【作者】 张雯雯；

【导师】 王贵明；

【作者基本信息】 西南大学 ， 马克思主义理论与思想政治教育， 2008， 硕士

【摘要】 关于未来社会的所有制的探索是马克思经济思想的重要内容。马克思恩格斯历来非常重视所有制问题,他们在《共产党宣言》中指出:“共产党人到处都支持一切反对现存的社会制度和政治制度的革命运动。”①“在所有这些运动中,他们都强调所有制问题是运动的基本问题,不管这个问题的发展程度怎样”。②马克思“个人所有制”理念的经典性、确定性表述,是1867年《资本论》第一卷第24章“所谓原始积累”之七“资本主义积累的历史趋势”中的一段文字:“从资本主义生产方式产生的资本主义占有形式,从而资本主义的私有制,是对个人、以自己的劳动为基础的私有制的第一个否定。但资本主义生产由于自然过程的必然性,造成了对自身的否定。这是否定的否定。这种否定不是重新建立私有制,而是在资本主义时代的成就的基础上,也就是说,在协作和土地及靠劳动本身生产的生产资料的共同占有的基础上,重新建立个人所有制。”③理论界对这一问题众说纷纭,莫衷一是,形成了许多不同甚至对立的观点,似乎成了理论界攻不破的难题,以至有人把它称为经济学的“哥德巴赫猜想”。本文力图对理论界对马克思“重新建立个人所有制”思想的误解进行澄清,对这一思想进行一个全面系统的梳理。主要从以下四部分对这一思想进行研究:第一部分:导言。该部分主要对目前理论界对马克思“重新建立个人所有制”思想的误解进行澄清,从马克思经济思想的历史发展过程中,来把握与分析马克思的“重新建立个人所有制”思想。第二部分:马克思的“重新建立个人所有制”思想的内涵。该部分首先研究了该思想的形成过程;其次通过正确理解马克思在《资本论》中所采用的否定之否定的规律,对“否定之否定”的内涵、外延及其内在逻辑联系进行有力的分析与充分的论证。对所有制转变的历史蓝图即“劳动者个体所有制”——资本主义私有制——“个人所有制”的每个阶段进行分析,进而从分析中论证“重新建立个人所有制”的合理性与必然性;最后在此基础上分析出这一理论的具体内涵。第三部分:实现“重新建立个人所有制”的历史前提。该部分指出只有在生产力的高度发达、消除劳动分工和消灭生产资料私有制的历史前提之下,才能真正实现“重新建立个人所有制”。第四部分:马克思的“重新建个人所有制”思想的现实意义。该部分阐释了马克思的“个人所有制”在当今中国的所有制改革以及构建和谐社会中的现实意义,同时强调我们既要避免进入“‘个人所有制’是私有制”的观点的误区,但同时又不能陷入把“个人所有制”等同于我国现阶段社会主义公有制或者股份制形式的另一个误区。更多还原

【Abstract】 The exploration of the future socialistic ownership plays the main contents in Marx’s economical thoughts. Marx and Engels have attached much importance to the issue of ownership, and they pointed out in the Manifesto of Communist Party that "communists support all the revolution movements that fight against the existing social and political system." "Among all such movements, they particularly emphasize the issue of ownership which is regarded as movement’s basic issue whatever extent it has developed into." The precise and accurate statement of Marx’s "individual ownership" rooted in a passage: "Capitalistic private ownership, engendered from the capitalistic production system, is a first negation to the individual and private ownership based by ones own labor. It is the negation of negation that the course of capitalistic production causes disapproves to itself engendered from the inevitability of natural course. This kind of negation does not mean rebuilding private ownership, but reconstruct individual ownership based on the achievements of capitalistic period, which is also to say, based on the public possession of production material made by cooperation, land and labor itself." (On Capital Theory: 1867, vol 1, 24) Theoretical academia have a variety of opinions on this issue and form many different even opposite ideas, as a result, someone called it as economics’ "Gold Bach’s conjecture." This thesis aims to clarify theoretical academia’s misunderstanding of Marx’s thoughts about "rebuilding individual ownership." And it sorts out the thoughts in a comprehensive and systematic way. It mainly starts with the following four parts to study the thoughts:Part I: Introduction. In this part, it mostly clarifies theoretical academia’s misunderstanding of Marx’s "rebuilding individual ownership. It explores in the historical development of Marx’s economical thinking to understand and analyze his thoughts.Part II: The connotation of Marx’s "rebuilding individual ownership". In thispart, firstly, it studies the forming course of this thought. Secondly, through accurately apprehending the law of the "negation of negation" adopted by Marx in the On Capital Theory, it makes a potent analysis and sufficient illustration on the connotation, extension, and immanent logic connections. It analyzes every phases in conversion of ownership of historical blueprint which relates to "worker’s personal ownership" , "capitalistic private ownership" and "individual ownership" and demonstrates the rationality and inevitability of "rebuilding individual ownership" by analysis. Finally, it bases on what has been discoursed upon on to analyze the concrete connation of the thoughts.Part III: Historical premise for achieving "rebuilding individual ownership". In this part, it points out that "rebuilding individual ownership" can be realized; only when being on historical premise of that productive force is highly developed, the divisions of labor and private ownership of means of production are eliminated.Part IV: The practical significance of Marx’s "rebuilding individual ownership". In this part, it elucidates what the practical significance Marx’s "individual ownership" plays in the revolution of ownership and constructing harmonious society in present China. Meanwhile, it emphasizes that we should avoid holding misunderstanding that ’"individual ownership’ is private", but also can not misunderstand that "individual ownership" equates with socialistic public-owned system or joint-stock system in present stage of our country.更多还原