评价网 > 科教论文 > 教育学毕业论文 > 文化论文 > 正文

知识分子、民工、下岗工人的阶级关系(8)

2017-08-19 05:51
在进入他们的理论对于中国的民工这样的当代阶级分化问题的阐释之前，有必要先来谈他们两人对他们自己身上，和150年的‘马克思主义实践’中的马克思主义的清理，从他们对马克思主义的清理来看看我们中国知识分子应如何清理自己身上总是已经以某种样式存在的种种马克思主义，在必然会成为某种马克思主义者的这种现实下，去思考自己想成为怎样的一个马克思主义者，如何将现实关心得马克思主义。因为这总是件不容易的事：将马克思主义当作从各种意识形态中脱颖而出的一种关于意识形态的科学，但同时从来都意识到马克思主义也是以意识形态作为存在方式的，甚至如华勒斯坦所说它本身也是世界资本主义体系的意识形态（没有它，资本主义也不会有今天）；而也正是马克思主义告诉了我们：我们用来批判各种知识和话语的各种马克思主义，也是时刻需要我们去批判的，我们总是象骑手射着活动靶的。
这两个作者在当代很不客气地将马克思重新读成一个‘作者’，一个问题重重、有时是隐含着危险的伟大作者。华勒斯坦：‘…no thinker , however insightful, can ever state things in such a way that they are correct 100 years later. The very evolution of the 100 years creates additional empirical reality which means that the previous theoretical abstractions must be modified.…Marx would have written the Communist Manifesto differently in 1948 than in 1848, and Capital differently in 1959 than in 1859. We must do the same.’〖《脱思社会科学》，同上，151－2页〗我们没法不要马克思主义，但我们必须重创马克思主义。巴利巴：马克思拒绝将自己看作是一个马克思主义者，我们今天也能看穿恩格斯想把马克思主义搞成一个体系的手脚，但我们可以通过我们的精读，使马克思成为第一个也是最伟大的‘后马克思主义者’。〖《马克思主义哲学》，同上，122页〗马克思不是学院派、不是专业思想家、也不是社会活动家或革命活动家。他也只是象我们一样出于自己的良知安慰的需要，而对受压迫、受剥削者的苦难作出了描述，为改变他们的命运而呐喊的一个书生，他也为必须如何呐喊这一点而苦恼。他的与布朗基们、杜林们、拉萨尔们、克鲁泡特金们的斗争，并不证明他的立场的唯一正确，而是表明了他对无产阶级解放事业、人类的平等的社会主义未来的信念的坚定、执着，和对实现过程的屈折和迷离的当真和负责。马克思在我们时代必然会成为一个后马克思主义者，我们，中国的无产阶级，未被他选择、但仍苦苦求索而成为的他的传人（《中国和欧洲的革命》〖《选集》，12卷，纽约，1979年，94页〗中马克思说过一段很让中国无产阶级丧气、很是欧洲中心论的话：It would seem as though history had first to make this whole people（鸦片战争时的中国人民） drunk before it could rouse them out of their hereditary stupidity…It may seem a very strange and a very paradoxical assertion that the next uprising of the people in Europe, and their next movement for republican freedom and economy of government, may depend more probably on what is now passing in the Celestial Empire （天朝）），也必须以他的精神将自己超度和重生到某种二十一世纪的马克思主义里去。民工和下岗工人这样的问题，正在强迫我们对马克思主义在其自身发展的不同阶段上的阶级分析理论作出新的解释，说得上流一点，我们说不定可以用中国的新的阶级、新的剥削和压迫问题，来对马克思主义这种欧洲中心论式的人类解放筹划重作构图。
在当代重读了马克思的阶级理论后，我们对民工问题的讨论需从下面的问题开始：什么是无产阶级？巴利巴在《马克思主义哲学》〖同上，54－5页〗作了一个对于我们认识中国新无产阶级、民工问题很有启发意义的讨论：In reality, the concept of the proletariat is not so much that of a particular ‘class’, isolated from the whole of society, as of a non-class, the formation of which immediately precedes the dissolution of all classes and primes the revolutionary process. For this reason, when speaking of it, Marx employs, for preference, the term ‘Masse’ which he turns round against the contemptuous use made of it by bourgeois intellectuals in his days. Just as the proletarian masses are fundamentally propertyless (eigentumslos)，they are fundamentally ‘without illusions’(illusionslos) about reality, fundamentally external to the world of ideology, whose abstractions and ideal representations of the social relation ‘do not exist ’for them. The Manifesto will say the same thing, illustrating the idea with phrases which have since become fanous, but which today seems derisory, such as ‘the working men have no country.’ Similarly, they are free of the beliefs, hopes or hypocrisies of religion, morality and bourgeois law. For the same reason, they could not have ‘idologues’ proposing to instruct or guide them—‘organic intellectuals’, as Gramsci would later term them. (Marx certainly did not see himself as anything of the kind and this produced increasing difficulties when it came to conceptualizing the function of his own theory within revolutionary practice. Here again, Engels was to make the decisive step by bringing the expression ‘scientific socialism’ into general use. 我们必须象巴利巴那样从马克思的阶级理论出发在当代形成自己的关于什么是当代新无产阶级的一种‘理论’，来分析民工的阶级地位问题，否则，一动口，就会落进现存意识形态的框架和腔 调里。民工问题使我们必须重新斟酌和敲定与马克思主义的阶级分析理论的关系。