Vero Publishing - A Visualized History of Contemporary Chinese Social Dvelopment

Why "Black and White" is a Visualized History of

Contemporary Chinese Social Development

Speech By Yun Kai, October 19, 2024

Liu Jiming's "Black and White" is a socialist realist novel with critical elements. The work spans from the 1911 Revolution through the Land Revolution War, Anti-Japanese War, Liberation War, Chairman Mao's era after the founding of New China, and into Deng Xiaoping's era after Reform and Opening Up. It traverses the "Second Republic" led by Deng, Jiang, and Hu. Through representative major social events and typical character stories from various historical periods with their respective political, economic, and ideological backgrounds, it vividly and authentically reproduces a century of Chinese historical political changes from modern to contemporary times. It touches on politics, economy, culture, education, art, and the underworld that correspond to the imperial court. The twisting character fates and gripping realistic plots are filled with intense critical colors and a patriotic concern for country, party, and people. The author's sincere faith in Marxism-Leninism-Maoism and genuine feelings for the working-class laboring people represented by workers and peasants are even more unmistakable.

Many critics say "Black and White" is a visualized contemporary Chinese social development history. I'll share my views from several perspectives.

I. From Du Wei's background, identity, and Luo Zheng's narrative

One of the main characters in "Black and White" is Du Wei, whose grandfather, Zhan Datong, participated in the 1911 Revolution but lost his political enthusiasm due to internal fighting and opened a photo studio. He arranged his daughter Zhan Rong to marry Guo Da, a Kuomintang general. When refusing the son of a vegetable farmer, Du Fu spat: "Pah, you're truly a toad wanting to eat swan meat. How dare you take the Zhan surname, how dare you... like my daughter?" Stimulated by this insult, Du Fu endured humiliation, made achievements, and finally married Zhan Rong. Zhan Datong died three years after their marriage.

I find this plot design quite intriguing. Zhan Datong participated in the 1911 Revolution, so logically, he should have been more open-minded, but he viewed social class as an insurmountable gulf. This reveals part of why the 1911 Revolution failed—its lack of thoroughness, completely excluding the masses from the revolutionary mainstream.

Du Fu committed suicide after discovering his son Du Wei wasn't his biological child. Wu Bozhong told Zhan Rong: "My era and my son's era will both come!" Later when Wu Bozhong privately discussed with Song Qiankun, he proposed a "breaking out of the cocoon" restoration theory, to which Song Qiankun replied that he "was also approaching his final judgment" (see Part 3, pages 212-214).

In Part One, Luo Zheng recounts his experiences from joining the revolution to before Reform and Opening Up (see Part 1, pages 332-353), during which he asked Anna in prison: "How will history and the future evaluate people like us?"

At this point, I feel "Black and White" touches on how to evaluate a century of Chinese history and its figures.

For instance, on the question of evaluating Chairman Mao, it's not difficult to understand why Deng and others viewed the "comprehensive evaluation" of Chairman Mao as so important. Because a comprehensive evaluation of Chairman Mao's lifetime achievements, merits, and demerits is not only about Chairman Mao personally, but is closely connected to everything "going back to 1840" including the two Opium Wars, the Taiping Heavenly Kingdom Movement, the Self-Strengthening Movement, the First Sino-Japanese War, the Boxer Indemnity, the 1911 Revolution, the May Fourth Movement, the New Democratic Revolution, the Socialist Revolution and Construction, the Cultural Revolution, Reform and Opening Up, etc. Viewed internationally, it's also connected to the French Revolution, the Paris Commune, the October Revolution, the Soviet revisionist change, the U.S.-Soviet rivalry, U.S.-China relations, etc. These cannot be separated. Chairman Mao belongs not only to himself, but to the Chinese Communist Party, the People's Republic of China, and more importantly to the Chinese people and the people of the world.

To achieve a truly meaningful "reconciliation" between history—reality—future, politics—economy—culture—military, revolution—construction—reform, the First Republic—Second Republic—Third Republic, the historical task of a comprehensive evaluation of Chairman Mao is unavoidable.

Of course, this historical task will eventually be completed by someone at some time, though not necessarily by the Red Dynasty.

Looking back now, we can see why the book takes the 1911 Revolution as a historical starting point, possibly with this consideration in mind. In 2011, some people inside and outside the Party used the 100th anniversary of the 1911 Revolution as an opportunity and even moved a Confucius statue to Tiananmen Square, though it was removed after significant criticism. But that Confucius statue remains in a small courtyard behind the National Museum. Three years later in 2014, they began saying that Confucius Institutes belong to China and to the world, and now they venerate and sacrifice to Confucius, essentially retreating all the way back to the Way of Confucius and Mencius. This is a trampling of the 1911 Revolution and even the entire modern revolutionary history since 1840.

"Black and White" effectively reveals this complex historical process.

II. From the perspective of Hong Hu, Han Ying, Song Qiankun, Lu Shengping, and Niu Niu

Previously, I analyzed the character images from Song Qiankun, Hong Hu, Old Commander Gu to Chen Yimeng in an article still on Renjing website (titled "From Song Qiankun, Hong Hu, Old Commander Gu to Chen Yimeng—Reading 'Black and White'"), so I won't repeat all of that here.

"Black and White" covers the full century of history from 1912-2012. Against the backdrop of changing historical circumstances, through the intersecting lives and fluctuating fortunes of the Hong Hu couple, Song Qiankun, Lu Shengping, and Niu Niu, it vividly reproduces this twisting, complex, back-and-forth historical period, while revealing the necessity of revolutionary movements, the complexity of class struggle, and the cruelty of political struggles. It allows history to speak for itself, clearly explaining to the world how, in the surging historical tide, human nature's true, good, and beautiful aspects are constantly competing fiercely with the false, evil, and ugly. It eloquently proves that only by identifying with "continuing revolution under the dictatorship of the proletariat" can one be a true communist, and this is the necessary path to realize a communist society.

Hong Hu, Han Ying, Song Qiankun, Lu Shengping, and Niu Niu all met during the war years, fighting against internal and external enemies to establish an independent, people-ruled socialist New China. They all came from the poorest families with the deepest grievances, with the strongest revolutionary will and spirit. In the war era of destroying the old world, they all belonged to the class camp oppressed by imperialist powers and reactionary ruling classes. Under the guidance of Mao Zedong Thought and the Communist Party's revolutionary program, they had clear revolutionary goals of defeating imperialist invaders and overthrowing Kuomintang reactionaries. Facing strong hostile forces formed by internal and external alliances, they built a Great Wall of flesh and blood with revolutionary faith and class feelings to resist foreign aggression and strike against internal and external enemies. So even if they weren't perfect, even if like Song Qiankun they joined the revolution out of temporary personal grievance, they chose to join rather than observe from the sidelines in the rolling tide of revolution.

After the "First Republic" died, a "Second Republic" that privatized public property and allowed a hundred flowers to bloom began. The political and economic system shifted from "class struggle as the key link" to "economic construction as the central task." Former "landlords, rich peasants, counter-revolutionaries, bad elements, and rightists" had their labels removed with one stroke. The new slogan that "whether a cat is black or white, if it catches mice it's a good cat" promoting productivity and economic benefits theory smoothed over the clear class divisions formed in people's minds during the First Republic era and dissolved the clear class struggle consciousness formed during the planned economy era. Under the impact of the new tide of reform encouraging bold experimentation, the new political and economic system broke free from the constraints of "class struggle as the key link" and "proletarian dictatorship," regaining a jungle environment of survival of the fittest. People's thoughts in real society changed in this new social ecological environment. This change, with the deepening of reform and the passage of time, progressed from shallow to deep. Society rapidly stratified according to standards of money and power. The socialism of the "First Republic" period was undeniably alienated, presenting a mixed social form of feudalism, capitalism, and revisionism.

As relatively free human individuals in civilized society, objectively speaking, people are both creators of their era and subjects of their era. Their thoughts, spirits, and behaviors all bear the stamp of their times. Humans are not only social but also temporal; human thought can change with the times, just as when spring comes, the withered tree root systems buried underground will sprout seasonal vitality, and when autumn comes, even the most flourishing flowers will wither. This once again proves that to realize a communist society, the "continuing revolution under the dictatorship of the proletariat" must be upheld in socialist society. Ideological transformation must continue without relaxation. We cannot rely merely on individual moral self-discipline, but must rely on the people and mobilize the masses to rise up in supervision.

III. From the perspective of Hong Taihang, Chen Yimeng, Song Xiaofan, and Jiang Haiyang

Hong Taihang, Chen Yimeng, Song Xiaofan, and Jiang Haiyang all came from Red Second Generation backgrounds. Their youth was spent in the high tide of anti-imperialism, anti-revisionism, and socialist construction. Having experienced political storms and the great social melting pot during the transition from old to new historical periods, they developed keen insight into politics, society, and even international situations. Long social experience forged their unbending characters and ability to adapt to changing environments.

Hong Taihang was General Hong Hu's son. After the Cultural Revolution was negated, he abandoned his imminent promotion to deputy division level in the Production and Construction Corps to return to Beijing, and through his father's influence, went to work at the Development and Reform Commission. Riding the east wind of Reform and Opening Up, he established a "sheep's head selling dog meat" trading company. Taking advantage of the opportunity as China opened its doors and surplus goods from capitalist countries flooded in, he engaged extensively in profiteering, "running toward money," and quickly became a standout among "the portion of people allowed to get rich first," becoming one of Beijing's first batch of commercial housing buyers.

Hong Taihang fabricated high-sounding pretexts for his criminal behavior, often spouting theories like "corruption is the lubricant of reform," "high salaries prevent corruption," and "small government, big society," using political reform as a smokescreen for his crimes. His social circle centered around him continued to expand, with salon activities at his residence—Bingma Hutong No. 9 Courtyard—becoming increasingly frequent. This small group included not only fellow children of high-ranking cadres but also policy researchers from the State Council Research Office, young teachers from the Central Party School, and writers who had been labeled rightists during the Cultural Revolution and were only recently rehabilitated... They were elites from central ministries and commissions and various social sectors. When discussing major political issues like whether to continue on the socialist road or push for complete Westernization under the banner of reform, they engaged in sharp intellectual exchanges with incisive words. Avant-garde and pointed speculations were filled with stubborn prejudices and sophistry, with some even directly targeting Chairman Mao. After leaving his position, Hong Taihang built his wealth empire through his father's relationship network. His familiarity with Beijing's complex political and business relationships, especially high-level official relationships, was as if his brain contained a "contact map" that could immediately locate anyone he needed. In fact, every business deal he completed relied on this "contact map."

Later, Hong Taihang turned his gaze across the ocean, tying himself to American Duke Corporation with a profit cord (this "American Duke Corporation" also appears in "Renjing," with the two books having a dream linkage), becoming both a pathfinder for foreign capital entering China and a strong arm protecting foreign interests. In other words, he became a "red comprador" for Western capital in China.

Song Xiaofan was Song Qiankun's daughter. During the Cultural Revolution, she had loved Guo Liang, married the East River workers' rebel leader Cheng Guojun, but divorced him at her father Song Qiankun's behest after Cheng was labeled one of the "three types of people." She lived with the reactionary rightist writer Li Xin in America and later married Bai Wen, son of the Kuomintang general Bai Shouhe. She was a typical "scar literature writer," with "Xiangchun Street" being her scar literature work.

Scar literature continued until the early 1980s, running through the so-called "reflective literature" and "reform literature" that followed, and diffused outward, providing material and impetus for other art forms like film and fine arts. This literary trend of denouncing Cultural Revolution trauma was named after "Scar." The "scar" writing had such far-reaching influence that it almost covered the entire literary creation of the 1980s, to the extent that some say the only literary theme of the 1980s was the Cultural Revolution. Even much of the root-seeking literature and avant-garde literature were merely variations on the "scar" theme.

Scar literature vulgarized class struggle and denied historical progress. At the micro level, it weakened and distorted the power of the proletariat, packaging working people as mobs and fools. Proletarian literature can only truly serve the proletariat by standing on a proletarian position, telling proletarian narratives at the macro level, and reflecting the actual conditions of the proletariat at the micro level.

Content determines form. Contemporary Chinese literary workers who themselves do not stand on the proletarian position and are detached from the labor life content of workers and peasants certainly cannot create good literary forms. In other words, "how can good literature and art be created while staying with these insects?" Since Reform and Opening Up, from scar literature to new era literature, these gentlemen have consistently imprisoned themselves in ivory towers, becoming defenders and custodians of the bourgeois and even aristocratic capitalist literary and art front.

Since the "October Thunder," China's literary field has generally experienced two processes: liberalization and conservatism. Why did such completely opposite changes occur? Because bourgeois interests became divided. At the beginning of restoration, the two had common interests, jointly eroding the achievements of socialism through collusion. Later in the Second Republic, as China's imperialist tendencies began to emerge, the contradictions between bureaucratic capitalists and private capitalists intensified, and the aristocratic capitalists controlled the state propaganda machine. Thus, officials naturally strengthened conservative propaganda, reanimating corpses, serving the rule of bureaucratic capitalists, such as "new era mainstream literature and art." Such literary works not only detach from the historical background and erase class struggle but also attempt to sing the praises of "human nature theory" with the stench of the bourgeoisie to stigmatize and distort working people. Of course, whether conservative or liberal, they are both the "changing banners on the city wall" of bourgeois literature and art. Their progression from collusion to competition essentially reflects the development process of revisionism containing feudalism, capitalism, and imperialism in China, and cannot change the bourgeois essence.

"Black and White," through its portrayal of Song Xiaofan and the old rightist Li [name unclear], deeply exposes the reactionary and decadent nature of scar literature writers.

The cousins Hong Taihang and Song Xiaofan are representative figures among the Red Second Generation group. With changing political winds and the shifting positions of their fathers, they swiftly jumped from the "politics takes command" tide of the First Republic to the "economics takes command" tide of the Second Republic. At the beginning of Reform and Opening Up's "crossing the river by feeling the stones," like other "Red Second Generation" members who boldly broke through socialist legal prohibitions, Hong Taihang used his excellent organizational ability and keen political vision to build bridges of friendship among former classmates and comrades, establishing a social circle of high-ranking cadres' children centered around himself. They were distributed in key departments of various central ministries and commissions, being the future successors of the state. Song Xiaofan also relied on her father's help to enter the East University writers' class and become a so-called "young writer," gaining a foothold in the ideological and cultural field. She believed that "everything I have now, isn't it the compensation I should have received long ago?" From radical revolutionaries in the red era, they transformed themselves into self-negating pioneers of reform and opening up, criticizing the political and economic system of the planned economy era. Just as they viewed themselves as the rightful successors to the proletarian revolutionary cause during the Cultural Revolution, they now saw themselves as "pioneers" and "navigators" of reform and opening up, clearing away the "Cultural Revolution poison."

Why did those who received years of Party education and revolutionary furnace tempering, who were taught by their elders' words and deeds from childhood, and who were once the best in the revolutionary ranks, collapse so quickly in the reform era, transforming almost overnight? They had very strong personal heroic desires. In any era, like gamblers, they staked their lives to be the pioneers of their times. For them, revolutionary ideals, communism, and even sacred words like motherland and people were merely external decorations for achieving their personal goals of standing out. As soon as the political climate changed, out of self-interest, they could discard these without any lingering attachment. Therefore, regardless of whether the social system was public or private, they were always the brightest stars in different eras. They lacked the pain experienced at the beginning of the revolution, lacked their elders' deep understanding of the meaning of revolution and why one should fight lifelong for the communist cause, and thus could easily change with the wind. Additionally, there might be a psychological imbalance from feeling they had given too much for the revolutionary cause, for national and people's interests, without receiving special material benefits, plus the fact that most of their fathers had been caught in political storms during the Cultural Revolution, subjected to what they considered "unfair" suspension and investigation, planting seeds of resentment in their hearts that grew uncontrollably when the political "spring breeze" blew.

So we see that to cooperate with uprooting the "First Republic," Hong Taihang's group acted on the economic base while Song Xiaofan's group worked on the superstructure. Therefore, from their chameleon-like changes in political conduct and attached moral qualities across different eras, we must consider a political question: the relationship between political and economic systems, how the political-economic system determines social ideology, determines whom the state machinery serves, thus determining the class nature of the state. The fundamental root governing all this is the formation of the Party's leading collective and the selection of the main helmsman. Historically, we've seen peasant uprisings and dynastic changes, and more recently, the collapse of the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe. During the Cultural Revolution, there was a slogan: "A hero's father produces a good man, a reactionary's father produces a scoundrel." From a materialist view, if there's some truth to this inference, it's mainly built on how the "son's" later life is imperceptibly influenced by the father's words and deeds, and the political and social environment of the significant era. As for mysterious genetic inheritance, which belongs to biological science and idealism, its impact on whether descendants become "heroes" or "cowards" might be less significant than pouring a bottle of mineral water into the Dead Sea to change its salt content. At the same time, as descendants of heroes with their fathers' heroic halos, they subconsciously have a sense of pride and superiority that descendants of ordinary people don't, with a direct motivation to emulate their fathers and strive to be extraordinary. The general objective social mentality also gives them priority in recognition to become heroes. Therefore, due to the influence of their fathers, their own efforts, the resources they access, the information they grasp, and society's protection and encouragement, the children of heroes are often more likely to become outstanding than the descendants of ordinary people.

Looking at Chen Yimeng next. He saved Hong Taihang's life in the Great Northern Wilderness. In 1976, he was recommended as a worker-peasant-soldier student to Beijing University, and after graduation, was assigned to the Central Office, becoming secretary to Old Commander Gu, whom he had called Uncle Gu since childhood. He and his first wife came together because of their common fate and mutual attraction, while his relationship with his second wife was pure love. In the early days of Reform and Opening Up, he requested to be sent down to a poor county in North China as county Party secretary, eventually becoming mayor of a coastal city. He later transferred to be governor of a northern province, revitalizing the old industrial base in just a few years. During the reform process, Chen Yimeng was known for "daring to eat crabs" and "gnawing hard bones," earning the reputation of "Chen Whirlwind." Just after Chen Yimeng took office as East River Provincial Party Secretary with high expectations from the central government, he encountered the workers' rights defense incident during the East Steel merger process. He halted the East Steel merger process after in-depth exchanges with East Steel workers. After Gu Zheng and Li Hong jointly exposed the corruption scandal of Phoenix Island, Chen Yimeng thoroughly investigated the corrupt forces of Phoenix Island. Although the corrupt forces of Phoenix Island were suppressed, Chen Yimeng's actions did not satisfy the high levels, and he was eventually transferred out of East River Province, replaced by Jiang Haiyang, with his prospects of further promotion evaporating.

Chen Yimeng differed from ordinary Red Second Generation members. Although he started on the foundation of the socialist political system established by his father's generation through hardship, his thinking was sharper and his vision broader, and he carried the responsibility for the Party and the state on his shoulders. As a reformer, his feelings toward the masses were complex, but his heart always held the people. To ensure the Party's nature and purpose, he consistently emphasized protecting people's interests during the reform process (see Part 3, pages 160-162). He didn't throw away the people as a burden, and this burden prevented him from carrying out bold reforms like ordinary "reformers." In the tide of Reform and Opening Up, he didn't abandon the core concept of socialism from the "First Republic." Pausing the East Steel merger project required bearing pressure from multiple sides, including upper levels, colleagues, and his friend Hong Taihang, who was one of the beneficiaries of the East Steel merger project. But for the future destiny of the Party and the state, for the interests of the masses, and for his own former ideals, after careful consideration, he finally took the most crucial step, breaking through various obstacles regardless of consequences, displaying the courage and spirit of a reformer. His ability to make political decisions from a public heart for the country and people, without placing personal or group private interests above national, ethnic, or even class interests, made him worthy of the title "statesman."

Isn't it said that "he who wins the people's hearts wins the world"? So why did Chen Yimeng ultimately fail? In Part 3, page 367, Bai Wen tells Song Xiaofan: "The Chinese high levels were obviously not very satisfied with Chen Yimeng's actions, otherwise, they wouldn't have transferred him out of East River so quickly. China's reforms have become irreversible; no conservative force can change or delay them." This reveals why Chen Yimeng failed—his legs weren't moving in unison. One leg wanted to walk forward on the socialist path, while the other wanted to stay in place, making a fall inevitable. Undoubtedly, Chen Yimeng was a member of the capitalist reform path. Otherwise, there wouldn't be the "Chen Whirlwind" story, and he wouldn't have been cultivated as a successor by Old Commander Gu. But the socialist sentiment that Chen Yimeng developed during the "First Republic" period meant he couldn't advance on the reform path without concerns like fellow Red Second Generation members Jiang Haiyang and Luo Baochang. State-owned enterprise reform was an inevitable path in the market economy. In a market economy environment, labor becomes a commodity, and workers must sell their labor, unable to remain masters of their own fate. Therefore, during the state-owned enterprise reforms of that time, many workers were laid off, losing their "iron rice bowls" to create "golden rice bowls" for a few. The capitalist road and the interests of the working masses are fundamentally opposed; one must choose. Chen Yimeng, on one hand, believed state-owned enterprise reform towards a market economy was inevitable, but on the other hand, he wanted to care for the fundamental interests of workers harmed by these reforms. A person must either stand on the position of the bourgeoisie or the proletariat, but Chen Yimeng tried to stand on both, wavering, constraining his own hands and feet, ultimately being quietly transferred out of East River Province, with East Steel workers' interests ultimately unprotected—one can imagine that after the takeover by Jiang Haiyang, who had no feeling for the common people and only spouted book learning and terminology, the process of East Steel reform became irreversible.

In Part 3, pages 170-171, Old Commander Gu discusses the "make-up lesson theory" with Chen Yimeng before he assumes office as East River Provincial Party Secretary, revealing his worries about the Party and state affairs with the deepening of reform, which serves as a final political testament from this old revolutionary of the "First Republic" era to Chen Yimeng. I wanted to cry when I first read this part, and still feel moved every time I read it, not because I'm being sentimental, but because I thought of how the revolution hasn't stopped even as the great waves sift the sand. Lenin once said that human thought needs and can be instilled. Isn't this so-called make-up lesson theory also a kind of instillation? That's why it's said, "if the proletariat doesn't occupy the ideological front, the bourgeoisie will." But ideology belongs to the superstructure category, and when the economic base has already changed, the superstructure cannot remain motionless, so changes or even chaos in ideology are inevitable. Otherwise, we fall into the trap of mechanical materialism.

The make-up lesson theory holds that socialist revolutions are premature and deformed births that shouldn't have happened. But which period was really deformed and premature? Some argue that the "Second Republic" was deformed, born prematurely, and died early. Many say it could have completed that transformation, especially from the 17th Party Congress between 2007 and 2012, when ideological divisions in the Party's upper levels were severe, developing into a path struggle by 2012. I was skeptical when this view was first proposed. We know that the legitimacy of Reform and Opening Up was built on negating the Cultural Revolution, and around 2007-2008, voices emerged calling for a rational reflection on reform and a calm view of the Cultural Revolution (the New Left). Articles published in New Left platforms like "Cultural Traverse," "Tianya," and "Reading" during those years showed this tendency. Otherwise, the anti-Mao figure Mao Yushi wouldn't have said in 2008, "I'm disappointed in the prospects for reform." At that time, CCTV even broadcast some red songs, including unedited versions from the Cultural Revolution period. Some asked, "Is there going to be a left turn?" Looking back, we now know it wasn't the reappearance of dawn but a kind of returning light.

Mechanical materialists believe the superstructure is always in the hands of the proletariat, but once the economic base changes, the superstructure determined by the economic base must change with it. When the superstructure changes, it reacts back on the economic base, transforming it even more. Once such production relations are formed, they necessarily develop and evolve according to the laws of these production relations, which cannot be controlled by a few "socialist road advocates." It will continuously develop toward concentration and monopoly, regardless of who controls it; on the contrary, whoever controls it becomes its agent. Isn't that how the so-called "property rights reform history" came about?

After the political storm triggered by moldy rice in the university cafeteria (Part 1, pages 379-397), the "First Republic" completely died in body and soul from its ruling position, and China transitioned from the "post-Mao era" to the "post-Tiananmen era." Revolution was narrated as a failed modernization story, held responsible for China's delayed and interrupted modernization process. Western liberals viewed the Mao-led First Republic period as a resurgence of "Eastern feudal despotism" and "Asian despotism"—this is the Western summary of the relationship between state and society built on traditional agricultural water conservancy foundations during the First Republic period, a debating point in the Communist International movement surrounding the proletarian revolutions in China and the Soviet Union, and also the starting point of self-confirmation for the so-called "new enlightenment" in the 1980s. The former "revolutionary history paradigm" was replaced by the so-called "modernization paradigm," not just in literature and history circles, but in the entire knowledge production shift in the "post-Tiananmen era," determining China's dominant topics and frameworks in the politically correct Reform and Opening Up period of the Second Republic.

In the Second Republic period, China's socialist revolution existed in name only in reality. The replacement of Chinese revolution by modernization stabilized global capitalism, while China's entry into the WTO gave global capitalism new development, making capitalist globalization a fact (i.e., "the world needs China"). Against this background, globalization's modernization and revolution became binary opposites, corresponding to other binary oppositions like democracy and authoritarianism, freedom and despotism, state and society—these oppositions are both historical projections of China's real political game in the "post-Tiananmen era," especially after the "92 Southern Tour," and world political projections after the Soviet Union's collapse in 91. They hide in the theoretical depths of "globalization" and "modernity." Today's world remains imprisoned in the cognitive barriers of a series of binary oppositions.

During the Second Republic period, China's "New Left" was born from reflection on China's "1990s." The landmark event was Wang Hui's article "Contemporary Chinese Intellectual Conditions and the Problem of Modernity," written in 94 and published in 97, viewed as the manifesto of the "New Left's" birth. In this article, Wang Hui emphasized that China's socialist historical practice is a special form of Chinese modernity, that socialist movements aimed at modernization contained completely different value orientations, emphasized distinguishing between modernization in the Chinese context and the concept of "modernity" in Western modernization theory, criticized placing reflection on Chinese socialism in the binary opposition of tradition/modernity of the "new enlightenment thought trend," and believed that avoiding the predicament of Chinese socialism in the state system, party politics, and industrialization process is actually part of the entire world's "modernity crisis." This reasoning is also reflected in his subsequent series of discussions on "anti-modernity modernity," that is, saving Chinese socialism from "modernity."

The massive layoffs after the 98 Congress, the urban-rural gap behind the three rural issues, regional divisions between the southeast coast and northwest interior, social group events like Foxconn's multiple suicides and "toothbrush deaths," increasing corruption and embezzlement... these all became the price paid by the Chinese people after China joined the WTO (i.e., "China needs the world"). This meaning of "developmentalism" was criticized by the left both domestically and internationally. The debate between neoliberals and the New Left about China's path occurred against this background, and the ideological debate between these two factions was very intense in the years around the 17th Party Congress.

The 2012 New Year's message in "Southern Weekend" titled "Like One Bundle of Light Embracing Another Bundle of Light" wrote: "The brilliance of thought is being reborn. From former depletion and rigidity to the revival of humanity, from the dispute between the New Left and Liberals to the constitutional debate of 2011. Where do we come from? Where are we going? What should and can we do? For 170 years, Chinese society has never been as clear about its path as now."

In fact, China's "special situation" is not manifested as external to "ideological globalization"; on the contrary, China's internal ideological field is a reflection of global ideological struggle. Regardless of left or right, when this field is labeled by Western liberal scholars and politicians as stereotypical "despotism" and forms a binary opposition of good versus evil, light versus darkness with so-called "liberal democracy," this result is precisely the real picture of global ideological struggle. The only way to break this picture is to "return to 1978" to choose again—to find again the global historical significance of the Third World represented by the Chinese-Soviet revolution with its node at the October Revolution, thereby breaking this series of binary oppositions, and only then is it possible to clean up and continue the historical experience and practical process of socialist revolution.

Has the examination paper written by this history been completed? I think it was completed by 2012, and in recent years everyone has given their own scores in their hearts. At some point, the people, as the examiner, will give the final effective score for this answer sheet.

2012 was a year of dramatic social transformation, and also a year when the Party's line struggle, which had been suppressed for many years since Reform and Opening Up, finally transformed from quantitative to qualitative changes, expanding into a path struggle within and outside the Party (when drafting the "Two Decisions," Deng raised the opinion that in principle, the term "line struggle" would no longer be used).

What is a line struggle? It's the watershed of fundamental differences, either the west wind prevailing over the east wind or the east wind prevailing over the west wind. This looks not only at what a person says but also at what they do and for whom they do it. These are the sharpest bullets that have crossed history to the present. In the final analysis, line struggles have no room for reconciliation, no matter how much the royalists hide and avoid this most fundamental principle, the opportunists' actions are real, and an incomplete revolution is tantamount to a complete non-revolution or even counter-revolution.

Chen Yimeng was essentially a bourgeois statesman and reformer, from a line perspective, a reformist opportunist. Even with his desperate cover-up, like the "Second Republic" he represented, he was full of opportunistic airs. Don't be like the royalists and saving royalists who only know how to look upward and follow the elite route, seeking representatives among those who mingle with the ruling class, as the capitalist roaders once did. We should focus

Most people's attitudes toward Chen Yimeng range from indifferent, regretful, nostalgic, praising, cursing, disliking, to loathing, and these different attitudes reflect their respective class positions.

As for the masses of East River's attitude toward him, most tend toward nostalgia and praise, mostly stemming from simple personal emotions based on class position, like the citizens who recently knelt crying before the statue of Judge Bao (at this point, what kind of person the historical Bao Zheng really was and the role of the so-called "honest official" are no longer so important. Think about it: if one could personally experience the fair justice they deserve in real life, who would still kneel crying before a statue?). This is because the kind-hearted, simple masses don't ask for much; they just want their real-life problems to be cared about, noticed, and properly resolved. When simple needs are met, the masses will naturally gather around, requiring neither cajolery nor force, and will give wholehearted support and love.

Therefore, I've always said that when evaluating any political figure, one shouldn't bring in personal emotions (such as love or hatred) but should clearly establish a class position before examining the class interests they represent, their political line, and their political ability.

Capitalism can be restored, but socialism cannot be restored; the proletariat can only take back the fruits of its labor through struggle.

This is actually where history shows its kindness: even in moments of crisis, there will still be insightful people who try to save the country and the people; but this is also where history shows its cruelty: a corrupt and incompetent ruling class no longer deserves these insightful people's efforts. If they cannot save it, they become the pushers of the last shovel of yellow earth to bury it.

History has always been full of tenderness; history has always been full of cruelty.

This is the historical truth that "Black and White" reveals to us.

IV. Conclusion

On Douban, I described "Blossoms" as "a Balzac-style elegy for Reform and Opening Up," while "Black and White" is "a Tolstoy-style revolutionary symphony." This is because "Blossoms" represents the decadent bourgeois petty-bourgeois culture, while "Black and White" represents the new, progressive proletarian revolutionary literature and art.

In class society, ideological forms such as politics, law, philosophy, religion, literature, and art "all influence each other and also influence the economic base." The history of class struggle shows that revolutionary literature and art play a positive role in promoting the development of new, progressive economic foundations, pushing history forward; reactionary literature and art maintain decaying, backward economic foundations, hindering historical development. Literature and art that promote new, progressive production relations inevitably have a destructive effect on decaying, backward production relations, accelerating their collapse. Literature and art that maintain decaying, backward production relations inevitably hinder the formation and development of new, progressive production relations.

Bourgeois literature and art still hold a dominant position, but they are after all decadent things without vitality and will eventually be eliminated by history. As Chairman Mao pointed out: "All decadent ideologies and other unsuitable parts of the superstructure are collapsing day by day; although thoroughly sweeping away this garbage still requires time, the trend of their collapse is definitely certain."

"Black and White" teaches us that the correct attitude is to abandon illusions, prepare for struggle, resolutely and thoroughly struggle against revisionism; fail, struggle again; fail again, until victory. This is the awareness that a believer in Marxism-Leninism-Maoism should have, rather than being immersed in delusions and dreams. One must bear the consequences if one lacks the courage to face reality. This process may be dry and tedious, but it doesn't mean we can't see any dawn that leads to despair. The appearance of a new generation of Marxists like Tian Qingqing and Liang Tian in the final part of "Black and White" represents this glimmer of dawn's hope.