马克思正义批判的尺度与限度

The Scale and Limit of Marx’s Critique of Justice

尽管人们赞成马克思把资本主义谴责为不正义,但对他发起正义批判所秉持的尺度却见仁见智。人们通常把生产方式、阶级利益和按需分配作为马克思正义批判的尺度,从而得出了大相径庭的结论。但是,马克思的正义批判是基于劳动本体论的“元尺度”和由此衍生的“次生尺度”的双重控诉。他依据“劳动历史唯物主义”开创了解释正义的新视角:即评判一种社会制度是否正义,绝不能脱离现实的劳动关系,而应优先考虑历史唯物主义之“物”所内蕴的“劳动”及其衍生的物质生活关系。劳动本体论预指了劳动正义的优先性。资本主义之所以不正义,就在于它侵犯了人的劳动,违背了劳动正义原则,造成了人的生存意义上的不平等和不公正。当然,马克思的正义批判仍然存在一定的“限度”,表现为事实评价和价值评价、解构性话语和建构性话语、描述性原则和规范性原则之间的不对等和不平衡。

Although people agree with Marx’s condemnation of capitalism as injustice, there are different opinions on the criteria for his critique of justice. People usually regard the production mode, class interests and distribution on demond as the criterion of Marx’s critique of justice, thus drawing the very different conclusions. However, Marx’s critique of justice is a kind of double accusation based on the “meta-criterion” of the labor ontology and its “secondary criterion”. According to the “Labor Historical Materialism”, he created a new perspective to explain justice: that is, to judge whether a social system is just or not, we should never be divorced from the reality of labor relations and we ought to give priority to the “labor” contained in the “material” of historical materialism and its derived material life relations.The labor ontology presupposes the priority of labor justice. The reason why capitalism is unjust is that it infringes on people’s labor and violates the principle of labor justice, which causes the inequality and injustice in the sense of human existence. Of course, Marx’s critique of justice still has certain limits, which are reflected in the unequivalence and imbalance between factual evaluation and value evaluation, deconstructive discourse and constructive discourse, descriptive principle and normative principle.