On the morning of April 26, 2024, the second session of the “Lychee Garden Salon for Young Marxist Scholars” was successfully held at the School of Marxism at Shenzhen University. Professor Wang Daiyue from the School of Marxism at Tsinghua University was invited as the keynote speaker, while Professor Lin Zhao from the School of Marxism at Sun Yat-sen University, Associate Researcher Ling Feixia from the Department of Philosophy at Sun Yat-sen University, and Professor Xing Lijun from the School of Marxism at Shenzhen University served as discussants. The event was hosted by Professor Zhang Shoukui, Vice Dean of the School of Marxism at Shenzhen University, and was attended by numerous faculty members and students.

Professor Wang Daiyue’s keynote speech, titled “The ‘Stirner Impact’: Theoretical Opportunities for Advancing the Materialist Conception of History from Abstraction to Concrete Reality,” was divided into three parts. First, “From Abstract Unity to Specific History: Reality in the Materialist Conception of History.” Professor Wang argued that Marx and Engels, through their materialist conception of history, overturned the relationship between ideology and material reality, demonstrating that productive forces, social relations, property forms, and labor division are key drivers of historical development. This shift marked a transition from philosophy to a “positive science” and “communism as movement.” Although Marx and Engels did not use the terms “historical materialism” or “materialist conception of history” in The German Ideology, their critical examination of terms like “ideology,” “petty bourgeois,” and “civil society” reveals the development of a materialist conception of history in the “Saint Max” chapter, representing a shift from ideological critique to empirical inquiry.

Second, “Economic Reality Criticized from Stirner’s Political Economy Perspective.” In this section, Professor Wang explored Stirner’s studies in political economy, Hegel’s concept of property, and Stirner’s influence. Unlike Bauer and Feuerbach, Stirner redefined Feuerbach’s concept of “Man” as “god-man,” advocating a return to concrete individuals. He used political economy to analyze economic realities, extending ideological critique to daily experiences and replacing philosophical discourse with economic terminology, thus opening a new direction for ideological critique.

Third, “The ‘German Petty Bourgeoisie’: The Real Basis of The German Ideology.” Professor Wang discussed Stirner’s grasp of economic reality through a “German lens,” the evolving concept of “petty bourgeoisie,” and the unique nature of the “German petty bourgeoisie” that reflects Germany’s specific realities. In her conclusion, she noted, “Returning to reality”—while a summary by Althusser of Marx’s early intellectual development—is also an inherent requirement of the materialist conception of history. Returning to reality requires questioning what kind of reality to return to. In Paris, Marx understood the realities of developed capitalist societies in England and France through political economy. The Saint Max chapter begins with a reflection on Germany’s backwardness, then shifts to a historical perspective on Germany’s specific conditions. Stirner, as a typical representative of the German petty bourgeoisie, provided Marx with the theoretical opportunity to make this shift. Through his discovery of the “German petty bourgeoisie,” Marx transcended general ideological critique and abstract historical laws, revealing the impact of Germany’s unique realities on the German ideology and thus realizing the materialist conception of history’s focus on concrete realities. Therefore, the view of the MEGA2 Volume I/5 editorial board is not without reason: Stirner’s role in shaping Marx’s materialist conception of history deserves objective evaluation.

In the subsequent discussion session, participants engaged in a lively debate on topics such as “the distinction between historical materialism and the materialist conception of history,” “the materialist conception of history and Chinese-style modernization,” “interpreting Stirner’s literary style,” and “understanding Marx’s ‘positive science.’” Scholars such as Lin Zhao, Ling Feixia, and Xing Lijun actively raised questions and shared insights, creating an engaging atmosphere with frequent applause.

This academic salon provided young Marxist scholars from universities with a platform to share research findings and engage in scholarly discussion. It also inspired teachers and students, further broadening their professional horizons and enhancing their academic skills.