The Essence of the "Xiaokang Society" Is
"The World Belongs to Private Owners"
By Hao Guisheng. Utopia (Wuyou zhi Xiang), September 17, 2026. Translated by Vero Publishing.
Lead: The mistaken understanding, in theory and practice, that certain people in power and the mainstream media today show on a whole series of questions, such as the "xiaokang society" and "the Party's original aspiration and mission," reveals an extremely important social problem. Consciously or not, they have abandoned the guiding position of Marxism; their theoretical grasp of Marxism-Leninism and Mao Zedong Thought is far too low; and, consciously or not, they have taken a stand opposed to the proletariat and working people.
I recently wrote an article on cultural development,[1] an important part of which dealt with how to understand Chairman Mao's principle of "taking the essence and discarding the dross" and with commentaries on the integration of two cultures. To prove the correctness of the "integration theory," most scholars cite as typical examples Chairman Mao's idea of "seeking truth from facts" and Deng Xiaoping's idea of a "xiaokang society."
"Seeking truth from facts" originally appears in the Book of Han, praising Liu De, Prince Xian of Hejian, for his scholarship. Through analysis and dissection, Chairman Mao recognized that it was only a method of scholarship, which should be transformed by the epistemology of dialectical materialism into the line and method of Communist practice. So in "Reform Our Study" he gave "seeking truth from facts" a new and deeper meaning. This idea is therefore not the product of "integrating" two cultures but the result of Marxism's "critical transformation, bringing forth the new from the old." There are a great many examples of this kind.
Others often cite the idea of a "xiaokang society" as a product of the "integration theory." Some articles say, for example, that at the start of reform and opening up, Comrade Deng Xiaoping creatively borrowed the concept of xiaokang, rich in the flavor of traditional Chinese culture, to describe a stage goal of China's modernization; that these are typical examples of integrating the basic tenets of Marxism with China's fine traditional culture; that the "xiaokang society" comes from the "Evolution of Rites" chapter of the Book of Rites and is the ideal state of society the Chinese nation has pursued since ancient times; and that using the concept of xiaokang to set China's development goals makes them easy for the broadest masses to understand and support. I consider this completely wrong.
In fact, the "xiaokang society" is in essence part of the dross of the Book of Rites. It stands opposed to "the world belongs to all" and emphasizes the world as private property. In this sense the "xiaokang society" does not belong to fine traditional culture at all. However a certain great personage and some eminent theorists interpret its so-called "rational" and "positive" elements, they can never change its essential character as a society dominated by private property and private-ownership thinking. Forcing this essentially mistaken dross directly into socialist culture has objectively promoted the spread of private-ownership thinking across China. The "xiaokang society" is therefore certainly not the product of integrating Marxism with fine traditional culture. It is the product of revising and distorting scientific socialism, of peddling feudal culture. Why do I say this?
I. The Nature of the "Xiaokang Society" as Private Ownership and Private-Ownership Thinking, Seen from the Confucian Text of the Book of Rites
The term xiaokang comes from the "Evolution of Rites" chapter of the Confucian classic the Book of Rites. The chapter opens with Confucius sighing deeply after taking part in the great year-end sacrifice in the state of Lu. His disciple asks why the Master sighs, and Confucius speaks of the age of "Great Unity" (datong) that he was born too late to see, and of the present age of "Lesser Prosperity" (xiaokang).
Confucius first describes six features of the society of Great Unity. First, "when the Great Way prevailed, the world belonged to all," which is close to what we call a system of public ownership and the idea of the common good. Second, democratic selection, good faith and harmony: "they chose the worthy and the able, and cultivated good faith and harmony." Third, the idea of the common good prevailed: "people did not love only their own parents, nor treat as children only their own children." Fourth, social security, everyone having their place: "the aged were provided for to the end of their lives, the able-bodied were employed, the young were brought up, and widows, widowers, orphans, the childless and the sick and disabled were all cared for." Fifth, each according to ability: "men had their tasks and women their homes. They hated to see goods lying wasted on the ground, but did not hoard them for themselves; they hated not to exert their strength, but did not exert it only for themselves." Sixth, a fine social ethos: "thus scheming was stifled and never arose, robbers, thieves and rebels did not appear, and the outer doors were never shut." From this one can see that the society of Great Unity described here resembles what we call communist society. It is also the aspect that many scholars cite at length as "congruent" with Marxism.
Confucius goes on to say that this Great Way, the society of Great Unity in which "the world belonged to all," had vanished and been replaced by the "xiaokang society":
"Now the Great Way has become hidden, and the world belongs to families. Each loves only his own parents and treats as children only his own children; goods and labor are used for oneself. Great men take hereditary succession as the rite, and city walls, moats and ditches as their defense. Rites and righteousness are made the guiding rules, to set right the relation of ruler and subject, to make father and son devoted, to bring harmony between brothers and concord between husband and wife, to establish institutions, to lay out fields and dwellings, to honor the brave and the wise, and to win merit for oneself. Hence scheming arises, and from it come wars. Yu, Tang, Wen, Wu, King Cheng and the Duke of Zhou were the finest of these. Not one of these six gentlemen failed to be careful in observing the rites, by which they made righteousness manifest, tested good faith, exposed faults, took benevolence as their model and courtesy as their teaching, showing the people the constant rules. If anyone did not follow them, even those in power were removed, and the people regarded them as a calamity. This is called Lesser Prosperity."[2]
Confucius's idea of the "xiaokang society" can be summed up in the following features. First, economically it is a system of private property: "the world belongs to families," "goods and labor are used for oneself." Second, private-ownership thinking predominates: "each loves only his own parents and treats as children only his own children." Third, an unequal, hereditary hierarchy: "great men take hereditary succession as the rite, and city walls, moats and ditches as their defense." Fourth, hierarchical thinking with "rites" at its core: "rites and righteousness are made the guiding rules, to set right the relation of ruler and subject ... Hence scheming arises, and from it come wars ... showing the people the constant rules." Fifth, those who violate the "rites" are condemned and punished: "if anyone did not follow them, even those in power were removed, and the people regarded them as a calamity."
From this one can see that the "xiaokang society" described here is a fundamental negation of, and reaction against, the "world belongs to all" of the society of Great Unity. "The Great Way has become hidden": it is gone, entirely replaced by the "xiaokang society." This "xiaokang society" typically refers to a society of private property in which the private economy, private-ownership thinking, hierarchy and hierarchical thinking of feudal society predominate. If "the world belongs to all" is the essence of the society of Great Unity, then "the world as private property" is the essential feature of the "xiaokang society."
That the society of Great Unity, where "the world belongs to all," is part of the essence of traditional Chinese culture is the common understanding of theoretical circles. Then the "xiaokang society," where the world is private property, is certainly not essence but dross through and through. To call both of them "fine" and "essence" would be self-contradictory, would it not?
Marxism can draw on the essence of the idea of Great Unity, but it must never force the dross of "the world as private property" into its own system of thought.
II. The Subjective Idealist Interpretation of the "Xiaokang Society" by a Certain Great Personage and by Baidu Baike
In 2015 I looked up "xiaokang society" in Baidu Baike.[3] It was explained as follows: "The xiaokang society is an attractive social ideal described by ancient thinkers, and it also expresses ordinary people's pursuit of an ideal life of comfort and plenty. A xiaokang society in all respects means not only solving the problem of food and clothing, but meeting the needs of urban and rural development in politics, the economy, culture and every other area."
The entry continued: "The report to the Sixteenth Party Congress defined the specific content of building a xiaokang society in all respects in four areas: the economy, politics, culture and sustainable development, specifically including the capacity for sustainable development. Concretely, there are six 'mores': a more developed economy, sounder democracy, more advanced science and education, a more flourishing culture, a more harmonious society, and a better-off life for the people." "Xiaokang is a stage of living standards between having enough to eat and wear and being affluent. It should be understood not only in terms of living standards but as a new concept with richer theoretical content, a new concept embodying the comprehensive and coordinated development of the economy and society. Its goals include the people's living standards, economic development, political development and social development. Thus a xiaokang society is a society of comprehensive and coordinated economic, political and cultural development, with a developed economy, political democracy, a flourishing culture, social harmony, a beautiful environment, a well-off life, people living and working in peace and contentment, and strong overall national power; it is the stage of social development in which the Chinese nation moves toward great rejuvenation." "The 'xiaokang society' is an economic concept, and the approach of achieving xiaokang first is correct. The xiaokang society fully integrates the governing method of the Legalist Guanzi: 'when the granaries are full, people know propriety; when food and clothing are sufficient, people know honor and shame.'[4] This is the premise and foundation of building a xiaokang society. China's economic development makes every individual's standard of living relatively better and better; only so will every individual's freedom, rights and human rights steadily improve." This interpretation, it must be said, basically reflects the understanding of the "xiaokang society" held by national leaders and official documents.
Looking up Baidu Baike again recently, I found: "The 'xiaokang society' is a strategic concept proposed by Deng Xiaoping when he drew up the blueprint for China's economic and social development at the start of reform and opening up. A xiaokang society is a stage of social development in which the productive forces develop continuously, per capita GNP and the people's living standards keep rising, and the country's overall strength, especially its economic strength, grows markedly. The report to the Eighteenth Party Congress first proposed 'completing the building of a xiaokang society in all respects': a xiaokang society whose fruits of development and reform truly benefit more than a billion people, a xiaokang society of all-round economic, political, cultural, social and ecological development, a xiaokang society that lays a solid foundation for realizing the grand goal of socialist modernization and the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation."
These interpretations basically reflect the views and understanding of certain great personages and the mainstream media. In my view, their chief error is that they evade the essential character of the "xiaokang society" in the original text of the Book of Rites: the predominance of private property, private-ownership thinking and hierarchical thinking. Setting aside the relations of ownership, they interpret it, first, as the continuous development of the productive forces; second, as a stable and prosperous life for ordinary people, a "xiaokang life"; third, as improvement in freedom, rights and human rights; and fourth, as the comprehensive and coordinated development of the economy, politics and culture. This interpretation departs entirely from the historical-materialist principle that ownership of the means of production is the decisive factor in social development. On the basis of the "private property and private-ownership thinking" of a so-called "xiaokang society" built on the economic base of the feudal landlord class, what talk can there be of prosperity and stability for ordinary people? Of the "democratic and free rights" of the masses? Of "the comprehensive and coordinated development of the economy, politics and culture"? These interpretations are subjective idealist distortions by certain great personages and the mainstream media. Setting aside feudal private ownership, they obliterate the essence of private ownership and private-ownership thinking, strive to beautify, elevate and extol the "xiaokang society," and endow it with new so-called attributes and qualities it never had. Some regard this as the product of "innovation" and "integration." In essence it is regression and distortion built on the betrayal of Marxism's critical character, the covert insertion and peddling of feudal dross within the scientific system of Marxism.
III. The Essence and Harm of "Integrating" the "Xiaokang Society" into "Marxist Culture"
1. However many socialist hats the "xiaokang society" is given, its essence of private property and private-ownership thinking cannot change
In order to stuff the "xiaokang society" into socialist culture, some great personages and the mainstream media have crowned it with a great many socialist terms and concepts, such as prosperity, stability, democracy, freedom and all-round development. But none of this can change the essence of the "xiaokang society" as private property and private-ownership thinking. For the first and defining feature of Confucius's idea of the "xiaokang society" is "the world belongs to families," as opposed to "the world belongs to all." His "goods and labor are used for oneself" is private ownership of the means of production. This "family" is not the family of all or of the state, but the small family, the individual household; it is private-ownership thinking. It is precisely because private-ownership thinking predominates that "each loves only his own parents and treats as children only his own children," and so a strict, unequal hereditary hierarchy and hierarchical thinking take shape. Confucius did speak of the economic condition of the "xiaokang society," of the prosperity and stability of individual households. But these ideas of his cannot be separated from his ideas of private property and private-ownership thinking. From the standpoint of historical materialism, a society founded on private property and private-ownership thinking is certainly not one of stability and prosperity for the majority of working people, nor of democracy and freedom for working people. It is one of prosperity and stability, democracy, rights and freedom for the exploiting and ruling few, built on the exploitation and oppression of the working majority.
2. The "xiaokang society" cannot be regarded as "the ideal state of society the Chinese nation has pursued since ancient times," still less be "described as a stage goal of China's modernization"
In order to raise the theoretical standing of the "xiaokang society," some great personages and scholars have gone to great lengths to extol it as "the ideal state of society the Chinese nation has pursued since ancient times." This is complete nonsense. As the original text of the Book of Rites shows, it is only Confucius's description of an ideal state of society after he had set aside the society of Great Unity; in essence it is the ideal pursued by the feudal aristocracy that Confucius represented. It is also the essence of his "restrain the self and return to the rites." In history there were also feudal men of letters who pursued the society of Great Unity, such as Tao Yuanming of the Eastern Jin, with his "Peach Blossom Spring."[5] That is "the ideal state of society the Chinese nation has pursued since ancient times."
The concept of xiaokang does include the ideal of some property owners, peasants among them, for a stable and prosperous life. But the overall idea of the "xiaokang society" as Confucius explained it is indeed a typical state of society dominated by private property and private-ownership thinking. It is the deep economic root of the feudal landlord class's exploitation and oppression of the peasants, and the economic and political root of thousands of years of peasant revolt. Yet Communists have copied it wholesale without any analysis, even covering it with many socialist terms and hats and dressing it up as a "stage goal of modernization" for Communists guided by Marxism. Is this not a classic case of "learning to walk in Handan" and "Dong Shi imitating Xi Shi's frown"?
3. The "xiaokang society" and Adam Smith's "invisible hand" have colluded to form the typical features of a decadent culture with very "Chinese characteristics"
Since reform and opening up, under the influence of "globalization" thinking, a craze for learning from the West has arisen, especially for learning Western market-economy theory. The philosophical basis of market theory is the "theory that human nature is selfish," typically expressed in the British classical economist Adam Smith's idea of the "invisible hand." Its proponents hold that the collectivism and selflessness that aroused people's enthusiasm for production in the Mao era go against human nature and against the theory that human nature is selfish. In 2004, Mr. Xie Sizhong, a self-styled "expert on national character," quoted Adam Smith's key passage on the "invisible hand" from The Wealth of Nations in his book China's Crisis of National Character, and launched a sweeping attack on the idea of "selflessness for the public good": "Decades of practice have proclaimed the bankruptcy of the myth of 'great public spirit and no self.' In a certain sense, it is not 'great public spirit and no self' but 'great self-interest yielding public good.' Only when every member of society does his utmost for his own interests can public accumulation be maximized, which in turn benefits every member of society; conversely, if everyone depends blindly on the collective and the state, they will forever be holding a beggar's bowl." The meaning of this passage is very clear: only the "theory that human nature is selfish" truly reveals the relationship between public and private and plays a positive role in social development. And the "world as private property" idea of the "xiaokang society" coincides perfectly with the idea of the "invisible hand." Although they are cultural contents of different eras and different classes, they both belong to the culture of exploiting and ruling classes. This essential "congruence" allows them to be so-called "integrated," which in essence means colluding and mixing together. In China they have become the typical features of a decadent culture with "Chinese characteristics."
4. The "xiaokang society" idea has become an extremely important guiding idea of "reform and opening up" in every sector
It is precisely because society as a whole does not see clearly the "world as private property" essence of the "xiaokang society" that certain people in power have worked hard to write it into all kinds of Communist Party documents, including speeches at Party congresses. At the same time it has become an extremely important guiding idea for reform in every department and field of society. Under the present conditions of privatization and marketization in China, it has been "integrated" into a so-called "brilliant" banner of the guiding ideology of so-called "reform" in Chinese society today. The Xiaogang village reform, the explosive growth of private enterprises and the restructuring of state enterprises are all products of this current of thought. This private-ownership thinking has penetrated, influenced and soaked into every level, aspect, stratum and corner of society, with an extremely great influence above all on officials at every level, intellectuals and young students. In education today, drilling into students that they "must not lose at the starting line" is a concrete expression of Confucius's "one who excels in study should become an official."[6]
In remarks published in the Guangzhou Daily on January 8, 2008, Professor Wang Changjiang, director of the Party Building Department of the Central Party School, said that under the planned economy the state was always searching for spiritual motivation, whereas since reform and opening up "the mechanism of motivation has changed fundamentally, returning interest to people. Acknowledging that the pursuit of interest is human nature is 'neither socialist nor capitalist'; it is simply human nature. By using human nature to drive economic and social development, we have the most primal motive force." Wang Changjiang even said that the Communist Party also has its own private interests. So in the eyes of Xie Sizhong, Wang Changjiang and a great many others, including some officials and intellectuals, xiaokang means my own xiaokang household; in practice it means simply pursuing a prosperous life for oneself or one's family. Communists pursue collectivism and selflessness, but they have never denied legitimate individual interests. Those who live by pursuing the goal of xiaokang are in essence typical egoists, selfish through and through. In their eyes, ideals, convictions, communism, serving the people, selflessness, national prosperity and the people's happiness are all false and empty and should all be cast aside; only money is real. "Development is the only hard truth" really means that money is the only hard truth.
It is precisely in this nationwide race toward xiaokang that people, never mind whether the cat is black or white so long as it catches mice, each show their own prowess like the Eight Immortals crossing the sea, using every power, every bit of capital and every resource they can to enrich themselves. Officials and state enterprise personnel in particular have frantically used the resources in their hands to grab power and money for themselves. The hundreds of thousands, even millions, of upstarts and corrupt officials who got rich overnight are the models and paragons of getting rich on the road to xiaokang. It is an objective fact that no one can deny: the spread of private-ownership thinking and its corrosion of officials, intellectuals and the whole people has reached its worst point since the founding of the People's Republic. The deep ideological root of the many upstarts, freaks and monstrosities thrown up by the practice of reform and opening up, such as Xu Jiayin, Shi Yongxin and Zhao Benshan,[7] is the collusion of the "world as private property" of the xiaokang society with Adam Smith's "invisible hand" and every other variety of private-ownership thinking. They are the inevitable result of building a "xiaokang" society. Communist officials at every level, and the top leaders above all, should come to their senses, stop being deceived by this alluring so-called goal of xiaokang, and abandon once and for all the absurd idea of a "xiaokang society." Even Confucius himself said that "Great Unity" was the Great Way, the Great Way of "the world belongs to all," while xiaokang was a lesser way, the lesser way of "the world as private property." Are Communists to follow the lesser way rather than the Great Way?
The mistaken understanding, in theory and practice, that certain people in power and the mainstream media today show on a whole series of questions, such as the "xiaokang society" and "the Party's original aspiration and mission," reveals an extremely important social problem. Consciously or not, they have abandoned the guiding position of Marxism; their theoretical grasp of Marxism-Leninism and Mao Zedong Thought is far too low; and, consciously or not, they have taken a stand opposed to the proletariat and working people. The most urgent task is to launch a movement throughout the Party to study Marxism-Leninism and Mao Zedong Thought: to read the works of Marx, Lenin and Chairman Mao honestly; to truly learn their stand, viewpoint and method; to gain the ability to tell genuine from sham Marxism and genuine from sham socialism; to consciously remold our subjective world; to let the people be masters of the country; to criticize every kind of feudal, capitalist and revisionist error; and to carry through to the end the great cause of Chinese socialism that Chairman Mao began!
Translator's Notes
1. "An article on cultural development." The author's "On Chairman Mao's Principle of 'Taking the Essence and Discarding the Dross'," also translated on this site. Several passages here repeat that article.
2. The Book of Rites passage. The translation of the "Evolution of Rites" (礼运) passages is the translator's own. The original article follows the classical text with a modern Chinese paraphrase, which is not repeated here.
3. Baidu Baike (百度百科). China's largest online encyclopedia, run by the search company Baidu.
4. "When the granaries are full ..." (仓廩实而知礼节). From the opening chapter of the Guanzi, a text attributed to the statesman Guan Zhong of the seventh century BCE.
5. "Peach Blossom Spring" (桃花源记). Tao Yuanming's (365?–427) fable of a hidden village whose people live in peace and equality, untouched by the dynastic world outside.
6. "One who excels in study should become an official" (学而优则仕). Analects 19.13. The words are in fact spoken by Confucius's disciple Zixia.
7. Xu Jiayin, Shi Yongxin and Zhao Benshan. Xu Jiayin is the founder of the collapsed Evergrande property group. Shi Yongxin is the former abbot of the Shaolin Temple, removed in 2025 amid a criminal investigation. Zhao Benshan is a popular comedian and television star.