论“流氓无产阶级”及其在当代哲学语境中的嬗变

The "Lumpenproletariat" and Its Evolution in the Context of Contemporary Philosophy

马克思对流氓无产阶级的评价主要是负面的,但后来的一些理论家如法农、马尔库塞等人,则看到了流氓无产阶级作为革命主体的可能性。这主要是因为,马克思的"无产阶级"概念并非实际存在的群体,而是一种主体性位置。随着具体情境的变化,流氓无产阶级也可能被用于填充这一位置。在当今的激进左派这里,这种观点基于一种拉康化的框架得到了进一步发展。巴迪欧的"事件位""先将来时主体"、朗西埃的"无分之分"、齐泽克的"贫民窟"等理论,都将流氓无产阶级或边缘人群视为实在界的剩余,并认为其基于偶然性与异质性的原则,具有了突破象征秩序的潜力。但是,这样的思路存在着严重的问题,激进左派忽视了流氓无产阶级的流变性及其与资本的同构性,被其寄予厚望的流氓无产阶级可能摇身一变站在资本的一边。激进左派因而背离了马克思。

Marx’s evaluation of lumpenproletariat is mainly negative, but later theorists such as Fanong, Marcuse and others pointed out the possibility of lumpenproletariat as a revolutionary subject. This is mainly because Marx’s concept of 'proletariat' is not an actual group, but a subjective position. As the specific situation changes, the rogue proletariat may also be used to fill this position. In today’s radical left, this view has been further developed on the basis of a Lacanized framework. Badio, Loncier, Zizek and other theories regard the lumpenproletariat or marginalized groups as the remnants of the real world, and believe that they have the potential to break through the symbolic order based on the principle of contingency and heterogeneity. However, there are serious problems in this way of thinking. The radical left neglects the rheology of the lumpenproletariat and its isomorphism with capital. The lumpenproletariat, which is highly expected by the Radical Left, may change its position on the side of capital. The Radical Left deviated from Marx.