【作者】 李后东；

【导师】 赵明义；

【作者基本信息】 山东大学 ， 科学社会主义与国际共产主义运动， 2014， 博士

【摘要】 异中求同、同中求异是通过现象认识本质,由特殊到一般,再由一般到特殊循环往复的认识活动的基本要求。本文对中国特色社会主义与经典科学社会主义的同异比较,没有局限于找出两者的同点和异点,而是坚持“三步曲”：第一步,从马克思、恩格斯、列宁的经典著作和中国共产党及其主要领导人的官方文献出发,对两大“主义”(特指本文的两个比较对象“中国特色社会主义”与“经典科学社会主义”,下同)相关理论形成、发展的历史进行纵向梳理,梳理的过程就是对它们进行纵向比较的过程。第二步,在纵向梳理和比较的基础上,进一步找出两大“主义”的“异中之同”和“同中之异”。第三步,结合两大“主义”形成、发展的历史和建设中国特色社会主义的具体实际,尝试分析它们两者在许多层面异中有同、同中有异的原因以及认清这种辩证同异关系的重要意义。依照上述“三步曲”,全文分别从中国特色社会主义与经典科学社会主义形成、发展的时代背景和历史条件,基本立场、观点和方法,对于“什么是社会主义”、“怎样建设社会主义”的认识四个层面进行了同异比较,指出两者在这些层面异中有同、同中有异：第一,形成、发展的时代背景和历史条件同异比较。现在来看,中国特色社会主义与经典科学社会主义形成、发展的时代相差有一百多年,它们之间的“代沟”是明显、巨大的。但“代沟”背后存在一些内在联系：无论是马克思、恩格斯的科学社会主义,还是列宁主义阶段的科学社会主义,还是中国特色社会主义,它们的形成、发展都离不开科学技术革命、经济全球化浪潮以及资本主义不断发展这样的时代背景和历史条件,两大理论体系都是生产力和社会化大生产发展到一定程度的产物,而不是主观臆造的。从这个意义上讲,两者异中有同。同时,我们也应看到,不同时期、发展阶段的科学技术革命、经济全球化浪潮和资本主义在发展程度、基本特征和影响范围等方面都具有较大差异,这就使得它们对于科学社会主义形成、发展的意义也存有差异。从这个意义上讲,两者又同中有异。第二,立场、观点和方法同异比较。辩证唯物主义和历史唯物主义的立场、观点、方法,是马克思主义哲学的基本立场、观点和方法,是我们必须永远坚持、不会改变的,但它可以而且应该根据不同的历史条件和任务进行新的概括和阐发。经典科学社会主义与中国特色社会主义就因各自面临的时代条件和时代课题不同,而在对它们的具体运用上存在差异：从立场看,两大“主义”都以无产阶级和绝大多数人的立场为根本立场。同时,两者关于这一根本立场的指代范围、表现形式和阶段性任务又有差异。从观点和方法看,两者的基本内容和精神实质是一致的。中国特色社会主义的观点和方法是对经典科学社会主义观点和方法实践上运用和创新、理论上的继承和发展。创新发展集中表现在以“实事求是”为核心的中国特色社会主义思想路线论是辩证唯物论与历史唯物论的中国化和大众化。因此,中国特色社会主义与经典科学社会主义在立场、观点和方法层面是同中有异。这主要是由马克思主义哲学是实践唯物主义的本质规定和批判性、科学性、革命性有机统一的根本特点决定的。认清这种辩证同异关系,有助于提高中国共产党人运用马克思主义立场、观点和方法进行理论创新、实践创新的自觉性和积极性。第三,关于“什么是社会主义”同异比较。(1)对于社会主义本质的认识异中有同、同中有异。从“社会主义本质论”的基本语境看,马克思、恩格斯对于未来社会主义社会本质层次的论述,是以资本主义已经灭亡,生产力已经高度发展为客观依据的。而在经济文化比较落后的中国生长起来,尚处于初级阶段的中国特色社会主义,并不是资本主义“瓜熟蒂落”的结果,也不具备高度发达的生产力前提和基础。虽然两大“主义”关于社会主义本质理论的客观依据差别很大,但它们都认为高度发达的生产力是实现社会主义本质的前提和基础。如果离开了它,任何关于社会主义本质的论述都是空谈。从这个意义上讲,两者异中有同。同时,我们也应看到：在经典科学社会主义那里,高度发达的生产力这个前提和基础是“完成时”,随着无产阶级革命的胜利,社会主义制度的确立,社会主义本质也自然会得到体现。而在中国特色社会主义那里,高度发达的生产力这个前提和基础则是“进行时”,社会主义本质的完整体现也需要一个漫长的过程。从这个意义上讲,两者又同中有异；从“社会主义本质论”的基本内容看,经典科学社会主义认为社会主义(共产主义)的最高本质体现是消灭阶级,实现每个人自由而全面的发展。中国特色社会主义则把消灭剥削、消除两极分化,最终达到共同富裕作为初级阶段社会主义的最高本质体现。但两大“主义”关于社会主义本质的论述,都把出发点和落脚点放在了“现实的人”身上,是手段和目标的统一：共同富裕是中国特色社会主义的最高本质目标,解放和发展生产力,消灭剥削、消除两极分化都是手段。但相对于经典科学社会主义的消灭阶级,实现每个人自由而全面的发展来讲,解放和发展生产力,消灭剥削、消除两极分化,最终达到共同富裕又都变成了手段①。从上述意义上讲,两者异中有同。同时,我们也应看到：两大“主义”关于实现社会主义本质的逻辑存在差异：经典科学社会主义的逻辑可以概括为：无产阶级革命——打碎旧的国家机器,消灭私有制——消除阶级之间、城乡之间、脑力劳动和体力劳动之间的对立和差别——实现各尽所能、各取所需,每个人自由而全面的发展,人与人、人与自然之间的矛盾彻底解决。而中国特色社会主义的逻辑则可能为：新民主主义革命——改造旧的国家机器,建立社会主义新政权——解放和发展生产力,消灭剥削和两极分化等各种对立和差别,逐步实现共同富裕——实现各尽所能、各取所需,每个人自由而全面的发展,人与人、人与自然之间矛盾的彻底解决。从上述意义上讲,两者又同中有异。(2)对于社会主义基本制度特征的认识异中有同、同中有异。这主要体现在：①关于社会主义社会高度发达的生产力特征的思想异中有同、同中有异。中国特色社会主义与经典科学社会主义都遵循了唯物史观关于物质资料生产是人类社会赖以存在的基础和前提,生产力是一切社会发展的最终决定力量的基本原理,把高度发达的生产力作为成熟社会主义的首要特征。但在马克思、恩格斯的经典科学社会主义那里,高度发达的生产力是物质前提和基础,特别是对于成熟社会主义、共产主义社会高级阶段,这个前提是自然而然的内在逻辑要求,相对来说是“完成时”。而在中国特色社会主义那里,高度发达的生产力是必然要求和最终结果,相对来说是“进行时”。从这个意义上讲,两者同中有异。同时,我们也应看到,高度发达的生产力对于中国特色社会主义和经典科学社会主义,虽然在发展程度上有“进行时”和“完成时”的差异,但这种差异只是相对意义上的差异,即它们都需要一个发展的过程,而且这个发展过程的目的都是要保证和满足每个人的一切合理需要,实现共同富裕。从这个意义上讲,两者又异中有同。②关于生产资料所有制的理论异中有同。从内在依据和条件看,经典科学社会主义的“生产资料归全社会直接占有”与中国特色社会主义的“以公有制为主体,多种所有制经济共同发展”是依据不同条件得出的不同结论。也就是说,生产资料所有制的选择,是以一定的历史条件和社会发展的实际情况为基础,由社会发展的主要矛盾决定的；从“公有制”的发展程度看,中国特色社会主义的“公有制”不能覆盖到整个社会,相当一部分公有制表现为局部的或集团的公有制,大量的公有制建立在小生产的基础上,而且绝大部分的公有制采取了国家所有制或政府所有制的形式,存在公有资产的法律所有权和经济所有权相分离的可能性①。因此,中国特色社会主义的“公有制”与马克思主义创始人所说的未来社会主义社会的“公有制”根本不在一个发展层面。但中国特色社会主义坚持的“公有制为主体”,是有利于工人阶级和劳动群众的经济制度,国家所有制和政府所有制是向未来社会所有制发展的“初级形态”,是“准公有制”。从上述意义上讲,两大“主义”关于生产资料所有制的理论虽然差别较大,但这种差别之中蕴涵着内在联系和同一性。③关于个人消费品分配的理论异中有同。从理论依据和前提条件看,马克思主义创始人的按劳分配理论,需要生产力的高度发达、生产资料归全社会共同占有、商品经济和商品交换的消亡等基本条件。而现阶段中国特色社会主义哪一条都不具备,不仅因生产力水平还比较落后而坚持公有制为主体、多种所有制经济共同发展的基本经济制度,还因商品经济不够发达而大力发展社会主义市场经济。可见,两种分配方式都有它们依据的前提条件,都是与相应的条件相适应的。如果离开了这些条件,空谈这些分配方式和分配原则,是没有任何意义的；从理论内容看,马克思主义创始人除了对未来社会主义社会的分配方式进行了设想之外,更重要的是提出了按贡献分配、体现形式上的平等和事实上的不平等、承认劳动力要素的个人所有权等基本原则②。在社会主义市场经济条件下,中国特色社会主义根本不可能完全实行马克思主义创始人所设想的按劳分配,但两者具有内在联系和同一性：劳动、资本、技术和管理等生产要素按贡献参与分配的原则与按劳分配的按贡献分配的原则具有内在的一致性③,按劳分配为主体、多种分配方式并存之形式上平等和事实上不平等的问题更加严重①,都认为劳动力所有权在按劳分配中有重要作用②。从上述意义上讲,两大“主义”关于个人消费品分配的理论虽然差别较大,但这种差别之中蕴涵着内在联系和同一性。④关于无产阶级和劳动人民掌握政权的理论异中有同、同中有异。建立马克思所说的无产阶级专政的社会条件与中国特色社会主义坚持人民民主专政的社会条件有很大的差别。这就决定了中国特色社会主义的“人民民主专政”和马克思的“无产阶级专政”不能简单划等号,两者具有很大差别。但二者在实质内涵上是一致的：马克思主义经典作家认为,无产阶级专政是指人口占绝大多数的工人阶级、劳动者的集体事业,是民主和专政的统一。“人民民主专政”紧密联系“无产阶级专政”的这种实质内涵,不仅把人民当家作主作为社会主义民主政治建设的核心内容和本质要求,还坚持共产党的领导、人民当家作主和依法治国的有机统一。从这个意义上讲,两者异中有同。同时,我们也应看到,“人民民主专政”与“无产阶级专政”相同实质内涵的具体表现形式存在差异,即“大多数人”的指代范围、政权组织形式存在差异。从这个意义上讲,两者又同中有异。⑤关于社会主义精神文明(建设)的理论异中有同、同中有异。从精神文明状况的现实基础和条件看,马克思、恩格斯所论述的未来社会主义社会的精神文明状况是和高度发达的生产力,生产资料公有制以及阶级对立、剥削现象的消失紧密联系在一起的。而中国特色社会主义的精神文明状况,受生产力和生产关系发展程度的限制和一些比较落后、传统思想观念的不利影响,在短时期内是无法达到那个极高境界的。但这种差异恰恰都体现了精神文明归根到底是社会经济关系的产物这一客观规律。从这个意义上讲,两者异中有同。从精神文明建设的理想目标和路径选择看,两大“主义”都以人的精神境界极大提高,最终实现人的解放和全面发展为最高理想目标。但对于中国特色社会主义来说,更重要的是“建设”,而且在具体方式和方法的选择上,它坚持把共产主义的理想信念与时代精神、民族精神相结合。从这个意义上讲,两者则同中有异。两大“主义”关于“什么是社会主义”的理论异中有同、同中有异,主要是因为它们是不同物质条件的产物,科学社会主义理论本身又具有与时俱进的理论品格。认清这种辩证同异关系,有助于我们更好地理解经典科学社会主义和中国特色社会主义的源流关系。第四,关于“怎样建设社会主义”同异比较。(1)关于奠定社会主义物质基础的思想异中有同、同中有异。按照经典科学社会主义的观点,发达资本主义国家的无产阶级在夺取政权之后,可以纵向继承资本主义旧社会现成的发达生产力,进而进行生产资料私有制改造,奠定社会主义新社会的物质基础。而中国特色社会主义已经没有纵向继承资本主义发达生产力的可能了,它要想尽快奠定向成熟社会主义转变的物质基础,必须在自身积累、发展生产力的过程中注重学习、借鉴当代发达资本主义发展生产力的先进经验。显然,这是差别很大的路径。但从基本内涵看,这两条路径都同资本主义脱不了关系,都要认识和处理同资本主义的关系。从这个意义上讲,两者异中有同。同时,我们也应看到,两条路径揭示了社会主义同资本主义的两种不同关系：一是成熟社会主义与资本主义的历史继承关系；二是初级阶段社会主义与资本主义借鉴、合作、竞争、共存的关系。从这个意义上讲,两者又同中有异。(2)关于社会主义社会经济体制的理论异中有同、同中有异。经典科学社会主义认为,未来新社会应有计划地组织全部社会生产、消除商品经济,而中国特色社会主义主张建立和完善社会主义市场经济体制。显然,两大“主义”对于经济体制的选择,差异很大。但这种差异之中还有相同之处,即都是针对“资本主义市场经济”提出的。从这个意义上讲,两者异中有同。同时,我们也应看到,虽然马克思主义创始人设想未来新社会要有计划地组织全部社会生产与中国特色社会主义坚持和完善社会主义市场经济体制的思想都是针对“资本主义市场经济”提出的,但此“资本主义市场经济”与彼“资本主义市场经济”又不是完全相同的,它们分属于不同的发展阶段,具有不同的特征。从这个意义上讲,两者又同中有异。(3)关于社会主义社会改革、开放的思想同中有异。①社会主义改革论同中有异。从改革的理论依据看,经典科学社会主义关于社会主义改革的思想是中国特色社会主义改革论的理论依据,但从更深层次看,它们具有相同的更深刻的理论依据。相对资本主义社会来说,社会主义社会的生产关系和上层建筑更能适应先进生产力和经济基础的发展要求。但它的生产关系和上层建筑同其他新生事物一样,也需要一个从不完善到完善的成熟过程,因而它在发展过程中不可避免地存在着某些与生产力发展不相适应的方面和环节。而且,在社会主义初级阶段,这种矛盾具有不同的状态和表现形式,中国特色社会主义改革论更直接地以它们为现实依据；从改革的性质看,恩格斯所说的社会主义社会的“变化和改革”与中国特色社会主义的改革都是社会主义制度的自我完善和发展。但后者具有深刻、广泛的革命性意义,是中国的第二次革命。②社会主义对外开放论同中有异。从对外开放的现实依据看,两大“主义”的对外开放思想,都是以资本主义大工业和商品经济发展引发的世界性联系和普遍交往为事实依据。但这种相同的事实本身,又存在着发展范围、程度和形式等方面的差异；从对外开放的内容看,马克思、恩格斯设想的未来社会主义是比资本主义的生产社会化和开放程度更高,已在世界范围内取得胜利的社会主义。对于这样的社会主义来说,“开放”已经成为它本身自然、内在的属性。而且,随着商品经济、阶级、民族、国家的逐步消灭,“开放”就是自由人联合体内部的毫无障碍的人与人、人与自然、人与联合体之间的和谐沟通,没有了“对外”之说,更不存在和资本主义的相处问题。而从世界范围看,中国特色社会主义等现实社会主义,都还只是“数国”的胜利,社会主义和资本主义两制共存于世。在这样的条件下,如何正确处理与资本主义的关系,利用资本主义建设社会主义就成为对外开放的重大课题。(4)关于坚持共产党领导的思想同中有异、异中有同。经典科学社会主义和中国特色社会主义都认为社会主义、共产主义事业是和共产党紧密联系在一起的,应坚持它的领导地位。但马克思主义创始人关于坚持无产阶级政党领导核心的理论,主要针对无产阶级政党夺取政权时的任务和特点,核心是阐述了共产党的性质、指导思想、宗旨、组织结构等内在本质问题①。作为新时期的执政党,中国共产党的核心任务,则是通过有效执政,逐步实现社会主义现代化和中华民族的伟大复兴,使中国特色社会主义事业不断从胜利走向胜利。从这个意义上讲,两者同中有异。同时,我们也应看到,虽然两者的历史地位和首要任务存在差异,但它们的最终任务都是为实现共产主义,无产阶级和全体劳动人民的解放创造必要的条件。从这个意义上讲,两者又异中有同。两大“主义”对于“怎样建设社会主义”的理论异中有同、同中有异,主要是因为马克思主义创始人没有亲自参加建设社会主义的实践,列宁对于“怎样建设社会主义”的探索也是初步的。相比而言,中国特色社会主义对于“怎样建设社会主义”的探索则具有较强的实践性、时代性、民族性和人民性。认清这种辩证同异关系,有助于进一步深化对建设中国特色社会主义的认识。最后,在对中国特色社会主义与经典科学社会主义进行同异比较的基础上,尝试对“过时论”和“背离论”进行了有理有据地辨析,认为：经典科学社会主义的有些方面已经过时；有些方面将来有可能过时；其精髓永远不会过时。中国特色社会主义与经典科学社会主义在有些方面的“差别”还谈不上背离；有些方面出现了一定程度的背离,如果不能及时有效地解决,很有可能会完全背离。更多还原

【Abstract】 Seeking similarities in differences, distinguishing differences in similarities, is the basic requirements of awareness activities about understanding the nature by phenomenon, from the particular to the general, and then from the general to the specific infinitively. Comparison between socialism with Chinese characteristics and classical scientific socialism in this thesis, is not confined to identify their different points and same points, but rather adhering to the "three steps":The first step, according to the Marxist classical writers’classic dissertation and the Chinese Communist Party’s authority literature, combing the forming and developing history of the classical scientific socialism and socialism with Chinese characteristics longitudinally, combing process is the longitudinal comparison process. The second step, base on the longitudinal combing and comparison, identify the "similarities in differences" and "differences in similarities" of socialism with Chinese characteristics and classical scientific socialism. The third step, combining the two "isms" forming, developing history and the specific practical of advancing socialism with Chinese characteristics, try to analyze the reasons of their two different, but have the same, the same in different on several aspects and recognizing the significance of this dialectical same, different relationship.According to above-mentioned "three steps", this thesis compare socialism with Chinese characteristics and classical scientific socialism from their background and historical conditions of formation and development, fundamental standpoint, viewpoints and methods, the understanding of "What is socialism","how to build socialism", pointing out that the two "ism" are organic unity of "similarities in differences","differences in similarities":I.Compare the background and historical conditions of formation and development. Now look, the formation time of classical scientific socialism is more than one hundred years earlier than socialism with Chinese characteristics’, the "generation gap" between them is obvious and huge. But behind the "generation gap" there is some intrinsic link: Wether Marx and Engels’scientific socialism, or scientific socialism in Leninism stage, or socialism with Chinese characteristics, their formation and development can not be separated from the background and historical conditions of the revolution in science and technology, economic globalization, development of capitalism. The two theories are the result of development to a certain extent of productive forces and mass production of social system, rather than subjective creation. From the above sense, the two are "similarities in differences". Simultaneously, we should also see:The revolution in science and technology, economic globalization, development of capitalism in different periods are different in many respects such as level of development, basic characteristics and sphere of influence. So their significance to the formation and development of socialism with Chinese characteristics and classical scientific socialism is different. From the above sense, the two are " differences in similarities ".II. Compare the basic standpoint, viewpoints and methods. The standpoint, viewpoints and methods of dialectical materialism and historical materialism is Marxism philosophy’s basic standpoint, viewpoints and methods, which we should always insist, will not change. But they can and should be generalized and elucidated newly based on different historical conditions and tasks. Because of facing different conditions and contemporary issues, the specific application of these standpoint, viewpoints, methods by Classic scientific socialism and socialism with Chinese characteristics is different. Looking from the standpoint, the standpoint of the working class and the vast majority of people is the basic standpoint of both socialism with Chinese characteristics and classical scientific socialism. Meanwhile, the basic standpoint is different in the referring range, manifestations and short-term tasks. Looking from viewpoints and methods, basic content and spiritual essence of the two is same. The viewpoints and methods of socialism with Chinese characteristics are the use and innovation in practice, the inheritance and development in theory of the viewpoints and methods of classical scientific socialism. The innovation and development is the concentrated expression that the ideological line of socialism with Chinese characteristics which considers "seeking truth from facts" as the core, is the result of adapting the viewpoints and methods of classical scientific socialism to Chinese conditions, the popularization of the viewpoints and methods of classical scientific socialism. So the standpoint, viewpoints, methods of classical scientific socialism and socialism with Chinese characteristics are the organic unity of "differences in similarities". This mainly because that Marxism Philosophy is the essence requirements of practical materialism and has the fundamental features of critical, scientific, and revolutionary. Understanding the dialectic relationship between similarities and differences can help Chinese Communists to enhance the consciousness and enthusiasm of using Marxist standpoint, viewpoints and methods to carry out theoretical and practice innovation.III.Compare the theory about "what is socialism".1. The theory of the nature of socialism is organic unity of "similarities in differences","differences in similarities". Looking from the basic context of argument, Marx’s and Engels’dissertation on the nature of the future socialist society is based on the fact that capitalism has been destroyed, has been developed productive forces highly, they did not specify high-developed productive forces as the essential characteristic of socialism clearly. Socialism with Chinese characteristics which has been growing up in China that was economically and culturally backward, is in the primary stage of socialism, is not the "ripened fruit" of capitalism, do not have the highly developed level of productivity. It can be said, the classic scientific socialism and socialism with Chinese characteristics about the nature of socialism, are based on highly developed productive forces, however, this basis of the former is "complete", the latter is the "in progress". Looking from the basic content of the nature of socialism, classic scientific socialism thinks that the highest essential embodiment of socialism (communism) is to eliminate the class, to achieve everyone’s free and comprehensive development. Socialism with Chinese characteristics thinks that the highest essential embodiment of the primary stage of socialism is elimination of exploitation and polarization, and ultimately achieving common prosperity. It can be said that both of them reveal the essence of socialism from the highest target. But the goals and means are relative, eliminate exploitation and polarization, and achieving common prosperity ultimately of socialism with Chinese characteristics is the highest-level goals, others are means. Relative to eliminating classes, achieving everyone’s free and comprehensive development of classical scientific socialism, elimination of exploitation and polarization, achieving common prosperity ultimately has become a means. From the above sense, the two are "similarities in differences". Simultaneously, we should also see:Though two "-ism" regard the "people" as the starting and ending points, achieve the full development of human freedom, high degree of harmony between human beings each other, human beings and nature. But the logic of achieving highest goal is different. The logic of classical scientific socialism can be summarized as:proletarian revolution-smashing the old state machinery, the eradication of private ownership-eliminating the opposition and differences between different classes, urban and rural areas, mental and physical labor-achieving whatever, what they need, everyone’s free and comprehensive development, solving the contradiction between man and man,man and nature completely. The logic of socialism with Chinese characteristics is likely to:new democratic revolution-transformation of the old state machinery, the establishment of a new socialist regime-emancipating and developing productive forces, eliminating exploitation and polarization, and gradually achieving common prosperity-achieving whatever, what they need, everyone’s free and comprehensive development, solving the contradiction between man and man, man and nature completely. From the above sense, they are "differences in similarities".2. The theory of basic system features of socialist society is organic unity of "similarities in differences","differences in similarities". They are mainly reflected in:Firstly, thought about a socialist society characterized by highly developed productive forces is "similarities in differences","differences in similarities". Socialism with Chinese characteristics and classical scientific socialism both follow the fundamental that material production is the basis and precondition for the existence of human society, productivity is the ultimate decision power of all social development, regard he highly developed productive forces as the primary character of mature socialism. To Marx and Engels’ classic scientific socialism, highly developed productive forces is the material premise and foundation, especially for mature socialism, advanced stage of communism, this premise is naturally inherent logic requires, is relatively "Completion". To socialism with Chinese characteristics, highly developed productive forces is an inevitable requirement and end result, is relatively "progress". From the above sense, they are "differences in similarities". Simultaneously, we should also see:Differences between "completion" and "progress" is differences only in the relative sense, both of them require a development process, and the purpose of this development process is to assure and satisfy all reasonable needs of each person, to achieve common prosperity. From the above sense, they are "similarities in differences". Secondly, production ownership theory is "similarities in differences". Looking from the forming intrinsic basis and conditions,"Production are owned by society as a whole direct possession" of classic scientific socialism and "Public ownership is dominant and diverse forms of ownership develop together" of socialism with Chinese characteristics are conclusions based on different conditions and foundation. But they are not out of thin air, both base on certain historical conditions and the actual situation of social development, decided by the principal contradiction of social development. Looking from the developing degree of public ownership of production, the "public ownership" of socialism with Chinese characteristics can not cover the entire community, a considerable part manifested as local public ownership or group public ownership, a large number of public ownership built on small-scale production, and the vast majority of public ownership has taken the form of state ownership or government ownership, there is the possibility of legal ownership separating from economic ownership of public assets. So the "public ownership" of socialism with Chinese characteristics and the "public ownership" of future socialist society said by founders of Marxism are simply not a development dimension. Socialism with Chinese characteristics, adhering to the "public ownership as the mainstay", is the economic system beneficial to the working class and the laboring masses, state ownership and government ownership is the "primary forms" of future development of social ownership,"quasi public ownership". Thirdly, the theory of personal distribution of consumer goods is "similarities in differences". Looking from the basis and prerequisites of the distribution theory, the distribution theory of Marxism founders needs basic conditions of highly developed productive forces, production owned by society as a whole common share, the demise of commodity economy and commodity exchange. Socialism with Chinese characteristics at this stage do not have one, not only uphold the basic economic system that the public ownership is dominant and diverse forms of ownership develop together, which because the level of productivity is still backward relatively, also develop the socialist market economy because the less developed of commodity economy. Obviously, the two distribution methods have their precondition, adapted to their corresponding conditions. There is no sense, if you leave these conditions to talk distribution and allocation of these principles. Looking from the main content of the theory of distribution according to work, the Marxism founders in addition to giving some ideas of a specific distribution way of the future socialist society, proposing the principles of distribution according to contribution, reflecting the formal equality and in fact inequality, recognizing the individual ownership of labor is more important. Under the conditions of the socialist market economy, socialism with Chinese characteristics is impossible to implement the principle of distribution fully envisaged by the Marxism founders. But the two are intrinsically linked and homogeneity:the principles of production factors of labor, capital, technology and management participating in the distribution according to contribution and distribution according to contribution of distribution according to work are consistent internally, the problem of the formal equality and in fact inequality of "Distribution according to work is dominant and a variety of modes of distribution coexist" is more serious, both of them agree that ownership of labor force has an important role in distribution according to labor. Fourthly, the theory of dictatorship of the proletariat is organic unity of "similarities in differences","differences in similarities". The social conditions of the dictatorship of the proletariat said by Marx and people’s democratic dictatorship of socialism with Chinese characteristics are different. So the dictatorship of the proletariat is different from people’s democratic dictatorship. But their substance is same:Marxist classical writers think that dictatorship of the proletariat is the collective career of the vast majority of the working class, laborers, the unity of democracy and dictatorship,"people’s democratic dictatorship" links the substance of "dictatorship of the proletariat" closely, not only regards the position of the people as masters of the country as the core content and essential requirements of developing socialist democracy, but also ensures the unity of the leadership of the Party, the position of the people as masters of the country and law-based governance. From the above sense, they are "similarities in differences". Meanwhile,"people’s democratic dictatorship" is different from "dictatorship of the proletariat" in the range of "most people", the specific form of political organization. From the above sense, they are also "differences in similarities". Fifthly, the theory of socialist spiritual civilization (construction) is organic unity of "similarities in differences","differences in similarities". Looking from the realistic foundation and conditions of spiritual status, the spiritual civilization status of the future socialist society’s newcomers discussed by Marx and Engels links to highly developed productive forces, public ownership of production and the disappearance of class antagonisms, exploitation phenomenon closely. But the spiritual civilization status of socialism with Chinese characteristics constrained by the developing degree of productive forces and relations of production, effected by some more backward, traditional ideas adversely, can not achieve very high level in a short period. But this difference reflects the objective laws that the spiritual civilization is the result of social and economic relations in the final analysis. Looking from the ideal goal and path selection of spiritual civilization construction, two "isms" both regard greatly improved man’s spiritual realm, comprehensive development of human liberation as the highest ideals and goals. But for socialism with Chinese characteristics,"building" is more important, and adheres to the specific choice of ways and means of the combination of communist ideal, spirit of the times and the national spirit. From the above sense, the theory about "what is socialism" of socialism with Chinese characteristics and classical scientific socialism is organic unity of "similarities in differences","differences in similarities". This mainly because that they are the result of different levels of productivity and production, scientific socialism has the theory character of advancing with the times. Understanding the dialectic relationship between similarities and differences helps us to understand the origin and development relations of classical scientific socialism and socialism with Chinese characteristics better.IV.Compare the theory about "how to build socialism".1. The theory about laying material foundation of socialism is organic unity of "similarities in differences","differences in similarities". In the view of classical scientific socialism, after the proletariat of developed capitalist countries the seizing power, can inherit developed productive forces from the old capitalist society longitudinally, transform private ownership of production and lay the material foundation of the new socialist society further. But socialism with Chinese characteristics has no such possibility of inheriting developed productive forces from the old capitalist society longitudinally. It wants to lay the material foundation for transformation to mature socialism soon, must focus to learn the advanced experience of developing productive forces from contemporary capitalist countries in the process of accumulating and developing productive forces by itself. Obviously, the two are very different paths. But looking from the basic connotation, these two paths are not off the relationship with capitalism, must understand and handle relations with the capitalist. From the above sense, they are "similarities in differences". Meanwhile, two paths reveal two distinct relationships between socialism and capitalism:the historical inheritance of mature socialism and capitalism; relationships of reference, cooperation, competition, coexistence between primary stage of socialism and capitalism. From the above sense, they are also "differences in similarities".2. The theory about socialist economic system is organic unity of "similarities in differences","differences in similarities". In the view of classical scientific socialism, the future new society should plan to organize all the social production, eliminate the commodity economy. Socialism with Chinese characteristics advocates establishing and improving the socialist market economic system. Obviously, the selections of the economic systems are very different. But the same is that their selections all proposed to "the capitalist market economy". From the above sense, they are "similarities in differences". Simultaneously, we should also see: The two "capitalist market economies" belong to different stages of development, have different characteristics. From the above sense, they are also "differences in similarities".3. The theory about socialist reform, opening up is "differences in similarities". Firstly, classic scientific socialism on the socialist idea of reform is the theoretical basis of the reform theory of socialism with Chinese characteristics, but from deeper look, they have the same, more profound theoretical basis. Compared with capitalist society, the production relations and superstructure of socialist society can adapt the developing requirements of advanced productive forces and economic basis. But like other new things, its production relations and superstructure also needs a gradual maturation process, so it is inevitable that there are certain aspects and links incompatible with the development of productive forces in the developing process. Moreover, in the primary stage of socialism, this contradiction has different status and forms, the reform theory of socialism with Chinese characteristics bases on them more directly. Looking from the nature of reformation, socialist society’s "change and reform" which is said by Engels and the reform of socialism with Chinese characteristics is self-improvement and development of the socialist system. But the latter has a profound and broad revolutionary significance, is China’s second revolution. Secondly, the theory of socialist opening-up is "differences in similarities". Looking from realistic basis for opening, the opening thought of two "-isms" is based on the factual basis of widespread worldwide contacts and exchanges triggered by large industrial and capitalist commodity economy. But this same fact itself has some differences in development areas, extents and forms. The time when Marx and Engels discussed the theory of opening up of socialist society, is only in the developing stage of free competition capitalism, the history of mankind has just completed the transition to world history. When the theory of opening up of socialism with Chinese characteristics formatted, capitalism has grown to national, international monopoly stage, the degree of intertillages and interdependent between countries around the world has reached a new height. Looking from the contents of opening up, the socialism envisaged by Marx and Engels has a higher degree of capitalist socialization of production and openness than capitalism and has obtained the worldwide triumph. To such socialism,"open" has become its own nature, intrinsic property. Moreover, with the gradual elimination of commodity economy, class, ethnicity, national,"open" is the harmony communication between human beings each other, human beings and nature, human beings and the Commonwealth without internal barriers in the community of free individual, without the said of "external", the issues of along with capitalism. The Soviet Union in the period of Leninist and socialism with Chinese characteristics are founded based on the basis of backward economy and culture, underdeveloped capitalism, socialism are just "one country" or "several States" victories, socialism and capitalism, two systems co-exist in the world. Under these conditions, how to handle the relationship with capitalism correctly, utilize capitalism to build socialism became a major socialism opening topic of the two countries in succession.4. The theory about upholding the core leadership of proletarian political parties is organic unity of "similarities in differences","differences in similarities". Two "-isms" all think that socialism, communism is linked to the Communist Party closely, should adhere to its leadership position. But the theory of upholding the core leadership of proletarian political parties expounded by Marxist classical writers, mainly aims the tasks and characteristics of the parties of the proletariat when they lead to seize power. Its core content is describing the inherent nature of the Communist Party’s nature, guiding ideology, objectives, organizational structure. As the ruling party in the new era, the core task of the Communist Party of China is to achieve socialist modernization and the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation through effective governance gradually, to help the building of socialism with Chinese characteristics to obtain one victory after another. From the above sense, they are "differences in similarities". Meanwhile, their ultimate mission is to create the necessary conditions for achieving communism, the liberation of the proletariat and all working people. From the above sense they are also "similarities in differences". This mainly because that the founders of Marxism did not personally participate in the practice of building socialism, Leninism about "how to build socialism" is a preliminary exploration. In contrast, the exploration of "how to build socialism" of socialism with Chinese characteristics has the strong characteristics of practicality, times, nationality and people. Understanding the dialectic relationship between similarities and differences helps us to deepen the building of socialism with Chinese characteristics in theory and practice further.Finally, on the basis of comparison, trying to discriminate the "outdated theory "and "deviation theory" reasonably and make the conclusions realistically.更多还原