论生态马克思主义理论构建的路径差异--以帕森斯与阿格尔为例

Path Differences in the Construction of Ecological Marxist Theory--Taking Parsons and Agger as Examples

生态马克思主义作为一个包含多重内容维度和研究进路的理论或话语体系,不仅基于对经典马克思主义理论方法的继承发展与创新应用,也离不开对当代世界范围内生态环境问题与社会绿色转型实践的批判性分析与超越性构想.生态马克思主义在形成初期就呈现出两种各具特色的研究路径.一是以帕森斯为代表的“经典阐释”路径,帕森斯坚持从经典文本出发阐释马克思和恩格斯的生态思想,并从辩证的生态自然观、资本主义寄生性生态批判、社会主义生态及其转变战略三重维度论述马克思主义生态学的基本框架.二是以阿格尔为代表的“理论重构”路径,阿格尔通过对马克思主义危机理论的重构来拓展其生态向度,并从异化消费分析、生态危机阐释、期望破灭的辩证法构想三个方面建构生态马克思主义理论.两种差异化的研究进路直接影响了生态马克思主义多样化的理论样态与发展格局,其理应成为推动生态马克思主义发展的两个相互补充的维度,这对于构建中国风格的马克思主义生态学具有重要启发意义.

Ecological Marxism,as a theoretical system with multiple content dimensions and research approach,is not only based on the inheritance and development of classical Marxist theoretical methods,but also inseparable from a critical analysis and transcendental conception of the contemporary world's ecological environmental problems and the practice of social green transformation.At the early stage of the formation of ecological Marxism,two distinctive research paths were presented.One is the path of“classic interpretation”represented by Parsons.Parsons insists on explaining the ecological position of Marx and Engels from the classic text and discusses the basic theories frame of Marxist ecology from the perspective of dialectical ecological nature,capitalist parasitic ecology criticism,socialist ecology and its transformation strategy.The other is the path of“theoretical reconstruction”represented by Agger.Agger expands Marxism's ecological dimension through the reconstruction of its crisis theory,and constructs ecological Marxism from the analysis of alienated consumption,the interpretation of ecological crisis,and the dialectic of shattered expectations.Two differentiated research approaches directly affect the diversified theories and development patterns of ecological Marxism,and they should become two complementary dimensions to promote the development of ecological Marxism,which is of great significance to the construction of Chinese Mar xist ecology.