The Civilizational Implications and Practical Pathways of Building a Community with a Shared Future for Mankind

*Xi Jinping: The Governance of China* Volume V (hereinafter referred to as Volume V) puts forward a series of original new concepts, ideas, and strategies for governing the country, which centrally present the latest achievements in adapting Marxism to the Chinese context and the needs of the times, and scientifically answer the questions of China, the world, the people, and the times. In response to the questions of the world, Volume V clearly points out how to further address global development challenges such as the peace deficit, development deficit, security deficit, and governance deficit by building a community with a shared future for mankind, profoundly understands and answers the major issue of “what kind of world to build and how to build it,” and highlights the contemporary value and global significance of building a community with a shared future for mankind. Particularly noteworthy is Volume V’s elucidation of the significance of building a community with a shared future for mankind. It not only points out that it innovates the paradigm of global governance thinking and depicts the future vision of world order, but more importantly, it emphasizes that it is quietly changing the development process of human civilization. Clearly, this is a further highlighting of the original intention and essence of building a community with a shared future for mankind. That is to say, building a community with a shared future for mankind aims to transcend modern civilization dominated by the Western-centric theory, and to make an overall re-planning of the development process of human civilization in the 21st century, involving important aspects such as the development value, connotation and nature, paradigm pattern, rules of interaction, and development goals of civilization. Therefore, it is of great significance to grasp the building of a community with a shared future for mankind from the perspective of the innovation and progress of human civilization.

《习近平谈治国理政》第五卷(以下简称第五卷)提出了一系列原创性的治国理政新理念新思想新战略，集中展现了马克思主义中国化时代化的最新成果，科学回答了中国之问、世界之问、人民之问、时代之问。在对世界之问的回答上，第五卷明确指出了如何进一步以构建人类命运共同体来应对和平赤字、发展赤字、安全赤字、治理赤字等全球发展难题，深刻认识与回答了“建设一个什么样的世界、如何建设这个世界”的重大课题，突出了构建人类命运共同体的时代价值与世界意义。尤其值得关注的是第五卷对构建人类命运共同体的意义的阐发，不仅指出它创新了全球治理思维范式、描绘了世界秩序的未来图景，更为重要的是，强调了它正在悄然改变人类文明的发展进程。显然，这是对构建人类命运共同体的初衷与本质的进一步凸显。也就是说，构建人类命运共同体，旨在超越西方中心论统治下的现代文明，对21世纪人类文明发展进程重新作出总体性谋划，涉及文明的发展价值、内涵性质、范式格局、交往规则、发展目标等重要方面。因而，从人类文明革新与进步的角度把握构建人类命运共同体意义重大。

I. Origin and Foundation: The Civilizational Mission and Ideological Origins of Building a Community with a Shared Future for Mankind

一、缘起与基础：构建人类命运共同体的文明使命与思想渊源

To examine the origin of the concept of building a community with a shared future for mankind from the perspective of civilizational theory, it is necessary to grasp the contemporary circumstances of modern civilization. The West, due to the British Industrial Revolution and the French Revolution, took the lead in laying the foundation for modernization, initiated the process of modern human civilization, and successfully created the Western path of modernization and the Western form of human civilization, so that “Western-centric theory” existed in the form of hegemony for a long historical period. However, human civilization in the 21st century has not developed in the direction envisioned by the West; history has not come to an “end” in “Western-centric theory”; on the contrary, Western civilization, with Anglo-Saxon civilization as its base, is facing multiple crises. General Secretary Xi Jinping points out, “Changes of the world, of the times, and of history are unfolding in ways like never before,” and “acts of bullying, plundering, and zero-sum games, such as hegemonism, high-handedness, and power politics, are causing grave harm; the peace deficit, development deficit, security deficit, and governance deficit are worsening; and human society is facing unprecedented challenges.” These crises are clearly closely related to Western-dominated human civilization, and behind them directly point to the failure and disorder of Western civilizational concepts, which constitutes the civilizational background for building a community with a shared future for mankind. Building a community with a shared future for mankind is precisely a Chinese solution to respond to the changes of the world, the times, and history.

从文明论视角透视构建人类命运共同体理念的缘起，必然要把握现代文明的时代境遇。西方因英国工业革命和法国大革命而率先奠定现代化基础，开启了人类现代文明进程，成功创造出现代化的西方道路与人类文明的西方形态，使得“西方中心论”在很长历史时期内都以霸权形式存在。然而，21世纪的人类文明并没有按西方所设想的方向发展，历史没有在“西方中心论”中走向“终结”;相反，以盎格鲁-撒克逊文明为底色的西方文明正面临重重危机。习近平总书记指出，“当前，世界之变、时代之变、历史之变正以前所未有的方式展开”,“恃强凌弱、巧取豪夺、零和博弈等霸权霸道霸凌行径危害深重，和平赤字、发展赤字、安全赤字、治理赤字加重，人类社会面临前所未有的挑战”。这些危机显然都与西方主导的人类文明密切相关，背后直指西方文明理念的失灵与失序，这构成了构建人类命运共同体的文明论背景。构建人类命运共同体，正是应对世界之变、时代之变、历史之变的中国方案。

“Changes of the world” reflect major transformations in the development of global civilization, contain the basic question of “what kind of world to build and how to build it,” and constitute the historical context for building a community with a shared future for mankind. Humanity’s entry into modern civilization and history’s turn to world history are both closely related to the emergence and development of capitalist civilization. Admittedly, this form of civilization once created historical brilliance. Marx and Engels compared its achievements to “wonders far surpassing Egyptian pyramids, Roman aqueducts, and Gothic cathedrals” and “expeditions far surpassing the great migrations of peoples and the Crusades.” [1]1 This is a paraphrase of a passage from *The Communist Manifesto* (1848) by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, where they describe the revolutionary role of the bourgeoisie in creating wonders and expeditions that surpass those of earlier eras. However, today’s world and today’s civilization both demonstrate that capitalist civilization “is like a sorcerer who is no longer able to control the powers of the nether world whom he has called up by his spells”: from the US subprime mortgage crisis, the Greek sovereign debt crisis to trade wars, tariff wars, etc., the world economy is sluggish in recovery; from Al-Qaeda, the Islamic State to the Russia-Ukraine conflict, the Israel-Palestine conflict, the Israel-Iran conflict, etc., international politics is in turmoil and change; non-traditional security issues such as global climate change, network domain security, public health crises, nuclear wastewater pollution, and refugee crises are becoming increasingly prominent; Brexit, the US withdrawal from a series of international organizations, the intensification of nationalism and populist ideologies, the continuous rise of protectionism and isolationism, and the anti-globalization wave have shifted from undercurrents to rampant raging. These facts all indicate that while capitalist civilization continuously assimilates the world, it also continuously divides the world. The crisis of modern civilization under the rule of capital has broken through national boundaries and, through the interaction and exchange between civilizations, presents global characteristics. Faced with global division and civilizational fragmentation, rethinking the direction of the world and civilization has become the most significant and urgent global issue of the contemporary era.

“世界之变”折射出全球文明发展的重大变革，蕴含着“建设一个什么样的世界、如何建设这个世界”的基本问题，构成构建人类命运共同体的历史语境。人类进入现代文明、历史转向世界历史，都与资本主义文明的生成与发展密切相关。诚然，这一文明形态曾创造了历史的辉煌，马克思恩格斯将其成就比作“完全不同于埃及金字塔、罗马水道和哥特式教堂的奇迹”,“完全不同于民族大迁徙和十字军征讨的远征”。然而，今天的世界、今日之文明，均昭示着资本主义文明“像一个魔法师一样不能再支配自己用法术呼唤出来的魔鬼了”:从美国次贷危机、希腊主权债务危机到贸易战、关税战等，世界经济复苏乏力；从基地组织、“伊斯兰国”到俄乌冲突、巴以冲突、以伊冲突等，国际政治动荡变革；全球气候变化、网络领域安全、公共卫生危机、核废水污染、难民危机等非传统安全问题日益突出；英国脱欧、美国退出一系列国际组织，民族主义、民粹主义思潮愈演愈烈，保护主义和孤立主义行径不断抬头，逆全球化浪潮从暗流汹涌转向疯狂肆虐。这些事实都说明资本主义文明在不断同化世界的同时又持续地分裂世界，资本统治下的现代文明的危机突破了国家的界限，借由文明之间的交往互动呈现出全球性的特点。面对全球分裂、文明破碎，重新思考世界与文明的走向，便成为当代最为重大且亟须解决的全球性课题。

“Changes of the times” reflect the vigorous development of the modern power of Chinese civilization, contain the basic question of “what China should do from catching up with the times to leading the times,” and constitute the realistic foundation for promoting the building of a community with a shared future for mankind. This era is a historical era in which “the Chinese nation has achieved a great leap from standing up and growing rich to becoming strong.” “Becoming strong” means not only the continuous enhancement of our comprehensive national power, but also that we can “continuously make new and greater contributions to humanity.” Therefore, facing the contemporary predicament of global civilization development, the Chinese Communists have both the sentiment and responsibility, as well as the ability, to contribute Chinese wisdom and propose Chinese solutions. On the one hand, the great achievements of socialism with Chinese characteristics over more than 40 years of reform and opening up, especially since the New Era, are our greatest confidence in promoting global civilization development. Over more than 40 years of reform and opening up, from the start of a new period to entering the New Era, our Party has adhered to emancipating the mind and seeking truth from facts, led the people to boldly experiment and bravely reform, carved out a new world, and provided an excellent leadership core, scientific theoretical guidance, and a stronger political guarantee, a more complete institutional guarantee, a more solid material foundation, and a more proactive spiritual force for realizing the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation. These are all our sources of confidence. On the other hand, in the historical era of moving towards “becoming strong,” the Chinese Communist Party upholds the commitment to “continuously make new and greater contributions to humanity,” demonstrating a global vision and the responsibility of a major party. Since the 18th National Congress of the CPC, General Secretary Xi Jinping has always insisted on paying attention to the future and destiny of humanity with a world perspective, correctly understanding and handling relations with the external world from the perspective of the general trend of human development, the general pattern of world change, and the great history of China’s development, and put forward the important thesis that “the world will be better only when China is good; China will be better only when the world is good.” Such confidence, sentiment, and responsibility have laid a solid foundation for promoting the building of a community with a shared future for mankind.

“时代之变”折射出中华文明现代力量的蓬勃发展，蕴含着“从赶上时代到引领时代中国何为”的基本问题，构成推动构建人类命运共同体的现实基础。这个时代是“中华民族迎来了从站起来、富起来到强起来的伟大飞跃”的历史时代，“强起来”既意味着我们的综合国力不断增强，也意味着我们能“为人类不断作出新的更大的贡献”。因此，面对全球文明发展的当代困境，中国共产党人既有情怀担当，也有能力贡献中国智慧、提出中国方案。一方面，改革开放40多年特别是新时代以来中国特色社会主义的伟大成就，是我们推动全球文明发展的最大底气。改革开放40多年来，从开启新时期到进入新时代，我们党坚持解放思想、实事求是，带领人民大胆地试、勇敢地改，闯出了一片新天地，为实现中华民族伟大复兴提供了卓越的领导核心、科学的理论指导和更为坚强的政治保证、更为完善的制度保证、更为坚实的物质基础、更为主动的精神力量，这都是我们的底气。另一方面，在走向“强起来”的历史时代，中国共产党秉持“为人类不断作出新的更大的贡献”的承诺，彰显出世界情怀和大党担当。党的十八大以来，习近平总书记始终坚持以世界眼光关注人类前途命运，从人类发展大潮流、世界变化大格局、中国发展大历史出发，正确认识和处理同外部世界的关系，提出“世界好，中国才能好；中国好，世界才更好”的重要论断。这样的底气、情怀和担当为推动构建人类命运共同体奠定了坚实的基础。

The “transformation of history” reflects a profound shift in the balance of power between two civilizations, embodying the fundamental question of “unity or division, openness or closure, cooperation or confrontation,” and constitutes the core issue in building a community with a shared future for mankind. As socialism with Chinese characteristics enters a New Era, the center of the world socialist movement has shifted to China, and scientific socialism has radiated greater vitality in the East. Not only have we held high and stabilized the great banner of socialism in the world, but we have also advanced scientific socialism to a brand-new stage. At the same time, socialist countries such as Vietnam, Cuba, Laos, and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea continue to explore development models with their own characteristics, achieving notable results in economic, political, and cultural construction; left-wing forces have successively come to power in Mexico, Argentina, Peru, Bolivia, Chile, Honduras, Colombia, and other countries, with the “Latin American progressive axis” continuously expanding; some capitalist countries have also begun to borrow elements of socialism to varying degrees to address their own shortcomings. All this demonstrates, from different angles, the dawn of a revival of world socialism. The historical evolution and contest between the two ideologies and two social systems of socialism and capitalism have undergone a major shift favorable to socialism. In the future, the problems faced by capitalist civilization will continue to increase, and the influence of socialist civilization will continue to expand. How the two systems and two civilizations coexist has become the most central issue in the “transformation of history.” The world once again stands at a historical crossroads: unity or division? Peace or conflict? Cooperation or confrontation? The peoples of all countries must make important choices.

“历史之变”折射出两种文明力量对比的深刻变化，蕴含着“是团结还是分裂，是开放还是封闭，是合作还是对抗”的基本问题，构成构建人类命运共同体的核心议题。中国特色社会主义进入新时代，世界社会主义运动的中心转移到中国，科学社会主义在东方焕发出更大生机活力。我们不但在世界上把社会主义伟大旗帜举住了、举稳了，而且把科学社会主义推向崭新的阶段。与此同时，越南、古巴、老挝和朝鲜等社会主义国家继续探索具有本国特色的发展模式，并在经济、政治、文化等领域的建设上取得不俗业绩；左翼也相继在墨西哥、阿根廷、秘鲁、玻利维亚、智利、洪都拉斯、哥伦比亚等国执政，“拉美进步轴心”不断扩大；一些资本主义国家也开始不同程度地借鉴社会主义的因素来解决自身弊端。这都从不同侧面展示出世界社会主义复兴的曙光。社会主义和资本主义两种意识形态、两种社会制度的历史演进及其较量发生了有利于社会主义的重大转变。今后，资本主义文明面临的问题仍将不断增多，社会主义文明的影响还会不断扩大，两种制度、两种文明如何相处成为“历史之变”中最核心的问题。世界又一次站在历史的十字路口：团结还是分裂?和平还是冲突?合作还是对抗?各国人民都需要作出重要抉择。

Only by deeply observing and analyzing the questions of the world, the times, and history can we clarify the necessity of promoting the building of a community with a shared future for mankind, and can we further grasp the mission and responsibility of building such a community from the perspective of civilization. Of course, the proposal of the concept of a community with a shared future for mankind stems not only from a clear understanding of the world’s transformation, the pulse of the times, and the general trend of history, but more importantly, from the inheritance and elevation of one’s own intellectual resources and cultural genes. If the former is necessity, the logic of practice, then the latter is possibility, the logic of theory; both are indispensable for the proposal of the concept of a community with a shared future for mankind. As a theoretical possibility, the key reason why the Communist Party of China has been able to propose the concept of a community with a shared future for mankind is precisely its adherence to the methodology of the Two Integrations, unifying the “soul” and the “roots,” [2]2 The “soul” refers to Marxism; the “roots” refer to fine traditional Chinese culture. The Two Integrations is the principle of integrating the basic tenets of Marxism with China’s specific realities and with the best of fine traditional Chinese culture. thereby enabling the unique view of civilization contained in fine traditional Chinese culture to achieve creative transformation and innovative development in the New Era.

唯有深刻洞察与剖析世界之问、时代之问与历史之问，我们才能明晰推动构建人类命运共同体的必要性，才能从文明的视角进一步把握构建人类命运共同体的使命担当。当然，构建人类命运共同体理念的提出，不仅源于对世界变局、时代脉搏与历史大势的清醒认知，更重要的是对自身思想资源与文化基因的传承与升华。若前者是必要性，是实践逻辑，后者则是可能性，是理论逻辑，二者对于构建人类命运共同体理念的提出缺一不可。作为理论可能性，中国共产党之所以能提出构建人类命运共同体理念，最为关键的便是因为坚持“两个结合”的方法论，将“魂脉”与“根脉”统一起来，使中华优秀传统文化蕴含的独特文明观在新时代实现了创造性转化、创新性发展。

On the one hand, Marx’s thought on civilization provides strong theoretical support for the concept of a community with a shared future for mankind. The crisis of civilization in modern society had already begun to emerge in the era of free competition capitalism in which Marx lived. Standing at the height of historical materialism, Marx analyzed the universal laws of the development of human civilization and the special laws of the operation of capitalist civilization, constructing a completely new concept of human civilization. Marx’s thought on civilization profoundly reveals three core issues of human civilization: How can diverse regional civilizations be “synthesized” into a universally meaningful (world-historical) human civilization? Why does capitalist civilization offer only a “false universality”? What is the possibility of constructing a new type of human civilization with genuine universality? In Marx’s view, “the bourgeoisie, by the rapid improvement of all instruments of production, by the immensely facilitated means of communication, draws all, even the most barbarian, nations into civilization,” [3]3 Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, *The Communist Manifesto* (1848). and “it compels all nations, on pain of extinction, to adopt the bourgeois mode of production; it compels them to introduce what it calls civilization into their midst, i.e., to become bourgeois themselves. In one word, it creates a world after its own image.” [4]4 Ibid. At this point, a modern, bourgeois “universal human civilization” began to take shape. However, Marx adhered to historical dialectics, examining the paradox of civilization under the dominance of the logic of capital, and pointed out that capitalist civilization would inevitably perish due to the internal contradictions of its mode of production, and that human civilization would move from a “false universality” to a higher stage with genuine universality, reaching a state of civilization characterized by “free individuality.” The Chinese Communists have deeply grasped the essence of Marx’s thought on civilization, recognized the history and laws of the development of human civilization, clarified the roots of the current chaos in civilization, and discerned the trends and goals of civilizational development. All this provides solid theoretical support for the concept of a community with a shared future for mankind.

一方面，马克思的文明思想为构建人类命运共同体理念提供了强大理论支撑。现代社会的文明危机在马克思生活的自由竞争资本主义时代已初露端倪。马克思站在历史唯物主义的高度，分析了人类文明发展的普遍规律及资本主义文明运行的特殊规律，构建起全新的人类文明观念。马克思的文明思想深刻揭示了人类文明的三大核心问题：形态殊异的各地域性文明何以“综合”成普遍意义(世界历史性)的人类文明?资本主义文明何以提供的是“虚假的普遍性”?构建具有真正普遍性的新型人类文明的可能性何在?在马克思看来，“资产阶级，由于开拓了世界市场，使一切国家的生产和消费都成为世界性的了”,又“由于一切生产工具的迅速改进……把一切民族甚至最野蛮的民族都卷到文明中来了”,“一句话，它按照自己的面貌为自己创造出一个世界”。此时，一种具有现代意义的、从属于资产阶级的“普遍性人类文明”开始生成。然而，马克思坚持历史辩证法，审视了资本逻辑主导下的文明悖论，指出资本主义文明必然会因其生产方式的内在矛盾走向自我灭亡，人类文明将由“虚假的普遍性”进入具有真实普遍性的高阶阶段，以达到“自由个性”的文明状态。中国共产党人深刻把握了马克思文明思想的精髓，认识到人类文明发展的历史与规律，厘清了当今文明之乱的根源，洞悉了文明发展的趋势与目标，这都为构建人类命运共同体理念提供了坚实的理论支撑。

On the other hand, the view of civilization contained in fine traditional Chinese culture provides rich cultural nourishment for the concept of a community with a shared future for mankind. The view of civilization in traditional Chinese culture takes “When the great Way prevails, the world is shared by all” [5]5 From the *Book of Rites* (Liji), chapter “Li Yun” (The Conveyance of Rites), describing an ideal Confucian society. as its core concept and ultimate ideal, encompassing aspects such as “the benevolent person loves others,” “wearing out one’s body and exhausting one’s heels for the benefit of the world,” [6]6 A phrase describing the self-sacrificing dedication of the Mohist school, associated with Mozi. and “harmony and great unity.” “The benevolent person loves others” embodies the principle of the world and is the basic premise of “When the great Way prevails, the world is shared by all,” fully demonstrating the wisdom of the ancient Chinese view of civilization in dealing with the world, containing concepts such as “Do not do to others what you do not want done to yourself” and “harmony among all nations.” “Wearing out one’s body and exhausting one’s heels for the benefit of the world” embodies the benefit of the world and is the principle and standard of “When the great Way prevails, the world is shared by all,” demonstrating that civilizational interaction is aimed at common development, requiring both “enriching the state and strengthening the military” to achieve one’s own development and adhering to the concept of “when calculating benefits, one should calculate the benefits of the world” to achieve common development. “Harmony and great unity” embodies the destination of the world and is the fundamental goal of “When the great Way prevails, the world is shared by all,” advocating social peace, benevolence, love for others, fraternity among all people, and kinship with all things, emphasizing the selection of the worthy and capable, and pursuing common development. It is the depiction of an ideal social state in fine traditional Chinese culture and represents the universal expectation of humanity for a good society. It is precisely because the Chinese Communists have fully grasped the unique view of civilization in fine traditional Chinese culture that they have been able to consistently adhere to the principle and stance of “appreciating the beauties of one’s own culture, appreciating the beauties of other cultures, and together, achieving the great harmony of the world,” [7]7 A modern formulation attributed to sociologist Fei Xiaotong, expressing an ideal of mutual respect and harmony among different cultures. which provides profound cultural nourishment for the concept of a community with a shared future for mankind.

另一方面，中华优秀传统文化所蕴含的文明观为构建人类命运共同体理念提供了丰厚文化滋养。中国传统文化中的文明观以“大道之行，天下为公”为核心理念与终极理想，涵盖着“仁者爱人”“摩顶放踵利天下”“和合大同”等多方面内容。“仁者爱人”体现天下之义，是“大道之行，天下为公”的基本前提，充分彰显了中国古代文明观的处世智慧，蕴含着“己所不欲，勿施于人”与“协和万邦”等观念。“摩顶放踵利天下”体现天下之利，是“大道之行，天下为公”的原则准绳，彰显文明交往是为了共同的发展，既要“富国强兵”实现自身发展，又要秉持“计利当计天下利”的理念，实现共同发展。“和合大同”体现天下之归，是“大道之行，天下为公”的根本目标，倡导社会和平、仁者爱人、民胞物与，讲求选贤举能，追求共同发展，是中华优秀传统文化关于理想社会状态的描绘，是人类对于美好社会的普遍期待。中国共产党人正是充分把握了中华优秀传统文化中独特的文明观，才能始终坚持“各美其美，美人之美，美美与共，天下大同”的立场原则，这为构建人类命运共同体理念提供了深厚的文化滋养。

II. Breakthrough and Innovation: The Civilizational Transcendence and Reconstruction of Building a Community with a Shared Future for Mankind

二、突破与创新：构建人类命运共同体的文明超越与重构

The reason why the concept of a community with a shared future for mankind can conform to the trend of the times and meet the expectations of the people of all countries is fundamentally because it opens up a new path for the development of human civilization based on a profound insight into the shortcomings of Western civilization. Western civilization, driven by capital, motivated by interests, and aimed at hegemony, exhibits characteristics such as “deconstructive,” “universalist,” “homogenizing,” “hierarchical,” and “short-sighted” in terms of civilizational nature, value, connotation, interaction, and goals, becoming the source of the world’s civilizational predicament. The very deficiencies of Western civilization are precisely the points of breakthrough and innovation for the concept of a community with a shared future for mankind. By promoting new civilizational propositions such as putting people first, upholding fundamental principles and breaking new ground, promoting exchange and mutual learning, sharing weal and woe, and pursuing harmony and coexistence, the concept of a community with a shared future for mankind achieves the transcendence and reconstruction of Western civilization, thereby becoming a realistic plan to break through the global civilizational dilemma.

构建人类命运共同体理念之所以能够顺应时代发展潮流、符合各国人民期待，从根本上说是因为它是在深刻洞察西方文明之弊的基础上开创出的一种人类文明发展的新路向。西方文明以资本为主导、以利益为驱动、以称霸为目的，进而在文明性质、文明价值、文明内涵、文明交往以及文明目标上分别表现出“解构型”“普世性”“单一化”“等级化”“短视化”等特征，成为世界文明之困的渊薮。西方文明的缺失之处恰是人类命运共同体理念的突破创新之口，人类命运共同体理念通过弘扬以人为本、守正创新、交流互鉴、命运与共、和合共生的文明新主张，实现了对西方文明的超越与重构，并由此成为突破全球文明困境的现实方案。

1. Reconstructing the Intrinsic Quality of Civilization

1.重构文明内在质性

After the establishment of the capitalist system, Western countries, on the one hand, vigorously pursued industrialization, commodification, and urbanization domestically, amassing enormous wealth; on the other hand, they actively expanded outward, dumping goods, exporting capital, and plundering raw materials, seeking exclusive development. In this process, the state of mutual isolation and separation between different countries and different civilizations was completely broken, and human society began to enter an era of economic globalization led by the West. Faced with the interweaving and collision of different civilizations under the wave of economic globalization, Western countries, relying on their own first-mover advantages and using capitalism as the yardstick of civilization, proposed a world civilizational schema divided into “tradition—modernity,” “civilization—barbarism,” “progress—conservatism,” and “the West—the non-West.” They claimed to stand at the very top of the ladder of human civilization, declaring that “civilization” equated to the power to dominate the world, while “barbarism” meant being enslaved and conquered. Driven by this discourse of “civilizational superiority,” Western countries, under the pretext of opposing tradition and eliminating ignorance, wantonly invaded and colonized other countries, attempting to deconstruct all non-Western civilizations with Western civilization, replace diversity with uniformity, and thereby incorporate all non-Western countries into the evolutionary trajectory and civilizational lineage of capitalism. As a result, the diversity of human civilization was dissolved and replaced by the singularity of capitalist civilization, and the garden of human civilizations withered under the civilizational narrative of Western deconstructionism.

资本主义制度确立后，西方国家一方面对内大搞工业化、商品化、城镇化，积累起巨额财富；另一方面则积极对外扩张，倾销商品、输出资本、掠夺原料，谋求排他式发展。在此过程中，不同国家、不同文明之间相互隔绝、孤立的状态被彻底打破，人类社会开始进入由西方主导的经济全球化时代。面对经济全球化浪潮下不同文明的交织碰撞，西方国家倚仗自身的先发优势，以资本主义为文明标尺提出了“传统—现代”“文明—野蛮”“进步—保守”“西方—非西方”分殊的世界文明图式，并自诩站在人类文明阶梯的最顶端，宣称“文明”就等于宰制世界的权力，“野蛮”则意味着被奴役、被征服。在这一“文明优越”论调的驱使下，西方国家打着反传统、去愚昧的幌子肆意侵略、殖民其他国家，企图以西方文明解构一切非西方文明，用一元取代多元，从而把非西方国家全部纳入资本主义的进化路线和文明谱系。由此，人类文明的多样性被资本主义文明的单一性所消解、取代，人类文明的百花园在西方解构主义的文明叙事中走向凋零。

Unlike the “deconstructive” attitude of Western civilization toward the world, the community with a shared future for mankind advocates a positive, constructive view of civilization. General Secretary Xi Jinping points out: “Promoting the building of a community with a shared future for mankind does not mean replacing one system with another, nor replacing one civilization with another. Rather, it means that countries with different social systems, different ideologies, different histories and cultures, and different levels of development share interests, rights, and responsibilities in international affairs, forming the greatest common denominator for building a better world.” [8]8 Xi Jinping, “Holding High the Great Banner of Socialism with Chinese Characteristics and Striving in Unity to Build a Modern Socialist Country in All Respects — Report to the 20th National Congress of the Communist Party of China” (October 16, 2022), in *Selected Readings from Xi Jinping’s Works*, Vol. 1 (Beijing: People’s Publishing House, 2023), p. 35. [This is a standard citation format for Chinese political texts; the note provides the source of the quotation.] Clearly, the concept of a community with a shared future for mankind manifests a “constructive” view of civilization that is entirely different from that of the West. On the one hand, this constructiveness is embodied in the active easing of the relationship between two types of civilizations by the concept of a community with a shared future for mankind. It pursues a new ecology of exchange and mutual learning between civilizations, criticizing the Western dissolution of other civilizations: “To think that one’s own race and civilization are superior and to insist on remolding or replacing other civilizations is foolish in understanding and disastrous in practice!” [9]9 Xi Jinping, “Deepening Exchanges and Mutual Learning among Civilizations to Build a Community with a Shared Future for Mankind” (May 15, 2019), in *Selected Readings from Xi Jinping’s Works*, Vol. 2 (Beijing: People’s Publishing House, 2023), p. 213. On the other hand, this constructiveness is reflected in the concept’s depiction of a future world picture and its elucidation of a program for a better world. Whether it is the construction of the “five worlds” [10]10 “Five worlds” refers to the five aspects of building a community with a shared future for mankind: a world of lasting peace, universal security, common prosperity, openness and inclusiveness, and clean and beautiful. covering the political, security, economic, cultural, and ecological fields, or the characteristics of creativity and peace it embodies, these all indicate that the concept of a community with a shared future for mankind aims to create a better world and a more splendid civilization. It seeks to build a new order of human civilization by promoting the integration and complementarity of different civilizations, thereby achieving a transcendence of the capitalist “deconstructive” orientation toward civilization.

与西方文明对待世界的“解构性”态度不同，人类命运共同体所倡导的是一种积极的、建构型的文明观。习近平总书记指出：“推动构建人类命运共同体，不是以一种制度代替另一种制度，不是以一种文明代替另一种文明，而是不同社会制度、不同意识形态、不同历史文化、不同发展水平的国家在国际事务中利益共生、权利共享、责任共担，形成共建美好世界的最大公约数。”显然，人类命运共同体理念所彰显的是与西方截然不同的“建设型”文明观。一方面，这种建设性体现在人类命运共同体理念对两种文明关系的主动缓和上。它所追求的是两种文明交流互鉴的新生态，批判了西方文明对其他文明的消解：“认为自己的人种和文明高人一等，执意改造甚至取代其他文明，在认识上是愚蠢的，在做法上是灾难性的!”另一方面，这种建设性体现在人类命运共同体理念对未来世界图景的刻画、对美好世界纲领的阐明上。不论是涵盖政治、安全、经济、文化、生态领域的“五个世界”建设，还是其所体现出的创造性与和平性特征，都能标识人类命运共同体理念意在打造一个更加美好的世界、一种更为灿烂的文明，是要在推动不同文明的融合互补中建设一种人类文明新秩序，从而实现了对资本主义“解构型”文明取向的超越。

2. Innovating the Value Concept of Civilization

2.创新文明价值理念

Modern Western civilization was born out of the Christian tradition. The doctrines of perfectionism, universalism, and redemption, based on abstract human nature, have long steeped and shaped its mental structure, thereby giving rise to a deeply ingrained “messiah” complex. To realize their particular interests, the bourgeoisie excel at cloaking their own particular interest preferences, development orientations, and institutional choices in the garb of “universalism,” generalizing them into abstract, absolute value symbols that transcend time and history, nations and states. “Universal values” are a typical example. They export and peddle Western values such as “freedom,” “democracy,” and “human rights” everywhere, plotting to achieve global hegemony. These “universal values” are, in essence, an ideological facade for Western civilization to realize its own interests. They have failed to be truly “universally applicable” either to Western civilization itself or to all of human civilization. Problems such as racial discrimination, money politics, labor-capital antagonism, and lack of human rights protection in Western societies have long persisted and are intensifying. “Color revolutions,” the “Arab Spring,” [11]11 “Color revolutions” refer to a series of pro-Western protest movements and regime changes in post-Soviet states (e.g., Ukraine’s Orange Revolution, Georgia’s Rose Revolution). The “Arab Spring” refers to a wave of anti-government protests and uprisings across the Arab world beginning in 2010, which in some cases led to civil war and state collapse. Both are cited in Chinese discourse as examples of Western interventionism and the failure of exported “universal values.” and other acts of peaceful evolution stand in stark contrast to the “universal values” that the West promotes and flaunts.

西方现代文明脱胎于基督教传统，以抽象人性论为基础的至善论、普世论和救赎论长期浸润并形塑着其心性结构，进而催生出根深蒂固的“救世主”情结。资产阶级为了实现其特殊利益，擅长将自己的特殊利益偏好、发展取向以及制度选择裹上“普世主义”的外衣，泛化为超越时空和历史、超越国家与民族的抽象的、绝对的价值符号，“普世价值”便是其典型代表。他们到处输出、贩卖西方的“自由”“民主”“人权”等价值观，图谋实现全球霸权。这一“普世价值”,实质上是西方文明以实现自身利益为目的的意识形态幌子，无论是对于西方文明本身，还是对于整个人类文明，都未能做到“普适”。西方社会的种族歧视、金钱政治、劳资对立、人权无保障等问题长期存在且愈演愈烈，“颜色革命”“阿拉伯之春”等和平演变行为都与西方宣扬与标榜的“普世价值”形成鲜明对照。

In response to the discourse of “universal values” in Western civilization, the concept of a community with a shared future for mankind opposes artificially elevating a particular form of civilization into the sole yardstick of civilization or packaging the will of a single civilization as a “gospel” for all humanity. It advocates “understanding with an open mind the perceptions of different civilizations regarding value connotations, and not imposing one’s own values and model on others,” [12]12 Xi Jinping, “Jointly Shouldering the Responsibility of the Times and seeks to distill genuine basic common values for all humanity on the basis of seeking common ground while reserving differences, promoting the common values of all humanity: “peace, development, fairness, justice, democracy, and freedom.” [13]13 Xi Jinping, “Work Together to Build a Community with a Shared Future for Mankind,” speech at the United Nations Office at Geneva, January 18, 2017. The common values of all humanity embody the common aspirations and universal expectations of different civilizations. Among them, peace is the eternal hope of all peoples, development is the necessary prerequisite for prosperity, fairness and justice are the moral foundation of the international order, and democracy and freedom are the distinctive markers of the comprehensive development of the individual. By promoting the common values of all humanity, a new value concept of civilization, different from Western “universal values,” is established. On the one hand, it fully understands the unique value connotations of different civilizations, fully respects the paths different civilizations explore to realize their own values, and strongly supports the right of different countries to pursue the happiness of their people. On the other hand, it distills the basic value consensus of all humanity, outlines a value concentric circle that transcends differences and disagreements, and finds the greatest common denominator among civilizations. In this way, the community with a shared future for mankind opens up broad space for the diverse development of civilizations in the unity of commonality and individuality, universality and particularity, while also laying a value foundation for the common prosperity of different civilizations. This promotes the transformation of the development of human civilization from “taking the West as the standard of beauty” to “each civilization appreciating its own beauty, and the beauty of all civilizations being shared.” [14]14 Ibid.

针对西方文明的“普世价值”论调，人类命运共同体理念反对将某种特殊文明形态人为拔高为文明的唯一标尺、将某个单一文明意志包装为全人类的“福音书”,主张“要以宽广胸怀理解不同文明对价值内涵的认识，不将自己的价值观和模式强加于人”,要在求同存异的基础之上凝练真正的全人类基本价值共识，弘扬“和平、发展、公平、正义、民主、自由”的全人类共同价值。全人类共同价值蕴含着不同文明的共同诉求和普遍期待，其中，和平是各国人民的永恒期望，发展是繁荣昌盛的必要前提，公平正义是国际秩序的道义基础，民主自由是人的全面发展的显著标识。通过弘扬全人类共同价值，一种不同于西方“普世价值”的新的文明价值理念得以确立。一方面，它对不同文明的独特价值内涵给予充分理解，对不同文明探索自身价值实现路径给予全面尊重，对不同国家追求人民幸福的权利加以大力支持；另一方面，它凝练出全人类的基本价值共识，勾画出超越差异分歧的价值同心圆，找到了文明间的最大公约数。由此一来，人类命运共同体就在共性与个性、普遍性与特殊性的统一中为文明的多样性发展打开了广阔空间，同时也为不同文明的共同繁荣奠定了价值基石，从而推动了人类文明发展从“以西为美”向“各美其美，美美与共”的转变。

3. Enriching the Connotation of Civilizational Development

3.丰富文明发展内涵

In the modern transformation of Western civilization, capital is the core force behind it. The history of the development of modern Western civilization is actually a history of the expansion and evolution of capital. Modern Western civilization was born from capital and thrives on capital. Therefore, the principle of capital is its primary principle, and the logic of capital is deeply permeated into its civilizational fabric, becoming an indelible undertone. For capital, achieving maximum valorization is its highest goal. This determines that Western civilization must enshrine the economic rationality of optimal efficiency and maximum profit as the supreme criterion, thereby safeguarding the unlimited growth of capital. From the logic of “progressive compulsion” [15]15 Xi Jinping, “Working Together to Build a Community with a Shared Future for Mankind,” speech at the United Nations Office at Geneva, January 18, 2017. followed in capitalist production to the rule of “money above all else” implemented in social interaction, and to the principle of “winner takes all” reflected in civilizational interaction, everything is weighed and chosen on the scales of interest, and everything must submit to and give way to the “supreme” principle of maximizing economic interests. As a result, Western civilization has degenerated in the vortex of economic rationality and growthism into a single-form civilization centered on material modernization. Although it has accumulated enormous material wealth, the economic crises, social crises, cultural crises, ecological crises, and spiritual and moral crises caused by the narrowing of civilization have been pushed to an extreme. The so-called “Pareto optimum” [16]16 Francis Fukuyama, The End of History and the Last Man (New York: Free Press, 1992), p. xi. has ultimately resulted in a “dead end” for its own civilizational development, as well as persistent turmoil and stagnation across the world.

在西方文明的现代转型中，资本是其背后的核心力量，现代西方文明的发展史实际上就是一部资本的扩张与演进史。现代西方文明依资本而生、因资本而兴，所以资本的原则就是其首要原则，资本的逻辑亦深深浸透于其文明肌理并成为难以掩盖的底色。对于资本而言，实现最大限度的增殖是其最高目的，这就决定了西方文明势必要将效率最优、利润最大的经济理性奉为至高无上的准则，从而为资本的无限度增长保驾护航。从资本主义生产所奉行的“进步强制”逻辑到社会交往所贯彻的“金钱至上”法则，再到文明互动中映射出的“赢者通吃”准则，一切都被摆在利益的天平上加以衡量取舍，都要服膺、让位于经济利益最大化这个“至高无上”的原则。由此一来，西方文明就在经济理性和增长主义的漩涡中堕落成了以物质现代化为核心的单一型文明形态，虽然积累起巨大的物质财富，但文明窄化所导致的经济危机、社会危机、文化危机、生态危机以及精神道德危机被推向无以复加的地步，所谓的“帕累托最优”最后换来的却是其文明发展的“死胡同”,以及全世界的持久动荡和停滞不前。

Faced with the “prisoner’s dilemma” of Western civilization under a single economic rationality, the concept of a community with a shared future for mankind, grounded in the sustainable development and enduring prosperity of the world, clearly points out that human civilization is a complex organism composed of economic, political, cultural, social, and ecological aspects, among others, whose various elements are interconnected, mutually reinforcing, and indivisible. Only when all civilizational elements advance in tandem and achieve coordinated unity can they serve as the balance and stabilizer ensuring sustainable development. Therefore, “the international community must make efforts in partnership, security architecture, economic development, civilizational exchange, and ecological construction” [13]13 Xi Jinping, “Work Together to Build a Community with a Shared Future for Mankind,” speech at the United Nations Office at Geneva, January 18, 2017. in order to build “a world of lasting peace, universal security, common prosperity, openness and inclusiveness, and clean and beauty.” [14]14 Ibid. Specifically, politically, we must adhere to dialogue rather than confrontation, partnership rather than alliance, and build a new type of partnership characterized by enduring friendship, high trust, and shared weal and woe; economically, we must balance immediate and long-term interests, both making the “cake” bigger and dividing it well, promoting economic globalization toward greater inclusiveness, balance, and win-win outcomes; in security, we must establish a new concept of common, comprehensive, cooperative, and sustainable security, providing a security umbrella for the people of all countries; in civilization, we must learn from each other’s strengths, make common progress, and build a garden of world civilizations; ecologically, we must advocate green, low-carbon, circular, and sustainable production and lifestyles, achieving the organic unity of production development, affluent living, and a sound ecology. The concept of a community with a shared future for mankind has greatly broadened the horizon of human civilization, enriched the connotation of civilization, and, with the high-level wisdom of comprehensive, coordinated, and sustainable development, achieved a thorough sublation of the single economic rationality of Western civilization, providing a practical action guide for the world’s prosperity and stability.

面对单一经济理性下西方文明的“囚徒困境”,人类命运共同体理念立足世界的永续发展和持久繁荣，明确指出人类文明是由经济、政治、文化、社会、生态等各方面构成的复杂有机体，其诸要素之间是相互联系、相互促进、不可分割的。只有各文明要素齐头并进、协调统一，才是确保可持续发展的平衡器和稳定仪。因此，“国际社会要从伙伴关系、安全格局、经济发展、文明交流、生态建设等方面作出努力”,这样才能建设一个“持久和平、普遍安全、共同繁荣、开放包容、清洁美丽的世界”。具体来说，就是政治上要坚持对话不对抗、结伴不结盟，构建世代友好、高度互信、休戚与共的新型伙伴关系；经济上要兼顾当前和长远，既做大“蛋糕”又分好“蛋糕”,推动经济全球化朝着更加普惠、平衡、共赢的方向发展；安全上要树立共同、综合、合作、可持续的新安全观，为各国人民撑起安全伞；文明上要取长补短、共同进步，建设世界文明的百花园；生态上要倡导绿色、低碳、循环、可持续的生产生活方式，实现生产发展、生活富裕、生态良好的有机统一。人类命运共同体理念极大拓宽了人类文明的视野、丰富了文明内涵，以全面协调可持续的高阶智慧实现了对西方文明单一经济理性的彻底扬弃，为世界的繁荣稳定提供了切实可行的行动指南。

4. Reshaping the Paradigm of Civilizational Interaction

4.重塑文明交往范式

Given the inherent exclusivist nature of Western civilization, the global paradigm of civilizational interaction and governance structure formed under its dominance also exhibits a distinct “center-periphery” characteristic of one-power hegemony or joint governance by a few powers. To ensure that the world’s political and economic development pattern consistently embodies capitalist will and tilts toward the capitalist side, Western countries engage extensively in ideological demarcation and bloc alliance, cobbling together exclusive “arbitrary and dictatorial” small circles, and distribute power according to the so-called “hierarchy of strength,” thereby forming a unidirectional global governance pattern centered on a few countries, diminishing outward from the inside. In this pattern, the Western central powers firmly control the discourse power over the world’s political, economic, cultural, and security orders, arbitrarily altering international rules with an extreme pragmatist approach of “use if agreeable, discard if not,” while the vast “peripheral” countries can only unconditionally submit to their arrangements and directives. Any behavior or opinion contrary to the will of the “central” countries is stigmatized as “rebellion” or “heterodoxy,” and subjected to relentless isolation and sanctions. In this way, the equal relationship between civilizations is thoroughly destroyed, and the vast number of late-developing countries are long suppressed within the distorted order of “control-dependency,” slavishly following the orders and manipulation of Western countries, becoming victims of capitalist development.

鉴于西方文明排他主义的内在秉性，由其主导形成的全球文明交往范式和治理结构也呈现出鲜明的一国独霸、几方共治的“中心—边缘”特征。为了使世界政治经济发展格局始终贯彻资本主义意志、倒向资本主义一方，西方国家大搞意识形态划界与抱团结盟，拉帮结派拼凑“专横独断”的小圈子，并按所谓“实力等级”原则进行权力派发，进而形成以少数国家为中心、自内向外依次递减的单向式全球治理格局。在此格局中，西方中心国家牢牢把持着世界政治、经济、文化以及安全秩序的话语权，以“合则用、不合则弃”的极端实用主义做派任意篡改国际规则，广大“边缘”国家只能无条件地服从其安排和指令。任何与“中心”国家意志相违背的行为或意见都被污名化为“反叛”“异类”,都会遭受无情的孤立和制裁。这样一来，文明之间的平等关系就被破坏殆尽了，广大后发国家在“控制—依附”的扭曲秩序中长期受到压制，亦步亦趋地受西方国家的差遣和摆布，沦为资本主义发展的牺牲品。

In response to the hegemonic, domineering, and bullying practices in the Western paradigm of civilizational interaction, the concept of a community with a shared future for mankind, with a world vision and global sentiment of shared interests, shared rights, and shared responsibilities, advocates that although countries differ in size and strength, they are all equal members of the international community and should receive undifferentiated treatment and respect. Any practice of monopolizing international affairs, dominating development advantages, or controlling the destiny of other countries will only lead to global development imbalance, security disorder, and governance failure, ultimately causing human civilization to suffer backlash in the bipolar confrontation of “the rich forever rich, the poor forever poor.” Therefore, the establishment of a civilizational order “cannot allow whoever has the ‘stronger arm’ to be listened to”; [15]15 Xi Jinping, “Working Together to Build a Community with a Shared Future for Mankind,” speech at the United Nations Office at Geneva, January 18, 2017. different countries and civilizations should, under the premise of equal rights, equal opportunities, and equal rules, replace civilizational suppression with civilizational exchange, and civilizational superiority with civilizational mutual learning, thereby jointly writing international rules, jointly governing global affairs, jointly controlling the world’s destiny, and jointly sharing the world’s achievements. Only when global affairs are discussed by all together, the governance system is built by all together, and the fruits of governance are shared by all together, can different civilizations move toward exchange and mutual learning, allowing their unique charms and profound foundations to shine and complement each other in integrated symbiosis. At this point, the entire paradigm of civilizational interaction will also shift from “a solo performance” to “a multi-part harmony,” with all parties joining hands in a new civilizational order of extensive consultation, joint contribution, shared governance, and shared benefits to jointly create a new future for the development of human society.

针对西方文明交往范式中的霸权、霸道、霸凌主义行径，人类命运共同体理念以利益共生、权利共享、责任共担的世界眼光和天下情怀，主张国家虽有大小，实力虽有强弱，但都是国际社会中的平等一员，都应得到无差别的对待和尊重。任何包揽国际事务、垄断发展优势、主宰他国命运的做法，都只会造成全球发展失衡、安全失序、治理失效，最终在“富国恒富、穷国恒穷”的两极对抗中使人类文明遭受冲击反噬。因此，文明秩序的确立“不能允许谁的‘胳膊粗’就听谁的”,不同国家、不同文明应该在权利平等、机会平等、规则平等的前提下以文明交流取代文明压制、以文明互鉴取代文明优越，从而共同书写国际规则、共同治理全球事务、共同掌握世界命运、共同分享世界成果。只有全球事务由大家一起商量，治理体系由大家一起建设，治理成果由大家一起分享，不同文明才能走向交流互鉴，才能使彼此的独特魅力与深厚底蕴在融合共生中交相辉映、相得益彰。此时，整个文明交往范式也将从“一方独鸣”走向“多方合奏”,在共商共建共治共享的文明新秩序中各方携手共同创造人类社会发展新未来。

5. Defining the Goals of Civilizational Progress

5.厘定文明进步目标

Viewed through historical materialism, human civilization always develops forward in the contradictory movement between productive forces and relations of production, presenting a dynamic evolutionary process. However, capitalism eternalizes its own limited civilizational progress, complacently posing as the “creator of civilization,” declaring capitalism to be the “eternal law,” an unchanging “millennial kingdom.” Especially after the collapse of the Soviet Union at the end of the 20th century, the apologists of capitalism went so far as to put forward the anti-intellectual rhetoric of the “end of history,” falsely claiming that capitalist civilization is “the end point of mankind’s ideological evolution” and “the final form of human government,” [16]16 Francis Fukuyama, The End of History and the Last Man (New York: Free Press, 1992), p. xi. asserting that “today we can hardly imagine a world fundamentally better than ours, or a future that is not essentially democratic and capitalist,” [17]17 Ibid., p. 46. thereby, with an extremely distorted civilizational narcissism, whitewashing capitalism as a panacea “capable of everything” and “curing all ills,” and enchanting Western civilization as the highest goal and “ultimate perfection” of human civilizational evolution. Ironically, it is precisely this so-called “ultimate perfection” of civilizational form that, faced with the current world of intertwined turmoil and rising risks and challenges, shows deep inadequacy and obvious strain, barely able to protect itself by “building fences and walls,” “decoupling and severing supply chains,” and “reneging on treaties and withdrawing from groups,” leading to the bankruptcy of the myth of the “end of history.”

以唯物史观观之，人类文明总是在生产力与生产关系的矛盾运动中不断向前发展的，呈现出一个动态的演进过程。然而，资本主义却将自身有限的文明进步性加以永恒化，故步自封地以“文明缔造者”的身份自居，宣称资本主义是“永恒的法则”,是永世罔替的“千年王国”。尤其是在20世纪末苏联解体以后，资本主义的卫道士们更是抛出“历史终结”的反智言论，妄称资本主义文明是“人类意识形态发展的终点”和“人类最后一种统治形式”,“今天的我们难以想象一个在根本上比我们这个世界更好的世界，或者一个在本质上并非民主主义和资本主义的未来”,从而以一种极度扭曲的文明自恋心态，将资本主义粉饰为“包打天下”“包治百病”的济世良方，将西方文明赋魅为人类文明进化的最高目标和“终极圆满”状态。讽刺的是，恰是这一所谓“终极圆满”的文明形态，面对当今世界变乱交织、各种风险挑战持续上升的局面，却表现出深深的力不从心与明显的捉襟见肘，只能以“围栏筑墙”“脱钩断链”“毁约退群”的方式勉强自保，“历史终结”的神话走向破产。

The paradox of Western civilization proves to us that capitalism is by no means the apex of human civilizational development; the “end of history” does not conform to common sense, let alone to laws. Faced with a human world undergoing great development and great transformation, we must never pin our hopes on the decrepit and decaying Western civilization. Instead, we must stand on the right side of history, on the side of human civilizational progress, and, supported by building a community with a shared future for mankind, closely unite countries with different social systems, different ideologies, different historical cultures, and different levels of development, break down barriers to civilizational interaction with a broad mind as vast as the ocean, absorb the nutrients of various civilizations with an inclusive attitude, thereby establishing new ideas for civilizational interaction for the future, gathering new wisdom for global governance, opening up a new order for international interaction, depicting a new vision for a better world, and creating a new form of human civilization. The new form of human civilization is a great creation that deeply observes the general trend of world development, accurately grasps the common aspirations of the world’s people, deeply explores the laws of economic and social development, and insists on standing on the right side of history. It is the right path for humanity that conforms to the laws of human civilizational development and follows the trend of history. Thus, the concept of a community with a shared future for mankind has redrawn the future landscape of world civilizational development, achieving a major innovation in the theory and practice of civilizational development. It not only provides new choices for the development of all countries but also contributes Chinese wisdom to breaking through the predicament of human civilization, becoming a clear banner for China to lead the direction of human civilization in the 21st century.

西方文明的悖论向我们证明，资本主义绝非人类文明发展的顶点，“历史终结”不符合常识，更不符合规律。面对正在经历大发展、大变革的人类世界，我们绝不能寄希望于垂暮腐朽的西方文明，而必须站在历史正确的一边，站在人类文明进步的一边，以构建人类命运共同体为支撑，将不同社会制度、不同意识形态、不同历史文化、不同发展水平的国家紧密团结起来，以海纳百川的宽广胸怀打破文明交往壁垒，以兼收并蓄的态度汲取各种文明养分，从而面向未来确立文明交往新思路、凝聚全球治理新智慧、开辟国际交往新秩序、描绘美好世界新愿景、创造人类文明新形态。人类文明新形态是深刻洞察世界发展大势、准确把握世界人民共同愿望、深入探索经济社会发展规律、坚持站在历史正确一边的伟大创造，是符合人类文明发展规律、顺应历史发展趋势的人间正道。由此，人类命运共同体理念重新绘制了世界文明发展的未来图景，实现了文明发展理论与实践的重大创新，不仅为世界各国的发展提供了全新选择，更为突破人类文明困境贡献了中国智慧，成为中国在21世纪引领人类文明走向的鲜明旗帜。

III. Expansion and Sublimation: Promoting the Building of a Community with a Shared Future for Mankind under the Guidance of the New Form of Human Civilization

三、拓展与升华：在人类文明新形态引领下推动构建人类命运共同体

At present, the world is undergoing accelerated changes unseen in a century, and humanity once again stands at a historical crossroads. In response, General Secretary Xi Jinping has pointed out: “Facing the tests of high winds, choppy waters, and even treacherous waves, all countries must uphold a correct worldview, view of history, and overall perspective, transforming the concept of building a community with a shared future for mankind into action and turning the vision into reality.” [18]18 This quotation is from Xi Jinping’s remarks at the opening ceremony of the 2023 Central Conference on Work Relating to Foreign Affairs, held in Beijing from December 27 to 28, 2023. The full text of the speech was published in *People’s Daily* on December 29, 2023. However, in the process of transforming concepts into action and visions into reality, practical difficulties such as value divergences, interest conflicts, cognitive differences, and responsibility mismatches are bound to arise. This requires us to take the implementation of the four major global initiatives as a lever to promote a systematic renewal of global value consensus, development order, civilizational concepts, security systems, and governance structures, thereby continuously expanding and elevating the great practice of building a community with a shared future for mankind.

当前世界百年未有之大变局加速演进，人类又一次站在了历史的十字路口。对此，习近平总书记指出：“面对风高浪急甚至惊涛骇浪的考验，各国要秉持正确的世界观、历史观、大局观，把构建人类命运共同体的理念转化为行动、愿景转化为现实。”然而，在把理念转化为行动、把愿景转化为现实的过程中，势必会碰到价值分歧、利益博弈、认知差异、责任错位等现实难题，这要求我们必须以践行四大全球倡议为抓手推动全球价值共识、发展秩序、文明理念、安全体系以及治理格局的系统性更新，推动构建人类命运共同体的伟大实践不断拓展升华。

First, further grasp new civilizational values, break through the value barriers arising from differing interests among nation-states, and forge a community of ideas based on joint consultation and consensus. Building consensus on value concepts is the basic prerequisite for constructing a community with a shared future for mankind. Only through mutual recognition and acknowledgment can people think with one mind and act with one force to build a better world. The deepening development of economic globalization has increasingly tightened ties among countries, making the international community more and more a community with a shared future where “you have me, and I have you.” However, constrained by differences in historical and cultural traditions, social systems and models, and core interest demands among countries, this reality of “symbiosis of interests” has not been transformed into a “universal consensus” at the value level, thereby leading to difficulties in cooperation on interest coordination, rule-making, and other aspects. Some Western countries have long found it hard to face the fact of the diversity of world civilizations, even placing their own value systems above the diverse civilizations of the world and attempting to unify the values of all countries with “universal values.” Yet this is not a true consensus on value concepts but an ideological tool for interfering in the internal affairs of other countries and dominating the international order. To a certain extent, the September 11 attacks, the Afghanistan War, the Iraq War, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and the Russia-Ukraine conflict are all manifestations of value conflicts. [19]19 The September 11 attacks (2001) were a series of coordinated terrorist strikes by al-Qaeda against the United States. The Afghanistan War (2001–2021) and the Iraq War (2003–2011) were U.S.-led military interventions. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a long-standing territorial and political dispute; the Russia-Ukraine conflict escalated with Russia’s full-scale invasion in February 2022. These events are cited here as examples of value conflicts manifesting in violent forms. In view of this, the community with a shared future for mankind consistently upholds the common values of all humanity as universal principles and ideal pursuits. At the level of global governance, it uses the Global Development Initiative, the Global Security Initiative, the Global Civilization Initiative, and the Global Governance Initiative to consolidate broad value consensus, providing basic guidance for breaking down value barriers among countries. This new civilizational consensus does not attempt to dissolve the particular values of each country with common values but emphasizes seeking the “greatest common divisor” of the interests of all countries through dialogue and consultation on the basis of respecting value differences. However, for countries around the world to truly build a consensus on value concepts, in addition to having common values of all humanity that represent the shared aspirations of people in all countries, these values must also become a “conscious choice” for each country based on its own rational judgment and interest considerations. Therefore, building consensus on value concepts requires neither avoiding differences nor amplifying oppositions. It is necessary to construct dialogue mechanisms with equal participation of multiple actors, promoting exchanges and consultations among countries on their respective core concerns, so that countries with different social systems, different ideologies, different histories and cultures, and different levels of development can seek common ground while reserving differences and transform differences into commonalities in international affairs. Only in this way can we break through the value barriers arising from differing interests among nation-states and truly forge a community of ideas based on joint consultation and consensus.

第一，进一步把握新的文明价值，突破民族国家因利益不同而出现的价值隔阂，打造共商共识的理念共同体。凝聚价值理念共识是构建人类命运共同体的基本前提，只有彼此认同、承认，才会心往一处想、劲往一处使，共建美好世界。经济全球化的深入发展推动国家间的联系日益紧密，国际社会越来越成为“你中有我，我中有你”的命运共同体。但受限于各国历史文化传统、社会制度模式与核心利益诉求的不同，这种“利益共生”的现实未能转化为价值层面的“普遍共识”,进而导致各国在利益协调、规则制定等方面的合作面临困难。部分西方国家始终难以正视世界文明多样性的事实，甚至将自身价值体系凌驾于世界多元文明之上，试图用“普世价值”来统一各国价值观念，但这并非真正的价值理念共识，而是干涉他国内政、主导国际秩序的意识形态工具。“9·11”事件、阿富汗战争、伊拉克战争、巴以冲突、俄乌冲突等，在一定程度上说都是价值观念冲突的表现形式。鉴于此，人类命运共同体始终坚持作为人类普遍原则和理想追求的全人类共同价值，在全球治理层面以全球发展倡议、全球安全倡议、全球文明倡议、全球治理倡议凝聚广泛价值共识，为打破国家间的价值隔阂提供了基本遵循。这种新的文明共识并不试图以共同价值消解各国的特殊价值，而是强调在尊重价值差异的基础上通过对话协商寻求各国利益的“最大公约数”。但是，要让世界各国真正凝聚起价值理念共识，除了要有代表各国人民共同追求的全人类共同价值，还必须使其成为各国基于自身理性判断与利益考量的“自觉选择”。因此，凝聚价值理念共识既不能回避分歧，也不能放大对立，要构建多元主体平等参与的对话机制，推动世界各国就各自核心关切问题开展交流协商，让不同社会制度、不同意识形态、不同历史文化、不同发展水平的国家都能够在国际事务中求同存异、聚同化异。唯有如此，才能突破民族国家因利益不同而出现的价值隔阂，真正打造以共商共识为基础的理念共同体。

Second, further grasp new civilizational achievements, break through the interest barriers arising from the asymmetry of the global industrial chain division of labor, and forge a development community based on joint construction and shared access. The community with a shared future for mankind is committed to narrowing the North-South gap and resolving unbalanced development, enabling all countries to participate in and enjoy the fruits of world economic development. Although the current global industrial chain division of labor system has achieved great successes in efficiency improvement and wealth creation, its inherent asymmetry has increasingly become the core crux of global development imbalance. In the global industrial chain division of labor, a few developed countries have long occupied the high-value-added links at both ends of the “smile curve,” capturing the vast majority of the benefits brought by the global industrial chain division of labor, while most developing countries are stuck in the low-value-added links at the bottom of the “smile curve,” such as raw material supply and low-end processing and manufacturing, obtaining only a small share of the benefits and falling into the trap of “growth without development.” The fundamental reason lies in the extension and intensification of the internal contradictions of capitalist civilization on a global scale. The global community driven by it is essentially a “false community” co-opted by the logic of capital, where the “sharing” nature of the community is alienated into the “exclusivity” of capital, thereby stripping the global industrial chain division of labor of its attribute of “mutual benefit and win-win” and reducing it to a channel for capital’s one-sided plunder. In response, the community with a shared future for mankind must adhere to the civilizational development logic of equality and common progress for all countries in the world. By promoting the Global Development Initiative, it seeks to achieve equal opportunities for development, universal access to development outcomes, and sustainable development models, “unifying the interests of one’s own people with those of the people of all countries,” so that the global industrial chain division of labor benefits the people of all countries more and more fairly. On the one hand, the “cake” must first be made bigger. Responding to the universal demands of all countries for development, we should take the global industrial chain division of labor as a link, strengthen international cooperation, promote technology sharing, and jointly cultivate and expand new quality productive forces, injecting lasting momentum into world economic growth. On the other hand, the “cake” must be distributed well. We should encourage countries to take into account the legitimate concerns of others while pursuing their own interests, and promote common development for all countries while seeking their own development, so that the dividends of the global industrial chain division of labor benefit all countries in the world. Ultimately, by making the “cake” of world economic development bigger and distributing it well, we can realize a civilizational development landscape where each contributes its strengths, does its best, and obtains its due.

第二，进一步把握新的文明成就，突破因全球产业链分工的不对等性而出现的利益藩篱，打造共建共通的发展共同体。人类命运共同体致力于缩小南北鸿沟、破解发展不平衡，让世界各国都能参与并享有世界经济发展的成果。当前全球产业链分工体系虽然在效率提升、财富创造上取得了巨大成就，但其内在的不对等性日益成为世界发展失衡的核心症结。在全球产业链分工中，少数发达国家长期占据“微笑曲线”两端的高附加值环节，攫取了全球产业链分工所带来的绝大部分收益，而大多数发展中国家则处于“微笑曲线”谷底的原材料供应、低端加工制造等低附加值环节，只能从全球产业链分工中获得较少收益，落入“有增长而无发展”的陷阱。其中的根本原因在于资本主义文明的内在矛盾在全球范围内的延伸与激化，由其所驱动的全球共同体实质上是被资本逻辑裹挟的“虚假共同体”,共同体的“共享性”被异化为资本的“独占性”,从而使全球产业链分工失去了“互利共赢”的属性，沦为资本单向掠夺的通道。对此，人类命运共同体要坚持世界各国一律平等、共同进步的文明发展逻辑，以弘扬全球发展倡议推动实现发展机会的均等化、发展成果的普惠化以及发展模式的可持续化，“把本国人民利益同世界各国人民利益统一起来”,让全球产业链分工更多更公平惠及各国人民。一方面，要先把“蛋糕”做大，顺应世界各国发展的普遍诉求，以全球产业链分工为纽带，加强国际合作、推动技术共享，共同培育壮大新质生产力，为世界经济增长注入持久动力。另一方面，要把“蛋糕”分好，推动各国在追求本国利益时兼顾他国合理关切，在谋求本国发展中促进各国共同发展，让全球产业链分工红利惠及世界各国。最终，通过做大和分好世界经济发展的“蛋糕”,实现各施所长、各尽所能、各得其所的文明发展图景。

Third, further grasp the new civilizational guarantee, break through the existential threats posed by traditional and non-traditional security issues, and forge a security community of co-governance and co-existence. Security issues bear on the future and destiny of the world and the life and death of humanity. A community with a shared future for mankind aims to form a balanced, effective, and sustainable security architecture, so that the people of every country can live and work in peace and contentment. At present, human security faces a severe situation: traditional security issues such as territorial disputes and arms races have not yet been eradicated, while non-traditional security threats such as terrorism, separatism, religious extremism, and cyber security are intertwined and coexist. The interweaving of traditional and non-traditional security threats seriously endangers the life safety of people in all countries, and achieving international common security urgently requires new concepts and new methods. However, some developed countries uphold the supremacy of power and pursue absolute security, plunging the global community dominated by capitalism into a security dilemma. Not only are they unable to form a joint force to jointly address new security challenges, but they have instead become an important cause of the global security deficit. Therefore, the key to escaping the global security dilemma lies in using the Global Security Initiative, which aims to promote the world's shared security and shared danger, to sublate the national security logic advocated by capitalist civilization, and to establish a new concept of common, comprehensive, cooperative, and sustainable security. [20]20 The Global Security Initiative is a Chinese foreign policy concept proposing a vision of common, comprehensive, cooperative and sustainable security. Specifically, a community with a shared future for mankind must first enable all countries to establish an awareness of equal security rights, respect and guarantee the security of every country, ensure that no country can place its own security above that of others, let alone at the expense of others' security, thereby promoting the transformation of national security strategies from "exclusive defense" to "inclusive co-governance." On this basis, on the one hand, it is necessary to coordinate the maintenance of security in both traditional and non-traditional fields, build a comprehensive, multi-layered security system, guard against the interweaving and mutual intensification of the two types of security risks, both using the stability of traditional security to solidify the foundation for addressing non-traditional security, and using the governance of non-traditional security to eliminate the potential triggers of traditional security. On the other hand, it is necessary to coordinate and advance security governance through dialogue and cooperation, build multilateral security mechanisms, leverage the synergistic role of the United Nations and major-power coordination in security governance, so that all countries can form a joint force to jointly address security threats in both traditional and non-traditional fields. Only by building a global security governance system covering both traditional and non-traditional security fields can we promote the transition of human society from a security dilemma of "each fighting for itself" to a security pattern of "co-governance and co-existence," providing a solid guarantee for the continuation of human civilization.

第三，进一步把握新的文明保障，突破因传统与非传统安全问题造成的生存威胁，打造共治共处的安全共同体。安全问题事关世界前途命运和人类生死存亡，人类命运共同体旨在形成均衡、有效、可持续的安全架构，让每一个国家的人民都能安居乐业。当前，人类安全面临着严峻形势，领土争端、军备竞赛等传统安全问题尚未根除，恐怖主义、分裂主义、宗教极端势力、网络安全等非传统安全威胁又交织并存。传统安全威胁与非传统安全威胁相互交织，严重威胁着各国人民生命安全，实现国际共同安全急需新理念、新办法。然而，部分发达国家奉行实力至上，追求绝对安全，使得由资本主义主导的全球共同体陷入安全困境，不仅不能形成合力去共同应对新安全挑战，反而成为加剧全球安全赤字的重要原因。因此，摆脱全球安全困境的关键在于，以旨在促进世界安危与共的全球安全倡议扬弃资本主义文明所倡导的国家安全逻辑，树立共同、综合、合作、可持续的新安全观。具体来说，人类命运共同体首先要使各国树立安全利益平等的意识，尊重和保障每一个国家的安全，确保任何国家都不能把自身安全凌驾于他国安全之上，更不能以损害他国安全为代价，从而推动各国将安全战略从“排他性防御”转向“包容性共治”。在此基础上，一方面，要统筹维护传统领域和非传统领域安全，构建全方位、多层次的安全体系，警惕两类安全风险相互交织、彼此激化，既以传统安全的稳定为应对非传统安全筑牢根基，又以非传统安全的治理消除传统安全的潜在诱因。另一方面，要通过对话合作协调推进安全治理，构建多边安全机制，发挥联合国组织与大国协调在安全治理中的协同作用，使各个国家能够形成合力，共同应对传统领域和非传统领域的安全威胁。只有构建起覆盖传统与非传统安全领域的全球安全治理体系，才能推动人类社会从“各自为战”的安全困境走向“共治共处”的安全格局，为人类文明存续提供坚实保障。

Fourth, further grasp the new civilizational pattern, break through the contradiction between humanity and nature caused by the traditional development concept, and forge an ecological community of co-existence and co-beauty. The progress of human civilization should not come at the expense of nature; rather, sustainable development should be achieved through the harmonious coexistence of humanity and nature. A community with a shared future for mankind aims to hold the environmental bottom line for nature and strive to build a shared home for humanity and nature on Earth. The development model of conquering nature and plundering resources formed since industrial civilization, although enabling rapid development of human society in a relatively short period, has led to increasingly severe ecological problems such as global environmental pollution, climate warming, sharp decline in biodiversity, and shortage of energy and resources, seriously threatening human survival and development. Western developed countries, as the pioneers and biggest beneficiaries of industrial civilization, are the historical parties responsible for the global ecological crisis. However, on ecological issues, they have adopted "double standards" and "responsibility shifting": on the one hand, they extract cheap resources from nature and developing countries to support their own development, while shifting the ecological costs of high pollution and high emissions onto nature and developing countries; on the other hand, they pose as "environmental guardians," imposing stringent environmental standards on developing countries, yet passively fulfilling their own commitments on emission reduction targets, financial assistance, and technological support. This self-serving traditional development concept exacerbates the contradiction between humanity and nature and has become the biggest obstacle to global ecological governance. Facing the dilemma of global ecological governance, the international community should jointly fulfill the principle of adhering to the harmonious coexistence of humanity and nature advocated by the Global Development Initiative, and under the framework of a community with a shared future for mankind, join hands to build a community of life for humanity and nature, and seek the path of harmonious coexistence between humanity and nature. On the one hand, all countries in the world should firmly establish the ecological civilization concept of "respecting nature, conforming to nature, and protecting nature," transcend the traditional development concept with the "new development concept of innovation, coordination, green, openness, and sharing," [21]21 The "new development concept" (新发展理念) is a set of five guiding principles for China's economic development: innovation, coordination, green, openness, and sharing. and advocate a "green, low-carbon, circular, and sustainable" production and lifestyle, thereby continuously expanding the civilized development path of production development, affluent life, and good ecology, achieving the superposition of economic, social, and ecological benefits. On the other hand, the international community should adhere to the global ecological responsibility concept of "common but differentiated," actively fulfill international obligations and carry out global actions. In particular, Western developed countries need to face up to their accumulated ecological debts in the process of industrial civilization, fulfill commitments such as financial assistance, technological support, and energy conservation and emission reduction with concrete actions, and join hands with developing countries to promote global ecological governance, leaving a clean and beautiful world for future generations.

第四，进一步把握新的文明格局，突破因传统发展观造成的人与自然之间的矛盾，打造共生共美的生态共同体。人类文明的进步不应以牺牲自然为代价，而应在人与自然和谐共生中实现永续发展，人类命运共同体就是要为自然守住环境底线，努力构建人与自然和谐共生的地球家园。工业文明以来形成的征服自然、掠夺资源的发展模式，虽然使人类社会在较短时间内实现快速发展，却导致全球环境污染、气候变暖、生物多样性锐减、能源资源短缺等生态问题日益严峻，严重威胁着人类的生存与发展。西方发达国家作为工业文明的先行者与最大受益者，是造成全球生态危机的历史责任方，但其在生态问题上却采取了“双重标准”与“责任转嫁”的做法：一方面，从自然界和发展中国家攫取廉价资源支撑自身发展，又将高污染、高排放的生态代价转嫁给自然界和发展中国家；另一方面，自诩“环保卫士”,对发展中国家设置严苛的环保标准，却对自身承诺的减排目标、资金帮扶、技术支持消极履行。这种自私自利的传统发展观加剧了人与自然之间的矛盾，成为全球生态治理的最大阻碍。面对全球生态治理困境，国际社会要共同履行全球发展倡议所倡导的坚持人与自然和谐共生的原则，在人类命运共同体框架下携手构建人与自然生命共同体，共谋人与自然和谐共生之道。一方面，世界各国应牢固树立“尊重自然、顺应自然、保护自然”的生态文明理念，以“创新、协调、绿色、开放、共享的新发展理念”超越传统发展观，倡导“绿色、低碳、循环、可持续”的生产生活方式，从而不断拓展生产发展、生活富裕、生态良好的文明发展道路，实现经济效益、社会效益与生态效益的叠加。另一方面，国际社会应坚持“共同但有区别”的全球生态责任理念，积极履行国际义务、开展全球行动，特别是西方发达国家需正视自身在工业文明进程中累积的生态欠账，以实际行动兑现资金援助、技术支持、节能减排等承诺，与发展中国家携手推动全球生态治理，把一个清洁美丽的世界留给子孙后代。

Fifth, further grasp the new civilizational goal, break through the global power distribution struggle caused by the diffusion and eastward shift of international power, and forge a cooperative community of mutual benefit and win-win. A community with a shared future for mankind ultimately aims to forge a cooperative community of mutual benefit and win-win, achieving the value goal of "countries with different social systems, different ideologies, different historical cultures, and different levels of development sharing interests, rights, and responsibilities in international affairs." [22]22 This is a direct quotation from a Chinese official document on the vision of a community with a shared future for mankind. The realization of this goal will inevitably be affected by the struggle for international power. With the collective rise of emerging market countries and developing countries, the global power structure shows a trend of overall diffusion and eastward shift, the essence of which is a profound adjustment of international power from "monopoly by a few countries" to "participation by multiple actors." This adjustment touches on the fundamental architecture and future direction of the international order, breaking the global governance system led by Western countries, with the United States at the core, formed after World War II. Western countries, led by the United States, are unwilling to easily give up their existing rule-making dominance and attempt to exclude Global South countries from the power system; while Global South countries, composed of emerging market countries and developing countries, eagerly hope to participate in global governance and enhance their representation and voice in the global governance system. The interests and demands of all parties are difficult to reconcile, thus triggering a global power contest and rule competition. Facing the objective trend of the evolution of the international power structure, to forge a cooperative community of mutual benefit and win-win, it is necessary to promote a smooth transition of the global governance system from "Western dominance" to "pluralistic co-governance." On the one hand, in the face of common human challenges and the dilemma of global governance, it is necessary to follow the Global Governance Initiative to actively promote "North-South dialogue," allowing developed and developing countries to resolve differences, build consensus, and reach cooperation through equal communication, deeply integrate the advantages of developed countries with the potential of developing countries, form a mutual benefit and win-win pattern of "1+1>2," thereby transforming the original power game into momentum for coordinated development and weakening the antagonism of power struggles. On the other hand, it is necessary to improve and perfect the implementation mechanism of the Global Civilization Initiative, transcend differences in history, culture, geography, and systems, transform Global South countries from scattered expression of demands into unified governance participants, deepen practical cooperation in regional and specific fields of governance around common demands, form a collective force sufficient to promote the reform of international rules, and promote global governance towards a more just and reasonable direction. Ultimately, by forging a cooperative community of mutual benefit and win-win, friendly cooperation between countries with different social systems, different stages of development, and different sizes can be achieved, continuously advancing towards the human ideal community of the "association of free individuals." [23]23 "Association of free individuals" (自由人联合体) is a term from Marx and Engels' *Communist Manifesto* describing the ultimate goal of communist society.

第五，进一步把握新的文明目标，突破因国际权力扩散与东移而产生的全球权力分配斗争，打造互利共赢的合作共同体。人类命运共同体最终要打造的是共利共赢的合作共同体，实现“不同社会制度、不同意识形态、不同历史文化、不同发展水平的国家在国际事务中利益共生、权利共享、责任共担”的价值目标。这一目标的实现势必会受到国际权力斗争的影响。随着新兴市场国家和发展中国家群体性崛起，全球权力结构呈现出总体扩散和东移的态势，其本质是国际权力从“少数国家垄断”向“多元主体参与”的深刻调整。这一调整触及国际秩序的根本架构与未来走向，打破了第二次世界大战后形成的、以美国为首的西方国家主导的全球治理体系。以美国为首的西方国家不愿轻易放弃现有的规则主导权，企图将全球南方国家排除在权力体系以外；而由新兴市场国家和发展中国家构成的全球南方国家则迫切希望参与全球治理，提升在全球治理体系中的代表性和发言权。各方利益诉求难以调和，由此引发了全球权力角逐与规则之争。面对国际权力结构演变的客观趋势，要打造互利共赢的合作共同体，推动全球治理体系从“西方主导”向“多元共治”平稳过渡。一方面，面对人类共同挑战与全球治理困境，必须以全球治理倡议为遵循积极推进“南北对话”,让发达国家和发展中国家在平等沟通中化解分歧、凝聚共识、达成合作，将发达国家的优势与发展中国家的潜力深度融合，形成“1+1>2”的共利共赢格局，进而将原来的权力博弈转化为协同发展的动能，弱化权力争夺的对抗性。另一方面，必须健全完善全球文明倡议践行机制，超越历史、文化以及地缘和制度的差异，让全球南方国家从分散的诉求表达者转变为统一的治理参与者，围绕共同诉求深化区域与具体领域治理务实合作，形成足以推动国际规则改革的集体力量，推动全球治理朝着更加公正合理的方向发展。最终，通过打造共利共赢的合作共同体，实现不同社会制度、不同发展阶段、不同大小国家友好合作，朝着“自由人联合体”的人类理想共同体不断迈进。

Author's bio: Liu Yang, Professor and Doctoral Supervisor, School of Marxism, Shanghai University of Finance and Economics.

作者简介：刘洋，上海财经大学马克思主义学院教授、博士生导师。