一 问题的提出 社会主义市场经济对经济理论提出很多新的挑 战,对财政金融理论也是如此。传统财政理论很难回 答目前财政实践与理论研究中出现的新问题,许多人 (特别是理论工作者)出现担忧,产生困惑。其根源在 于传统理论对人们的束缚,人们只从经济学、社会学与 辨证唯物主义的一般原理认识财政分配,忽略了财政 科学自身的特殊本质。因此我国传统的财政理论有许 多问题没有解决。 比较突出的问题表现在传统财政理论没有解决对 财政形态的正确分类,只用与社会发展史相一致的方法把财政史分为几个不同阶段,把财政划分为奴隶制 财政、封建制财政、资本主义财政与社会主义财政。这 种划分方式以辩证唯物主义历史观为指导,符合社会 主义经济理论的一般要求。但它只注意唯物史观和社 会主义经济理论的一般要求,忽视了财政分配本身的 特殊性。这种分类方法单纯地把国家财政分为两大 类,即剥削阶级国家财政与无产阶级国家财政,抹杀了 A question put forward The socialist market economy on economic theory has many new challenges, the same is true of the theory of finance and economics. The traditional fiscal theory can hardly answer the new problems that appear in the current financial practice and theoretical research. Many people (especially the theoretical workers) appear worried and confused. Its root lies in the traditional theory of people’s bondage, people only from the general principles of economics, sociology and dialectical materialism to understand the financial allocation, ignoring the special nature of the financial science itself. Therefore, many problems of China’s traditional financial theory have not been solved. The more prominent problem is that the traditional fiscal theory did not solve the correct classification of the financial form. It divided the fiscal history into several different stages only in a way consistent with the history of social development, dividing finance into slavery finance, feudal system finance, Capitalist Finance and Socialist Finance. This division is guided by the dialectical materialist conception of history and meets the general requirements of the socialist economic theory. However, it only paid attention to the general requirements of historical materialism and socialist economic theory and neglected the particularity of the fiscal distribution itself. This classification simply divides state finances into two major categories, that is, the exploiting class state finances and the proletarian state finances and denying