China's civilizational vision in an age of uncertainty

In left-leaning circles across the globe, a quiet crisis persists. Despite relentless pressure, marginalization, and even demonization, many who still carry the torch of emancipatory politics grapple with historical disappointments while clinging to hope for a more just world. As the founder of the Italian Communist Party, Antonio Gramsci, once noted, the struggle between pessimism of the intellect and optimism of the will demands moments of reflection.

There is no better occasion for such reflection than the milestone anniversary of a living socialist project.

The 105th anniversary of the founding of the Communist Party of China is not merely a commemoration of the past, but also an invitation to reimagine the future.

My recent visit to the Memorial of the First National Congress of the CPC in Shanghai left me deeply moved by the historical context, the biographies, the struggles, and the unwavering vision of those early pioneers: a small boat, a clear compass, and the courage to chart a new course against all odds.

Where some post-socialist societies in Eastern Europe abandoned their emancipatory compass to align with the "one civilization" pattern, China's path demonstrates how dialectical adaptation can renew socialism without surrendering its core values.

Socialism with Chinese characteristics is not a retreat from principle, but a synthesis: it anchors modern development in ancient civilizational continuity, places human well-being at the center of governance, and integrates foreign policy with domestic priorities.

This external dimension is particularly significant. China is often misunderstood — either portrayed as a "future hegemon" or criticized for its "strategic restraint".

In reality, Beijing has no interest in hegemonic domination.

Its internationalism operates on two tracks: principled solidarity with progressive movements, and a deeper, long-term commitment to civilizational dialogue.

This second track has been cultivated over a century and finds its clearest expression in the concept of "mutual learning among civilizations".

The "clash of civilizations" thesis, popularized in the 1990s, presumed that cultural differences inevitably breed conflict, a narrative that conveniently legitimized intervention and civilizational exceptionalism. The CPC's framework offers a direct alternative.

It starts from a materialist and historical understanding: civilizations are not static entities locked in eternal rivalry, but dynamic processes shaped by exchange, adaptation, and collective struggle.

Mutual learning does not mean relativism or the erasure of identity. It is the recognition that in an era of polycrisis, no single tradition holds a monopoly on wisdom.

Differences are not a threat to a shared human future; they are its foundation.

This resonates deeply in the Balkans. My own region has lived through the consequences of imposed civilizational hierarchies and institutional engineering.

The tragic dissolution of Yugoslavia sparked countless Western academic prescriptions, yet imported models of managed multiculturalism have rarely delivered genuine coexistence.

In Bosnia and Herzegovina or North Macedonia, differences are often administratively frozen rather than dynamically engaged.

Ironically, while Western universities proliferate "intercultural studies" programs, they rarely point to China's practical approach to civilizational dialogue. To learn from others, one must first understand oneself. China's model begins with civilizational self-awareness: honoring one's own heritage without imposing it as a universal template.

It then extends outward: engaging with other traditions not to assimilate them, but to build mutual understanding and prevent the misunderstandings that fuel conflict.

This is not merely an academic ideal; it is an anti-imperialist stance rooted in peace, solidarity, and the strengthening of people-to-people bonds.

A superficial glance at today's world might suggest the US scholar Samuel P. Huntington's prophecy is unfolding. However, it is chaos by design, and yes — there are alternatives.

The West represents a demographic and historical minority; the Global South constitutes the overwhelming majority of humanity, offering countless examples of civilizational resilience and resistance to cultural homogenization.

China's depth is immense, but so is the intellectual and cultural wealth of Iran, India, Africa, and Latin America. Each carries living archives of alternative modernities.

Together, they form the backbone of a new cultural order based on mutual respect.

This vision has now been formalized in the Global Civilization Initiative proposed by China. For the Balkans, a region long treated as the periphery of competing empires, the GCI is not a distant diplomatic concept. It aligns intuitively with our historical memory of the Non-Aligned Movement and our age-old reality of multicultural coexistence.

It affirms that we, too, have civilizational contributions to offer, rather than reasons to feel inferior or subordinate.

What is needed now is civilizational confidence: the same clarity and courage that guided those pioneers on a small boat near Shanghai over a century ago. Mutual learning among civilizations is not a rhetorical exercise.

It is an operational framework for a world that refuses to be divided into clashing blocs.

As we navigate fragmentation and uncertainty, the CPC's 105-year journey reminds us that the future cannot be monopolized; it has to be co-authored.

The author is a professor of political science and international relations from Skopje, North Macedonia, and the director of Synergia Orbi: Institute for Global Analysis.

The views don't necessarily reflect those of China Daily.

If you have a specific expertise, or would like to share your thought about our stories, then send us your writings at opinion@chinadaily.com.cn, and comment@chinadaily.com.cn.