The ideological obstacles that must be overcome in order to study classic works seriously
Hou Huiqin Published: 2010-06-24
The premise of studying Marxist classics is to attach importance to theoretical learning and maintain theoretical interest. The Fourth Plenary Session of the 17th CPC Central Committee summarized the historical experience of the 88 years since the founding of the Party and the 60 years since the ruling of the Party. The first experience is "to insist on putting ideological and theoretical construction in the first place and improve the Marxist level of the whole Party"; the primary problem of the Party's inadaptability today is that "some Party members and cadres neglect theoretical learning, are out of touch with learning and application, have shaken their ideals and beliefs, are not firm in their belief in Marxism, and lack confidence in socialism with Chinese characteristics"; the first of the six new arrangements for Party building made by the Fourth Plenary Session is "to build a Marxist learning party and improve the ideological and political level of the whole Party", emphasizing that "it is an important task for Party members and cadres to learn and practice the socialist core value system in an exemplary manner to build a Marxist learning party". The Party Central Committee with Comrade Hu Jintao as General Secretary attaches great importance to ideological work and ideological and theoretical construction, and has repeatedly emphasized that while the whole Party is concentrating on modernization, it cannot relax ideological work for a moment.
From the perspective of Marxism, whether a party or a class has theoretical interest depends on whether it can be consistent with the laws of history, whether it has the courage to pursue the truth and a bright future. Therefore, attaching great importance to the ideological and theoretical construction of the party is not only the fundamental experience of the Communist Party of China to maintain its advanced nature, but also a concentrated embodiment of the party's vitality, invincible strength and great future. It is particularly important that our party's interest in theory has been maintained not only during the revolutionary period and the construction period under the closed-door policy, but also in the new period of reform and opening up, which fully proves that the Communist Party of China is an advanced party of the working class without its own interests. Engels once pointed out that the German bourgeoisie also had theoretical interests during its revolutionary period and formed valuable theoretical wealth such as German classical philosophy. However, as it gained power, the pursuit of money and fame completely replaced theoretical interests. "In the field of historical science, including philosophy, the old spirit of theoretical recklessness has completely disappeared with classical philosophy; in its place, mindless eclecticism, concern for positions and income, and even the most despicable idea of climbing up the ladder." "Theoretical interest among Germans has not declined but continues to exist only among the working class. Here it cannot be eradicated. Here, there is no consideration of positions, profit, or the grace of superiors. On the contrary, the more reckless and selfless science is, the more it conforms to the interests and aspirations of the workers. The new school, which has found the key to understanding the entire social history in the history of the development of labor, has been mainly oriented to the working class from the beginning, and has received sympathy from the working class, which it has neither sought nor expected in official science. The German workers' movement is the heir of German classical philosophy." It is no exaggeration to say that the loss of theoretical interest, the immersion in utilitarian things, and the signs of degeneration are the beginning of losing the true nature of the proletariat and the Communist Party. Therefore, in studying classic works seriously, we must first oppose quick success and pragmatism.
The key to studying classic works carefully is to scientifically understand and correctly treat the relationship between Marxism-Leninism and Sinicized Marxism. Our party's consistent attitude is not to separate or replace them, that is, not to separate the two, and not to replace Marxism-Leninism with Sinicized Marxism. This non-replacement, in the party's classic statement, means not to "put Chinese comrades" on a par with Marxism-Leninism. Mao Zedong pointed out, "Why shouldn't the Chinese Communists be put on the same level as Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin? We should widely publicize Marxism, and at the same time we do not oppose and should not oppose the propaganda of Chinese things. But what we lack more is the theories of Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin. Our party's theoretical level is low. Although we have translated many books, we have not actually done a good job of promoting the works of Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin. So now we should do a good job of promoting Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin's theories on materialism, on the party and the country, and on their political economy, etc. throughout China and the world, instead of putting Mao on the same level as Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin. We say that our system is the experience of a country, and this is a good way of saying it, it is better. If we put them on the same level, it seems that we have everything, as if we are the host, and we invite Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin to be guests. We invite them not to be guests, but to be teachers, and we are students." Mao Zedong's words here are very profound. Fundamentally speaking, Marx, Engels and Lenin are teachers and we are students; Marxism-Leninism is a universal principle, and Sinicized Marxism is the experience of a country.
As early as 1960, Deng Xiaoping pointed out, "We should not separate Mao Zedong Thought from Marxism-Leninism, as if they were two different things. When we promote Mao Zedong Thought, we must follow the instructions of the Central Committee and mention 'studying Marxism-Leninism' and 'studying the works of Comrade Mao Zedong' together. Of course, we can also mention Mao Zedong Thought alone, but we must not forget Marxism-Leninism and must not lose this most fundamental thing." Deng Xiaoping's words were also very profound. Marxism-Leninism is the most fundamental thing, and we should not attempt to replace it.
The scientific attitude of the Chinese Communists towards Marxism-Leninism is not just modesty, but first of all seeking truth from facts. The fundamental issue here is how to view our development of Marxism-Leninism. Undoubtedly, the process of sinicization of Marxism is the inheritance and development of Marxism. In this process, we have said some things that our ancestors did not say, and we have done some things that our ancestors did not do. We do have some areas beyond Marxism-Leninism, and we have innovations and developments. In this regard, we must fully affirm and be confident. But the question is, in what sense is this development?
In fact, there are two "development theories" of Marxism-Leninism: one is the development of the "stage theory", which regards the development of the sinicization of Marxism as a new linear stage. This development theory has two major meanings: one is comprehensive development, and the other is comprehensive transcendence. The "three stages and three milestones" of Marxism proposed by Lin Biao is this development theory, and the result is to replace Marxism-Leninism with the results of the sinicization of Marxism. This development theory is not the basic position and attitude of our party. Our party's attitude on this issue is the development of the "combination theory", that is, the essence of the development we are talking about is to combine the basic principles of Marxism with China's reality, to apply Marxism to China's specific national conditions and new era characteristics, that is, specific application development, local development, rather than innovation in fundamental positions, views, and methods, and not comprehensive transcendence. This is because Marxism-Leninism is a scientific theory abstracted from relatively mature and developed capitalist regions. It reveals the objective laws of the entire historical period of transition from capitalism to communism, and its basic principles are universally applicable. However, the sinicized Marxism is the application of the basic principles of Marxism under relatively special historical conditions, revealing the twists and turns of historical development. Therefore, learning sinicized Marxism cannot replace learning Marxism-Leninism.
Deng Xiaoping once pointed out, "Some comrades have proposed that we should study political economy with Mao Zedong Thought as the outline. Of course, Comrade Mao Zedong has made some progress in political economy, but when talking about capitalism in its early stages of development, it is always Marx and Engels, and Capital; when talking about imperialism, it is always Lenin's Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism; when talking about socialism, both Lenin and Stalin have made contributions, and Comrade Mao Zedong has also made important developments. Therefore, we cannot just talk about studying political economy with Mao Zedong Thought as the outline, otherwise when people ask you which work you use as the outline for studying imperialism, how will you answer? You will not be able to make it clear. Of course, Comrade Mao Zedong has made some progress in his discussion of imperialism, such as the assertion that imperialism is a paper tiger. However, Capital and Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism have already solved the basic theoretical problems about capitalism and imperialism. Treating Mao Zedong Thought is a very serious and principled issue. We must not vulgarize it. Vulgarization is not good for us, nor for the international communist movement."
Therefore, the key to the problem lies in accurately evaluating the historical status of Marxism in China. As a guiding ideology for concrete practice, it is unified with the reality of China's specific development stage, draws vitality from it and actually plays the role of theory. In this sense, whether or not the great achievements of Marxism in China can be produced is indeed the main indicator of whether the Chinese proletariat and its party are politically mature. However, since it is related to more specific social and historical conditions, although it also contains some content that embodies universal applicability, in general, its direct scope of application is smaller than the historical capacity of Marxism as a whole. Therefore, the two cannot be completely equated, and one cannot replace the other.
Why is it impossible to develop Marxism comprehensively through combined development? Although there is a relationship of inheritance between the two, they are essentially the same: through the creative application of Marxism in China, the essence of Marx's theory is constantly realized and kept young; on the other hand, the use of Marx's standpoint, viewpoint and method to solve the main contradictions in China's practice and gradually form a theoretical system is the process of Marxism in China. However, due to the following two reasons, Marxism in China and Marxism-Leninism cannot be fully equated:
First, due to the specific national conditions of China, there are differences in the degree of need for Marxist theory and the focus of attention. Because it is necessary to make choices based on the needs of the country's practice, as Lenin said, focusing on a certain aspect does not depend on subjective wishes, but on all historical conditions. This shows that the application, inheritance and development of Marxist theory in the process of sinicization cannot and does not need to be "comprehensive". This alone can explain that the "milestone"-style linear development stage theory is difficult to establish.
Secondly, the sinicization of Marxism also includes the problem of "conversion" from thinking habits to language expression. In order to make Marxism easily accepted by people of different cultural backgrounds and overcome the differences in psychology, language and even thinking habits formed as a result, Marx's doctrine must be "retranslated" into the national language. This is essentially a theoretical re-creation. However, no matter how outstanding this creation is, it is still different from the original, and there will always be a certain "cutting off". Therefore, after the above double "digestion" (practical and national cultural), there is always a difference between Marxism-Leninism and the great achievements produced by its actual application in China. We can neither separate the two nor equate the two. We should start from what we are doing and focus on the practical application and development of Marxism, but we should not abandon our ancestors and not read our ancestors. We should be good at organically unifying the study of Marxism-Leninism and the study of sinicized Marxism, and we should be good at applying the standpoint, viewpoint and method of Marxism not only to solving practical problems, but also to solving theoretical learning.
It is not difficult to understand why our party always corrected its learning style first when it was carrying out major ideological rectification (such as Mao Zedong during the Yan'an Rectification Movement and Deng Xiaoping after the end of the "Ten Years of Civil War"), and always linked the connection between theory and practice with the "complete, systematic and accurate" learning and mastering of Marxism; why Mao Zedong and others repeatedly opposed the one-sided emphasis on Mao Zedong Thought and repeatedly proposed to "study Marxism-Leninism" in response to the extreme left performances of Lin Biao and the "Gang of Four". In any case, only by viewing Marxism as a dialectical unity of continuity and keeping pace with the times, ideals and science, world outlook and methodology, theory and practice, etc., can we truly understand Marxism.
(Author’s unit: Chinese Academy of Social Sciences)
.jpg)
No comments