古典政治经济学在阶级分析上的得失——以穆勒《政治经济学原理》为例
|
摘要
阶级分析是政治经济学的一个重要主题,古典政治经济学在这个方面的探讨值得重视。约翰·穆勒的《政治经济学原理》重点阐述了私有制条件下产品分配所决定的各阶级的收入和命运,其基本框架承袭李嘉图,但蕴含着对劳动阶级的同情与期望。其阶级分析在生产、分配和交换等各个领域中的贯彻对一些"次阶级"群体的分析、对非劳动所得的限制以及对工人合伙经营的鼓励都值得当代政治经济学借鉴。由穆勒的政治经济学扩展至全部古典政治经济学来看,其阶级分析取得了许多成就,但仍然存在着不能真正触及私有制的立场缺陷。
Class analysis is an important subject of political economy, and the study of classical political economy in the aspect deserves attention. John Mill's Principles of Political Economy focuses on the income and destiny of all classes determined by the distribution of products under private ownership. Its basic framework inherits Ricardo's, but contains sympathy and expectations for the working class. The implementation of its class analysis in various fields of production,distribution and exchange, the analysis of some "sub-class"groups, the restriction of non-labor income and the encouragement of the joint enterprise of workers are all worthy of the reference of contemporary political economics. From the perspective of the extension of Mill's political economy to the whole classical political economy, its class analysis has made a lot of achievements, but there are still defects in the position that can't really touch private ownership.
Class analysis is an important subject of political economy, and the study of classical political economy in the aspect deserves attention. John Mill's Principles of Political Economy focuses on the income and destiny of all classes determined by the distribution of products under private ownership. Its basic framework inherits Ricardo's, but contains sympathy and expectations for the working class. The implementation of its class analysis in various fields of production,distribution and exchange, the analysis of some "sub-class"groups, the restriction of non-labor income and the encouragement of the joint enterprise of workers are all worthy of the reference of contemporary political economics. From the perspective of the extension of Mill's political economy to the whole classical political economy, its class analysis has made a lot of achievements, but there are still defects in the position that can't really touch private ownership.
引文
[1]约翰·穆勒.政治经济学原理[M].北京:华夏出版社,2009.
[2] KURER O,MILL J S. The politics of progress[M]. London:Garland Publishing Inc.,1991.
[3]张继亮.阶级、阶级对抗和社会主义———约翰·密尔的阶级观念[J].贵州大学学报,2016(5):13-17.
[4]秦胜军.约翰·密尔与社会主义[J].史学月刊,2005(4):61-68.
[5] SARVASY W. J. S. Mill’s theory of democracy for a period oftransition between capitalism&socialism polity[M]. Chicago:The University of Chicago Press,1984:568.
[6]盛文沁.约翰·密尔论社会主义[J].浙江学刊,2016(5):119-126.
[7] LOSMAN D L,MILL J S. On alternative economic systems[J].American Journal of Economics and Sociology,1971(30):85-104.
[8]陶大铺.简论资产阶级古典政治经济学[J].四川大学学报(哲学社会科学版),1984(4):25-27.
[9]马克思,恩格斯.马克思恩格斯全集:第25卷[M].北京:人民出版社,1974.
[10]马克思,恩格斯.马克思恩格斯全集:第24卷[M].北京:人民出版社,1972.
[11]马克思,恩格斯.马克思恩格斯全集:第23卷[M].北京:人民出版社,1972.
[12]陈俊明.论资产阶级古典学派劳动价值论的历史发展[J].华侨大学学报,2000(3):16-23.
[13]MILL J S. Collected works of John Stuart Mill[M]. Toronto:University of Toronto Press,1967.
[2] KURER O,MILL J S. The politics of progress[M]. London:Garland Publishing Inc.,1991.
[3]张继亮.阶级、阶级对抗和社会主义———约翰·密尔的阶级观念[J].贵州大学学报,2016(5):13-17.
[4]秦胜军.约翰·密尔与社会主义[J].史学月刊,2005(4):61-68.
[5] SARVASY W. J. S. Mill’s theory of democracy for a period oftransition between capitalism&socialism polity[M]. Chicago:The University of Chicago Press,1984:568.
[6]盛文沁.约翰·密尔论社会主义[J].浙江学刊,2016(5):119-126.
[7] LOSMAN D L,MILL J S. On alternative economic systems[J].American Journal of Economics and Sociology,1971(30):85-104.
[8]陶大铺.简论资产阶级古典政治经济学[J].四川大学学报(哲学社会科学版),1984(4):25-27.
[9]马克思,恩格斯.马克思恩格斯全集:第25卷[M].北京:人民出版社,1974.
[10]马克思,恩格斯.马克思恩格斯全集:第24卷[M].北京:人民出版社,1972.
[11]马克思,恩格斯.马克思恩格斯全集:第23卷[M].北京:人民出版社,1972.
[12]陈俊明.论资产阶级古典学派劳动价值论的历史发展[J].华侨大学学报,2000(3):16-23.
[13]MILL J S. Collected works of John Stuart Mill[M]. Toronto:University of Toronto Press,1967.