Table of Content

15 December 2025, Volume 59 Issue 12 Previous Issue   

---

For Selected:

Download Citations EndNote Ris BibTeX

Toggle Thumbnails

Select

The Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Common Prosperity: Dual Effects and Collaborative Governance Liu Gang1, Liang Han2 2025, 59 (12):  5-19.  Abstract ( )   PDF (1463KB) ( )   The wave of artificial intelligence (AI) is sweeping across the globe, profoundly reshaping how humans produce and live. Like a “doubleedged sword”, AI exerts dual effects on the systems of production and distribution of social wealth. On the production front, the application of AI has expanded the scope, enhanced the efficiency, broadened the domains, and reshaped the infrastructure of wealth production through novel means of production. It has given rise to a new paradigm of intelligent labor characterized by “humanmachine collaboration”, releasing social free time, stimulating creative labor, and constructing a wealth production system that is more efficient and of higher quality, thereby positively promoting the realization of common prosperity. However, within a market economy context, on the distribution front, changes in the composition of production factors have simultaneously triggered a weakening trend of laborers as distribution agents. The changes in the demand structure for production factors have led to a supplydemand gap in skills and a bias toward intelligent capital, resulting in an uneven evolution of the distribution structure, which hinders the realization of common prosperity. This dual tension renders the process of common prosperity nonlinear in nature. It is imperative to fully leverage the advantages of the socialist system to construct a “governmentmarketsociety” collaborative governance framework aimed at reinforcing technological equity, bridging the technological divide, and promoting participatory technological governance. Related Articles | Metrics

Select

Guiding and Promoting the Modernization of Humanity through Socialist Spiritual Production Zhang Zhi 2025, 59 (12):  20-29.  Abstract ( )   PDF (1172KB) ( )   The core of modernization lies in the modernization of humanity. The Chinese path to modernization is the modernization of material and culturalethical advancement. Bolstering the vigorous development of spiritual production, enriching the spiritual and cultural lives of the people, enhancing the overall level of civilization in society, and thus laying a strong cultural foundation for the construction of a strong country and the rejuvenation of the nation are integral parts of Chinese modernization. The Communist Party of China, adhering to the theoretical logic of Marxist theories on spiritual production, has reshaped and reconstructed the spiritual production and spiritual lives of the people in contemporary China. In guiding and promoting the free and wellrounded development of each individual within the Chinese context, it interprets the consciousness, peoplecenteredness, and superiority of socialist spiritual production. Socialist spiritual production possesses unique advantages and significant value in advancing the modernization of individuals' inner worlds, social relationships, and surrounding environments. In the new era and on the new journey, adhering to the principle of putting people first to promote and expand the Chinese path to modernization, we should advance the development of socialist spiritual production toward a more proactive, inclusive, prosperous, and outstanding direction, which continuously provides steadfast ideological guidance and abundant spiritual nourishment for the modernization of humanity. Related Articles | Metrics

Select

The Positioning of the Type of the Chinese Path to Modernization and Its Significance Du Yanhua 2025, 59 (12):  30-42.  Abstract ( )   PDF (1418KB) ( )   The new and uniquely Chinese path to modernization and the creation of a new form of human civilization signify that the Chinese modernization has achieved a transformation from being “exogenously driven” to “endogenously driven”. The type of modernization in latedeveloping countries depends on their chosen path to modernization. China's unique cultural traditions, historical destiny, and national conditions determine that its modernization must follow a development path suited to its own characteristics, rendering the change in its type of modernization a historical inevitability. Since the inception of Chinese modernization in the latter half of the 19th century as a “latedeveloping, exogenously driven” model, its path has undergone multiple significant transformations, ultimately culminating in the “endogenously driven” path to Chinese modernization. This has created an exemplary case of modernization transition from being “exogenously driven” to “endogenously driven”. The change in the type of Chinese modernization possesses not only sufficient preconditions, but also historical conditions such as the unity of ideological emancipation and theoretical innovation, a powerful spiritual drive, and the impetus of reform and openingup. The positioning of the Chinese path to modernization as “endogenously driven” is of critical importance for constructing an independent knowledge system, disciplinary system, academic system, and discourse system for Chinese philosophy and social sciences. Related Articles | Metrics

Select

Foundational Contributions of Exploring the Laws of Building a Marxist Governing Party in the New Era Tang Huangfeng 2025, 59 (12):  43-56.  Abstract ( )   PDF (1234KB) ( )   Since the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China (CPC), the Central Committee of the CPC, with Comrade Xi Jinping at its core, has engaged in theoretical and practical explorations regarding the construction of a Marxist governing party. This has led to the proposal of a series of original concepts and theoretical propositions. The theory of “this country is its people, and the people are the country” offers a more vivid theoretical elaboration of the principle of peoplecenteredness in Marxist governing parties from an ontological perspective. The theory of “the overall leadership of the CPC” provides new theoretical viewpoints for the leadership theory of Marxist governing parties, based on a holistic understanding of the relationship between leadership and governance. The theory of the Partys political construction optimizes the action plan for the construction of Marxist governing parties through a scientific grasp of the overall layout of Party building. The theory of the Party's selfreform elevates the fundamental principles of building a Marxist governing party through a profound revelation of the essential characteristics and distinctive qualities of Marxist parties. These theoretical contributions achieve a mutual integration of the essence of Marxism with the best of fine traditional Chinese culture, endowing the theory of building a Marxist governing party with distinct Chinese characteristics, and laying a solid theoretical and practical foundation for constructing an independent knowledge system in the study of Party history and Party building. Related Articles | Metrics

Select

Marx's Understanding of Contingency and Its Contemporary Interpretation Zhou Yang 2025, 59 (12):  57-65.  Abstract ( )   PDF (1398KB) ( )   Although Marx draws upon Aristotelian thought and German idealism to construct a theory of contingency based on sensation and practice as early as the period of his Doctoral Dissertation, this theory remains confined within the dualism of thought and existence. Like Hegels theory of contingency, in The German Ideology, contingency lies within existence itself; however, unlike Hegel, Marx believes that contingency represents the contradiction between “conditions”  and “reification”  within social existence, as well as that between social existence and social consciousness. In a capitalist society, social consciousness of the “contingent individual”  is a product of these contradictions and contingencies. Yet, through the help of “reification”, it constructs a false necessity and attempts to obscure the contradictions and contingencies from which social consciousness originates. Although contemporary radical leftists criticize the “reification” structure of capitalist society, they dissolve the contradiction between the “reification” structure and its historical conditions of existence, thereby falling back into the ideology of the “contingent individual” that Marx criticizes. Related Articles | Metrics

Select

On the Ideological Attributes of Embodied Intelligence Wen Xu 2025, 59 (12):  66-76.  Abstract ( )   PDF (1185KB) ( )   Embodied intelligence refers to a technical system that relies on physical entities to achieve intelligent growth through interaction with the environment. Its development and application have transcended the scope of pure technology, demonstrating distinct ideological attributes in aspects such as value orientation and cognitive construction. From the perspective of technological logic, embodied intelligence centers on an interactive loop of perception, decisionmaking, and action, deeply permeating everyday life and evolving into an ideological carrier that combines technical intermediaries with value transmission properties. From the perspective of communication mechanisms, relying on embodied presence experience, it transforms the human body into a medium of communication, thus achieving efficient information transmission and implicit ideological discipline. From the perspective of operational patterns, it encourages the presentation of ideology characterized by embodied discipline, focused operation, and immersive infiltration. In the process of developing and applying embodied intelligence, it is essential to integrate mainstream ideology into its operational logic: technically, we should solidify the value foundation through data calibration, align algorithms to control the decisionmaking direction, and innovate communication paths through interactive empowerment; practically, we should unleash its effectiveness through scenariobased integration and multimodal interaction, firmly grasp the embodied discourse power, and strengthen the safeguards for national ideological security. Related Articles | Metrics

Select

On the “Remaking” of China's Modern State and the Transformation of County Governance from the Perspective of Historical Political Science: Also a Review of A Study of County Governance under the Nanjing National Government#br# Wang Xutian, Gao Junjie 2025, 59 (12):  77-90.  Abstract ( )   PDF (1452KB) ( )   County governance, as the cornerstone of greatpower politics, is a foundational and crucial part of China's modern statebuilding. The Kuomintang's “state rebuilding”, as a form of statebuilding during a specific historical period, interacted with and shaped the transformation of county governance. The notion of “state rebuilding” proposed by Sun Yatsen emphasized implementing local autonomy at the county level to achieve modern statebuilding based on the “Three Peoples Principles”. However, the Kuomintang later deviated from Sun Yatsens vision of “state rebuilding”, leading to distortions in the transformation of county governance. From the grand historical perspective of Chinas modern statebuilding, the state rebuilding and the transformation of county governance led by the Kuomintang could only be transitional. The Communist Party of China has achieved state rebuilding and the reconstruction of county governance through thorough social revolution, and its model of “county governance by and for the people” has been evidently a historical leap. This study takes history both as its object and methodology, offering a novel interdisciplinary perspective and understanding from the perspective of historical political science for comprehending and interpreting the theories of Chinas modern state and local politics. Related Articles | Metrics

Select

Digital Sovereignty, Digital Fortress, and the Brussels Effect: How EU Digital Governance Policies Shape the Global Digital Governance Model Xiong Guangqing1, Chen Fei2 2025, 59 (12):  91-104.  Abstract ( )   PDF (1486KB) ( )   Through its digital sovereignty strategy and the construction of a digital fortress, the European Union (EU) has successfully shaped the global model of digital governance, driving the formation of the “Brussels effect”. Existing scholarly explanations for how EU digital governance rules shape the global digital governance model follow two analytical paths: the marketbased approach and the regulationbased one. Both perspectives share a common logic of embedding the phenomenon of digital governance within traditional political economy frameworks. However, these theoretical assumptions risk oversimplifying the internal logic of the EUs digital sovereignty strategy and fall short in fully capturing the mechanisms through which its governance model exerts international influence. To more accurately understand how and why the EU plays a central role in shaping the global digital governance model, it is essential to examine “digital sovereignty” and the “Brussels effect” as components of an interlinked institutional process. It can be argued that the capability of the EUs digital governance model in generating the “Brussels effect” not only stems from its solid rulemaking capabilities and the spillover effects of its market size but also from an internally and externally coupled institutional dynamic mechanism. This mechanism embeds its digital standards into the institutional choices of third countries in response to external governance needs, thereby achieving effective alignment between institutional supply and demand, and enhancing the adaptability and legitimacy of its digital regulatory output.  Related Articles | Metrics

Select

A Tendency toward Panpoliticization of Global AI Governance and Strategies in Response SUN Zhiwei1, Yin Haocheng2 2025, 59 (12):  105-115.  Abstract ( )   PDF (1190KB) ( )   The logic of security confrontation in international politics and the competition of interests among states have created significant spillover effects on global artificial intelligence (AI) governance, leading to a pronounced panpoliticization tendency in technological governance issues. The competitive domains of AI governance have extended beyond the formulation of rules to encompass areas such as the development of computational power, data security, and algorithm performance. At the same time, discursive struggles surrounding the values of governance continue to affect the normative foundations of global governance, exacerbating the fragmentation and antagonism within the governance system. To mitigate the potential crises arising from this tendency toward panpoliticization, global AI governance needs to return to the original technocentric purpose. This necessitates a thorough analysis of the impacts of deep developments in humanmachine interaction, the highlevel aggregation of information, and the evolution of anthropomorphic characteristics of intelligence on governance. Relevant actors should transcend existing divisions of interest, discard the logic of competition and confrontation, and place the healthy development of technology at the core starting point of governance discussions. This will promote the depoliticization of global AI governance, aiming to establish a more inclusive, collaborative, and efficient governance system. Related Articles | Metrics

Select

Spatial Reconstruction and Accumulation Models of Platform Capital CAI Zhiji, LI Bangxi 2025, 59 (12):  115-125.  Abstract ( )   PDF (1199KB) ( )    In the era of the digital economy, internet platforms, as a digital means of production with infrastructural properties, are the result of the synergistic interplay between the information technology revolution and changes in production relations.  Through the establishment and appropriation of internet platforms, platform capital reconstructs the mode of production. The spatial reconstruction mechanism of platform capital follows a dual logic of the spatialization of capital and the capitalization of space. On the one hand, platform capital, which performs multiple functions of capital, creates a new digital space that reflects an abstract form of spatial power and spatial order based on new economic relations, originating essentially from the reproduction of production relations maintained by capital expansion. On the other hand, digital space gives rise to novel forms of rent and becomes a sphere of circulation for interestbearing capital, which is incorporated into the proliferation process of platform capital, exacerbating underlying crises such as spatial injustice. This paper elucidates that the reconstruction of digital space is a product of the movement and proliferation of platform capital, thereby further clarifying the forms of capital, sources of profit, and accumulation models of platform capital. It aims to apply the conceptual potential of spatial production theory to the theoretical analysis and practical governance of platform capital, in order to guide and regulate the healthy and sustainable development of the platform economy. Related Articles | Metrics