Group 1 - The core message of the "14th Five-Year Plan" emphasizes the construction of a modern industrial system and the strengthening of the real economy, indicating a shift in focus towards the real economy and maintaining a reasonable proportion of manufacturing [1] - The modern industrial system is fundamental to economic strength, comprehensive national power, defense capability, and international influence, as highlighted by the historical lessons from the Soviet Union and the United States [1][2] - The U.S. has seen a decline in manufacturing's share of GDP from 25% to below 9%, leading to industrial hollowing and innovation constraints, prompting a push for industrial resurgence to restore its status as a manufacturing and technological power [1][2] Group 2 - The prioritization of the modern industrial system over technology innovation in the "14th Five-Year Plan" reflects a recognition of the new laws of the positive development between industry and technology, informed by historical experiences from the Soviet Union and the U.S. [2] - The manufacturing sector's share of GDP should ideally stabilize around 25%, a level observed in many powerful nations during their peak periods, countering the belief that post-industrial societies must see a decline in manufacturing [2] - The U.S. has acknowledged the pitfalls of the post-industrial society theory, reinforcing the need to focus on industry, which requires a robust institutional and strategic framework rather than mere rhetoric [3]

Core Argument - The mainstream economic view that prioritizes service industries, particularly productive services, as the leading sector for a country's industrial structure is outdated. Instead, a strong manufacturing sector, especially high-end manufacturing, is essential for national strength and economic leadership [1][2][3]. Group 1: Historical Context - Historically, no country has become a global superpower solely through service industries; all major powers have relied on manufacturing. The rise of the Netherlands in the 17th century was closely tied to its manufacturing and commercial activities [3]. - The decline of the Netherlands in the 18th century was attributed to an overemphasis on commerce and finance at the expense of manufacturing, which allowed Britain to surpass it [3]. - The United States, despite its strong service sector, became a manufacturing powerhouse in the 19th century, with significant milestones such as surpassing the UK in manufacturing output in 1894 [3]. Group 2: Current Trends and Implications - The global economic landscape is shifting, with developed countries like the U.S. focusing on revitalizing their manufacturing sectors as a strategic priority. This includes a competitive focus on high-end and advanced manufacturing [2][5]. - The experience of Hong Kong illustrates that a strong service sector alone is insufficient for sustainable development without a robust manufacturing base [4]. - National security is closely linked to manufacturing capabilities. Countries lacking strong manufacturing sectors risk vulnerability, as seen in historical contexts where nations without industrial strength faced external threats [4]. Group 3: Future Outlook - The emphasis on developing a manufacturing-centric industrial system is not only significant for long-term growth but also urgent for countries like China, as global competition intensifies [5].