Why No One Can Explain What "Chinese Characteristics" Are
Wang Zhongxin, Dongfanghong Memorial Hall | May 19, 2026 04:32 |
An absolute prerequisite for any social revolution conducted by the Chinese people under the leadership of the Communist Party of China (CPC)—including rectification movements and reforms—is that the concepts of the revolution and reform being undertaken must be clearly expressed, comprehensively defined, and concisely stated. Yet, after more than forty years of Reform and Opening Up, a considerable number of leading cadres cannot clearly explain what "Socialism with Chinese Characteristics" is. The fundamental reason is that there is neither a comprehensive logical definition nor a concise summary of what kind of economic relationship "Socialism with Chinese Characteristics" actually entails, making it very difficult for anyone to explain. "Socialism with Chinese Characteristics," a phrase constantly on everyone's lips, has become a riddle without an answer.
I. The Great Confusion Encountered by Teacher Wang Lihua
1. Leading cadres cannot explain it clearly. In a speech, Teacher Wang Lihua stated: "We have been engaged in Reform and Opening Up for thirty or forty years, and our banner is Socialism with Chinese Characteristics, but do you know what Socialism with Chinese Characteristics is? I have asked leading cadres on many occasions, and very few can answer. If one or two people don't know, it's understandable, but when a vast majority don't know, don't you find that dangerous? Why don't they know? Because there is a force, consciously or unconsciously, obfuscating what Socialism with Chinese Characteristics is, confusing your thoughts."
In his article The "Four Principles" and "Four Problems" of Teaching Party History, Wang Lihua pointed out: "Scientifically answering what Socialism with Chinese Characteristics is constitutes an issue of our times. It is a major question that must be answered as we deepen reforms, and it is also something that a considerable number of Party members, including leading cadres, are unclear about. After 40 years of Reform and Opening Up, not knowing what Socialism with Chinese Characteristics is is not alarmist talk, but an objective reality. If you don't believe it, go ask around; the results will definitely shock you."
2. Famous scholars cannot explain it clearly. If leading cadres don't know what Socialism with Chinese Characteristics is, do scholars know?
On November 13, 2019, during a speech at Thammasat University in Thailand, Jin Canrong, Associate Dean of the School of International Studies at Renmin University of China, was asked to "briefly introduce what the China Model is." He responded: "Our government is very cautious and has not spoken of a 'China Model'." He added, "[The China Model] has no authoritative definition." He emphasized that "the Communist Party of China has played a particularly important role" and also introduced the role of Chinese culture and civilization. However, this seemed to dodge the core question of "What is the China Model?" Ultimately, he had to admit: "Frankly speaking, the China Model is a topic that requires further research. We can only say that China's modernization has been successful, particularly its success in industrial capacity."
If a highly respected and popular scholar like Jin Canrong awkwardly fails to clearly explain what the "China Model" or Socialism with Chinese Characteristics is, how could those "fence-sitting," independent-thought-lacking, "flesh-megaphone" public intellectual elites possibly explain it?
3. Ordinary people are even less clear. If officials and famous scholars cannot explain it, can the common people? A sample survey of 100 people at a factory asked, "What is Socialism with Chinese Characteristics?" and everyone looked completely bewildered. If a sample of 10,000 people were surveyed in public, perhaps not a single one could explain it clearly.
Why can no one clearly explain what Socialism with Chinese Characteristics is? Because the crux of the matter lies in the absence of an authoritative definition that uses accurate, clear, and comprehensive logic to summarize and define its core meaning. As a result, "Socialism with Chinese Characteristics" remains an empty concept that naturally no one can explain.
II. What is Capitalism and New Democracy?
To clearly explain the origins of "Socialism with Chinese Characteristics," we must inevitably trace it back to the source and first explain what Capitalism and New Democracy are.
1. What is Capitalism? Capitalism, capitalist society, and capitalist nation are three interconnected yet overlapping concepts. However, capitalism fundamentally denotes an economic relationship: capitalism is based on the private ownership of capital, where capitalists create value through wage-labor relations to earn profits generated by the factors of production.
The six main characteristics of capitalism are: the bourgeoisie owns the means of production and uses them to exploit wage labor; everything appears in the form of commodities, including labor power; the purpose of production is the exploitation of surplus value; it is materially based on socialized mass machine production; the basic contradiction of society is between socialized production and private capitalist appropriation; and competition, the anarchy of production, and cyclical economic crises cause severe destruction to productive forces.
The development of capitalism underwent two stages: before the 1870s, it was characterized by free competition (free capitalism); after the 1870s, it gradually transitioned into monopoly. By the late 19th and early 20th centuries, monopoly replaced free competition as the primary characteristic, known as monopoly capitalism or imperialism. According to the law of social development—that the relations of production must correspond to the nature of the productive forces—the capitalist system is inevitably bound to be replaced by the socialist system.
2. What is the New Democratic Revolution? New Democracy and the New Democratic Revolution are overlapping concepts.
The accurate, clear, and comprehensive definition of the New Democratic Revolution is: "In the era of imperialism and proletarian revolution, in a colonial and semi-colonial country, it is a bourgeois-democratic revolution led by the proletariat (through the CPC) guiding the masses against imperialism, feudalism, and bureaucrat-capitalism. Its goal is for the proletariat to firmly hold revolutionary leadership, thoroughly complete the revolutionary tasks, and promptly realize the transition from New Democracy to socialism."
This definition outlines that in a specific era and under specific national conditions, a revolution of a special nature is undertaken—namely, the proletariat leading the masses to overthrow the "Three Great Mountains" (imperialism, feudalism, and bureaucrat-capitalism). It also explicitly sets a goal: the prompt transition from New Democracy to socialism. In short, it means overthrowing the "Three Great Mountains" and achieving one "transition."
The basic economic program of the New Democratic Revolution was to establish specific economic relations: "Confiscate large banks, large industries, and large commercial enterprises that manipulate the national economy and people's livelihood, establishing a state-owned economy; confiscate landlord property and distribute it to peasants, guiding them to develop a cooperative economy; allow the development of the national capitalist economy and the existence of a rich peasant economy."
III. What is Scientific Socialism and the "One Industrialization and Three Transformations"?
So, what is Scientific Socialism? What is the Sinicized socialist revolution?
1. What is Scientific Socialism? Socialism, socialist society, and socialist nation are interconnected and overlapping concepts.
However, as Scientific Socialism, it is the doctrine founded by Marx and Engels in the 1840s concerning the nature, conditions, and general aims of the proletarian liberation movement. The principles of scientific socialism distinguish it from various other socialist factions and, more importantly, from capitalism.
Regardless of how many points these principles are summarized into, as an indication of a new economic relationship, the core consists of five elements: first, replacing the private ownership of the means of production with public ownership; second, from each according to his ability, to each according to his work; third, allocating the means of production through a unified scientific plan (preventing the cyclical economic crises caused by anarchic production); fourth, increasing the total productive forces as rapidly as possible; and fifth, achieving common prosperity for all people.
2. What is the Sinicized Socialist Revolution? The New Democratic Revolution led by the CPC garnered widespread support from the national bourgeoisie and the petty bourgeoisie, but New Democracy explicitly proposed the goal to "promptly realize the transition from New Democracy to socialism."
In the early days of the People's Republic of China, in order to transform private ownership of the means of production into socialist public ownership and realize socialist industrialization, it was necessary to develop productive forces. This involved the socialist transformation of agriculture, handicrafts, and capitalist industry and commerce—specifically, collectivizing agriculture and handicrafts, and implementing public-private partnerships for capitalist industry and commerce (the "Three Great Socialist Transformations").
Combining China's national conditions, from the second half of 1952 to 1956, the new China took merely four years to complete the socialist transformation of agriculture, handicrafts, and capitalist industry and commerce. It successfully transformed private ownership into socialist public ownership. Through this non-bloody "One Industrialization and Three Transformations," the transition from New Democracy to socialism was achieved, and the basic socialist system was initially established in China.
The "One Industrialization and Three Transformations" was Sinicized scientific socialism in practice. However, all internal contradictions within the Party and the country became concentrated around the question of whether to "promptly realize the transition from New Democracy to socialism." Among the Party, democratic parties, and non-party figures, a considerable number of representatives believed "the boat has reached the pier and the train has arrived at the station" and were unwilling to pursue socialism, even resisting the "transition from New Democracy to socialism." The development of these contradictions became irreconcilable, inevitably leading to the outbreak of the "Cultural Revolution."
IV. What is "Socialism with Chinese Characteristics"?
If the principles of scientific socialism are relative to capitalism, then Socialism with Chinese Characteristics is undoubtedly relative to scientific socialism. Currently, there are three relatively authoritative expressions of what "Socialism with Chinese Characteristics" is:
Expression One: A dictionary definition states: "Originally termed 'socialism with Chinese characteristics', proposed by Deng Xiaoping, it is the theme of all theoretical and practical innovations of the Party since Reform and Opening Up. Socialism with Chinese Characteristics is the product of combining the basic principles of scientific socialism with China's reality, and is the CPC's summary of its program at the current stage. It includes the path, theoretical system, system, and culture of Socialism with Chinese Characteristics."
This expression mentions who proposed it, that it is the theme of innovation, a product of combination, adheres to Party leadership, and includes path, theory, system, and culture. But it entirely fails to state what the economic relations and economic principles of Socialism with Chinese Characteristics are.
Expression Two: "Upholding the overall leadership of the Party is the path we must take to adhere to and develop Socialism with Chinese Characteristics; Socialism with Chinese Characteristics is the path we must take to realize the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation; uniting in struggle is the path the Chinese people must take to create historic achievements; implementing the new development philosophy is the path we must take for our country to grow stronger in the new era; and exercising full and rigorous self-governance of the Party is the path the Party must take to maintain its vitality and successfully navigate the new exams ahead."
This expression states that Socialism with Chinese Characteristics is part of the "five paths we must take," but it also fails to explain what its economic relations and principles are, nor does it explain what economic relations and principles are used to walk these "five paths."
Expression Three: "Socialism with Chinese Characteristics, originally termed 'socialism with Chinese characteristics', was proposed by Comrade Deng Xiaoping, the chief architect of China's Reform and Opening Up. It is the product of combining the basic principles of scientific socialism with China's reality, possessing distinct characteristics of the times and Chinese features. The leadership of the Communist Party of China is the most essential defining feature of Socialism with Chinese Characteristics."
"The path of Socialism with Chinese Characteristics means, under the leadership of the CPC, basing ourselves on fundamental national conditions, taking economic construction as the central task, adhering to the Four Cardinal Principles, adhering to Reform and Opening Up, liberating and developing social productive forces, building a socialist market economy with Chinese characteristics, socialist democratic politics, advanced socialist culture, a harmonious socialist society, and a socialist ecological civilization, promoting the well-rounded development of individuals, gradually realizing common prosperity for all people, and building a modern, strong socialist country that is prosperous, strong, democratic, culturally advanced, harmonious, and beautiful."
This expression mentions Party leadership, economic construction as the central task, Reform and Opening Up, developing productive forces, and becoming a strong modern country. Yet, it still fails to explain what the economic relations and economic principles of Socialism with Chinese Characteristics actually are.
From the time "socialism with Chinese characteristics" was proposed until now, there has never been a singular, authoritative, definitional exposition, and it goes out of its way to avoid discussing the economic relations and principles of Socialism with Chinese Characteristics. Although it is stated that "the principles of scientific socialism cannot be discarded; if they are discarded, it is not socialism," what kind of economic relationship this non-discarded "Socialism with Chinese Characteristics" actually is has become a riddle with no answer.
V. A Logically Comprehensive Definition Must be Made for "Characteristic Economic Relations"
The basic principles of scientific socialism are not dogmas, nor are they rigid formulas; they must "advance with the times." However, the basic principles of scientific socialism are absolutely not concepts that can be arbitrarily tailored, nor a girl that can be casually dressed up, nor a Rubik's cube that can be twisted at will.
Marxist innovations do not appear out of thin air; they must be inherited and possess a certain foundation in Marxist academic theory. Otherwise, it is absolutely out of the question to speak of upholding Marxism and Mao Zedong Thought!
Grammatically speaking, the various definitional statements of "Socialism with Chinese Characteristics" merely propose a general requirement or point out a direction; they do not logically and comprehensively define its content and principles.
What are the economic relations of "Socialism with Chinese Characteristics"? How does "Socialism with Chinese Characteristics" uphold and embody the principles of scientific socialism? This is what the "Theory of Characteristics" most needs to articulate clearly, what the practice of Reform and Opening Up most needs to follow, and it should be the core and most valuable content of the theory. Therefore, it absolutely cannot remain an avoided blank space!
Because there has yet to be a clear articulation and definition of what kind of economic relations "Socialism with Chinese Characteristics" represents, nor any prescriptive support based on Marxist academic theory and principles, the ideological and theoretical circles have been vigorously interpreting the "characteristics" throughout the 40-plus years of the "characteristic path." In practice, everyone stares at the "characteristics," interpreting and shifting the colors of these "characteristics" based on their own stances, experiences, needs, and cognition. As a result, in the eyes of 1,000 people, there are 1,000 versions of "Socialism with Chinese Characteristics."
Pursuing characteristic socialism according to various different colors inevitably leads to chaos, or what might be called a "kaleidoscope of colors." In practice, carrying out privatization, taking "make-up lessons" in capitalism, implementing distribution by capital, pushing for comprehensive marketization, and allowing a small minority to get rich first under the banner of "Socialism with Chinese Characteristics" are in almost direct contradiction with the basic principles of scientific socialism.
Therefore, whether starting from the current practical needs of Reform and Opening Up or considering the long-term theoretical guidance of reform, the question of what kind of economic relations and economic principles "Socialism with Chinese Characteristics" actually intends to implement is an extremely critical theoretical and practical issue. We absolutely cannot continue to "grope in the dark," we absolutely cannot avoid it any longer, we absolutely cannot keep guessing riddles, and it absolutely cannot remain a blank slate. A concise, accurate, clear, and logically comprehensive definition must be provided!
Conclusion: "Socialism with Chinese Characteristics" is neither capitalism with Chinese characteristics nor classical scientific socialism, yet it cannot discard the basic principles of scientific socialism. So, what kind of economic relations does this socialism have? And what economic principles must this socialism uphold?
Correct theory guides correct social practice. After more than 40 years of Reform and Opening Up, to avoid making directional and subversive mistakes, it is time that this fundamental issue must be clearly explained. We cannot simply "just do it without talking about it" because we can't explain it, and we can absolutely no longer "grope in the dark"!