论文部分内容阅读
自第二国际以来,所谓生产力一元决定论一直是对历史唯物主义的流行解释。这一解释的根本缺陷,在于假定生产关系只具有一种功能,即适应和促进生产力的发展。本文在历史唯物主义文献研究的基础上,指出生产关系的功能不仅在于适应和促进生产力的发展,而且在于增加统治阶级获取的剩余。生产关系的这两重功能既可能相互结合,也可能相互背离。在实际历史过程中,除了生产力系统的自主变化外,阶级斗争和国家间的竞争是推动生产方式演变的两大直接动因。一种生产方式的演变在何种程度上转化为有机生产方式的变迁——即以生产力的根本进步为必要条件的整体变迁——取决于流行的生产关系的性质及其变化的方向。如果一国的特定利益集团或利益集团联盟,面对来自阶级冲突和国家间竞争的压力,有能力利用国家权力推动一场制度的创造性毁灭,将流行的生产关系转变为切合生产力发展需要的生产关系,从而使剩余的增长更多地建立在生产力发展的基础上,就有可能促成有机生产方式的变迁。这一制度的创造性毁灭过程,同时也是国家形成的过程。国家既是推动制度变迁的外部力量,其自身之形成也构成了这一制度变迁的内在组成部分,正是这一特点使得国家理论相应地成为一切制度变迁理论的核心。笔者希望,本文提出的这一再解释能给历史唯物主义带来足够的弹性和活力,使之不仅摆脱传统的生产力一元决定论的束缚,而且能为发展一种马克思主义制度变迁理论提供方法论的指引。
Since the Second International, so-called univocal determinism of productive forces has been a popular explanation of historical materialism. The fundamental flaw of this interpretation lies in the assumption that the relations of production have only one function, namely to adapt and promote the development of the productive forces. Based on the study of historical materialism, this paper points out that the function of the relations of production lies not only in adapting and promoting the development of productive forces, but also in increasing the surplus acquired by the ruling class. The dual functions of the relations of production may or may not be compatible with each other. In the actual course of history, in addition to the autonomous changes in the productive forces system, class struggle and competition among countries are the two major direct motivators for promoting the evolution of the mode of production. The extent to which the evolution of a mode of production translates into a shift in the mode of organic production - the overall change that takes the fundamental advance of productive forces as a prerequisite - depends on the nature of the prevailing relationship of production and the direction in which it is changing. If a particular interest group or a consortium of interest groups in a given country is faced with pressure from class conflicts and inter-state competition and is capable of using state power to promote the creative destruction of a system and transform popular relations of production into production in line with the needs of the development of productive forces Relations, so that the remaining growth based more on the development of productive forces, it is possible to promote the changes of organic production methods. The system of creative destruction, but also the formation of the state process. The state is not only an external force to promote the institutional change, but also forms an inherent part of this institutional change. It is precisely this feature that makes state theory the core of all institutional change theories. The author hopes that this reinterpretation made in this paper will bring enough flexibility and vitality to historical materialism so that it will not only get rid of the shackles of traditional determinism of productive forces but also provide a methodological guideline for the development of a Marxist theory of institutional change .