【作者】 李建勇；

【导师】 包心鉴；

【作者基本信息】 山东大学 ， 政治学理论， 2010， 博士

【摘要】 本文主要是关于“马克思主义中国化”命题的研究。“马克思主义中国化”既是一个具有很强政治权威性、很高政治定位并得到广泛运用的概念,也是一个富于争议的命题。论文试图通过对于“马克思主义中国化”命题提出背景、理论来源、运用变迁及若干理论争鸣的研究与评述,揭示其内涵、实质和意义,以获得对这一问题的新认识。作者相信,通过对“马克思主义中国化”命题的考察,能够给人们提供一个独特的视角来理解党的历史和中国政治的发展。导论部分主要是关于马克思主义中国化研究现状的介绍及对“中国化”内涵的辨析。关于马克思主义中国化问题的研究,无论是在中共延安时期还是在新的历史时期,都构成了一个重要的理论和政治现象。作为一个得到广泛应用的概念,“中国化”的一般内涵是外来理论应用于中国实际、解决中国问题、获得中国特色(与中国传统相结合)并形成中国版本的理论,但是也可以理解为那种热切追求“中国特色”、弘扬民族传统、并力图发现或证明中华民族优异特征的心理倾向和思想共鸣。本文是在这两重意义上使用“中国化”这一概念的,并认为对于“马克思主义中国化”也可以作如是理解。就是说,既要注意到“马克思主义中国化”所体现的理论与实际“相结合”的意义,也应充分把握其时代特色和文化内涵。第一章是对于毛泽东1938年提出“马克思主义中国化”背景和动机的研究。认为需要进行“立体的”而非“平面的”解读,才能全面理解这一概念所传达的多重信息。考诸历史背景可以认为：“马克思主义中国化”象征着中国共产党谋求独立自主地位的努力,是党内斗争的政治和理论工具,是构建中国的“新马克思主义”——毛泽东思想的“理论钥匙”,也是毛泽东政治人格和文化观的体现。更重要的是,它也是抗战时期民族主义思潮勃兴背景下中共政治和文化策略民族主义转向的体现：“马克思主义中国化”及相关命题如“民族形式”、“中国作风和中国气派”等显然是在民族主义背景下提出的,后者是前者的深层动力所在。通过对于“民族形式”、“中国化”的诉求,不仅有助于中国共产党获得共产主义运动内部的自主性,成为一个具有独立自主权和相应意识形态的政党；同时也有利于中国共产主义运动与民族解放事业的汇合,使其在理论和实践层面真正成为民族的、中国的运动。对于毛泽东和中国共产党而言,这一命题既是战略的,又是策略的,具备“有经有权”的性质。第二章分析了“马克思主义中国化”命题的思想来源。一是马列主义经典作家有关理论民族化的思想。其主要内容包括：强调马克思主义的基本原理“必须结合具体情况并根据现存条件加以阐明和发挥”；批评了理论民族化过程中出现的变形失真问题；反对将民族化的特殊经验加以绝对化的错误倾向。经典作家的这些思想可视为“马克思主义中国化”的理论根源；二是早期思想界“问题与主义”的有关论争、中共早期领导人关于马克思主义与中国实际相结合的思想。这些对于毛泽东提出“马克思主义中国化”起到了思想铺垫的作用：三是党的理论家们如陈伯达、艾思奇等人对于“民族形式”的讨论及对于相关口号的应用。这些对于毛泽东形成“马克思主义中国化”的概念产生了直接影响；四是斯大林所提出的“民族形式”和“民族文化”理论,与“马克思主义中国化”思想之间构成了源流关系。第三章对于毛泽东后来修改“马克思主义中国化”的提法的原因进行了探讨。认为主要原因是受到了来自苏联和斯大林的外部政治压力,但也与历史语境的变迁、政治形势的变化有着密切关系。至于后来未重新使用这一概念,则与对于“毛泽东思想”不科学的政治定位、对于传统文化价值不科学的估量有关。离开特定的历史语境来讨论“中国化”、“马克思主义中国化”并无实际意义。虽然可以从形式逻辑的意义上讨论“马克思主义中国化”的概念是否科学,但鉴于这一表达已经约定俗成,所传达的主要信息是明确的,所以这种讨论意义有限。至于那种认为“相结合”比“中国化”用语更规范的认识也值得商榷。第四章对于新时期“马克思主义中国化”在政治层面被重新提出的原因进行了分析。认为从历史比较的角度来讲可以有如下结论：从“反倾向”斗争的视角来看,重提“马克思主义中国化”是新时期中国共产党坚持中国特色社会主义理论和道路、反对错误思潮的象征；从理论创新的视角来讲,“马克思主义中国化”是打开“创立中国特色社会主义理论体系之门的理论钥匙”；从马克思主义中国化所包含的马克思主义与中国历史、中国文化相结合的要求来讲,可以认为是党的政治和文化策略出现了回归民族传统的转向：在当下的中国,倡扬民族主义、爱国主义,向传统要资源,以文化求认同,以提高国家凝聚力和忠诚感,已经成为执政党的自觉意识和行动。这一点在某种意义上可以称其为是新的“中国化”思潮。从中国近代历史发展的背景来看,“马克思主义中国化”是融入世界与转向民族传统相统一的象征,是一个矛盾的统一体。出现这种现象的根本原因在于：中国共产党谋求通过马克思主义找到一条实现民族复兴、国家富强的现代化道路,另一方面又要摆脱外力控制民族命运的局面,实现民族的独立。“俄国化”与“中国化”、“全球化”与“中国化”的对立统一关系就体现在“马克思主义中国化”的话语之中。第五章对于在马克思主义中国化研究中的争鸣进行了评析：某些学术话语在如何认识和评价马克思主义中国化的问题上存在着与政治话语的偏离。这些认识有的存在着明显的谬误,有的则有其认识的客观依据和意义,不能简单地对其加以否定或排斥。有关争论从一个侧面表明“马克思主义中国化”是一个具有丰富包容性的命题,相关研究也有助于从多重视角认识马克思主义中国化问题。但需要明确的是,在政治话语中,“马克思主义中国化”并不是一个无立场的、不包括价值判断的、对于马克思主义在中国的传播、应用、发展进行纯粹“客观”描述的用语,而是一个具有鲜明针对性和特定功能价值的命题。总之,本文通过对于“马克思主义中国化”提出及运用历史语境的考察、理论渊源的梳理,形成的主要结论是：“马克思主义中国化”概念的提出及其运用变迁,从一个侧面反映了中国共产党人对于中国实际特别是中国历史、中国文化认知和评价的变化。这个看似非常普通的政治术语实则是一个与中国共产党历史发展高度耦合的政治概念,是党的历史上、也是当今中国政治生活和社会发展中最具典型意义的政治文化符号之一,凝聚着非常丰富的政治文化内涵,折射着特定的政治价值取向和鲜明的时代特征：它既体现着中国共产党人对待马克思主义的科学观,即一切从实际出发,实事求是,在实际中检验真理和发展真理；也体现着中国共产党人对待马克思主义的价值观,它的提出及运用与民族主义／爱国主义有着无可否认的关联性,它兼具科学与价值的双重要求。至于理论界对于这一问题产生的争鸣,主要缘于马克思主义中国化实践的复杂性、“中国化”内涵的多重性、传统文化的多面性。归根结底,马克思主义中国化是为了解决中国问题而提出的,它是一个典型的实践性命题,具有鲜明的实践性品质；马克思主义中国化的实践性决定了它是一个持续的、开放的过程,不可能毕其功于一役；马克思主义中国化命题的生命力来自于其背靠历史(与中国历史、中国文化的结合)、面对现实(解决中国实际问题)、面向未来(用马克思主义来指导中国社会的跨越式发展)的强大能力。“哲学家们只是用不同的方式解释世界,而问题在于改变世界。”中国共产党人领导中国人民所进行的波澜壮阔的革命、建设、改革的实践以及在实践中所总结产生的诸多富于现实生命力的理论成果,就是关于什么是“马克思主义中国化”问题的最好回答。更多还原

【Abstract】 This dissertation is a study about the concept sinicization of Marxism. Though sinicization of Marxism has highly political authority and political positioning, and the concept is widely used in many subjects, yet it is a controversial problem. Therefore, it is necessary to deliberate the concept. The author wants to get some new remarks about the problem through the study of the historical context, theory origin, changes and academic contends.The first part named introduction is an overview of the study of sinicization of Marxism and the analysis of the concept sinicization. Sinicization of Marxism is a composite concept. Study with sinicization of Marxism is an important political and theory phenomenon both in Yan’an period and in nowadays. The concept sinicization has been widely applied in many subjects for a long period. Generally speaking, sinicization means a foreign theory applied to Chinese actual conditions, and in the application, the theory embody aesthetic taste of traditional Chinese culture and reflect the distinct Chinese characteristics and style, finally, a Chinese edition theory was formatted. However, sinicization could be also understood in this way:reflecting the national identity, propagating Chinese traditional culture, extolling Chinese Ethnic People’s distinct individuality. Sinicization of Marxism could be understood in those ways too.In chapter one, the author studies the historical background and the motivation of Mao Zedong put forward sinicization of Marxism in 1938:firstly, it means the independence of Chinese Communist Party from the Communist International; secondly, it symbols the inner-Party struggle between Mao Zedong and Wang Ming; thirdly, it was a theory key to the building of Chinese Marxism i.e. Mao Zedong Thought; fourthly, it embodied the political personality as well as the culture outlook of Mao Zedong; finally and most importantly, it symbolized the strategy and tactics nationalism transformation of both Chinese Communist Party’s political and culture policy in Anti-Japanese War period. Besides sinicization of Marxism, concepts like National Form, Chinese work style and Chinese manner were all associated with the rising of nationalism in anti-Japanese war apparently. Sinicization of Marxism was helpful to the independence of CCP from the Communist International as well as to the integration of the communist movement with national liberation movement.In chapter two, the author summaries the theory sources of sinicization of Marxism: firstly, Marxism classical writer’s theory nationalization thought was the theoretical roots; secondly, controversy about "problems and-isms" among thinkers in 1920s and the thought integrating Marxism with Chinese realities by some early Marxists paves roads to the concept; thirdly, the use of concepts like National form, sinicization by theoretical workers in 1930s may impact Mao directly. Joseph Stalin’s National culture theory also was the theory sources of Mao’s sinicization of Marxism.In chapter three, the author studies the reason why Mao Zedong revised sinicization of Marxism as integrate Marxism with Chinese realities and why the concept was abandoned for a long period. Besides the political pressure from CPSU and Stalin, the reason may lie in these:firstly, the changes of historical context; secondly, unscientific positioning of Mao Zedong Thought; thirdly, the unscientific evaluation of Chinese traditional culture by Mao Zedong in his later years. As for the controversy which term is more accurate, sinicization of Marxism or the concept integrate Marxism with Chinese realities, most of the controversy means little because the controversy divorced from the historical context.In nowadays, sinicization of Marxism regained use in Chinese politics. We may explain this political phenomenon through historical comparison method:firstly, the term is a symbol of countertendency; secondly, it is a key to theoretical system of Chinese socialism. Thirdly, it may also indicate the nationalism transformation of ruling party’s theory. In a sense, it is a contradictions continuum of integration into the global as well as return to the traditional culture. Those are the main contents of Chapter four.Chapter five is a summary of a controversy with sinicization of Marxism in academic sector. In the study of sinicization of Marxism, some academic discourses deviate from political discourses. Yet we cannot refute those academic discourses simplistically because those two kinds of views have their theory basis and theoretical significance respectively. Those discourses can help us from different angles. It should be noted that sinicization of Marxism is not a concept that described the spread, use and development of Marxism in China objectively yet has no political outlook.Briefly speaking, sinicization of Marxism means integrate Marxism with Chinese realities, Chinese history and Chinese traditional culture. It manifests the scientific attitude and the value outlook of CCP to Marxism. The use, revise and reuse of sinicization of Marxism reflect the development and changes of China’s realities as well as the assessment of Chinese traditional culture by CCP. The concept sinicization of Marxism is one of the most representative political and culture symbol in the history of CCP as well as in Chinese politics. The study with the concept sinicization of Marxism provides a unique perspective of observation about the Party’s history and the development of Chinese politics. All in all, sinicization of Marxism is a practical concept. The vitality of sinicization of Marxism comes from back-depend on the history, foot on the present condition, and face to the future. Just like Karl Marx said, the philosophers have only interpreted the world in various ways; the point is to change it. Chinese·Marxism and the practice of CCP in new democracy revolution, socialism reform and construction period are the best answer to the problem what is sinicization of Marxism.更多还原