列宁从未提出“‘国家辛迪加’模式”——二评吴敬琏“社会主义模式论”

Lenin Had Never Set Forth a "National Syndicate" Pattern

本文是对吴敬琏"社会主义模式论"系列评论的第二篇。其基本观点如下:第一,列宁从来不承认有一个先验的、普适性的"社会主义模式",更没有去制造这么一个东西。第二,列宁曾借用"国家辛迪加"的比喻,表达了在社会主义革命成功后,将努力实现马克思说的"人民管理制",亦即走向"自由人联合体"的理想。这与吴敬琏杜撰的列宁"‘辛迪加’模式"风马牛不相及。第三,"十月革命"以后,列宁在俄国开创了社会主义经济建设的新局面,但并没有来得及完成这一任务,何来一个"‘国家辛迪加’模式"的苏联"社会主义计划经济体制?"第四,列宁提出新经济政策、建立公有制等多种所有制并存、计划与市场相结合、对外开放的混合经济体制,以向社会主义社会过渡。这种具有历史意义的创举,其重要性远远超过列宁认为仅仅是"临时的办法"的、短期的"战时共产主义"。而吴敬琏对此却抑前扬后,是不公正和有特殊目的的。

This paper is the second comment on WU Jing-lian's'Socialist Pattern''.The basic viewpoints as follows: Firstly Lenin had never admitted any priori and universal socialist 'pattern',and more he had never attempted to create such a thing.Secondly,Lenin once took the 'national syndicate' as a metathor,expressed that when revolution got succeeded,he would try hard to realize 'people managing system' like Marx said,in other words achieve ideal of'the union of free men'.This has nothing in common with Lenin'syndicate pattern'fabricated by Wu.Thirdly,after the October Revolution,Lenin initiated building socialist process in Soviet Union,and he did not finish the work.How did he get a Soviets 'socialist planned economic system' of 'national syndicate pattern'? Fourthly,Lenin set forth a new economic policy that had public ownership and of various forms of ownership coexisting,combined plan with market,opening and mixed economic,to realize the transition to socialist society.The importance of the bold invention of historical significance was far ahead 'only stopgap'and 'at war policy' given by Lenin himself.Wu constrains former and praises the latter is unfair and has ulterior motives.