|
| 文章编号：1672-3104(2021)03-0122-09 |
| |
|
论马克思财产权批判理论的规范性基础 |
| |
张守奎 |
| |
|
（深圳大学马克思主义学院，广东深圳，518060） |
| |
| 摘 要： 当代西方学界在马克思的财产权批判是否基于某种规范性基础的看法上存在争议。通过回溯马克思对国民经济学的批判过程可见，他对私有财产的批判既是基于科学性分析，又是基于规范性探寻。不过，此种规范性不是指通常的伦理价值范畴，而是指自我实现意义上的个人自由。与国民经济学家的模糊化认知立场不同，马克思通过区分“作为劳动的私有财产关系”与“作为资本的私有财产关系”，认定后者本质上是有产者剥削和奴役无产者的权力支配关系，其对人的个性成长和自我实现来说都是一种妨碍。基于这种规范性基础，马克思在私有财产问题上既批判了国民经济学家，又超越了全部自由主义者。马克思财产权批判的规范性基础，对当前中国的所有制改革有着重要的启示，这就是应在坚持社会主义制度不变的前提下，以能够实现每个人获取更多和更大的自由为目的。 |
| |
| 关键词： 马克思；私有财产权；伦理价值； 规范性基础；个人自由 |
| |
|
| |
On the normative foundation of Marx’s critical theory of property rights |
| |
ZHANG Shoukui |
| |
（School of Marxism, ShenZhen University, ShenZhen 518060, China） |
| |
| Abstract: It has been controversial in the western academic circles whether the criticism of Marx’s property rights is based on a certain normative basis or not. By tracing back to Marx's refutation of national economics, we can see that his critique at private property is based on both scientific analysis and normative exploration. However, this kind of normativeness refers not to any usual ethical value category, but to personal freedom in the sense of self-realization. Different from the obscured cognition position of national economists, Marx distinguishes between "private property relations as labor" and "private property relations as capital", and recognizes that the latter is essentially the power domination relationship of property owners exploiting and enslaving the proletariat, which is a hindrance to a person's personality growth and self-realization. Based on this normative foundation, Marx criticized national economists and surpassed all liberals on the issue of private property. This enlightens us that the current ownership reform in China should be based on the premise that the socialist system remains unchanged, with the goal of achieving more and greater freedom for everyone. |
| |
Key words: Marx; private property; normative foundation; individual freedom |
| |
|
