This paper begins from a global perspective, grounded in the dual aspects of architectural theory and practice. Through historical tracing, regional comparison, and contemporary reflection, it systematically explains the core theory, regional differentiation, and modern implications of “New Brutalism”, aiming to provide cross-cultural critical references for contemporary human settlement construction in China.The article first reconstructs the core concepts and ideological lineage of “New Brutalism” in the 1950s and 1960s. The emergence of “New Brutalism” was influenced by multiple factors, including Cubism, Purism, Dadaism, and Art Brut. In the first half of the 20th century, early modern architects, including Le Corbusier, contributed to the exploration of formal architectural principles for this type of architecture. In the 1950s and 1960s, post-war generations of architects and architectural theorists promoted and socialized the value of the theory. After the 1960s, “New Brutalism” gradually faded, and its architectural features, material characteristics, and theoretical principles gradually merged with emerging architectural movements and theories, forming broader and more profound impacts. The paper then divides the discussion into four aspects: economic appropriateness, distinguishable forms, material authenticity, and exposed facilities, explaining how each of these characteristics of “New Brutalism” has influenced subsequent architectural practice and theoretical development. 1) “Economic appropriateness” emerged as a reflection of the economic difficulties during post-WWII European reconstruction. It provides the ethical support and principle discovery for the appearance of “New Brutalism”. Thus, typical and pure “New Brutalism” practices often emerged in the early stages of economic take-off in certain regions. Once economic constraints were lifted, the theory remained only in its formal elements and merged with other emerging ideologies in these regions. 2) “Distinguishable forms” include three sub-characteristics: complete forms, elevated ground floors, and repetitive units. The paper discusses the influence of complete forms on North American architectural practices in the 1960s-1970s, the implications of elevated ground floors on urban design, and the interaction between unit repetition, structuralism, and megastructural urban studies. 3) “Material authenticity” is both a response to economic constraints and a reflection of construction ethics, sparking sustained thinking on “critical regionalism” and “constructivist theory”. Meanwhile, the mechanisms of material surface treatments, combined with research on spatial scale perception, contributed to the development of “street theory”. 4) “Exposed facilities”, originating from the “Serviced Shed” concept, resonates with the Metabolism movement and some of Louis Kahn’s theories, reflecting a dialectical reflection on the integration of building equipment and the building’s core structure. This feature was continued in the development of the British High-tech movement.The paper then provides a comprehensive analysis of the internal logic of the aforementioned discussions, presented diagrammatically, and responds to the theme of “Brutalist Regions”. Finally, the paper returns to the contemporary Chinese context and critically explores the potential for the local adaptation of New Brutalism. As the economy and industrialization levels improve, contemporary architectural practices have gradually moved away from rough construction methods. However, Chinese architects have found that “roughness” still holds value. Thebasic principles advocated by “New Brutalism”, such as economic appropriateness, technical applicability, material authenticity, exposed facilities, and complete forms—remain relevant in rural construction in China. After these principles are deeply integrated with local materials and rural construction techniques in the central and western regions, they are expected to provide low-cost, highly recognized solutions to urban-rural differences and regional imbalances. China’s adoption of New Brutalism must go beyond mere formal imitation, focusing instead on its essence— “ethics over aesthetics”. In rural revitalization, rough enclosures and exposed structures should not be seen as symbols of technological backwardness but should be transformed into honest responses to local resources, craftsmanship, and community needs.As the enduring vitality of the “unfinished modernity project”, the value of New Brutalism lies not only in offering diverse pathways for architectural practice in the era of globalization but also in warning contemporary architects: amid the pressures of technological worship and consumerism, reclaiming the ethical dimension of “material authenticity” and “social responsibility” may be the key to solving the homogenization dilemma and reconstructing regional identity.