Several Fundamental Issues in the Theoretical Study of the Socialist System with Chinese Characteristics

The socialist system with Chinese characteristics represents a new height of socialism in the development of human civilization, a new realm of Chinese civilization in its long historical evolution, and an epoch-making great creation in the history of human institutional civilization. General Secretary Xi Jinping points out: the socialist system with Chinese characteristics is “a system and governance system guided by Marxism, rooted in the soil of China, with a deep foundation in Chinese culture, and deeply supported by the people.”

中国特色社会主义制度，代表了社会主义在人类文明发展中的新高度，代表了中华文明在长期历史演进中发展的新境界，是人类制度文明史上划时代的伟大创造。习近平总书记指出：中国特色社会主义制度是“以马克思主义为指导、植根中国大地、具有深厚中华文化根基、深得人民拥护的制度和治理体系”。

China is a great civilized country with a history of more than 5,000 years and a representative of Eastern civilization; at the same time, China is also a great country that has successfully carried out socialist modernization and a representative of socialist civilization. The institutional civilization of socialism with Chinese characteristics, as a great creation in the history of human institutional civilization, has been formed and developed on the basis of actively absorbing and digesting all achievements of human civilization, including the more than 5,000 years of Chinese civilization. It inherently contains profound historical, theoretical, and practical logic, and possesses an academic system, a theoretical system, and a discourse system that belong both to itself and to human institutional civilization. It requires China’s philosophy and social science circles to reveal its inherent logic and present its complete system from a theoretical and academic perspective. This is the glorious mission and lofty responsibility for the flourishing development of Chinese philosophy and social science in the 21st century. Chinese philosophy and social science should, in this most autonomous, creative, and global academic exploration and research, truly move toward the world with a high-spirited posture of successfully constructing the academic system, theoretical system, and discourse system of China’s institutional construction theory.

中国是拥有5000多年文明史的文明大国，是东方文明的代表；同时，中国又是成功进行社会主义现代化建设的大国，是社会主义文明的代表。中国特色社会主义制度文明作为人类制度文明史上的伟大创造，是在积极吸收和消化包括5000多年中华文明在内的人类一切文明成果基础上形成和发展的，内在地蕴含深刻历史逻辑、理论逻辑和实践逻辑，拥有既属于自己、也属人类制度文明的学术体系、理论体系和话语体系，需要我国哲学社会科学界从理论和学理性上揭示其内在逻辑、呈现其完整体系。这是21世纪中国哲学社会科学繁荣发展的光荣使命和崇高责任。中国哲学社会科学理应在这最具自主性、创造性、世界性的学术探索和研究中，以成功构筑中国制度建设理论的学术体系、理论体系、话语体系的昂扬姿态，真正走向世界。

I. The Theoretical Foundation of the Socialist System with Chinese Characteristics is Marxism

一、中国特色社会主义制度的理论基础是马克思主义

It is universally recognized that, to date, the most systematic study, the most profound analysis, and the most scientific grasp of the laws of motion of capitalist society and the laws of development of human society belong to Marx and Marxism. General Secretary Xi Jinping points out: “From the publication of the *Communist Manifesto* to today, 170 years have passed, and human society has undergone earth-shaking changes, but the general principles expounded by Marxism as a whole remain entirely correct. We must adhere to and apply the worldview and methodology of dialectical materialism and historical materialism, adhere to and apply the Marxist stance, viewpoint, and method, adhere to and apply Marxist principles concerning the materiality of the world and its laws of development, concerning the naturalness, historicity, and related laws of human social development, concerning the laws of human liberation and free and comprehensive development, concerning the essence of cognition and its laws of development, and adhere to and apply the Marxist view of practice, the mass view, the class view, the view of development, and the view of contradiction, truly mastering, thoroughly understanding, and skillfully using Marxism, this essential skill.” The theoretical foundation of the socialist system with Chinese characteristics is Marxism. Only by “truly mastering, thoroughly understanding, and skillfully using Marxism, this essential skill,” as General Secretary Xi Jinping says, can we scientifically construct the theoretical system of the socialist system with Chinese characteristics.

全世界已有公认，到目前为止，对资本主义社会运动规律、对人类社会发展规律研究最系统、分析最深刻、把握最科学的，当属马克思以及马克思主义。习近平总书记指出：“从《共产党宣言》发表到今天，170年过去了，人类社会发生了翻天覆地的变化，但马克思主义所阐述的一般原理整个来说仍然是完全正确的。我们要坚持和运用辩证唯物主义和历史唯物主义的世界观和方法论，坚持和运用马克思主义立场、观点、方法，坚持和运用马克思主义关于世界的物质性及其发展规律，关于人类社会发展的自然性、历史性及其相关规律，关于人的解放和自由全面发展的规律，关于认识的本质及其发展规律等原理，坚持和运用马克思主义的实践观、群众观、阶级观、发展观、矛盾观，真正把马克思主义这个看家本领学精悟透用好。”中国特色社会主义制度的理论基础是马克思主义，只有像习近平总书记说的那样“真正把马克思主义这个看家本领学精悟透用好”，我们才能科学地构筑起中国特色社会主义制度理论体系。

Marx started from the study of ancient Greek philosophy, entered political economy from law and history, traced from modern times back to antiquity, and crossed from the West to the East. With his scientific method, grand vision, and meticulous observation, he originally explored the path to human liberation. Therefore, to grasp the relationships among different civilizations and to explore the essential differences between capitalist institutional civilization and socialist institutional civilization within the laws of human social development and the entire system of human civilization, we must adhere to the guidance of Marxism and fully excavate the “unique discoveries” that Marx had “in every field he studied,” thereby more comprehensively and systematically using the Marxist stance, viewpoint, and method to grasp the inherent logic and scientific system of the socialist system with Chinese characteristics, providing a scientific theoretical foundation and persuasive academic support for constructing the academic system, theoretical system, and discourse system of theoretical research on the socialist system with Chinese characteristics.

马克思从研究古希腊哲学起步，从法学、历史学进入政治经济学，从现代追溯到古代，从西方跨越到东方，以其科学的方法、宏大的视野、缜密的观察，独创性地探索实现人类解放的道路。因此，要在人类社会发展规律和整个人类文明体系中，把握不同文明的关系、探究资本主义制度文明和社会主义制度文明本质差别，就必须坚持以马克思主义为指导，充分挖掘“马克思在他所研究的每一个领域”都有的“独到的发现”，从而更全面系统地用马克思主义的立场、观点和方法把握中国特色社会主义制度的内在逻辑和科学体系，为构筑中国特色社会主义制度理论研究的学术体系、理论体系和话语体系，提供科学的理论基础和有说服力的学理支撑。

The socialist system with Chinese characteristics, as a type of institutional civilization, is both the product of the integration of the basic principles of Marxism with China’s actual conditions and the product of the integration of the socialist civilization established by scientific socialism with the more than 5,000 years of Chinese civilization. Therefore, scientifically grasping the theory of the socialist system with Chinese characteristics needs to be carried out simultaneously in two dimensions. One dimension is the dimension of the integration of the basic principles of Marxism with China’s actual conditions, which we often use and renew. The other dimension is the dimension of the integration of socialist civilization with Chinese civilization. The former dimension is the great creation of the Chinese Communists and the successful path of adapting Marxism to the Chinese context. The latter dimension originates from Marx’s most creative scientific exploration in his later years and is a new path envisioned by Marx from the perspective of historical philosophy for non-Western countries to reach socialist society.

作为一种制度文明的中国特色社会主义制度，既是马克思主义基本原理同中国实际相结合的产物，同时也是科学社会主义所奠定的社会主义文明，同5000多年中华文明相结合的产物。因此，科学把握中国特色社会主义制度理论，需要同时在两个维度上展开。一个维度是我们常用常新的马克思主义基本原理同中国实际相结合的维度；另一个维度是社会主义文明和中华文明相结合的维度。前一个维度，是中国共产党人的伟大创造，是马克思主义中国化的成功之路；后一个维度，源于马克思晚年最具创造性的科学探索，是马克思从历史哲学上为非西方国家展望的通往社会主义社会的新路。

In order to comprehensively reveal the laws of human social development, Marx shifted his research focus in his later years to prehistoric society and Eastern society. On the basis of a large number of anthropological notes, he formed two major theoretical achievements: first, he found the anthropological basis for humanity’s march toward communist society from primitive communism, arguing that communist society would be the revival of primitive communism at a higher level; second, he demonstrated that Russia could take the rural commune, which practiced common land ownership, as the “direct starting point” for moving toward future socialist society, without having to “pass through the Caudine Forks of the capitalist system.” [1]1 This is a quotation from Engels’s speech at Marx’s funeral (1883), summarizing Marx’s two great discoveries: the law of development of human history (historical materialism) and the special law of motion of capitalist production (surplus value theory). These two major theoretical achievements, formed on the basis of enriching and developing Marx’s historical materialism, opened up a path for non-Western countries that had not experienced the stage of capitalist development to directly explore the road to socialist society. The theoretical project by which Marx opened up this path, in addition to his anthropological investigation of prehistoric society and Eastern society, was his scientific research and precise grasp of the inherent limitations of the capitalist social formation.

为了全面揭示人类社会发展规律，马克思晚年把研究重心转向了史前社会和东方社会。他在大量人类学笔记基础上形成了两个重大理论成果：一是从原始共产主义中找到人类迈向共产主义社会的人类学依据，认为共产主义社会将是原始共产主义在高级形式下的复活；二是论证了俄国可把实行土地共有的农村公社，作为迈向未来社会主义社会的“直接出发点”，而不必“通过资本主义制度的卡夫丁峡谷”。这两个在丰富发展马克思唯物史观基础上形成的重大理论成果，打通了没有经历过资本主义发展阶段的非西方国家，可以直接探索迈向社会主义社会的道路。马克思打通这条道路的理论工程，除了对史前社会和东方社会的人类学考察之外，就是对资本主义社会形态内在局限性的科学研究和精准把握。

Marx believed that the reason Russia could take the rural commune as the direct starting point for moving toward socialist society was that Russia at that time was in an era when capitalism ruled the world, and it could directly absorb all the achievements of civilization created by humanity in the capitalist era, thereby moving toward socialism, without first having to go through the intermediate link of developing capitalism. In this way, Russia would both seize “the best opportunity that history could offer a nation” and avoid “suffering all the disastrous upheavals brought by the capitalist system.” [2]2 This is from Marx’s 1877 letter to the editor of the Russian journal *Otechestvennye Zapiski*, where he rejects the idea that his analysis of Western European capitalist development is a universal historical-philosophical theory applicable to all peoples. In Marx’s view, capitalism was not an inevitable necessity for Russia’s historical development. Marx pointed out that although capitalism had come to rule the world, the “historical inevitability” of moving toward capitalism was not necessarily applicable to all of humanity; it was “explicitly limited to the countries of Western Europe.” [3]3 This continues the same letter, where Marx specifies that the “historical inevitability” of the expropriation of the peasantry is limited to Western Europe, and that applying it to Russia would mean transforming common property into private property. In other words, although capitalist society is a necessary stage in the development of human society, it is not necessarily a historical stage that all countries and nations in the world must go through; on the contrary, as capitalism connects countries and nations into a world, it provides a realistic basis and creates a historical inevitability for all countries and nations to move together toward communism.

马克思认为，俄国之所以可以把农村公社作为通向社会主义社会的直接出发点，乃是因为那时的俄国正处于资本主义统治世界的时代，完全可通过直接吸收资本主义时代人类创造的一切文明成果，进而迈向社会主义，而不必先经历发展资本主义这个中间环节。这样，俄国就既抓住了“历史所能提供给一个民族的最好的机会”，又避免了“遭受资本主义制度所带来的一切灾难性的波折。”在马克思看来，资本主义对俄国来说并不是其历史发展的必然。马克思指出，虽然资本主义已统治了世界，但迈向资本主义的“历史必然性”，不必然是对全人类而言的，它是被“明确地限制在西欧各国的范围内”的。换言之，资本主义社会虽然是人类社会发展的必然阶段，但不必然是世界各国、各民族发展必经的历史阶段；相反，随着资本主义把各国、各民族联系成世界，资本主义却为各国、各民族共同迈向共产主义提供了现实基础、创造了历史必然。

Marx was a great thinker who “discovered the special law of motion of the modern capitalist mode of production and of the bourgeois society that this mode of production creates.” [1]1 This is a quotation from Engels’s speech at Marx’s funeral (1883), summarizing Marx’s two great discoveries: the law of development of human history (historical materialism) and the special law of motion of capitalist production (surplus value theory). By virtue of his profound grasp of the process and laws of the formation and development of capitalism in Western Europe, Marx believed that the Western European path of capitalist development was not a general development path that all countries in the world must follow. Marx clearly stated that those who “metamorphose my historical sketch of the genesis of capitalism in Western Europe into a historico-philosophical theory of the general path of development prescribed by fate to all peoples, whatever the historical circumstances in which they find themselves,” would “do me both too much honour and too much discredit.” [2]2 This is from Marx’s 1877 letter to the editor of the Russian journal *Otechestvennye Zapiski*, where he rejects the idea that his analysis of Western European capitalist development is a universal historical-philosophical theory applicable to all peoples. This is because “on the basis of the capitalist system, there is a complete separation between the producer and the means of production … the whole process is based on the expropriation of the peasant. This expropriation has only been carried out completely in England … but all the other countries of Western Europe are going through the same movement.” “Thus the ‘historical inevitability’ of this movement is expressly limited to the countries of Western Europe.” “In this Western movement, the question is the transformation of one form of private property into another form of private property,” while if a society like Russia, which possessed rural communes, were required to undergo this movement, it would be “to transform their common property into private property.” [3]3 This continues the same letter, where Marx specifies that the “historical inevitability” of the expropriation of the peasantry is limited to Western Europe, and that applying it to Russia would mean transforming common property into private property.

马克思是“发现了现代资本主义生产方式和它所产生的资产阶级社会的特殊的运动规律”的伟大思想家，凭借对西欧的资本主义形成发展过程和规律的深刻把握，马克思认为西欧资本主义发展道路，并不是世界各国都要遵循的一般发展道路。马克思明确指出，那些“把我关于西欧资本主义起源的历史概述彻底变成一般发展道路的历史哲学理论，一切民族，不管它们所处的历史环境如何，都注定要走这条道路”的做法，既“会给我过多的荣誉，同时也会给我过多的侮辱。”因为，“在资本主义制度的基础上，生产者和生产资料彻底分离了……全部过程的基础是对农民的剥夺。这种剥夺只是在英国才彻底完成了……但是，西欧的其他一切国家都正在经历着同样的运动。”“可见，这一运动的‘历史必然性’明确地限制在西欧各国。”“在这种西方的运动中，问题是把一种私有制形式变为另一种私有制形式”，而如果要求像俄国这样存在农村公社的社会也进行这种运动，那就是“要把他们的公有制变为私有制。”

Based on his profound analysis of these issues, Marx formed two important conclusions that are “universally applicable”: first, capitalism is not a historical necessity for the social development of all countries in the world, and therefore the capitalist system is not a system that all countries must implement; second, non-Western countries can take the social foundations inherited from ancient societies that have future significance as a starting point, actively absorb all the achievements of civilization created by humanity in the capitalist era, and directly advance toward a socialist society of a higher form than capitalism. Marx also particularly emphasized that in this regard “one should not be too frightened of the word ‘archaic’.” [4]4 This is from Marx’s 1881 draft reply to Vera Zasulich, where he discusses the possibility of the Russian rural commune serving as a starting point for socialist development without first passing through capitalism. Although these two important conclusions of Marx were not derived from an analysis of the historical development of Chinese society, they provide us with a very important guiding ideology, scientific theory, and logical starting point for practical exploration in studying the socialist system with Chinese characteristics, which is rooted in over 5,000 years of Chinese civilization.

马克思基于对这些问题的深刻分析，形成了两个“放之四海而皆准”的重要结论：一是资本主义不是世界各国社会发展的历史必然，因而，资本主义制度也不是世界各国都要实行的制度；二是非西方国家可将从古代社会延续下来的、具有未来意义的社会基础作为起点，通过积极吸收资本主义时代人类创造的一切文明成果，直接迈向比资本主义更高形态的社会主义社会。马克思还特别强调，在这方面“不应该过分地害怕‘古代’一词。”马克思的这两个重要结论，虽然不是在分析中国社会的历史发展中得出的，但却为我们研究根植5000多年中华文明的中国特色社会主义制度，提供了十分重要的指导思想、科学理论和实践探索的逻辑起点。

The above historical review and theoretical tracing enlighten us: to study the theory of the socialist system with Chinese characteristics, we must neither depart from Marxist theory nor simplify or conceptualize Marxist theory. We need to delve deeply into all the “truth” particles of the Marxist ideological system, theoretical system, and academic system, and conduct a comprehensive excavation and systematic collation. Only by putting in such deep effort can we construct the theory of the socialist system with Chinese characteristics on the foundation of Marxist theory. There is no other way.

以上的历史回顾和理论溯源启示我们：研究中国特色社会主义制度理论，既不能离开马克思主义理论，也不能把马克思主义理论简单化、概念化。我们需要深入马克思主义思想体系、理论体系、学术体系的所有“真理”的颗粒之中，进行全面挖掘、系统整理，唯有下这样的深功夫，才能在马克思主义理论的基础上构建起中国特色社会主义制度理论。舍此之外，别无他途。

II. The Historical Logical Starting Point of the Socialist System with Chinese Characteristics Lies in Chinese Civilization

二、中国特色社会主义制度的历史逻辑起点在中华文明

The socialist system with Chinese characteristics was formed in the historical development of China and possesses profound historical foundations. General Secretary Xi Jinping pointed out: “In the course of several thousand years of historical evolution, the Chinese nation created a splendid ancient civilization and formed a wealth of ideas on state systems and state governance,” “forming a set of state systems and state governance systems including systems for the imperial court, prefectures and counties, land, taxation, the imperial examination, supervision, and military affairs, among others.” [5]5 This is a quotation from Xi Jinping’s speech at the Third Plenary Session of the 19th Central Committee of the CPC (February 2018), discussing the historical origins of China’s state system. The historical logical starting point of the socialist system with Chinese characteristics lies precisely in this long-standing Chinese civilization.

中国特色社会主义制度是在中国历史发展中形成的，具有深厚的历史底蕴。习近平总书记指出：“在几千年的历史演进中，中华民族创造了灿烂的古代文明，形成了关于国家制度和国家治理的丰富思想”，“形成了一套包括朝廷制度、郡县制度、土地制度、税赋制度、科举制度、监察制度、军事制度等各方面制度在内的国家制度和国家治理体系”。中国特色社会主义制度的历史逻辑起点就在这具有悠久历史的中华文明之中。

Marx said, “History is serious.” [6]6 This is a paraphrase of a line from Marx’s *The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte* (1852), where he writes “Hegel remarks somewhere that all great world-historic facts and personages appear, so to speak, twice. He forgot to add: the first time as tragedy, the second time as farce.” The phrase “history is serious” is a common Chinese rendering of Marx’s attitude toward historical analysis. Every nation that has created a history of civilization has come from antiquity, and different developmental histories have forged different civilizations. Chinese civilization and Western civilization originated in different regions, starting from different historical logical starting points, each creating its own “Axial Age” of civilizational development that belongs both to itself and to humanity, and each forming an independent and complete civilizational system. Western civilization, which came from ancient Greece, went global in the capitalist era it created, influencing all human society; Chinese civilization, which came from the Xia, Shang, and Zhou dynasties, inaugurated the “Axial Age” of the Hundred Schools of Thought, forged a unified state pattern that lasted for 2,000 years, successfully crossed the “Caudine Forks” of the capitalist system, entered socialist society, and “became the only brilliant civilization in human history that has continued uninterrupted for over 5,000 years to the present day.” [7]7 This is a quotation from Xi Jinping’s speech at the Conference on Cultural Heritage and Cultural Exchange (2019), emphasizing the continuity of Chinese civilization. The development of Western civilization produced capitalist society and established the capitalist system, whereas Chinese civilization has no such genes at all.

马克思说过，“历史是认真的。”每一个创造了文明历史的民族，都是从古代走来的，不同的发展历史铸就了不同的文明。中华文明和西方文明发生于不同地域，从不同的历史逻辑起点出发，都各自创造了既属于自己、同时也属于人类的文明发展“轴心时代”，各自都形成了独立完整的文明体系。从古希腊走来的西方文明，在自己创造的资本主义时代走向世界，影响了整个人类社会；从夏商周走来的中华文明，开创了诸子百家的“轴心时代”，打造了维系2000年的大一统国家格局，成功跨过资本主义制度的“卡夫丁峡谷”，迈入社会主义社会，“成为人类历史上唯一一个绵延5000多年至今未曾中断的灿烂文明。”西方文明的发展产生了资本主义社会，确立了资本主义制度，而中华文明却根本没有这方面的基因。

Engels pointed out as early as in *The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State* that “the state is the summary of civilization,” and an important sign of a nation’s transition from barbarism to civilization is the replacement of clan society by the state. [8]8 This is a direct quotation from Engels’s *The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State* (1884), Chapter IX, where he summarizes the state as the product of irreconcilable class antagonisms. Marx and Engels believed that, from an anthropological perspective, primitive society was the initial social form experienced by all nations. Under different natural conditions, various nations formed different modes of production, ways of life, and modes of interaction in their production practices, thereby forming different social structures and social organizations, which determined that the forms in which nations emerged from primitive society and established states were different. Engels believed that Western society had at least three forms of state origin: Athenian, Roman, and Germanic. Marx’s scientific discoveries in the study of Eastern societies, however, showed that the three forms summarized by Engels could explain the West but not the East, because the Western states produced by these three forms were all formed on the basis of the development of private property, which plunged primitive society into severe class antagonism and ultimately led to its disintegration, whereas Eastern societies still retained rural communes based on common land ownership until the nineteenth century. In other words, Eastern states were not built on the ruins of primitive societies disintegrated by private property and class antagonism; on the contrary, they were built on the basis of rural communes evolved from clan communes. Therefore, Marx believed that Western capitalism was the product of “the transformation of one form of private property into another form of private property,” while if Eastern societies “once fell into the embrace of the capitalist system,” it would be a transformation from common property to private property; if so, Eastern societies would not be getting closer to socialism, but further away.

恩格斯早在《家庭、私有制和国家起源》中指出，“国家是文明社会的概括”，一个民族从野蛮时代迈入文明时代的重要标志，就是氏族社会被国家所代替。马克思和恩格斯认为，从人类学上讲，原始社会是各民族共同经历的最初社会形态，在不同的自然条件下，各民族在生产实践中形成了不同的生产方式、生活方式和交往方式，从而形成了不同的社会结构、社会组织，这决定了各民族走出原始社会并建立国家的形式是不同的。恩格斯认为，西方社会至少有雅典、罗马和德意志三种国家起源形式。而马克思在研究东方社会的科学发现则表明，恩格斯总结的这三种形式，能够说明西方、不能说明东方，因为由这三种形式产生的西方国家，都是在私有制的发展使原始社会陷入严重阶级对立、并最终走向解体的基础形成的，而东方社会直到十九世纪依然保留着以土地公有为基础的农村公社。换言之，东方国家不是建立在因私有制和阶级对抗而解体的原始社会废墟之上的，相反，是建立在从氏族公社演变而来的农村公社基础上。所以，马克思认为西方的资本主义是“一种私有制形式变为另一种私有制形式”的产物，而东方社会“一旦倒进资本主义制度的怀抱”，就是从公有制变成私有制；如果这样，东方社会就不是离社会主义越来越近了，而是越来越远了。

Because Eastern societies did not generate private land ownership, Engels believed that “in such places, state power appears in the form of despotism.” [9]9 This is a paraphrase of Engels’s argument in *Anti-Dühring* (1878) and *The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State*, where he links the absence of private land ownership in the East to the emergence of despotic state forms. Conversely, Western states, which originated from private property and class antagonism, formed different political systems according to the differences in the social class structure and antagonistic conditions determined by private property. This also explains why ancient Greece was a city-state, while the various states of China’s Spring and Autumn and Warring States periods uniformly implemented monarchical autocracy. It can be seen that from the very moment when the East and West each crossed the threshold of statehood, their respective institutional civilizations embarked on different development paths, creating two different types of political civilization.

由于东方社会没有产生土地私有制，恩格斯认为，“在这样的地方，国家政权便以专制政体的形式出现。”相反，从私有制和阶级对立中起源的西方各国，根据私有制所决定的社会阶级结构和对立状况的差异，形成了不同政体。这也就解释了古希腊是一种城邦，而中国春秋战国各诸侯国都统一实行君主专制政体的缘由所在。可见，从东西方各自迈进国家门槛的那时起，各自的制度文明就走上了不同发展道路，创造了两种不同的政治文明。

The *Communist Manifesto* points out: “The modern bourgeoisie is itself the product of a long course of development, of a series of revolutions in the modes of production and of exchange.” [10]10 This is a direct quotation from Marx and Engels’s *The Communist Manifesto* (1848), Section I, describing the historical development of the bourgeoisie. This “long course of development” is the process from the emergence of the state in ancient Greece; this “series of revolutions” is the series of revolutions and developments of private property that led to the disintegration of Western primitive society. Insofar as “modern bourgeois private property is based on class antagonisms, on the exploitation of some by others,” bourgeois private property differs from the private property of ancient Greek slaveholders only in form, not in essence. [11]11 This is a direct quotation from *The Communist Manifesto*, Section II, where Marx and Engels critique bourgeois private property as based on class exploitation. Therefore, Western civilization is inherently endowed with the soil for generating capitalism; capitalism is its historical necessity.

《共产党宣言》指出：“现代资产阶级本身是一个长期发展过程的产物，是生产方式和交换方式的一系列变革的产物。”这个“长期发展过程”，就是从古希腊产生国家以来的过程；这个“一系列变革”就是导致西方原始社会解体的私有制的一系列变革和发展。就“现代的资产阶级私有制是建立在阶级对立上面、建立在一些人对另一些人的剥削”而言，资产阶级私有制同古希腊奴隶主私有制仅有形式上差异，而无本质上的区别。所以，西方文明与生俱来地拥有产生资本主义土壤，资本主义是其发展的历史必然。

But in Chinese civilization, under the ancient sacred principle that “everywhere under heaven is the king’s land; every subject on the land is the king’s servant,” [12]12 "On the People's Democratic Dictatorship" (论人民民主专政) was a speech by Mao Zedong on June 30, 1949, commemorating the 28th anniversary of the founding of the CPC, which laid out the theoretical basis for the state system of the People's Republic of China. ancient Chinese society was always one in which the state held all land. Even though after the Qin dynasty successive dynasties saw varying degrees of a private land tendency allowing land annexation and sale, this did not fundamentally change the land ownership attribute of “everywhere under heaven is the king’s land.” Therefore, Chinese civilization could under no circumstances give rise to a capitalism based on developed private ownership. It is precisely because the Communist Party of China clearly recognizes this that it long ago made a scientific judgment on the nature of Chinese society: “Chinese society over the past three thousand years was a feudal society,” and after the Opium War of 1840 it became a semi-colonial and semi-feudal society, not a capitalist society. Comrade Mao Zedong said: “To recognize the nature of Chinese society, that is, to recognize China’s national conditions, is the fundamental basis for recognizing all revolutionary problems.” [13]13 Mao Zedong, “On New Democracy” (1940). China’s revolutionary path was explored on the basis of this epistemology. This path not only clarified the targets, tasks, driving forces, and nature of the Chinese revolution, but also clarified the revolution’s prospects and path, namely, first to complete a “revolution of a bourgeois-democratic nature” led by the Communist Party of China—that is, the New Democratic Revolution—“and to prepare to shift it to the stage of socialist revolution when all necessary conditions are in place.”

但在中华文明中，在“普天下之，莫非王土；率土之滨，莫非王臣”的古老神圣原则之下，古代中国社会一直是由国家掌握所有土地，即使秦之后历代王朝都不同程度出现了土地可以兼并买卖的土地私有倾向，也没有根本改变“普天之下，莫非王土”的土地所有属性。因此，中华文明无论如何也不可能产生出以发达私有制为基础的资本主义。中国共产党正是因为清楚地认识到这一点，所以对中国社会性质早就作出了科学判断：“中国过去三千年来的社会是封建社会”，1840年的鸦片战争之后的社会是半殖民地半封建的社会，而不是资本主义社会。毛泽东同志说：“认清中国社会的性质，就是说，认清中国的国情，乃是认清一切革命问题的基本的根据。”中国的革命道路就是在这样的认识论基础上探索出来的。这条道路不仅明确了中国革命的对象、任务、动力和性质，而且明确了革命的前途和路径，即先完成由中国共产党领导的“资产阶级民主主义性质的革命”，即新民主主义的革命，“并准备在一切必要条件具备的时候把它转变到社会主义革命的阶段上去”。

It is precisely on the basis of a scientific grasp of the nature of Chinese society that the Communist Party of China, during the revolutionary period, accurately positioned the form of state power organization for China after the victory of the revolution, thereby prescribing the form and laying the foundation for the socialist system with Chinese characteristics that would later take shape. In 1940, Comrade Mao Zedong clearly stated in *On New Democracy* that China’s social nature and class structure determined that the republic established after the victory of the New Democratic Revolution would be neither a bourgeois dictatorship republic nor a Soviet-style proletarian dictatorship republic, but “can only be a democratic republic under the joint dictatorship of all anti-imperialist and anti-feudal people led by the proletariat.” The state system would be the joint dictatorship of all revolutionary classes, and the form of government would be democratic centralism.

正是基于对中国社会性质的科学把握，中国共产党在革命年代就准确定位了革命胜利之后中国国家政权组织形式，为此后形成的中国特色社会主义制度规定了形态、奠定了基础。1940年，毛泽东同志在《新民主主义论》中明确指出，中国的社会性质和阶级结构，决定了新民主主义革命成功后建立的共和国，既不是资产阶级专政共和国，也不是苏联式的无产阶级专政共和国，“只能是在无产阶级领导下的一切反帝反封建的人们联合专政的民主共和国，”国体是各革命阶级联合专政，政体是民主集中制。

The above historical review and theoretical tracing enlighten us: Chinese civilization, especially Chinese institutional civilization, never possessed the genes to produce a capitalist system. Yet it provided a historical-logical starting point for the establishment and development of the socialist system with Chinese characteristics in our country, and also provided a rich historical and cultural foundation for the growth, development, and perfection of the socialist system with Chinese characteristics rooted in Chinese society.

以上的历史回顾和理论溯源启迪我们：中华文明特别是中华制度文明，从来就没有产生资本主义制度的基因，但它却为中国特色社会主义制度在我国的确立和发展，提供了历史逻辑起点，也为根植中国社会的中国特色社会主义制度成长、发展和完善提供了丰厚的历史和文化基础。

III. The Socialist System with Chinese Characteristics Is Highly Compatible with the Development of Chinese Civilization

三、中国特色社会主义制度高度契合中华文明发展

In April 2014, General Secretary Xi Jinping visited Europe, the birthplace of Western civilization, and said in a speech at the College of Europe in Bruges: “Among the world’s several major ancient civilizations, Chinese civilization is one that has continued uninterrupted to the present day, with a history of more than five thousand years.” [14]14 From the *Book of Rites* (*Liji*), “The Mean” (*Zhongyong*). For Chinese civilization, which has continued uninterrupted for more than five thousand years to the present day, the socialist system with Chinese characteristics is both the latest civilizational achievement of its development over several thousand years and the fundamental guarantee for its continued march toward an even more glorious future. Both history and reality show that the socialist system with Chinese characteristics is highly compatible with the development of Chinese civilization.

2014年4月习近平总书记访问西方文明的发源地——欧洲，在布鲁日欧洲学院的演讲中说道：“在世界几大古代文明中，中华文明是没有中断、延续发展至今的文明，已经有五千多年历史了。”对于延续5000多年至今未曾中断中华文明来说,中国特色社会主义制度，既是其历经几千年发展至今的最新文明成果,也是其继续迈向更加辉煌未来的根本保证。历史和现实都表明，中国特色社会主义制度高度契合中华文明发展。

Both Chinese and Western civilizations possess rich achievements in institutional civilization, but their emphases differ. Western civilization emphasizes the institutional arrangement of the form of government, while Chinese civilization emphasizes the institutional arrangement of governance. The institutional arrangement of the form of government—that is, the political system—addresses the configuration and organization of state power; the institutional arrangement of governance addresses the organization and operation of state governance. Although the arrangement of the political system determines the governance system and methods, it cannot determine whether governance is good or bad. The fact that various forms of government in ancient Greek city-states all experienced mutinies due to governance problems fully illustrates this point. The political system that ran through several thousand years of ancient Chinese history was the autocratic monarchy. Under the consistent practice of “a hundred dynasties all follow the Qin political system,” [15]15 From the *Book of Documents* (*Shangshu*), “The Great Declaration” (*Taishi*). the Chinese nation created a highly developed institutional system for state governance, enabling the vast territory, large population, and multi-ethnic Chinese land to maintain a unified pattern for several thousand years, creating a unique miracle of state governance in the history of human civilization.

中西文明都拥有丰富的制度文明成就，但两者的侧重点有所不同，西方文明侧重政体的制度安排，中华文明则侧重治理的制度安排。政体的制度安排，即政治制度，解决的是国家权力的配置和组织；而治理制度安排解决的是国家治理的组织和运行。政治制度安排虽然决定治理体系和方式，但它不能决定治理的好坏，古希腊城邦各种政体，都因治理问题而发生兵变的事实充分说明了这一点。而贯穿几千年中国古代历史的政治制度，就是君主专制政体。在“百代都行秦政法”的一贯制下，中华民族创造了十分发达的关于国家治理的制度体系，使地域广阔、人口众多、民族多元的中华大地，在几千年时间里始终保持着大一统的格局，创造了人类文明发展史上独一无二的国家治理奇迹。

Whether in Western civilization or Chinese civilization, the process of their formation and development is one in which institutions and civilization mutually shape and promote each other. Therefore, Western institutions have the stipulations of Western civilization, and Chinese institutions likewise have the stipulations of Chinese civilization. Although modern Western institutions are completely different from ancient Greek city-state institutions in their construction principles, organizational forms, and modes of operation, the civilizational stipulations upheld by Western institutions in both eras are the same: they all take the institutional arrangement of rights and power as the axis of institutional construction. In contrast, in Chinese civilization, institutions before and after the pre-Qin period differed greatly—before the Qin it was the Zhou system, after the Qin it was the Qin system—but the civilizational stipulations of the institutions they upheld were the same: they all arranged the institutional system of state governance around the relationship between pacifying the people and bringing peace to the world.

不论西方文明，还是中华文明，其形成和发展的过程都是制度和文明相互塑造、相互促进的过程，因此，西方制度有西方文明的规定性，中国制度同样有中华文明的规定性。虽然现代西方制度在建构原则、组织形态和运行方式上完全不同于古希腊城邦制度，但是两个时代的西方制度所秉承的文明规定性却是共同的，即都是把权利和权力的制度性安排作为制度建构的轴心。反观中华文明，先秦前后的制度有很大差异，秦前是周制，秦后是秦制，但秉承的制度文明规定性却是相同的，都是围绕安民和平天下这对关系来安排国家治理的制度体系。

Civilization is the basis of the rationality and effectiveness of institutions; institutions are the guarantee of the continuation and development of civilization. Once institutions and civilization deviate from each other, institutions will decay and civilization will perish. The Western Renaissance, while achieving the separation of humans and gods, also achieved the integration of modern institutions and the Western civilizational tradition. The “crisis of substance and function” [16]16 From the *Book of Rites* (*Liji*), “The Conveyance of Rites” (*Liyun*). in modern China caused by the invasion of Western powers was essentially a crisis brought about by institutional failure and civilizational anomie. To save the nation from peril, people began to learn from the West, hoping to use Western institutions to transform China and continue Chinese civilization. The first experiment was carried out in the form of “Chinese substance, Western function,” [17]17 Ibid. aiming to learn from the West, reform the traditional autocratic monarchy, and implement a constitutional monarchy. The second experiment was carried out in the form of “Western substance, Chinese function,” [18]18 The traditional Chinese concept of political and cultural unity under a single central authority. after the Revolution of 1911 overthrew feudal rule, implementing wholesale Westernization. In the national anthem of the Republic of China, which called for “emulating the

文明是制度合理性和有效性的基础；而制度则是文明延续和发展的保证。一旦制度和文明相互背离，制度会颓败，文明也会消亡。西方文艺复兴在实现人和神分离的同时，也实现了现代制度和西方文明传统的合体。由西方列强入侵导致的近代中国“体用危机”，实质上就是制度失效、文明失范所带来的危机。为了挽救民族危亡，人们开始学习西方，想用西方的那套制度来改造中国，延续中华文明。第一次实验是以“中体西用”方式进行的，指望通过学习西方，改革传统君主专制，搞君主立宪制；第二次实验是以“西体中用”方式进行的，辛亥革命推翻封建统治后，搞全盘西化，在“揖美追欧，旧邦新造”的中华民国国歌声中，引进欧美制度，在中国搞资本主义。两次实验，虽然在两种社会状态下进行、由两种力量承担、用两种方式进行，但都以失败告终。这足以说明：一个社会实行什么样的制度，不是人的主观意志所能决定的，根本上还是决定于特定的社会、历史和文化，决定于社会发展的内在规律，决定于社会发展所处的时代潮流。

On the eve of the founding of New China, Comrade Mao Zedong, in his important article "On the People's Democratic Dictatorship" concerning the state system of New China, provided a syllogistic analysis of the historical logic behind China's choice of the socialist system: first, "Since the failure of the Opium War in 1840, advanced Chinese, after untold hardships, sought truth from the Western countries." Second, "The Chinese learned a great deal from the West, but it did not work; their ideals could never be realized." Moreover, this Western "teacher" constantly "bullied the student," thereby "shattering the Chinese dream of learning from the West." Third, "The Chinese found Marxism-Leninism, the universally applicable truth, and the face of China began to change." [12]12 "On the People's Democratic Dictatorship" (论人民民主专政) was a speech by Mao Zedong on June 30, 1949, commemorating the 28th anniversary of the founding of the CPC, which laid out the theoretical basis for the state system of the People's Republic of China. This syllogistic analysis logically explains the historical inevitability of China's choice of the socialist system.

新中国成立前夕，毛泽东同志就新中国的国家制度发表的重要文章《论人民民主专政》中，对中国选择社会主义制度的历史逻辑，给出了一个三段论式的分析：其一，“自从一八四〇年鸦片战争失败那时起，先进的中国人，经过千辛万苦，向西方国家寻找真理。”其二，“中国人向西方学得很不少，但是行不通，理想总是不能实现”，不仅如此，西方这位“先生”还老是“侵略学生”，从而“打破了中国人民学西方的迷梦”。其三，“中国人找到了马克思列宁主义这个放之四海而皆准的普遍真理，中国的面目就起了变化”。这个三段论式分析，合乎逻辑地解释了中国选择社会主义制度的历史必然性。

First, the historical inevitability of the Chinese people’s choice of socialism. To begin with, while modern China experienced the bankruptcy of practicing capitalism, liberal capitalism also faced various crises worldwide. Using socialism to rescue capitalism from crisis was the inevitable choice of that era, and using socialism to rescue the Chinese nation from peril was the sole choice of the modern Chinese people. Second, the success of the socialist revolution in a large country like Russia brought not only to China but also to the world unprecedented new hope, new direction, and new paths. The success of the October Revolution, on the one hand, brought Marxism-Leninism to the Chinese people, providing them with an ideological and theoretical weapon for scientifically understanding, grasping, and transforming society; on the other hand, it brought the Chinese people a completely new hope and choice, thereby awakening the entire Chinese people who were groping in the dark, enabling “the Chinese people to shift from passivity to initiative in spirit.” [13]13 Mao Zedong, “On New Democracy” (1940). Just as theory, once grasped by the masses, becomes a material force, so practice, once it becomes conscious and proactive, turns into a powerful social movement.

一是中国人民选择社会主义的历史必然。首先，近代中国在实践资本主义遭遇破产的同时，自由资本主义也在世界范围面临各种危机，用社会主义挽救资本主义危机是那个时代的必然选择，而用社会主义挽救中华民族危亡则是现代中国人民的唯一选择。其次，社会主义革命在俄国这样的大国取得成功，不仅给中国，而且给世界带来了前所未有的新希望、新方向和新路径。十月革命的成功，一方面给中国人民带来了马克思列宁主义，使中国人民有了科学认识世界、把握世界和改造社会的思想理论武器；另一方面也给中国人民带来一个全新的希望和选择，从而唤醒在黑暗中摸索的全体中国人民，使“中国人在精神上就由被动转入主动” 。如同理论一经掌握群众、就会变成物质力量一样，实践一旦转为自觉和主动，就会成为强大的社会运动。

Second, the historical inevitability of Chinese civilization trending toward socialism. Chinese civilization imposes two major civilizational determinations on the Chinese system: first, pacifying the people — “Man is the heart of heaven and earth,” [14]14 From the *Book of Rites* (*Liji*), “The Mean” (*Zhongyong*). “The people are the foundation of the state” [15]15 From the *Book of Documents* (*Shangshu*), “The Great Declaration” (*Taishi*). — the people are the soul of Chinese civilization, and pacifying the people is the foundation of the Chinese system. Second, pacifying all under heaven — near at hand, “all under heaven are one family”; [16]16 From the *Book of Rites* (*Liji*), “The Conveyance of Rites” (*Liyun*). far-reaching, “the Great Harmony under heaven” [17]17 Ibid. — its basis is ensuring that the Chinese nation and the land of China are always perpetuated within the pattern of “great unification.” [18]18 The traditional Chinese concept of political and cultural unity under a single central authority. “Great unification is the constant principle of heaven and earth, the universal truth through the ages.” [19]19 From the *Book of Han* (*Hanshu*), “Biography of Dong Zhongshu” (*Dong Zhongshu Zhuan*). Therefore, when modern China fell into total crisis and the Chinese nation suffered unprecedented hardship, for Chinese civilization to be preserved and continued, it naturally inclined toward a socialist system capable of achieving people’s liberation and maintaining national unity. All the theories and practices that the Chinese people experimented with showed that the capitalist system, which could not align in value with Chinese civilization, also failed in practice to realize the eternal political ideals of the Chinese nation — people-centeredness and national unification. Hence it was “cast aside like a worn-out shoe” [20]20 A classical Chinese idiom meaning to discard something as worthless. by the Chinese people.

二是中华文明趋向社会主义的历史必然。中华文明对中国制度形成了两大文明规定性：一是安民，“人者，天地之心也”，“民者，国之基也”，人民为中华文明之魂，安民为中华制度之本。二是平天下，近则“天下一家”，远则“天下大同”，其基础就是确保中华民族和中华大地始终延续在“大一统”的格局之中。“大一统者，天地之常经，古今之通谊也。”因此，当近代中国陷入全面危机、中华民族遭受前所未有苦难的时候，中华文明要保存、要延续，就自然而然地倾向能够实现人民解放、维系国家统一的社会主义制度。中国人试验过的所有理论和实践都表明，在价值上同中华文明难以契合的资本主义制度，在实践上也实现不了中华民族千古不变的人民本位和国家一统的政治理想，因此它才会被中国人民“弃之如蔽履”。

History and practice show that the Chinese nation, whether in ancient times or in the contemporary era, has been able to create effective systems ensuring the flourishing development of Chinese civilization, proceeding from the determinations of that civilization. The socialist system with Chinese characteristics has created two miracles rarely seen in the world: rapid economic development and long-term social stability, enabling the Chinese nation to achieve a great leap from standing up and growing prosperous to becoming strong. Over 5,000 years of Chinese civilization have laid the civilizational foundation of the socialist system with Chinese characteristics, while the socialist system with Chinese characteristics in the New Era continues and develops Chinese civilization and propels it toward great rejuvenation.

历史和实践表明，中华民族不论在古代，还是在当代，都能够从中华文明的规定性出发，创造确保中华文明繁荣发展的有效制度。中国特色社会主义制度创造了世所罕见的经济快速发展和社会长期稳定这两大奇迹，使中华民族迎来了从站起来、富起来到强起来的伟大飞跃。中华5000多年文明奠定了中国特色社会主义制度的文明根基，而中国特色社会主义制度在新时代则延续和发展了中华文明、并推动其迈向伟大复兴。

IV. The Institutional Mechanism of the Socialist System with Chinese Characteristics Forms a System of Its Own

四、中国特色社会主义制度的制度机理自成体系

The system of people’s congresses is the fundamental political system of our country and a great creation of the Party and the people. At the conference celebrating the 60th anniversary of the founding of the National People’s Congress, General Secretary Xi Jinping revealed the secret of the success of our political system: it is rooted in our own history and reality, firmly planting the roots of the system in Chinese soil, independently creating the system so that it forms a system of its own. He profoundly pointed out: “In designing and developing the political system of a country, we must pay attention to the organic unity of history and reality, theory and practice, form and content. We must proceed from national conditions and reality, grasp both the long-formed historical heritage and the development path traversed, the political experience accumulated, and the political principles formed, and also grasp the requirements of reality and focus on solving real problems. We cannot sever history, nor can we imagine suddenly moving in a ‘peak flown in from elsewhere’ in the political system.” [21]21 Xi Jinping, “Speech at the Conference Celebrating the 60th Anniversary of the Founding of the National People’s Congress” (2014). “In terms of political systems, seeing that other countries have something we do not, we simply think we are lacking and want to copy it; or seeing that we have something other countries do not, we simply think it is superfluous and want to remove it. Both views are simplistic and one-sided, and therefore both are incorrect.” [22]22 Ibid. “Only a system rooted in its own soil and absorbing sufficient nutrients is the most reliable and the most effective.” [23]23 Ibid. The reason we today have a solid foundation for confidence in our system is precisely that the socialist system with Chinese characteristics is a system that forms a system of its own.

人民代表大会制度是我国的根本政治制度，是党和人民的伟大创造。在庆祝全国人民代表大会成立六十周年大会上，习近平总书记道出了我国政治制度的成功秘诀：这就是立足自己的历史和现实，把制度的根牢牢扎在中国大地上，自主创造制度，使制度自成体系。他深刻指出：“设计和发展国家政治制度，必须注重历史和现实、理论和实践、形式和内容有机统一。要坚持从国情出发、从实际出发，既要把握长期形成的历史传承，又要把握走过的发展道路、积累的政治经验、形成的政治原则，还要把握现实要求、着眼解决现实问题，不能割断历史，不能想象突然就搬来一座政治制度上的‘飞来峰’。”“在政治制度上，看到别的国家有而我们没有就简单认为有欠缺，要搬过来；或者，看到我们有而别的国家没有就简单认为是多余的，要去除掉。这两种观点都是简单化的、片面的，因而都是不正确的。”“只有扎根本国土壤、汲取充沛养分的制度，才最可靠、也最管用。”我们今天之所以有强大的制度自信底气，就在于中国特色社会主义制度是自成体系的制度。

The capitalist system is the concentrated embodiment of Western civilization, a system for realizing the rule of capital and safeguarding the interests of the bourgeoisie. As the *Communist Manifesto* clarifies: “The modern state power is merely a committee for managing the common affairs of the entire bourgeoisie.” [24]24 Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, *The Communist Manifesto* (1848). The class nature of the Western system is sufficient to indicate the enormous differences between the Chinese and Western systems. However, to grasp the differences between Chinese and Western systems from the perspective of civilizational systems, we must delve deeper into the institutional mechanism. Looking through history, the socialist system with Chinese characteristics, rooted in Chinese society, is completely different in mechanism from the Western system. It is original, pioneering, and unique, and it forms a system entirely of its own.

资本主义制度是西方文明的集中体现，是实现资本统治，维护资产阶级利益的制度，正如《共产党宣言》所阐明的：“现代的国家政权不过是管理整个资产阶级的共同事务的委员会罢了。”西方制度的阶级属性，足以表明中西制度的巨大差异。但是，从制度文明上来把握中西制度的差异，还需要深入制度的机理之中。纵观古今，根植中国社会的中国特色社会主义制度在机理上同西方制度完全不同，它属于原创、首创和独创，并且完全自成体系。

First, the mechanism of system generation. From the history of human civilization, the Western system emerged with the appearance of private ownership and developed with the evolution of private ownership; Chinese civilizational systems were generated on the basis of state ownership of land; the contemporary socialist system with Chinese characteristics is built on the foundation of socialist public ownership.

第一、制度生成机理。从人类文明发展史来看，西方制度是随着私有制的出现而出现、并随着私有制演变而发展的；中国制度文明是在土地国家所有的基础上生成；当代中国特色社会主义制度建立在社会主义公有制基础之上。

Looking at the historical logical premises of the socialist system with Chinese characteristics and the Western capitalist system, our country takes the liberation of the masses of the people as its premise and the people being masters of the country as its foundation; the West, by contrast, takes individual liberation as its premise and egoistic individual freedom as its foundation. Marx believed that the political liberation brought by the bourgeois revolution, on the one hand, turns people “into egoistic, independent individuals, and on the other hand, into citizens, into legal persons.” [25]25 Karl Marx, “On the Jewish Question” (1843). The Western capitalist system is formed on the basis of civil society composed of egoistic individuals and the society of citizens composed of legal persons. Civil society and the society of citizens are merely different forms of expression of capitalist society; in essence, both are societies composed of atomized, egoistic individuals, where “there is no other bond between man and man than naked self-interest, than callous ‘cash payment’.” [26]26 Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, *The Communist Manifesto* (1848).

从中国特色社会主义制度和西方资本主义制度的历史逻辑前提看，我国是以人民大众的解放为前提、以人民当家作主为基础；而西方则是以个体解放为前提，以利己的个人自由为基础。马克思认为，资产阶级革命所带来的政治解放一方面把人“变成利己的、独立的个人，另一方面把人变成公民，变成法人。”西方的资本主义制度，就是在利己个人构成的市民社会和法人公民构成的公民社会基础上形成的，市民社会和公民社会，只是资本主义社会的不同表现形式，本质上都是原子化的、利己的个人组成的社会，“人和人之间除了赤裸裸的利害关系，除了冷酷无情的‘现金交易’，就再也没有任何别的联系了。”

This difference in the mechanism of system generation is like how, in nature, whatever seed is sown determines what flower blooms and what fruit is borne.

这种制度生成机理的差异，就像自然界中栽什么种子开什么花、结什么果一样。

Second, the mechanism of system function. Engels, from the origin of the state in the West, concluded that the state is the product of irreconcilable class contradictions, a third force mediating class antagonism, standing above society. [27]27 Friedrich Engels, *The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State* (1884). Therefore, any class, in order to seize state power, must present itself as the representative of the whole society and attempt in practice to have the state play a relatively autonomous role.

第二，制度功能机理。恩格斯从西方国家起源中得出国家是阶级矛盾不可调和的产物、是调和阶级对抗的第三种力量、超越于社会之上的结论。因此，任何阶级为了掌握国家权力，都要把自己说成全社会的代表，并试图在实践中让国家扮演相对自主性的角色。

However, in China, whether in the ancient state system or in the contemporary socialist system with Chinese characteristics, the core function is to ensure the unity of state order and social development, achieving effective governance for national peace and the people’s well-being. This state order does not arise from irreconcilable class antagonism but from the operation and development of the social organism itself. Under the conditions of socialist society with Chinese characteristics, it arises from the social operation that continuously liberates and develops social productive forces, and liberates and develops social vitality.

然而，在中国，不论是古代国家制度，还是当代中国特色社会主义制度，其核心功能都是确保国家秩序和社会发展的统一，实现国泰民安的有效治理。这个国家秩序不是生成于不可调和的阶级对抗，而是生成于社会有机体的自身运行和发展，在中国特色社会主义社会条件下，生成于不断解放和发展社会生产力、解放和发展社会活力的社会运行之中。

Third, the mechanism of system design. First, the logical starting points of Chinese and Western system design differ. The German sociologist Ferdinand Tönnies, regarding Western capitalist society, distinguished “society” from “community” from the perspective of social philosophy, arguing that “in community, despite all separation, there remains connection; in society, despite all connection, there remains separation.” [28]28 Ferdinand Tönnies, *Community and Society* (1887). Such a “society” is precisely what Marx called bourgeois civil society. Therefore, the logical starting point of Western system design is the egoistic individual; the logical starting point of Chinese system design is the people as a national community, a community with a shared future — that is, taking the entire people, the Chinese nation, as the logical starting point.

第三，制度设计机理。一是中西制度设计的逻辑起点不同。德国社会学家斐迪南·滕尼斯针对西方资本主义社会，从社会哲学的角度，把“社会”同“共同体”区别开来，认为“在共同体里，尽管有种种的分离，仍然保持着结合；在社会里，尽管有种种的结合，仍然保持着分离”。这样的“社会”，就是马克思讲的资产阶级的市民社会。因此，西方制度设计的逻辑起点是利己的个人；而中国制度设计的逻辑起点是民族共同体、命运共同体的人民，即以全体人民、以中华民族为逻辑起点。

Second, the theoretical systems of Chinese and Western institutional design differ. The divergence in theoretical systems is related not only to different logical starting points but also to the inherent logic of the theories themselves. In the Western theoretical system, the individual, as the logical starting point of Western institutions, is not a real person but an abstract one. Specifically, each individual is abstracted as a rational person, who, by virtue of “natural rights,” enters into a “social contract” to form the state. To ensure individual freedom, state institutions are arranged according to the principle of separation of powers and checks and balances. Consequently, the legitimacy of Western institutions derives not from the reasonable demands of real society but from the absolute rationality of the rational person. In contrast, Marxist theory directly establishes state institutions on the basis of human practical activity, emphasizing that productive forces determine relations of production, and the economic base determines the superstructure. State institutions take shape in the course of social development and safeguard and propel that development; they are not eternal but must evolve with society. Socialist institutions are always oriented toward realizing the comprehensive development of humanity and society.

二是中西制度设计的理论体系不同。理论体系的差异，除了与逻辑起点不同有关之外，还与理论本身的逻辑不同有关。在西方理论体系中，作为西方制度逻辑起点的个人，不是现实的人，而是抽象的人，具体来说，就是把每个个体都抽象为一种理性人，由理性人凭借“天赋人权”签订“社会契约”组成国家，为了保证个人自由，按三权分立制衡原则安排国家制度。于是，西方制度的合理性不是来自现实社会的合理要求，而是来自理性人的绝对理性。而马克思主义理论是直接把国家制度确立在人的实践活动基础上，强调生产力决定生产关系，经济基础决定上层建筑，国家制度在社会发展中形成并保障和推动社会发展，它不是永恒的，而是必须随社会发展而发展，社会主义制度都是着眼于实现人和社会全面发展的制度。

Fourth, the structural mechanism of institutions. Western institutions possess an inherent fragmentation: first, fragmentation caused by class conflict, as seen in multiparty politics; second, fragmentation resulting from the binary division between society and the state, as evidenced by the fact that even in the United States and the United Kingdom, which emphasize centralization, various centrifugal forces constantly arise from the retention of inherent powers by localities; third, fragmentation arising from the tension between individual rights and state interests, such as the mutual conflicts among state power departments swayed by interest groups.

第四，制度结构机理。西方制度具有内在的分散性：一是由阶级冲突导致的分散性，如多党政治；二是由社会和国家二元分化导致的分散性，正如即使强调中央集权的美国和英国，至今都时时面临着因地方保留其固有权力而产生种种离心力；三是由个人权利和国家利益紧张导致的分散性，如国家权力部门受利益集团左右而产生的相互冲突。

From ancient times to the present, China’s institutions have differed from those of the West, consistently maintaining an inherent wholeness. First, wholeness derived from the organic nature of the community: the state is a unified organic whole, not an aggregate of parts. Sun Yat-sen believed that the American federal system moved from dispersion to centralization, but if China were to adopt federalism, it would move from centralization to dispersion. This is because Chinese society, unified for millennia, has always existed as a holistic entity. Second, wholeness derived from the principle that the people are the foundation of the state. The belief that the people are the foundation of the state is an eternal conviction of the Chinese nation; putting the people at the center is the unwavering purpose of successive generations of Chinese Communists. This determines that state power cannot belong to any special social interest group but must forever belong to the entire people. Third, wholeness derived from the integration of state and society. In China, the state and society have from ancient times to the present maintained a relationship of mutual interdependence and mutual determination; the state is not a force transcending society. The “social republic” that Marx discovered in the practice of the Paris Commune was precisely about reclaiming the state, which had been seized by the bourgeoisie, into the hands of the entire people, returning it to society so that it would no longer be an instrument of bourgeois rule but a tool for the united social laborers to realize the overall interests of society. Therefore, under the socialist system with Chinese characteristics, China’s state and society are organically unified.

中国的制度从古至今，都与西方制度不同，都主张要保持内在的整体性。一是由共同体的有机性带来的整体性，即国家是统一的有机整体，不是部分凑合的整体。孙中山先生认为，美国搞联邦制是从分散走向集中，但中国如果也搞联邦制，那就是从集中走向分散。因为，几千年大一统的中国社会，历来是整体性存在的社会。二是由民为邦本带来的整体性。民为邦本是中华民族千古不变的信念；以人民为中心是中国共产党人心目中几代人毫不动摇的宗旨，由此决定了国家权力不能归属于任何特殊社会利益集团，而必须永远属于全体人民。三是由国家和社会一体带来的整体性。在我国，国家和社会从古至今都保持相互依存、相互决定的关系，国家不是超越社会的力量。马克思从巴黎公社实践中发现的“社会共和国”，就是要把由资产阶级掌握的国家重新收回到全体人民手中，使之回归社会，不再是资产阶级统治的工具，而是联合起来的社会劳动者用于实现社会整体利益的工具。因此，在中国特色社会主义制度下，我国的国家同社会是有机统一的。

Fifth, the dynamic mechanism of institutions. In Western civilization, from the bourgeois Enlightenment thinkers of yesteryear to Francis Fukuyama, who proposed the “end of history,” all adhere to an unchanging belief: that Western values are universal truths and Western institutions are eternal institutions. On this point, Engels sharply criticized: the “rational kingdom” regarded as embodying “eternal truth” and “eternal justice” is “nothing more than the idealized kingdom of the bourgeoisie”; Engels also argued that the counterrevolutionary terror and Napoleonic dictatorship that emerged after the French Revolution fully demonstrated that “when the French Revolution realized this rational society and this rational state, the new institutions showed that, however rational they might be compared with the old ones, they were by no means absolutely rational. The rational state had completely collapsed.” Facts show that Western institutions, in their process of self-sanctification, have gradually lost their internal driving force for development.

第五，制度动力机理。在西方文明中，从当年的资产阶级启蒙思想家到当今提出“历史终结论”的福山，都秉承着一个不变的理念，即西方价值是普世的真理、西方制度是永恒的制度。对此，恩格斯曾尖锐地批判说：被视为体现“永恒的真理”和“永恒的正义”的“理性的王国不过是资产阶级的理想化的王国”；恩格斯还认为，法国大革命后出现的反革命恐怖和拿破仑专制充分说明，“当法国革命把这个理性的社会和这个理性的国家实现了的时候，新制度就表明，不论它较之旧制度如何合理，却决不是绝对合乎理性的。理性的国家完全破产了。”事实表明，西方制度在自我神圣化中逐渐失去了内在发展动力。

In contrast, the theory of socialism with Chinese characteristics has always held that the socialist system is advanced but not ultimate; it develops with economic and social progress, continuously absorbs all outstanding achievements of human civilization in the struggle for human liberation, and improves and develops itself in keeping with the times. Therefore, the socialist system with Chinese characteristics is a system that unremittingly pursues self-development and self-improvement, a system oriented toward humanity, the world, and the future, and it will always achieve self-development and self-improvement in the course of promoting social development and progress.

相反，中国特色社会主义理论始终认为，社会主义制度是先进的、并非终极的制度，它是随着经济和社会发展而发展的，是在为实现人类解放而奋斗中不断吸收一切人类文明优秀成果，与时俱进地完善和发展自身的。因此，中国特色社会主义制度是不懈追求自我发展和自我完善的制度，是面向人类、面向世界、面向未来的制度，将始终在推动社会发展和进步中实现自我发展和自我完善。

V. The Theoretical Core of the Socialist System with Chinese Characteristics Is People’s Democracy

五、中国特色社会主义制度的理论内核是人民民主

General Secretary Xi Jinping points out: “People’s democracy is the lifeblood of socialism. Without democracy, there is no socialism, no socialist modernization, and no great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation.” The reason the socialist system with Chinese characteristics possesses strong vitality and notable superiority lies in the fact that “it is deeply rooted in the people,” possessing a distinct people-centered character that matches its name with reality. General Secretary Xi Jinping points out: “The name of our country and the names of our state organs at all levels are all prefixed with ‘people’—this is our basic positioning of China’s socialist political power.” “This basic positioning must never be ambiguous or diluted at any time.” Therefore, to deeply grasp the theory of the socialist system with Chinese characteristics, one must base oneself on this basic positioning and closely adhere to the theoretical core of people’s democracy.

习近平总书记指出：“人民民主是社会主义的生命。没有民主就没有社会主义，就没有社会主义的现代化，就没有中华民族伟大复兴。”中国特色社会主义制度之所以具有强大的生命力和显著优越性，就在于“它深深根植于人民之中”，具有名实相副的鲜明人民性。习近平总书记指出：“我们国家的名称，我们各级国家机关的名称，都冠以‘人民’的称号，这是我们对中国社会主义政权的基本定位。”“这一基本定位，什么时候都不能含糊、不能淡化。”因此，要深刻把握中国特色社会主义制度理论，就必须立足于这个基本定位，紧扣人民民主这个理论内核。

The French thinker Montesquieu argued that studying various forms of government requires grasping not only the nature of the government but also its principle. The nature of the government determines its structure; the principle of the government determines its operation. Another French thinker, Tocqueville, in his book *Democracy in America*, stated that the principle governing the American political system is popular sovereignty. It is evident that merely characterizing the differences between institutions by their nature is insufficient; one must also consider the institutional principles on which their operation relies. Institutional principles are not only the basic norms of institutional operation but also the fundamental guidelines for institutional improvement and development. The innovative theories and practices of our Party all indicate that only by continuously deepening the understanding and grasp of institutional principles can one touch the theoretical core of the system.

法国思想家孟德斯鸠说过，研究各种政体，不仅要把握政体性质，而且要把握政体原则。政体性质决定政体构成，政体原则决定政体运作。法国另一位思想家托克维尔在《论美国民主》一书中说过，支配美国政治制度的原则是人民主权。可见，仅仅从制度性质来定性不同制度的差异是远远不够的，还需要考虑制度运行所依凭的制度原则。制度原则既是制度运行的基本规范，同时也是制度完善和发展的基本遵循。我们党的创新理论和实践都表明，只有不断深化对制度原则的理解和把握，才能触及制度理论的内核。

Grasping institutional principles is not a simple application of institutional concepts and dogmas; it requires grasping the historical logic, theoretical logic, and practical logic behind them. Socialist theory and institutions do not negate popular sovereignty, but one cannot therefore simply equate the people’s democracy upheld by the socialist system with the popular sovereignty Tocqueville observed in the American political system. On the surface, people’s democracy and popular sovereignty seem similar, but once used to express the principles of specific institutions, essential differences emerge. The American principle of popular sovereignty originates from natural rights, whereas the socialist principle of people’s democracy originates from the socialist revolution led by the proletariat. It is formed on the basis of eliminating private ownership, eliminating the class rule attribute of the state, and having the people as a whole master state power—that is, the people being the masters of the country. After studying the experiences and lessons of the Paris Commune, Marx pointed out that the Commune was “the political form at last discovered under which to work out the economic emancipation of labor,” and its principle was that the people hold state power, the state belongs to the people, and it no longer dominates society as an instrument of the ruling class. In a word, this principle is the people’s democracy of the people being the masters of the country, manifested as the socialist system with Chinese characteristics. It is evident that behind the principle of people’s democracy lie very specific historical, theoretical, and practical logics. Its historical appeal and theoretical persuasiveness far exceed those of “social contract theory” and “natural rights theory.” The key is to systematically construct these historical, theoretical, and practical logics, forming a theoretical system that supports our institutions.

把握制度原则，不是制度概念和信条的简单套用，而是要把握制度原则背后的历史逻辑、理论逻辑和实践逻辑。社会主义理论和制度并不否定人民主权，但不能因此就把社会主义制度坚持的人民民主同托克维尔在美国政治制度中关注到的人民主权简单地等同起来。人民民主和人民主权，从字面上看差距不大，但一旦用于表达具体制度的原则，就会显现本质性的差异。美国的人民主权原则源于天赋人权，而社会主义的人民民主原则，源于无产阶级领导的社会主义革命，它是在消除私有制、消除国家的阶级统治属性、人民整体掌握国家权力即人民当家作主基础上形成的。马克思在研究巴黎公社的经验和教训后指出，公社是“可以使劳动在经济上获得解放的政治形式，”其原则是人民掌握国家权力，国家属于人民、并不再作为统治阶级的工具驾驭社会。一句话，这个原则是表现为中国特色社会主义制度的人民当家作主的人民民主。可见，人民民主原则背后，蕴含的历史逻辑、理论逻辑和实践逻辑都是十分具体的，其所具有的历史感染力和理论说服力是远远大于“社会契约论”、“天赋人权论”的，关键是要把这个历史逻辑、理论逻辑和实践逻辑体系化地建构起来，形成支撑我们制度的理论体系。

In the history of the formation of the socialist system with Chinese characteristics, our Party initially envisioned the republic as a worker-peasant republic; in 1935, in order to unite all forces that could be united against Japanese imperialism, our Party changed the worker-peasant republic into a people’s republic. Comrade Mao Zedong believed that this transformation had not only a practical strategic necessity but also a practical political foundation, namely that the Chinese Communist Party, which had emerged from the Long March, had truly become the “central pillar” of the revolutionary united front and the “central force” of the people. This was a historic political judgment; from then on, the exploration and practice of the political system of New China were closely centered on the “people” with the Chinese Communist Party as the core force. Comrade Mao Zedong’s famous theoretical works such as “On New Democracy,” “On Coalition Government,” and “On the People’s Democratic Dictatorship” were all based on the “people” to construct the future national political system. It can be seen that the logical starting point of the theory and practice of the socialist system with Chinese characteristics is the “people,” and that the people being the masters of the country is the greatest principle of our entire national system. Upholding the organic unity of Party leadership, the people being the masters of the country, and law-based governance, and developing our socialist democratic politics, are inherent requirements for upholding and improving the socialist system with Chinese characteristics.

在中国特色社会主义制度形成的历史上，我们党最初设想的共和国是工农共和国；1935年，为了团结一切可以团结的力量反对日本帝国主义，我们党把工农共和国改变为人民共和国。毛泽东同志认为，这种转变不仅有现实的战略需要，而且有现实的政治基础，这就是从长征中走出来的中国共产党，已经真正成为革命统一战线的“中心支柱”，成为了人民的“中心力量”。这是历史性的政治论断，从此之后，新中国政治制度的探索和实践，都紧紧围绕着以中国共产党为核心力量的“人民”来展开。毛泽东同志的《新民主主义论》《论联合政府》《论人民民主专政》等著名理论篇章都是立足于“人民”来建构未来国家政治制度的。可见，中国特色社会主义制度理论和实践的逻辑起点就是“人民”，人民当家作主是我们整个国家制度的最大原则。坚持党的领导、人民当家作主、依法治国有机统一、发展我国社会主义民主政治，乃是坚持和完善中国特色社会主义制度的内在要求。

In the Marxist theoretical system, the “people” is a collective concept with rich connotations; it can refer to the broad masses of laborers, or to the broad masses of the people; it can refer to the entire people constituting the nation, or to the world’s people constituting a community with a shared future for mankind. The people’s democracy advocated by Marxism is built on the social and political foundation where the exploiting classes have been eliminated as classes, class antagonism no longer exists in society, and state power is in the hands of the entire people. Its greatest difference from Western bourgeois democracy lies in the fact that state power is no longer monopolized by a particular class but truly belongs to the entire people; everyone genuinely has equal opportunities and channels to participate in politics and hold state power. Therefore, people’s democracy is not only a new type of social form but also a new type of state form, and thus a new type of institutional form. The socialist system with Chinese characteristics is a system built on such a social form and state form, a new type of institutional form. Clearly, this is fundamentally different from the capitalist system, which is centered on the “individual,” based on class antagonism, and characterized by class rule, even though their constitutions also claim that state power comes from the people.

在马克思主义理论体系中，“人民”是具有丰富内涵的集合概念，它既可以指广大劳动者，也可以指广大人民群众；既可以指构成国家的全体人民，也可以指构成人类命运共同体的世界人民。马克思主义主张的人民民主，是建立在剥削阶级作为阶级已经消灭、社会已不存在阶级对抗、国家权力掌握在全体人民手中的社会和政治基础上的。它同西方资产阶级民主的最大区别就在于，国家权力不再是由特定阶级把持，而是真正归属全体人民所有；每个人都切实拥有平等参与政治、掌握国家权力的机会和途径。因此，人民民主既是一种新型的社会形态，也是一种新型的国家形态，进而也是一种新型的制度形态。中国特色社会主义制度就是建立在这样的社会形态和国家形态之上的制度，是一种新型的制度形态。显然，这同以“个体”为中心、以阶级对抗为基础、以阶级统治为本质的资本主义制度具有根本区别，尽管在他们的宪法中也主张国家权力来自人民。

Returning to Chinese culture, the “people” (人民) is composed of “person” (人) and “folk” (民). In the logic of Chinese philosophy, “person” is the heart of heaven and earth, determining that “folk” are the foundation of the state; when persons flourish, heaven and earth nurture the world; when the folk are at peace, the state is harmonious and prosperous. Therefore, in Chinese culture, the principle and concept of people’s democracy still have many valuable connotations that can be excavated and expanded, which will also provide rich cultural resources and space for innovation for the self-improvement and self-development of the socialist system with Chinese characteristics.

回到中华文化，“人民”由“人”和“民”构成，在中国哲学逻辑中，“人”是天地之心，决定了“民”为邦国之本；人兴，则天地化育世界；民安，则邦国祥和昌盛。因此，在中华文化中，人民民主这个原则和概念也还有许多有价值的内涵可以挖掘和拓展，这也将为中国特色社会主义制度的自我完善和自我发展提供丰富的文化资源和创新空间。

It can be seen that, as an institutional principle, people’s democracy not only endows the socialist system with Chinese characteristics with value advancement but also grants it infinite potential for development. People’s democracy is not a label for the socialist system with Chinese characteristics, but a great treasure trove for theoretical innovation and practical innovation of the socialist system with Chinese characteristics. Therefore, it is imperative to comprehensively, deeply, and systematically study and grasp the theoretical core of people’s democracy, and on this basis, construct and elucidate the theoretical system of socialism with Chinese characteristics. As long as we strive to fully excavate the theoretical and practical connotations of people’s democracy within the system of socialism with Chinese characteristics from the theoretical depth of Marxism, the cultural thickness of Chinese civilization, and the practical breadth of the development of human civilization, we will certainly be able to lay a more solid foundation for the theoretical edifice of the socialist system with Chinese characteristics.

可见，作为制度原则，人民民主在赋予中国特色社会主义制度价值先进性的同时，也赋予了其发展的无限性。人民民主，不是中国特色社会主义制度的一份标签，而是中国特色社会主义制度理论创新和实践创新的一大宝库。因此，理应全面、深入、系统地研究和把握人民民主这个理论内核，并在此基础上，构筑和阐发中国特色社会主义理论体系。只要努力从马克思主义的理论深度、中华文明的文化厚度和人类文明发展的实践广度上，充分挖掘人民民主在中国特色社会主义体系中的理论和实践内涵，我们就一定能为中国特色社会主义制度的理论大厦打下更加坚实的根基。

VI. The Practical Logic of the Socialist System with Chinese Characteristics Is Self-Improvement

六、中国特色社会主义制度的实践逻辑是自我完善

The socialist system with Chinese characteristics was formed and developed in the great social revolution led by the Party and the people. The great social revolution forged the socialist system with Chinese characteristics, and the socialist system with Chinese characteristics will inevitably continue to self-develop and self-improve with the deepening of the great social revolution. As General Secretary Xi Jinping said: “Reform and opening up is the only way to uphold and develop socialism with Chinese characteristics, so we must always carry forward the spirit of reform and innovation through all aspects of governance and continuously promote the self-improvement and self-development of our socialist system.” Self-improvement and self-development are not only the political advantage of the Chinese Communist Party but also the significant advantage of the socialist system with Chinese characteristics. General Secretary Xi Jinping believes that this self-improvement and self-development are not temporary; it is always on the way. He admonishes the entire Party: “We must remember Comrade Deng Xiaoping’s heartfelt words: ‘We have only been engaged in socialism for a few decades and are still in the primary stage. Consolidating and developing the socialist system will require a very long historical stage, requiring the unremitting efforts of several generations, a dozen generations, or even dozens of generations.’” This unceasing, continuous self-improvement and self-development not only fundamentally distinguish the socialist system with Chinese characteristics from other systems in the world but will also make the socialist system with Chinese characteristics the most advanced system in the world.

中国特色社会主义制度是在党领导人民进行的伟大社会革命中形成和发展起来的。伟大社会革命铸就了中国特色社会主义制度，中国特色社会主义制度也必将随着伟大社会革命的深入而不断自我发展和自我完善。正如习近平总书记所说：“改革开放是坚持和发展中国特色社会主义的必由之路，所以必须始终把改革创新精神贯彻到治国理政各个环节，不断推进我国社会主义制度自我完善和发展。”自我完善和发展，既是中国共产党的政治优势，也是中国特色社会主义制度的显著优势。习近平总书记认为，这种自我完善和发展不是一时的，它永远在路上，他告诫全党：“我们必须牢记邓小平同志语重心长说过的这段话：‘我们搞社会主义才几十年，还处在初级阶段。巩固和发展社会主义制度，还需要一个很长的历史阶段，需要我们几代人、十几代人，甚至几十代人坚持不懈地努力奋斗’。”这种永不停歇的、持续的自我完善和发展，不仅使中国特色社会主义制度从根本上区别于世界上其他制度，而且将使中国特色社会主义制度成为世界上最先进的制度。

Since its founding, the Chinese Communist Party has led the people in exploring the path to the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation and planning the system for the new China and new society. The socialist system with Chinese characteristics was formed and developed in the long-term struggle led by the Party and the people in revolution, construction, and reform, and was perfected and improved in the unremitting exploration of governing the Party, the state, and the military, demonstrating vigorous vitality and great superiority, becoming the fundamental institutional guarantee for ensuring the realization of the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation. The leadership of the Chinese Communist Party is the greatest advantage of the socialist system with Chinese characteristics; the people being the masters of the country is the greatest principle of the socialist system with Chinese characteristics; and continuous self-development and improvement is the greatest guarantee of the socialist system with Chinese characteristics.

中国共产党自成立以来，就带领人民探索中华民族的复兴之路，谋划新中国新社会之制。中国特色社会主义制度在党领导人民进行革命、建设和改革的长期奋斗中形成和发展，在治党、治国、治军的不懈探索中健全和完善，展现出旺盛的生命力和巨大的优越性，成为确保实现中华民族伟大复兴的根本制度保障。中国共产党领导是中国特色社会主义制度的最大优势，人民当家作主是中国特色社会主义制度的最大原则，在不断自我发展中完善是中国特色社会主义制度的最大保障。

The socialist system with Chinese characteristics has its own specific historical process of generation, establishment, and development, and it has a completely different construction logic from the social systems of Western countries. The Communist Manifesto points out: “The communist revolution is the most radical rupture with traditional property relations” and “The first step in the revolution by the working class is to raise the proletariat to the position of ruling class, to win the battle of democracy.” The nature and process of China’s socialist revolution determine that the socialist system with Chinese characteristics has its own unique construction and development logic: First, the socialist system is established through revolution, meaning that the socialist system cannot be generated from historically existing systems in any country but must be established through a people’s revolution that thoroughly overthrows the old system. Second, the socialist system in any country begins with the creation of a new type of political system, so that the proletariat can independently and autonomously hold state power and use the power of the state to eliminate private ownership, establish socialist public ownership, and thus lay the economic foundation for the socialist political system.

中国特色社会主义制度有自身生成、确立和发展的具体历史进程，它同西方国家的社会制度有完全不同的建构逻辑。《共产党宣言》指出：“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”“工人革命的第一步就是使无产阶级上升为统治阶级，争得民主。”中国社会主义革命的性质和进程，决定了中国特色社会主义制度有自己的独特建构和发展逻辑：一是社会主义制度是通过革命建立的，即社会主义制度在任何国家都不能从历史上既有的制度中生成，而是要通过人民革命彻底推翻旧制度才能得以建立。二是社会主义制度在任何国家都是从创建一种新型的政治制度开始的，以便无产阶级能够独立自主地掌握国家政权并用政权的力量消除私有制，确立社会主义公有制，从而奠定社会主义政治制度的经济基础。

Looking at the nearly century-long process of building the socialist system with Chinese characteristics and the construction and development logic of the socialist system itself, the process of building the socialist system with Chinese characteristics up to the present can be summarized into three periods: namely, the period of constructing national order, the period of promoting comprehensive development, and the period of modernizing national governance.

纵观中国特色社会主义制度建设近百年的历程以及社会主义制度本身的建构和发展逻辑，可将迄今为止的中国特色社会主义制度建设历程，概括为三个时期：即建构国家秩序时期、推动全面发展时期和国家治理现代化时期。

First, institutional construction during the period of building state order. Revolution is a social movement that overthrows the old world and establishes a new one, subverts the old order and builds a new order. To establish a new world and a new order, new institutions must be established, beginning with political institutions. Therefore, revolution is always accompanied by the practice of exploring and constructing new political institutions. In modern Chinese revolution, the first to appear was the bourgeois democratic revolution. Although the Xinhai Revolution overthrew the autocratic rule of feudal monarchy and "made the concept of a democratic republic deeply rooted in the hearts of the people,"[37]37 Sun Yat-sen, "Declaration of the First National Congress of the Kuomintang," 1924. it did not complete the tasks of the bourgeois revolution. The Chinese revolution gave birth to the Communist Party of China, and it was only under the leadership of the CPC that the face of the Chinese revolution was fundamentally changed, clarifying the two major tasks and the dual missions of the Chinese revolution. The two major tasks are "the national revolution to overthrow imperialist oppression externally and the democratic revolution to overthrow feudal landlord oppression internally";[38]38 Mao Zedong, "The Chinese Revolution and the Chinese Communist Party," 1939. the dual missions are to complete "the revolution of a bourgeois-democratic nature (the new-democratic revolution) and the revolution of a proletarian-socialist nature."[39]39 Mao Zedong, "On New Democracy," 1940. The nature, tasks, and missions of the Chinese revolution determined that the institutional construction carried out by the CPC during the revolution would inevitably take socialism as its orientation and destination, unfolding around the two major tasks of the new-democratic revolution: achieving national independence and national unification, and realizing the democratic revolution for people's liberation.

第一，建构国家秩序时期的制度建设。革命就是推翻旧世界并建立新世界、颠覆旧秩序并建立新秩序的社会运动。要建立新世界、新秩序，就必须建立新制度，首先是政治制度，因此，革命始终伴随着探索和建构新政治制度的实践展开。近代以来的中国革命，首先登场的是资产阶级民主革命。辛亥革命虽然推翻了封建君主专制统治，“使民主共和国的观念从此深入人心，”但它没有完成资产阶级革命任务。中国革命催生了中国共产党，在中国共产党的领导下，才彻底改变了中国革命的面貌，明确了中国革命的两大任务和两重使命。两大任务“就是对外推翻帝国主义压迫的民族革命和对内推翻封建地主压迫的民主革命”；两重使命就是完成“资产阶级民主主义性质的革命（新民主主义的革命）和无产阶级社会主义性质的革命。”中国革命的性质、任务和使命，决定了中国共产党在革命中所进行的制度建设，必然是以社会主义为取向和依归，围绕实现民族独立和国家统一民族的革命以及实现人民解放的民主革命这两大新民主主义革命任务来展开。

In 1939, Comrade Mao Zedong creatively summarized the three magic weapons with which our Party defeated the enemy in the Chinese revolution: the united front, armed struggle, and Party building.[40]40 Mao Zedong, "Introducing The Communist," 1939. Historical practice shows that these three magic weapons led and ensured the success of the Chinese revolution. At the same time, the practical application of these three magic weapons involved exploring and practicing a new type of political system led by the Party. First, Party leadership and Party building are both the fundamental prerequisite for exploring a new type of political system and the primary foundation for it. Viewed from the course of Party building, army building, and state building after the success of the revolution, the new type of political system unfolded on the basis of the practices of Party building and army building. Therefore, exploring Party building, strengthening the Party's leadership over the military, and improving the Party's leadership over state power were organically unified from the very beginning and ran through the entire process of exploring and practicing the new type of political system. Thus, the Chinese characteristics and Chinese advantages in the relationship among Party leadership, the people's army, and state power were shaped in a manner logically consistent with history in the course of the Chinese revolution, and they are also the fundamental experience underlying the success of the Chinese revolution. Second, the united front ran through the entire process of exploring and practicing China's new type of political system, always serving as the foundation and resource for the Party and the people in this endeavor. Establishing a revolutionary united front and a patriotic united front is, for the Chinese revolution, a matter of revolutionary strength and revolutionary success; for Party leadership, a matter of the Party's leadership power and leadership capacity; for state power construction, a matter of the nature and structural form of state power; and for national construction, a matter of people's unity and national unification. Therefore, in practice, the united front provided important political channels, social foundations, operational mechanisms, and development platforms for the exploration and practice of the new type of political system, thereby endowing China's new type of political system with its most distinctive Chinese characteristics and its most vibrant democratic space over the long term and continuously. Third, the various revolutionary base areas and anti-Japanese base areas opened up through armed struggle were the foundation and stage on which China's new type of political system was established. In each period of the Chinese revolution's development, through the concrete application and practice of these three magic weapons, the Party led the Chinese people and the people's army in a series of explorations and practices of state power construction under the Party's partial control in the base areas of different periods. Examples include the early Soviet area state power construction practice, the Shaanxi-Gansu-Ningxia Border Region state power construction practice, among which the thirteen years of state power construction practice in Yan'an was the most comprehensive, systematic, and mature.[41]41 The "thirteen years in Yan'an" refers to the period from 1935 to 1948 when the CPC Central Committee was based in Yan'an, Shaanxi, during which the Party developed mature theories and practices of state building. Its series of institutional innovations in governing the Party, governing the military, building people's state power, and developing the economy and society provided an extremely important practical foundation and institutional model for the construction of state power in New China.

1939年，毛泽东同志创造性地总结了我们党在中国革命中战胜敌人的三大法宝，即统一战线、武装斗争和党的建设。历史实践表明，这三大法宝引领和保证了中国革命取得成功，同时，这三大法宝的实践运用，则是探索和实践了党领导的新型政治制度。首先，党的领导和党的建设既是探索新型政治制度的根本前提，同时也是探索新型政治制度的首要基础。从建党、建军以及革命成功后建国的历程看，新型政治制度是在建党和建军实践基础上展开的，因此探索党的建设、加强党对军队的领导以及完善党对政权的领导，一开始就是有机统一的，并贯穿于新型政治制度探索和实践的全过程。因此，在党的领导、人民军队和国家政权这三者关系中的中国特色、中国优势，是在中国革命的历史进程中合乎历史逻辑地塑造的，也是中国革命取得成功的根本经验之所在。其次，统一战线贯穿中国新型政治制度探索和实践全过程，始终是党和人民探索实践新型政治制度的基础和资源所在。建立革命统一战线、爱国统一战线，对中国革命来说，关系到革命力量和革命成败；对党的领导来说，关系到党的领导权和领导力；对政权建设来说，关系到政权性质和结构形式；对国家建设来说，关系到人民团结和国家统一。因此，在实践中，统一战线为新型政治制度的探索和实践提供了重要的政治途径、社会基础、运行机制和发展平台，从而长久地、源源不断地赋予中国新型政治制度以最鲜明的中国特色、最鲜活的民主空间。第三，由武装斗争开辟的各革命根据地、抗日根据地，是中国新型政治制度得以确立的基础和舞台。在中国革命发展的各个时期，通过这三大法宝的具体运用和实践，党领导中国人民以及人民军队在不同时期的根据地，进行了一系列党局部掌握的国家政权建设探索和实践，如早期的苏区政权建设实践，陕甘宁边区的政权建设实践，其中延安十三年的政权建设实践，是最全面、最系统、最成形的，它在治党、治军、建设人民政权、发展经济社会等方面形成的一系列制度创新，为新中国的国家政权建设，提供了极为重要的实践基础和制度样本。

In short, the state political system of the people's democratic dictatorship established at the time of New China did not fall from the sky nor was it drawn on paper; it was practically explored by the Party and the people in the practices of Party building, the united front, and armed struggle, and was repeatedly compared and summarized in practice. Therefore, Zhang Lan, Chairman of the China Democratic League, said at the First Plenary Session of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference: "This new political system will be different from any existing system of any country in the world."[42]42 Zhang Lan (1872–1955) was a prominent Chinese political figure and chairman of the China Democratic League, a non-Communist party that cooperated with the CPC.

总之，新中国时所确立的人民民主专政的国家政治制度，不是天上掉下来的，也不是纸上画出来的，而是党和人民在党的建设、统一战线、武装斗争的实践中实实在在地探索出来的，是在实践中经过反复、比较、总结出来的。因此，中国民主同盟主席张澜在第一届全国政协会议上说：“这个新的政治制度，将不同于世界上任何一个国家的现有制度。”

The nature and tasks of the socialist revolution determine that the first task after the proletariat seizes state power is to eliminate private ownership, establish socialist public ownership that enables the people to achieve economic emancipation and liberation, and use advanced relations of production to liberate and develop the productive forces. To this end, after the founding of New China, the state quickly restored the economic foundation damaged by war and soon initiated the socialist transformation, promoting the formation of socialist ownership. In 1954, the Constitution clarified this task: "The People's Republic of China, relying on state organs and social forces, through socialist industrialization and socialist transformation, ensures the gradual elimination of the system of exploitation and the establishment of a socialist society."[43]43 Article 4 of the 1954 Constitution of the People's Republic of China. The socialist transformation established China's socialist public ownership. Socialist public ownership and the planned economy formed on its basis provided the necessary economic foundation for consolidating the newborn socialist political system. The basic institutional framework of China's socialism was thus formed.

社会主义革命的性质和任务决定了无产阶级掌握国家政权之后的第一个任务，就是消灭私有制，建立让人民在经济上获得翻身和解放的社会主义公有制，并用先进的生产关系去解放和发展生产力。为此，新中国成立之后，国家在迅速恢复被战争破坏的经济基础之上，很快就启动了社会主义改造，推动形成社会主义所有制。1954年，宪法明确了这项任务：“中华人民共和国依靠国家机关和社会力量，通过社会主义工业化和社会主义改造，保证逐步消灭剥削制度，建立社会主义社会。”社会主义改造确立了我国社会主义公有制。社会主义公有制以及在其基础上形成的计划经济，为巩固新生的社会主义政治制度提供了必要的经济基础。我国社会主义的基本制度框架由此得以形成。

Second, institutional construction during the period of promoting comprehensive development. The period before reform and opening up was China's period of socialist revolution and construction; the period after reform and opening up is China's period of socialist reform and development. The focus of national institutional construction in these two periods differs: before reform and opening up, it mainly revolved around constructing the state order appropriate for a socialist society; after reform and opening up, it mainly revolved around developing the socialist society. Specifically, it unfolded around the essential requirement of socialism: liberating and developing the productive forces, and liberating and enhancing social vitality. As Comrade Deng Xiaoping said, although we established a socialist state, what socialism really is and how a backward country should build socialism were not fully understood even by the Soviet Union.[44]44 Deng Xiaoping, "Reform is the Only Way for China to Develop Its Productive Forces," 1985. Therefore, the construction of the socialist system with Chinese characteristics, which reform and opening up carried out around the essential requirements of socialism, is another great institutional creation by our Party leading the people.

第二，推动全面发展时期的制度建设。改革开放前，是我国的社会主义的革命建设时期；改革开放后，是我国社会主义的改革发展时期。这两个时期的国家制度建设的侧重点不同：改革开放前，主要围绕着建构社会主义社会应有的国家秩序展开；而改革开放后，则主要围绕着发展社会主义社会展开。具体来说，就是围绕解放和发展社会生产力、解放和增强社会活力这个社会主义的本质要求展开。正如邓小平同志所说的那样，虽然我们建立了社会主义国家，但是社会主义到底是什么、落后国家如何建设社会主义，即使是苏联也没有完全搞清楚。因此，改革开放围绕社会主义本质要求展开的中国特色社会主义制度建设，是我们党领导人民进行的又一次伟大的制度创造。

Like the institutional construction of the previous period, the institutional construction of this period was not derived from blueprints but was gradually explored and groped for in practice. On the basis of continuously deepening reforms of the economic system, political system, and various other systems, our Party broke through the traditional planned economic system, creatively established a vibrant socialist market economy system, and formed the basic economic system for the primary stage of socialism. This has revolutionary significance for the institutional construction of socialist countries in China and even the world. The establishment of the socialist market economy system opened up a completely new space for the innovative development of various national institutions and, at the same time, provided a stable economic institutional foundation for the improvement and consolidation of the national system. It can be said that the socialist market economy system is both the greatest achievement of China's institutional construction in this period and the driving force behind the construction of the national system in this period.

同上一个时期的制度建设一样，这个时期的制度建设也不是从图纸中得来的，仍然是从实践中逐步探索和摸索出来的。在不断深化经济体制和政治体制以及各方面体制改革的基础上，我们党破除了传统的计划经济体制，创造性地确立了充满生机活力的社会主义市场经济体制，形成了我国社会主义初级阶段的基本经济制度。这对我国乃至世界上社会主义国家制度建设都具有革命性的意义。社会主义市场经济体制的确立，为国家各项制度的创新发展，打开了一个全新空间，同时也为国家制度的健全和巩固，提供了稳定的经济制度基础。可以说，社会主义市场经济体制，既是这个时期我国制度建设的最大成果，也是这个时期国家制度建设的动力源泉。

Development is the hard truth for solving all problems in contemporary China. The institutional construction carried out around development concerns the rise and fall of our socialist cause and the future and destiny of the nation. The path of socialism with Chinese characteristics, which emerged from the great revolution of reform and opening up, relies not only on theoretical innovation and practical innovation but also on institutional innovation. The socialist system with Chinese characteristics, together with the path, theory, and culture of socialism with Chinese characteristics, are mutually generated, mutually reinforcing, and organically unified as the scientific components of socialism with Chinese characteristics. The institutional construction of this period laid a series of important institutional foundations for developing socialism with Chinese characteristics. These can be summarized mainly as: the socialist market economy system, the modern government system, the socialist legal system, socialist consultative democracy, socialist grassroots democracy, the “one country, two systems” system, the social security system, and a series of basic institutional systems needed for modernization development, including the modern enterprise system and the modern university system. These institutional achievements demonstrate both the strong institutional construction capacity of the Party and the people and the strong capacity of the socialist system with Chinese characteristics for self-transformation and self-improvement. Practice shows that these two capacities are precisely where the vitality and advantages of the socialist system with Chinese characteristics lie.

发展是解决当代中国所有问题的硬道理。围绕发展而展开的制度建设，事关我国社会主义事业兴衰和国家前途命运。从改革开放伟大革命中走出来的中国特色社会主义道路，除依靠理论创新、实践创新外，就是依靠制度创新。中国特色社会主义制度同中国特色社会主义道路、理论、文化相伴而生，相互促进，有机统一为中国特色社会主义的科学组成部分。这个时期的制度建设为发展中国特色社会主义奠定了一系列重要制度基础。概括起来主要有：社会主义市场经济体制、现代化政府体系、社会主义法律体系、社会主义协商民主、社会主义基层民主、“一国两制”制度、社会保障制度体系以及包括现代企业制度、现代大学制度等一系列现代化发展所需要的基础制度体系。这些制度成果，既展现了党和人民所具有的强大制度建设能力，也展现了中国特色社会主义制度具有的强大自我变革、自我完善能力。实践表明，这两大方面的能力正是中国特色主义制度的活力所在、优势所在。

Third, institutional construction during the period of national governance modernization. Historical materialism shows that the socialist system bears the historical mission of continuously liberating and developing the social productive forces; it must constantly develop and improve with the development of the productive forces. Therefore, the construction and development of the socialist system is always in progress, never completed. If the institutional construction during the revolutionary era laid the basic framework of the socialist system with Chinese characteristics, then the institutional construction during the new historical period of reform and opening up activated the mechanism for the self-improvement and development of the socialist system with Chinese characteristics. Just as reform is always ongoing, the socialist system with Chinese characteristics will henceforth become a system that never ceases to improve itself through self-development. This is the difference between the socialist system with Chinese characteristics and all systems in the world today, and it is also the fundamental reason why the socialist system with Chinese characteristics will inevitably become the most advanced force in human institutional civilization.

第三，国家治理现代化时期的制度建设。历史唯物主义表明，社会主义制度承载着不断解放和发展社会生产力的历史使命，它需要始终随生产力的发展而不断发展和完善，因此，社会主义制度的建设和发展只有进行时，没有完成时。如果说革命年代的制度建设，奠定了中国特色社会主义制度的基础框架，那么改革开放历史新时期的制度建设，则启动了中国特色社会主义制度自我完善和发展的机能。就像改革永远在路上一样，中国特色社会主义制度，从此也将成为永不停歇地在自我发展中完善的制度。这是中国特色社会主义制度同今天世界上所有制度的不同之处，也是中国特色社会主义制度必将成为人类制度文明最先进力量的根本所在。

As socialism with Chinese characteristics enters the New Era and China’s reform and opening up also enters a new period of comprehensive deepening of reform, the self-development of the socialist system with Chinese characteristics has simultaneously entered a new period with the goal and task of realizing the modernization of national governance. The modernization of national governance places entirely new requirements on upholding and improving the socialist system with Chinese characteristics: First, it is necessary to integrate Party leadership into all aspects, fields, and links of national governance, making the Party leadership system and the national system organically coordinated, ensuring the overall coordination and unity of the socialist system with Chinese characteristics. Second, it is necessary to comprehensively build a socialist rule-of-law system, promote the legalization of the national system and the modernization of national governance, and promote social fairness and justice. Third, it is necessary to fully stimulate the inherent superiority of the socialist system with Chinese characteristics and transform it into governance effectiveness, continuously improve the structure and function, system and layout, mechanisms and procedures of the system, and enhance the system’s governance capacity. Fourth, it is necessary to enable the system to form comprehensive and whole-process supervision of power, creating a unique self-supervision system in the world. Fifth, centering on the Five-Sphere Integrated Plan for national modernization construction, it is necessary to improve specific systems in all aspects, strengthen coordination among systems in all aspects, and make the socialist system with Chinese characteristics a systematic institutional system that ensures the Party’s long-term governance, the country’s lasting peace and stability, and the enduring prosperity of the Chinese nation.

随着中国特色社会主义进入新时代、中国改革开放也进入全面深化改革新时期，中国特色社会主义制度自我发展的建设同时进入了以实现国家治理现代化为目标任务的新时期。国家治理现代化对坚持和完善中国特色社会主义制度提出了全新要求：一是要把党的领导贯穿到国家治理各方面、各领域、各环节，使党的领导制度和国家制度有机协同起来，确保中国特色社会主义制度的整体协调和统一。二是全面建设社会主义法治体系，推动国家制度法制化，国家治理现代化，促进社会公平正义。三是把中国特色社会主义制度的内在优越性充分激发出来、并转化为治理效能，不断完善制度的结构和功能、体系和布局、机制和程序，提高制度治理能力。四是使制度形成对权力的全方位、全过程监督，形成世界上独一无二的自我监督体系。五是围绕国家现代化建设的五位一体总体布局，完善各方面具体制度，强化各方面制度协同，使中国特色社会主义制度成为确保党长期执政、国家长治久安、中华民族长盛不衰的系统化的制度体系。

This period is the new cycle of self-development of the socialist system with Chinese characteristics at the current stage. From the perspective of the goal of building a great modern socialist country and realizing the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation, after the institutional construction of this period, there will be new institutional construction missions, and thus another new cycle of institutional self-development will be formed. The socialist system with Chinese characteristics will inevitably, through such cyclical advancement with the times and continuous self-development, continuously scale new heights of human institutional civilization and provide Chinese solutions and contribute Chinese wisdom to promoting the building of a community with a shared future for mankind.

这个时期是现阶段中国特色社会主义制度自我发展的新周期，从建设社会主义现代化强国、实现中华民族伟大复兴的奋斗目标来看，在这个时期的制度建设之后，还会有新的制度建设使命，因而还会形成又一个制度自我发展的新周期。中国特色社会主义制度必将在这样周期性的与时俱进、持续不断的自我发展中，不断攀上人类制度文明的新高峰，并为推动构建人类命运共同体建设提供中国方案、贡献中国智慧。

(Author: President and Deputy Party Secretary of Renmin University of China)

（作者：中国人民大学校长、党委副书记）

Online editor: You Heng

网络编辑：有恒

This article was originally published in: Chen Mingming, ed., *Centennial Political Science and the Construction of an Independent Knowledge System for Chinese Political Science*, Fudan University Press, 2023 edition.

本文原载于：陈明明主编《百年政治学与中国政治学自主知识体系的建构》，复旦大学出版社2023年版。