The "Group Portrait" and "Chaos" of Contemporary Foreign Marxist Thought

Foreign Marxism is an important component of the camp of Marxist theory and practice, and also a stone from another mountain that can serve as a mirror for contemporary Chinese Marxism. Since the 1970s, with the emergence and development of globalized financial capitalism, capitalism has exhibited a series of new changes and new characteristics, giving rise to new contradictions and new problems. In response, traditional Western Marxism, which had taken as its mission the critique of developed capitalist industrial civilization, has also adapted to the times and circumstances, transforming into currents of contemporary foreign Marxist thought, manifesting new features of value pluralism, ideological pluralism, and positional pluralism. To a certain extent, this signifies "the end of Western Marxism" and also reveals a fragmented phenomenon in which the glory of "contending schools of thought" and the suspicion of "a proliferation of chaos" coexist within contemporary foreign Marxist thought. This especially requires us to examine, distinguish, and discern it objectively on the basis of a firm Marxist standpoint, viewpoint, and method.

国外马克思主义是马克思主义理论与实践阵营的重要组成部分，也是当代中国马克思主义可供镜鉴的他山之石。20世纪70年代以来，随着全球化金融资本主义的发生发展，资本主义表现出一系列新变化新特征，涌现出新矛盾新问题。对此，以批判发达资本主义工业文明为己任的传统西方马克思主义也顺时因势地向当代国外马克思主义思潮转型，体现出价值多元、思想多元、立场多元的新特征。这在一定程度上意味着“西方马克思主义的终结”，也彰显出当代国外马克思主义思潮“群雄逐鹿”之荣与“乱象迭生”之嫌共生共存的碎片化现象。这尤其要求我们在坚定马克思主义立场观点方法的基础上对其加以客观审视、勘辨察识。

The Descriptive Character of Social Critique Superficializes the Social Historical View and Methodology

社会批判的描述性特征浅化了社会历史观与方法论

Historical materialism is one of Marx's two great discoveries and a core theoretical weapon for scientifically understanding and critiquing the essence of capitalism and the laws of development of capitalist society. However, currents of foreign Marxist thought, in their theoretical depictions and social critiques of the new changes in contemporary capitalism, have weakened or even transformed the worldview and methodology of historical materialism.

唯物史观是马克思的两个伟大发现之一，是科学认识与批判资本主义本质及资本主义社会发展规律的核心理论武器。然而，国外马克思主义思潮却在对当代资本主义新变化的理论描摹与社会批判中，削弱甚至改造了历史唯物主义的世界观和方法论。

First, the theoretical critique of contemporary capitalism by contemporary foreign Marxist thought primarily focuses on summarizing and generalizing the new forms of expression of capitalist society and its crises, often neglecting in-depth analysis of the intrinsic social historical causes and driving forces behind changes in relations of production and transformations in economic structure. They excel at vividly depicting the new changes and new characteristics of contemporary capitalism from different perspectives: from the form of monopoly, they generalize it as the stage of "international monopoly capitalism"; from the form of capital, they refer to it as "globalized financial capitalism"; from technological change, they emphasize the arrival of the era of "digital capitalism"; from the developmental course of capitalism, they believe the present is entering the dead end of "late capitalism"; from the model of social civilization, they argue that humanity is stepping into "post-industrial civilization," the "information society," the "high-tech society," the "post-capitalist society," and so on. Their "pulse-taking and diagnosis" of the crises of contemporary capitalism is equally vivid and diverse (accelerationist crisis, legitimation crisis, new alienation crisis, everyday life alienation crisis, crisis of symbolic symbolism, post-truth, mass culture crisis in the hyperreal era, etc.), engaging with and responding to the problems of modernity under the capitalist system from multiple angles such as digital exploitation, value decline, political disorder, technological loss of control, identity overlap, cultural blending, and the interweaving of time and space. These theoretical depictions of the new changes in capitalism reaffirm and confirm from various sides Marx's famous dictum that the bourgeoisie "creates a world after its own image," yet they rarely employ the methodological principles of historical materialism to deeply analyze the intrinsic structural elements and essential driving forces that necessarily lead capitalism to develop into its contemporary form. The social historical view is increasingly marginalized within their analytical framework.

其一，当代国外马克思主义思潮对当代资本主义的理论批判，主要着墨于总结概括资本主义社会及其危机的新表现形式，常常忽视深入分析生产关系变革与经济结构变迁的内在社会历史根由与动因。他们长于从不同视角形象地刻画当代资本主义新变化新特征：从垄断形式上概之为“国际垄断资本主义”阶段，从资本形式上指之为“全球化金融资本主义”，从技术变革上强调“数字资本主义”时代到来，从资本主义的发展历程上认为当下正迈入“晚期资本主义”的穷途，从社会文明模式等方面认为人类正在步入“后工业文明”“信息社会”“高科技社会”“后资本主义社会”等。他们对当代资本主义危机的“切脉诊疗”同样生动纷繁（加速主义危机、合法化危机、新异化危机、日常生活异化危机、符号象征主义危机、后真相、超真实时代的大众文化危机，等等），从数字剥削、价值式微、政治失序、技术失控、身份交叠、文化交融、时空交错等多重角度关涉与回应资本主义制度下的现代性问题。这些对资本主义新变化的理论描摹，从各个侧面再度体认并确证了马克思批判资产阶级“按照自己的面貌为自己创造出一个世界”的至理名言，却鲜见其以唯物史观方法论原则深度剖析资本主义必然发展至当代新形态的内在结构性要素与本质动力。社会历史观在其分析框架中日渐式微。

Second, contemporary foreign Marxist thought continuously injects analytical paradigms from political science, sociology, geography, ecology, psychology, and other fields into Marxism. On the one hand, this expands the theoretical horizon and discursive space of Marxist critique of capitalism, but on the other hand, it also has the side effect of using the methodologies or analytical tools of other social or natural sciences to infiltrate and dissolve the methodological principles of historical materialism. The Frankfurt School's critical theory integrates sociological observation and analytical methods into Marxism; structuralism provides Marxism with linguistic-semiotic and positivist bases for overdetermination; Freudianism adds micro-paradigms of psychology and psychoanalysis to Marxism; ecological Marxism reconstructs historical materialism with political ecology; feminist Marxism demands a reconciliation between feminism's "historical blindness" and historical materialism's "gender blindness"; spatial critical theory, on the methodological foundation of human geography, demands the reconstruction of historical materialism into historical-geographical materialism; and post-Marxist currents seek discursive support for deconstructing the "metanarrative" of historical materialism. A wide variety of schools and currents often emphasize the analytical paradigms they inject into Marxism, standing on the latter's theoretical positions and thinking foundations to treat Marxist theory as an instrumental object for self-confirmation or self-perfection, deviating from or even abandoning the social historical view and methodology of historical materialism. Therefore, although they claim to "reconstruct historical materialism," they are in fact taking the "non-Marxist" path of betraying historical materialism.

其二，当代国外马克思主义思潮不断向马克思主义注入政治学、社会学、地理学、生态学、心理学等分析范式，其一方面拓展了马克思主义资本主义批判的理论视野与话语空间，但另一方面也起到了以其他社会科学或自然科学的方法论与分析工具浸染并消解历史唯物主义方法论原则的副作用。法兰克福学派的社会批判理论向马克思主义融入社会学观察与分析方法，结构主义为马克思主义提供了语言符号与实证主义的多元决定论依据，弗洛伊德主义为马克思主义增添了心理学与精神分析方法的微观范型，生态学马克思主义用政治生态学重构历史唯物主义，女性主义马克思主义要求调和女性主义的“历史盲”与历史唯物主义的“性别盲”，空间批判理论在人文地理学的方法论地基上要求改建历史唯物主义为历史—地理唯物主义，后马克思思潮则为解构历史唯物主义的“元叙事”寻找话语支撑。形形色色的思潮流派往往强调其向马克思主义所注入的分析范式，站在后者的理论立场与思维基点上将马克思主义理论视为自我确证或自我完善的工具性对象，偏离甚至舍弃历史唯物主义的社会历史观与方法论。因此，他们虽自我标榜所谓“重建历史唯物主义”，实则走向背弃历史唯物主义的“非马”道路。

The Strategy of Polycentric Value Identification Abandons the Principle of the Proletarian Standpoint

多元中心主义价值认同策略背弃了无产阶级立场原则

The class standpoint of the proletariat is one of the hallmarks of Marxist faith and principle. From its inception, Marxist theory has taken human liberation as its highest goal, standing on the standpoint of the proletariat, which is consistent with the universal interests of humanity, to guide the proletariat in its liberation struggle, emphasizing the historical subject status of the proletariat. On this, Lukács said: "The proletariat can only perfect itself by transcending itself, by carrying its class struggle through to the end and realizing a classless society." In the historical period when capitalism transitioned from the stage of free competition to monopoly capitalism, early Western Marxism recognized the objective situation of the proletariat and the reality of internal class differentiation, but still stood on the class standpoint, emphasizing that the proletariat should enhance its "class consciousness" and "cultural hegemony" and other "soft power" of the class, and through self-perfection and self-improvement, consciously assume the epochal task of revolutionary liberation. However, this proletarian standpoint and the still partially existing logic of actual revolution underwent a fundamental shift with the changes in capitalism, developing into the contemporary New Left, which replaced the proletariat with multiple subjects.

无产阶级阶级立场是马克思主义信仰与原则的标志之一。马克思主义理论从诞生伊始便以人类解放为最高目标，站在与人类普遍利益一致的无产阶级立场上指导无产阶级进行解放斗争，强调无产阶级的历史主体地位。对此，卢卡奇说道：“无产阶级只有扬弃自身，只有把它的阶级斗争进行到底，实现无阶级社会，才能完善自身。”在资本主义从自由竞争阶段转向垄断资本主义的历史时期，早期西方马克思主义认识到无产阶级的客观处境和内部阶层分化的现实，但依然站在阶级立场上，强调无产阶级应提升“阶级意识”与“文化领导权”等阶级“软实力”，通过自我完善、自我提升，自觉担负起革命解放使命的时代任务。但是，这一无产阶级立场和尚存的部分现实革命逻辑随着资本主义的变迁发生了根本偏移，发展至当下新左翼，则以多元主体取代了无产阶级。

The numerous and competing schools of contemporary foreign Marxist thought have reached a certain degree of consensus on the "obsolescence theory" of Marxism. Specifically regarding the social existence of the proletariat, Western radical left scholars believe that the era of two major classes opposing each other based on the criterion of whether one owns property or controls the means of production has passed and will not return. In contemporary capitalist society, there is no traditional proletariat; the basic constituent units of social strata have shifted to subcultural groups, diverse interest groups, or generalized politically marginalized groups based on cultural value identification or political identity identification. Rancière's "the part of those who have no part," Negri's "multitude," Agamben's "bare life," Žižek's "a subject reduced to the Cartesian 'cogito,' approaching a zero point" as the "new proletariat," Fraser's "bivalent collectivity," and other diverse radical democratic collectives have become what they consider to be the historical subject concepts and their actual manifestations that transcend the proletariat in the contemporary era. In the view of Western radical left scholars, it is precisely these diverse groups—radical in nature, conscious of collective interests, and excluded on the basis of different political identity premises—that possess the potential to resist and challenge the existing political order. They look favorably upon the autonomous movements and new social movements that resist the capitalist establishment with these groups as subjects, considering them an effective way to promote social justice, practice, and realize "new communism."

派别林立的当代国外马克思主义思潮却在马克思主义“过时论”上达成某种程度的共识。具体到关于无产阶级的社会存在问题，西方激进左翼学者认为，以有无财产或是否占有生产资料为标准日益形成两大阶级对立的时代已经一去不返。当代资本主义社会不存在传统的无产阶级，社会阶层的基本组成单元已经转向以文化价值认同、政治身份认同为基础的亚文化群体、多元利益群体，或泛化的政治边缘群体。朗西埃所谓“无分者之分”、奈格里所谓“诸众”、阿甘本所谓“赤裸生命”、齐泽克所谓“一个被还原到笛卡尔式‘我思’的趋近于零点的主体”的“新无产阶级”、弗雷泽所谓“二价集体”等多元激进民主集体，成为他们所认为的当代超越无产阶级的历史主体概念及其现实表征。在西方激进左翼学者看来，恰是这些具有激进性质的、具有集体利益自觉的、被以不同政治身份前提所排斥的多元群体具备反抗与挑战现存政治秩序的潜能，并对以之为主体展开的反抗资本主义建制的自治运动、新社会运动青睐有加，认为这是促进社会公平、践行并实现“新共产主义”的有效途径。

Clearly, their ideas and theories about communism have already strayed far from scientific socialism. They replace the “association of free individuals” with commonality and political community; on the prospect of communism, they substitute abstract utopian assumptions and the identity struggles of radical democracy for real revolutionary movements; and regarding the forces on which communism relies, they replace the proletariat with multiple subjects. These absurd views exhibit certain characteristics of relativism, revivalism, and romanticism. The problem does not lie in the radical left’s theoretical recognition of the diversification of social strata, but rather in their stance—based on differences in political identity, cultural values, and social interests—of treating the emerging or disadvantaged new social strata and groups as “inter-group” entities with mutually independent cultural value systems, thereby replacing class relations with inter-group relations. On this basis, they transform the historically necessary path of liberation through the proletariat’s seizure of political power into a struggle for political identity, pinning their hopes on contingent possibilities.

显然，他们关于共产主义的理念与理论，已经与科学社会主义相去甚远。他们以共同性和政治共同体取代了“自由人联合体”；在关于共产主义的前途上，以抽象的乌托邦假设和激进民主主义的身份认同斗争取代现实革命运动；在共产主义的依靠力量方面，以多元主体取代无产阶级。这些荒唐的看法显现出一定的相对主义、复古主义、浪漫主义的特征。问题不在于激进左翼对社会阶层多元化的理论认识，而在于他们主要站在政治身份差异、文化价值观差异、社会利益差异等立场上将不断涌现或遭受不公的社会新阶层和群体视为文化价值体系彼此独立的“群际”，以群际关系置换了阶级关系。基于此，他们将原本具有社会历史必然性的无产阶级夺取政权的解放道路转换为政治认同斗争，并寄托于具有潜在可能的偶然性上。

Thus, what we commonly see is this: contemporary radical leftists expend great effort in searching for a yardstick to balance difference and equality, and in reinterpreting political discourses such as “democracy” and “equality.” Consequently, they either fall into an abyss of infinite metaphysical pursuit of the endless definition of political subjects’ identities, or sink into the quagmire of antinomies with no way to change, or drift into utopian reveries, remaining stuck in theoretical debates about the rationality and irrationality of visions of a “new communism,” while making no progress in practical movements to reform social governance models or overthrow hegemonic political rule. At root, contemporary foreign Marxism is nothing more than a lack of firm faith in communism and an incomplete adherence to the basic positions, principles, and methods of Marxism. They often treat Marxist theory as a theoretical tool for academic debate and scholarly research, rather than as a scientific guiding ideology for promoting social change.

所以我们常见到的情况是：当代激进左翼花费大量精力在寻找平衡差异与平等的公尺，以及重释“民主”“平等”的政治话语上。因而，他们要么在无穷尽的形而上追索中陷入对主体政治身份无限界定的无底深渊；要么深陷二律背反的泥潭，变法无门；抑或流于乌托邦式的遐思，停留在关于“新共产主义”憧憬的合理性与不合理性的理论争辩中，而在革新社会治理模式与推翻强权霸权政治统治的实践运动方面原地踏步。究其根本，当代国外马克思主义无外乎对共产主义信仰不坚定，对马克思主义基本立场原则方法的坚持不彻底，他们常常将马克思主义理论作为一种学理争辩、学术研究的理论工具，而非推动社会变革的科学指导思想。

The humanist stance and method weaken the scientific and revolutionary character of Marx’s critique of capitalism

人本主义立场方法弱化了马克思资本主义批判的科学性与革命性

From the perspective of theoretical traits and modes of thought, an important reason why contemporary foreign Marxist trends are pluralistically juxtaposed, hard to reach consensus, and weak in practice lies in their return to a humanist axiological stance and the methodological principle of cultural-philosophical critique in criticizing contemporary capitalism, rather than adopting the scientific and revolutionary methodological principles of political-economic critique and historical materialism.

从理论特质与思维方式上看，当代国外马克思主义思潮多元并置、难达共识、实践疲软的一个重要原因在于，回归人本主义价值论立场与文化哲学批判方法论原则批判当代资本主义，而非以科学和革命的政治经济学批判与唯物史观为方法论原则。

In the history of foreign Marxism’s critical theory of capitalism, a persistent and omnipotent theoretical axis is the critique of alienation. From Lukács’s revelation of the reification phenomenon and reified consciousness of modern capitalist society deeply trapped in the “universalization of the commodity form,” to the Frankfurt School’s proposals of consumption alienation, everyday-life alienation, technological alienation, self-psychological alienation, symbolic alienation, spectacle alienation, and accelerationist alienation in advanced capitalist industrial civilization, and then to current new forms of alienation such as digital alienation, platform alienation, environmental alienation, and spatial alienation—all are inseparable from the humanist value-critical tradition. The normative critical logic that their substance relies on and reflects often stems from philosophical-speculative academic critique, pointing to debates over the rationality and legitimacy of cultural values, while neglecting or obscuring the political-economic analysis of capitalism’s inherent structural contradictions based on the scientific worldview and methodology of historical materialism, as well as the firm commitment to and implementation of the revolutionary path of liberation through practice. Anderson summarized the contemporary critical logic of foreign Marxism: “it increasingly takes neither the economic nor the political structure as the central focus of its theoretical concern; its entire center of gravity has fundamentally shifted toward philosophy.” [6]6 Perry Anderson, *Considerations on Western Marxism* (London: Verso, 1976), p. 49. Harvey similarly recognized and criticized this normative logic of critique as a critique of appearances, “a political activity that avoids core contradictions can only ever deal with symptoms.” [7]7 David Harvey, *The Enigma of Capital and the Crises of Capitalism* (London: Profile Books, 2010), p. 218. Fraser also admitted from the dimension of political-philosophical critique, “we are still far from having a convincing answer.” [8]8 Nancy Fraser, “Behind Marx’s Hidden Abode,” *New Left Review* 86 (2014), p. 72.

在国外马克思主义的资本主义批判理论史中，一条持存且万能的理路轴线是异化批判。从卢卡奇揭示资本主义现代社会结构深陷“商品形式普遍化”的物化现象与物化意识问题，到法兰克福学派提出发达资本主义工业文明的消费异化、日常生活异化、科技异化、自我心理异化、符号异化、景观异化、加速主义异化，再到当下的数字异化、平台异化、环境异化、空间异化等异化新表现形式，都离不开人本主义价值批判传统。其实质所依据与反映出的应然性批判逻辑，往往出于哲学思辨式的学理批判，指向文化价值观的合理性与合法性论争，而忽视或遮蔽基于唯物史观科学世界观与方法论对资本主义内在结构性矛盾的政治经济学分析，以及对革命实践解放道路的坚定与落实。安德森总结国外马克思主义的当代批判逻辑，“越来越不把经济或政治结构作为其理论上关注的中心问题，他的整个中心从根本上转向了哲学”。哈维同样意识到并批判这种应然性逻辑的批判，是“一种避开了核心矛盾的政治活动永远只能对付征候”的表象批判。弗雷泽从政治哲学批判的维度也曾坦言，“我们离有一个令人信服的答案还差得很远”。

Thus, the cultural-philosophical critique based on the humanist stance and principle ultimately inevitably falls into a utopian destination, or manifests as formalized liberation schemes such as political struggle and cultural rejection, which remain on paper or in imagination. Marxism has always emphasized that the driving force of history is revolution, not critique; remaining at any level of formal speculation or so-called consciousness revolution is not the true driving force of history. More important than endless theoretical debate is reaching valuable consensus and forming a united force on the goal of advancing social-historical development and the progress of human civilization, firmly adhering to the basic positions, viewpoints, and methods of Marxism, relying on the main force of the masses, liberating and developing productive forces through continuous revolutionary practice, constantly innovating the mode of material production and life, comprehensively raising the level of material civilization and cultural-ethical progress, and gradually advancing toward the realization of human freedom and liberation.

由此，人本主义立场原则的文化哲学批判，最终难免频陷乌托邦归宿，或呈现为政治斗争、文化拒斥等形式化、流于纸面或想象的解放方案。而马克思主义始终强调历史的动力是革命，而不是批判，停留于任何形式上的思辨与所谓意识革命，都不是历史真正的推动力。比起无止境的理论争辩，更重要的是在推进社会历史发展与人类文明进步的目标上达成宝贵的共识、形成团结的合力，坚定马克思主义基本立场观点方法，依靠人民群众主体力量，在持续的革命实践中解放和发展生产力，不断革新物质生产生活方式、全面提升物质文明与精神文明水平，向实现人的自由解放逐步迈进。

In a certain sense, contemporary foreign Marxist trends launch multidimensional critiques of real social issues concerning human living conditions, such as ecological and environmental problems, social equality and justice, cyberspace security, social psychology, and democracy and the rule of law. Schools such as ecological Marxism, feminist Marxism, Marxist spatial critical theory, and historical-geographical materialism have surged, continuously attempting to combine natural science with Marxist theory, and to organically integrate the humanities and social sciences with Marxist theory. In terms of identifying problems, criticizing current ills, and expanding the global vision, regional characteristics, and interdisciplinary integration of Marxist theory, they have continued the critical tradition of Western Marxism, further enriching and expanding the contemporary interpretive perspectives of Marxism, and fully demonstrating the theoretical vitality and truth-power of Marxism. However, as mentioned above, contemporary foreign Marxist trends also, through multiple “avatars,” further descend into the “post-modern” abyss of fragmentarily deconstructing the basic positions, viewpoints, and methods of Marxism, dismembering the integrity of the Marxist theoretical system, making the difficulty of reaching theoretical consensus and practical unity the greatest limitation and obstacle to their development.

从一定意义上看，当代国外马克思主义思潮针对生态环境问题、社会平等公正问题、网络空间安全问题、社会心理问题、民主法治问题等关乎人类生存生活境遇的现实社会问题展开多维度批判。生态学马克思主义、女性主义马克思主义、马克思主义空间批判理论、历史—地理唯物主义等思潮流派风起云涌，不断尝试自然科学与马克思主义理论的结合、人文社会科学与马克思主义理论的有机结合，他们在发现问题、针砭时弊、开拓马克思主义理论全球视野、地域特征、跨学科交融等方面延续了西方马克思主义的批判传统，继续丰富拓展着马克思主义的当代解读视域视角，充分彰显了马克思主义的理论生机与真理力量。然而，正如上文所言，当代国外马克思主义思潮同时也以多元“分身”的方式，进一步迈向碎片化地解构马克思主义基本立场观点方法的“后学”深渊，肢解了马克思主义理论体系的整体性，使难达理论共识与实践合力成为其发展的最大局限与阻碍。

Online editor: Zhang Jian

网络编辑：张剑