甚精。观此语始知泡氏亦以个人主义为基础，此个人主义乃为精神的，可谓之精神之个人主义。个人有无上之价值，百般之价值依个人而存，使无个人（或个体）则无宇宙，故谓个人之价值大于宇宙之价值可也。故凡有压抑个人、违背个性者，罪莫大焉。”青年毛泽东汲取了包尔生（这里，青年毛泽东简称包尔生为“泡氏”，亦泡尔生）的精神个人主义的精髓，并把它与现实主义并称为自己伦理观的两个主义。如此，“吾内而思维、外而行事，皆达正鹄”。

It must be pointed out that Paulsen’s spiritual individualism is not pure egoism, nor is it individual utilitarianism, nor is it absolute social utilitarianism. Rather, it emphasizes the self-realization of the individual spirit, and while the individual spirit achieves self-realization, the life of society as a whole is also perfected. When the young Mao Zedong read Paulsen’s discussion that in moral life, the individual’s own moral conduct (virtue) is both a means and an end for the individual, and that the individual’s moral conduct (virtue) is both a means and an end for the moral whole—that is, the indispensability of individual virtue for the perfected life of the individual and society—he annotated: “The correct goal. This meaning is extremely refined; it can be called a great invention in ethics.” Influenced by this, the young Mao Zedong, in his philosophical and ethical views, advocated establishing, on the basis of utilitarianism (teleology), a special theory of self-realization of the individual personality of the “heroic person” that contains the gene of the excellent traditional Chinese culture of “sacrificing life for righteousness” and can unify the perfected life of the individual and society.

必须指出的是，包尔生的精神个人主义不是纯粹的利己主义，或者说不是个体功利主义，也不是绝对的社会功利主义，而是强调个体精神的自我实现，而个体精神在自我实现的同时社会整体的生活也得到完善。青年毛泽东在阅读包尔生有关道德生活中个体自身的道德行为（德性）对个体来讲既是目的又是手段，以及个体的道德行为（德性）对道德整体来讲既是目的又是手段，亦即个体的德性对于个人和社会的完善生活的不可缺少等论述时批注道：“正鹄。此义极精，可谓伦理学一大发明。”受其影响，青年毛泽东在哲学与伦理学观上主张在功利论（目的论）基础之上建立一种特殊的具有中华优秀传统文化“舍生取义”基因的、能够把个人和社会的完善生活统一起来的“豪杰之士”个性自我实现论。

The young Mao Zedong’s theory of self-realization of the individual personality of the “heroic person” was soon put into practice in social activities. And in the spiritual collision with Marxism, it gradually transformed into the thought of proletarian revolutionary utilitarianism, which organizes the proletariat and its party for the liberation of the masses of workers and peasants and engages in unremitting struggle. As early as the inaugural declaration of the *Xiangjiang Review* on July 14, 1919, the young Mao Zedong clearly stated: “Since the Renaissance, with the liberation of thought, ‘How should humanity live?’ has become an enormous question. From studying this question, we have reached the conclusions of ‘one should live that way’ and ‘one should not live this way.’ Some scholars advocated it, the majority of the people responded to it, and thus many reforms have been or will be successfully achieved.” [11]11 The *Xiangjiang Review* (《湘江评论》) was a weekly founded and edited by Mao Zedong in Changsha in 1919, advocating for popular struggle and social reform. In his view, the problem of eating was the greatest problem of human life. To solve it, it was necessary to use the strongest force of the people’s union (populism) to overthrow the various dictatorships of the minority classes through force. In the spring of 1920, the young Mao Zedong led the Hunan delegation to petition for the expulsion of Governor Zhang Jingyao to Beijing, continuing to practice his theory of self-realization of the individual personality of the “heroic person.” During his stay in Beijing, he read three books: the *Communist Manifesto* translated by Chen Wangdao, Karl Kautsky’s *Class Struggle*, and Thomas Kirkup’s *A History of Socialism*. He believed that the Marxist interpretation of history was correct, began to be inspired by communism, and moved towards it. In a letter to his classmate Zhou Shizhao on March 14, he mentioned wanting to create a new life in Changsha, establish a self-study university, organize a “work-study mutual aid group,” and live a communist life. He also believed that “Russia is the first civilized country in the world… We should organize a group to visit Russia.” According to Mao Zedong’s conversation with Edgar Snow in Yan’an, it is known that he established his belief in Marxism from the summer of 1920. This is also confirmed in his letter to his classmate Luo Zhanglong on November 25, 1920. He wrote: “I think our society should not merely be a gathering of people or a union of feelings, but should become a union of isms. An ism is like a flag; once the flag is raised, people have something to look to and know where to go.” Here, the “ism” the young Mao Zedong spoke of was Marxist communism, and he took it as his “hope” and moved towards it. Thus, the young Mao Zedong began the new starting point and new journey of forming the thought of “proletarian revolutionary utilitarianism” for Chinese Communists, by combining his theory of self-realization of the individual personality of the “heroic person” with the Marxist values of proletarian revolution in the practice of the Chinese revolution. After the founding of the CPC, the heroic spirit of countless Chinese Communists who unswervingly struggled and sacrificed for the common interests and happiness of the masses of the people erupted vigorously during the Great Revolution, the Civil War, and the War of Resistance Against Japan. All of this laid the foundation of outlook on life, values, and practice for Mao Zedong to clearly propose the thought of “proletarian revolutionary utilitarianism” at the Yan’an Forum on Literature and Art.

青年毛泽东的“豪杰之士”个性自我实现论随即在社会实践中得到了践行，并且在与马克思主义发生的精神碰撞中，逐步转换成为了工农大众的解放而组织成为无产阶级及其政党并进行不懈奋斗的无产阶级的革命的功利主义的思想。早在1919年7月14日《湘江评论》创刊宣言中，青年毛泽东就明确提出：“自文艺复兴，思想解放，‘人类应如何生活？’成了一个绝大的问题。从这个问题，加以研究，就得了‘应该那样生活’‘不应该这样生活’的结论。一些学者倡之，大多民众和之，就成功或将要成功许多方面的改革。”在他看来，吃饭问题是人类生活的最大问题，为此就要在民众联合（平民主义）这一最强力量的基础上通过强权来打倒各种少数阶级专制的强权。1920年春，青年毛泽东率湖南驱张请愿团到北京，继续践行他的“豪杰之士”个性自我实现论。在北京期间，他阅读了陈望道翻译的《共产党宣言》、考茨基的《阶级斗争》、柯卡普的《社会主义史》三本书，认为马克思主义对历史的解释是正确的，开始受到共产主义的启发并趋赴之。他在3月14日致同学周世钊的信中就讲到要在长沙创造一种新生活，办自修大学，组织“工读互助团”，过共产的生活，并且认为“俄国是世界第一个文明国……我们要组织一个游俄队”。根据毛泽东在延安与斯诺的谈话，可知他于1920年夏天起就确立了对马克思主义的信仰。这一点在他于1920年11月25日致同学罗章龙的信中也得到了印证。他讲道：“我想我们学会，不可徒然做人的聚集，感情的结合，要变为主义的结合才好。主义譬如一面旗子，旗子立起了，大家才有所指望，才知所趋赴。”这里，青年毛泽东所讲的“主义”就是马克思主义的共产主义，并以其为“指望”而趋赴之。由此，青年毛泽东开启了他在中国革命实践中把“豪杰之士”个性自我实现论与马克思主义的无产阶级革命价值观相结合，从而开启中国共产党人的“无产阶级的革命的功利主义”思想形成的新起点与新征程。中国共产党成立后，许许多多的中国共产党人为了人民大众的普遍利益与幸福而矢志不渝地奋斗牺牲的英雄气概，在大革命、国内革命战争、抗日战争时期得到了轰轰烈烈的迸发。所有这些为毛泽东在延安文艺座谈会上明确提出“无产阶级的革命的功利主义”思想奠定了人生观、价值观、实践观的基础。

II

二

Mao Zedong’s thought of “proletarian revolutionary utilitarianism” was nurtured in the historical process of Chinese Communists combining the proletarian values, which run through the *Communist Manifesto* and call for Communists to fight for the immediate and long-term interests of the working class in the proletarian revolutionary movement, with the practice of China’s New Democratic Revolution.

毛泽东提出的“无产阶级的革命的功利主义”思想，熏陶于中国共产党人把贯穿于《共产党宣言》的共产党人在无产阶级革命运动中为工人阶级的最近利益和长远利益而奋斗的无产阶级价值观同中国新民主主义革命实践相结合的历史进程。

The *Communist Manifesto*, which Mao Zedong read over a hundred times, had the deepest influence on his integration of the youthful theory of the self-realization of the “heroic individual” with the Marxist proletarian revolutionary values, thereby forming the Chinese Communists’ thought on “proletarian revolutionary utilitarianism.” The *Communist Manifesto*, as a “small encyclopedia” of Marxism, takes class struggle as the main thread for examining the development of human history, takes the sharp contradiction between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie caused by the bourgeois mode of production and its developmental trends as its content, and clearly elucidates the ideological essence of proletarian revolutionary values. First, the proletarian revolution has a fundamentally different nature from the bourgeois revolution, manifested in the fact that “all previous historical movements were movements of minorities, or in the interest of minorities. The proletarian movement is the independent movement of the immense majority, in the interest of the immense majority.” To this end, the proletarians must organize themselves into a class and its party to oppose the political and economic rule of the bourgeoisie and to abolish bourgeois ownership. “The communist revolution is the most radical rupture with traditional property relations; no wonder that its development involves the most radical rupture with traditional ideas.” Second, Marx and Engels emphasized that the proletarian revolutionary movement must always be carried out according to the conditions of the time and place, combining the principle of the proletarian revolution with flexibility: “The communists fight for the attainment of the immediate aims, for the enforcement of the momentary interests of the working class; but in the movement of the present, they also represent and take care of the future of that movement.” Third, the goal of the proletarian revolution is, through the proletarian revolution, to abolish bourgeois private property, the condition for class antagonism, and to establish an association of free individuals in which the free development of each is the condition for the free development of all. These three aspects collectively embody the core content of Marxist proletarian values, including the nature of the proletarian revolution, its leading force, its revolutionary strategy, and its revolutionary goals.

毛泽东阅读超过百遍的《共产党宣言》对其把青年时期的“豪杰之士”个性自我实现论与马克思主义的无产阶级革命价值观结合，进而形成中国共产党人的“无产阶级的革命的功利主义”思想影响最深。《共产党宣言》作为马克思主义的“小百科全书”，以阶级斗争作为考察人类历史发展的主线，以资产阶级生产方式所导致的无产阶级与资产阶级的尖锐矛盾及其发展趋势为内容，对无产阶级革命价值观的思想精髓进行了明确的阐释。其一，无产阶级革命有着与资产阶级革命根本不同的性质，表现为“过去的一切运动都是少数人的，或者为少数人谋利益的运动。无产阶级的运动是绝大多数人的，为绝大多数人谋利益的独立的运动”。为此，无产者必须组织形成阶级及其政党去反对资产阶级的政治与经济统治，消灭资产阶级所有制。“共产主义革命就是同传统的所有制关系实行最彻底的决裂；毫不奇怪，它在自己的发展进程中要同传统的观念实行最彻底的决裂。”其二，马克思、恩格斯强调无产阶级革命运动必须随时随地依据当时的条件来进行，并把无产阶级革命的原则性与灵活性相结合，“共产党人为工人阶级的最近的目的和利益而斗争，但是他们在当前的运动中同时代表运动的未来”。其三，无产阶级革命的目标，是通过无产阶级革命，废除资产阶级私有制这一阶级对立的条件，建立起每个人的自由发展是一切人的自由发展的条件的自由人的联合体。这三个方面集中体现了包括无产阶级革命的性质、领导力量、革命策略与革命目标在内的马克思主义无产阶级价值观的核心内容。

Mao Zedong applied the proletarian values advocated in the *Communist Manifesto* to the practice of the Chinese revolution, gradually forming a theory of the Chinese revolution that conformed to China’s actual conditions, encompassing the leading force and relying forces of the Chinese revolution, the nature and path of the Chinese revolution, and the immediate and long-term goals of the Chinese revolution. This laid the theoretical foundation for his proposal of the thought on “proletarian revolutionary utilitarianism.” Regarding the leading force and relying forces of the Chinese revolution, Mao Zedong pointed out in *Analysis of the Classes in Chinese Society* during the First Revolutionary Civil War period [12]12 The First Revolutionary Civil War period (1924–1927) refers to the first united front between the CPC and the Kuomintang, aimed at overthrowing the warlords and imperialism.: “All warlords, bureaucrats, comprador classes, and big landlord classes who collude with imperialism, along with a part of the reactionary intelligentsia attached to them, are our enemies. The industrial proletariat is the leading force of our revolution. All semi-proletarians and the petty bourgeoisie are our closest friends. The vacillating middle bourgeoisie, its right wing may be our enemy, and its left wing may be our friend—but we must constantly be on guard against them, lest they disrupt our ranks.” Regarding the nature and path of the Chinese revolution, Mao Zedong provided a relatively specific discussion in *The Struggle in the Jinggang Mountains* during the Second Revolutionary Civil War period [13]13 The Second Revolutionary Civil War period (1927–1937) refers to the period of the Agrarian Revolutionary War, during which the CPC established rural base areas and fought against the Kuomintang regime.: “China is indeed still in the stage of a bourgeois-democratic revolution. The program of a thoroughgoing democratic revolution in China includes, externally, overthrowing imperialism to achieve complete national liberation; internally, eliminating the urban forces of the comprador class, completing the agrarian revolution, abolishing feudal relations in the countryside, and overthrowing the warlord government. Only through such a democratic revolution can a genuine foundation for the transition to socialism be created.” This was Mao Zedong’s earliest understanding of the nature of the Chinese revolution, one that both adhered to the basic principles of Marxism and conformed to China’s actual conditions, laying the theoretical foundation for his later proposal of the theory of New Democratic Revolution. Regarding the strategy of the Chinese revolution and its immediate and long-term goals, in *On Tactics Against Japanese Imperialism*, Mao Zedong criticized the erroneous view within the Party that the Chinese national bourgeoisie could not unite with the Chinese workers and peasants to resist Japan, pointing out that under changed revolutionary circumstances, revolutionary strategy and leadership methods must also change. The Party’s basic strategic task was to establish a broad national revolutionary united front. The Chinese revolution at that time remained a bourgeois-democratic revolution, not a proletarian socialist revolution, and the motive forces of the revolution were the workers, peasants, urban petty bourgeoisie, and national bourgeoisie. In *Problems of Strategy in China’s Revolutionary War*, which summarized the experience of the Second Revolutionary Civil War, Mao Zedong clearly stated that China’s revolutionary wars were all led by the Chinese proletariat and its political party, the Communist Party of China, and that “before the entire nation, it has shown itself to be the friend of the people, standing every day at the forefront of the revolutionary war to protect the interests of the people and for the people’s freedom and liberation.” During the War of Resistance Against Japan, in *The Tasks of the Chinese Communist Party in the Period of the War of Resistance Against Japan*, Mao Zedong clearly pointed out that the contradiction between China and Japan had become the principal contradiction, with domestic contradictions relegated to a secondary and subordinate position. For the sake of peace, democracy, and resistance to Japan, and to establish an anti-Japanese national united front, “the Communist Party, the Kuomintang, and the entire nation should strive together for the three great goals of national independence, civil liberties, and the people’s livelihood and well-being.” Although these three goals were of a bourgeois-democratic revolutionary nature, every Communist Party member should clearly understand that “to reorganize the spirit of the Three People’s Principles, under the banner of nationalism for external independence and liberation, democracy for internal democratic freedom, and the people’s livelihood for enhancing the people’s welfare, the two parties should cooperate anew and resolutely lead the people in implementing them. This is entirely in line with the historical demands of the Chinese revolution and should be clearly understood by every Communist Party member. Communists never abandon their ideals of socialism and communism; they will pass through the stage of the bourgeois-democratic revolution to reach the stage of socialism and communism.” Mao Zedong’s above propositions laid the theoretical premise for his assertion of the thought on “proletarian revolutionary utilitarianism” at the Yan’an Forum on Literature and Art, a premise that conformed to the actual conditions of the Chinese revolution.

毛泽东把《共产党宣言》所主张的无产阶级价值观运用到中国革命实践中，逐渐形成了符合中国革命实际的以中国革命的领导力量与依靠力量、中国革命的性质与道路、中国革命的策略与革命眼前目标和长远目标为内容的中国革命的理论，从而为他提出“无产阶级的革命的功利主义”思想奠定了理论基础。就中国革命的领导力量与依靠力量来讲，毛泽东在第一次国内革命战争时期的《中国社会各阶级的分析》中指出：“一切勾结帝国主义的军阀、官僚、买办阶级、大地主阶级以及附属于他们的一部分反动知识界，是我们的敌人。工业无产阶级是我们革命的领导力量。一切半无产阶级、小资产阶级，是我们最接近的朋友。那动摇不定的中产阶级，其右翼可能是我们的敌人，其左翼可能是我们的朋友——但我们要时常提防他们，不要让他们扰乱了我们的阵线。”就中国革命的性质与道路来讲，毛泽东在第二次国内革命战争时期的《井冈山的斗争》对此有较为具体的论述：“中国现时确实还是处在资产阶级民权革命的阶段。中国彻底的民权主义革命的纲领，包括对外推翻帝国主义，求得彻底的民族解放；对内肃清买办阶级的在城市的势力，完成土地革命，消灭乡村的封建关系，推翻军阀政府。必定要经过这样的民权主义革命，方能造成过渡到社会主义的真正基础。”这是毛泽东对中国革命性质最早作出的既遵循马克思主义基本原理又符合中国实际的认识，这为后来毛泽东提出新民主主义革命理论奠定了理论基础。就中国革命的策略与革命眼前目标和长远目标来讲，毛泽东在《论反对日本帝国主义的策略》中，批判了党内那种认为中国民族资产阶级不可能和中国工农联合抗日的错误观点，指出在革命的形势改变的情况下，革命的策略与领导方式也必须改变，党的基本的策略任务是建立广泛的民族革命统一战线，中国革命在当时依然是资产阶级民主主义性质的革命，不是无产阶级社会主义性质的革命，革命的动力是工人、农民、城市小资产阶级和民族资产阶级。在总结第二次国内革命战争经验的《中国革命战争的战略问题》中，毛泽东明确指出，中国革命战争都是中国无产阶级及其政党中国共产党领导的，“在全国人民面前，表示了自己是人民的朋友，每一天都是为了保护人民的利益，为了人民的自由解放，站在革命战争的最前线”。在抗日战争时期，毛泽东在《中国共产党在抗日战争时期的任务》中明确指出，中日民族矛盾成为主要矛盾，国内矛盾降到次要的地位与服从方面，为了和平、民主和抗战，为了建立抗日民族统一战线，“共产党、国民党、全国人民，应当共同一致为民族独立、民权自由、民生幸福这三大目标而奋斗”。虽然这三大目标是资产阶级民主主义革命性质的，但是每一个共产党员应当明白认识到，“重新整顿三民主义的精神，在对外争取独立解放的民族主义、对内实现民主自由的民权主义和增进人民幸福的民生主义之下，两党重新合作，并领导人民坚决地实行起来，是完全适合于中国革命的历史要求，而应为每一个共产党员所明白认识的。共产党人决不抛弃其社会主义和共产主义的理想，他们将经过资产阶级民主革命的阶段而达到社会主义和共产主义的阶段”。毛泽东的上述主张，为他在延安文艺座谈会上提出“无产阶级的革命的功利主义”思想的论断奠定了符合中国革命实际的理论前提。

III

三

The thought on “proletarian revolutionary utilitarianism” proposed by Mao Zedong was inspired by Lenin’s “literature and art serving the millions upon millions of working people” and Lu Xun’s proletarian revolutionary literary thought of “fierce-browed, I coolly defy a thousand pointing fingers; head bowed, like a willing ox I serve the children.” [14]14 This couplet by Lu Xun (1881–1936), a leading figure of modern Chinese literature, expresses his defiance toward enemies and his dedication to serving the people.

毛泽东提出的“无产阶级的革命的功利主义”思想，启示于列宁的“文艺为千千万万劳动人民服务”以及鲁迅的“横眉冷对千夫指，俯首甘为孺子牛”的无产阶级革命文艺思想。

In his “Talks at the Yan’an Forum on Literature and Art,” Mao Zedong specifically affirmed the literary and artistic thought of Lenin and Lu Xun, pointing out that their literary stance insisted that literature and art serve the masses of the people rather than the exploiters and oppressors such as the landlord class and the bourgeoisie. At the same time, he emphasized that the foundation of literature and art is not abstract theories of human nature, nor the abstract ravings of “love,” but rather the concrete and class-specific. The literary and artistic work led by the Communist Party of China proceeds from the concrete human nature of the proletariat and serves the interests of the masses of the people. Therefore, literature and art face the question of how to integrate with the masses of the new era. In “Party Organization and Party Literature,” Lenin elucidated the literary thought that “literature serves the thousands upon thousands of working people,” pointing out that free writing is “not for the sake of private greed, nor for fame and status, but for socialist ideas and sympathy for the working people… not serving the well-fed gentlewoman, not serving the bored and fat ‘ten thousand upper-class elements,’ but serving the thousands upon thousands of working people, the essence of the country, the strength of the country, the future of the country. This will be free writing, which will enrich the latest achievements of human revolutionary thought with the experience and vigorous work of the socialist proletariat, and which will cause constant interaction between past experience (scientific socialism developed from primitive utopian socialism) and present experience (the current struggle of worker comrades).” Lenin’s thought that “literature serves the thousands upon thousands of working people” not only laid the proletarian revolutionary stance of “literature serves whom” for Mao Zedong’s proposal of “proletarian revolutionary utilitarianism,” but also gave direct inspiration to Mao’s proposal that revolution and literary and artistic work “serve the people” as the fundamental purpose of the Communist Party of China. In his speech “The United Front in Cultural Work” delivered to cultural and educational workers in the Shaanxi-Gansu-Ningxia Border Region in October 1944, Mao Zedong clearly stated: “Our culture is the culture of the people. Cultural workers must have a high degree of enthusiasm for serving the people, must connect with the masses, and must not detach themselves from the masses. To connect with the masses, one must follow the needs and voluntariness of the masses. All work for the masses must proceed from the needs of the masses, not from any good personal wishes.”

毛泽东在延安文艺座谈会上的讲话中专门对列宁与鲁迅的文艺思想作了肯定，指出他们的文艺立场坚持的是文艺是为人民大众而不是为地主阶级与资产阶级等剥削者压迫者服务的，与此同时，强调文艺的基础不是抽象的人性论，不是抽象的“爱”的呓语，而是具体的且有着阶级性的。中国共产党领导的文艺工作，是从具体的无产阶级的人性论出发的，是为人民大众利益服务的。因此，文艺就有一个如何与新的时代的群众相结合的问题。在《党的组织和党的出版物》中，列宁阐明了“文艺为千千万万劳动人民服务”的文艺思想，指出自由的写作，“不是私利贪欲，也不是名誉地位，而是社会主义思想和对劳动人民的同情……不是为饱食终日的贵妇人服务，不是为百无聊赖、胖得发愁的‘一万个上层分子’服务，而是为千千万万劳动人民，为这些国家的精华、国家的力量、国家的未来服务。这将是自由的写作，它要用社会主义无产阶级的经验和生气勃勃的工作去丰富人类革命思想的最新成就，它要使过去的经验（从原始空想的社会主义发展而成的科学社会主义）和现在的经验（工人同志们当前的斗争）之间经常发生相互作用”。列宁的“文艺为千千万万劳动人民服务”的思想，不仅为毛泽东提出“无产阶级的革命的功利主义”思想奠定了“文艺为什么人”的无产阶级革命立场，而且也给毛泽东提出革命与文艺工作“为人民服务”这一中国共产党的宗旨以直接的启示。在1944年10月对陕甘宁边区文教工作者所作的《文化工作中的统一战线》的讲演中，毛泽东明确指出：“我们的文化是人民的文化，文化工作者必须有为人民服务的高度的热忱，必须联系群众，而不要脱离群众。要联系群众，就要按照群众的需要和自愿。一切为群众的工作都要从群众的需要出发，而不是从任何良好的个人愿望出发。”

Regarding Lu Xun’s literary and artistic thought, Mao Zedong praised it with two lines from Lu Xun’s poem: “Fierce-browed, I coolly defy a thousand pointing fingers; head bowed, like a willing ox I serve the children.” [15]15 From Lu Xun’s poem “Self-mockery” (1932). “A thousand pointing fingers” (千夫指) is a classical allusion to those who are pointed at by many, here reinterpreted as enemies; “willing ox” (孺子牛) refers to a story in the Zuo Commentary about a ruler playing an ox for his son, here reinterpreted as serving the people. He pointed out that these two lines should become the motto for the Party’s leadership of literary and artistic work. Regarding these two lines, Mao Zedong, standing on the position of proletarian revolutionary literature and art, specifically explained: “‘A thousand pointing fingers’ here means the enemy; we will never yield to any ferocious enemy. ‘The children’ here means the proletariat and the masses of the people. All Communist Party members, all revolutionaries, all revolutionary literary and artistic workers should learn from Lu Xun’s example, be the ‘ox’ for the proletariat and the masses of the people, bending their backs to the task until their dying day. Intellectuals need a process of mutual understanding to integrate with the masses and serve the masses. This process may and certainly will involve much pain and much friction, but as long as everyone has determination, these requirements can be achieved.” In his “Opinions on the League of Left-Wing Writers,” Lu Xun once said: “A united front necessarily requires a common purpose… The fact that our front cannot be unified proves that our purposes are not consistent, or that we only care for small groups, or even only for individuals. If the purpose is all for the workers and peasants, then of course the front will be unified.” Lu Xun in the “era of the essay” [16]16 The “era of the essay” (杂文时代) refers to the 1920s–1930s in China, when Lu Xun and others used the short, satirical essay form (zawen) as a weapon of social and political critique. was famous for his sharp criticism and bitter satire; he truly spoke from the standpoint of the people, emphasizing the positive role of literature and art in improving life and social change through “use without use.” [17]17 “Use without use” (不用之用) is a phrase from Lu Xun’s essay “On the Power of the Mara Poets” (1907), where he argues that art has no direct practical utility but exerts a profound indirect influence on human spirit and social transformation. As Mao Zedong pointed out, even when criticizing the shortcomings of the people, Lu Xun spoke with full enthusiasm for protecting and educating the people. It is worth noting that Lu Xun’s literary and artistic thought was deeply influenced by the Russian Marxist Plekhanov’s literary thought based on historical materialism, opposing the view of art for art’s sake that breaks free from class interests, and emphasizing the class nature of literature and art and the utilitarian tendency of class interests in revolutionary and combat literature. In his “Translator’s Preface” to Plekhanov’s “On Art,” Lu Xun pointed out that Plekhanov “uses rich evidence and rigorous logic to elucidate the fundamental proposition of historical materialism that the production of useful objects (labor) precedes artistic production. In detail, what Plekhanov elucidates is that social man, when looking at things and phenomena, initially proceeds from a utilitarian point of view, and only later moves to an aesthetic point of view. Among all humans, what is considered beautiful is what is useful to them—what has meaning in their struggle for survival against nature and other social life. Usefulness is recognized by reason, but beauty is recognized by intuitive ability. When enjoying beauty, although one hardly thinks of usefulness, it can be discovered through scientific analysis. Therefore, the particularity of the enjoyment of beauty lies in its immediacy; yet if usefulness does not lie hidden at the root of the pleasure of beauty, then that thing would not be considered beautiful. It is not that man exists for beauty, but that beauty exists for man. This conclusion is that Plekhanov introduced the utilitarian view of society, race, and class, which idealist historians deeply detest, into art.”

对于鲁迅的文艺思想，毛泽东以鲁迅的两句诗——“横眉冷对千夫指，俯首甘为孺子牛”——来加以称赞，指出这两句诗应该成为共产党领导文艺工作的座右铭。对于鲁迅的这两句诗，毛泽东站在无产阶级革命文艺的立场上专门进行了解释：“‘千夫’在这里就是说敌人，对于无论什么凶恶的敌人我们决不屈服。‘孺子’在这里就是说无产阶级和人民大众。一切共产党员，一切革命家，一切革命的文艺工作者，都应该学鲁迅的榜样，做无产阶级和人民大众的‘牛’，鞠躬尽瘁，死而后已。知识分子要和群众结合，要为群众服务，需要一个互相认识的过程。这个过程可能而且一定会发生许多痛苦，许多磨擦，但是只要大家有决心，这些要求是能够达到的。”鲁迅在给左翼作家联盟的意见中曾说：“联合战线是以有共同目的为必要条件的……我们战线不能统一，就证明我们的目的不能一致，或者只为了小团体，或者还其实只为了个人。如果目的都在工农大众，那当然战线也就统一了。”“杂文时代”的鲁迅以犀利批判与辛辣讽刺闻名，他是真正站在人民的立场上来说话的，强调文艺对人生改良与社会变革的“不用之用”的积极作用。正如毛泽东所指出的，即使是对人民的缺点的批评，鲁迅也是怀着保护人民、教育人民的满腔热情来说话的。值得指出的是，鲁迅的文艺思想深受俄国马克思主义者普列汉诺夫的以唯物史观为基础的文艺思想影响，反对那种摆脱阶级的利害、为艺术而艺术的观点，强调文艺的阶级性以及革命文学与战斗文学的阶级利害的功利性倾向。在为普列汉诺夫的《文艺论》而作的“译本序”中，鲁迅指出，蒲力汗诺夫（普列汉诺夫）“用丰富的实证和严正的论理，以究明有用对象的生产（劳动），先于艺术生产这一个唯物史观的根本底命题。详言之，即蒲力汗诺夫之所究明，是社会人之看事物和现象，最初是从功利底观点的，到后来才移到审美底观点去。在一切人类所以为美的东西，就是于他有用——于为生存而和自然以及别的社会人生的斗争上有着意义的东西。功用由理性而被认识，但美则凭直感底能力而被认识。享乐着美的时候，虽然几乎并不想到功用，但可由科学底分析而被发见。所以美底享乐的特殊性，即在那直接性，然而美底愉乐的根柢里，倘不伏着功用，那事物也就不见得美了。并非人为美而存在，乃是美为人而存在。——这结论，便是蒲力汗诺夫将唯心史观者所深恶痛绝的社会、种族、阶级的功利主义底见解，引入艺术里去了”。

IV

四

The thought of “proletarian revolutionary utilitarianism” proposed by Mao Zedong is practiced in the revolutionary actions of the Communist Party of China, which takes the greatest interests of the broadest masses of the people as its highest standard.

毛泽东提出的“无产阶级的革命的功利主义”思想，践行在中国共产党以最广大人民群众的最大利益为最高标准的革命行动中。

As Marx stated, any genuine philosophy, as the quintessence of the spirit of its age, inevitably comes into contact with and interacts with the real world of its own era. Mao Zedong’s thought of “proletarian revolutionary utilitarianism,” as the quintessence of the spirit of the age during China’s New Democratic Revolution, has its own practical principles of revolutionary struggle, sacrifice, and creation led by the Communist Party of China for the liberation of the Chinese people. In summary, these are the principles Mao emphasized in *On Coalition Government*: “All words and deeds of Chinese Communists must take as the highest criterion whether they conform to the interests of the broadest masses of the people and win their support.” [18]18 *On Coalition Government* (1945) was Mao’s political report to the Seventh National Congress of the CPC, outlining the Party’s program for post-war China. Mao’s proposition distinctly embodies the ideas of maximizing individual interests and maximizing the interests of the greatest number found in the utilitarian theories of Bentham and Mill. The young Mao Zedong’s grasp of the utilitarian theories of Bentham and Mill is not only concentratedly displayed in his annotations on Bao Er’s *Principles of Ethics* [19]19 Bao Er’s *Principles of Ethics* is the Chinese translation of Friedrich Paulsen’s *System der Ethik*, which Mao annotated as a student. but also more clearly cognized in his complete transcription, in seven notebooks, of his mentor Yang Changji’s then-unpublished *History of Western Ethics*. [20]20 Yang Changji (1871–1920) was Mao’s ethics teacher at the Hunan First Normal School and later his father-in-law. In Chapter 5, “The English Doctrine of Utility (Part One),” of the third part, “Modern Ethics,” and Chapter 4, “The English Doctrine of Utility (Part Two),” of the fourth part, “Ethical Theories after the Nineteenth Century,” of *History of Western Ethics*, as well as in Yang Changji’s own *Commentary on Western Ethics*, which discusses public hedonism, i.e., utilitarianism, utilitarianism is explicitly expounded, leaving a deep impression on the young Mao Zedong regarding utilitarian theory. Yang Changji stated: “Public hedonism, also called utilitarianism or the doctrine of utility, takes the greatest happiness as the standard for judging conduct; the greatest happiness refers to the maximum amount of happiness remaining after subtracting pain from happiness. Depending on whether the one enjoying the happiness is oneself, others, society, or humanity in general, hedonism gives rise to various distinctions: that which advocates one’s own greatest happiness is called individual hedonism, as advocated by the ancient Greek Epicurus and the modern Englishman Hobbes; that which takes the greatest happiness of others as its goal is called altruism, as advocated by the Frenchman Comte; and that which takes the greatest happiness of society, humanity in general, or sentient beings as the goal of conduct is called public hedonism, as advocated in the early nineteenth century by Paley, Bentham, and Mill.” [21]21 William Paley (1743–1805) was an English utilitarian theologian; “Mill” here refers to John Stuart Mill (1806–1873). Yang Changji briefly described the utilitarian doctrines of Bentham and Mill, pointing out that pleasure and pain are the sovereign masters governing humanity, and that the distinction between moral good and evil is based on pleasure and pain: conduct that produces pleasure is good, and conduct that produces pain is evil. “Therefore, moral conduct does not consist in bringing happiness to oneself, but in bringing happiness to the public of society; the ultimate goal of life is the greatest happiness of the greatest number.”

正如马克思所言，任何真正的哲学作为自己时代精神的精华，必然会同自己时代的现实世界接触并相互作用。毛泽东的“无产阶级的革命的功利主义”思想作为中国新民主主义革命时期的时代精神的精华，有其轰轰烈烈的中国共产党领导的为中国人民的解放而奋斗、牺牲和创造的革命实践遵循原则，概括地讲，就是毛泽东在《论联合政府》中所强调的“中国共产党人的一切言论行动必须以合乎最广大人民群众的最大利益，为最广大人民群众所拥护为最高标准”。毛泽东的这一主张，鲜明地体现了边沁、密尔的功利主义主张的个人利益最大化与最大多数人的利益最大化的思想。青年毛泽东对边沁、密尔的功利主义理论的把握，不仅在其对包尔生的《伦理学原理》的评注中得到了集中的展现，而且在对其恩师杨昌济所著但彼时尚未出版的《西洋伦理学史》的整整七本的抄录中有了更为清晰的认知。《西洋伦理学史》的第三篇“近世伦理学”的第五章“英国之功利说（其一）”与第四篇“十九世纪以后之伦理说”的第四章“英国之功利说（其二）”，以及杨昌济本人所撰写的《西洋伦理学述评》对公众的快乐主义即功利主义的述评，对功利主义作了明确的论述，这使得青年毛泽东对功利主义理论印象深刻。杨昌济讲道：“公众的快乐主义，一曰功利主义，又曰功利说。此主义以最大快乐为判断行为之标准；最大快乐者，自快乐减去苦痛残余之快乐之最大量之谓也。由享受快乐者之为自己，或他人，或社会，或一般人类，而快乐主义生种种之区别：有标榜自己之最大快乐者谓之个人的快乐主义，古代希腊之伊壁鸠鲁，近世英国之霍布斯等所主张者是也；有以他人最大之快乐为目的者谓之利他主义，法国孔特之所倡者是也；以社会或一般人类或有情生类之最大快乐为行为之目的，则谓之公众的快乐主义，在十九世纪之初期配列，边沁，穆勒等之所倡者是也。”杨昌济对边沁与穆勒（密尔）的功利主义学说作了略述，指出快乐与苦痛是主宰人类的主权者，道德上的善与恶的区分就是以快乐与苦痛为标准，产生快乐的行为就是善，产生苦痛的行为就是恶。“是故道德的行为，不在于致己一身之快乐，而在于致社会公众之快乐；人生究竟之目的，乃最多数之最大幸福也。”

Yang Changji’s proposition that the utilitarian “ultimate goal of life is the greatest happiness of the greatest number” directly influenced Mao Zedong’s formulation that the greatest interests of the broadest masses of the people constitute the highest criterion for all words and deeds of Chinese Communists. In the concrete historical practice of the Chinese revolution, Mao Zedong determined that this highest criterion for all words and deeds of Chinese Communists consists of two goals—struggling for the present New Democratic Revolution and struggling for future socialism and communism—which are sequential but cannot be “accomplished in one single battle.” [22]22 “Accomplished in one single battle” (毕其功于一役) is a Chinese idiom meaning to achieve a complex goal in a single effort. In *On Coalition Government*, Mao pointed out: “Only through democracy can socialism be reached; this is the unalterable truth of Marxism. In China, the struggle for democracy will still last for a long time. Without a new democratic united and unified state, without the development of the new democratic state economy, without the development of private capitalist economy and cooperative economy, without the development of a national, scientific, and popular culture, i.e., new democratic culture, without the emancipation and development of the individuality of hundreds of millions of people—in a word, without a new type of thorough bourgeois democratic revolution led by the Communist Party, it would be sheer utopianism to try to build a socialist society on the ruins of a semi-colonial and semi-feudal society.” Mao further pointed out that Communists are not afraid of, but rather advocate, the development of domestic capitalism under certain conditions, because compared to the oppression of the Chinese people by imperialism and feudalism, the development of domestic capitalism is progressive and inevitable; “it benefits not only the bourgeoisie but also the proletariat, or rather, it benefits the proletariat even more… We Communists, based on our Marxist understanding of the laws of social development, clearly know that under Chinese conditions, under the new democratic state system, besides the state’s own economy, the individual economy of the working people, and the cooperative economy, private capitalist economy must be allowed to develop conveniently within the scope of not controlling the livelihood of the people, so as to benefit the progress of society.” On this basis, Mao concretized the highest criterion for all words and deeds of Chinese Communists into the criterion of productive forces. He said: “In the final analysis, the goodness or badness, the size of the effect, of the policies and practices of all political parties in China as manifested among the Chinese people depends on whether and to what extent they help the development of the productive forces of the Chinese people, and whether they fetter or liberate the productive forces. To eliminate the Japanese aggressors, to carry out land reform, to liberate the peasants, to develop modern industry, to build an independent, free, democratic, united, and prosperous new China—only all this can liberate the social productive forces of China and be welcomed by the Chinese people.” Here, the criterion of productive forces proposed by Mao does not refer to productive forces in general, but specifically to the productive forces of the New Democratic period, i.e., productive forces developed for the interests of the Chinese people. The concept of “the Chinese people” corresponds to the main forces developing productive forces in the New Democratic period. In this regard, Mao pointed out in *On the People’s Democratic Dictatorship* that during the New Democratic period, the liberation and development of social productive forces are consistent with the greatest interests of the broadest masses of the people; the working class, the peasant class, the urban petty bourgeoisie, and the national bourgeoisie are all main forces in the development of social productive forces; social productive forces can only be liberated and developed on the basis of realizing the greatest interests of the broadest masses of the people; and the thought of “the greatest interests of the broadest masses of the people” is premised on the liberation and development of social productive forces.

杨昌济所讲的功利主义“人生之目的乃最多数之最大幸福”的主张，对毛泽东提出最广大人民群众的最大利益是中国共产党人一切言论行动的最高标准产生了直接影响。在中国革命的具体的历史的实践中，毛泽东把这一中国共产党人一切言论行动的最高标准确定为为现在的新民主主义革命而奋斗与为将来的社会主义和共产主义而奋斗的这两个前后相继但又不能“毕其功于一役”的目标。毛泽东在《论联合政府》中指出：“只有经过民主主义，才能达到社会主义，这是马克思主义的天经地义。而在中国，为民主主义奋斗的时间还是长期的。没有一个新民主主义的联合统一的国家，没有新民主主义的国家经济的发展，没有私人资本主义经济和合作经济的发展，没有民族的科学的大众的文化即新民主主义文化的发展，没有几万万人民的个性的解放和个性的发展，一句话，没有一个由共产党领导的新式的资产阶级性质的彻底的民主革命，要想在殖民地半殖民地半封建的废墟上建立起社会主义社会来，那只是完全的空想。”毛泽东进一步指出，共产党人不怕而且提倡本国的资本主义在一定条件下的发展，因为与帝国主义和封建主义对中国人民的压迫相比，本国的资本主义发展是进步的且是不可避免的，“它不但有利于资产阶级，同时也有利于无产阶级，或者说更有利于无产阶级……我们共产党人根据自己对于马克思主义的社会发展规律的认识，明确地知道，在中国的条件下，在新民主主义的国家制度下，除了国家自己的经济、劳动人民的个体经济和合作经济之外，一定要让私人资本主义经济在不操纵国民生计的范围内获得发展的便利，才能有益于社会的向前发展。”基于此，毛泽东把中国共产党人一切言论行动的最高标准具体化为生产力标准。他说：“中国一切政党的政策及其实践在中国人民所表现的作用的好坏、大小，归根到底，看它对于中国人民的生产力的发展是否有帮助及其帮助之大小，看它是束缚生产力的，还是解放生产力的。消灭日本侵略者，实行土地改革，解放农民，发展现代工业，建立独立、自由、民主、统一和富强的新中国，只有这一切，才能使中国社会生产力获得解放，才是中国人民所欢迎的。”在这里，毛泽东提出的生产力标准，不是泛指一般的生产力，而是指具体的新民主主义时期的生产力，即为着中国人民的利益而发展的生产力。“中国人民”的概念是同新民主主义时期生产力发展的主体力量相对应的，对此，毛泽东在《论人民民主专政》中指出，在新民主主义时期，社会生产力的解放和发展同最广大人民群众的最大利益是一致的，工人阶级、农民阶级、城市小资产阶级和民族资产阶级都是社会生产力发展的主体力量，社会生产力只有在实现最广大人民群众的最大利益的基础上才能得到解放和发展，而“最广大人民群众的最大利益”的思想是以解放和发展社会生产力为前提的。

The highest standard for all words and actions of Chinese Communists — “the greatest interests of the broadest masses of the people” — was concretely manifested in the domestic revolutionary war, the War of Resistance Against Japan, and the War of Liberation led by the Communist Party of China. To summarize, the great revolutionary movement led by the Communist Party of China displayed the indomitable revolutionary will and dauntless spirit of self-sacrifice of Chinese Communists, who would go through fire and water for the supreme interests of the people and the nation. The land revolution in the base areas carried out by the Communist Party of China was aimed at enabling the vast peasantry to stand up and achieve liberation; it was a struggle for the fundamental interests of the people. As the mainstay of the entire nation’s War of Resistance Against Japan, the Communist Party of China, for the interests of the whole nation, united all forces that could be united, led the people and the people’s army to fight to the death with indomitable courage, and sustained the hope of the Chinese nation for national salvation and survival. The Communist Party of China led the War of Liberation, overthrew the rule of imperialism, bureaucratic capitalism, and feudalism in China, and established an independent, free, and democratic New China. From then on, the people became the masters of the new China and the new society, opening a broad path for achieving national prosperity, people’s happiness, and national rejuvenation. It was precisely in the great revolutionary process of practicing this highest standard for all words and actions of Chinese Communists that the connotation of the Communist Party of China’s purpose of “serving the people,” inherent in Mao Zedong’s thought of “proletarian revolutionary utilitarianism,” was fully demonstrated. In *On Coalition Government*, when discussing the army led by the Communist Party in the people’s war, Mao Zedong pointed out: “This army is powerful because all its members have a conscious discipline; they have come together and fight not for the private interests of a few or a narrow clique, but for the interests of the broad masses of the people and for the interests of the whole nation. Closely united with the Chinese people and serving them wholeheartedly — this is the sole purpose of this army.” “Serving the people,” as the purpose of the Communist Party of China and the people’s army, not only embodies the individual ethical consciousness forged by every Chinese Communist in the revolutionary struggle of diligently and conscientiously sacrificing themselves for the interests of the people but also embodies the ethical spirit of the political community condensed by Chinese Communists in the vigorous revolutionary cause of striving and creating for the interests of the people. As early as the period of the Second Revolutionary Civil War [23]23 The Second Revolutionary Civil War (1927–1937) refers to the period of the Chinese Civil War between the Communist Party of China and the Kuomintang, also known as the Ten-Year Civil War or the Agrarian Revolutionary War., in *On Correcting Mistaken Ideas in the Party*, Mao Zedong specifically criticized various individualistic non-proletarian ideas existing within the Fourth Red Army, such as vengefulness, small-group mentality, and hedonism. He pointed out that individualism “starts entirely from a personal point of view, unaware of class interests and the interests of the entire Party,” “pays attention only to the interests of its own small group, not to the interests of the whole,” and “goes to the big cities not to work but to enjoy pleasure,” calling it “a corrosive that weakens the organization and reduces its fighting capacity.” Mao Zedong’s criticism of various individualistic non-proletarian ideas had already clearly demonstrated the ethical consciousness and ethical spirit that Chinese Communists should possess. In the practice of the Chinese revolution, Mao Zedong further developed the ethical consciousness and ethical spirit that Chinese Communists should possess into the three principles he discussed in *On Coalition Government*: first, the principle of proceeding from the interests of the people in everything; second, the principle of maintaining close ties with the masses; and third, the principle of unifying responsibility to the people with responsibility to the Party. “Another notable hallmark distinguishing us Communists from any other political party is our closest ties with the broadest masses of the people. Our starting point is to serve the people wholeheartedly, never for a moment divorce ourselves from the masses, proceed in all matters from the interests of the people and not from the interests of individuals or small groups, and identify responsibility to the people with responsibility to the leading bodies of the Party. Communists must be ready at all times to uphold the truth, because truth is always in the interests of the people; Communists must be ready at all times to correct mistakes, because mistakes are always against the interests of the people.” Mao Zedong’s thought of “proletarian revolutionary utilitarianism” is truth because it conforms to the interests of the people and has been richly tested in the practice of the Chinese revolution and construction.

“最广大人民群众的最大利益”这一中国共产党人一切言论行动的最高标准，在中国共产党领导的国内革命战争、抗日战争与解放战争中得到了具体的展现。概括地讲，中国共产党领导的大革命运动展现了中国共产党为人民和民族的最高利益不惜赴汤蹈火的宁死不屈的革命意志和大无畏的自我牺牲精神。中国共产党开展的根据地的土地革命就是要让广大农民翻身得解放，就是为人民的根本利益而斗争。中国共产党作为全民族抗日战争的中流砥柱，为着全民族的利益，团结一切可以团结的力量，领导人民与人民军队宁死不屈、血战到底，支撑起中华民族救亡图存的希望。中国共产党领导解放战争，推翻了帝国主义、官僚资本主义、封建主义在中国的统治，建立了独立、自由、民主的新中国，人民从此成为新中国、新社会的主人，为实现国家富强、人民幸福、民族复兴开辟了广阔的道路。正是在践行这一中国共产党人一切言论行动的最高标准而进行的伟大革命进程中，毛泽东的“无产阶级的革命的功利主义”思想所蕴含的中国共产党“为人民服务”的宗旨意识得到了充分彰显。在《论联合政府》中，毛泽东在谈到人民战争中共产党领导的军队时指出：“这个军队之所以有力量，是因为所有参加这个军队的人，都具有自觉的纪律；他们不是为着少数人的或狭隘集团的私利，而是为着广大人民群众的利益，为着全民族的利益，而结合，而战斗的。紧紧地和中国人民站在一起，全心全意地为中国人民服务，就是这个军队的唯一宗旨。”“为人民服务”作为中国共产党与人民军队的宗旨，不仅体现了每一个中国共产党人在兢兢业业地为人民大众利益而自我牺牲的革命奋斗中淬炼而成的个体的伦理意识，而且体现了中国共产党人在轰轰烈烈的为人民大众利益而奋斗创造的革命事业中所凝聚成的政治共同体的伦理精神。早在第二次国内革命战争时期所著的《关于纠正党内的错误思想》中，毛泽东就专门对红四军党内存在的报复主义、小团体主义、享乐主义等各种个人主义的非无产阶级思想作了批评，指出个人主义“完全从个人观点出发，不知有阶级的利益和整个党的利益”，“只注意自己小团体的利益，不注意整体的利益”，“到大城市不是为了去工作，而是为了去享乐”，“这是一种削弱组织、削弱战斗力的销蚀剂”。毛泽东对各种个人主义的非无产阶级思想的批评，就已鲜明体现出中国共产党人应有的伦理意识与伦理精神。在中国革命的实践中，毛泽东把中国共产党人应有的伦理意识与伦理精神进一步发展为他在《论联合政府》中讲到的三个原则：一是一切从人民的利益出发的原则；二是密切联系群众的原则；三是向人民负责与向党负责相统一的原则。“我们共产党人区别于其他任何政党的又一个显著的标志，就是和最广大的人民群众取得最密切的联系。全心全意地为人民服务，一刻也不脱离群众；一切从人民的利益出发，而不是从个人或小集团利益出发；向人民负责和向党的领导机关负责的一致性；这些就是我们的出发点。共产党人必须随时准备坚持真理，因为任何真理都是符合于人民利益的；共产党人必须随时准备修正错误，因为任何错误都是不符合于人民利益的。”毛泽东的“无产阶级的革命的功利主义”思想是真理，因为它符合人民的利益，并在中国革命与建设的实践中得到了丰富的检验。

(Author’s bio: Miao Guishan, Professor and Master’s Supervisor, School of Marxism, Henan University of Science and Technology)

（作者简介：苗贵山，河南科技大学马克思主义学院教授、硕士生导师）

(Fund project: This article is a phased result of the National Social Science Fund Later-Stage Project “A Study of Utilitarianism in the Perspective of Marx and Engels” (20FKSB041) and the Henan Provincial Philosophy and Social Science Planning Project “A Textual Interpretation of Lefebvre’s *The Sociology of Marx*” (2021BKS011).)

（基金项目：本文系国家社会科学基金后期资助项目“马克思恩格斯视野中的功利主义研究”（20FKSB041）与河南省哲学社会科学规划项目“列斐伏尔《马克思的社会学》文本学解读”（2021BKS011）的阶段性成果）

Online editor: Tongxin

网络编辑：同心