An Analysis of Marx and Engels' Thoughts on Social Character
Marx and Engels' profound insights on the issue of social character are specifically reflected in the following aspects: First, social character is a trait system of low-level social consciousness, and also an intermediate link and phased product in the transformation of social consciousness into the superstructure; Second, national character, class character, and universal human personality forms constitute the three dimensions of their thoughts on social character, encompassing the issue of social character in the broadest sense; Third, they studied the issue of social character starting from the essence of man, and their related thoughts possess important social, historical, practical, and humanistic significance.
Introduction
Social character refers to a collective psychological trait and the psychological-behavioral pattern it constitutes. It is a collection of social psychological traits and an important spiritual factor in the development of human civilization. At present, attention to the issue of social character has important practical significance. First, our country is facing a complex international environment and profound social transformation; the impact of external values and fluctuations in internal social psychology are important factors affecting ethnic unity and social stability. Second, as socialism with Chinese characteristics enters a new era, the principal contradiction in our society has transformed into the contradiction between the people's ever-growing needs for a better life and unbalanced and insufficient development. The issue of the people's spiritual needs and free and comprehensive development should receive broader attention. Third, individual psychological problems accompanying modern civilization, such as depression, anxiety, and loneliness, have become important aspects of the spiritual predicament of modern people. Therefore, shaping a healthy social character and cultivating a sound personality to forge a strong sense of community for the Chinese nation, promote the free and comprehensive development of the people, and address the negative effects of modern civilization on human spiritual life is an important issue urgently awaiting our exploration.
Marx and Engels formed profound insights into the issue of social character in their discussions of national character, class character, and universal personality. This article will attempt to explore this from multiple perspectives and elucidate its social, historical, practical, and humanistic significance, seeking instruction from those who know.
I. Defining the Connotation of Social Character in Marx and Engels' Vision
Character, as a major component of personality structure, refers to an individual's relatively stable personality traits or psychological qualities. It has a relatively sustained guiding effect on an individual's thinking and actions, thereby constituting a relatively stable psychological-behavioral pattern. Social groups composed of individuals possess certain common psychological traits and are influenced and shaped by factors such as economy, politics, culture, history, and geography, gradually forming a psychological-behavioral pattern shared by group members, namely social character. In a general sense, social character can be understood as the organization and structuration of social psychological traits, or a "trait system" of social psychology, involving many aspects such as the group's emotions, beliefs, will, habits, and values. It has a relatively sustained guiding effect on the group's thinking and actions, thereby exerting a deep influence on social and historical development. The "social" in social character broadly refers to all groups in human society. Therefore, at different group levels, social character exists in various forms such as national character, class character, cultural character, and regional character.
Marx and Engels' in-depth exploration of class character, national character, and human spiritual liberation is an important theoretical cornerstone for the study of social character. The concept of "social character" was proposed by Erich Fromm, inspired by Marx and Engels, through a critical transformation of Freud's theories. In Escape from Freedom, Fromm defined social character as: "the essential core of the character structure of the majority of the members of a group, developed as the result of the basic experiences and mode of life common to that group." In Fromm's view, Freud's character theory overemphasized human biological factors, attributing the main behavioral motivations to sexual instinct, whereas "the depth and breadth of Marx's thinking far exceeded Freud's." His contact with Marxist theory made him place greater emphasis on the influence of social factors on character, and he attempted to use social character to further connect the economic base and the superstructure, combining social character theory with the critique of capitalist society. Fromm candidly stated: "Without Marx, ... my thinking would have lost its crucial driving force."
It is worth noting that Engels used a concept approximating "social character" in The Condition of the Working Class in England. In the English edition of The Condition of the Working Class in England, we can find the two terms "social character" and "public character." Among them, "social character" is used to describe the social nature of the English Chartist movement, that is, its characteristic of aiming at "social happiness," and the Chinese translation renders it as "social nature"; "public character" is used to describe the character of the English working class, referring to "character in the public sphere," and in the Chinese translation, it is rendered as "social character" as a concept opposed to "private character," i.e., "individual character." Admittedly, the meanings of the above two concepts are not entirely the same as those of Fromm and the "social character" referred to in this article, but in Engels' work, they are indeed used in discussions of issues highly related to social character, such as the spiritual traits of nations and classes and their relationship with social history.
Therefore, the related thoughts of Marx and Engels are an important source of Fromm's social character theory and played a significant inspirational role in the proposal of his concept of "social character." It can be said that the term "social character" carries a Marxist "lineage" and a historical materialist color. Although Fromm's interpretation of Marx's humanist thought is controversial, using the concept of "social character" and the issues it explores as a clue, we will...
II. The Threefold Dimensions of Marx and Engels' Thoughts on Social Character
(1) National Character
Marx and Engels' discussions of national character are closely linked to their analysis of specific social-historical conditions. They clarified the relationship between national character and social history, namely that social-historical conditions shape national character, and national character influences social-historical development. This mainly involves three social-historical factors.
First, the mode of production and way of life. In The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte, Marx pointed out that the scattered, self-sufficient small-peasant economy and the poverty and transportation problems it brought about made French peasants lack the conditions and motivation for social interaction. Therefore, they were characterized by superstition, conservatism, and prejudice, and found it difficult to autonomously form political organizations, requiring an external power to serve as their representative. The historical experience of the French nation itself also endowed them with a deep "Napoleonic complex." They placed their hopes in Louis Bonaparte, and what they received was merely the establishment of another authoritarian regime. Although Marx's analysis targeted the French small-peasant class, because they were the most numerous class and supporters of the regime at the time, their character largely represented the dominant national character of France under specific social-historical conditions. This national character was jointly shaped by a certain mode of production, way of life, and historical experience, and thereby formed specific political beliefs, which in turn influenced the historical process of the country.
In The Condition of the Working Class in England, Engels also selected representative classes to reflect the process by which the mode of production and way of life changed national character. Before the Industrial Revolution, the British textile industry was generally in the form of household workshops. Due to backward technology and low output, products were only supplied to local markets with little competitive pressure. Textile workers were also small farmers, and their lives were peaceful, leisurely, and monotonous. In this environment, the typical English worker was generally law-abiding, humble, and devout, but also closed-minded, simple-minded, and spiritually impoverished. Later, the introduction of advanced textile technology brought about refined division of labor, large-scale machine production, and commercialized operation. The traditional textile industry lost its market. The enclosure movement, market competition, and commercial monopoly caused more peasants to lose their land. They were forced to flood into cities, becoming cheap labor in factories, engaging in high-intensity, low-pay mechanical labor. Their lives were impoverished, their living environments filthy, and they lacked basic security, even suffering from illness. Spiritually, they also became gloomy, pessimistic, and world-weary, while morally degenerate and indulgent in alcohol and sex. Engels stated directly: "His character and way of life are determined by these circumstances." Clearly, "these circumstances" refer to the capitalist mode of production that thoroughly turned British workers into proletarians. They distorted the original national character of British workers. As the working class became the most numerous group in large cities, this distorted character became increasingly common among the populace and, for a period, evolved into a new national character.
Second, the mode of social change. Engels believed that different national characters led to different modes of social change: the Germans, who believed in Christian spiritualism, were a theoretical nation and experienced a philosophical revolution; the French, who believed in classical materialism, were a political nation and experienced a political revolution. The English, however, "are a hybrid of the German and French elements," and their national character contains two opposing aspects: an equally strong longing for the otherworldly and for secular interests. This internal opposition was never resolved through reason, thus producing a "lasting inner unease," which led British philosophy to reject reason and esteem experience, and also prompted the English to engage in large-scale practical activities such as navigation, colonization, and industrial construction. It is in this sense that Engels said: "To lose confidence in eliminating the antithesis and therefore to follow experience completely is inherent in the national character of the English." This national character dissolved the English pursuit of universal principles, freeing them from excessive constraints of the old religious and political order, and enabling them to initiate earlier than other nations a bourgeois revolution dominated by individual interests and occurring directly in the social sphere. Of course, this national character also manifested as the isolation and atomization of individuals in society, as well as the long-term poverty and dispersion of the working class.
In their analysis of the German workers' movement, Marx and Engels pointed out that the German national character emphasized abstract principles and neglected real interests. This characteristic made Germans overly conservative on practical issues, timid in the face of real interests, and unable to abandon principles, which to a certain extent led to the German workers' movement being in a backward position in Europe. Marx said bluntly: "In Germany, no particular class lacks... the kind of resoluteness, sharpness, courage, and ruthlessness that would mark it as the negative representative of society. Likewise, no estate possesses the broad-mindedness that is identical with the soul of the people, even momentarily, the talent to inspire material force to exercise political violence, the fearless revolutionary spirit." This characteristic also made Germans the most theoretically cultivated nation, achieving extremely high attainments in philosophy. However, it was precisely philosophy, as the conceptual reflection of Germany's existing system, that tightly bound the German revolution. Therefore, Marx believed that the German revolution could not avoid the critique of old philosophy. Only by using philosophical revolution to drive social revolution could the German people achieve true liberation. Scientific socialism was born from German philosophy and took root in the minds of German workers. The calm, rational national...
(2) Class Character
Marx and Engels realized that beyond national character, there also exists a class character, and the latter is replacing the former as a more important "nationality." Class character is the common psychological traits and the psychological-behavioral pattern constituted by them, shared by members of a specific class. It is the manifestation of social character at the class level. It is determined by the political and economic status of a specific class in the social structure, reflects the spiritual state of that class, and is also an important spiritual factor in class struggle. In the Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844, Marx, from the perspective of the evolution of forms of private property, outlined the typical characteristics of the feudal aristocratic class, the bourgeois class, and the proletariat. He pointed out: "This material, directly sensuous private property is the material, sensuous expression of alienated human life. The movement of private property... is the realization or reality of man." Therefore, a certain form of private property is the material manifestation of a certain class, and a certain class is the personified manifestation of a certain form of private property. The character of a class is embodied in its relationship with the private property it possesses. The feudal aristocracy corresponded to the immovable form of private property, namely landed estate; the bourgeoisie corresponded to the movable form of private property, namely capital.
Under the European feudal order, private property manifested as landed estate and the wealth built upon it, which was the initial alienated form of private property. The feudal aristocracy regarded the fruits of others' labor as their rightful possessions and private property for their own squandering and enjoyment. Therefore, they also mistook the unrestrained possession and reckless squandering of wealth for the realization of their essential powers. The excess of wealth and the "romantic sentiment" and "aristocratic spirit" formed on this basis sometimes made them display disdain for wealth, treating it merely as a means to achieve certain "noble purposes." Therefore, Marx evaluated the feudal aristocracy thus: "generous and at the same time base, fickle, arrogant, infatuated with everything, refined, cultured, and witty." These traits appear self-contradictory, but in fact they are all derivatives of the same private property, "the beautiful illusion about the essence of wealth dazzled by sensuous appearance," and thus can coexist in the same class. Precisely because they could not see the alien essence of wealth, while possessing wealth, they were also enslaved by it.
In stark contrast is the bourgeoisie and private property existing in the form of capital. Marx believed that the greatest difference between capitalists and feudal aristocrats is that they do not indulge in illusions about the essence of wealth, but rather "drown all sentiments above wealth in the icy water of egoistic calculation." They are cold, greedy, and at the same time sober, frugal, and full of practical spirit. Marx further pointed out that the capitalist is the personification of capital, and "only as personified capital does he have historical value." In other words, the character of the bourgeoisie is the sensuous presentation of the logic of capital, manifested as a strong desire for value appreciation and capital accumulation. When this character is continuously reinforced in commercial activities, the desire for capital is no longer merely a material pursuit but also manifests as a spiritual need. They are bound by their own greed for wealth and the sense of crisis from competition. "Only when the increasing possession of abstract wealth becomes the sole motive of his activity does he function as a capitalist or as personified, will-conscious capital." The pursuit of capital becomes the symbol of their identity and the confirmation of meaning. Therefore, although the capitalist's desire for enjoyment is inevitably stimulated with the growth of wealth, the truly shrewd capitalist is "calculating" even in enjoyment and will not exceed the limit that can be compensated through reproduction.
In Marx's view, the above two forms of private property are the results of private property's own activity. Capital, as a substitute for landed estate, is a developed and universalized private property, because it breaks the external limitations of private property and replaces the old order with a new order of universality and worldliness. At the same time, Marx used a personified analogy to reveal the class character differences behind the replacement of the two forms of private property. He believed this was the victory of greed for wealth over the desire for enjoyment, and the victory of "open, worldly-wise, assiduous, shrewd, and enlightened egoism" over "narrow-minded, prim, lazy, and fantasy-indulging superstitious egoism."
However, universalized private property is also an alienated form of human essence, and because it breaks through its own external objectivity and attaches to the essential determinations of man himself, it further negates human essence. Universalized private property manifests in the working class as a miserable real situation and a pathological class character. At this point, "the nationality of the worker is not French, not English, not German, but labor, the slavery of freedom, self-sale." They are in a state of being highly alienated and deprived of their nature, and spiritual pain and suppressed needs become their class character. The worker's labor process is forced, the products of labor are not at his disposal, and he engages in high-intensity labor for a long time, unable to experience value, pleasure, and self-identity in labor. Therefore, he is often in negative emotions such as depression, anxiety, and anger. This long-term spiritual torment suppresses their human needs to the greatest extent, turning them into "bestial barbarism and thoroughly crude, abstract simplification" of animal needs, and even the needs of animals or primitive people for hunting, movement, and interaction no longer exist.
This is clearly not the original character of the working class. They should have displayed their character like the German workers with a "theoretical sense," the "industrious and intelligent" English workers, and the passionate, self-sacrificing Irish workers in Engels' writings. Therefore, Marx believed that the ultimate transcendence of private property is the realization of communism, which makes man no longer dominated by alien private property, and private property no longer becomes the essential determination of man; thus man achieves the true possession of his own essence. In this process, Marx saw that the spiritual needs of the working class, especially the need for interaction, developed. The past "smoking, drinking, and eating" when gathered together became "interaction as an end"...
(3) Universal Human Personality
(Note: The translated text from the source jumps from the discussion of class character to the conclusion and the section on "inherent purport." The section heading for "universal human personality" is not explicitly present in the lines retrieved, but the content that follows—beginning with the quote about "the first historical act"—is clearly part of the discussion on the realization of free individuality and the universal human personality form.)
...makes this productive force a social wealth belonging to everyone. At this point, the individual is freed from dependence on persons and things. The individual does not have to labor merely for survival needs, but can also labor for appropriate enjoyment needs, and still has sufficient leisure and material conditions to fully develop his own abilities, thereby making the realization of free individuality possible. Of course, the realization of free individuality and a sound personality does not mean a state of universal laissez-faire or the cessation of development. First, the comprehensive development of man includes the realization of man's social essence. Therefore, people will value their identity as a member of the community and respect the free individuality of others, thereby establishing a relationship of interaction that returns to their essence as "the sum total of all social relations," and creating a social environment in which "the free development of each is the condition for the free development of all." Second, a sound personality form, as a psychological-behavioral pattern, can only be cultivated, maintained, and developed in the process of practice. Labor, as man's most basic and important practical activity, will inevitably become the way for people to cultivate, maintain, and develop this sound personality. Finally, man, as a conscious, active, and practical being, while satisfying existing needs, "the first need itself that has already been satisfied, the activity of satisfying needs, and the instruments already acquired for satisfying needs, lead to new needs." This also becomes the driving force for historical development. Marx called the emergence of new needs and the production of the materials to satisfy them "the first historical act." It is precisely in the process of creating and satisfying new needs that humanity can continuously achieve new development.
III. The Inherent Purport of Marx and Engels' Thoughts on Social Character
The form of social character has an inherent consistency with the form of human existence. In Marx and Engels' view, man's real existence can be divided into three basic forms: man as a group being, man as a human being, and man as an individual being. Therefore, their exploration of different forms of social character, rising from the character of groups such as nations and classes to the universal human personality form as a species characteristic, and then returning to the sound personality of each individual, namely the realization of free individuality, encompasses the broadest sense of "social character" forms. At the same time, man, as the subject of social character, has his essence and attributes that also determine the essence and attributes of social character. Starting from this, we can discover the inherent purport of Marx and Engels' thoughts on social character.
(1) Social Purport
Marx and Engels' thoughts on social character fully emphasize the relationship between social character and the social environment, possessing a social purport. Social character is the trait system of social psychology and also the intermediate link in the formation and development of the social superstructure. The characters of different social groups are influenced by factors such as the mode of production, social structure, class differences, and regional culture, possessing significant social attributes.
In fact, in Marx and Engels' view, all consciousness is essentially social consciousness. They pointed out that "consciousness is from the outset a social product," and "the expression of life... is also the expression and confirmation of social life." Similarly, the spiritual expression of life based on the function of consciousness—the formation and development of personality—always takes place in social life. In this sense, we can also say that there is no absolute "individual character"; all character is social character. Individual character is contained within social character and is the reflection of social life at the psychological and behavioral levels of man. This understanding is also consistent with Marx's view that "the essence of man is in its reality the sum total of social relations." Therefore, the soundness of social character must also be realized in a good social environment. Based on man's social attributes, Marx said, "Since it is the environment that creates man, the environment must be created in a human way. Since man is by nature social, he can only develop his true nature in society; the power of human nature should be measured not by the power of a single individual but by the power of society." This establishes a connection between a sound social character and an ideal society.
Therefore, specifically, the clear chain between individual character, social character, and social system is: the general soundness of individual character is the soundness of social character; the soundness of social character is realized through the perfection of the social system; and the perfection of the social system also needs to be completed in the process of the soundness of individual character and social character. In this sense, we can truly understand the essence of "the free development of each is the condition for the free development of all." What it expounds is precisely the relationship between human development and the social system. It is precisely because they fully recognized this relationship that Marx and Engels advocated establishing new relations of production and a new social system through proletarian revolution, fundamentally realizing the universal liberation and free and comprehensive development of man. In Fromm, we can also see a similar social ideal. Fromm believed that a sound social character depends on a sound social system. He explicitly proposed that the only way to save us from degenerating into a "robot state" of "life without meaning, without joy, without faith, without reality" is to "implement humanistic socialism." Under such a social system, "the material conditions available to everyone are sufficient to guarantee him a life of dignity," and "through experiencing himself as the subject of his own powers, he gains a sense of self," thereby developing a social character that is "adventurous, brave, imaginative, capable of enduring hardship, and also capable of enjoying joy."
(2) Historical Purport
Marx and Engels' thoughts on social character always place social character in a specific era background and historical stage, analyzing the relationship between social character and social-historical development from both material and spiritual conditions, possessing a historical purport.
(II) Historical Purport
Marx and Engels' thoughts on social character always place social character within a specific era background and historical stage, analyzing the relationship between social character and social-historical development from both material and spiritual conditions. This possesses a historical purport.
In Marx and Engels' view, social character exists under specific social-historical conditions, and its emergence and development are both influenced by social-historical conditions. On the material level, man is a living natural being, so his survival and development are built upon certain material conditions. Consciousness, as a function of the human brain, is generated and evolves in the history of nature and human material activity, and personality is constructed upon this function by various contents of consciousness. The content of consciousness and its process of emergence are constrained by the productive forces and relations of production, which in turn shape people's ideas and thoughts. It is in this sense that Engels said: "The ideas and thoughts of each historical period can also be explained very simply by the economic conditions of life of that period and the social and political relations determined by these conditions." On the spiritual level, man is a conscious being. Social character is influenced by the historical development of consciousness, namely cultural tradition, and also influences historical development as a new factor of consciousness. Marx pointed out that human historical creation always takes place under "conditions directly encountered, given, and transmitted from the past," and "the tradition of all dead generations weighs like a nightmare on the brain of the living." Thus we can see that the revolutionaries in France for decades after 1830 also "anxiously conjured up the spirits of the past to their service, borrowing from them names, battle slogans, and costumes, ... in order to present the new scene of world history." In the earlier English bourgeois revolution, Cromwell also borrowed "the language, passions, and illusions of the Old Testament" precisely to evoke the historical memories rooted in social character by cultural tradition. Machiavelli, the founder of modern political science, was also well versed in this approach. He provided extensive descriptions of traditional factors in the historical transformations of ancient Rome and Italy, and of the practice of borrowing the shell of these traditions to evoke certain inherent emotions and beliefs among the populace. He stated bluntly that for reformers, "since new things unsettle men's minds, you should contrive to make those unsettling innovations retain as much as possible the appearance of the old order."
Moreover, Marx's exposition of the universal human personality form also reveals the historical logic of the evolution of social character. "All history is nothing but the continuous transformation of human nature," and personality, as "the determination of man," is clearly an inherent component of "nature." The universal personality form, as a "species characteristic," is the spiritual dimension of humanity's own level of development. It is inherent in the context of historical development, becomes increasingly perfected with the evolution of human civilization, and ultimately achieves a sound state in the free and comprehensive development of man. Universal soundness of personality requires and signifies that human civilization is at a high-level historical stage, and its realization requires a lengthy historical process.
(III) Practical Purport
Marx and Engels' thoughts on social character place great emphasis on man's practical attributes and practical abilities, possessing a practical purport. On the one hand, they emphasize man's practical attributes. Marx pointed out: "What they are... coincides with their production, both with what they produce and with how they produce." This is because man's mode of existence is practice. Through practice, people apply their needs, motives, purposes, will, and other essential powers to objective things, making the latter into the objects of practice. Social existence is precisely the object and product of this practice. Although social character is influenced by social history and shaped by social existence, social character is in fact the character of social members, and it is practicing people who are the subjects of social character. Therefore, one should "regard consciousness only as their consciousness" (referring to the consciousness of real, living individuals), and further regard social character only as the character of real, living social members. This interpretation of man's practical attributes avoids the abstract subjectivity pursued by previous humanism, and instead emphasizes that man transforms the real world through practice, thereby embodying a real subjectivity grounded in sensibility.
On the other hand, they emphasize man's practical ability. Man's practical ability is embodied in man's capacity to transform the world according to his own purposes, and in this process, man also achieves self-knowledge and self-transformation. When practical ability is embodied in social character, it means that man, as the subject of social character, can influence and transform social character through practice. Marx pointed out that people "in changing this their reality... also change their thinking and the products of their thinking." "Thinking and the products of thinking" naturally include character as a psychological-behavioral pattern. The interaction between psychology and behavior is an important operating mechanism of character. As Engels said, "everything that sets men in motion must go through their brains." Man controls behavior through a set of neurophysiological mechanisms. In the process of behavior, external information received by man is processed through neurophysiological mechanisms and integrated into consciousness. Through the repeated occurrence of this process, personality achieves self-shaping. The mechanism of social character shaping, on the one hand, is the recurrence of the above process in the majority of social members; on the other hand, it also achieves the universalization of this shaping through social interaction and social influence.
(IV) Humanistic Purport
Marx and Engels' thoughts on social character emphasize the subject's autonomy and self-determination, possessing a humanistic purport.
The subject's autonomy is embodied as a subject right. In the issue of social character, it manifests as the right of the subject of social character not to have its social character changed or extinguished by coercion. On the issue of national character, Marx and Engels advocated that the objective existence of national character should be recognized, opposed the crude alteration and extinction of national character, and also opposed placing narrow national particularity above the cause of human liberation. For example, regarding Bauer's proposition that Jews "renounce their Jewish essence" to obtain equal citizenship rights, Marx pointed out that the so-called "Jewish essence" has its social-historical foundation. To a certain extent, it has become a core component of the spiritual character of civil society, namely egoism and the desire for wealth. Therefore, the injustice and discrimination suffered by Jews in the modern state cannot be resolved by depriving them of their religious beliefs and extinguishing their national character, but rather through the emancipation of civil society—which centrally embodies the Jewish egoism and desire for wealth—and even the emancipation of all humanity. Engels criticized the Pan-Slavists' demand to place the "fictitious national characteristics of all Slavs" above the proletarian revolution, and pointed out that a revolution built on such narrow nationality could very likely degenerate into strife between nations. These two viewpoints are not simply a balance or compromise between national particularity and human universality, but rather signify that Marx and Engels' thinking on national character had already reached a higher dimension—namely, no longer entangled in the defense or critique of specific national characters, but rather placing the national question within the value goal of universal human liberation.
The subject's self-determination means that the subject's existence takes itself as its end. In social character, it manifests as the development of social character taking the soundness and perfection of the subject of social character itself as its purpose. It is precisely from the subject's self-determination that Marx and Engels realized the transformation of the subject of social character from nation to class, and based on this transformation, shifted the principal contradiction to be resolved in the issue of social character—namely, the spiritual liberation of the oppressed class, thereby promoting the soundness of the universal human personality form, and ultimately realizing the comprehensive development of man and free individuality. The subject's self-determination is also reflected in the connotation of a sound personality: a sound personality means both satisfying the universal needs of "man's intensely striving essential powers for his objects" and realizing the development that man as a species-being should achieve, as well as satisfying the individual's particular needs and realizing the individualized development of man as an independent individual. Only by simultaneously satisfying man's universal and individual needs, and simultaneously realizing universal and individual human development, is this the embodiment of all-round, multi-level self-determination.
Source: Originally published in Journal of Beijing Normal University (Social Sciences Edition), 2022, Issue 6, pp. 11–22. Full text available at the Marxism Research Network: http://marxism.cass.cn/mksjbyl/202312/t20231213_5710263.shtml
