Marx and the Transition Problem

Marx is concerned with theory that not only interprets but also changes the world. His central concern lies in the transition from capitalism to communism. This paper examines three ways that he might understand this transition as concerns economic crisis, politics, or the proletariat.     

Marx and the spiritual dimension

Marx and the spiritual dimension     

Marx and the human individual

In both Marx and Schaff, Marxism does not provide an adequate interpretation of the individual. The main reason for this is that there is no satisfactory analysis of autonomy.     

Marx and Russia

I present the scope andcharacteristics of Marx's interest in Russiaand review its evolution. Initially, Marx'sattitudes were marked by russophobia,pronounced anti-panslavism, assessments ofRussia as an outpost of European reaction andcounterrevolution, and even as the head of aconspiracy to block the world revolution. Withtime, however, Marx came to consider Russia asthe country in which the outbreak of theRevolution was most likely. In his research forsucessive volumes of Capital, he readRussian theoretical works by, among others, V.Bervi-Flerovskij and A. Koshelev. Marx'sattitudes to the anticipated peasant revolutionin Russia remained ambivalent; to a certaindegree he feared its occurrence suspecting thatit could take on an `asiatic' hue.     

Marx and Exploitation

The discussion of the adequacy of Karl Marx's definition of exploitation has paid insufficient attention to a prior question: what is a definition? Once we understand Marx as offering a “reference-fixing definition in a model” we will realise that it is resistant to certain objections. A more general analysis of exploitation is offered here and it is suggested that Marx's own definition is a particular instance of the general analysis which makes a number of controversial moral assumptions.     

马克思与正义——评当代英美马克思主义伦理学研究中的一场争论

20世纪70年代以来英美的马克思主义伦理学研究热潮是由一场"马克思与正义"的争论引发的.从立场上看,主要有"马克思反对正义"和"马克思赞成正义"两派,议题涉及正义价值的来源问题、道德善和非道德善问题、道德现实主义问题、道德改良主义问题等.在争论中,虽然有学者对马克思主义的正义现作出了合理客观的评价,但从历史背景、社会条件和西学立场来看,英美学界实际上是想借助马克思的批判精神为新型的资本主义良序社会扫除障碍.所以,由这场争论带动的正义问题研究,从程度上讲,尽管很深入,但却不彻底.     

Marx and religion

R. Leuze, Kaiser Verlag, Theologie und religionsgeschichte: Der Weg Otto Pfleiderers, München, 1980, pp.448. N.p.

P. J. Nel, The structure and ethos of the Wisdom admonitions in Proverbs: (Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 158). W. de Gruyter. Berlin, New York, 1982. p. xii + 142. DM.74.00     

Marx and Justice

Marx's thought about justice is essentialist and dialectical. It has been interpreted in terms of immoralism. It is rather a synthesis of the traditional natural law, based on the Aristotelian concept of nature as the potential for perfection or ideal fulfilment, radically different from the Hobbesian reductionist concept of nature as atomistic and mechanical; of the tradition of dialectics in its German idealist form; and of Feuerbach's humanism. Marx's explicitly realist idea of science reveals 'veiled wage-slavery'. Concentration on the market exchange, to the exclusion of the subsequent exploitative use of labour power, deceives exclusively analytic observers into the belief that there is some justice in capitalism. Marx characterized the proletariat as the 'universal class', capable of bringing about the fulfilment of the human essence in a family-style mode of production , because it is the victim of total injustice . However, he criticized workers for not rising above such bourgeois selfishness as demanding 'a fair wage', which is not even a coherent concept. Capitalism is not only a moral injustice, but an ontological injustice, a violation of the worker's humanity. It is coercion into alienation, fetishism and idolatry.     

马克思与虚无主义问题

马克思的目的是要说明人对价值的需要无须超越历史就能得到满足。认为善(good)内在于历史上与断言善是与历史相同的并非一回事。马克思并不是一个历史主义者——如罗森所使用的术语——因为他没有把善与"所发生之事"等同起来。罗森认为,马克思必定主张在历史中发生的任何事情都是可允许的。马克思的标准是人,而不是历史中在马克思的特定意义上算作人类的(行动)的所有行动。实际上在历史进程中,绝大多数个体是以一种非人的方式把自己对象化的。这就是马克思把前共产主义时期描述为"前历史"的原因,因为那是这样一段时间,在其中社会存在是人类活动的无意识的产物。只有当诸个体自觉地决定其生活并把物质世界置于合作性控制之下,恰当意义上的历史才真正开始。     

马克思与现代性问题

马克思作为生活在现代性盛期的思想家,对现代性做了深入的诊断和批判。作者认为,马克思不是一个狭隘的对资本主义进行功能主义批判的制度分析论者,而是一个现代性的辩证的批判者。首先,他继承了个人自由和全面发展的现代性规范理想;其次,他通过对资产阶级法治国家和市民社会的批判,揭示把现代性理想与资本主义现代化的内在矛盾,并从这一批判中揭示现代性的新的出路,即社会主义和共产主义。这一方案虽然在现实中面临着许多理论和实践难题,但仍然构成我们今天现代性话语不可超越的视域。     

Fanon and Marx Revisited

ABSTRACT

On this 200th anniversary of Marx’s birth, what can we learn from Fanon’s turn to Marx over 60 years ago? This paper reviews Fanon’s active engagements with Marx throughout his work from Black Skin, White Masks to The Wretched of the Earth; from the importance of Marx’s 18th Brumaire in Fanon’s thinking, to what he calls stretching Marxian concepts. In this moment of crisis and retrogression, what can we learn from Fanon’s creative use of Marxian categories?     

晚期马克思与“资本积累”

根据《资本论》的相关论述,马克思是基于一个完全的资本主义世界才提出资本积累概念的。但问题是,当马克思将资本积累理解为雇佣工人以及所需的生产资料在数量上的增长时,他就不得不考虑资本主义对非资本主义的渗透所带来的更多无产者,由此,“资本积累”被证明不可能在单一的、完全的资本主义世界中被理解。在马克思身后,卢森堡、维克斯等人都回应了马克思理论中的上述难题,尽管卢森堡侧重于对非资本主义经济模式的关切,而维克斯更注重完全的资本主义语境的前设与价值理论之间的矛盾。无论是哪一种思考,都至少说明马克思的资本积累概念仍有进一步探讨和阐释的理论空间。     

成熟马克思异化观疏证

只要涉及异化,人们就会在成熟时期的马克思的论述中,遇到某种令人困惑之处。对那些断言马克思的著作中存在某种令人欣慰的断裂的人来说,与异化这个概念联系在一起的术语的用法太多了。然而,由于成熟马克思对异化的说明,处于极其次要和零散的状态,所以,这种说明无法构成真正清楚的、对于这里不存在任何断裂的具体证明。那些支持存在这种断裂的人,都在很大程度上忽视了成熟马克思所撰写的、在其中反复运用异化这个术语的论述段落。而那些支持不存在这种断裂的人——他们当中的绝多数人都显然是用英文写作的马克思评论家,则在很大程度上利用这些论述段落来“证明”,异化在成熟马克思著述中确实居于核心地位.