自由与平等的内在一致与冲突

The Intrinsic Consistency and Conflicts between Freedom and Equality

自由与平等这两个理念在现代政治哲学中始终处于核心地位,人们认为这两者似乎是内在一致的。然而,洛克、卢梭、罗尔斯以及诺齐克等政治哲学家的理论却表明,这两者之间存在着不一致或冲突。洛克提出人的生命权、自由权和财产权都是人生而具有的平等权利,然而,这些权利是形式平等却内在包含着实质性的对不平等财产拥有的权利。卢梭则从人类不平等的起源意义上强调,由于私有制的出现和财产占有上的不平等导致了政治不自由,因此,要实现政治自由,关键在于无私有制或有限私产前提下的政治共同体的确立。罗尔斯的正义论把政治自由与经济平等同社会平等相对区分,将政治自由平等置于优先地位,并以此规范财富占有,从而使其趋向于平等。诺齐克则认为罗尔斯的趋于平等的分配模式是对自由的侵犯。

The ideas of freedom and equality, which have remained the central concepts in modern political philosophy, are assumed to be intrinsically consistent. However, important representatives of modern political thoughts, including John Rock, Rousseau, Rawls and Nozick, put forwards theories indicating that there are inconsistency and conflicts between the two ideas. Locke claims that the rights to life, liberty and property are all equity rights human beings are endowed by nature, which are formally equal but essentially include the right to unequal property. Whereas Rousseau, from the perspective of inequity of human original, points out that due to the emergence of private ownership and the inequality of possession leads to political non-freedom. Therefore, to achieve political freedom lies with the establishment of the political community which is free from private ownership or with limited private property. Rawls＇s theory of justice, which relatively differentiates political freedom and economic equality from social equality, gives priorities to political freedom and political equality, and sets norms for wealth, thereby showing a tendency to equality. Nozick proposes that Rawls＇s equal distribution model is a violation of freedom.