再论“贱民”与“无产阶级”——黑格尔“贱民”概念的困境及超越

Further Discussion on“Rabble”and“Proletariat”——The Dilemma and Transcendence of Hegel's Concept of“Rabble”

在一定意义上,黑格尔的“贱民”与马克思恩格斯的“无产阶级”指向同一群体。与其说是主观情绪,不如说是物质贫困从根本上导致了“贱民”的产生。黑格尔关于“贱民”的界定受到马尔萨斯等英国政治经济学家的影响,存在表象化和偏见化的描述。这一概念亦面临着理论上的困境,即以“劳动”为核心对“贱民”的批判难以成立。马克思和恩格斯则站在历史唯物主义的哲学立场、无产阶级运动的阶级立场,以政治经济学批判为核心重释了“贱民”问题,用“糟糕的社会关系”代替“穷人的不法”,用“资本运动”代替“理性运动”,实现了从“贱民”到“无产阶级”的概念变革以及两个概念之间的相互建构:“无产阶级”是“贱民”的真理,“贱民”表征了“无产阶级”的低下地位,把为承认而斗争与为解放而斗争现实地勾连起来,并且实现了对古典经济学和黑格尔的批判性超越。

In a sense,Hegel's“rabble”and Marx and Engels's“proletariat”point to the same group.Hegel's“rabble”is actually what Marx and Engels later called the“proletariat”.It is not so much subjective emotion as material poverty that fundamentally leads to the emergence of“rabble”.Hegel's definition of“rabble”has been influenced by Malthus and other British political economists,and there are problems of representation and prejudice.This concept also faces a theoretical dilemma,that is,it is difficult to establish the criticism of“rabble”with“labor”as the core.Marx and Engels,on the philosophical standpoint of historical materialism and the class standpoint of the proletariat movement,reinterpreted the socalled“rabble”issue with political and economic criticism as the core,replace“poor lawlessness”with“poor social relations”,and replace“rational movement”with“capital movement,”realizing the conceptual transformation from“rabble”to“proletariat”and the mutual construction between the two concepts:“proletariat”is the truth of“rabble,”and“rabble”represents the low status of“proletariat”.It realistically linked the struggle for recognition with the struggle for liberation,and realized the critical transcendence of classical economics and Hegel.