俄国自由主义与列宁主义关于私有土地保护标准之争——来源正义保护与资本主义经营保护
发布时间：2019-03-03 16:33
【摘要】：革命者在革命中都会宣布革命对象违法,但只要不是以"砸烂一切"为目标的极端主义,都会依据某种标准从现存事物中认定出合法部分,这些合法的部分应该从革命对象中排除。1861年改革之后,俄国出现了私有土地,在俄国民粹派看来,当时俄国面临的是社会主义革命,全部私有土地都是革命对象,没有排除情况,也就无所谓排除标准。但在俄国自由主义和列宁主义看来,当时俄国面临的是民主革命,虽然现存的私有土地大部分是革命对象,但还是有一些私有土地应该受到保护,需要从革命对象中排除,然而排除标准并不相同:自由主义以来源正义为标准,列宁主义以资本主义经营为标准。换言之,前者以权利为标准,后者以效率为标准。对待私有土地如此,推而广之,对待一切财产亦是如此。认真梳理这两种思路的差异和得失,对我国的改革事业有重要启示。
[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.
【作者单位】： 同济大学马克思主义学院;
【基金】：国家社科基金重大项目(14ZDA059)
【分类号】：D751.2
，
本文编号：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.
【作者单位】： 同济大学马克思主义学院;
【基金】：国家社科基金重大项目(14ZDA059)
【分类号】：D751.2
，
本文编号：2433890
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/shekelunwen/guojizhengzhilunwen/2433890.html
