I. Question Raised

In the hundred-year journey in which the Communist Party of China has led the Chinese people to overcome difficulties and forge ahead, the aspiration, pursuit, and realization of the right to subsistence has always been to the fore. Proceeding from Chinese national conditions, Xi Jinping, General Secretary of the Communist Party of China (CPC) Central Committee has stated that “the right to subsistence and development are the primary basic human rights.”[1] It can be said that the right to subsistence has always been the key to China’s human rights cause, which continues to highlight China’s historical experience and major achievements.[2] To build a moderately prosperous society in all respects, subsistence is the basis of all human rights, and the protection of the right to subsistence is the primary goal.[3] All these have laid a solid foundation and pointed out the direction for the development of China’s human rights cause.[4] However, what is not commensurate with the rich experience and great attention is that the summary and construction of the discourse on the right to subsistence still needs to be improved.[5] At present, China’s official expression of the right to subsistence focuses more on panoramic examples rather than systematic interpretation. The consensus in the academic community is more inclined toward the overall and macro level, and specific discussions are still insufficient and controversial.[6] The right to subsistence is crucial in the human rights spectrum of China. If there is a lack of necessary review, summary, and interpretation, it will be difficult to provide stronger support and guidance for current and future practice and affect the publicity and introduction of achievements that have been made to uphold the right to subsistence in the cause of realizing comprehensive well-off society and poverty alleviation.

From a historical perspective, China’s extraordinary efforts, historical experience, and remarkable achievements in guaranteeing the right to subsistence should be passed on. From a realistic point of view, China is perfecting its human rights system, promoting the cause of human rights, publicizing its human rights achievements, and responding to unwarranted attacks. But it still too needs a brief, clear, and feasible expression of the right to subsistence. Therefore, this paper has no intention of abstractly or metaphysically exploring the “objective”, “transcendental” and “universal” right to subsistence. Instead, it seeks to be deeply rooted in the reality of China, both historically and socially. By reviewing existing official practices and expressions represented by past human rights white papers, it captures and extracts the embedded logic of the practice concerning the right to subsistence, and uses this as a context for discourse interpretation, in order to have a clearer understanding and recognition of China’s view of the right to subsistence.

II. Practical Logic of China’s Right to Subsistence

As for the view that “China originated the right to subsistence”,[7] some people argue that the right to subsistence has a longer history in the West and that China is only the first to consider it as the primary human right.[8] The subtext is that there is no fundamental difference in the right to subsistence between China and the West. They are only different in positioning. It is true that people’s demands for subsistence and the expression of rights have something in common, but human rights are formed historically in human society, and different time and space factors will affect people’s specific understanding of subsistence and the right to subsistence, forming a specific “time and space matrip.”[9] This requires a combination of universality and particularity of human rights. China’s concept of the right to subsistence is not a copy of foreign experience. The practical logic of China’s right to subsistence needs to be thoroughly grasped and refined in history and reality.
 

A. Historical origin of the practical logic

At present, the concepts of the right to subsistence with international influence and practical support mainly come from the West, Africa, and China. Despite their similarities, there are still some differences in the origin and focus of the concepts of the three regions.

1. The way to guarantee the right to subsistence in the West

When Western capitalist countries entered the stage of large-scale industry and monopoly, social contradictions became increasingly acute, and there were numerous drawbacks in production and distribution. The majority of working people rebelled because they could not guarantee basic survival. In addition, the pressure brought about by economic crises and wars forced Western capitalist countries to consider easing conflicts to maintain domestic rule. The individual subsistence crisis arising from the “collapse of capitalism’s social and economic autonomy” in turn led to “structural changes in capitalism”, which was the fundamental reason for the formation of the right to existence.[10] This right to subsistence is a supplement to traditional freedom. Its content and coverage are also supplemented in social development.[11]

At the legal level, based on Enlightenment thought and natural law, the right to subsistence was first explicitly recognized as a constitutional right in the Weimar Constitution in 1919, and then developed and spread in Western countries and regions that accepted the Western legal tradition.[12] This concept of the right to subsistence focuses on major social issues, mostly with the Constitution as the core. It either directly stipulates the right to subsistence in the law, or directly refers to the right to subsistence in the legal content without explicitly stating so.[13] Different from the traditional rights, the right to subsistence requires the active actions of the state to provide economic and social security for human subsistence, so it has a high degree of compatibility with the economic, social, and cultural rights as the second generation of human rights. Some scholars also consider the right to subsistence from the perspective of “second-generation human rights” or social rights in constitutional rights (citizenship), and even directly equate the right to subsistence with the two.[14] This has also sparked doubts in the Western theoretical community about the right to subsistence. They believe that “the right to subsistence replaces human rights with enough food, clothing, and warmth, without the attribute of rights”.[15]

2. The way to guarantee the right to subsistence in Africa

African countries experienced similar tragic experiences and independence struggles to choose of China. During the decline of Western colonial power and the wave of international decolonization after World War II, the Organization of African Unity, with the support of various parties, adopted the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (hereinafter referred to as the African Charter) on July 28, 1981. The African Charter entered into force on October 21, 1981, with the broad endorsement of African states.[16]

The “right to existence” in Article 20 of the African Charter has been translated as “the right to subsistence (sheng cun quan)) “by some Chinese scholars, but the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR) did not make a clear definition of the content of rights and the peoples as the subjects of rights but prefers to analyze them on a case-by-case basis.[17] The relevant resolutions either link the right to existence with national self-determination and independence or only refer to the right to existence without any discussion.[18] The treatment of communications based on the right to existence is equally vague, either calling for an end to oppression and the provision of the necessary resources,[19] or for recognition of the legitimacy and independence of political organizations representing a people and for the pursuit of national independence,[20] or for other states to respect the independence of a country in the event of external interference.[21] Such a right to existence tends to safeguard the independence and self-determination rights of African ethnic groups from a collective perspective.[22] In the context of international human rights law and international criminal law, some scholars have argued that this right to existence is a collective human right, which should at least include the prohibition of genocide.[23]

3. The way to guarantee the right to subsistence in China

In the middle and late 19th century, due to natural and man-made disasters and bullying by foreign powers, China was in dire straits for a long time. At that time, human rights had just been introduced to China. Therefore, the understanding of human rights was limited by feudal thoughts, and relevant laws and concepts were still preliminary and scattered.[24] It was difficult to guarantee all human rights including the right to subsistence, let alone systematizing the theory of the right to subsistence. Before 1949, China was faced with a severe and urgent reality. It needed to consider how to resist aggression, achieve independence, and eliminate exploitation, so as to truly meet the subsistence needs of its people. At that time, there was neither the international environment when Africa proposed the right to existence nor the condition of capitalist social reform.[25] After 1949, China needed to consider how to rebuild itself, improve productivity and economic and social development, and solve the contradiction between the growing material and cultural needs of the people and backward social production. All these have made the right to subsistence historically a human rights issue that the Chinese people must first resolve.[26]

The bitter experience of the old China, which suffered from internal troubles and foreign aggression and “lost countless lives due to war, hunger and cold,” showed that only by realizing national independence can we truly ensure the right to subsistence.[27] Since 1949, the new China’s need for independence and its sense of danger arising from the international situation have never subsided. The structural competition between China and the United States since the 1990s has also made it objectively necessary for China to safeguard the rights and interests of the country and its people with the right to subsistence.[28] Western countries, led by the United States, are unwilling to understand and accept China’s cultural background and human rights claims. They often use human rights as an excuse to pressure China and attempt to “educate” China to comply, and unfounded accusations of Chinese human rights continue to increase.[29] In this context, China needs to convey its unique history, national conditions, and the resulting rights demands to the world, and regard the most proud and glorious poverty alleviation and livelihood-improving practices as representative achievements of China’s human rights cause. This is not only China’s legitimate and reasonable self-justification, but also China’s solution to global human rights governance.[30]

B. Material analysis of the practical logic

The concept of the right to subsistence in China formed and developed in a unique historical background and social reality will in turn affect practice, and the fact that China’s right to subsistence practice can maintain consistent stability also indicates that we can explore a relatively clear practical logic from it. Grasping and refining the practical logic of China’s subsistence to life from practice is crucial for a clearer understanding of the right to subsistence and elucidating its discourse. This section starts from the first white paper on human rights, China’s Human Rights Situation, released in 1991, and analyzes a series of comprehensive human rights white papers over the past thirty years, laying the foundation for further grasping and refining the practical logic of the right to subsistence embedded in them in the following parts of the paper.

1. Changes in the style of the right to subsistence in the white papers on human rights

“Style” refers to the framework structure, writing format, and organizational form. Human rights white papers over the years have placed the right to subsistence above all other human rights. Their styles can be roughly divided into two categories:

The first approach is to discuss the right to subsistence separately in the main text with separate headings and subheadings. This can be further divided into two forms:

(1) The title directly refers to the right to subsistence, as in the white paper on Human Rights in China (1991) and the white paper titled The Practice of the CPC in Respecting and Protecting Human Rights (2021);

(2) The title does not mention the right to subsistence, but the text essentially discusses the right to subsistence, such as the white paper titled Moderate Prosperity in All Respects: Another Milestone Achieved in China’s Human Rights (2021).

The second is the common type of human rights white papers from 1991 to 2021, which discuss the right to development and the right to subsistence side by side, equally and indiscriminately. This can be further divided into three forms:

(1) The title of the relevant section mentions both the right to subsistence and the right to development, such as the eight white papers on human rights issued between 1995 and 2010, and the white paper titled Progress in Human Rights over the 40 Years of Reform and Opening-Up in China (2018);

(2) The relevant section does not mention the right to subsistence and the right to development in the title, but in the general paragraph at the beginning of this section, and the specific discussion is generally consistent with previous white papers on human rights, such as the white paper Progress in China’s Human Rights in 2012 (2013) and the white paper Seeking Happiness for People: 70 Years of Progress on Human Rights in China (2019);

(3) Under the title of Right to Development, there is no mention of the right to subsistence, but the specific discussion is generally consistent with previous human rights white papers, such as the white papers Progress in China’s Human Rights in 2013 (2014) and Progress in China’s Human Rights in 2014 (2015).

The style analysis is helpful in understanding the right to subsistence in general. Since 1991, the white papers on human rights have roughly anchored the position of the right to subsistence in the human rights spectrum, delimited the scope of the right to subsistence, and are consistent and stable in relevant discussion. However, it should also be noted that although the general idea is roughly constant, there is still some ambiguity in the specific treatment of the right to subsistence in the white papers over the years, especially in the content of the right to subsistence.

2. Specific expressions of the right to subsistence in the white papers on human rights

For further analysis, this section will delve into the specific discussions on the right to subsistence in human rights white papers over the years, and explore the characteristics and laws within them. The author summarizes the white papers and makes the following table:

Table 1 Summary of the right to subsistence in human rights white papers from 1991 to 2021[31]

 
Meanwhile, the human rights white papers over the years have selected more specific indicators to illustrate the above issues. Take the white paper titled Moderate Prosperity in All Respects: Another Milestone Achieved in China’s Human Rights (2021) as an example:

Table 2 Indicators under the “Right to a basic standard of living without absolute poverty”

 
 
Based on this, combined with the specific content of past human rights white papers, the following preliminary summary can be made:

First, the most intuitive feature of white papers on human rights over the years is that the right to subsistence and other human rights are intertwined and their contents are integrated. In particular, the right to subsistence and the right to development have been put side by side for a long time, and the two rights have been “combined and dealt with” and discussed together without distinction. Although this well demonstrates the positioning of the two as “primary basic human rights,” this approach makes it difficult for people to intuitively judge which content belongs to the right to subsistence and which content belongs to the right to development. Similarly, formally, the right to subsistence and economic, social, and cultural rights are two independent parts in the vast majority of human rights white papers. However, many of the specific issues used to discuss the former are also often seen as the content of the latter, especially when it comes to education, labor, health care, and social security.[32] In a few cases, economic, social, and cultural rights may also be combined with the rights to subsistence and development.[33]

Second, the items and indicators used to illustrate the right to subsistence are certainly closely related to the right to subsistence, but they should not be directly included in the content of the right to subsistence without distinction. This is not only because some content is also a discourse on the right to development, but also because the right to subsistence should not be simply expressed as a “right related to subsistence,” otherwise it will become an all-encompassing “super right”.[34] As far as the theory of rights is concerned, the right to subsistence is people’s demand for survival and the behavior, status, or interest they have or can claim,[35] and its content should also be indispensable and directly related to people’s survival. The repeated occurrence of the “economic development level” in the table above reflects China’s consistent guiding ideology of “promoting human rights through development,” and only a higher level of development can better realize all human rights, including the right to subsistence. Although this is closely related to the solution of the issue of the right to subsistence, it does not necessarily constitute the content of the right to subsistence.

Third, the content of the right to subsistence is generally stable and specifically flexible. Being generally stable refers to the fact that despite the aforementioned situations, the human rights white papers over the years have still formed a relatively coherent and generally determined narrative logic of the right to subsistence, including the positioning of the right to subsistence in the human rights spectrum of China, basic ideas for problem-solving, and items showing that “the most important is always the most important” (such as food and clothing, and the living standards of the impoverished population). Being specifically flexible means the fluidity of the items and indicators in the tables above. On the one hand, in different years of human rights white papers, the same content will shift between the right to subsistence (and development) section and the economic, social, and cultural rights section.[36] On the other hand, as the level of economic and social development improves, the indicators for discussing the same matter will also change accordingly.[37] The length of different content in the human rights white papers will also change with social concerns. Some major issues will be added to the right to subsistence (and the right to development) and continue to exist,[38] and the subordinate content of some issues will also be “upgraded”,”[39] which shows dynamic enrichment of the practical connotation of the right to subsistence.

White papers on human rights over the years have shown the above characteristics, which is reasonable. The reason is that as documents that clarify the Chinese government’s principled stance and basic policies on major issues,[40] the fundamental goal and core function of the human rights white papers lie in introducing, promoting, and interpreting China’s human rights cause in a comprehensive and multi-level manner, rather than providing a systematic and detailed theoretical explanation.

C. Grasping and refining the practical logic

The discourse on the practice of the right to subsistence in human rights white papers over the years has generally maintained consistency and stability. It is not difficult to understand that there should be a practical logic that is commonly followed and plays a guiding and leading role.

Specifically, for both individuals and countries, human survival is not an abstract and indivisible concept, but rather, it has content and is hierarchical. This is a prerequisite for understanding the practical logic of the right to subsistence. For individuals, in order to survive, people will have a variety of needs. However, these needs are not equal but have different priorities. Matters such as food and clothing are more urgent and necessary for survival and are prioritized choices driven by instinct and rationality. Only when the bottom line needs are met can people consider other survival needs.[41] As far as the state is concerned, as the primary obligation subject to protect human rights, a state needs to take active measures to realize and safeguard the right to subsistence. However, due to various factors such as the complexity of domestic affairs, material conditions, and the level of economic and social development, it is difficult to solve all the issues concerning people’s right to subsistence in one go. Therefore, it is also necessary to sort out different levels of problems in the development process.

Therefore, the practical logic of China’s right to subsistence is clear. Since an individual’s subsistence needs can be subdivided into levels of importance and urgency, and since it is also difficult for the state to achieve all the subsistence needs of everyone once and for all, the realization and protection of the right to subsistence need to be carried out step by step, rather than in one step. As a result, there are different logical levels in the content of the right to subsistence. This is exactly the way of thinking presented in China’s first white paper on human rights. The white paper The Human Rights Situation in China (1991) analyses and summarizes the practice of China’s right to subsistence over the past few decades, and looks forward to the future cause of China’s right to subsistence: based on “national independence and unity... and when the Chinese people stand up as masters of the country”. The issue of the right to subsistence has two levels: firstly, “when the problem of food and clothing for the people is basically solved, the issue of the people’s right to subsistence will also be basically solved”; second, “only by enabling the people to enjoy basic living security can the problem of the right to subsistence be truly solved.”[42] This approach has also been inherited by a series of human rights white papers since then, highlighting two keywords for grasping and refining the practical logic of the right to subsistence: “basic settlement” and “true settlement”.

First, “basic settlement.” To address the issue of the right to subsistence, the key is to identify and deal with the core and the most fundamental issues in the content of the right to subsistence. The ‘basic’ here has two levels of connotations. From the perspective of priority, it points to the most fundamental content. Solving the problems involved means consolidating the foundation of the entire building of the right to subsistence. From the scope of content, “basic” is not “the whole picture” after all. Further completion of other content is needed on this basis to truly solve the problem of the right to subsistence. The discussion on the most fundamental issues related to the right to subsistence in human rights white papers over the years can be mainly divided into two categories. One is the lack of survival ability caused by poverty, including primary poverty and sliding back into poverty. The key lies in the minimum subsistence needs represented by food and clothing.[43] Recent white papers on human rights have emphasized the importance of eradicating absolute poverty at the basic level of the right to subsistence.[44] The other is difficulty in surviving due to disasters and other events. In addition to the already mentioned sliding back into poverty, it also includes situations where someone is not poor but his/her necessary living conditions have been severely weakened by unforeseen circumstances e, such as those related to emergency rescue and relief, major infectious disease prevention and control, post-disaster relief, production, and life safety, etc.[45]

Then comes “true settlement,” Only by basically solving the problem of the right to subsistence, and then consolidating and continuously improving solutions to the most fundamental issues, continuing to address other issues closely related to subsistence, and ultimately completing the full picture of the right to subsistence is the “true settlement” of the problem of the right to subsistence. Now it comes to the “improvement” “part of the content of the right to subsistence. The white paper “Human Rights Situation in China” (1991) corresponded it to “basic living security,” but did not specifically elaborate on it. Based on the consistent expressions in subsequent human rights white papers, it can be summarized as: First, in terms of scope, the content of “true settlement” is more extensive, not limited to the absolute poverty problem which is mainly about food and clothing. As long as one is still in a state of relative poverty and other living difficulties, even if there may not be a serious and fatal survival crisis, it is also a necessary content to pay attention to when addressing the right to subsistence. Second, even in the same field of content, compared to “basic settlement,” the degree of “true settlement” is deeper in related matters. The issue of the right to subsistence cannot be solved overnight. People’s living conditions and living standards need to be gradually improved in the process of development. Taking food and clothing as an example. Eating enough and getting warm are a key goal at the “basic settlement” level, but if we are only satisfied with this and remain stagnant, it is obvious that we cannot truly solve the issue of the right to subsistence.

This three-dimensional and progressive practical logic of the right to subsistence also indicates that when dealing with the issue of the right to subsistence, static, isolated, and abstract methods should not be adopted. Instead, the right to subsistence should be placed in the process of development for dynamic, connected, and concrete cognition, and realized and guaranteed through “continuous liberation and development of productivity, commitment to poverty eradication, and improvement of development level”.[46] Adopting this approach, taking a further view and with a broader horizon, it is not difficult to see that with development as the axis, as the level of development improves, a person can completely overcome the impact of poverty and other survival difficulties, and then pursue a better life without any worries. This is not only the destination of enjoying the right to subsistence, but also the starting point for the “transition” to the right to development.[47] From “basic settlement” to “true settlement” of the right to subsistence, and then the “improvement” to the right to development, it is the specific reflection of the concept of “promoting human rights through development” in China’s human rights cause.[48]

III. Interpretation of the Discourse on China’s Right to Subsistence

By analyzing past human rights white papers and figuring out and refining the practical logic of the right to subsistence embedded in them from “basic settlement” to “true settlement,” we can interpret the discourse of the right to subsistence from the most fundamental issues and “areas for improvement” in the content of the right.

A. The most fundamental issues related to the right to subsistence: an irrevocable bottom line

As for the chronic survival crisis of the Chinese people since modern times, Mao Zedong once said “The degree of poverty and lack of freedom of the Chinese people is rarely seen in the world.”[49] He pointed out the inescapable bottom-line requirements when solving the problem of the right to subsistence: breaking the two barriers of material scarcity and spiritual bondage. This is also the original aspiration and mission of the Communist Party of China in leading the Chinese people in their century-long fight. Therefore, this section will also discuss both material and spiritual levels.

1. Material level

General Secretary Xi Jinping regards the poverty alleviation campaign as the “most important thing in his heart.”[50] As pointed out in the white paper “The Human Rights Situation in China” (1991), “Having enough to eat and wear warm clothing is the minimum requirement of the Chinese people who have been struggling with hunger and cold for a long time... When the problem of people’s basic food and clothing is basically solved, the issue of people’s right to subsistence will be basically solved.” Regardless of whether they are in a state of poverty when facing survival difficulties, people need to first address their minimum survival needs. As mentioned earlier, with the progress of the times and economic and social development, we should have a dynamic understanding of the right to subsistence. Therefore, this section will analyze the content of the most fundamental issues at the material level in the protection of the right to subsistence, based on China’s national conditions, with social life rather than natural life as the field, taking the concepts and practices in poverty alleviation and the elimination of absolute poverty in recent years as the starting point, and taking into account relevant international human rights standards.[51]

General Secretary Xi Jinping stresses that “The success of the efforts to build a moderately prosperous society lies in the improvement of the poor, and in how well the poverty alleviation work is done.” And the key to poverty alleviation is “whether the ‘two no worries and three guarantees’ are implemented.”[52] To eliminate absolute poverty, it is necessary to ensure that people do not worry about food and clothing, that compulsory education, basic medical care, and housing safety is guaranteed, and that drinking water safety is achieved.[53] This is the minimum subsistence guarantee and bottom line for the impoverished population in China today. It is also a precise interpretation of the material aspect of the most fundamental issues in the protection of the right to subsistence.

Firstly, no worries about food or clothing. This is the key to the issue of food and clothing. In addition to basic aspects such as “having enough and good food” and “having seasonal changes in clothing and warm bedding,” it is also necessary to take into account people’s food acquisition ability, nutritional level, safety level, consumption ability of daily necessities, and disposable income. Especially for the impoverished population, “having enough to eat and wear warm” is the most important part of their consumption expenditure. To make the solution to the problem of food and clothing more targeted, operational, and practical, a minimum cost standard that closely integrates with reality and can ensure... the most basic survival needs and maintain basic survival is also necessary.[54] This is also in line with international human rights standards, which emphasize caring for vulnerable groups who have been in a state of hunger for a long time due to natural disasters, turmoil, poverty, and other reasons, focusing on addressing issues such as hunger and malnutrition, and requiring that food meet basic human survival needs in both quantity and quality, be free of harmful substances, and be sustainably accessible.[55]

Secondly, compulsory education. On the surface, education seems to have little to do with subsistence issues, and a lack of education is not as difficult to sustain as a lack of food and clothing. Actually, it’s not the case. As mentioned earlier, the solution to the issue of the right to subsistence in China is focused on human society, rather than in a primitive state of desolation. Education is not only crucial for individuals to establish themselves and survive in society but also significantly blocks the intergenerational transmission of poverty.[56] Therefore, education is listed as the top priority of the “three guarantees.” General Secretary Xi Jinping points out that the lack of education and the resulting low knowledge and superstition will seriously hinder the elimination of poverty.[57] Therefore, “the poorer the place, the more difficult it is to provide education. But the poorer the place, the more education is needed.”[58] Of course, education is also a multidimensional and wide-ranging matter that covers from basic survival to self-realization, and cannot all be included in the right to subsistence. Education, which belongs to the most fundamental issues in the protection of the right to subsistence, mainly refers to compulsory education for school-age children and adolescents, including ensuring access to education and supporting educational conditions and facilities, avoiding dropouts and deprivation of education opportunities. Not only should tuition fees be waived, but miscellaneous fees and textbook fees should be waived as well. Living allowances and targeted funding should be improved. These are all material aspects[59] and are consistent with the “minimum education standards” in international human rights standards.[60]

Third, healthcare. Unhealthy physical and mental health not only directly affects a person’s survival status, but also leads to situations such as poverty caused by illness and returning to poverty due to illness, exacerbating the pressure of survival difficulties on people. Therefore, healthcare is not only directly related to subsistence, but also plays an irreplaceable role. Similar to education, healthcare is also widely involved. Regarding the most fundamental issues in the protection of the right to subsistence, it is necessary to focus on building a complete public medical and health service system (especially at the county, township, and village levels) and treatment and management measures, providing basic medical insurance, serious illness insurance, medical assistance, and other guarantees, reducing medical expenses through various means, solving problems such as “less access to and high cost of health services, and poverty caused by illness”, and achieving “sufficient hospitals, doctors, and guarantees of medical insurance system”.[61] Similarly, international human rights standards also propose that, based on the development level of the corresponding countries, the minimum level of healthcare and supporting factors should include safe and clean drinking water, necessary building facilities, trained personnel, and essential drugs certified by the World Health Organization.[62]

Fourth, housing safety. A place to live is also a fundamental aspect of the right to subsistence. It is necessary to provide affordable housing projects, collective housing projects, financial subsidies, safety assessments, and renovations to ensure that people without houses and those living in dilapidated mud and grass houses, adobe houses, and urban shantytowns can live in safe houses. “Safety” not only includes the quality of the house itself and its ability to resist earthquakes and disasters but also includes the living environment in which the house is located, including protection of the surrounding living environment, pollution control, domestic waste, sewage treatment, etc.[63] International human rights standards also provide similar minimum housing standards, requiring solutions to major issues such as displacement, homelessness, and severe housing shortages. Housing cannot be simplified as a place that can only provide shelter from wind and rain. We should also consider the necessary safety and affordability of housing, and ensure legal protection of housing possession without forced eviction.[64]

Fifth, drinking water safety. For anyone, drinking water is no less important for subsistence than food and clothing. Starting from the fundamental issues in the protection of the right to subsistence, the very bottom line requirement for drinking water safety is to ensure the amount and quality of drinking water, and minimize and ultimately eliminate the obstacles that people, especially the poor, may face in accessing safe water sources. This requires the support of supporting water supply services and engineering systems.[65] “Maintaining livelihoods” is also the primary and bottom line goal of drinking water and water supply in international human rights standards, and it is necessary to fully consider the water necessary for the subsistence of individuals and families. Given that water resources are closely related to almost all human rights, their allocation and use should also fully consider their promoting role in addressing hunger, disease, and other issues, as well as safeguarding core human rights. Priority should be given to ensuring that poor and marginalized groups have fair access to water resources.[66]

The above content is not only an unavoidable bottom-line requirement for assisting the impoverished population and eliminating absolute poverty. For those who are in difficulties due to disasters, accidents, and other situations that weaken necessary living conditions, even if they are not in poverty at the time, they should follow the above standards to address the issues related to the right to subsistence. This is also the meaning of the most fundamental issues in the protection of the right to subsistence.

Given the complexity of the issue of the right to subsistence, it is not appropriate to simply interpret the above content as a simple material transmission from the state to individuals. Rather, a complete supporting system and mechanism are needed to coordinate and follow up. The basic links of the social security system are particularly crucial, including minimum living allowances, assistance, and support for extremely poor people, assistance to disaster victims, basic medical insurance, medical assistance, education assistance, housing assistance, etc.[67] This also echoes the international human rights standards of “providing minimum necessary guarantees to all individuals and families, ensuring that they have at least access to necessary medical services, basic housing, water, food, and education.”[68]

2. Spiritual level

In the process of solving poverty and achieving common prosperity, General Secretary Xi Jinping particularly emphasizes the “sense of gain, happiness, and security” of the people.[69] This means that the most fundamental issues in the protection of the right to subsistence cannot be short of the spiritual aspect of people. The essence is that the right to subsistence is a right of “people,” and even if people are in a disadvantaged position due to survival difficulties, they should be regarded as subjects rather than objects, goals rather than means. The right to subsistence cannot be simplified as only focusing on the material aspect of the “rights to food and survival,” nor is it to “bestow” on the poor with “food that comes with shame.” Therefore, the human rights white paper also emphasizes the spiritual aspect of the most fundamental issues related to the protection of the right to subsistence, stating that people should obtain the necessary freedom and dignity, and be free from bullying, exploitation, and oppression. It is necessary not only to make the basic life of “disadvantaged groups more secure”, but also to make people’s “lives more dignified.”[70]

Firstly, enjoying the right to subsistence means that anyone should obtain the means of production and enjoy the fruits of labor without being exploited or oppressed, and not become a slave for others to seize wealth and satisfy their desires. Before the founding of the PRC, the ravages, exploitation, and plunder of imperialism, feudalism, and bureaucratic capitalism directly caused the survival crisis of the Chinese people. To break the shackles of the old society and realize the right to subsistence of all Chinese people, the CPC realized that “farmers become masters of themselves politically and divide their fields economically” through agrarian revolution and other means.[71] After the founding of the PRC, the system of exploitation was fundamentally eliminated through socialist transformation and other means, thereby stimulating the enthusiasm of the people and liberating social productive forces.[72] These are all important symbols for addressing the issue of the right to subsistence, as contained in multiple human rights white papers, indicating that personal independence and spiritual freedom should be inherent and necessary contents of the right to subsistence, and should not be isolated from the right to subsistence simply because these contents traditionally belong to the right to freedom. Think about it: slave owners also provide certain clothing, food, and shelter for slaves to sustain long-term exploitation. However, if it is believed that slave owners only violate the freedom and dignity of slaves, but guarantee their right to subsistence, regardless of whether the words are self-consistent, the conclusion is absurd.

Secondly, enjoying the right to subsistence means that people should not reluctantly “voluntarily” sacrifice their legitimate rights in exchange for survival. Some scholars have proposed viewpoints such as the “subsistence exchange contract,” believing that when a person is unable to meet basic survival needs, they can give up some “less important” human rights through “full thinking” and “independent balancing” in exchange for the right to subsistence (such as being forced to accept exploitation). Even though this affects human dignity and value, it at least guarantees the minimum survival. If such a situation is “arbitrarily” prohibited, it may seem like protecting human rights, but in reality, it pushes vulnerable groups into greater suffering, which is actually “against morality.”[73] Such rhetoric may seem reasonable, but it is all about compromising on reality, and what it does is erode the foundation of human rights. Whether in terms of philosophy or practice, China’s right to subsistence should not and will not end up in such a situation. General Secretary Xi Jinping says that China has never made compromises with poverty and weakness, but has worked hard, repeatedly stressed and resolutely implemented the principle of promoting human rights through development, “constantly making the cake bigger,” “dividing well the cake that has been growing,” and steadily advancing China’s human rights cause, including the right to subsistence.[74] The realization and protection of the right to subsistence means that we should not sit idly by while people struggle in survival difficulties, or even ignore those whose difficulties are taken advantage of. Instead, we should provide people with the basic guarantee and the courage and hope to continue to live.

Third, to enjoy the right to subsistence means that people should acquire the security of rights with dignity, and not be humbled to receive alms. Even if people are struggling due to a survival crisis, the subject of the obligation of the right to subsistence, mainly the state, should firmly eliminate the superior mentality and treat people as equal subjects without discrimination and give them due respect. All human rights, including the right to subsistence, are deeply rooted in human dignity and have a core value of maintaining and consolidating human dignity. In contrast, people who are trapped in survival difficulties and demand the right to subsistence are inevitably in a disadvantaged position, which requires embedding values such as human dignity into the right to subsistence. Otherwise, there is a risk of deviating from the right track. That is why, under the leadership of the CPC, China has always adhered to the people-centered development philosophy, taking the right to subsistence as the primary basic human right, taking the strong and constantly developing comprehensive national strength as the basis, taking the people’s sense of gain, happiness, and security as the important criteria of all human rights, including the right to subsistence, placing the people in the main position of the human rights cause, and putting the people’s interests in the supreme position.[75]

B. The “improvement aspect” of the right to subsistence: the starting point of a happy life

General Secretary Xi Jinping points out that a happy life for the people is the greatest human right.[76] Taking the people as the center and gradually achieving common prosperity, it is necessary to implement the shared development concept of universal sharing, comprehensive sharing, joint construction and sharing, and gradual sharing. This is a “process from low-level to high-level, from being imbalanced to balanced.”[77] This also points out the direction for China’s protection of the right to subsistence: safeguarding and realizing the right to subsistence is not as simple as completing a single task, but a gradual process of expansion, deepening, and enhancement. The right to subsistence is not only about “enabling people to survive,” but should also become a huge support for people to “live well with hope.” Following the practical logic of China’s right to subsistence, while achieving the irrevocable bottom line requirement for the most fundamental issues and basically addressing the issue of the right to subsistence, it is necessary to “enable the people to enjoy basic living security to truly realize the right to subsistence.”[78]

Specifically, the most fundamental issues in the protection of the right to subsistence aim to meet people’s minimum survival needs, solidify the foundation of the right to subsistence, and thus fundamentally realize the right to subsistence. At this stage, people trapped in survival difficulties often find it difficult to provide self-relief due to their vulnerability, and the state, as the main obligation subject, needs to bear more responsibility. But in the stage of truly solving the issue of the right to subsistence, it is necessary to properly handle the “improvement aspect” in the content of the right to subsistence: to pursue meeting people’s further survival needs at a higher level and degree, making the right to subsistence the starting point for people to pursue a happy life, and extending the right further to organically connect with the right to development. At this stage, the fundamental issues are not set aside but still need to be further stabilized in the “improvement aspects”, continuously strengthening the realization and protection of the right to subsistence. However, relying solely on the unilateral efforts of the state, it is difficult to fully cover everyone’s pursuit of a happy life. Therefore, it is necessary to fully value the dominant position of the general public, mobilize their initiative, enthusiasm, and creativity, and adhere to the combination of assistance and support from the state and society and the self-reliance of those in need.

Human rights issues can only be accurately understood within the context of human society.[79] The issue of the right to subsistence cannot be solved by Robinson Crusoe-style survival on deserted islands, but by striving to ensure that those who were originally struggling to survive can establish themselves in society and live independently. Therefore, in China, the true settlement to the issue of the right to subsistence is not only limited to providing people with food to eat and shelter from the cold, nor is it about simply and directly distributing relief funds and other guarantees and subsidies. It emphasizes improving people’s development ability and opposing the tendency to indulge in ease and comfort and dislike labor. People in need should integrate into society with the support of the state, and achieve self-reliance in society. Therefore, the essence of the “improvement aspect” of the right to subsistence is not only to provide material support but also to help people be self-reliant. Based on the interpretation of previous human rights white papers, the following four points can be made.

First, the cultivation of abilities required for self-reliance. The ability and subjective initiative required to truly solve the problem of the right to subsistence through self-reliance are not innate, but rather learned and improved through experience in practice. This is mainly an education issue and is closely related to the construction of spiritual civilization. General Secretary Xi Jinping points out that the low level of morality and knowledge will seriously hinder the realization of poverty alleviation and prosperity. The construction of material civilization and spiritual civilization are two aspects of the process of poverty alleviation and prosperity in poverty-stricken areas that are “interrelated, coordinated, and mutually promoting.” To properly handle the construction of spiritual civilization, it is necessary to attach importance to education.[80] Similar to compulsory education, one of the most fundamental issues in the protection of the right to subsistence, education in the “improvement aspect” does not involve higher education, but rather focuses on contents like vocational and technical education, and adult education. These can enable people to acquire necessary labor and survival skills, improve their moral, technological, and cultural qualities, and thus obtain the ability to independently survive in society and continuously improve their living standards.[81] This is referred to as “secondary education” in international human rights standards, which formally requires universal establishment through all appropriate methods, openness to all, and gradual realization of free education. The content should reflect objectivity and human conscience, enabling people to establish themselves and participate in social life.[82]

Second, self-reliance based on abilities. After obtaining the ability to integrate into social production and life, it is also necessary to ensure that relevant abilities have the opportunity to be used so that people can truly settle down in society. This mainly involves issues of labor and employment. At the macro level, the state must increase the number of labor and employment opportunities available in society through sustained and reasonable development and policy funding support. Otherwise, the protection of the right to subsistence will fall into the dilemma of ready labor for no work, and the so-called “settlement” will only be a sheet of paper. At the individual level, to achieve “the protection of the legitimate rights and interests of workers, the growth of remuneration’ for work, the protection of income from work, the increasing dignity and happiness of people’s work, and the creation of a better life with their own hands,”[83] special measures should be taken to assist and ensure that workers can seek and retain vocational jobs and are not unreasonably deprived of them and that the labor market is available. It’s also necessary to ensure fairness and the practical possibility of work, to ensure the necessary basic treatment and rest time for workers during work, and to provide all workers with fair, non-discriminatory, and sufficient compensation for subsistence, as well as safe and clean working conditions. These contents also meet the minimum requirements of international human rights standards for employment.[84]

Third, the provision of basic guarantees while people rely on themselves. In the stage of true settlement of the right to subsistence, although the disadvantaged groups have already emerged from severe difficulties such as absolute poverty and their living conditions have improved to some extent, they are still relatively weak. Even if they have the determination, ability, and opportunity to pursue a happy life through self-reliance, their risk resistance ability is still poor, and the possibility of deteriorating living conditions or even returning to poverty due to expected changes is still high. “Security is the primary need of the people after they have met their basic needs.”[85] Therefore, a strong basic guarantee is still needed to build a social security barrier to cope with risks to safeguard and improve people’s livelihoods, maintain social equity, and enhance people’s well-being. In addition to the minimum guarantees of food and clothing, medical care, education, housing, and other aspects of the fundamental issues of the right to subsistence, China has actively promoted the development of various forms of security regarding the “improvement aspects,” forming a multi-level and fully covered social security system.[86] When people fall into more difficult situations than before due to work-related injuries, unemployment, disability, aging, illness, childbirth, child rearing, illness or death of family members, as well as social risks and emergencies such as disasters, accidents, and pandemic, they can also receive adequate and accessible relief from the state and society.[87] This is also reflected in the minimum requirements of international human rights standards for social security.[88]

Fourth, preference for special and difficult groups. The state should pay attention to the reality of different groups, especially vulnerable and disadvantaged groups, and adopt special policies and increase assistance based on respect and non-discrimination.[89] Specifically, for farmers, consideration should be given to the differences in land dependence, starting conditions, and development levels compared to urban residents, as well as the protection of rights and interests, settlement of children, and left-behind people in the issue of migrant workers. For women and children, we should firmly implement the basic national policy of gender equality, strengthen the protection of women’s rights and interests in labor, employment, health, etc., strengthen the nutritional and health level and education guidance of children, and provide more care for orphans, left-behind children, children in difficult situations, etc. For the elderly, it is necessary to timely increase the payment and treatment of basic pension insurance for urban and rural residents and strengthen guarantees for left-behind, widowed, elderly, and disabled impoverished elderly people. For persons with disabilities, special difficulties and needs in their work and life should be taken into account, and efforts should be made to promote barrier-free transformation and strengthen the level of protection for severely disabled persons. For ethnic minorities, it should be emphasized that all ethnic groups are equal, and emphasis should be placed on considering the “poor and bordering” geographical disadvantages of some ethnic minorities.[90]

General Secretary Xi Jinping points out that “improving people’s well-being and enhancing people’s quality of life” is an important aspect of building a great modern socialist country in all respects, including the distribution system, employment, social security, special group security, housing, health, pandemic prevention and treatment system, and capacity building for emergency response.[91] Guided by this thought, the various contents of the right to subsistence are interconnected, and an organic and three-dimensional system for the realization and protection of rights is constructed in both the most fundamental aspects and the “improvement aspects.” Through the combination of national assistance and self-reliance, people’s living standards are continuously improved in development, and ultimately the problem of the right to subsistence is truly settled, starting a new journey for people to achieve a happy life.

C. Understanding the right to subsistence in a dynamic manner and the alignment of rights

1.  Understanding the right to subsistence in a dynamic manner

Dynamic understanding can be analyzed from both qualitative and quantitative perspectives. Qualitatively speaking, the previous text concludes that the discourse on the right to subsistence in human rights white papers over the years is “generally stable and specifically flexible”, in which “specifically flexible” precisely illustrates the dynamic development of the right to subsistence. Although everyone’s bottom line and basic demands for subsistence are generally the same, even in the same country and society, with changes in economic and social development levels, the material conditions for maintaining people’s survival and the social ideologies formed under such influence are also changing at different times. For example, there is a difference in the understanding of “subsistence” between ancient and modern people. We cannot directly guide the realization and protection of modern people’s right to subsistence based on the ancient people’s qualitative understanding of the right to subsistence.

Quantitatively speaking, the protection of the right to subsistence cannot be separated from practical and feasible standards in relevant fields, otherwise specific policies and measures will be difficult to implement. As mentioned earlier, these specific quantitative standards will also fluctuate with changes in economic and social development at different times. Take poverty as an example. As an important parameter for judging poverty, the poverty standards issued by both China and the World Bank have been continuously improving in recent years with economic development. The survival standards required for maintaining life should not be fixed, but fluctuate over different periods with changes in social development and adapt to socio-economic levels.[92]

2. The relationship between the right to subsistence and related human rights

Based on grasping and refining the practical logic of the right to subsistence from the previous text and using it as a clue to explain the discourse on the right to subsistence, we can better understand the relationship between the right to subsistence and related human rights, especially with economic, social, cultural, and development rights. From the perspective of the composition of China’s human rights spectrum, in principle, the three should be independent and distinct from each other. But in fact, there is significant overlap in their content. As mentioned earlier, specific human rights can be found under economic, social, and cultural rights, such as the right to food, the right to education, and the right to labor, in the context of the most fundamental issues and the “improvement aspects” in the protection of the right to subsistence. The right to subsistence and the right to development have been coexisting for a long time, with equal emphasis and no substantive distinction. There is an overlap in the scope of content. Sometimes the right to subsistence is also placed under the category of the right to development. It is also necessary to respond to this situation to accurately understand the right to subsistence and consolidate the discourse expression on the right to subsistence.

Firstly, the rationality of overlapping content. In theory, we can design a clearly defined and tightly knit human rights spectrum, with clear content of each human right, clear relationships between them, each performing its duties without interfering with the other. When aggregated, this spectrum can cover all fields of human and society. This concept may seem great and rigorous, but it is disconnected from social reality. Human rights are not projected into human society from a higher-dimensional, objective, and transcendental world of ideology, but are historically generated under the influence and determination of social existence, based on people’s demands in specific social fields.[93] These demands mostly stem from human irrational or even instinctive needs, rather than rational calculations. In addition, the multidimensional, complex, and interrelated nature of various fields in society makes it difficult for people to achieve precise segmentation in their ideal state when constructing rights for various demands. Therefore, it is inevitable that the content of various human rights will blend, overlap, and even fall into co-petition.[94] Survival, development, life, health, food, water sources, environment, safety, and other matters all have an independent nature and corresponding human rights expressions can be found in each of them. However, neither these matters nor related human rights can achieve isolation from each other. Therefore, the existence of overlapping content does not necessarily indicate the inadequacy of theoretical construction. Rather, this is the background and premise that cannot be ignored when conducting theoretical construction.

Secondly, the relationship with economic, social, and cultural rights. Although the right to subsistence and economic, social, and cultural rights all stem from human demands, the field of survival that the right to subsistence involves is more macro and broad than the specific fields of other human rights, such as the right to food. On the other hand, although subsistence is an independent concept, an isolated concept of subsistence, separated from the concrete content, is meaningless in itself, and its connotation needs to be enriched by the concrete matters mentioned above. This also helps us understand the differences between economic, social, and cultural rights and the right to subsistence: taking the right to food as an example, it only needs to promote the development of food supply to a higher level, without considering the overall arrangement of issues related to subsistence. This process is objectively beneficial for promoting the right to subsistence, but it is not a sufficient and necessary condition. The protection of the right to food is neither equal to nor limited to the protection of the right to subsistence. In contrast, the right to subsistence directly concerns survival, which needs to be supported by a series of more specific matters such as food, water, health, etc. Otherwise, the issue of survival will only be too abstract and irrelevant to be implemented, and solving the problem of the right to subsistence will also be impossible. Besides, the right to subsistence does not require all relevant matters to be raised to a particularly high level, as long as the thresholds of the aforementioned most fundamental issues and “improvement aspects” related to the right to subsistence are met. At the same time, the simultaneous progress of multiple issues also needs to be coordinated by the right to subsistence. When necessary, it needs to make trade-offs, which is also the reflection of the attribute of the cluster rights to subsistence.[95]

Thirdly, the relationship with the right to development. The white paper titled “The Practice of the CPC in Respecting and Protecting Human Rights” (2021) indicates that “the right to subsistence is the premise and basis for the enjoyment of other rights, and is the right in the first place. The right to development and the right to subsistence are closely linked.” Taking development as a reference frame, the focus of each specific right under economic, social, and cultural rights is related to specific single matters (such as labor, education, etc.), focusing on the development level of these single matters. In contrast, the right to subsistence and the right to development encompass multiple matters. Just that the right to subsistence is anchored in low-development areas, while the right to development is focused on high-development areas. With the degree of development as the axis, the “improvement aspects” of the right to subsistence also naturally extend and align with the right to development. However, given the complexity of development issues, it is not appropriate to quantitatively set a unified boundary for the rights to subsistence and development.[96]

IV. Conclusion

General Secretary Xi Jinping has pointed out that “achieving moderate prosperity,” “winning the largest battle against poverty in human history” and “historically solving the problem of absolute poverty” are historic achievements in the cause of the Party and the country.[97] Building a great modern socialist country in all respects is the mission and task of the CPC in the new era and on a new journey. We need to continue to emphasize consolidating and expanding our achievements in poverty alleviation, improving people’s well-being, and improving people’s quality of life.[98] This indicates that the right to subsistence, which once played a significant role, will continue to contribute to the harmony in the magnificent chapter of the Chinese nation’s inheritance and development. Therefore, a comprehensive, in-depth, and accurate understanding of the right to subsistence is crucial.

This paper takes the human rights white papers of the past years as the main material for analysis, understands the concept of China’s right to subsistence in a dynamic way, deeply explores the embedded practical logic of the right to subsistence, and summarizes the interpretation of discourse on that basis. From this, it can be concluded that the right to subsistence includes the most fundamental issues and the “improvement aspects” in terms of content. The former covers the most fundamental and relevant matters in the fields of food and clothing, education, medical care, housing, drinking water, and so on. By realizing these, the issue of the right to subsistence is fundamentally solved, “which not only meets basic survival needs but also lays the foundation for subsequent development.”[99] Given that people facing survival difficulties are often more vulnerable, it is necessary for the state, as the primary obligation subject of the right to subsistence, to invest more and play a greater role, and take the best care of them. Based on continuous stabilization and improvement of the most fundamental issues related to the right to subsistence, the “improvement aspects” combine the assistance and support of the state and society with individual self-reliance, and enable people to truly gain a foothold in society and “live a good life with hope” by cultivating abilities, providing opportunities, providing basic guarantees, and caring for vulnerable groups. Only in this way can we truly protect the right to subsistence.

(Translated by CHEN Feng)