（1）On Laruelle’s Non-philosophical Answer to the Korsch’s Question

Huang Qihong Wu Min

The Korsch’s question is ostensibly to explore the relationship between Marxism and philosophy,but the deeper and broader focus is on the relationship between theory and practice.The domestic researches on the Korsch’s question focus on the positioning of historical materialism,and the essence of their debate can be attributed to the discussion of the relationship among Marxism and science and philosophy.The answer to this question can be divided into two lines of thoughts:one is represented by Althusser’s epistemological break,and the other is represented by the unified theory of Laruelle.Laruelle has made a unique answer to the Korsch’s question from the perspective of non-philosophy.He believes that Marxism contains both dimensions of philosophy and science,and there is no superiority between the philosophical dimension and scientific dimension of Marxism,so there is no question of philosophical priority or scientific priority.The equal relationship and peaceful coexistence between them just prove that Marx is both a philosopher and a scientist,so that Marx’s theory is constantly open to the One or reality,and new elements or links can be added continuously,this is the root of Marxism’s ability to keep pace with the times.Starting from this non-philosophical solution of Laruelle,we may find that discussion of Korsch’s question in China’s academic circles has just fallen into a binary hierarchy and theoretical closure..

（2）Importance of Manufacturing to Innovation：A New Interpretation of USA’s Reindustrialization

Jia Genliang Chu Shanshan

Currently,the new global structure of manufacturing is being reshaped,and the topic of“the importance of manufacturing” attracts attention from the western scholars again.Western scholars’ reunderstanding of the importance of manufacturing industry mainly focuses on the internal logic between manufacturing and innovation.This paper attempts to sort out and comment on the new trend of this research at the theoretical level.Through the analysis of typical cases,it explores the mechanism of interaction between R&D,production and market.On this basis,it reinterprets the micro-theoretical basis of American re-industrialization.Foundation.At the same time,it examines the evolution of Bonvillian’s five innovation modes and their relationship with the rise and fall of the manufacturing ecosystem in the United States,examines the delicate relationship between manufacturing and innovation from a historical perspective,and shows that manufacturing plays an important role in integrat-ing national innovation capacity and maintaining innovation sustainability.These new ideas and historical facts will help to provide a theoretical reference for the new industrial policy and the layout of Belt and Road initiative in the transformation and upgrading stage of China's manufacturing industry.It is noteworthy that while Bonvillian's judgment that Sino-US economic relationship will eventually evolve from “innovate in America,produce in China” to “produce in China,innovate in China”stretches the truth,it has been the ideological foundation of the scientific and technological cold war launched by United States against China.

（3）“Bie” of the Bie-modern

Wang Jianjiang

Bie-modern theory travels through the western modern and post-modern discourse,attracts the attention of scholars and settles down in the U.S.and Europe in the form of institution.On the surface Bie-modern theory is the internationalization of local discourse while the deep reason lies in its precise generalization of the specific social form and historical stage of development.It has conducted a brand-new discussion on many important theoretical issues,thus leading to the birth in the local reality of the ideas and theories quite different from the West modern and postmodern.Bie-modern’s“Bie” has a clear cut from “Post-theory”,“Post-truth” and “Complex Modernity”,which boasts the functions of complex sentences and reversing criticism.Bie-modern’s ideas and methods which start from reality constitute an incision for dissecting China’s problems,and thus form a platform for dialogue between China and the West.Bie-modern theory is not only ontology,but also methodology.It is a kind of philosophical innovation.It embodies the values of authenticism with its“difference through no difference”.There are many substantive innovations in Bie-modern’s theory,but the most important innovation is to reflect on and criticize the pseudo-modern theory from the reality of China and insist on the value pursuit of seeking truth.

（4）The Basic Legal Regulation of Tax Auditing in Song Dynasty

Xiao Jianxin

Although there were no special and systematic auditing laws,regulations and provisions in Song Dynasty,tax auditing laws were very abundant.There were a large number of auditing regulations and laws in basic codes,administrative laws and many special laws and decrees,involving many forms of traditional laws,such as laws(lv),orders(chi),decrees(ling),rules(ge),forms(shi),imperial edicts(zhaoling),declarations(shenming),even ministers’petition accepted by the emperor and so on.In terms of form and style,the auditing laws in Song Dynasty and other ancient dynasties were rough,crude and scattered.However,in terms of their regulated objects,contents and legal efficiency,the auditing laws could basically meet the needs of tax auditing.From the overall content,all kinds of relevant auditing laws and regulations,cooperating with each other,were more systematic;Judging from the function and orientation of laws and regulations,they superficially guaranteed the collection and growth of taxes,essentially they were the ways to evaluate the economic performance of officials,maintain the smooth operation of finance,and centralize economic power.For this reason,the auditing laws of Song Dynasty were the laws and regulations of national auditing or government auditing,and thus embodied the essential attributes of traditional auditing laws.

（5）Sino-US Interactions and the Evolution of China’s Intellectual Property System since the Introduction of Reform and Open Policy

Yi Jiming

The evolution of China’s intellectual property system has virtually not left the interaction between China and the United States since the introduction of Open and Reform policy.From the relevant agreements at the beginning of the establishment of diplomatic relations between China and the United States to the first Sino-US intellectual property negotiation in 1991,the Sino-US interaction during this period promoted the formation of the basic framework of China’s intellectual property system.The two intellectual property negotiations in 1994 and 1996,as well as the consultations and rulings under the WTO framework in 2007,have continuously advanced the progress of China’s intellectual property legislation and enforcement system.In the past 10 years,with China’s familiarity and application of WTO rules and the improvement of China's position in the global trading system,the concerns of this round of 301 investigation in 2017 have gradually emerged.From a macroscopic analysis,sino-US interactions have developed in a cycle from institutional construction,institutional improvement,enhancement of law enforcement to institutional re-examination.The pressure exerted by the United States on China in this round of 301 investigation is essentially the last link of that cycle.It may serve as a timely external impetus to force China to overcome the deep-water zone of reforms.

（6）Value Orientation of Government Performance Evaluation since Reforming and Opening up:Review,Comments and Development in the New Era

Peng Wenlong

Since the reform and opening up,the value orientation of the government performance evaluation of China has undergone a transition from developing production to market-oriented,and then to service-oriented.It has gradually evolved from economic rationality to political rationality.People-centered is the latest achievement of this evolution.Since the reform and opening up,the value orientation in different periods has effectively guided the government’s behavior,greatly improved the level of government economic performance,but also produced some problems.In the new historical position,the construction of socialism with Chinese characteristics in the new era requires the government to realize the fundamental change in the value orientation of performance evaluation and establish the people-centered value orientation.