Take Wang Huning's explanation

I think there are always little pinks who are unclear about the current political system of the CCP. This set of things, whether the CCP does or not, does not hinder the theoretical basis, they say or not, teach or not. What do cadres do and learn in the party school. It's a matter of opinion. This set of logic is only an exposition of the legitimacy of its own class governance. But far from other levels, such as military, economic, community and so on. Especially the current new research, new point of view. Demographic structure, population mobility, etc. under the trend of globalization.

There are always people who say to defend the fundamentalist Marxism, why can't your fundamentalism be practical? Because it can't explain the situation at all. If you don't change the angle, do these gangsters have any other tricks? Just a big liar and a little liar. The results are well known: philosophy spends its time claiming that it is apolitical, that it is aloof from the political conflict of classes, that it speaks to all, that it speaks in the name of humanity, that it is non-partisan, that is, does not recognize itself Selected political party. This is what Marx meant by philosophy as just explaining the world. Actually any philosophy does not just explain the world: any philosophy is politically active, but most philosophies spend their time denying themselves politically active. They say: We are politically independent, we just explain the world, we just say what things are. This is what Freud called denégation. Once someone comes to you and says: I don't do politics, then you can be sure that he does politics.

This is a veritable religion, a bewitchment, a vertigo, a hypnotic state, a pure enjoyment. Philosophy has become the object of consumption and speculative enjoyment. Philosophers are ultimately created for consumption and speculative enjoyment. Marx criticized speculative-interpretation of the world. ("Althusserian On Art (Part Five)" Translator: Chen Yue) The question is whether the Majiao is the optimal solution, is it necessary to solve it, and the final solution.

Eternity is not Marx, eternity is an idea created with respect to time. Time has no beginning and therefore no end. Or humans are not aware of time. Taking eternity into Marxism is not the right mouth. The emergence of Marx clearly has a beginning and an end. This is not constant.

The thought and philosophy of ancient Greece has spread to this day. Can you say that it is eternal? Because we cannot foresee the future, we can only predict the future. There are always multiple answers for future observations.

You cannot talk about Marx in isolation from the whole social and world context. This is like a capitalist trade activity, people-to-people, things to things, people to things, things to people. form a big cycle. achieve the purpose of exchange. achieve the purpose of capital flow. Since there is a carrier in physics, Marxism is parasitic in capitalism. It is also transmitted by means of a carrier. To put it badly, the Xinhua Bookstore, which prints Marx's books, also abides by business principles. It is impossible to spread unchecked. So Marx's finite element, ideological boundary, communication. It is also accompanied by economic mobility. Not a pure class theory.

I hope the horse believers will stop harming others. You make a revolution, but you want others to shed blood. Marx himself would not bleed. This is not the difference in the division of labor in the revolution. Why is it that in Internacion where everyone is equal, some people sacrifice and some people take care of themselves. It can be seen that this set of realistic logic is still based on social distribution. Since it is recognized that communism is not an absolute concept, it is only a relative concept. So why is Majiao the only solution?