论文部分内容阅读
马恩价值理论并非劳动价值一元论,而是宏观的“效用/劳动价值论”;劳动价值论只是其向“具体”上升中的抽象出发点。考茨基《卡尔·马克思的经济学说》一书是在《资本论》第三卷未公开发表的条件下撰成的,存在对《资本论》第三卷的悖离和对第一卷的形式主义或绝对化理解。伯恩斯坦依据《资本论》第二、三卷,畅言劳动价值论与当时已兴起的效用价值论的互补,是比较符合马恩价值理论本相的,而考茨基等人以“反修”为名,用“劳动价值论一元论”批判伯氏,虽在政治上有一定合理性,但在理论上却是僵守误解,曲解马恩。这种“一元论”后来因“反修”而“正宗”化于列宁,独尊于前苏联,至今残喘于中国,乃是“阶级斗争为纲”在价值理论中的遗存物。
Marx’s theory of value is not a monistic theory of labor value, but a macroscopic “utility / labor theory of value ”; labor theory of value is only an abstract starting point toward its rise. Kautsky’s “Economic Theory of Karl Marx” was compiled under the unpublished terms of the third volume of Capital, with the exception of the third volume of Capital and the second volume of Capital Formalism or absolute understanding. Bernstein, according to the second and the third volumes of The Theory of Capital, said that the complementariness of labor theory of value and the utility theory of value that was then emerging is more in line with Mann’s theory of value. However, Kautsky et al. In the name of “anti-revisionism”, Criticism of Berbatov on “Unitary Theory of Labor Theory of Value” has some rationality in politics, but in theory it is a misgiving of misgivings and distorting Marx and Engels. This “monism ” was later resisted by “anti-revisionism ” and “authentic ” in Lenin, residing in the former Soviet Union and still residing in China so far, but “in the theory of class struggle” in the value theory The remains of.