Cross-cultural comparative analysis demonstrates that principles of Lei Feng's spirit can enhance global governance and humanitarian assistance, suggesting significant cultural adaptations.
The spirit of Lei Feng has maintained its status as an important component of moral education in Chinese society since the 1960s, with key values such as "wholehearted service to the people," "selfless dedication," and "persevering struggle against difficulties" not only retaining practical significance for contemporary Chinese society but also demonstrating unique moral appeal in the fields of international humanitarian assistance, global governance, and intercultural dialogue. This study is dedicated to the relevance of the spirit of Lei Feng in the era of globalization and the ways of its international dissemination, focusing on the transformation of this Chinese moral model into a system of shared values of global significance. The research gains particular relevance in the context of the growing resistance to Western hegemony in the peaceful development of the global community. A comprehensive methodology is employed, combining cross-cultural comparative analysis, theoretical genesis, and case studies. The scientific novelty lies in overcoming a unicultural perspective by establishing intercultural theoretical connections between the spirit of Lei Feng, primitive communism, Confucian thought, and Marxism, as well as in developing a dissemination strategy based on value resonance and localized adaptation. The results of the study demonstrate that principles of the spirit of Lei Feng, such as selflessness, mutual assistance, and frugality, possess universal value and, when transmitted through cultural dialogue rather than political narrative, can enrich global ethics with Chinese wisdom. At the same time, while maintaining their cultural identity, countries should enhance dialogue to exchange value orientations. Through mutual enrichment of spiritual heritage, it is possible to collectively supplement the intellectual resources for the development of a global ethical system.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wang et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: