中華文明與中國道路

Chinese Civilization and Path

潘 岳

Pan Yue

2019年11月

November 2019

中共十九屆四中全會(huì )就推進(jìn)“國家治理體系與治理能力現代化”做出重大戰略部署。習近平主席強調，“一個(gè)國家治理體系與能力與這個(gè)國家的歷史傳承和文化傳統密切相關(guān)，解決中國的問(wèn)題只能在中國大地上探尋適合自己的道路和辦法。”道路決定命運，文化傳統決定道路選擇。數千年來(lái)，中華文明塑造了中國特色社會(huì )主義道路的文明根性。

A major strategy was adopted for advancing the modernization of China’s system and capacity for governance at the fourth plenary session of the 19th Central Committee of the Communist Party of China (CPC). As Chinese President Xi Jinping stressed, the governance system and capacity of a country is closely related with its history and cultural traditions, and the solution to China’s issues can only be found in China. The destiny hinges upon the path taken, which is determined by cultural tradition. The path of socialism with Chinese characteristics has been shaped by the Chinese civilization of several thousand years.

一、中華文明的核心要義是“大一統”傳統

今天論壇的主題，是中華文明與中國道路。中華文明的核心要義大一統，就是制度統一、政令統一、文化統一。這個(gè)概念，很多西方朋友不喜歡，但這個(gè)概念恰好是理解中國道路的核心。從中國歷史上來(lái)看，大一統包含幾個(gè)方面:

一是中央集權的政治制度。郡縣制確保中央權力可以在基層運行，解決央地離心傾向;科舉制打破階層固化，開(kāi)放國家權力和治理體系;文官制保證王權與士大夫集團共治天下;鄉紳制反映朝野協(xié)同共治基層。因為大一統傳統，中國創(chuàng )造了世界唯一不中斷的“分久必合”的中國奇跡。

二是以文化認同塑造民族認同。是否是中華民族一員，不是靠種族，不是靠地緣，不是靠宗教，而是靠文化。所謂“諸侯用夷禮則夷之，夷而進(jìn)于中國則中國之”。即是說(shuō)生于中華之族群，不認同中華文化，就非中華之人;不生在中華地域的族群，只要認同中華文化，就是中華之人。歷史上，任何一個(gè)少數民族政權定鼎中原，都主動(dòng)選擇繼承發(fā)展中華文明大一統體系。例如蒙元創(chuàng )造了中央集權制度中的“行省制”，滿(mǎn)清創(chuàng )造了包括西藏新疆在內的多民族邊疆治理體系。因此，中華文明大一統體系也是多民族共同創(chuàng )造的。正因為大一統民族之道，中華文明不是西方意義上的現代民族國家，更不是西方意義上的帝國霸權，而是“多元一體”的中華民族共同體。

三是中華文明永遠開(kāi)放包容。中華文明從未拒絕過(guò)任何一種外來(lái)文化， 也從來(lái)不宣稱(chēng)自己已經(jīng)進(jìn)化到了歷史的終點(diǎn)。不論強弱，都不搞封閉，不放棄學(xué)習。任何一種宗教和文化進(jìn)入中國，都會(huì )自覺(jué)不自覺(jué)地淡化非此即彼的排他性，因為多元和包容是中華文明的又一核心價(jià)值。

四是協(xié)和萬(wàn)邦的世界秩序。中華文明崇尚“美人之美、美美與共”，主張和合共生、互利共贏(yíng)。因為大一統和平之道，傳統中國沒(méi)有像西方帝國那樣進(jìn)行對外軍事征服，沒(méi)有靠殖民霸權，沒(méi)有派任何儒生去世界強行文化輸出。所謂的朝貢體系也主要是禮尚往來(lái)。

很多西方學(xué)者認為，所謂“大一統”觀(guān)念，是因為先建立了中央集權的政治制度，為了符合政治需要才發(fā)明出的意識形態(tài)。實(shí)際并非如此。在秦漢大一統王朝之前幾百年，戰國百家爭鳴的時(shí)代里，大一統思想就在諸子百家各派中討論。盡管諸子百家思想分歧極大，但在“定于一”上都有共識。他們不約而同將治亂問(wèn)題放在政治問(wèn)題的首位，將統一的秩序放在了政治價(jià)值的首位。其中一個(gè)重要原因是，中國是超大規模國家，只有大一統體系才能維持穩定。

僅從軍事史來(lái)看。先看古希臘古羅馬。雅典在其鼎盛時(shí)期伯羅奔尼撒戰爭開(kāi)始時(shí)最多只能動(dòng)員1.3萬(wàn)人參戰。亞歷山大大帝征服歐亞的部隊只有4萬(wàn)人。羅馬史上傷亡最大的戰爭坎尼之戰，只死亡6萬(wàn)人。而和古希臘古羅馬同時(shí)的中國戰國時(shí)期，大小戰爭多達230次，死亡10萬(wàn)-40萬(wàn)或出兵20萬(wàn)-60萬(wàn)之間的超大規模戰爭，就有十幾次之多；死亡4-6萬(wàn)人只能算中小型戰爭。

可以說(shuō)，中國作為超大規模國家的戰爭烈度，遠遠超過(guò)西方;因政治分立的造成的戰爭死亡和痛苦，也遠遠超過(guò)西方。正是這個(gè)巨大的代價(jià)，從歷史源頭塑造了中華文明的政治觀(guān)。超大規模的政治體，如果沒(méi)有大一統體系，將會(huì )產(chǎn)生超大規模的人道主義危機。穩定與秩序，是中國人的第一政治，亦是中國人的集體經(jīng)驗，任何政治理論都無(wú)法動(dòng)搖。

1. The Grand Unification tradition sits at the heart of the Chinese civilization 

The theme of the forum today is Chinese civilization and path. The Grand Unification that lies at the heart of the Chinese civilization is about unifying systems, government decrees, and cultures, which many in the West loathe but exactly explains the essence of China’s path. From the perspective of the Chinese history, the Grand Unification includes the following elements:

First, a centralized political system. The system of prefectures and counties ensures the power of the central government can be exercised at the grassroots level to prevent local governments from pulling away from the central government; the imperial examination system promotes social mobility to usher in a system of state power and governance accessible to the general public; the civil service system guarantees a joint rule by royalty and the shidafu scholar-bureaucrat class; and the local gentry system reflects a shared push by the court and the commonalty to govern the grassroots. It is this Grand Unification that has made China create its miracle, which is unique in the world: the world, after a long period of division, tends to unite.

Second, national identity shaped by cultural identity. The Chinese nation is not defined by race, geography, or religion, but by culture. As is said in the Spring and Autumn Annals or Chunqiu, anyone who is born in China but disagrees with the Chinese culture is not a member of the Chinese nation, while anyone who is not born in China but agrees with the Chinese culture is a member of the Chinese nation. Any ethnic minority regime that ruled China volunteered to retain and carry forward the Grand Unification. For example, the Mongolian ethnic group in the Yuan Dynasty introduced the system of administrative provinces within the centralized framework, and the Man ethnic group in the Qing Dynasty created a multi-ethnic system of governing the border regions including Tibet and Xinjiang. In this sense, the Grand Unification system of the Chinese nation is also the result of the joint efforts by China’s multiple ethnic groups. Hence, the Chinese civilization is not a modern nation state or an imperial hegemon in the Western context, but actually a community of the Chinese nation with ethnic groups diversified yet integrated as one.

Third, the Chinese civilization that has always been open and inclusive. The Chinese civilization has never rejected any foreign cultures, nor did it assert that it has evolved to the end of history. No matter how strong or weak it was, it never isolated itself from the world or ceased to learn. Any religion or culture coming into China would see its exclusiveness fade, as the Chinese civilization is characterized by diversity and inclusion.

Fourth, a harmonious world order. The Chinese civilization upholds the notion of accepting the beauties of other civilizations and sharing all the beauties, and advocates harmony and mutual benefit for win-win results. Because of the peaceful path taken to the Grand Unification, traditional China didn’t venture out to conquer other countries militarily as the empires in the West, seek hegemony through colonialism, or export its culture through any Confucian scholars. And its tributary system was built on the notion that says propriety suggests reciprocity.

Many scholars in the West believe that the Grand Unification is an ideology invented to meet political demands following the establishment of the centralized political system. But it’s actually not the case. In the hundreds of years prior to the unified empire in the Qin and Han dynasties, which is the Warring States period, the idea of the Grand Unification was already discussed by the hundred schools of thought. The various schools of thought had bitter disputes over ideas, but they all reached agreement on unification. One of the key reasons why they tacitly took suppression of revolts as the top political problem to be reckoned with and put unification first is that only a grand unification system could stabilize such a vast country as China. 

Take a look at the military history in Ancient Greece and Rome. Even in its heyday, Greece could only send 13,000 soldiers at most to fight in the Peloponnesian War as it broke out. Alexander the Great conquered Eurasia with only 40,000 soldiers. In the Battle of Cannae as the war registering the largest number of casualties in the history of the Roman Empire, only 60,000 soldiers died. But in the contemporaneous Warring States period in China, there were as many as 230 wars, large or small, and over a dozen of mega wars that caused 100,000 to 400,000 deaths or involved 200,000 to 600,000 troops, which means wars that resulted in 40,000 to 60,000 deaths were deemed small and medium-sized wars in China at that time.

So it’s fair to say that China as a vast country has experienced far more fierce wars as well as fatalities and pain in wars caused by political divide than countries in the West. And it is this huge price that China has paid that has shaped the political outlook of the Chinese nation. Without a system of grand unification, a country as vast as China would see a huge humanitarian crisis. That’s why stability and order have always come the first for the Chinese people and are the invaluable experience that the Chinese people have gained throughout the history, which remains unshakable in whatever political theories.

二、根植于馬克思主義與中華文明的中國道路

常有西方朋友問(wèn)我，什么是中國特色社會(huì )主義。我說(shuō)，實(shí)質(zhì)意義就是社會(huì )主義與中華文明緊密結合，也就是馬克思主義中國化。這便是我們?yōu)楹闻c蘇聯(lián)不同的原因。中華文明是馬克思主義落地生根的文化土壤，馬克思主義是中華文明的現代轉型的關(guān)鍵動(dòng)力，中國共產(chǎn)黨將兩者深度結合。

基于中華文明政治一統思想，我們將馬克思主義國家理論中國化為中國特色國家治理體系和治理能力。通過(guò)民族區域自治，不同民族和諧共處;通過(guò)“一國兩制”，不同制度并行共處;通過(guò)央地統合，發(fā)揮中央統籌和地方積極性;通過(guò)大統戰，促進(jìn)階層統合與人心凝聚。

基于中華文明社會(huì )結構，我們將馬克思主義無(wú)產(chǎn)階級專(zhuān)政理論中國化為“人民民主專(zhuān)政”。新中國的政權基礎不僅是工人階級，而且還包括工農聯(lián)盟、民族資產(chǎn)階級和小資產(chǎn)階級在內的四萬(wàn)萬(wàn)同胞。

基于中華文明協(xié)商共治傳統，我們將馬克思主義民主理論中國化為中國特色民主政治實(shí)踐。協(xié)商民主與選舉民主有機結合，一黨執政與多黨參政有機結合，既代表直接利益，更代表根本利益，不斷實(shí)踐實(shí)質(zhì)民主。

基于中華文明經(jīng)濟治理傳統，我們將馬克思主義公有制理論、列寧的新經(jīng)濟政策中國化為混合所有制經(jīng)濟制度。將社會(huì )主義與市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟相結合，在公有制為主體的前提下，多種所有制經(jīng)濟共同發(fā)展，國有企業(yè)和民營(yíng)企業(yè)都是自己人。

基于中華文明天人合一思想，我們將馬克思主義生態(tài)觀(guān)中國化為社會(huì )主義生態(tài)文明。中國不走西方依靠戰爭和殖民而完成原始積累的工業(yè)化老路。我們依靠社會(huì )主義體制的力量，不僅能避免資本主義唯利是圖導致的生態(tài)危機，還能進(jìn)行更高效的環(huán)境治理以實(shí)現社會(huì )公平正義。

基于中華文明政教傳統，我們將馬克思主義宗教觀(guān)中國化為中國特色新型政教關(guān)系。關(guān)鍵是立足“政主教從、多元通和”歷史經(jīng)驗，推進(jìn)宗教和諧寬容。

基于中華文明民族治理體系，我們將馬克思主義民族觀(guān)中國化為中國特色解決民族問(wèn)題之路。中國既不會(huì )通過(guò)削弱多樣性來(lái)強化國家認同;也不會(huì )因為要保持多樣性而削弱國家認同。民族區域自治制度不是強化民族間的特殊性和差異性，而是以特殊優(yōu)惠政策調動(dòng)各民族積極性，為中華民族共同體添磚加瓦。

基于中華文明賢能政治傳統，我們將馬克思主義先鋒隊理論中國化為“兩個(gè)先鋒隊”。中國共產(chǎn)黨既是工人階級先鋒隊，又是中國人民和中華民族先鋒隊，是民族性與階級性的有機統一。我們不是少部分人的利益代表，而是全民族的利益代表;不是選舉機器，而是執政為民的使命型政黨;不是嚴重脫離人民的私利集團，不輸出革命，而是有著(zhù)自我革命精神與嚴明政治紀律的革命型政黨。以上馬克思主義中國化的例子還有很多。

2. The Chinese path rooted in Marxism and the Chinese civilization

Some friends in the West often asked me what the socialism with Chinese characteristics really is. I told them that it’s in essence a perfect blend of socialism and the Chinese civilization, or localization of Marxism in China. That is why we are different from the Soviet Union. The Chinese civilization provides a cultural breeding ground for Marxism to take root and flourish, while Marxism provides a key impetus to modern transition of the Chinese civilization. And it is the CPC that has integrated the two.

Based on the Grand Unification thought of the Chinese civilization, we have localized the Marxist doctrine of the state as the system and capacity for governance with the Chinese characteristics. Regional autonomy of ethnic minorities ensures different ethnic groups live in harmony; the “One Country, Two Systems” model ensures two different systems operate without conflict; the coordination between the central and local governments ensures the role of the central government to centralize and the motivation of local governments; and the grand united front work ensures people of all ranks and classes can be united as one.

Based on the social structure of the Chinese civilization, we have localized the Marxist dictatorship of the proletariat as the people’s democratic dictatorship. The regime of China following the founding of the People’s Republic of China has been built not only on the working class, but the worker-peasant alliance, the national bourgeoisie, and the petite bourgeoisie.

Based on the tradition of the Chinese civilization to jointly govern through consultation, we have localized the Marxist theory of democracy as the practice of democratic politics with Chinese characteristics. Combining consultative democracy with electoral democracy and one-party rule with multi-party participation in politics represents not only the immediate interest but the fundamental interest, which is an ongoing process of practicing substantive democracy.

Based on the economic governance tradition of the Chinese civilization, we have localized the Marxist theory of public ownership and Lenin’s New Economic Policy as the economic system of mixed ownership. We have integrated socialism with the market economy to have an economic system with public ownership playing a dominant role and diverse forms of ownership developing side by side, where the state-owned and private enterprises are both regarded as our own people.

Based on the thought of the Chinese civilization that says man is an integral part of nature, we have localized the Marxist view on ecology as the socialist ecological civilization. China would not embark on the path to primitive accumulation through wars or colonization as the West did, but would instead resort to the socialist system to avoid the ecological crisis caused by the venality of capitalism and embrace more efficient environmental governance for social justice and fairness.

Based on the tradition of the Chinese civilization for regime and religion, we have localized the Marxist view on religion as the new relations between regime and religion with Chinese characteristics. The key is to create a harmonious and inclusive environment for religion based on the historical experience of allowing regime to play a dominant role and religion to play second fiddle in a way that encourages diversification and harmony.

Based on the ethnic governance system of the Chinese civilization, we have localized the Marxist view on ethnicity as a solution to ethnic issues with the Chinese characteristics. China would not enhance national identity by weakening diversity, or erode national identity to maintain diversity. China’s regional autonomy of ethnic minorities is not about highlighting ethnic particularity or disparity, but about motivating all ethnic groups with special and preferential policies to contribute to the community of the Chinese nation.

Based on the political meritocracy tradition of the Chinese civilization, we have localized the Marxist vanguard theory as two vanguards. The CPC is both the vanguard of the working class and the vanguard of the Chinese people and the Chinese nation, which integrates nationality with class. We are representative of not the minority but the whole nation; we are not a voting machine but a mission-driven party for the people; and we are not a self-interest group that divorces ourselves far away from the people, but a revolutionary party that doesn’t export revolutions but seeks for self-targeted revolution and strict political discipline. And there are many more such examples of localizing Marxism in China.

第三，中國道路的世界意義

一是中國道路打破了“歷史終結論”。歷史不可能終結,應終結的該是偏見(jiàn)。如今，“本國優(yōu)先”“逆全球化”思潮蔓延世界，中國將反其道而行，高舉新型全球化旗幟，積極參與全球治理。

二是中國道路打破了“西方中心論”。中國靠的是集中力量辦大事、集中力量辦成事。為發(fā)展中國家現代化提供新的體制參照。現代化不等于西方化，更不等于美國化。

三是中國道路打破了“國強必霸論”。中國不會(huì )陷入西方霸權沖突的歷史周期律。中國即使是在綜合實(shí)力最強的時(shí)候，也沒(méi)有對外殖民掠奪、沒(méi)有炮艦政策、沒(méi)有強加于人的不平等條約。無(wú)論是積極倡導“一帶一路”，還是主動(dòng)參與全球治理，我們都把對內改革與對外開(kāi)放統一起來(lái)，把中國發(fā)展與世界發(fā)展聯(lián)系起來(lái)，把中國人民利益同各國人民共同利益結合起來(lái)。

四是中國道路打破了“文明沖突論”。這為促進(jìn)多元文明交流互鑒提供了新的力量。西方宣揚的所謂普世價(jià)值，如果沒(méi)有與中華文明對話(huà)交流，肯定不會(huì )是“普世”的。中華文明如果不與西方文明對話(huà)交流，同樣不能實(shí)現創(chuàng )新性發(fā)展。只有多元文明交流互鑒，我們才能更為妥善地平衡個(gè)體與群體、責任與自由、義務(wù)與權利、德治與法治、道義與利益、本國與世界的關(guān)系，從而淬煉真正的人類(lèi)共同價(jià)值。

3. The significance of the Chinese path to the world

First, the Chinese path has overturned the notion of the End of History. It is bias not history that has an end. As the world is gripped by the ideological trend that calls for putting one’s own country first and reversing globalization, China will buck the trend by holding high the banner of new globalization and actively participating in global governance.

Second, the Chinese path has overturned the West-centrism. China has proved the effectiveness of focusing all the resources on undertaking and pulling off tasks, which serves as a new reference for developing countries to modernize. Modernization is not tantamount to westernization, much less Americanization.

Third, the Chinese path has overturned the conclusion that says a country that rises to a power would always seek hegemony. China would not get into any conflict over hegemony as the West did. Even as we saw our comprehensive national strength rising to the highest level, we didn’t initiate colonization or plundering, adopt any gunboat policy, or impose any unequal treaty on other countries. Whether it be the Belt and Road Initiative or an active part in global governance, we have always integrated internal reform with opening-up, our own development with global development, and the interest of the Chinese people with the shared interest of all the people around the world.

Fourth, the Chinese path has overturned the belief in the clash of civilizations, providing fresh impetus to communication among different civilizations. Without a dialogue with the Chinese civilization, the so-called universal values preached by the West would certainly not be universal in the first place. And vice versa: the Chinese civilization would not achieve innovative development if it doesn’t communicate with the Western civilization. Only through communication can we strike a better balance between individuals and groups, responsibility and freedom, obligations and rights, rule of virtue and rule of law, morality and interest, and country and the world, and extract the real values shared by humanity.