劳动所有权与“马克思正义悖论”问题

Labor Ownership and the Issue of“Marx’s Paradox of Justice”

围绕由“塔克—伍德命题”所引发的“马克思正义悖论”问题,西方左翼学者进行了数十年的争论,但正如罗尔斯所指出的,解答这一悖论问题的关键在于,澄清马克思是否使用了某种特定的正义观念来批判资本主义。而劳动所有权便属于这一正义观念。劳动所有权,分为以自我劳动为基础的所有权和以占有他人劳动为基础的所有权。后者而非前者,被分析马克思主义者视为代表资本主义的法权与正义原则。实际上,这是一种“错位理解”,低估了资本主义意识形态家的狡猾性与欺骗性,未能准确把握马克思批判资本主义非正义性的文本场域与历史语境。近代资本主义意识形态谱系所标榜的一直是自我劳动所有权。在《资本论》及其手稿中,马克思从历史和逻辑两个方面对劳动所有权进行了双重批判,阐发了劳动与所有权同一规律与分离规律的“辩证转变”,进而揭露了资本主义所承诺的正义的虚伪性。在未来社会中,应实行真正的劳动所有权和更高阶的需要所有权。

Around the issue of“Marx’s paradox of justice”caused by the Tucker-Wood thesis,Western left wing scholars have been debating for decades.However,as John Rawls points out,the key to solving this paradox is to clarify whether Marx criticizes capitalism by using a particular conception of justice,to which labor ownership belongs.Labor ownership can be divided into two types,i.e.ownership based on self-labor and ownership based on the possession of other’s labor.It is the latter,rather than the former,that is regarded by analytical Marxists as a principle of legality and justice that represents capitalism.In fact,this is a kind of“misaligned understanding”,underestimating the cunning and deception of capitalist ideologues and failing to accurately grasp the textual and historical context of Marx’s criticism of the injustice of capitalism.The ideological pedigree of modern capitalism has always boasted self-labor ownership.In Das Kapital and its manuscripts,Marx criticizes labor ownership from two aspects(i.e.the aspect of history and the aspect of logic),expounds the“dialectical transformation”of the law of the identity and separation of labor and ownership,and then exposes the hypocrisy of justice that capitalism promises.In the future society,real labor ownership of and higher-order need ownership should be implemented.