The Issue of “Socialism and Capitalism Coexisting” in the Context of Community of Shared Future For  Mankind

The Issue of “Socialism and Capitalism Coexisting” in the Context of Community of Shared Future For  Mankind

Summary How socialist countries and capitalist countries get along is a major historical issue. The concept of a community with a shared future for mankind provides us with a new theoretical perspective to understand this issue. From the perspective of the history of the development of Marxism, the peaceful coexistence of socialist countries and capitalist countries has gone through a development process from being a temporary strategy to being a long-term principle. It not only considers the survival and development of socialist countries, but also cares about the future of human civilization. From the perspective of the practice of international relations, the mutually beneficial cooperation between socialist countries and capitalist countries has a realistic basis, among which the United Nations is the organizational basis, the world market is the economic link, and the challenges faced by all mankind are issues of common concern. From the perspective of the development path of international relations, to achieve the common destiny of countries with different systems, we must start from building consensus on values, focusing on common actions, and daring to and being good at struggle. In thinking about the issue of “coexistence of two systems” from the perspective of a community with a shared future for mankind, we must fully recognize the long-term coexistence of the two systems, the complexity of the contradictions faced by mankind, and the diversity of the social development paths of various countries. We must focus on grasping the dialectical unity of adhering to Marxism-Leninism and developing Marxism-Leninism, the dialectical unity of using capitalism and transcending capitalism, and the dialectical unity of pursuing humn liberation and respecting the autonomy of the road.

1. Introduction

The basic principles of Marxism tell us that new things will inevitably defeat old things, and advanced social systems will inevitably replace backward social systems. In fact, due to the complexity of the evolution of social forms, the imbalance of social development in various countries, and the long-term transition from the old to the new social system, it is very common in human history that two or even multiple social systems exist at the same time. The socialist system will inevitably replace the capitalist system. This is the general trend of history. However, in a certain historical period, these two systems can coexist within a country (such as China’s “one country, two systems”) or in different countries, that is, capitalist countries coexist with socialist countries. From the perspective of history, theory and reality, the issue of the coexistence of socialist countries and capitalist countries (referred to as “the coexistence of the two systems”) is a complex and controversial important issue.

First, the issue of “two systems coexisting” has a strong reality and concerns the direction of human civilization. In the era of free competition capitalism, Marx and Engels made a classic theoretical interpretation of the issue that socialism will inevitably replace capitalism. Under the conditions of monopoly capitalism, Lenin not only had the theory and practice of socialism replacing capitalism, but also explored the peaceful coexistence of the two systems after the victory of the October Revolution. The Chinese Communists have made arduous explorations in this regard and have experienced a process of deepening understanding. Some scholars pointed out that in the 100 years of the 20th century, the Chinese people have learned a lot of new things from their own experience, one of which “cannot be ignored” is “the relationship between capitalism and socialism and how to understand and deal with this relationship.” The issue of “two systems coexisting” has also received widespread attention in the West. Among them, some people advocate that the West adopt a strategy of engagement, containment, and evolution towards socialist countries, and ultimately make capitalism defeat socialism; some people believe that socialism will accumulate strength in peaceful coexistence with capitalism and will eventually replace capitalism; some people believe that the two will eventually move towards institutional convergence through peaceful competition and mutual influence, and so on. In recent years, the US government has adopted a tough attitude towards China, showing a strong color of the new Cold War. For example, former U.S. Minister to China, Limin Fu, pointed out: “The United States is currently forcing China to become an opponent that it may not be able to defeat.” Although these views have different positions and propositions, they all focus on the major practical issue of “two systems coexisting”. Against the backdrop of the global spread of the current COVID-19 epidemic, Sino-U.S. relations have concentratedly and prominently reflected this practical issue concerning the direction of human civilization, which has attracted great attention from all sides.

Second, the issue of “two systems coexisting” is highly complex and contains intricate relationships. For a long time, the relationship between the two systems has attracted continuous attention from the academic community. This issue contains multiple connotations of the relationship between socialism and capitalism, namely, the coexistence of two different ideological value systems, two successive social forms, and two countries of different natures; it contains multiple relationships between socialist countries and capitalist countries, namely, opposition, historical inheritance, reference and cooperation, and substitution; it contains multiple identities of socialist China to contemporary capitalism, namely, critic, competitor, and learner. This issue not only involves the relationship between the two systems, but also involves other related contradictions. Among them, developing countries and developed countries, emerging powers and traditional powers, socialist countries and capitalist countries often engage in fierce competition over development paths and models. In our view, at present, the subjects, environment, means, processes, and results of the exchanges between socialist countries and capitalist countries are full of high uncertainty, diversity, and coupling. At the same time, they face highly complex contradictions such as the special entanglement of capital logic and global challenges, and the dual interweaving of structural friction and institutional friction.

Third, the issue of “two systems coexisting” is controversial and urgently needs to form an ideological consensus. Historically, the issue of “two systems coexisting” has emerged after the victory of the October Revolution and has become increasingly prominent after the Second World War. During the ten-year Sino-Soviet debate from 1956 to 1966 , the two parties of China and the Soviet Union had serious differences and debates on whether socialist countries and capitalist countries could coexist peacefully and how to achieve peaceful coexistence. This issue still bothers people today. From the perspective of socialism alone, the proposition of “fighting to win” often attracts evaluations such as “dogmatism” and “impracticality”; while the answers of “peaceful coexistence” and “mutually beneficial cooperation” are easily labeled as “revisionism”. At present, the in-depth development of world multipolarization, economic globalization, cultural diversity, and social informatization has provided a new historical situation for “two systems coexisting” and raised new issues of the times. How to maintain a benign interaction between theory and practice and realize the mutual reflection of ideals and reality? Promoting the building of a community with a shared future for mankind is a creative application of the basic principles of Marxism by contemporary Chinese Communists, and a wise thinking and unique insight into the common challenges currently facing mankind. “China advocates the concept of a community with a shared future for mankind and opposes the Cold War mentality and zero-sum game. China insists on the equality of all countries, regardless of size, strength, poverty or wealth, and respects the right of people of all countries to independently choose their own development path.” The Chinese Communists “explore the laws of human social development through deepening their own practice and share them with countries around the world. We do not “import” foreign models, nor “export” the Chinese model, and will not ask other countries to “copy” China’s practices.” Promoting the concept of building a community with a shared future for mankind, with an inclusive attitude that transcends differences in social systems and ideologies, and with feasible solutions to promote a fair and reasonable international order, provides us with a new theoretical perspective for thinking about the issue of “two systems coexisting.”

II. Historical Review: Why Peaceful Coexistence Is Necessary

From the perspective of world history, socialist countries and capitalist countries did not coexist peacefully from the beginning, but went through a tortuous historical development process. After the October Revolution, the relationship between Soviet Russia and Western countries experienced a transformation from a life-and-death struggle to peaceful coexistence. During the Second World War, in order to win the victory of the anti-fascist war, the two systems formed a temporary alliance. After the Second World War, the West adopted a “containment” strategy against socialist countries, which led to the confrontation between the two camps. Afterwards, the relationship between the two camps tended to ease, and then there was a peaceful evolution and anti-peaceful evolution between the two systems. After the reform and opening up, China repositioned the relationship between the two systems based on the theme of peace and development. Some scholars have conducted a systematic investigation of the history of the relationship between the two systems. Some scholars believe that if the historical evolution of socialist countries and capitalist countries is expressed figuratively, it has roughly experienced the stages of hot war, cold war, cold peace, and hot peace, and it seems to have entered the “new cold war” stage.

From the perspective of the history of the development of Marxism, why should socialist countries coexist peacefully with capitalism? To explore this issue, we must go back to Lenin. On the second day of the October Revolution, Lenin pointed out in his “Report on the Peace Question” that “governments and the bourgeoisie will do their utmost to unite and drown the workers’ and peasants’ revolution in blood.” On March 7 , 1918 , Lenin further pointed out that international imperialism “cannot live in harmony with the Soviet Republic under any circumstances and under any conditions… In this regard, conflict is inevitable.” Soon thereafter, Britain, France, the United States and other countries, out of hatred for socialism, gathered more than a dozen countries to launch armed intervention against the Soviet Union in an attempt to strangle the new Soviet regime. Lenin led the Bolsheviks to organize forces to fight back against aggression, carry out anti-encirclement and suppression, and successfully defended the Soviet regime. Based on changes in the international situation and the needs of domestic construction, Lenin expressed the desire of “the Russian Socialist Federative Soviet Republic to live in peace with the people of all countries.” In January 1920 , the Supreme Council of the Allied Powers announced the lifting of the economic blockade against the Soviet Union. In 1921 , Lenin repeatedly discussed the relative balance of power between socialist and capitalist countries in his reports and speeches, such as “Closing Speech”, “Report on the Strategy of the Russian Communist Party”, and “On the Internal and Foreign Policy of the Republic” at the Tenth National Congress of the Russian Communist Party (Bolsheviks), explored how the Soviet Union could survive in this special environment, and expounded on the view of peaceful coexistence. In April 1922 , the Soviet Union and Germany signed the Treaty of Rapallo. This treaty “formally recognized the equal rights between socialist and capitalist countries for the first time in the history of international relations.”

On the basis of solving the survival problem of the new socialist countries, Lenin further thought about the development of socialist countries and profoundly expounded the importance of Soviet Russia using the achievements of capitalist civilization to develop itself. Standing at the height of the principles of scientific socialism, he emphasized: “Whether socialism can be realized depends on how well we combine the Soviet regime and Soviet management organizations with the latest progressive things of capitalism.” Therefore, he strongly advocated that the Soviet Union should find ways to maintain economic ties with other countries and “use, strengthen and intensify the economic use of the capitalist West in every possible way” through the implementation of concessions and commodity exchange policies. These ideas of Lenin have effectively promoted the stability and development of the Soviet Union’s economy and society.

In short, Lenin proposed peaceful coexistence between the two systems of countries based on the consideration of the survival and development of the new socialist countries, and more importantly as a temporary strategy. World revolution is still Lenin’s fundamental proposition for resolving the contradictions between the two systems of countries. In December 1920 , Lenin made it clear in a report to a conference: “As long as capitalism and socialism exist, they cannot coexist peacefully. In the end, either one will win or the other; either we will sing a dirge for the Soviet Republic or we will sing a dirge for world capitalism. This is a postponement of the war.”

Stalin inherited Lenin’s ideas. On the one hand, he emphasized the importance of peaceful coexistence. For example , in April 1947 , Stalin pointed out in a conversation with American Republicans: “Cooperation does not require the people of all countries to have the same system. The system that the people agree with should be respected. Only under such conditions can cooperation be possible.” On the other hand, he also emphasized the strategic nature of peaceful coexistence. In his view, peaceful coexistence is only temporary. In the long run, “the problem of building socialism in the Soviet Union is the problem of defeating the bourgeoisie of its own ‘nation,’ while the problem of the ultimate victory of socialism is the problem of defeating the world bourgeoisie.” Stalin’s later theory of “two parallel markets” reflected the confrontation between the two systems at that time. In the 1950s , the Chinese Communists put forward the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence, which further developed Lenin’s idea of ​​peaceful coexistence. Mao Zedong repeatedly expressed the idea of ​​learning and utilizing the strengths of capitalist countries and coexisting peacefully with Western countries including the United States. Among them, in his conversation with the British Labour Party delegation in 1954 , he emphasized: “Different systems can coexist peacefully.” Later, with the changes in the international situation, Mao Zedong put forward views such as “the east wind prevails over the west wind”, which showed a deviation in his understanding.

During the ten-year Sino-Soviet debate from 1956 to 1966 , the two parties had serious differences on the issue of peaceful coexistence of countries with two systems, launched fierce debates, and labeled each other “revisionists” and “dogmatists”, which reflected the different understandings of Lenin’s peaceful coexistence by the two parties. At that time, the Soviet Communist Party emphasized the importance and reality of peaceful coexistence; the Chinese Communist Party emphasized the strategic and combative nature of peaceful coexistence, believing that “Lenin’s policy of peaceful coexistence was based on the viewpoint of international class struggle, while Khrushchev’s ‘peaceful coexistence’ replaced class struggle with class cooperation on an international scale.” In addition to different understandings of the policy of peaceful coexistence of countries with two systems, this debate also involved different propositions on the future of human civilization and the path of human liberation.

In fact, after the outbreak of World War II, the relationship between the two systems became increasingly complex, and was often intertwined with class contradictions, national interests, and human destiny. During World War II, fascism caused serious harm to the progress of human civilization. In 1943 , Stalin decided to dissolve the Communist International. There were many reasons for his decision, including considerations that it was convenient for the Communist parties of various countries to deal with problems independently, and factors to strengthen cooperation with Britain and the United States and consolidate the anti-fascist alliance. In this regard, this cooperation and alliance temporarily transcended institutional differences and had the significance of opposing common enemies. Nuclear weapons, which were used for the first time in World War II, were further developed after the war. This put human civilization to a huge test: Will nuclear war change the direction of human civilization? Is the way of proletarian world revolution feasible?

In 1988 , Soviet scholar Menshikov said at the beginning of his dialogue with American scholar Galbraith: “There is an extremely remarkable and unusual fact, but some people have only recently discovered it: a war between the United States and the Soviet Union, two major powers representing two different and competing social systems, may lead to the end of human civilization and even the two systems. Many people, or even most people, may not yet recognize this situation.” Menshikov raised an important question, but he did not notice that the Sino-Soviet debate many years ago involved this issue. Regarding the Sino-Soviet debate, Deng Xiaoping later commented that “Looking back, both sides talked a lot of empty words. What exactly has changed more than a hundred years after Marx’s death? How to understand and develop Marxism under changing conditions has not been figured out.”

In the 1980s , Deng Xiaoping made new scientific judgments on the theme of the times and the direction of human civilization, and on this basis repositioned the relationship between the two systems of countries. He clearly pointed out that peace and development are “the real big problems in the world now, and global strategic issues.” As far as the issue of peace is concerned, hegemonism is the most dangerous source of war in the world, but both the United States and the Soviet Union face nuclear deterrence and dare not easily start a war. At the same time, the forces of world peace are constantly developing and also restrict the occurrence of wars. Therefore, “it is possible that a large-scale world war will not occur for a long time, and there is hope to maintain world peace.” As for the issue of development, development is a universal requirement of all countries in the world. Developing countries are eager for development, and developed capitalist countries are also facing the problem of re-development. “The issue of development is the responsibility of both developing countries and developed countries.” Deng Xiaoping also clearly stated on the basis of summarizing historical experiences and lessons that compared with “big family”, “group politics” and “sphere of influence” and other methods, “the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence is the best way to deal with relations between countries.” In June 2014 , Xi Jinping made a profound summary of the historical experience of international exchanges in his speech at the commemoration meeting of the 60th anniversary of the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence, and clearly pointed out that “the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence have opened up a brand-new path for the peaceful settlement of historical issues and international disputes between countries” and “under the new situation, the spirit of the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence is not outdated, but has become more and more new; the significance of the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence is not diluted, but has become more and more profound; the role of the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence is not weakened, but has become stronger and stronger.” This is a high degree of affirmation of the great epoch-making significance of the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence, and also provides a basic guideline for handling relations between countries with different systems under new historical conditions.

In short, from the perspective of the history of the development of Marxism, the peaceful coexistence between socialist and capitalist countries has roughly experienced a development process from being a temporary strategy to being a long-term principle. Such development and change not only considers the survival and development of socialist countries, but also cares about the future of human civilization.

III. Realistic thinking: How is mutually beneficial cooperation possible?

After all, socialism and capitalism are mutually opposing ideological and institutional systems. How can mutually beneficial cooperation be achieved between countries with the two systems? According to the thinking mode of the Western capitalist world, countries follow the rules of zero-sum game. Mutually beneficial cooperation is difficult to achieve between capitalist countries, and it is even more difficult between countries with two systems, not to mention that Western countries have to be wary of socialism unifying the world. According to the traditional socialist discourse, the logic of capital is the way the capitalist world operates, and socialism must replace capitalism through revolution. In short, the Western world has long regarded socialism as a heresy and a scourge, while Eastern countries regard capitalism as a hegemonic and exploitative system. What is the realistic basis for mutually beneficial cooperation between countries with the two systems? In summary, it is at least reflected in the following aspects.

First, the United Nations is the organizational basis for mutually beneficial cooperation between countries with two systems. International organizations are an important part of modern international life. Historically, some thinkers have proposed the establishment of international organizations to coordinate relations between countries. For example, Dante proposed the “unity of mankind” in the 14th18th century. In addition to the efforts of bilateral governments, cooperation between countries with two systems is inseparable from the coordination of international organizations. The United Nations is a product of the Second World War and the victory of the world’s people’s anti-fascist war. From a historical and realistic perspective, an international organization that can be accepted by both socialist and capitalist countries and can promote mutually beneficial cooperation between the two sides is unlikely to be an organization like NATO, but only the United Nations. Maintaining international peace and security, conducting international cooperation, and developing international friendly relations based on respect for the equal rights and self-determination of peoples of all countries are the purposes of the United Nations. As the basic law of the United Nations, the Charter of the United Nations not only establishes the purposes, principles and organizational structure of the United Nations, but also stipulates the responsibilities, rights and obligations of member states, as well as the basic principles and methods for handling international relations and maintaining world peace and security.

In addition to organizational links in major UN General Assembly, UN Security Council, UN Secretariat and other major institutions, countries with two systems can also play a role together by participating in specialized UN agencies such as the World Health Organization, Food and Agriculture Organization, Universal Postal Union, World Meteorological Organization, World Bank, International Atomic Energy Agency and other UN agencies. From a realistic perspective, in the UN and its specialized agencies, although there are struggles and games between countries with two systems, there is also mutually beneficial cooperation. “International affairs are handled by everyone through consultation, and it has become a broad consensus in the international community to work together. There is a rainbow after the storm. After going through test after test, the United Nations is still full of vitality and carries the yearning of more than 7 billion people for a better life. The UN Charter is still an important guarantee for world peace and development.” Whether it is a socialist country or a capitalist country, as a member of the United Nations, it is the unshirkable responsibility of each member state to abide by the UN Charter and maintain the prestige of the United Nations. The Chinese government has repeatedly reiterated that we must inherit and carry forward the purposes and principles of the UN Charter, build a new type of international relations with win-win cooperation as the core, and “maintain the core position of the United Nations in global governance.”

Second, the world market is an economic bond for mutually beneficial cooperation between countries with two systems. The world market developed with the industrial age, is the product of the development of productivity and scientific and technological progress, and is also the field of modern human interaction. Marx once pointed out that the reason why Russia was able to cross the capitalist Caucasus Gorge was that it “lived in a modern historical environment, coexisted with a higher culture, and was linked to the world market dominated by capitalist production.” The key reason why Lenin was able to lead Russia across the developed capitalist stage and move towards socialism was that the Russian Revolution had become a part of the world proletarian revolution at that time, and Russia had become a weak link in the chain of imperialism, and could use the achievements of capitalist civilization through the world market. After the victory of the October Revolution, Lenin clearly realized that in an environment where two social systems coexisted and capitalism dominated the world market, “the socialist republic cannot survive without being connected with the world, and under the current circumstances, it should link its survival with the relationship with capitalism.” After that, the socialist countries had a deviation in their understanding of this issue. Stalin’s “two parallel markets” theory blocked economic exchanges between countries with two systems, and in fact caused the self-enclosure of socialism; Mao Zedong’s “East Wind Overwhelms West Wind” theory overestimated the power of socialism and ignored the long-term coexistence of the two systems. Deng Xiaoping pointed out on the basis of reflecting on historical experience and lessons: “Experience has proved that it is impossible to succeed in construction behind closed doors, and China’s development cannot be separated from the world.” “From the perspective of the world, China’s development is beneficial to world peace and the development of the world economy.”

After the 1980s , especially after the end of the Cold War, the confrontation between the two camps no longer existed, and the two parallel markets also disappeared. The interdependence of countries in the world has increased day by day, and economic globalization has developed rapidly. “Economic globalization has provided a strong impetus for world economic growth, promoted the flow of goods and capital, the progress of science and technology and civilization, and the exchanges between people of all countries.” It can be said that all countries in the world, including countries with two systems, can obtain the resources they need from economic globalization. China is not only a beneficiary of economic globalization, but also a contributor. In recent years, China has become the main trading partner of more than 100 countries and regions, including the United States, the European Union, and Japan. However, some American politicians have claimed with ulterior motives that Sino-US relations have long been unfair and unequal, with the United States suffering losses and China benefiting. In fact, “Sino-US relations have been based on complementary advantages, mutual benefit and win-win results from the very beginning, and both China and the United States have gained huge benefits from cooperation with each other.”

Under the conditions of economic globalization, both socialist and capitalist countries are seeking their own economic and social development and striving for favorable international conditions. Compared with military means, developed capitalist countries pay more attention to using the world market to achieve their own goals. An American scholar pointed out: “Many countries, especially major powers, realize that using military force to pursue their goals today costs more than in the past.” Some socialist countries have also adopted a market economy system and achieved smooth docking with the world market. However, in recent years, trade protectionism and unilateralism have risen internationally, and the COVID-19 epidemic has exacerbated the inward-looking tendencies of various countries. “At present, economic globalization has encountered some backlash, but the world will never return to a state of mutual closure and division. Open cooperation is still the historical trend, and mutual benefit and win-win are still what people want.”

Third, common challenges are the common concerns of mutually beneficial cooperation between countries with two systems. The world today is undergoing a major change that has not been seen in a century. The instability and uncertainty facing the world are prominent, the world economic growth is weak, regional hot issues are one after another, and non-traditional security threats such as terrorism, cyber security, drug abuse, major infectious diseases, and climate crisis continue to spread. Governance deficit, trust deficit, peace deficit, and development deficit have become severe challenges facing all mankind. “Humanity has entered a new era of interconnection, and the interests of all countries are closely related and their destinies are closely linked.” Whether it is a socialist country or a capitalist country, there is no exception. It can be said that at present, “the common challenges and common problems faced by mankind, in terms of causes, complexity, solutions, etc., far exceed the scope of the contradictions between the two systems.”

To respond to the common problems and challenges facing all mankind, the international community needs to transcend differences in social systems and ideologies, work together and respond together. For example, the climate crisis has complex causal relationships and a prominent “butterfly effect”, and the efforts of individual countries alone are far from enough. Another example is the COVID-19 pandemic that has ravaged the world in the past two years. It is a severe test for the whole world. Some American politicians have politicized scientific issues and politically manipulated the traceability of the new coronavirus, which has aroused widespread and continuous criticism from the international community. As pointed out in the article “The US’ Cold War Policy on China Will Isolate the United States Rather than China” published by an American person, the US attempt to undermine US-China relations will only backfire and will ultimately isolate itself; “Only by cooperating with other countries and international organizations can we contain this pandemic and respond to the difficulties facing the world economy and the many challenges we face together in the 21st century.”

IV. Exploring the way forward: How to achieve a shared future

How should we understand and realize the shared destiny of socialist and capitalist countries? Thinking about this question, we can’t help but think of the following question asked by Menshikov more than 30 years ago: “What will the world look like in the next 100 years? Will it become all capitalist? Or all socialist? Will it be a mixture of the two, with two systems coexisting as it is now? Will it merge into one society due to the interaction of the two systems, or will it become two more different societies? Will it be a different kind of society that we cannot even imagine now – the result of the famous Hegel concepts of positive (capitalism), anti (socialism), and synthesis (a future society that we can call futurism or some other name)?” Now it seems that the world has neither become all capitalist nor all socialist, and is still in a state of coexistence of countries with two systems. This is a special world system in which capitalism still occupies a dominant position. In order to change this world system and make it develop in a more just and reasonable direction, the joint efforts of the international community are needed. American scholar Wallerstein once said: “We cannot predict what kind of system it will be, but we can influence its results through our current political and moral activities.” There is no doubt that the concept of building a community with a shared future for mankind has pointed out a realistic and feasible action goal for us. We need to make every effort to transcend the differences in social systems and ideologies and promote the construction of a community with a shared future for mankind, including countries with two systems.

First, further consolidate the value consensus of the international community. The world is undergoing profound and complex changes, and mankind still faces many difficulties and challenges. The two systems have long been popular in the thinking of life and death and either this or that, and each has its own sense of moral superiority. American scholar Galbraith once described a common phenomenon in the exchanges between the two systems, that is, “some people on both sides have a tendency to say: ‘We are the center of all virtues, and you are the center of all evils.'” He believes that this tendency does not allow people to have a beneficial discussion on the relationship between the two systems, and is not conducive to frankly discussing the common problems of both sides. This statement makes sense. Therefore, in order to cope with the common challenges facing all mankind today, the international community needs to form a broad value consensus. Such a value consensus cannot be based on the position of serving only the interests of a few countries, but should take into account the common interests of all mankind. It is necessary to oppose the universal values ​​that a few Western countries force on the world and safeguard the common values ​​of all mankind.

“Ideas guide actions, and direction determines the way out. Throughout modern history, establishing a fair and reasonable international order is a goal that mankind has been striving for.” Historically, the international community has accumulated some recognized principles and formed some consensus on values ​​in the process of mutual exchanges. To promote the building of a community with a shared future for mankind, we must bid farewell to the Cold War mentality, reject zero-sum games, and strive to consolidate and expand the convergence of common interests among countries. “The Communist Party of China will continue to work with all peace-loving countries and peoples to promote the common values ​​of peace, development, fairness, justice, democracy and freedom for all mankind.”

Second, further focus on the joint actions of the international community. First, we must unite the progressive forces of the international community and focus on practical actions. Opposing colonialism and hegemonism and allowing people of all countries in the world to share the right to peace and development is a strong demand of progressive people in the current international community. Of course, we must see that some schools of thought have prominent characteristics in theoretical criticism but are not very practical. For example, the Latin American dependency theory advocates that developing countries should “decouple” from developed countries, and the idea of ​​establishing a “world socialist united government” proposed by Wallerstein and others all show idealism. In recent years, Western Marxism has developed towards diversification, and academic research has gradually become the mainstream. Although it still adheres to the criticism of capitalism and pays attention to the direction of human destiny, traditional revolutionary discourse has retreated, social movement subjects have been reconstructed, and the “post” learning (“post-Marxism” and “postmodern Marxism”) style has become popular, focusing on modern social issues such as social justice, ecological crisis, and urban space. We can actively respond to the progressive claims, but the current focus of our efforts is on practical actions. Secondly, we must resolutely oppose unilateralism, advocate multilateralism, and take joint actions. Only in this way can we embark on a righteous path of inclusiveness, universality, mutual benefit and win-win results. In order to face the common challenges facing all mankind today, countries around the world, under the organization and coordination of the United Nations, should strive to “take problem solving as the starting point, be guided by visible results, and balance the promotion of security, development, and human rights. In particular, we should take the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development as an opportunity, make responding to non-traditional security challenges such as public health a priority direction of the United Nations’ work, place development issues in a prominent position in the global macro framework, and pay more attention to promoting and protecting the right to survival and development.”

Third, socialist countries must dare to fight and be good at fighting. To promote the building of a community with a shared future for mankind, socialist countries must undoubtedly play an active role. When dealing with international relations, the Chinese Communists have the lofty pursuit of Marxism on human liberation, uphold the Chinese nation’s concept of peace, harmony and harmony, always adhere to the path of peaceful development, and actively promote world peace, development and security. At the same time, they follow the methodological principles of Marxism and flexibly apply revolutionary strategies and methods of struggle according to changes in the situation and practical needs. Mao Zedong once profoundly pointed out: “The achievement of world peace should mainly rely on the resolute struggle of the people of all countries.” The peaceful coexistence, mutually beneficial cooperation and shared destiny between countries with two systems cannot be achieved by the efforts of socialist countries alone, but also depend on the attitude of capitalist countries, especially the attitude of the United States, the number one capitalist power. After the Second World War, “the United States promoted its political influence overseas by making other countries rely on its military power and, to a certain extent, on its economic and technological potential.” The United States used the excuse of “the leader of the free world” to mobilize the Western world to contain and contain socialist countries. For such behavior that endangers the cause of human progress and undermines peaceful coexistence, we must carry forward the spirit of daring to fight and dare to win, launch international criticism and take countermeasures. At present, the United States has misjudged China’s development. The growing strength of China has caused the United States to be increasingly anxious, making it worry that its world hegemony will be challenged. However, the idea that the United States wants to remain the world hegemon forever cannot be found in the theory of hegemony cycle proposed by Westerners. The United States speculates on China’s development path according to its own hegemonic logic, which is a deliberate misreading and deliberate smearing of China. China will not follow the path of the West’s prosperity through colonial plunder, will never seek hegemony, and will continue to work with all peace-loving countries and peoples to resolutely fight against hegemonism and strive to “strive for unity in struggle, seek cooperation in struggle, and strive for win-win results in struggle.”

V. Conclusion

How socialist countries and capitalist countries get along is a difficult historical topic. People have carried out relay explorations on this issue under different historical conditions, and their understanding is constantly deepening. Standing on the historical horizon of the 21st century, observing the issue of “two systems coexisting” from the perspective of building a community with a shared future for mankind, we can think about it from many aspects, such as the era of peace and development, the theory of communication in world history, the theory of contradictions of unity of opposites, the process of the development of things, the value theory of win-win cooperation, the determinism of subject choice, and the game theory of international relations. At the same time, we must fully recognize the long-term coexistence of the two systems, the complexity of the contradictions faced by mankind, and the diversity of the social development paths of various countries. In short, the most important thing is to adhere to the organic combination of revolutionary idealism and revolutionary realism, and use the revolutionary dialectics of Marxism to focus on the dialectical unity of the three aspects.

First, adhere to the dialectical unity of Marxism-Leninism and develop Marxism-Leninism. Regarding the idea of ​​socialism replacing capitalism, Marx and Engels put forward the famous propositions of “two necessities” and “two will nevers”. “Two necessities” and “two will nevers” respectively emphasize the inevitability and conditionality of capitalism being replaced by socialism, and together reveal the historical temporary existence of the capitalist system and the historical legitimacy of the socialist system replacing it. “The organic unity of the ‘two necessities’ and ‘two will nevers’ will be the fundamental law that runs through the vertical development of the relationship between socialism and capitalism.” Lenin pioneered a new path for the development of socialism in countries with relatively backward economy and culture, and proposed that socialist countries and capitalist countries coexist peacefully, which was mainly a temporary strategy at the time. “From a global perspective, today is a period in which socialism and capitalism coexist, socialism represents the direction of human progress, and capitalism still occupies an advantage. It is a period in which world history further develops into economic globalization, developed countries continue to dominate the world market, but the voice of developing countries is gradually increasing. It is also a period in which mankind faces common challenges and common problems are gradually increasing.” Under such historical conditions, new ideas are needed to deal with the relationship between countries with two systems. “True Marxist-Leninists must understand, inherit and develop Marxism-Leninism in light of current circumstances.” The concept of promoting the building of a community with a shared future for mankind not only reflects the “pulse” of inheritance in terms of world historical perspective, human care spirit, equal communication concept, social practice orientation, etc., but also realizes the “progress” of innovation in terms of time and space orientation, subject dimension, main connotation, and implementation method, providing us with an action guide for dealing with the relationship between countries with two systems. It is our realistic goal to realize the transition of the relationship between socialist countries and capitalist countries from confrontation to communication, from confrontation to dialogue, and from mutual exclusion to mutual tolerance. Of course, we emphasize cooperation, but we are not afraid of struggle, and we strive to achieve cooperation in struggle; we respect institutional differences, but we do not forget the great unity of mankind, and strive to seek common ground in differences; we are committed to solving the common problems of mankind today, and constantly turning the yearning of people from all over the world for a better life into reality.

Second, the dialectical unity of utilizing capitalism and transcending capitalism. The new will inevitably defeat the old because the new inherits the reasonable factors of the old and has new factors that the old does not have. From a diachronic perspective, socialism is post-capitalism, a replacement and transcendence of capitalism, and a transcendence of the capitalist system and civilization. In terms of synchronicity, socialism and capitalism coexist and coexist, with both opposition and struggle, as well as competition and cooperation. Real socialist countries generally embark on the socialist road under relatively backward economic and cultural conditions, with a strong pre-capitalist color, and must absorb and utilize the achievements of capitalist civilization. From eliminating capitalism to developing socialism to utilizing capitalism to developing socialism, it is a major change from wartime communism to the new economic policy. In response to the one-sided understanding of the historical status of capitalism by some people for a long time, Deng Xiaoping clearly proposed that “we must clarify what capitalism is. Capitalism is superior to feudalism.” Under the condition of the coexistence of the two social systems, “if socialism wants to gain an advantage over capitalism, it must boldly absorb and learn from all the civilization achievements created by human society, and absorb and learn from all the advanced business methods and management methods that reflect the laws of modern socialized production in all countries in the world today, including developed capitalist countries.” As a pair of contradictory communities, the contradictions between socialist countries and capitalist countries are both combative and identical, but the status and role of the contradiction identity are more prominent at present. This has created favorable conditions for us to use capitalism to develop socialism.

Third, the dialectical unity of pursuing human liberation and respecting the autonomy of the road. There are different opinions in the academic community on the theoretical theme of Marxism. This article believes that the theory of “human liberation” is more comprehensive, inclusive and explanatory, and human liberation is the eternal theme of Marxism. As Xi Jinping pointed out: “Marxism is profound and profound. In the final analysis, it is a sentence: seeking liberation for mankind.” The pursuit of human liberation is also the ultimate pursuit of the world socialist movement. “All nations will move towards socialism. This is inevitable, but the way all nations move will not be exactly the same.” Today in the 21st century, we can understand Lenin’s statement and gain new insights. “All nations will move towards socialism” undoubtedly expresses the firm confidence in pursuing human liberation, while “the way they move will not be exactly the same” shows the diversity of specific ways, that is, the timing is different, the roads are not exactly the same, the characteristics are different, and so on. China adheres to and develops socialism with Chinese characteristics, actively promotes the continuous development of the world socialist movement, and firmly believes that human liberation will surely be achieved. At the same time, we respect the right of people of all countries to independently choose their social system. Regardless of whether the social system chosen by other countries is the same as that of China, we insist on peaceful coexistence and mutually beneficial cooperation with them, and strive to jointly promote human progress. The Chinese Communists deeply understand that only by persisting in doing our own things well and constantly demonstrating the institutional advantages of socialism with Chinese characteristics can we provide a Chinese solution for mankind’s exploration of an ideal social system and provide Chinese experience for other countries to independently choose their social systems.