众所周知,马克思创造性地通过劳动力商品范畴,科学地阐释了剩余价值理论,进而深刻地揭示了资本主义的本质,并为无产阶级进行剥夺剥夺者的革命提供了重要的理论根据。可以说,证明了劳动力商品范畴就揭示了资本主义的本质,就从理论上解决了资本主义社会的所有问题。那么,社会主义社会是否存在这样的经济范畴?我们能否证明这样的经济范畴,并从它出发而反映出社会主义的本质,从而说明社会主义社会的种种问题呢?关柏春研究了这个问题。他认为,劳动商品范畴就是这样的经济范畴,把马克思主义与现实相结合就能证明劳动具有商品的性质,这也是当代经济学家应当自觉承担的责任。但是,他也深深地知道,证明劳动的商品性质又谈何容易?劳动的性质问题是政治经济学中至关重要的问题,历史上许多著名的经济学家都曾研究过这个问题。斯密、李嘉图认为劳动是商品,马克思恩格斯则批判了劳动商品的说法。改革开放之后,林子力、王岩、王建民、黄正山、秦风白等一些学者又曾研究了劳动的商品性质问题,但是当他们遭遇卫兴华、马庆泉等学者提出同义反复问题的责难时却没能做出有说服力的回答,结果功败垂成。然而,这仅仅说明了证明劳动商品范畴会遇到理论难题,而并没有说明劳动商品范畴是不能证明的。可以肯定,证明了劳动商品范畴将是重大的理论突破,具有非凡的意义。关柏春自认为深入地研究了劳动的性质问题,并破解了同义反复难题,在此基础上通过系列性论文较为详尽地证明了劳动的商品性质。我们以为,他的研究成果的科学性问题暂且不论,他的探索精神是应当给予肯定的。那么,他的研究成果到底如何呢?本刊从本期把他的这个系列性论文逐期推荐给大家,见仁见智,请读者来做评判吧。 It is well-known that Marx creatively explained the theory of surplus value through the scope of labor goods and thus revealed the essence of capitalism profoundly and provided an important theoretical basis for the proletariat’s revolution to deprive the deprivation. It can be said that it has been proved that the category of labor goods reveals the essence of capitalism and has theoretically solved all the problems of capitalist society. Is there any such economic category in socialist society? Can we prove such an economic category and proceed from it to reflect the essence of socialism so as to illustrate the problems in socialist society? Guan Baichun studied this issue. In his view, the category of labor goods is such an economic category. Combining Marxism with reality can prove the nature of labor as commodities, and it is also the responsibility that contemporary economists should take consciously. However, he also deeply understands how easy it is to prove the nature of the commodity in labor. The nature of labor is a crucial issue in political economy, and many well-known economists in history have studied it. Smith, Ricardian think labor is a commodity, Marx and Engels criticized the saying of labor. After the reform and opening up, some scholars such as Lin Zili, Wang Yan, Wang Jianmin, Huang Zhengshan, Qin Fengbai and others studied the nature of the commodity of labor. However, when they encountered the censure of the Synonymous Repeated Questions by scholars such as Wei Xinghua and Ma Qingquan Failed to make a convincing answer, the result plummeted. However, this only shows that there are theoretical difficulties in proving the category of labor goods, but it does not indicate that the category of labor goods can not be proved. It can be affirmed that it is of extraordinary significance to prove that the category of labor goods will be a major theoretical breakthrough. Guan Bo-chun thinks that he has studied the nature of labor in-depth and has solved the problem of synonymous repetition and repetition. On the basis of this, he has proved in more detail the nature of the commodity in labor through a series of papers. We think that the scientific issue of his research is for the moment not to be overlooked, and his spirit of exploration should be affirmed. So, his research results in the end how? This issue from the current issue of his series of papers recommended to everyone, a matter of opinion, please readers to judge it.