俄國自由主義與列寧主義關(guān)于私有土地保護(hù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)之爭——來源正義保護(hù)與資本主義經(jīng)營保護(hù)
發(fā)布時(shí)間：2019-03-03 16:33
【摘要】：革命者在革命中都會(huì)宣布革命對(duì)象違法,但只要不是以"砸爛一切"為目標(biāo)的極端主義,都會(huì)依據(jù)某種標(biāo)準(zhǔn)從現(xiàn)存事物中認(rèn)定出合法部分,這些合法的部分應(yīng)該從革命對(duì)象中排除。1861年改革之后,俄國出現(xiàn)了私有土地,在俄國民粹派看來,當(dāng)時(shí)俄國面臨的是社會(huì)主義革命,全部私有土地都是革命對(duì)象,沒有排除情況,也就無所謂排除標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。但在俄國自由主義和列寧主義看來,當(dāng)時(shí)俄國面臨的是民主革命,雖然現(xiàn)存的私有土地大部分是革命對(duì)象,但還是有一些私有土地應(yīng)該受到保護(hù),需要從革命對(duì)象中排除,然而排除標(biāo)準(zhǔn)并不相同:自由主義以來源正義為標(biāo)準(zhǔn),列寧主義以資本主義經(jīng)營為標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。換言之,前者以權(quán)利為標(biāo)準(zhǔn),后者以效率為標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。對(duì)待私有土地如此,推而廣之,對(duì)待一切財(cái)產(chǎn)亦是如此。認(rèn)真梳理這兩種思路的差異和得失,對(duì)我國的改革事業(yè)有重要啟示。
[Abstract]:Revolutionaries will declare the object of revolution illegal in the course of the revolution, but as long as extremism is not aimed at "smashing everything", it will determine the legal part of existing things according to certain criteria. These legitimate parts should be excluded from the object of the revolution. After the 1861 reform, private land appeared in Russia. In the view of the Russian populist, Russia was facing a socialist revolution at that time, and all the private land was the object of the revolution. If there are no exclusions, there will be no exclusion criteria. But in the view of Russian liberalism and Leninism, Russia was faced with a democratic revolution at that time. Although most of the existing private land was the object of revolution, there were still some private lands that should be protected and need to be excluded from the revolutionary objects. However, the exclusion criteria are not the same: since liberalism, the source of justice as the standard, Leninism to capitalist management as the standard. In other words, the former is based on rights, and the latter is based on efficiency. This is how private land is treated, generously, and so does all property. Combing the differences and gains and losses of these two train of thought has important enlightenment to the reform cause of our country.
【作者單位】： 同濟(jì)大學(xué)馬克思主義學(xué)院;
【基金】：國家社科基金重大項(xiàng)目(14ZDA059)
【分類號(hào)】：D751.2
，
本文編號(hào)：2433890
[Abstract]:Revolutionaries will declare the object of revolution illegal in the course of the revolution, but as long as extremism is not aimed at "smashing everything", it will determine the legal part of existing things according to certain criteria. These legitimate parts should be excluded from the object of the revolution. After the 1861 reform, private land appeared in Russia. In the view of the Russian populist, Russia was facing a socialist revolution at that time, and all the private land was the object of the revolution. If there are no exclusions, there will be no exclusion criteria. But in the view of Russian liberalism and Leninism, Russia was faced with a democratic revolution at that time. Although most of the existing private land was the object of revolution, there were still some private lands that should be protected and need to be excluded from the revolutionary objects. However, the exclusion criteria are not the same: since liberalism, the source of justice as the standard, Leninism to capitalist management as the standard. In other words, the former is based on rights, and the latter is based on efficiency. This is how private land is treated, generously, and so does all property. Combing the differences and gains and losses of these two train of thought has important enlightenment to the reform cause of our country.
【作者單位】： 同濟(jì)大學(xué)馬克思主義學(xué)院;
【基金】：國家社科基金重大項(xiàng)目(14ZDA059)
【分類號(hào)】：D751.2
，
本文編號(hào)：2433890
本文鏈接：http://www.sikaile.net/shekelunwen/guojizhengzhilunwen/2433890.html
