一吻定情

民主党派联合调研服务京津冀协同发展_我的网站

四大名捕

一 | 日报讯（记者赵建、崔丛丛）近日，省召开民主党派调研协商座谈会。从会上获悉，近两年，各民主党派省委围绕“深入推进京津冀协同发展”开展联合调研，今年甄选确定21个课题，涉及北京（京津冀）国际科技创新中心建设、提升京津冀通勤和出行便利化保障水平、深化京津冀生物医药全产业链协同创新发展等领域，目前已有6篇调研报告报送民主党派中央，以参政履职实效服务协同发展大局。“联合调研是民主党派参政议政的制度性安排，每年由各民主党派省委围绕一个主题，结合自身优势从不同方面开展调研，形成高质量调研成果并报送民主党派中央，借助高层建言‘直通车’渠道，在服务保障重大国家战略实施的同时，助力更好地发展自己。”省委统战部有关负责人介绍。 (ECNS)-- China's newly implemented Ethnic Unity and Progress Promotion Law has elicited a predictable response from certain Western media outlets. Whenever ethnic unity is referenced, some Western critics rush to frame it as "assimilation" or a push for uniform national identity. Fan Yichou, associate professor at the Law School of Minzu University of China, argues that such misinterpretations arise primarily from projecting Western historical nation-state building trajectories onto China's ethnic policies. Put simply, some Western observers do not view China from the perspective of its domestic social realities, but rather judge it through the lens of their own historical experience. Fan argued that the traditional Western nation-state model rests on a core premise: one ethnic community ought to align with one sovereign state, with political boundaries largely overlapping ethnic territories. To build culturally homogeneous nation-states, most Western powers historically sought to eradicate internal ethnic diversity through assimilation, exclusion, and other coercive measures. Such nation-building drives were often accompanied by territorial conquest, mass population displacement, and systemic violence. He drew on arguments laid out by Canadian political philosopher Will Kymlicka, who observes that the classical European template of nation-building rested on an implicit consensus: states should strive to become culturally homogeneous, by either assimilating national minorities or expelling them. For centuries, this ideal of a mono-national state shaped state policy across almost all Western European countries, with Switzerland stands out as the only major exception. This deep-rooted historical trajectory continues to frame contemporary discourse on ethnic governance. A stark modern illustration emerged in 2025, when Danish local authorities took away the newly-born daughter of an 18-year-old Inuit mother from Greenland just one hour after birth following a controversial parenting competency assessment. Her case was far from isolated. According to reports by the BBC and other media outlets, another Greenlandic mother had all three of her children under state custody. She was first subjected to a so-called parenting competency test after social services raised concerns about the language development of her eldest daughter. Although the Danish government has decided to stop using such tests on Greenlandic families, local authorities have yet to halt the practice. The enduring harm of assimilationist policies extends far beyond this Danish case. UNESCO’s Memory of the World archives document that Canada's Indigenous residential school system continuously operated for nearly 150 years, with the explicit state objective of assimilating Indigenous children into settler society. Generations of Indigenous children were forcibly separated from their families, severed from their ancestral languages, cultural traditions, and intergenerational knowledge systems. The United States has grappled with comparable challenges. According to a 2025 Associated Press report, Native American children in California are roughly about four times more likely to enter the foster-care system than their peers. Newborns separated from their mother shortly after birth. Generations of children torn apart from their families and ancestral languages. Indigenous youth who remain vastly overrepresented in foster-care placements to this day. All these are legacies of the West's long-standing obsession with assimilation. That explains why, when some in the West hear China speak of "ethnic unity," they instinctively equate it with "assimilation." In reality, they are projecting their own social trauma onto China. China's context, however, is fundamentally different. As Fan Yichou notes, China has long been a unified multi-ethnic country. Within the Chinese tradition, political unity has not demanded cultural uniformity. Instead, unity and diversity have coexisted across most of the nation's history. This outlook finds theoretical expression in the concept of plurality-in-unity put forward by renowned Chinese sociologist Fei Xiaotong. In his framework, China's 56 ethnic groups represent the plurality, whereas the Chinese nation embodies unity. From this perspective, the Ethnic Unity and Progress Promotion Law is not designed to eliminate ethnic differences. Instead, it seeks to strengthen a shared sense of belonging while respecting cultural diversity. This distinction highlights a broader divergence between China and the West in approaching identity and social cohesion. In many Western societies, historical assimilation sought to diminish group differences and compel minority groups to conform to dominant-culture norms. By contrast, China's emphasis on forging a strong sense of community for the Chinese nation is not intended to obliterate diversity. It seeks to build shared civic and national identity, while enabling all ethnic groups to sustain their own languages, customs, and cultural traditions. Ethnic groups may speak different languages, practice different customs, and vary in development level. Yet they can still uphold shared dedication to national progress and a common sense of belonging within a unified multi-ethnic state. Genuine ethnic unity does not require everyone to fit into the same mold. It means ensuring that different ethnic groups can participate in national development while maintaining their own cultural characteristics and thriving with equal dignity and equitable opportunities. So when some in the West equate China's "ethnic unity" with "assimilation," their judgment stems not from an accurate assessment of China’s reality, but from a subconscious projection of their own historical burdens, contemporary social anxieties, and deep-rooted institutional scars onto China's ethnic policies. They are either unwilling or unable to fully comprehend China's governance philosophy and practices, yet arbitrarily pass arrogant judgment on the country. The outcome of this biased approach will be no exception of absurd narratives that fundamentally contradict objective reality. 。据了解，2025年，联合调研甄选确定15个课题。其中，民革省委“应对人口发展新常态”、民盟省委“京津冀协同推进抗洪用洪”、民建省委“推进京津冀自贸区协同发展”、农工党省委“‘十五五’时期推进京津冀协同发展”等4篇调研报告，被民主党派中央采用并以建言“直通车”形式呈报，得到相关部委研究。各民主党派省委将界别优势与重大国家战略、发展需求紧密对接，主动契合党派中央关注，结合省实际谋划课题切入点。2025年以来，在各民主党派省委努力下，各民主党派中央围绕“京津冀协同发展”“盐碱地综合开发利用”“推进国际科技创新中心建设”“完善生态环境基准体系”等课题来省考察调研达36批次。其中，农工党中央先后两次围绕“深化京津冀生物医药全产业链协同创新发展”到石家庄、秦皇岛、沧州等地调研座谈，为省相关领域工作开展赢得了关注。同时，各民主党派省委分别成立由主委任组长的调研指导组和课题组，加强与政府相关部门、高校、科研院所等合作，深入开展行业论证、学术研讨，促进信息共享、意见互换，形成各类资源有效整合、各方力量互动配合、各种优势有机结合的调研合力。民进省委在调研报告修改阶段建立“周推进”机制，课题组向京津冀交通部门、课题领域专家等开展多轮咨询，根据反馈情况完善框架与数据。九三学社省委结合参与九三学社中央“科学座谈会”对调研成果进行研讨论证，不断优化对策建议。为更好推进联合调研，省委统战部组织召开选题会、推进会、协商会，积极协调省市县有关部门精选考察地点、全力配合调研，协调省发改委提供需国家层面支持解决的事项20个。在今年联合调研成果协商阶段，就21个调研报告向省发改委、省教育厅、省科技厅等部门广泛征求意见建议共计35条，为各民主党派完善调研报告提供了有价值的参考。立足“十五五”新起点，省委统战部将结合民主党派中央重点关注工作和省委中心工作，与各民主党派省委一起，谋划实施联合调研课题。