Is the socialism established by the Soviet Union, Eastern Europe and other countries a concrete realization of Marx's "Kafting Canyon without going through the capitalist system"?

There is also a popular view in the theoretical circle: Marx not only put forward the idea that backward countries can cross the Kafting Canyon of the capitalist system, but also the practice of the former Soviet Union and eastern European countries on the socialist road has proved the truth of Marx's theory. The author believes that this is a theoretical annotation of socialism in contemporary backward countries with the help of Marx's words and phrases. To answer whether socialism in contemporary backward countries is the realization of Marx's "Kafting Canyon without going through the capitalist system" in reality, two problems must be solved.

First of all, is there any inevitable connection between the contemporary backward countries' stepping into socialism and Marx's Kafting Canyon, which does not pass through the capitalist system? Looking at Marx's four drafts of letters to Sulic, we can easily find that Marx's thought of Kafting Canyon, which does not pass through the capitalist system, is used in a very strict sense and should meet two conditions at the same time. First, the existence of public ownership of land in rural communes, that is, Russian rural communes "can preserve themselves by developing its foundation, that is, public ownership of land and eliminating the private ownership principle it also contains;" It can become the direct starting point of the economic system that modern society tends to, and you can get a new life without committing suicide. " This is the premise and foundation of "you can not pass through the Cafudin Canyon". Secondly, the existence of capitalist modern mass production, that is, the coexistence of Russian rural commune and capitalist production provides it with all conditions for collective labor. It may not pass through the Cafudin Canyon of the capitalist system, but occupy all the positive achievements created by the capitalist system "[16]. This is a necessary condition for "not going through the Cafudin Canyon". As far as the two conditions are concerned, the former is more important. Without the prerequisite of public ownership of land, the so-called "no pass" is impossible.

did Russia have this prerequisite before the October Revolution? Engels pointed out in 1895: "With the liberation of farmers, Russia entered the era of capitalism, and thus entered the era of rapid disintegration of commune land ownership." [17] "Russia has laid all the foundations of the capitalist mode of production in a short time" [18]. At the end of 19th century and the beginning of 2th century, Lenin repeatedly affirmed that Russia had entered the capitalist era. He pointed out: "Populists often oppose China's system and capitalism according to the backward technology of our national economy and the dominant handicraft production. Undoubtedly, this is extremely absurd. Because capitalism exists both in the case of underdeveloped technology and in the case of highly developed technology. " [19] It can be seen that before the October Revolution, Russia was already a capitalist country, and the prerequisite for rural communes not to adopt the capitalist system of Kafting Canyon has disappeared. Therefore, the problem of "leapfrogging" no longer exists.

Secondly, whether the socialism established by backward countries such as the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe is scientific socialism in Marx's original intention. The socialism that Marx conceived in his letter to Cha Sulic can enter directly without going through the Kafting Canyon of the capitalist system must be the scientific socialism that he has described many times, but it can never be all kinds of other socialism that he has criticized many times. So can socialism in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe be called scientific socialism? In my opinion, this is a debatable issue. According to the principles of "two necessities" and "two never" put forward by Marx in "Introduction to Criticism of Political Economy", scientific socialism can only be based on the achievements of highly developed capitalism, which is the most general universal law applicable to the development of human society. Although countries such as the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe had entered the low-level production stage of capitalism before the October Revolution, they lacked the material civilization and spiritual achievements created by developed capitalism, so it was completely different from the situation in which developed capitalism was transformed into socialism. Socialism produced by this unique development path is a kind of socialism with a special historical form formed by special historical conditions. It is qualitatively different from the socialist form that Marx said was born out of developed capitalism. This qualitative difference is ultimately determined by the level of productivity. Because different levels of productivity determine different production relations and superstructures. In this sense, socialism in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe is not the realization of crossing the Kafting Canyon. The emergence of socialism in this special historical form in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe actually wants to take a special road from developed capitalism to socialism, which is different from that proposed by Marx. Its ultimate failure is not the bankruptcy of Marx's scientific socialism theory. On the contrary, it proves from the opposite side that Marx's theory on the development path of human society has strong vitality and shows that the demise of capitalism and the victory of socialism are inevitable historical development laws.

Gao Weixiang: The great historical significance of China's crossing over the Kafting Gorge

Socialism with Chinese characteristics Road is a successful example of Marx and Engels' theory that economically and culturally backward countries can directly transition to socialism without going through the Kafting Gorge of capitalist system, which shows the strong vitality of Marxism in China. Socialism with Chinese characteristics Road embodies that the development law of human society is the unity of the historical logic of "the process of natural history" and the leap under special conditions, the decisive role of productive forces and the dynamic role of production relations, and the choice of historical subjects. More importantly, Socialism with Chinese characteristics Road changed the "one-way convergence" of modernization and broadened the way for nation-states to modernize. Its theoretical system correctly answered the theme of "what kind of socialism to build and how to build socialism" after China crossed the "Kafting Canyon of Capitalism", and created "China Model" or "China Road" in modern world history. It enriches the content of Marxist theory of "crossing the Kafting Canyon of capitalist system" from both theoretical and practical levels, thus greatly deepening the understanding of the laws of human social development, socialist construction and the ruling law of the * * * production party. (Journal of China Pudong Cadre College, No.6, 29)

Li Fangxiang: There are three new features in western countries' struggle for ideological discourse right

First, while spreading the fog of "ideological end" and the myth of "universal value", they politicize and ideologize general issues and export political systems to other countries. Trade deficit, RMB exchange rate, energy, environment, military expenditure growth, human rights and other issues are the usual weapons used by some western countries to "demonize" China. The opposition and differences between different ideologies in today's world still exist objectively. Hostile forces have attacked socialist countries as "totalitarian governments" and have never given up their hostile attitudes and positions towards socialist countries and Marxism. The second is to master and use the mass media to form an all-round and three-dimensional encirclement network for some countries. Traditional media, such as radio and satellite TV, are still important channels for ideological interference and infiltration in the west, and in recent years, they have stepped up their efforts to compete with China for the new position of Internet and other ideological culture. Third, taking advantage of the expanding international economic, trade and cultural exchanges, while importing cultural products to some countries, we should infiltrate the so-called "universal values" such as American freedom, democracy and human rights. At the same time, various foundations and non-governmental organizations are used to carry out the infiltration called "cultural exchange", making it a channel for exporting American lifestyle and values. The tactics and tricks of the hostile forces in the West are constantly updated, but their anti-* * *, anti-Marxist and anti-socialist positions are deeply rooted, and their strategic intentions and goals are consistent. (Theoretical Front of Colleges and Universities, No.1, 21)

Kong Genhong: Foreign "China Observers" talked about several core viewpoints of China's * * * production party

Under the background of the rise of China, some foreign "China Observers" turned their eyes to China and put forward several core viewpoints: First, the unprecedented "China Road". China * * * "did not blindly copy the western political and economic development model" and "wrote the most important chapter of national achievements in human history". The Russian Red Star newspaper said that China * * * "put forward its own development path-Socialism with Chinese characteristics. The Soviet Union disintegrated because it did not carry out such reforms. ". Naisbitt, Michel Godet and others believe that the Socialism with Chinese characteristics proposed by China "embodies the topic of the times" and "is changing the world's view of the China * * * production party". The second is the "change and innovation" of great wisdom and courage. Naisbitt said, "China * * * Producer Party no longer stays on the Manifesto of * * * Producer Party", "In 1978, China * * * Producer Party opened its hard shell isolated from the world for decades and began a magical transformation". Fu Limin, former assistant secretary of defense of the United States, said that China has made amazing progress in the past 28 years in its ability to work hard, catch up, reflect on itself, correct itself and adapt to change. Kuhn said that China has an innovative perseverance, a forward-looking vision and a broad vision of the world. China's reform and opening up began with the reform and innovation of China's political concept. "They are tired of standing still." The third is the unique "vertical democracy". "China * * production party is better at listening to people's wishes" and conforming to people's wishes "is the reason why China * * * production party has lasted for a long time". Naisbitt summarized China's political democracy model as "vertical democracy" in his new book "China Megatrends", which was approved by many "China observers". He said that "China's vertical democracy is based on the balance of top-down and bottom-up forces", and the "joint efforts of the two" have promoted the strength of the country and the improvement of people's living standards. (Contemporary World, No.12, 29)

martin jacques: China can no longer be explained by the western model

In the past 3 years, it is an indisputable fact that the western predictions about China are all wrong. They claim that China's economic growth rate is exaggerated; A big crisis is imminent; State control will gradually weaken; The influence of global media will gradually weaken the power of the * * * production party. Westerners predict that China's performance is so bad because they always use western models and experiences to explain China. Unless we try to understand China by focusing on itself, we will be wrong again and again about China. China is totally different from the West, and its way of doing things or thinking habits are totally different from ours. Facing this fact is far from being as simple as imagined. The country is still ubiquitous in China people's lives, still owns most large enterprises, and is good at finding new ways to resist the global media influence of the United States. Western observers usually think that China's intervention is out of fear, but there are deeper reasons why the state plays such an important role in China society. In the eyes of China people, the state is not an alien existence, but the embodiment and guardian of society. The reason lies deep in the history of China. China was a civilized country at least 2 years ago. Maintaining the integrity of China civilization is regarded as the most important political task and the sacred mission of the country, so the country has a unique role in China that is incomparable with the West. (Global Times, January 18, 21)

Wang Jin: Establish the consciousness of China issue and form the China School

Today, our social science research has always been subject to the western paradigm. The academic concept is western, the research method is western, and the evaluation standard is western. Some people have reached the point where they only follow the west's lead. On the surface, they advocate the so-called "integration with the international community". In fact, they fully agree with the western standards without discrimination and selectivity, and then completely deny China's academic research methods and academic values, China's academic research and cultural research achievements, and lose the dominant position in cultural construction. There are also some comrades who lack the necessary critical reflection on some categories and essentials first put forward by the West, are satisfied with what others say, or follow the trend and seek novelty, lack of development and innovation in practice, or even regard what the West has long abandoned as a treasure and become a vassal of Western theory, resulting in an endless stream of new terms and concepts on the surface, but with little practical significance or negative impact. It is this lack that has become a dangerous "interface" for "cultural imperialism" to "invade" and "colonize" China under the background of globalization. This gap directly leads to the intellectual and academic circles not only being unable to stand at the forefront of economic, social and cultural development, but also providing theoretical paradigms, theoretical explanations and development ideas for China's socialist construction, and being in a passive position in the dialogue with the West, and even often appearing collective aphasia. Without the consciousness of China problem, it is impossible to construct a socialist culture with China style and China style. Our academic research, cultural research and cultural construction in a broad sense should vigorously advocate China's consciousness, and strive to build China's own theoretical innovation system and value judgment scale of social science. (Contemporary World and Socialism, No.6, 29)

Jing Tiankui: The other side of welfare in developed countries is poverty and disaster

The global financial crisis has aroused people's deep thinking and discussion on social welfare issues. The United States is the largest developed country in the world, but it is the country with the biggest gap between the rich and the poor among developed countries. In order to maintain its high consumption, the United States also borrowed heavily. The world economic order is so unreasonable that it is no wonder that the financial tsunami on Wall Street in the United States can sweep the world in an instant. Just as we can't talk about finance and economy in the study of financial crisis, we can't talk about poverty and welfare in the study of sociology, social welfare and social policy. The dilemma of the welfare state lies not in the domestic financial difficulties, but in the fact that it is difficult for an increasingly rich-poor world to support the high welfare and high consumption of a few countries. The biggest limitation of the so-called "welfare state" theory, "welfare society" theory and "welfare capitalism theory" is that only a few rich countries with a fraction of the world's population are taken as the scope of care and practical basis, and their horizons are not "universal" to the underdeveloped countries with the majority of the world's population, and even fail to take into account the vast number of poor people in rich countries. In fact, the other side of such "welfare" is "failure", poverty and disaster. The real meaning of the concept of "welfare" is the benefits that are universally enjoyed rather than exclusively enjoyed by a few people. Therefore, it is the lofty purpose and historical mission of sociology, social welfare and social policy research to make mankind truly move towards the era of "universal welfare". (Beijing Daily, November 9, 29)