476
G. Xia
environmental restrictions on future economic development. This has aggravated the
man-nature tension to an unprecedented point.
China’s almost unique national condition featuring “large population, resource
shortage and strong economy” in parallel has led to the tensest relation between
man and nature and consequently given rise to the unique proposition or conclusion
that we must adhere to the socialist path with Chinese characteristics. Socialism in
essence means collectivism and seeks the common interests of the greatest majority
of people. Exactly because of the extreme strain between man and nature in China,
the whole society should collectively own the land and natural resources to avoid the
situation where a handful of people possess and monopolize scarce natural resources
while the majority falls into a development dilemma. On that basis, a powerful
leadership is needed to lead and organize the whole people to collectively use the
land and natural resources in a fair, rational, sustainable and planned approach, on
the principle of meeting the general interests of the whole society rather than those
of a small group of people. In other words, we must adhere to the public ownership
of territorial resources and the CPC’s leadership, which is equivalent to adhering
to socialism with Chinese characteristics. That’s the only way to provide the whole
society with universal development opportunities, and ensure national stability and
sustained development. Therefore, if we chose socialism out of “social justice” at
the beginning, then our adherence to socialism with Chinese characteristics today is
also for “environmental (ecological) justice.”
(2) Ecological civilization and state nature
How do we maintain our nature as a socialist country by developing ecological
civilization then?
Usually ecological progress is regarded as a special undertaking that’s not directly
connected with a political topic like maintaining the state nature, but such a connection does exist whether we think of it or not. As a matter of fact, with the central environmental protection inspections and the implementation of other strong measures,
ecological progress, particularly environmental protection, is displaying ever more
obvious political properties.
The central environmental protection inspection has revealed a large number of
appalling cases of environmental pollution and ecological damage, which, on the
surface, reflect natural damages caused by man, but expose on a deeper level a few
people’s infringement on the public interests of others and the society as a whole. The
“few people” refer to special interest groups. Enterprises and places that discharge
excessive pollutants are transferring the cost of pollution prevention and control to
the society while making more profits themselves. The society would be able to
bear it if there are very fewer polluting enterprises, their discharge can be digested
by nature itself, and the environmental damages are relatively small. But when a
lot of enterprises are doing the same, social damages would surface and conflicts of
interests would break out. Why is it that the serious pollution in certain places has not
be fundamentally addressed for so long? Why are many places and enterprises still
pretending to take corrective measures under the vigorous central supervision? It is
G. Xia
environmental restrictions on future economic development. This has aggravated the
man-nature tension to an unprecedented point.
China’s almost unique national condition featuring “large population, resource
shortage and strong economy” in parallel has led to the tensest relation between
man and nature and consequently given rise to the unique proposition or conclusion
that we must adhere to the socialist path with Chinese characteristics. Socialism in
essence means collectivism and seeks the common interests of the greatest majority
of people. Exactly because of the extreme strain between man and nature in China,
the whole society should collectively own the land and natural resources to avoid the
situation where a handful of people possess and monopolize scarce natural resources
while the majority falls into a development dilemma. On that basis, a powerful
leadership is needed to lead and organize the whole people to collectively use the
land and natural resources in a fair, rational, sustainable and planned approach, on
the principle of meeting the general interests of the whole society rather than those
of a small group of people. In other words, we must adhere to the public ownership
of territorial resources and the CPC’s leadership, which is equivalent to adhering
to socialism with Chinese characteristics. That’s the only way to provide the whole
society with universal development opportunities, and ensure national stability and
sustained development. Therefore, if we chose socialism out of “social justice” at
the beginning, then our adherence to socialism with Chinese characteristics today is
also for “environmental (ecological) justice.”
(2) Ecological civilization and state nature
How do we maintain our nature as a socialist country by developing ecological
civilization then?
Usually ecological progress is regarded as a special undertaking that’s not directly
connected with a political topic like maintaining the state nature, but such a connection does exist whether we think of it or not. As a matter of fact, with the central environmental protection inspections and the implementation of other strong measures,
ecological progress, particularly environmental protection, is displaying ever more
obvious political properties.
The central environmental protection inspection has revealed a large number of
appalling cases of environmental pollution and ecological damage, which, on the
surface, reflect natural damages caused by man, but expose on a deeper level a few
people’s infringement on the public interests of others and the society as a whole. The
“few people” refer to special interest groups. Enterprises and places that discharge
excessive pollutants are transferring the cost of pollution prevention and control to
the society while making more profits themselves. The society would be able to
bear it if there are very fewer polluting enterprises, their discharge can be digested
by nature itself, and the environmental damages are relatively small. But when a
lot of enterprises are doing the same, social damages would surface and conflicts of
interests would break out. Why is it that the serious pollution in certain places has not
be fundamentally addressed for so long? Why are many places and enterprises still
pretending to take corrective measures under the vigorous central supervision? It is