A Study of British Marxist Class Theory

From the perspective of intellectual history, the theoretical tradition of Western Marxism as a whole broadly presents two dimensions: first, a critique of contemporary capitalist society, i.e., critical theory of capitalist society; second, an exploration of possible revolutionary paths, i.e., new revolutionary theory. In this sense, although British Marxism differs markedly from continental European Western Marxism in its theoretical tradition and philosophical form, its theoretical creations basically unfold along these two dimensions. British Marxism has, in different periods, creatively interpreted, constructed, and defended historical materialism around themes such as class, culture, the state, and ecology, displaying a unique character within the diverse theoretical landscape of contemporary foreign Marxism. The development of Marxism in Britain has always been linked to its domestic socio-political life and global political circumstances. In particular, the occurrence of the 2008 financial crisis revived the once-dormant study of class issues, prompting British Marxist class theory to exhibit new developmental trends. In summary, since the 1950s, British Marxist class theory has undergone a process of establishing a historical research paradigm, a shift to a political science research paradigm, and a return to and reconstruction of a political economy research paradigm, thereby manifesting the theoretical individuality of British Marxism.

从思想史的角度来看，整个西方马克思主义的理论传统大致呈现为两个向度：一是对当代资本主义社会的批判，即资本主义社会批判理论；二是对可能的革命道路的探讨，即新革命理论。在这个意义上，尽管英国马克思主义在其理论传统与哲学形态上迥异于欧洲大陆的西方马克思主义，但它的理论创造基本沿着这两个向度展开。英国马克思主义在不同时期围绕着阶级、文化、国家与生态等主题对历史唯物主义进行创造性的解读、建构与辩护，并在当代国外马克思主义的多元理论版图中展现出独特的风貌。马克思主义在英国的发展始终与其本土的社会政治生活和全球政治形势联系在一起，尤其是2008年金融危机的发生使得阶级问题这个一度沉寂的研究再度复兴，促使英国马克思主义的阶级理论也呈现出新的发展态势。概言之，英国马克思主义阶级理论自20世纪50年代以来经历了历史学研究范式的建立、政治学研究范式的转向与政治经济学研究范式的复归和重建这一过程，从而呈现出英国马克思主义的理论个性。

Establishing a Historical Research Paradigm

建立历史学研究范式

The method of class struggle is the fundamental idea running through the *Communist Manifesto* and is also the basic method used by Marx and Engels to study human history, especially the development of modern society. However, Marx did not provide a clear definition of class in *Capital*. After the rise of the British New Left in 1956, British Marxist historians such as E.P. Thompson and Eric Hobsbawm, in texts like *The Making of the English Working Class* and *Labouring Men*, drew on relevant expositions of historical materialism, employed historical research methods, and examined the formation and historical evolution of the English working class from the perspective of the emergence of class consciousness. To a certain extent, this pioneered a historical research paradigm for class theory and enriched the historical materialist theory of class and class struggle.

阶级斗争的方法是贯穿于《共产党宣言》中的基本思想，也是马克思恩格斯研究人类历史、特别是研究现代社会发展的基本方法。但马克思在《资本论》中并没有给出关于阶级的明确定义。自1956年英国新左派兴起之后，汤普森、霍布斯鲍姆等英国马克思主义史学家在《英国工人的形成》《劳动的世界》等文本中，从历史唯物主义的相关论述出发，以历史学的研究方法，从阶级意识产生的角度考察英国工人阶级的形成及历史演化。这在一定程度上开创了阶级理论的历史学研究范式，丰富了历史唯物主义的阶级和阶级斗争学说。

First, the essence of class is a relationship. As a sum total of historical relations, the working class possesses not only the foundational relation of capitalist relations of production but also the essence of political, cultural, and other relations. Second, due to the mediating role of experience between social being and social consciousness, social being is understood as a living historical process rather than a rigid, substantive concept. Consequently, the formation of the working class requires not only the prerequisite condition of the capitalist mode of production but also customs, habits, and national cultural traditions, which can play an objective, and sometimes even decisive, role in the generation of class consciousness. In this regard, class and class consciousness are inseparable. Third, concerning class consciousness and class struggle, British Marxism emphasizes that the method of class struggle analysis is essentially a holistic method of relational analysis.

第一，阶级的本质是一种关系。作为历史的关系总和，工人阶级不仅具有资本主义生产关系这一基础性关系，而且有着政治、文化等关系的本质。第二，由于经验在社会存在和社会意识之间的中介性作用，社会存在被理解为一个活生生的历史过程而非僵化的实体概念。进而，工人阶级的形成不仅需要具备资本主义生产方式这一前提条件，同时风俗习惯、民族文化传统亦能在阶级意识的生成中发挥客观的、有时甚或是决定性的作用。就此而言，阶级与阶级意识不可分离。第三，在阶级意识与阶级斗争方面，英国马克思主义强调阶级斗争分析方法在本质上表现为一种总体性的关系分析法。

It can be said that the historical research paradigm attempts to rebel against and resist the dominant position of French "reason" and the scientific Marxist tradition by drawing on British national cultural traditions. In other words, this historical research paradigm tries to uphold the research tradition, initiated by British counter-Enlightenment philosophy since the 18th century, of equating philosophy with politics and history. It is essentially a tradition of historicist philosophy.

可以说，历史学的研究范式试图以英国的民族文化传统来反叛和抵制法国“理性”的支配地位及科学的马克思主义传统。换言之，这种历史学的研究范式，试图坚持自18世纪以来由英国反启蒙哲学所开创的将哲学与政治、历史等同起来的研究传统，本质上属于一种历史主义的哲学传统。

Shift to a Political Science Research Paradigm

转向政治学研究范式

The political science research paradigm advocates emphasizing the perspective of social power relations within the analysis of the political structure of class. Thus, this research paradigm reveals the composition and changes of power between the ruling class and the ruled class, conducts an in-depth investigation of the basic elements and causes of changes in the composition of power relations, and then reflects on the historical destiny of the working class and socialism.

政治学研究范式主张在阶级的政治结构分析中，强调社会权力关系的视角。由此，这种研究范式揭示统治阶级与被统治阶级之间的权力构成与变化，并对权力关系构成变化的基本要素与成因进行深入考察，进而思考工人阶级和社会主义的历史命运。

First, the political science research paradigm consistently emphasizes that Marx's method of class analysis is an effective tool for analyzing the reality and political phenomena of advanced capitalist societies. They argue that, in the political development process of advanced capitalist countries, despite the emergence of various "middle classes," their essence remains the process of confrontation between the ruled class, which sells its labor power, and the ruling class, which owns the means of production. Second, this research paradigm values the theoretical significance of the concept of the "collective worker" [Gesamtarbeiter] in *Capital* for understanding the working class, exploring the issue of the hierarchization of the working class in advanced capitalist societies. They argue that the new changes in the class structure of contemporary advanced capitalist societies are merely a problem of the ongoing recombination of the working class that has always existed throughout the historical process of capitalism. Regarding the subject of socialist revolution, they emphasize that the gravedigger of capitalism remains the organized working class, thereby refuting British neo-revisionism and the so-called "farewell to the working class" theory. Third, they use the concept of class to elucidate and construct their own theory of the state. They point out the importance of working-class political parties in the process of transforming capitalism into socialism, addressing the epochal questions facing Marxism. Particularly in *The State in Capitalist Society*, Ralph Miliband (1924–1994), based on an analysis of the relationship between state power and elite politics, emphasizes that although contemporary capitalist states have undergone significant changes in the economic, political, and cultural spheres, their essence remains an instrument of rule for the bourgeoisie as the ruling class. At the same time, he also borrows from Gramsci's theory of hegemony, revealing how advanced capitalist countries use new means of "political socialization" (intermediary channels such as mass media and education) to maintain the legitimacy of their class rule. Finally, in the "Miliband–Poulantzas debate," Miliband explicitly proposed the theory of state autonomy. His theoretical position holds that all states enjoy a certain degree of autonomy and independence from all classes (including the ruling class), but this autonomy and independence cannot change the essence of the state, i.e., its class character. Thus, within the framework of class struggle analysis, Miliband elaborated the view that "a theory of the state is also a theory of society and a theory of the distribution of power within that society."

首先，政治学研究范式始终强调马克思的阶级分析方法是分析发达资本主义社会现实与政治现象的有效工具。他们认为，在发达资本主义国家的政治发展过程中，尽管出现了各种各样的“中间阶级”，其实质仍然是出卖劳动力的被统治阶级与占有生产资料的统治阶级两者之间相对抗的过程。其次，这种研究范式重视《资本论》中的“总体工人”概念对于理解工人阶级的理论价值，探讨了发达资本主义社会中工人阶级的层级化问题。他们认为当代发达资本主义社会阶级结构的新变化，不过是整个资本主义历史进程中始终存在的工人阶级的重新组合问题。在社会主义革命的主体问题上，他们强调资本主义的掘墓人仍然是组织化的工人阶级，从而驳斥了英国的新修正主义及所谓的“告别工人阶级”的理论。再次，他们以阶级概念阐发并建构自己的国家理论。他们指出了工人阶级政党在资本主义转变为社会主义进程中的重要性，解答了马克思主义所面临的时代问题。特别是在《资本主义的国家》中，拉尔夫·密利本德（Ralph Miliband，1924—1994）在分析国家权力与精英政治的关系基础上，强调尽管当代资本主义国家在经济、政治与文化诸领域已发生重大变化，但其实质依然是作为统治阶级的资产阶级的统治工具。与此同时，他也借用了葛兰西的领导权理论，揭示了发达资本主义国家以“政治社会化”的新手段（大众媒介、教育等中介途径）维护自身阶级统治的合法性。最后，在“密利本德—普兰查斯之争”中，密利本德明确提出了国家自主性的理论。其理论主张，一切国家对一切阶级（包括统治阶级）都享有一定的自主性与独立性，只是这种自主性与独立性无法改变国家的实质即阶级性。由此在阶级斗争分析框架的基础上，密利本德阐发了“一种国家理论也是一种社会理论和在这个社会中分配权力的理论”的观点。

Return to and Reconstruction of the Political Economy Research Paradigm

复归与重建政治经济学研究范式

Accompanying the rise of neoliberalism in the late 1970s, "the end of class" became the dominant theoretical refrain of this period. Whether it was the analytical Marxist conception of class, which attempted to "transcend classical Marxist class analysis with a crude analytical method," or the post-Marxist conception of class, which completely dissolved class politics, the theoretical tendency was a discourse analysis bearing a clear imprint of "de-classification." It emerged alongside issues such as the "decline" of the traditional working class, the middle class, and social composition within the context of global capitalism, the new technological revolution, and new social movements.

伴随着20世纪70年代末新自由主义的兴起，“阶级的终结”成为这一时期的主要理论论调。无论是分析学马克思主义的阶级观试图以“一种粗线条的分析方法”超越经典马克思主义的阶级分析方法，抑或是后马克思主义阶级观对阶级政治的完全消解，其理论趋向都是一种带着明显“去阶级化”烙印的分析话语。它是伴随着全球资本主义与新技术革命的时代语境中新社会运动下的传统工人阶级“衰落”、中间阶级及社会构成等议题而出现的。

However, entering the 21st century, British Marxism points out that the capitalist crisis is in essence the product of neoliberal economic policies and the entire set of policies and discursive systems they have promoted at the political and cultural levels. Consequently, they emphasize the need to restore and uphold Marx’s critique of capitalism, particularly highlighting the importance of Marxist political economy for the study of class theory. They also stress a return to the dimension of critique of political economy, so as to restore the contemporary explanatory power of the labor theory of value. For instance, Alex Callinicos, in *Decoding Capital: Marx’s Capital and Its Fate*, reaffirms the labor theory of value, reiterating that capital accumulation originates from capitalists’ exploitation of surplus value, revealing the fundamental contradiction between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat, as well as the causes of capitalism’s inherent crises. On the one hand, he attaches importance to analyzing and studying the impact of specific socio-economic institutions on human behavior, as well as the concept of class as a collective force, in order to demonstrate the revolutionary subject status of the working class in neoliberal capitalist states. On the other hand, he emphasizes that the contemporary explanatory power of the working class lies in its most direct relationship with the capitalist mode of production, and that as wage laborers under capitalism, they possess a real economic, political, and social role. From this, he proposes that changes in social structure should be examined against the background of conflicts between “socio-economic classes.”

然而，进入21世纪，英国马克思主义指出，资本主义危机实质上是新自由主义经济政策及其在政治、文化层面所推行的一整套政策与话语体系的产物。进而，他们强调要恢复与坚持马克思对资本主义的批判，尤其是凸显马克思主义政治经济学对于阶级理论研究的重要性。他们还强调回归政治经济学批判的维度，重新恢复劳动价值论的当代解释力。如卡利尼科斯（Alex Callinicos）在《解码资本：马克思的〈资本论〉及其命运》中以对劳动价值论的坚守，重申了资本积累根源于资本家对剩余价值的剥削、揭示资产阶级与工人阶级的根本矛盾以及资本主义社会固有危机的成因。一方面，他重视对具体的社会经济制度在人的行为方面产生影响的分析与研究，以及作为集体力量的阶级概念，以论证新自由主义的资本主义国家中工人阶级的革命主体地位。另一方面，他强调工人阶级的当代解释力就在于它与资本主义生产方式有着最为直接的关系，且作为资本主义的雇佣劳动者具有真实的经济、政治和社会作用。由此，他提出对社会结构的变化要放置在“社会—经济阶级”相互冲突的背景下来进行考察。

In terms of theoretical interest, the study of political economy opposes the myth of the market’s omnipotence and the logic of consumerism, and advocates for transformative movements by the dominated classes aimed at reshaping the socio-economic environment. It is evident that the return to the research paradigm of the critique of political economy has become the main trend in the study of class theory in the 21st century. This research paradigm emphasizes that even though the logic of capital changes in form with the development of the times, leading to different demands in social practice and corresponding changes in power relations between classes, the nature of capital’s drive for self-expansion remains unchanged. Therefore, Marx’s way of understanding modern capitalist society through class struggle remains valid today.

在理论旨趣上，政治经济学研究反对市场万能论，反对消费主义逻辑，主张被统治阶级旨在改造社会—经济环境的变革运动。可见，复归政治经济学批判的研究范式成为了21世纪的阶级理论研究的主要趋势。这种研究范式强调，即使资本逻辑随着时代的发展，形态上有所不同，由此导致社会实践的需求有所不同，阶级之间的权力关系也会随之发生变化，但资本追逐增殖的本性并无二致。因此，马克思以阶级斗争来理解现代资本主义社会的方式，在今天依然有效。

The three shifts in the research paradigm of British Marxist class theory demonstrate British Marxists’ unique understanding of historical materialism. The historical materialism they understand is not an abstract formula, but rather takes the modern socialist movement as its content and foundation.

英国马克思主义阶级理论研究范式的三次转换，说明了英国马克思主义者对历史唯物主义的独特理解。他们所理解的历史唯物主义并非抽象的公式，而是以现代的社会主义运动作为自己的内容和基础。

Online editor: Zhang Jian

网络编辑：张剑