The Composite Narrative of Chinese-Path Modernization

General Secretary Xi Jinping has stressed: “We must accelerate the construction of a Chinese discourse and Chinese narrative system, use Chinese theory to explain Chinese practice, and use Chinese practice to elevate Chinese theory, creating new concepts, categories, and expressions that connect China and the rest of the world, so as to present Chinese stories and the ideological strength and spiritual power behind them more fully and more vividly.” The report of the 20th National Congress of the CPC profoundly expounded the Chinese characteristics, essential requirements, and major principles of Chinese-path modernization, and made a top-level design for advancing Chinese-path modernization, thereby “initially constructing a new theoretical system and discourse system of Chinese-path modernization on the whole.” [1]1 The 20th National Congress of the CPC was held in October 2022. “The central task of the Party and the state on the new journey of the New Era is to comprehensively advance the building of a strong country and the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation through Chinese-path modernization.” Chinese-path modernization is an important component of constructing a Chinese discourse and Chinese narrative system. From the perspective of narrative structure, Chinese-path modernization exhibits distinct composite characteristics across the four dimensions of narrator, narratee, story, and discourse, forming a new narrative paradigm — the “composite narrative of Chinese-path modernization” — which manifests the internal mechanism by which Chinese-path modernization transcends the logic of capital and promotes the pluralistic coexistence of civilizations.

习近平总书记强调：“要加快构建中国话语和中国叙事体系，用中国理论阐释中国实践，用中国实践升华中国理论，打造融通中外的新概念、新范畴、新表述，更加充分、更加鲜明地展现中国故事及其背后的思想力量和精神力量。”党的二十大报告深刻阐述了中国式现代化的中国特色、本质要求和重大原则，对推进中国式现代化作出了顶层设计，从“总体上初步建构起中国式现代化的新的理论体系和话语体系”。“新时代新征程党和国家的中心任务是以中国式现代化全面推进强国建设、民族复兴伟业。”中国式现代化是构建中国话语和中国叙事体系的重要内容。从叙事结构上看，中国式现代化在叙述者、受述者、故事和话语四个维度上呈现出鲜明的复合特质，形成了“中国式现代化复合叙事”这一新型叙事范式，彰显了中国式现代化超越资本逻辑、推动文明多元共生的内在机理。

I. Structural Critique and Theoretical Reflection on the Western Modernization Narrative

一、西方现代化叙事的结构批判与理论反思

Narrative is the social-practical mode of constructing discourse; it constructs the objective historical facts we perceive through both the selection of content and the strategy of narration. In short, “narrative” means “telling a story.” When we ask why modernization becomes a kind of “narrative,” we must begin by analyzing “narrative” itself. Marx once clarified the relationship between the “method of inquiry” and the “method of presentation” in *Capital*. He pointed out: “In form, the method of presentation must differ from that of inquiry. The latter has to appropriate the material in detail, to analyze its different forms of development, to trace out their inner connection. Only after this work is done can the actual movement be adequately presented.” From this perspective, the core of the Western modernization narrative is “the mystical side of Hegelian dialectics”; this “inverted” modernization narrative is, in the final analysis, the product of erroneous ideology. In response, it is necessary to critically analyze the basic structure of the Western modernization narrative, elucidate its inverted method of presentation, and provide a theoretical mirror for the emergence of the composite narrative of Chinese-path modernization.

叙事是话语的社会实践构造方式，它从内容选择与叙述策略两个方面建构出我们所感知到的客观历史事实。简言之，“叙事”就是“讲故事”，当我们追问现代化何以成为一种“叙事”时，需要从“叙事”本身开始分析。马克思曾在《资本论》中阐明了“研究方法”和“叙述方法”之间的关系，他指出，“在形式上，叙述方法必须与研究方法不同。研究必须充分地占有材料，分析它的各种发展形式，探寻这些形式的内在联系。只有这项工作完成以后，现实的运动才能适当地叙述出来”。从这个角度看，西方现代化叙事的内核是“黑格尔辩证法的神秘方面”，这种“倒立着的”现代化叙事归根结底是错误意识形态的产物。对此，有必要批判剖析西方现代化叙事的基本结构，阐明其颠倒的叙述方法，为中国式现代化复合叙事的出场提供理论镜鉴。

(I) A Structural Analysis of the Western Modernization Narrative in the Context of Narratology

（一）叙事学语境下西方现代化叙事的结构剖析

From the 1950s to the 1970s, classical modernization theory was formally formed in the West. Although its schools of thought are numerous, the common feature of this modernization narrative is the opposition between traditional society and modern society, and the belief that a single, homogeneous project of modernity would continue to advance globally. On the other hand, modernity itself contains an anti-modern tradition. The postmodernist trend that emerged in the 1960s shook the status of the classical modernization narrative, and a postmodern modernization narrative characterized by decentering, fragmentation, and irrationality emerged as a reflection on and critique of the classical modernization narrative. But as Agnes Heller said: “Postmodernity is not a stage that comes after modernity; it is not a remedy for modernity — it is modern.” Although the historical fields represented by the classical modernization narrative and the postmodern modernization narrative differ, both are interwoven within the common problem field of the “Western modernization narrative.” At present, academic research on the Western modernization narrative mainly focuses on the classical modernization narrative and its content critique; a holistic and structural critique of the Western modernization narrative still needs to be deepened. Narratology is the science of studying the structural laws and narrative techniques of narrative works. Using the theoretical tools of narratology to analyze the Western modernization narrative is conducive to revealing the narrative strategies and power mechanisms hidden behind its ideological illusion. In the context of narratology, the Western modernization narrative, as a “‘story-telling’ cultural product,” can be structurally divided into the following four aspects:

20世纪50—70年代，经典现代化理论在西方正式形成，尽管其流派观点众多，但将传统社会和现代社会相对立，并认为单一同质化的现代性规划将在全球持续推进，是这一现代化叙事的共性。另一方面，现代性本身就蕴含着反现代传统，60年代兴起的后现代主义思潮动摇了经典现代化叙事的地位，一种表现为去中心化、碎片化和非理性化的后现代化叙事开始作为对经典现代化叙事的反思和批判而出现。但正如阿格尼丝·赫勒所说的：“后现代性并不是在现代性之后到来的一个阶段，它不是对现代性的补救————它是现代的。”经典现代化叙事和后现代化叙事尽管所表征的历史场域有所差异，但二者都交织于“西方现代化叙事”这一共同的问题场域之中。目前，学界对西方现代化叙事的研究主要集中于经典现代化叙事及其内容批判，对西方现代化叙事的整体性、结构性批判还有待深化。叙事学是研究叙事作品结构规律与叙述技术的科学，借助叙事学的理论工具对西方现代化叙事进行剖析，有利于揭示其意识形态幻象背后隐藏的叙述策略与权力机制。在叙事学语境下，西方现代化叙事作为一种“‘讲述故事’的文化产品”，其结构主要可以分为以下四个方面：

First, the narrator (the one who narrates). This is the source of the “voice” in a narrative work, controlling the rhythm and direction of the narrative, and determining what the narratee sees and hears, and in what manner. In the classical modernization narrative, the narrator is usually represented by abstract universal concepts such as the state, the nation, and the region. By setting the criteria for judging civilization and barbarism, progress and backwardness in the modernization narrative, it strengthens the credibility of the narrative and its own subject status, thereby establishing the narrative legitimacy of “Western-centrism” and “the superiority of civilization.” The postmodern modernization narrative opposes taking grand abstract concepts as the subject of the modernization narrative, demanding recognition of the narrator status of sensible, concrete, pluralistic individuals in the modernization narrative. It advocates that “the multiple goals of individuals and groups, the legitimacy of individual interests, and so-called common interests can all have multiple interpretations,” but its denial of objective truth and rejection of collective order regards modernization as a random, discrete, and unstable contingent process.

一是叙述者（the one who narrates），这是叙事作品“声音”的来源，掌握叙事的节奏和方向，决定受述者看到什么、听到什么、以什么方式看到和听到。在经典现代化叙事中，叙述者通常表现为国家、民族和地区等抽象的普遍性概念，它通过设定现代化叙事中文明与野蛮、进步与落后的评判标准，强化叙事的可信度和自身的主体地位，从而确立起“西方中心论”与“文明优越论”的叙事合法性。后现代化叙事反对将宏大的抽象概念作为现代化叙事的主体，要求承认感性的现实多元个体在现代化叙事中的叙述者地位。它主张“个人和群体的多重目标、个人利益的合法性以及所谓共同利益都可以有多种解释”，但其否认客观真理、拒斥集体秩序的一面又将现代化看作随机、离散和不稳定的偶然过程。

Second, the narratee (the one who is narrated to), that is, the receiver of the information sent by the narrator, “the person who receives the narrative.” In the classical modernization narrative, the distinct “you” signal corresponding to the narratee is concealed by the universal third-person narrative technique. The narration of the modernization process appears before the narratee in a transcendental form, and the narrative manifests as a value-neutral, homogeneous, universal iron law and model of modernization. In the postmodern modernization narrative, with the collapse of sacred grand narratives, atomized, secularized plural subjects exhibit a state of looseness and alienation in values, and “narration itself is contingent, replaceable, variable; it no longer provides something binding and connecting, no longer settles us in existence.” The narratee itself is thus dispersed due to the abolition of objective truth.

二是受述者（the one who is narrated to），即叙述者所发出信息的接收者，是“接受叙述的人”。在经典现代化叙事中，受述者所对应的鲜明的“你”信号被普遍第三人称的叙事手法隐去，对现代化过程的叙述以先验形式出现在受述者面前，叙事表现为价值无涉的同质性、普适性的现代化铁律和现代化模式。而在后现代化叙事中，随着神圣性宏大叙事的瓦解，原子化、世俗化的多元主体呈现出价值观上的松散和疏离状态，而“讲述本身就是偶然的、可替换的、可变的，它不再提供有约束力和起联结作用的东西，不再将我们安身于存在之中”。受述者本身也就因客观真理的取消而弥散。

Third, the story. This is the narrated and narrated part of the narrative, “a series of logically and chronologically reconstructed events, caused or experienced by the participants of the events, extracted from the specific arrangement of the narrative text or discourse.” The story of the classical modernization narrative closely revolves around the main line of “capital.” The narrator carefully selects materials such as “opposing feudalism,” “conquering nature,” “pursuing wealth,” and “enlightening barbarism,” and on this basis depicts a picture of the global expansion of capital driven by “universal values.” The postmodern modernization narrative emphasizes the diversity of story content. With the rise of diverse issues such as ethnicity, race, gender, and the environment, the postmodern modernization narrative further enriches the main line of the Western modernization narrative. The rise of various branches of post-classical narratology in narratology, such as comparative narratology, postcolonial narratology, feminist narratology, and social narratology, is precisely a reflection of this situation.

三是故事（story），这是叙事中所述和被述的部分，是“从叙事文本或者话语的特定排列中抽取出来的，由事件的参与者所引起或经历的一系列合乎逻辑的，并按时间先后顺序重新构造的一系列被描述的事件”。经典现代化叙事的故事紧紧围绕“资本”这一主线，叙述者精心挑选了“反对封建”“征服自然”“追求财富”“启蒙野蛮”等素材，在此基础上描绘出“普世价值”驱动下的资本全球扩张图景。后现代化叙事则强调故事内容的多样性，随着民族、种族、性别、环境等多元议题的兴起，后现代化叙事进一步丰富了西方现代化叙事的故事主线。而在叙事学中如比较叙事学、后殖民叙事学、女性主义叙事学、社会叙事学等后经典叙事学诸分支的兴起，正是对这一境况的反映。

Fourth is discourse, the expressive form of a narrative work. For non-textual modernization narratives, the “temporal order” that controls the sequence of events and the “point of view” that determines the visibility of information constitute the temporal and spatial limits within which the narrative unfolds. In terms of temporal order, classical modernization narrative, by reconstructing the sequence of narration, inverts the relationship between history and concept, employing a “counter-temporal” technique to grant conceptual history an independent status and retrospective legitimacy. Postmodern narrative, in contrast, deconstructs temporal order itself. It emphasizes that, influenced by the subjective cognition of multiple narrators, no narrative temporal order can objectively restore history as it was, giving rise to a “non-temporality” in which “all true history is contemporary history.” [2]2 “All true history is contemporary history” is a famous dictum of the Italian philosopher Benedetto Croce (1866–1952), expressing the idea that all historical understanding is shaped by the concerns of the present. In terms of point of view, classical modernization narrative adopts an omniscient “zero focalization” perspective. This perspective allows the narrator to enter anyone’s inner world and grasp the development of all events within the story, thereby rendering the space of the narrative as a homogeneous, undifferentiated container. Postmodern narrative, by contrast, adopts a “fixed internal focalization” perspective. On the one hand, it denies value consensus and objective truth, so its point of view is singular and unable to intersect with other viewpoints—hence “fixed.” On the other hand, this narrative emphasizes the narrator’s perspective as a plural subject, which determines that its point of view is “internal focalization,” proceeding from the self.

四是话语（discourse），这是叙事作品的表达形式，对于非文本的现代化叙事而言，控制事件排列顺序的“时序”和信息可见程度的“视点”是叙事展开的时间和空间限度。在时序上，经典现代化叙事通过重构叙事顺序，颠倒了历史与概念的关系，以“逆时序”的手法赋予了概念史以独立地位和回溯合法性。后现代化叙事则对时序本身进行解构，它强调受多元叙述者主观认知的影响，任何叙事时序都无法客观还原历史本身，构成“一切真历史都是当代史”的“非时序”。在视点上，经典现代化叙事采取的是全知全能的“零聚焦”视点，这种视点让叙述者能进入任何人的内心世界并掌握故事中所有事件发展的脉络，叙事中的空间由此表现为均质化、无差别的容器。而后现代化叙事采取的是“固定式内聚焦”视点：一方面，它否认价值共识和客观真理，因此它的视点是单一且无法和其他视点相交的“固定式”；另一方面，这种叙事强调多元主体的叙述者视角，这决定了它的视点是从自身出发的“内聚焦式”。

(II) Theoretical Reflections on Western Modernization Narratives

（二）对西方现代化叙事的理论反思

From the perspective of narratological theory, classical modernization narrative is an abstract conceptual narrative whose narrative structure and main thread of content exhibit characteristics of singularity and homogenization. First, in classical modernization narrative, the narrator is not a purely concrete entity but a vast conceptual product that “descends from heaven to earth,” [3]3 This phrase alludes to Marx and Engels’s critique in *The German Ideology* of the Young Hegelians, who “descend from heaven to earth” by treating ideas as the driving force of history rather than material conditions. in which there is no place for the sensuous individual; the subject of the narrative is an abstract, identical, and eternal totality. Marx pointed out that this kind of narrative, which separates itself from sensuous life and takes universal spirit and concepts as its subject, is essentially a false ideology: “The ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas… The class which has the means of material production at its disposal, consequently also controls the means of mental production… The ruling ideas are nothing more than the ideal expression of the dominant material relations… hence the ideas of their dominance… This is expressed in the idea that gives its own ideas the form of universality, and represents them as the only rational, universally valid ones.” [4]4 This is a paraphrase and partial quotation from Marx and Engels, *The German Ideology* (1845–1846), MECW vol. 5, pp. 59–60. Classical modernization narrative is an elitist mode of narration; its true narrator is the ruling class and its ideologists, hidden behind the “illusion of the common interest.” [5]5 “Illusion of the common interest” is a phrase from *The German Ideology*, where Marx and Engels argue that the ruling class presents its particular interest as the common interest of all. Second, this abstract universal narrative restricts the role of the narratee and conceals the image of the narratee. In classical modernization narrative, the narrator is a “narcissistic subject” that is self-determining and self-authorizing; the narratee is regarded merely as a passive receiver of information and an object to be possessed and controlled. As the project of modernity advances, other countries and regions are shaped into “‘successful’ modern societies,” and the “other” is continuously reduced to the “self.” Third, the classical modernization narrative’s worship of reason, pursuit of freedom, promise of justice, and emphasis on efficiency all ultimately stem from capital’s thirst for surplus value; this mode of narration serves the storyline of capital’s valorization. The capitalist mode of production, as a “general illumination” and “a specific ether,” “determines the specific gravity of everything that appears within it,” [6]6 This is a paraphrase of Marx’s discussion of the capitalist mode of production in the *Grundrisse* (1857–1858), MECW vol. 28, p. 37. and the process of promoting abstract universal modernization is simultaneously the process of capital achieving global domination. Fourth, the inversion of concept and history in the temporal order of classical modernization narrative is itself merely an a priori deceptive rhetorical device. Marx noted: “Providence, providential ends—this is the big word used today to explain the course of history. In fact, this word explains nothing. It is at most a rhetorical form, one way among many of interpreting facts.” [7]7 This is a paraphrase of Marx’s critique of providentialist views of history, likely drawn from *The Holy Family* (1845) or similar texts. And in terms of point of view, the omniscient perspective adopted by classical modernization narrative not only treats the space in which modernization occurs as an undifferentiated container but also erases the indigenous character of modernization through singularity and homogeneity.

从叙事学理论看来，经典现代化叙事是一种抽象的观念性叙事，其叙事结构和内容主线呈现出单一化和同质化特征。其一，在经典现代化叙事中，叙述者并非纯粹的实体概念，而是“从天国降到人间”的庞大观念产物，其中没有感性个体的位置，叙事的主体是抽象、同一和永恒的总体性存在。马克思指出，这种脱离感性生活、以普遍性精神和观念作为主体的叙事本质上是一种虚假的意识形态，“占统治地位的将是越来越抽象的思想，即越来越具有普遍性形式的思想。……这在观念上的表达就是：赋予自己的思想以普遍性的形式，把它们描绘成唯一合乎理性的、有普遍意义的思想”。经典现代化叙事是精英主义的叙事方式，其真正叙述者是隐藏在“共同利益的幻想”之后的统治阶级及其意识形态家们。其二，这种抽象普遍性叙事限制了受述者作用，隐匿了受述者形象。在经典现代化叙事中，叙述者是自我决定、自我授权的“自恋主体”，受述者仅被视作被动的信息接收者和被占有和控制的客体。伴随着现代性规划持续推进的过程，其他国家和地区将被塑造为“‘成功’的现代社会”，“他者”将不断被缩减为“自我”。其三，经典现代化叙事对理性的崇拜、对自由的追求、对正义的许诺、对效率的重视，实质上都源于资本对剩余价值的渴望，这种叙事方式是为资本增殖的故事主线服务的。资本主义生产方式作为一种“普照的光”和“特殊的以太”“决定着它里面显露出来的一切存在的比重”，推进抽象普遍的现代化的过程也就是资本实现全球统治的过程。其四，经典现代化叙事在时序上对概念和历史的颠倒，本身只是一种先验的欺骗性修辞手法，马克思指出：“天命，天命的目的，这是当前用以说明历史进程的一个响亮字眼。其实这个字眼不说明任何问题。它至多不过是一种修辞形式，是解释事实的多种方式之一。”而在视点上，经典现代化叙事所采取的全知全能视角不仅将现代化的发生空间看作无差别的容器，更以单一性和同质性抹杀了现代化的本土性。

Although postmodern narrative reflects on and critiques the binary oppositional structure of modernization narrative and its traditional metaphysical theoretical biases, it falls into a dilemma in practice due to its lack of a constructive dimension in narration. First, postmodern narrative deconstructs the abstract narrative subject constructed by Enlightenment reason, but what it leaves behind is not the real individual engaged in concrete practical activities and situated in definite social relations, but rather a “loose and flexible, oriented toward feelings, emotions, and internalized processes, holding an attitude of ‘become who you are’” [8]8 This appears to be a paraphrase or composite quotation from postmodern theorists such as Michel Foucault or Gilles Deleuze, but the exact source is not identified in the original text.—a structurally fragmented and mutually isolated symbolic subject. Second, postmodern narrative awakens the self-attribute of the narratee as the “other,” dismantling the dominant and centralizing narrative subject of classical modernization narrative. However, its interpretation of the narratee is vague and contradictory. To highlight the diversity and differentiation of modernization narratives, the narratee often cannot receive a logically consistent or thematically continuous representation; in the process of avoiding being devoured by metaphysical violence, it degenerates into a passive autonomous existence lacking constructiveness. And when postmodern narrative erases the difference between the “other” and the “I,” the narrative itself disintegrates, because “without narrative, action degenerates into arbitrary action or reaction.” [9]9 This is a paraphrase of a point made by the philosopher Alasdair MacIntyre in *After Virtue* (1981), where he argues that narrative is essential for intelligible action. Third, as the grand, progressivist narrative disintegrates, many social realities concealed by the false common interest and the myth of capital’s valorization emerge before people—issues such as ecology, gender, and race become the main storylines of multiple narrators. But postmodern narrative’s excessive emphasis on the priority of the other and the individual subject exposes the narrative to the danger of nihilism. Hobsbawm believed that the late 20th century was an extreme age, “a revolution of the individual against society, in other words, a revolution that broke the texture of the interweaving of human beings and society.” [10]10 This is a paraphrase of Eric Hobsbawm’s argument in *The Age of Extremes: The Short Twentieth Century, 1914–1991* (1994). Today, the problems facing Western society—political polarization, ethnic conflicts, drug abuse—all indicate that the multiple storylines of postmodern narrative have not only failed to break free from the shackles of capital but have instead fallen into the fragmented predicament of social cognitive division. Finally, the extreme relativist tendency in the temporal order of postmodern narrative directly leads to the deconstruction and negation of history; modernization becomes a modernization floating in a void of nothingness, having neither past nor future, indulging only in the present at the phenomenal level. In terms of point of view, the new changes in the relationship between time and space brought about by time-space compression and symbolic culture lead to the spatialization of time and the suppression of temporal consciousness by spatial consciousness. Starting from a fixed perspective, the postmodern narrative that overemphasizes localization exacerbates the fragmentation and distortion of the narrative itself.

后现代化叙事虽然反思批判了现代化叙事的二元对立结构及其传统形而上学理论偏见，但它又因缺乏叙事的建构维度以致在实践中陷入两难境地。首先，后现代化叙事解构了启蒙理性所建构的抽象叙事主体，但它留下的不是从事具体实践活动、处于一定社会关系的现实个人，而是“松散而灵活的、以感觉、情绪和内在化过程为旨归的，并持有一种‘成为你自己’的态度”的结构松散且彼此割裂的符号化主体。其次，后现代化叙事唤醒了受述者作为“他者”的自我属性，瓦解了经典现代化叙事下统治性和中心化的叙述主体，但它对受述者的阐释却是模糊不清和互相矛盾的。为了凸显现代化叙事的多样化和差异化，受述者往往难以得到逻辑一贯、主题连续的表征，在防止被形而上学暴力吞噬的过程中沦为了缺乏建构性的消极的自主性存在。而当后现代化叙事将“他者”和“我”之间的差异抹除，叙事也就随之解体，因为“没有叙事，行动就会退化为任意的行动或反应”。再次，随着宏大的、进步主义的叙事走向解体，被虚假共同利益和资本增殖神话掩盖的诸多社会现实浮现在人们面前，如生态、性别、种族等议题成为了多元叙述者关注的故事主线。但后现代化叙事过度强调他者和个体主体的优先性又让叙事面临虚无主义的危险。霍布斯鲍姆就认为，20世纪后期是一个极端的年代，“是一场个人战胜社会的革命，换言之，是一场打破了人类与社会交织的纹理的革命”。如今，西方社会面临的政治极化、族群矛盾、毒品泛滥等问题，都表明后现代化叙事的多元故事主线不仅未能挣脱资本的束缚，反而陷入了社会认知割裂的碎片化困境。最后，后现代化叙事在时序上的极端相对主义倾向直接导致了对历史的解构与否定，现代化成为在虚无的真空中漂浮的现代化，它既没有过去也没有未来，只沉溺于现象层面的当下；而在视点上，时空压缩和符号文化让时间和空间关系发生的新变化导致了时间空间化以及空间意识对时间意识的压制，从固定视角出发，过度强调本土化的后现代化叙事加剧了叙事本身的碎片化和失真性。

In *The Sublime Object of Ideology*, Žižek refers to post-industrial society, postmodern society, risk society, and information society as the “Ptolemaization of the ‘old paradigm’ of classical sociological models.” [11]11 Slavoj Žižek, *The Sublime Object of Ideology* (1989), where he uses “Ptolemaization” to describe theoretical adjustments that preserve a failing paradigm by adding epicycles. In fact, postmodern narrative has not transcended the limitation of classical modernization narrative, which recounts the historical process of modernization from the level of abstract theoretical philosophy. Within the framework of “narrator—narratee—story—discourse,” the two present an irreconcilable contradiction, manifesting as a “narrative vacuum.” Han Byung-Chul argues that “telling creates community (Gemeinschaft), while storying only generates society (Community)”; [12]12 Han Byung-Chul, *The Crisis of Narration* (2023), where he distinguishes between “telling” (Erzählen) as a communal, meaning-producing act and “storying” (Storytelling) as a commodified, individualizing practice. telling is a carrier of meaning and produces social cohesion. How to elevate the contingency and particularity manifested in the process of modernization into a “narrative” that can be told and listened to is a problem difficult to solve under the paradigm of Western modernization narrative.

齐泽克在《意识形态的崇高客体》中将后工业社会、后现代社会、风险社会和信息社会等称为“古典社会学模型的‘旧范式’的托勒密化”。事实上，后现代化叙事并未超越经典现代化叙事从抽象理论哲学层面讲述现代化历史进程的局限，二者在“叙述者—受述者—故事—话语”的框架下呈现出无法调和的矛盾，进而表现为一种“叙事真空”。韩炳哲认为，“讲述创造出共同体（Gemeinschaft），而故事化只催生出社群（Community）”，讲述是意义载体并产生社会凝聚力，如何将现代化过程表现出的偶然性和特殊性上升为可以被讲述和被倾听的“叙事”，是西方现代化叙事范式下难以解决的问题。

II. The Emergence of the Composite Narrative of Chinese-Path Modernization

二、中国式现代化复合叙事的出场

The composite narrative of Chinese-path modernization does not derive from a priori conceptual deduction; rather, it is established on the foundation of long-term exploration and practice since the founding of New China, especially since reform and opening up. In this process, it has endogenously manifested a highly self-conscious composite structure. Specifically, this composite narrative is embodied in four core dimensions—narrator, narratee, story, and discourse—respectively as: constructing a storytelling community of multi-subject coordination, cultivating a value symbiosis of equal civilizational mutual learning, shaping an organic social body of interconnected mainline stories, and forging a spatiotemporal continuum of shared temporal domains across history. It systematically responds to the structural predicaments of Western modernization narratives and achieves a reconstruction and innovation of the modernization narrative paradigm.

中国式现代化复合叙事并非来自先验的概念推演，而是建立在新中国成立特别是改革开放以来的长期探索和实践基础之上，在这一过程中内生性地呈现出高度自觉的复合结构。具体而言，这一复合叙事在叙述者、受述者、故事和话语四个核心维度上分别体现为构建多元主体协同的讲述共同体、培育文明平等互鉴的价值共生体、形塑主线故事并联的社会有机体和打造历时共域融通的时空连续体，它系统回应了西方现代化叙事的结构性困境，实现了对现代化叙事范式的重构与创新。

(I) Constructing a Storytelling Community of Multi-Subject Coordination

（一）构建多元主体协同的讲述共同体

At the level of the narrator, the composite narrative of Chinese-path modernization overcomes both the elitism of classical modernization narratives, which mold abstract concepts into a single narrator, and the deconstructionism of postmodern narratives, which results from excessive decentering. It emphasizes that the masses are the driving force of modernization construction and the true narrators of the modernization narrative, constructing a storytelling community of multi-subject coordination under the leadership of the Communist Party of China.

中国式现代化复合叙事在叙述者层面上，既克服了经典现代化叙事将抽象概念塑造为单一叙述者的精英主义，也避免了后现代化叙事过度去中心化所导致的解构主义。它强调人民群众是现代化建设的动力来源和现代化叙事的真正叙述者，构建了一个中国共产党领导下多元主体协同的讲述共同体。

Constructing a storytelling community of multi-subject coordination requires adhering to the Marxist view of mass history, opposing the “false community” of Western modernization narratives, and emphasizing the true narrator status of the masses. Marx pointed out that capitalism destroyed the patriarchal relations of the old era and transformed “personal dependence” into “material dependence.” In political life, people “regard themselves as social beings,” yet in civil society they are reduced to tools for capital accumulation. Thus, the capital community is a “false community”; it cannot elevate “stories” into “narratives” with genuine cohesive force. The composite narrative of Chinese-path modernization is rooted in the Marxist view of mass history. It emphasizes that the masses are the true narrators of the modernization narrative. They are not a silent majority obscured by abstract concepts but real subjects who engage in the great cause of Chinese-path modernization through political participation, economic construction, social governance, and cultural creation. Their productive practices and daily lives constitute the most vivid and richest story material of Chinese-path modernization. On the one hand, the masses are the main force driving Chinese-path modernization. The masses have played a primary role in all historical periods of modernization construction; their concrete practical activities have created abundant modern material and spiritual products. The masses are the decisive force in comprehensively advancing the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation through Chinese-path modernization. On the other hand, the masses are the ultimate beneficiaries of the achievements of Chinese-path modernization. Chinese-path modernization insists that the fruits of modernization are ultimately shared by the people. It requires continuously meeting the people’s growing needs for a better life, achieving common prosperity, thereby promoting the free and comprehensive development of individuals, and constructing a “storytelling community” of multi-subject coordination in the process of moving toward a “true community.”

构建多元主体协同的讲述共同体，就要坚持马克思主义群众史观，反对西方现代化叙事的“虚假的共同体”，强调人民群众的真正叙述者地位。马克思指出，资本主义摧毁了旧时代的宗法关系并将“人的依赖性”转变为“物的依赖性”，人在政治生活中“把自己看做社会存在物”，却在市民社会中沦为资本增殖的工具，因此资本共同体是一种“虚假的共同体”，它不能将“故事”上升为具有真正凝聚力的“叙事”。中国式现代化复合叙事根植于马克思主义群众史观，它强调人民群众是现代化叙事的真正叙述者，他们不是被抽象概念掩盖的沉默多数，而是以政治参与、经济建设、社会治理、文化创作等方式投身到中国式现代化伟大事业的现实主体，他们的生产实践和日常生活构成了中国式现代化最鲜活和最丰富的故事素材。一方面，人民群众是推动中国式现代化的主体力量。人民群众在现代化建设的各历史时期中都发挥了主要作用，他们的具体实践活动创造了丰富的现代物质和精神产品，人民群众是以中国式现代化全面推进中华民族伟大复兴的决定性力量。另一方面，人民群众是中国式现代化成果的最终享有者。中国式现代化坚持现代化成果最终由人民共享，它要求不断满足人民日益增长的美好生活需要，实现共同富裕，从而推动人的自由全面发展，在走向“真正的共同体”的过程中构建多元主体协同的“讲述共同体”。

On the basis of emphasizing the narrator status of the masses, the composite narrative of Chinese-path modernization further highlights the leadership role of the Communist Party of China—adhering to the leadership of the Communist Party of China is the fundamental guarantee and greatest advantage of Chinese-path modernization, and it is also a prominent feature of the composite narrative of Chinese-path modernization at the narrator dimension. Engels emphasized: “On the one hand, a certain authority, no matter how it is formed, and on the other hand, a certain subordination—both of these are things we have to accept, regardless of how they came about.” [13]13 Friedrich Engels, “On Authority,” in Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, *Marx-Engels Collected Works*, vol. 23 (Chinese edition), p. 337. In advancing Chinese-path modernization, only by adhering to the leadership of the Communist Party of China can broad social consensus be gathered for constructing a storytelling community of multi-subject coordination, forming a “historical resultant force” for the forward development of the composite narrative of Chinese-path modernization. First, the Party’s leadership ensures the narrator status of multiple subjects in the composite narrative. In terms of nature, the Communist Party of China is the vanguard of the Chinese working class, as well as the vanguard of the Chinese people and the Chinese nation, representing the fundamental interests of the vast majority of the Chinese people. In terms of method, by adhering to the working line of “from the masses, to the masses,” developing whole-process people’s democracy, and upholding various political systems such as the system of multiparty cooperation and political consultation under the leadership of the Communist Party of China, the voices of the broad masses can be reflected and their abilities can be exercised, ensuring the narrator status of multiple subjects—individuals, political parties, communities, etc.—in the composite narrative of Chinese-path modernization. Second, the Party’s leadership injects strong momentum into the composite narrative of Chinese-path modernization. In the narrative, the Communist Party of China is not a condescending guide but a steadfast narrator and vigorous builder who “dares to advance into uncharted waters, dares to tackle tough issues, dares to face risks and dangers, and dares to confront new contradictions and challenges.” [14]14 Xi Jinping, “Speech at the Celebration of the 100th Anniversary of the Founding of the Communist Party of China” (July 1, 2021). Third, the Party’s leadership ensures the developmental direction of the composite narrative of Chinese-path modernization. Currently, the problem of unbalanced and inadequate development in our country remains prominent, and conflicts of interest and entanglements often exist among multiple subjects. The Communist Party of China holds high the great banner of socialism with Chinese characteristics, gathering each micro-story under the narrative theme of “the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation,” ensuring the steady and sustained progress of Chinese-path modernization.

在强调人民群众叙述者地位的基础上，中国式现代化复合叙事进一步凸显了中国共产党的领导作用———坚持中国共产党领导是中国式现代化的根本保证和最大优势，也是中国式现代化复合叙事在叙述者维度上的突出特征。恩格斯强调：“一方面是一定的权威，不管它是怎样形成的，另一方面是一定的服从，这两者都是我们不得不接受的。”在推进中国式现代化的过程中，只有坚持中国共产党的领导，才能为构建多元主体协同的讲述共同体广泛凝聚社会共识，形成中国式现代化复合叙事向前发展的“历史合力”。其一，党的领导确保了复合叙事中多元主体的叙述者地位。就性质而言，中国共产党是中国工人阶级的先锋队，同时也是中国人民和中华民族的先锋队，代表中国最广大人民的根本利益。就方式而言，通过坚持“从群众中来，到群众中去”的工作路线、发展全过程人民民主、坚持中国共产党领导的多党合作和政治协商制度等各种政治制度，广大人民群众的心声能够得以反映、能力能够得以施展，保证了个人、政党、社群等多元主体在中国式现代化复合叙事中的叙述者地位。其二，党的领导为中国式现代化复合叙事注入了强劲动力。在叙事中，中国共产党并非高高在上的指导者，而是“敢于突进深水区，敢于啃硬骨头，敢于涉险滩，敢于面对新矛盾新挑战”的坚定叙述者和有力建设者。其三，党的领导保证了中国式现代化复合叙事的发展方向。当前，我国发展不平衡不充分的问题仍然突出，多元主体之间往往存在着利益冲突和矛盾纠葛。中国共产党高举中国特色社会主义伟大旗帜，将各个微观故事凝聚到“中华民族伟大复兴”的讲述主题之下，保证了中国式现代化的行稳致远。

(II) Cultivating a Value Symbiosis of Equal Civilizational Mutual Learning

（二）培育文明平等互鉴的价值共生体

Narrative is a conscious or unconscious expression of the narrator’s ideology, containing the narrator’s subjective cognition and value orientation toward the narratee and the external world. Therefore, how the narratee is positioned in the narrative often reflects the values of the narrative itself: classical modernization narratives, based on binary opposition logic and metaphysical violence, conceal the narratee and construct the discursive hegemony of “Western-centrism”; postmodern narratives, on the other hand, eliminate the objective differences between narrator and narratee but fail to achieve genuine transcendence in practice. The composite narrative of Chinese-path modernization is not only a “storytelling community” but also an “alliance of listeners.” It advocates a dialectical view of the relationship between narrator and narratee. By promoting the common values of all humanity, advocating the concept of a community with a shared future for mankind, and building a new type of international relations, it initiates and cultivates a new type of civilizational narrative and value symbiosis characterized by “equality, mutual learning, dialogue, and inclusiveness.”

叙事是叙述者意识形态自觉或非自觉的表露，包含了叙述者对受述者和外部世界的主观认知和价值取向。因此受述者在叙事中的角色定位如何，往往反映了叙事本身的价值观：经典现代化叙事以二元对立逻辑和形而上学暴力将受述者隐藏，构建了“西方中心论”的话语霸权；后现代化叙事则取消了叙述者和受述者之间的客观差异，在实践中并没有真正实现超越。中国式现代化复合叙事不仅是一个“讲述共同体”，更是一个“倾听者的同盟”，它倡导辩证看待叙述者和受述者的关系，通过弘扬全人类共同价值、倡导人类命运共同体理念和构建新型国际关系，开创并培育一种“平等、互鉴、对话、包容”的新型文明叙事和价值共生体。

Acknowledging and respecting the dual status of each civilization as both “narrator” and “narratee,” and dialectically viewing the composite image of each civilization in the modernization narrative, is the basic prerequisite for cultivating a value symbiosis of equal civilizational mutual learning. The composite narrative of Chinese-path modernization holds that each civilization is a narrative subject with unique historical traditions, values, national conditions, and developmental aspirations, and also a narratee object universally connected and interacting with others. It asserts that every country and nation has the right to independently determine its own path of modernization, and that all civilizations are equal narrators in the modernization narrative. For China itself, the process of advancing Chinese-path modernization is a process of independently exploring a modernization path suited to China’s national conditions. From the “Four Modernizations” to the “Three-Step” strategy and then to the “Two-Step” strategy in the New Era, [15]15 The “Four Modernizations” (agriculture, industry, national defense, science and technology) were first proposed by Zhou Enlai in 1964. The “Three-Step” strategy, outlined by Deng Xiaoping in 1987, set goals for economic development by 1990, 2000, and the mid-21st century. The “Two-Step” strategy of the New Era, adopted at the 19th National Congress of the CPC in 2017, envisions basically realizing socialist modernization by 2035 and building China into a great modern socialist country by the mid-21st century. this fully demonstrates the particularity of China’s realization of modernization. For the world, from the founding of New China to the “Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence” and then to building a community with a shared future for mankind, the principle of “independence and self-reliance” has long since transcended the field of international politics, laying the foundation for constructing an equal order of modernization narratives. At the same time, the composite narrative of Chinese-path modernization always positions itself as a “narratee,” sincerely listening to the modernization narratives of other civilizational subjects, and endowing its own modernization narrative with “stones from other hills” [16]16 An allusion to the *Book of Songs* (Xiaoya · Heming): “Stones from other hills may serve to polish jade,” meaning that the experience of others can be used to improve oneself. through civilizational exchange and mutual learning. General Secretary Xi Jinping emphasized: “This world is fully capable of accommodating the common development and progress of all countries. Different civilizations can fully absorb each other’s strengths and shine together through equal treatment and mutual learning.” [17]17 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). There is no absolutely perfect form of civilization in the world; precisely because of their imperfection, civilizations must exchange and learn from one another to perfect and develop themselves. Diverse forms of civilization together constitute the rich tapestry of human civilization, while the “end of history” thesis proclaimed by classical modernization narratives can only lead to the withering of human civilization and bring civilization to an end.

承认并尊重各文明“叙述者”和“受述者”的双重地位，辩证看待各文明在现代化叙事中的复合形象，是培育文明平等互鉴的价值共生体的基本前提。中国式现代化复合叙事认为各文明是有独特历史传统、价值观念、现实国情和发展诉求的叙事主体，也是与他者普遍联系和相互交往的受述客体，主张各国各民族都有权自主决定自身现代化道路，各文明都是现代化叙事中地位平等的叙述者。对中国自身而言，推进中国式现代化的过程就是独立自主探索符合中国国情的现代化道路的过程，从“四个现代化”到“三步走”再到新时代“两步走”战略充分彰显了中国实现现代化的特殊性。对世界而言，从新中国成立到“和平共处五项原则”再到构建人类命运共同体，“独立自主”这一原则在今天早已超出国际政治领域，为构建一种平等的现代化叙事秩序奠定了基础。同时，中国式现代化复合叙事始终将自己置于“受述者”的位置，真诚倾听其他文明主体的现代化叙事，在文明交流互鉴中赋予自身现代化叙事以“他山之石”。习近平总书记强调：“这个世界完全容得下各国共同发展、共同进步。不同文明完全可以在平等相待、互学互鉴中兼收并蓄、交相辉映。”世界上不存在绝对完美的文明形态，正因为其不完美，各文明才必须交流互鉴以完善发展自身。多样的文明形态共同构成了人类文明的丰富图景，而经典现代化叙事宣称的“历史终结论”只会导致人类文明的凋敝，让文明走向终结。

On the basis of equal and mutual learning among civilizations, seeking common values that represent the “greatest common divisor” of various narrators, and transcending the meaninglessness and directionlessness under the flood of narratives, is the key to cultivating a value symbiosis of equal and mutual learning among civilizations. Agnes Heller argues: “The decline of grand narratives directly leads to the mutual coexistence of various micronarratives … it can also be accompanied by the complete negation and relativization of the universal.” [18]18 Agnes Heller, *A Theory of Modernity* (Oxford: Blackwell, 1999), p. 60. Although postmodern narratives endow modernization narratives with pluralistic characteristics, this view of “historical particularism” implies a tendency toward “isolationism.” Today, under the tide of anti-globalization, populism and conservatism are on the rise, geopolitical risks are increasing, regional conflicts are intensifying, and non-traditional security issues are becoming increasingly prominent; the world today is undergoing changes unseen in a century. Chinese-path modernization is a modernization that follows the path of peaceful development. It conforms to the trend of the times toward peace, development, cooperation, and mutual benefit, adheres to extensive consultation, joint contribution, and shared benefits, emphasizes “shared responsibility for the planet” on the basis of equal and mutual learning among civilizations, and widely builds international consensus through narrative practices such as the Global Development Initiative, the Global Security Initiative, the Global Civilization Initiative, and the Global Governance Initiative. It promotes the building of a community with a shared future for mankind characterized by “each appreciating its own beauty, appreciating the beauty of others, sharing beauty in unity, and achieving universal harmony,” [19]19 This phrase, originating from the Chinese sociologist Fei Xiaotong, expresses an ideal of cultural harmony: each civilization appreciates its own beauty, appreciates the beauty of others, shares beauty in unity, and achieves universal harmony (天下大同, a Confucian ideal of a world in great unity). providing a constructive new plan for “value symbiosis” that transcends the hegemonic logic of classical modernization narratives and the divisive trap of postmodern narratives.

在文明平等互鉴的基础上寻求代表诸叙述者“最大公约数”的共同价值，超越叙事泛滥下的无意义和无方向感，是培育文明平等互鉴的价值共生体的关键。阿格妮丝·赫勒认为：“宏大叙事的衰落直接导致各种微小叙事的相互共存……它也可以伴随着对共相的彻底否定和相对化。”后现代化叙事虽然赋予了现代化叙事以多元特征，但这种“历史特殊论”的观点却隐含了“孤立主义”的倾向。如今，逆全球化浪潮下的民粹主义和保守主义抬头、地缘政治风险上升、局部地区冲突加剧、非传统安全问题日益突出，当今世界正经历百年未有之大变局。中国式现代化是走和平发展道路的现代化，它顺应和平、发展、合作、共赢的时代潮流，坚持共商共建共享，强调在各文明平等互鉴的基础上“同球共济”，通过全球发展倡议、全球安全倡议、全球文明倡议、全球治理倡议等叙事实践广泛凝聚国际共识，推动构建“各美其美，美人之美，美美与共，天下大同”的人类命运共同体，为超越经典现代化叙事的霸权逻辑与后现代化叙事的分裂陷阱提供了富有建设性的“价值共生”新方案。

(3) Shaping a Social Organism with Parallel Storylines

（三）形塑故事主线并联的社会有机体

Classical modernization narratives revolve around the main thread of “capital,” reducing other dimensions of modernization such as politics, culture, ecology, and technology to appendages of capital accumulation. Beneath the surface of continuous growth in social material wealth, they manufacture a one-dimensional modern society characterized by “a comfortable, smooth, reasonable, democratic unfreedom.” [20]20 Herbert Marcuse, *One-Dimensional Man: Studies in the Ideology of Advanced Industrial Society* (Boston: Beacon Press, 1964), p. 1. Although postmodern narratives raise high the banner of plurality and difference, their excessive emphasis on the independence and priority of a particular story leads to a fragmented predicament where narrative main threads conflict with each other and social consensus is difficult to consolidate. In the Marxist context, modern society is a complex organic whole that is both full of vitality, continuously developing, self-improving, and self-consolidating, and also constantly in contradiction and crisis, undergoing periodic oscillations and thus continuous transformation. The composite narrative of Chinese-path modernization advocates breaking the domination of capital logic, constructing a “parallel narrative structure” in the story dimension in which multiple main storylines—economic, political, cultural, social, and ecological civilization—coordinate with each other, and integrating them with “the free and comprehensive development of the human person” as the goal of social development, thereby shaping a social organism with parallel storylines.

经典现代化叙事围绕“资本”主线，将政治、文化、生态、技术等其他现代化维度降格为资本增殖的附庸，在社会物质财富持续增长的表象下制造了“一种舒舒服服、平平稳稳、合理而又民主的不自由”的单向度现代社会。后现代化叙事虽然高举多元和差异大旗，却因过度强调某一特定故事的独立性和优先级导致陷入叙事主线相互冲突、社会共识难以凝聚的碎片化困境。在马克思主义的语境中，现代社会是一个既充满生机活力、持续发展、自我完善与巩固的，又始终处于矛盾与危机、周期性振荡从而不断变革的复杂有机整体。中国式现代化复合叙事主张破除资本逻辑统摄，在故事维度上构建经济、政治、文化、社会、生态文明等多条故事主线相互协同的“并联叙事结构”，并以“人的自由而全面发展”作为社会发展目标予以统合，形塑故事主线并联的社会有机体。

The presentation of the composite narrative of Chinese-path modernization in the story dimension is first established on the critique of capital logic and the harnessing of the power of capital. It requires the coordinated advancement of economic, political, cultural, social, and ecological civilization construction, forming a narrative structure with five coordinated main storylines, thereby breaking the capital “metanarrative” under the Western modernization model. General Secretary Xi Jinping points out that the modernization of Western developed countries is a “serial” process, while China’s is a “parallel” development process that catches up from behind. [21]21 Xi Jinping, “Explanatory Notes to the ‘Resolution of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China on the Major Achievements and Historical Experience of the Party’s Centenary Struggle’,” November 2021. This exposition fully embodies the multi-threaded storytelling technique of the composite narrative of Chinese-path modernization: First, Chinese-path modernization fully recognizes the dual nature of capital in driving the modernization process. On the one hand, it emphasizes the necessity of fully understanding capital’s profit-driven nature, resolutely regulating the disorderly expansion of capital to break the problems of wealth imbalance, social fragmentation, human alienation, and ecological destruction brought about by the rule of capital logic; on the other hand, it also sees the immense civilizing role of capital, and by regulating and guiding the healthy development of capital, it better leverages capital’s power in promoting scientific and technological progress, enlivening the market economy, and facilitating people’s lives. Second, the main storylines of the Five-Sphere Integrated Plan, summarized through long-term exploration and practice in Chinese-path modernization, each have their own internal logic and value goals, avoiding the “one-dimensional” trap of modernization narratives. From the “national industrialization” and “the Four Modernizations” [22]22 The Four Modernizations (四个现代化) were a set of goals announced by Zhou Enlai in 1964 and 1975, targeting the modernization of agriculture, industry, national defense, and science and technology. in the early days of the founding of New China, to the “Three-Sphere Integrated Plan” and “Four-Sphere Integrated Plan” during the period of reform and opening up, and then to the Five-Sphere Integrated Plan in the New Era, the story content of the Chinese-path modernization narrative has continuously enriched, forming a narrative structure with distinct “parallel” characteristics.

中国式现代化复合叙事在故事维度上的呈现，首先建立在批判资本逻辑和驾驭资本力量之上。它要求统筹推进经济、政治、文化、社会和生态文明建设，形成五条故事主线协同的叙事结构，破除了西方现代化模式下的资本“元叙事”。习近平总书记指出，西方发达国家现代化是一个“串联式”的过程，而中国则是一个后来居上的“并联式”发展过程。这一论述充分体现了中国式现代化复合叙事多线交织的故事手法：其一，中国式现代化充分认识到资本在推动现代化过程中的两面性，一方面它强调必须充分认识资本的逐利本性，坚决规制资本无序扩张以破除资本逻辑统治下带来的贫富失衡、社会撕裂、人的异化和生态破坏等问题；另一方面，它也看到资本所带来的巨大文明作用，通过规范和引导资本健康发展，更好地发挥其在促进科技进步、繁荣市场经济、便利人民生活等方面的力量。其二，中国式现代化在长期探索和实践中总结出的“五位一体”故事主线各有其内在逻辑和价值目标，避免了现代化叙事的“单向度”陷阱。从新中国成立初的“国家工业化”“四个现代化”，到改革开放时期的“三位一体”和“四位一体”，再到新时代的“五位一体”，中国式现代化叙事的故事内容不断丰富，形成了具有鲜明“并联”特征的叙事结构。

At the same time, the composite narrative of Chinese-path modernization by no means metaphysically separates and treats each main storyline in isolation; each main storyline reflects different aspects of the narrative theme of Chinese-path modernization. It emphasizes the dynamic balance and organic integration of the stories within the narrative, thereby promoting the continuous self-improvement of the social organism. Chinese-path modernization is a systematic and coordinated project containing multiple goals and requiring the handling of multiple relationships. It must both break the single main thread of modernizing according to capital logic and oppose the development predicament of falling into mutual opposition and fragmentation due to excessive focus on other main threads. For example, Chinese-path modernization is a modernization of harmony between humanity and nature. This means it neither repeats the development mistake of “pollute first, treat later,” nor advocates the one-sided radicalism of “absolute priority of environmental protection.” Instead, it creatively puts forward the concept that “lucid waters and lush mountains are invaluable assets,” [23]23 This is a well-known slogan of Xi Jinping’s ecological thought, first articulated in 2005 when he was Party secretary of Zhejiang Province, emphasizing that ecological wealth is also economic wealth. organically integrating the ecological and economic main threads to form a green development mode and lifestyle, thereby achieving the organic unity of environmental, economic, and social benefits. In contrast, radical environmentalism in postmodern narratives shapes environmental goals as an overriding “political correctness,” effectively abandoning full concern for economic costs, energy security, production efficiency, and people’s well-being, exposing a “one-sided green narrative” detached from the whole. Chinese-path modernization consistently takes realizing the people’s aspiration for a better life as the starting point and落脚点 [24]24 The Chinese term 落脚点 (luòjiǎo diǎn) literally means “foothold” or “point of arrival,” here rendered as “end point” to convey its sense of ultimate purpose. of modernization. It tells a modernization story that both respects diverse demands and emphasizes overall coordination, shaping a social organism that not only focuses on material growth but also pursues comprehensive development.

同时，中国式现代化复合叙事绝非形而上学地割裂看待各故事主线，各主线是对中国式现代化这一叙事主题不同方面的反映，它强调叙事中各故事的动态平衡与有机融合，进而推动社会有机体的不断自我完善。中国式现代化是一个包含多重目标、需要处理多重关系的系统性协同工程，它既要破除按资本逻辑统摄现代化的单一主线，也反对因过度关注其他主线从而陷入彼此对立、相互割裂的发展困境。例如，中国式现代化是人与自然和谐共生的现代化，这意味着它既不重蹈“先污染后治理”的发展覆辙，但也不讲“环保绝对优先”的片面激进，而是创造性地提出了“绿水青山就是金山银山”理念，将生态主线和经济主线有机融合，形成绿色发展方式和生活方式，从而实现环境效益、经济效益与社会效益的有机统一。反观后现代化叙事中的激进环保主义，它将环保目标塑造为压倒一切的“政治正确”，实际上就是放弃了对经济成本、能源安全、生产效率和民众福祉的充分关切，暴露出了一种脱离总体的“片面绿色叙事”。中国式现代化始终坚持把实现人民对美好生活的向往作为现代化建设的出发点和落脚点，它讲述的是一个既尊重多元诉求也强调整体协同的现代化故事，塑造的是一个既关注物质增长更追求全面发展的社会有机体。

(4) Creating a Time-Space Continuum Where Historical Time and Shared Space Interpenetrate

（四）打造历时共域融通的时空连续体

In terms of narrative discourse, “modern” can be understood from two perspectives: time and space. From the perspective of time, “modern” is both a temporal concept and a comparative concept. On the one hand, it points to the specific historical period of “the contemporary era,” as when Hegel called the modern “our time” and “the time of transition to a new period”; on the other hand, “modern” is often used to distinguish itself from tradition, as when Habermas argues that the modern understands itself as “the achievement of the transition from the old to the new.” [25]25 Jürgen Habermas, *The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity: Twelve Lectures*, trans. Frederick Lawrence (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1987), p. 7. From the perspective of space, the modern is embodied not only in the physical-geographical process of urbanization that continuously breaks down local barriers and the extension of various infrastructures, but also in the socio-cultural space of the global diffusion of Western modernization and the re-creation of local traditional spaces that resist homogenization. From this perspective, the modern is a concrete and unified “time-space continuum”—one cannot discuss the time of the emergence of the modern apart from concrete space, nor can one discuss the space of the emergence of modernization apart from concrete time.

就叙事话语而言，“现代”可以从时间和空间两个角度来理解：从时间上看，“现代”既是一个时间概念也是一个比较概念，一方面它指向“当代”这一具体的历史时期，如黑格尔将现代称为“我们的时代”和“向着新时期过渡的时代”；另一方面，现代也常被用于与传统相区分，如哈贝马斯认为，现代就是把“自己理解为新旧交替的成果”。从空间上看，现代既体现为物理—地理空间上不断打破地方区隔的城市化进程和各类基础设施的延伸，还体现为社会—文化空间上西方现代化的全球扩散和反抗同质化的地方性传统空间再创造。由此观之，现代是一个具体统一的“时空连续体”———既不能脱离具体空间谈论现代的发生时间，也无法脱离具体时间谈论现代化的发生空间。

Unlike Western modernization narratives, which temporally and spatially sever tradition from modernity and the local from the global in a “ruptured modernization,” the composite narrative of Chinese-path modernization emphasizes, at the discursive level, the interpenetration of the diachronic and the synchronic in narrative. It is a temporal-spatial continuous narrative that runs through history, the present, and the future, while simultaneously taking root in China and facing the world.

不同于西方现代化叙事在时空上割裂了传统与现代、本土与世界的“断裂式现代化”，中国式现代化复合叙事在话语层面强调叙事的历时性与共域性相融通，是一个贯穿了历史、当下和未来，同时扎根中国、面向世界的时空连续性叙事。

In terms of narrative sequence, the composite narrative of Chinese-path modernization adheres to the basic stance of historical materialism, adopting a “sequential order” that emphasizes the sequentiality and unity of historical development, and advocating a dialectical and dynamic view of the modernization process. In Western modernization narratives, whether it is the reverse sequence that treats “later history as the purpose of earlier history” or the non-sequential approach that deconstructs history to pursue the fleeting present, both are inseparable from modernity’s morbid pursuit of absolute innovation, a “self-contradictory and self-destructive tradition.” When “the modern” treats history in the manner of Baudelaire’s “L’Héautontimorouménos” (the self-tormentor), “the modern” as an abstract eternal concept loses its future

在叙事时序上，中国式现代化复合叙事坚持历史唯物主义的基本立场，采用的是强调历史发展的顺序性和统一性的“顺时序”，主张以辩证、运动的观点看待现代化过程。在西方现代化叙事中，无论是“后期历史是前期历史的目的”的逆时序，还是解构历史以追求当下须臾的非时序，都与现代性病态追求绝对创新“自相矛盾和自我毁灭的传统”密不可分。而当“现代”以波德莱尔笔下“L'Héautontimorouménos”（自我毁灭的怪物）的方式对待历史时，成为抽象永恒概念的“现代”也就失去了未来。习近平总书记指出：“在五千多年中华文明深厚基础上开辟和发展中国特色社会主义，把马克思主义基本原理同中国具体实际、同中华优秀传统文化相结合是必由之路。”中国式现代化复合叙事在时序上强调“过去—现在—未来”相贯通，分别体现为“正确对待中华优秀传统文化”“开辟发展中国特色社会主义”和“坚定共产主义远大理想”三个方面：其一，以中国特色社会主义道路为鲜明特征的中国式现代化是从中华五千多年文明史中生长起来的，这种叙事拒绝“概念先行”的颠倒时序和“历史虚无”的非时序，坚持从自身的独特历史出发提炼和升华现代化理论与道路。其二，中国式现代化对传统的继承不是一种“全盘接受”，而是对中华优秀传统文化进行创造性转化和创新性发展，在开辟发展中国特色社会主义道路的过程中让“传统的”成为“现代的”。其三，中国式现代化深刻认识到“我们所称为共产主义的是那种消灭现存状况的现实的运动”。它并不将自身看作社会发展的终极形态，它坚持以共产主义远大理想为指引，在不断解决时代问题、回应人民呼声的进程中扬弃自身，从而连接起现在与未来。

In terms of narrative viewpoint, the "multiple internal focalization" perspective adopted by the composite narrative of Chinese-path modernization emphasizes highlighting the localized spatial characteristics of the narrative from the angle of specific narrators, while preventing the fragmentation and distortion of the narrative caused by a fixed viewpoint. The report of the 20th National Congress of the CPC points out that Chinese-path modernization "has the common features of the modernizations of all countries, and, more importantly, Chinese characteristics based on its own national conditions." This means: on the one hand, the special spatial environment and huge population size determine that the development path and promotion method of Chinese-path modernization have their own uniqueness. Chinese-path modernization is born and grows in the specific space of China. Therefore, it neither falls into the myth of "modernization = Westernization," nor does it form a new narrative hegemony of modernization based on "China-centrism." Instead, it fully respects the right of each country to explore its own path of modernization and promotes the differentiated development of world modernization paths. On the other hand, Chinese-path modernization by no means treats space as an "empty background board." In the process of history turning into world history, China's modernization practice has always been connected with countries around the world. Chinese-path modernization is an enrichment and development of the world modernization model. As General Secretary Xi Jinping emphasized: "China's door of opening up will not close, and will only open wider and wider." Chinese-path modernization not only deeply cultivates local practice from an internal focalization perspective but also draws extensive nourishment from the achievements of human civilization. Moreover, through Chinese solutions such as the Belt and Road Initiative and the four major initiatives [26]26 The four major initiatives refer to the Global Development Initiative, the Global Security Initiative, the Global Civilization Initiative, and the Global Governance Initiative, proposed by China in recent years., it contributes public goods to enrich and develop the world modernization narrative. Therefore, the composite narrative of Chinese-path modernization is a "global narrative rooted in the local." It avoids the spatial disorder caused by blindly aligning with the world, and also prevents becoming a spatial island due to one-sided emphasis on localization, achieving the continuous connection and organic unity of time and space in the narrative.

在叙事视点上，中国式现代化复合叙事采取的“多重式内聚焦”视角，强调从具体叙述者的角度凸显叙事的本土化空间特征，同时防止了因视点固定导致叙事的碎片化和失真化。党的二十大报告指出，中国式现代化“既有各国现代化的共同特征，更有基于自己国情的中国特色”。这意味着：一方面，特殊的空间环境和巨大的人口规模决定了中国式现代化的发展途径和推进方式有其自身的独特性，中国式现代化是在中国这一具体空间下诞生和生长起来的，因此它既不陷入“现代化=西方化”的迷思，更不以“中国中心论”形成新的现代化叙事霸权，而是充分尊重各国探索自身现代化道路的权利，推动世界现代化道路的差异化发展。另一方面，中国式现代化也绝非将空间作为“空洞的背景板”，在历史向世界历史转变的过程中，中国的现代化实践始终与世界各国相联系，中国式现代化是对世界现代化模式的丰富与发展。正如习近平总书记所强调的：“中国开放的大门不会关闭，只会越开越大。”中国式现代化既以内聚焦视角深耕本土实践，又从人类文明成果中汲取广泛养分，更通过“一带一路”、四大倡议等中国方案贡献公共产品丰富发展世界现代化叙事。因此，中国式现代化复合叙事是一种“立足本土的全球叙事”，它避免因盲目接轨世界而导致的空间失序，也杜绝因片面强调本土化而变成空间孤岛，实现了叙事中时间和空间的连续贯通和有机统一。

III. The Philosophical Implications of the Composite Narrative of Chinese-Path Modernization

三、中国式现代化复合叙事的哲学意蕴

Lenin believed: "The all-sided, universal flexibility of concepts, a flexibility reaching to the identity of opposites — that is the essence of the matter. This flexibility, applied subjectively, equals eclecticism and sophistry. Flexibility, applied objectively, i.e., reflecting the all-sidedness of the material process and the unity of opposites, is dialectics, is the correct reflection of the eternal development of the world." The "composite" characteristic of the composite narrative of Chinese-path modernization is by no means a metaphysical "eclecticism." It is based on the Marxist practical philosophy, deeply grasps the concrete universality, subject-object unity, and systemic wholeness of the narrative, constructs a new type of modernization narrative with profound dialectical connotations, and achieves an internal transcendence of the speculative philosophical roots of the old modernization narrative.

列宁认为：“概念的全面的、普遍的灵活性，达到了对立面同一的灵活性，———这就是实质所在。主观地运用的这种灵活性=折中主义与诡辩。客观地运用的灵活性，即反映物质过程的全面性及其统一性的灵活性，就是辩证法，就是世界的永恒发展的正确反映。”中国式现代化复合叙事之“复合”特质绝非一种形而上学“折中”，它立足于马克思主义实践的哲学，深刻把握了叙事的具体普遍性、主客统一性和系统整体性，构建了一种具有深刻辩证法内涵的新型现代化叙事，实现了对旧现代化叙事思辨哲学根源的内在超越。

(I) Concrete Universality: The Principle Height of the Composite Narrative of Chinese-Path Modernization

（一）具体普遍性：中国式现代化复合叙事的原则高度

The "composite" nature of the composite narrative of Chinese-path modernization has its philosophical foundation in "the thought of dialectical materialism on the interrelationship between the universality and particularity of contradictions," that is, the dialectical unity between modernization as a universal law of human social development and its specific form of realization in the special spatial field of China.

中国式现代化复合叙事之“复合”，其哲学基础是“唯物辩证法关于矛盾普遍性与特殊性相互关系思想”，即现代化作为人类社会发展普遍规律和它在中国这一特殊空间场域中的具体实现形式的辩证统一关系。

The classical modernization narrative stands on the position of abstract universalism, believing that the modernization practices of all nations and regions must submit to some transcendental, homogeneous modernization model. The post-modernization narrative rejects abstract universality; it absolutizes the specific particularity of the individual but falls into the fragmented trap of isolationism and localism. Marx emphasized: "The concrete is concrete because it is the concentration of many determinations, hence unity of the diverse. It appears in the process of thinking, therefore, as a process of concentration, as a result, not as a point of departure, even though it is the point of departure in reality and hence also the point of departure for observation and conception." The binary opposition between universalism and particularism in the Western modernization narrative originates from "adhering to the theoretical philosophical explanatory principle of understanding 'universality' from abstract 'conceptual identity.'" Marx criticized Hegel's "concrete universality" at the level of concepts and logic, and then transformed dialectics into a scientific method for studying the development of human society, laying the fundamental philosophical principle for the composite narrative of Chinese-path modernization.

经典现代化叙事站在抽象普遍主义的立场，认为所有民族和地区的现代化实践必须服从于某种先验、同质的现代化模式；后现代化叙事拒斥抽象的普遍性，它将个体的具体特殊性绝对化，却陷入了孤立主义和地方主义的碎片化陷阱。马克思强调：“具体之所以具体，因为它是许多规定的综合，因而是多样性的统一。因此它在思维中表现为综合的过程，表现为结果，而不是表现为起点，虽然它是现实的起点，因而也是直观和表象的起点。”西方现代化叙事中普遍主义与特殊主义的二元对立根源于“坚持从抽象‘概念同一性’理解‘普遍性’的理论哲学解释原则”，马克思批判了黑格尔在概念和逻辑层面的“具体普遍性”，进而将辩证法改造为研究人类社会发展的科学方法，为中国式现代化复合叙事奠定了根本的哲学原则。

Marx believed that metaphysical ontology, modern epistemology, and Hegelian dialectics all regard "universality" as the ready-made determinacy of concepts, rather than understanding it from "revolutionary" and "practically critical" objective activity, leading to abstract universality overriding concrete particularity. By revealing the universal essence of perceptual practical activity, Marx emphasized that the connection between universality and particularity can only be achieved in the dialectical activity of the objectification of the subject and the subjectification of the object. In this sense, the composite narrative of Chinese-path modernization is a new type of narrative model based on the practical standpoint, containing the dialectical implication of "concrete universality."

马克思认为，形而上学存在论、近代认识论和黑格尔辩证法都将“普遍性”视作概念的现成规定性，而不是从“革命的”“实践批判的”对象性活动去理解，导致了抽象的普遍性凌驾于具体的特殊性之上。马克思通过揭示感性实践活动的普遍性本质，强调只有在主体客体化和客体主体化的辩证活动中才能实现普遍性和特殊性的贯通。在此意义上，中国式现代化复合叙事是一种立足于实践立场，包含“具体普遍性”辩证法意蕴的新型叙事模式。

First, the composite narrative of Chinese-path modernization fully respects the “particularity” of each narrator and its discourse as the modernization story unfolds. This means it opposes the use of abstract concepts to dominate the modernization narrative and the description of the modernization process from a spatiotemporal perspective of empty universality, emphasizing that the universality of the modernization narrative must be premised on the diversity of nations and societies. Second, although the composite narrative of Chinese-path modernization stresses the particularity of each narrator and its discourse, this particularity is not an isolated existence detached from other narrators under closed conditions. Rather, it fully acknowledges its own dual identity as both narrator and narratee, continuously enriching and deepening the “universal” connotation of modernization in the process of mutual interaction and engagement. Moreover, “the new form of human civilization it inaugurates, in its particular way, prefigures the universal trend of future human social development, and thus constitutes a historical particularity that can be elevated into a new universal regularity.” [27]27 The Five-Sphere Integrated Plan (五位一体总体布局) is the strategic framework for the cause of socialism with Chinese characteristics, covering economic, political, cultural, social, and ecological civilization construction, formally established at the 18th National Congress of the CPC in 2012. Third, the universal commonality and concrete individuality of the composite narrative of Chinese-path modernization are unified in the practice of modernization, in which local history transforms into world history and narrow individuals develop into free individuals. The “concrete universality” of Chinese-path modernization is not the external unfolding of an abstract concept but, through the practical activities of “subject objectification” and “object subjectification,” transforms the world and human beings themselves, fostering a broader and deeper integration between humans and between humans and the external world. In other words, what the composite narrative of Chinese-path modernization recounts is both a story of solving the common modernization problems facing humanity and constructing a new form of human civilization, and a depiction of the process of universal social intercourse and the realization of human liberation.

其一，中国式现代化复合叙事充分尊重现代化故事展开过程中各叙述者及其话语的“特殊性”，这意味着它反对以抽象概念统摄现代化叙事和以空洞普遍性的时空视点描述现代化过程，强调现代化叙事的普遍性必须以各民族和社会的多样性为前提。其二，中国式现代化复合叙事虽然强调各叙述者及其话语的特殊性，但这种特殊性不是在封闭条件下与其他叙述者相脱离的孤立存在，而是充分承认自身作为叙述者和受述者双重身份，在相互交往、作用的过程中不断丰富和深化现代化的“普遍性”内涵，并且“它所开创的人类文明新形态以特殊的方式预示着人类社会未来发展的普遍趋势，从而是可以上升为新的普遍规律性的历史特殊性”。其三，中国式现代化复合叙事的普遍共性和具体个性统一于地方历史向世界历史转变、狭隘个人向自由个人发展的现代化实践之中。中国式现代化的“具体普遍性”并非抽象概念的外在展开，而是通过“主体客体化”和“客体主体化”的实践活动改造世界和人自身，促成人与人、人与外部世界形成更加广阔和深入的融合关系。换言之，中国式现代化复合叙事所讲述的，既是解决人类面临的共同现代化难题、构建人类文明新形态的故事，也是对普遍社会交往和实现人的解放过程的描绘。

(II) The Unity of Subject and Object: The Epistemological Foundation of the Composite Narrative of Chinese-Path Modernization

（二）主客统一性：中国式现代化复合叙事的认识根基

Epistemologically, the “composite” nature of the composite narrative of Chinese-path modernization is manifested as the unity of objective modernization reality and subjective narrative. It grasps objective reality and subjective narrative through concrete, practical modernization activities, and on this basis establishes the truthfulness of the narrative.

在认识论上，中国式现代化复合叙事之“复合”体现为现代化客观现实与主观叙事的统一，它通过现实具体的现代化实践把握客观现实和主观叙事，在此基础上确立起叙事的真理性。

In narratology, there is a problem of narrative “credibility,” i.e., “the degree to which (certain parts of) the narrator’s telling is trustworthy within the narrative itself.” [28]28 The Second Centenary Goal refers to building China into a great modern socialist country that is prosperous, strong, democratic, culturally advanced, harmonious, and beautiful by the middle of the 21st century (the 100th anniversary of the founding of the People's Republic of China in 2049). In modernization narratives, this problem manifests as the epistemological question of truth: to what extent does the narrative, as a product of ideological subjective construction, reflect the objective reality of modernization? On this point, Western modernization narratives invert the sequence in which thought grasps the concrete and the concrete itself is generated, following a path that “evaporates the complete representation into abstract determinations.” [29]29 The "two-step" strategy for the period from 2020 to the middle of the 21st century: first, basically realizing socialist modernization from 2020 to 2035; second, building China into a great modern socialist country from 2035 to the middle of the 21st century. As early as ancient Greece, Plato distinguished between “mimesis” and “diegesis” in the narrative acts of Homer’s epics, arguing that when a poet engages in “mimesis,” he “is merely a representative of the gods, possessed by what attaches to them.” [30]30 "People first" (人民至上) is a core principle of the CPC, emphasizing that the interests and well-being of the people are the highest priority in all work and policy-making. Therefore, Plato took a critical stance toward “mimesis” — when a story is narrated from a composite rather than a singular standpoint, the physical presence blocks the path to truth, leading to moral decay and social disorder. It can be said that this dualistic, objective-idealist stance profoundly influenced the mode of expression in classical modernization narratives. Although postmodern narratives attempt to break free from this line of thought by deconstructing universal truth, their excessive emphasis on the subjective feelings of micro-level individuals plunges them into a situation of “the retreat of truth.”

在叙事学中存在一个叙事的“可信性”问题，即叙述者“讲述（的某些部分）就叙事本身而言值得信任的程度有大小之分”。在现代化叙事中这一问题表现为认识的真理性问题，即作为意识形态主观建构的结果，叙事在何种程度上反映了现代化的客观现实。关于这一点，西方现代化叙事颠倒了思维掌握具体和具体本身产生的顺序，走的是一条将“完整的表象蒸发为抽象的规定”的道路。而早在古希腊时期，柏拉图就将《荷马史诗》中的叙述行为区分为“模仿”和“叙事”，诗人在“模仿”时“只是众神的代表，被依附他们的东西占有了”。因此，柏拉图对“模仿”持批判态度———以复合的而非单一的立场对故事进行叙述时，身体的在场让通往真理的道路被阻塞，就会导致道德败坏和社会混乱。可以说，这种二元对立的客观唯心主义立场深刻影响了经典现代化叙事的表达方式。后现代化叙事虽然通过解构普遍真理的方式尝试从这一思路中解脱出来，但其过度强调微观个体主观感受的叙事手法又让自身陷入了“真理退隐”的局面。

In his “Theses on Feuerbach,” Marx completed the liquidation of all previous philosophy, emphasizing that “the question whether objective [gegenständliche] truth can be attributed to human thinking is not a question of theory but is a practical question.” [31] The practical perspective inherent in this new worldview provides the theoretical basis for the composite narrative of Chinese-path modernization to epistemologically transcend old modernization narratives: First, the practice of transforming objective reality is the premise and foundation of narrative construction. The composite narrative of Chinese-path modernization is not an a priori conceptual deduction or logical construction; its internal structure and core elements are rooted in China’s unique social material base and modernization practice. “On the basis of long-term exploration and practice since the founding of New China, especially since reform and opening up,” [32] rich story materials and innovative narrative discourses have further promoted the improvement and development of the composite narrative of Chinese-path modernization. Second, the credibility, i.e., truthfulness, of the narrative must be tested in the actual practice of Chinese-path modernization. The composite narrative of Chinese-path modernization adheres to the principle of “practice first,” taking practice as the crucial link between objective reality and subjective narrative and as the sole criterion for testing the truthfulness of the narrative. That is to say, the composite narrative of Chinese-path modernization opposes classical modernization narratives that place subjective construction above objective practice, and also criticizes postmodern narratives’ cultural mediation divorced from material practice; it demands continuous self-examination and self-innovation in practice. Third, a narrative with concrete truth has an active effect on modernization practice. A narrative that originates from practice and has been tested by practice thus possesses concrete truthfulness. On the basis of grasping objective laws, it can provide value orientation, spiritual impetus, and consensus cohesion for modernization construction, thereby transforming into a powerful material force for changing objective reality.

马克思在《关于费尔巴哈的提纲》中完成了对全部旧哲学的清算，他强调“人的思维是否具有客观的[gegenst ndliche]真理性，这不是一个理论的问题，而是一个实践的问题”。这一新世界观所蕴含的实践观点为中国式现代化复合叙事在认识论上超越旧现代化叙事提供了理论基础：其一，改造客观现实的实践是叙事建构的前提和基础。中国式现代化复合叙事不是先验的概念推演和逻辑建构，它的内在结构和核心要素都根植于中国独特的社会物质基础和现代化实践之中。“在新中国成立特别是改革开放以来长期探索和实践基础上”，丰富的故事素材和创新的叙事话语进一步推动了中国式现代化复合叙事的完善与发展。其二，叙事的可信性，即真理性必须在中国式现代化的现实实践中得以检验。中国式现代化复合叙事坚持“实践第一”的原则，将实践作为客观现实与主观叙事的重要纽带和检验叙事真理性的唯一标准。也就是说，中国式现代化复合叙事反对将主观建构置于对象性实践之上的经典现代化叙事，也批判后现代化叙事脱离物质实践的文化斡旋，它要求在实践中不断自我检验、自我革新。其三，具有具体性真理的叙事对现代化实践具有能动作用。源于实践又被实践检验过的叙事也就具有了具体的真理性，在把握客观规律的基础上，它能够为现代化建设提供价值导航、精神动力和共识凝聚，从而转化为改造客观现实的强大物质力量。

(III) Systemic Integration: The Methodological Guidance of the Composite Narrative of Chinese-Path Modernization

（三）系统集成性：中国式现代化复合叙事的方法遵循

The report of the 20th National Congress of the CPC points out: “We must uphold systemic thinking. All things are interconnected and interdependent. Only by observing things from the perspective of universal connection, comprehensive system, and development and change can we grasp the laws of development of things.” [33] Systemic thinking is rooted in the Marxist theory of social organism, and it is an accurate grasp of the universal relations of intercourse among various practical subjects in real material production

党的二十大报告指出：“必须坚持系统观念。万事万物是相互联系、相互依存的。只有用普遍联系的、全面系统的、发展变化的观点观察事物，才能把握事物发展规律。”系统观念根植于马克思主义社会有机体理论，是对现实物质生产活动中诸实践主体间普遍交往关系的准确把握。在推进中国式现代化进程中，通过全面深化改革、构建新发展格局、建设全国统一大市场等方式调动激发各领域活力，构建整体与局部相协调的良性互动格局，凸显了系统与要素之间的动态关联。坚持系统观念，以整体性和战略性思维规划、布局和推进现代化事业，是中国式现代化复合叙事之“复合”在方法论上重要体现。

First, adhere to the unity of the Party’s leadership and the exertion of efforts from multiple quarters. The leadership of the Communist Party of China is the distinctive feature, significant advantage, and strong guarantee of the composite narrative of Chinese-path modernization. By proposing guiding ideology, establishing the overall layout, and devising the strategic layout, the Party steers the direction of the entire modernization narrative, ensuring the coordination of narrative content across various fields and levels in terms of concepts, goals, and methods. The exertion of efforts from multiple quarters requires strengthening the cohesion of the Chinese nation, actively mobilizing the subjective initiative of diverse narrators, absorbing, integrating, and elevating the micro-narratives of countless grassroots individuals into the grand narrative of national development, endowing the social organism with vigorous vitality, and advancing the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation through Chinese-path modernization.

一是坚持党的领导和多方发力相统一。中国共产党的领导是中国式现代化复合叙事的鲜明特色、显著优势和有力保证，党通过提出指导思想、确立总体布局、谋划战略布局，为整个现代化叙事把舵定向，保障了各领域、各层级叙事内容在理念、目标和方法上的协同；多方发力则要求增强中华民族凝聚力，积极调动多元叙述者的主观能动性，将无数基层个体的微观叙事吸纳、汇入并升华到国家发展的宏大叙事之中，赋予社会有机体以蓬勃生命力，以中国式现代化推进中华民族伟大复兴。

Second, adhere to the unity of comprehensive coverage and coordinated development. The composite narrative of Chinese-path modernization regards society as a living organism. Its main storyline encompasses five aspects: economy, politics, culture, society, and ecological civilization, constituting the Five-Sphere Integrated Plan [27]27 The Five-Sphere Integrated Plan (五位一体总体布局) is the strategic framework for the cause of socialism with Chinese characteristics, covering economic, political, cultural, social, and ecological civilization construction, formally established at the 18th National Congress of the CPC in 2012.. This makes a scientific and systematic deployment for modernization in the New Era, demonstrating the synergistic effect of the composite narrative through holistic progress and substantive achievements. At the same time, “comprehensive coverage” does not mean “applying equal force.” In advancing modernization, adjusting development policies in a timely manner around changes in the principal social contradiction and objective real conditions, and strengthening the correlation and coordination of the main storylines, is conducive to promoting organic articulation and cyclical interaction among subsystems, thereby realizing overall functionality.

二是坚持全面覆盖和协同发展相统一。中国式现代化复合叙事将社会视为活的有机体，其故事主线涵盖了经济、政治、文化、社会和生态文明五个方面，构成了“五位一体”总体布局，对新时代的现代化建设作出科学的系统性部署，以整体性进展和实质性成效彰显了复合叙事的合力效应。同时，“全面覆盖”并非“平均用力”，在推进现代化建设中，围绕社会主要矛盾变化和客观现实条件适时调整发展政策，加强各故事主线的关联度和协同性，有利于推动各子系统间的有机衔接和循环互动，实现整体功能。

Third, adhere to the unity of overall planning and phased advancement. Chinese-path modernization is a long-term and complex systematic project, and its systemic concept is embodied in the temporal dimension as the dialectical unity of holistic strategy and phased tactics. In overall planning, the composite narrative of Chinese-path modernization establishes the grand blueprint of "building a great modern socialist country in all respects and realizing the Second Centenary Goal,"[28]28 The Second Centenary Goal refers to building China into a great modern socialist country that is prosperous, strong, democratic, culturally advanced, harmonious, and beautiful by the middle of the 21st century (the 100th anniversary of the founding of the People's Republic of China in 2049). and runs the theme of "the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation" throughout the entire process of Chinese-path modernization construction, maintaining the stability of strategic direction and the continuity of narrative goals. In phased advancement, the composite narrative of Chinese-path modernization, through phased goals such as the "two-step" strategy[29]29 The "two-step" strategy for the period from 2020 to the middle of the 21st century: first, basically realizing socialist modernization from 2020 to 2035; second, building China into a great modern socialist country from 2035 to the middle of the 21st century. and five-year plans, subdivides the abstract grand narrative of modernization into operable and assessable practical paths, coordinating the relationship between current development and long-term objectives.

三是坚持整体筹划和分段推进相统一。中国式现代化是一项长期而复杂的系统工程，其系统观念在时间维度上体现为整体性战略与阶段性战术的辩证统一。在整体筹划上，中国式现代化复合叙事确立了“全面建成社会主义现代化强国、实现第二个百年奋斗目标”的宏伟蓝图，并以“中华民族伟大复兴”这一主题贯穿中国式现代化建设始终，保持了战略方向的稳定性和叙事目标的连续性。在分段推进上，中国式现代化复合叙事通过“两步走”战略、五年规划等阶段性目标，将抽象的现代化宏大叙事细分为可操作、可评估的实践路径，协调好当下发展和长远目标之间的关系。

Fourth, adhere to the unity of endogenous development and opening up to the outside world. Chinese-path modernization cannot be separated from exchanges and interactions with countries around the world. The composite narrative of Chinese-path modernization emphasizes, from a spatial perspective, internal and external linkage to promote the construction of a new development pattern with domestic circulation as the mainstay and domestic and international circulations reinforcing each other, achieving the unity of independent development and opening up. Domestically, taking domestic circulation as the mainstay is based on China's huge population size and domestic demand potential. By extensively attracting domestic and foreign resource factors and improving the level of global resource allocation, it effectively responds to current issues such as anti-globalization, unilateralism, and protectionism, and is an important measure to promote modernization construction. From a global perspective, "the new development pattern is by no means a closed domestic circulation." It emphasizes deep participation in the international division of labor and the international market, promoting high-quality development of the Belt and Road Initiative to continuously expand high-level opening up, so that Chinese-path modernization resonates at the same frequency with world peace and development.

四是坚持内生发展与对外开放相统一。中国式现代化离不开世界各国的交流与互动，中国式现代化复合叙事在空间视点上强调内外联动推动构建以国内大循环为主体、国内国际双循环的新发展格局，实现自主发展与对外开放的统一。从国内看，以国内大循环为主体是基于中国巨大的人口规模和内需潜力，通过广泛吸引国内外资源要素、提高全球资源配置水平，有效应对当下逆全球化、单边主义、保护主义等问题，是推动现代化建设的重要举措。从世界看，“新发展格局决不是封闭的国内循环”，它强调深度参与国际分工和国际市场，以推动共建“一带一路”高质量发展不断扩大高水平对外开放，让中国式现代化与世界和平发展实现同频共振。

IV. The World Significance of the Composite Narrative of Chinese-Path Modernization

四、中国式现代化复合叙事的世界意义

The composite narrative of Chinese-path modernization is based on the practical philosophy of Marxism and the fundamental standpoint of historical materialism, transcending singularity with compositeness and eliminating antagonism with openness. It is a systematic summary of China's practical experience in promoting modernization and a theoretical expression of its development logic, as well as a process of theoretical concretization of "using the discourse of Chinese-path modernization to tell the story of Chinese-path modernization." From this perspective, the composite narrative of Chinese-path modernization achieves a thorough innovation of the Western modernization narrative at the source of narrative logic, providing a new paradigm of modernization with lasting vitality and broad appeal for Global South countries and even human society as a whole.

中国式现代化复合叙事立足于马克思主义的实践哲学和历史唯物主义的根本立场，以复合性超越单一性、以开放性消弭对抗性。它是对中国推进现代化实践经验的系统概括和发展逻辑的理论表达，也是“运用中国式现代化话语，讲述中国式现代化故事”的理论具象化过程。从这个角度看，中国式现代化复合叙事实现了对西方现代化叙事在叙事逻辑源头上的彻底革新，为全球南方国家乃至人类社会提供了一种具有持久生命力与广泛感召力的现代化新范式。

First, the composite narrative of Chinese-path modernization breaks the discursive monopoly of existing modernization narratives. Classic modernization narratives, relying on the advantages of early industrialization and the power endorsement formed by colonial expansion, established a long-term discursive monopoly worldwide. Post-modernization narratives not only failed to break the original discursive monopoly pattern but, due to discursive fragmentation, dissolved universal consensus, providing new possibilities for the West to continue maintaining its discursive advantage. The composite narrative of Chinese-path modernization, with its own successful practice, powerfully breaks the myth that "modernization equals Westernization," demonstrating that countries around the world can, while adhering to their own civilizational subjectivity, blaze a modernization path that composites tradition and modernity, the local and the global, creating a narrative ecology for the diversified development of human civilization that sheds hegemony yet does not lose consensus.

首先，中国式现代化复合叙事打破了既有现代化叙事的话语垄断。经典现代化叙事凭借先发工业化优势和殖民扩张形成的权力背书，在世界范围内建立起长期的话语垄断；后现代化叙事不仅未能打破原有的话语垄断格局，反而因话语碎片化消解了普遍共识，为西方继续维持话语优势提供了新的可能。中国式现代化复合叙事以自身的成功实践，有力打破了“现代化=西方化”的迷思，表明世界各国可以在坚持自身文明主体性的基础上，走出一条传统与现代、本土与全球相复合的现代化道路，为人类文明的多样化发展营造了一个摆脱霸权却又不失共识的叙事生态。

Second, the composite narrative of Chinese-path modernization transcends the development myth dominated by the logic of capital. The logic of capital is the core of the Western modernization narrative. It regards capital expansion as the core driving force of modernization and the amount of profit earned as the sole criterion for social progress and civilizational development, turning the environment, institutions, culture, and people themselves into tools alienated by capital. The composite narrative of Chinese-path modernization takes "people first"[30]30 "People first" (人民至上) is a core principle of the CPC, emphasizing that the interests and well-being of the people are the highest priority in all work and policy-making. as its logical anchor, responding to the development questions of developing countries such as "how to maintain the autonomy of modernization" and "how to balance growth and fairness." It demonstrates that modernization can break free from the shackles of the logic of capital, achieving coordination between material civilization and cultural-ethical progress, harmonious coexistence between humanity and nature, and common prosperity for all people, providing valuable reference for the Global South to explore modernization paths suited to their own national conditions.

其次，中国式现代化复合叙事超越了资本逻辑主宰下的发展迷思。资本逻辑是西方现代化叙事的核心，它将资本扩张当作现代化的核心驱动力，将赚取的利润多少视作社会进步与文明发展唯一标准，使环境、制度、文化和人本身成为被资本异化的工具。中国式现代化复合叙事以“人民至上”作为逻辑锚点，回应了发展中国家“如何保持现代化自主权”“如何兼顾增长与公平”等发展之问。它表明现代化可以摆脱资本逻辑束缚，实现物质文明与精神文明相协调、人与自然和谐共生和全体人民共同富裕，为全球南方探索适合自身国情的现代化道路提供了宝贵借鉴。

Finally, the composite narrative of Chinese-path modernization presages the general trend of a new form of human civilization. General Secretary Xi Jinping pointed out: "Chinese-path modernization is deeply rooted in fine traditional Chinese culture, embodies the advanced nature of scientific socialism, draws on and absorbs all outstanding achievements of human civilization, represents the direction of progress of human civilization, and presents a new picture different from the Western model of modernization. It is a completely new form of human civilization." On the one hand, the "composite" characteristic of Chinese-path modernization reflects the "newness" of the form of human civilization created by Chinese-path modernization in terms of narrative time-space and social form. On the other hand, the composite narrative of Chinese-path modernization, in a particular way, presages the universal trend of the future development of human society, namely, that "the 'concrete' of Chinese civilization, in the process of integrating with the general principles of historical dialectics, also elevates itself into a 'general' with significance for a higher historical stage." Under the guidance of this new form of civilization, humanity will inevitably gradually break free from the inherent dilemmas of old forms of civilization and move towards a new stage of free and comprehensive civilizational development.

最后，中国式现代化复合叙事预示了人类文明新形态的一般趋势。习近平总书记指出：“中国式现代化，深深植根于中华优秀传统文化，体现科学社会主义的先进本质，借鉴吸收一切人类优秀文明成果，代表人类文明进步的发展方向，展现了不同于西方现代化模式的新图景，是一种全新的人类文明形态。”一方面，中国式现代化的“复合”特质，在叙事时空和社会形态上体现了中国式现代化所创造的人类文明形态之“新”。另一方面，中国式现代化复合叙事更以特殊的方式预示着人类社会未来发展的普遍趋势，即“中华文明之‘具体’在同历史辩证法一般原理相结合的进程中，也将自身提升为有着更高历史阶段意义的‘一般’。”在这一文明新形态的引领下，人类必将逐步摆脱旧文明形态的内在困境，迈向自由而全面的文明发展新阶段。