As China marks the annual day dedicated to Lei Feng — the mid-20th century soldier elevated into a national symbol of selflessness — President Xi Jinping’s repeated praise for the “Lei Feng spirit” underscores a deliberate effort to make civic virtue part of everyday political life. Since the 18th Party Congress, Xi has repeatedly described the spirit as timeless, urged that “learn-from-Lei-Feng” activities be woven into daily routines, and insisted that “Lei Feng spirit, everyone can learn.” Those lines were reiterated in state media commentary this week, timed with the commemorative occasion.
Lei Feng’s image is a terse piece of political technology: a young People’s Liberation Army volunteer who, after his death, became an exemplar of modesty, sacrifice and service to others. The annual observance — March 5 — has long been used by the Communist Party to promote volunteerism, moral education and social discipline. For contemporary leaders, reviving that tradition helps translate abstract calls for civic duty into a recognizable cultural reference that spans generations.
The current emphasis on institutionalizing “learn-from-Lei-Feng” activity reflects broader priorities in Beijing’s governance toolkit. In a political environment where social stability and Party legitimacy are paramount, state-led moral campaigns serve multiple functions: they encourage grassroots service that can blunt local grievances, cultivate compliant civic norms among youth, and offer an alternative narrative of social solidarity amid economic and demographic stresses. Framing volunteer work as a routine, everyday practice makes it easier to mobilize citizens for public-health drives, disaster relief, or neighborhood management without relying solely on coercive measures.
At the same time, the revival carries a double edge. As a top-down moral pedagogy, the Lei Feng campaign can seem performative if not paired with tangible improvements in public services or avenues for genuine civic participation. Observers note that exhortations to emulate a model figure do not automatically address structural frustrations — such as housing costs, employment pressures or uneven social welfare — that shape public sentiment. The symbolic power of Lei Feng is real, but its capacity to substitute for policy reform is limited.
Internationally, the campaign is unlikely to alter Beijing’s foreign posture, but it does matter for how the Party manages domestic cohesion and projects an image of moral renewal. For foreign audiences, the emphasis on Lei Feng is best read as part of a broader effort to anchor contemporary governance in curated historical narratives that justify the Party’s central role in society. Whether the approach deepens civic engagement or amounts to recycled propaganda will depend on the degree to which symbolic initiatives are matched by material gains for ordinary citizens.
As the commemorative day passes, the core message from the top is clear: the Party wants the language of service and mutual help to live in everyday institutions — schools, neighborhoods and workplaces — and not merely in ceremonial observances. For Beijing, Lei Feng is less a relic than a reusable motif in a political strategy that prizes moral cohesion as a complement to administrative control.