The Theoretical Characteristics of Marx’s Thought on the Emancipation of Labour

Labour, as the cornerstone of human existence and development, is not only the source of creating wealth but also the pathway to realizing self-worth and free development. In the process of criticizing the capitalist mode of production, Marx put forward the thought on the emancipation of labour. This thought has multidimensional theoretical sources, providing a scientific theoretical basis for the free emancipation of the proletariat and all humanity, and is the key to understanding historical materialism.

劳动作为人类生存与发展的基石，不仅是创造财富的源泉，更是实现自我价值和自由发展的途径。马克思在批判资本主义生产方式的过程中，提出了劳动解放思想。这一思想有着多维的理论来源，为无产阶级和全人类的自由解放提供了科学的理论依据，是理解历史唯物主义的关键所在。

The Theoretical Origins of Marx’s Thought on the Emancipation of Labour

马克思劳动解放思想的理论探源

As a core component of his theoretical system, Marx’s thought on the emancipation of labour did not emerge as an isolated theoretical innovation but was built upon the dialectical sublation of ancient Greek and Roman philosophy, classical German philosophy, and classical political economy.

马克思劳动解放思想作为其理论体系的核心组成部分，其形成并非孤立的理论创新，而是建立在对古希腊罗马哲学、德国古典哲学、古典政治经济学等的辩证扬弃之上。

Ancient Greek and Roman philosophy closely linked labour with the hierarchical system, providing Marx with an important historical reference and critical starting point for thinking about the emancipation of labour. The ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle distinguished between “the labour of free men” and “the toil of slaves.” This distinction not only established a typological analytical framework for “labour” but also clarified the social-historical nature of labour itself—that is, the same productive activity takes on entirely different meanings within different social relations. Aristotle’s insight provided Marx with a source of thought for grasping the essence of labour from a class perspective, enabling Marx to penetrate through the surface forms of labour into the core of relations of production. The ancient Roman philosopher Cicero revealed an early form of the alienation of labour: when labour is alienated from man’s essential activity into a purchasable commodity, the labourer loses the essential determination of freedom. He stated, “the wages of all hired labourers are also unworthy of a free man and base, for what is bought is their labour, not their skill.” [1]1 Cicero, *De Officiis*, Book I, Section 150. The translation follows the Chinese text’s rendering of Cicero’s view that hired labour is incompatible with the dignity of a free man. In critically inheriting this intellectual tradition, Marx discarded the aristocratic prejudice that regarded manual labour as a “base affair.” Through historical materialist analysis, he revealed the historical roots of the alienation of labour—namely, that class antagonism under private ownership alienates labour from “man’s essential activity” into a means of survival and oppression.

古希腊罗马哲学将劳动与等级制度紧密关联，为马克思思考劳动解放问题提供了重要的历史参照和批判起点。古希腊哲学家亚里士多德区分了“自由人的劳动”与“奴隶的劳作”，这一区分不仅确立了“劳动”的类型学分析框架，更明确了劳动本身所具有的社会历史性质，即同样的生产活动在不同的社会关系中呈现出截然不同的意义。亚里士多德的洞见为马克思在阶级视野中把握劳动的本质提供了思想源泉，使马克思能够透过劳动的表象形式深入到生产关系的内核。古罗马哲学家西塞罗则揭示了劳动异化的早期形态，即当劳动从人的本质活动异化为可被购买的商品时，劳动者便失去了自由的本质规定性，“各种雇工的收入也是与自由人不相称的，卑贱的，因为被购买的是他们的劳动，而不是技艺”。马克思在批判继承这一思想传统时，摒弃了其中将体力劳动视为“卑贱之事”的贵族偏见，通过历史唯物主义分析揭示了劳动异化的历史根源，即私有制下的阶级对立使劳动从“人的本质活动”异化为生存压迫的手段。

Classical German philosophy constructed a system of dialectical thinking, injecting a profound philosophical critical dimension into Marx’s thought on the emancipation of labour. Kant established the principle that “man is an end in himself,” providing a value standard for the emancipation of labour and affirming man’s absolute value and dignity. He held that labourers should not serve as a means for the augmentation of capital but should themselves be the end of social development. Hegel constructed dialectics and revealed the dual role of labour in transforming nature and shaping the self: “the negative relation to the object becomes the form of the object and something that persists, precisely because the object has independence for the labourer.” [2]2 G. W. F. Hegel, *Phenomenology of Spirit*, Chapter on “Lordship and Bondage.” The quotation describes the formative activity of the bondsman, who through labour gives form to the object and thereby achieves a lasting existence for his self-consciousness. It can be said that Hegel, for the first time, elucidated from an ontological height the dual negative character of labour: labour is both a negative transformation of natural objects and a process of objectification of the subject’s self-consciousness. This dialectical understanding enabled Marx to recognize the historical generative essence of labour—that labour not only creates material wealth but, more importantly, creates man himself.

德国古典哲学构建了辩证思维方法体系，为马克思劳动解放思想注入了深刻的哲学批判维度。康德确立了“人是目的本身”的原则，为劳动解放提供了价值尺度，确立了人的绝对价值和尊严，认为劳动者不应作为资本增殖的手段，而应成为社会发展的目的本身。黑格尔构建了辩证法，并揭示劳动在改造自然与塑造自我中的双重作用，即“对于对象的否定关系成为对象的形式并且成为一种有持久性的东西，这正因为对象对于那劳动者来说是有独立性的”。可以说，黑格尔首次从本体论高度阐明了劳动的双重否定性质：劳动既是对自然对象的否定性改造，同时也是主体自我意识的对象化过程。这种辩证理解使马克思认识到劳动的历史生成性本质，即劳动不仅创造物质财富，更重要的是创造人本身。

British classical political economy established the framework of the labour theory of value, laying the political-economic analytical foundation for Marx’s thought on the emancipation of labour. William Petty was the first to introduce labour from the realm of moral philosophy into the core of economic analysis, making labour a key variable for understanding the production and distribution of social wealth. He explicitly stated: “all things ought to be valued by two natural denominations, which is land and labour.” [3]3 William Petty, *A Treatise of Taxes and Contributions* (1662), Chapter 9. Petty’s statement is a foundational text of the labour theory of value. Adam Smith systematically expounded the duality of the labour theory of value: on the one hand, “labour is the real measure of the exchangeable value of all commodities”; on the other hand, while it increases productivity, it plunges the labourer into a state of “stupidity and ignorance.” [4]4 Adam Smith, *The Wealth of Nations* (1776), Book I, Chapter 5 (on the real measure of value) and Book V, Chapter 1 (on the effects of the division of labour on the labourer’s mental state). Smith’s contradictory analysis provided important inspiration for Marx’s understanding of the inherent contradictions of the capitalist mode of production—the development of productive forces and the all-round development of labourers do not necessarily proceed in tandem; on the contrary, they may form an antagonistic relationship under specific relations of production. David Ricardo adhered to the single principle that labour time determines value, proposing that “the remainder after paying the landlord and the labourer must necessarily belong to the farmer, as the profit of his capital.” [5]5 David Ricardo, *On the Principles of Political Economy and Taxation* (1817), Chapter 6, “On Profits.” The quotation refers to the distribution of the product among landlord, labourer, and capitalist. Thus, in Ricardo’s view, the antagonistic nature of capitalist distribution relations is manifested in the fact that the generation of the value of the surplus part of labour is not a technical issue but a matter of social relations. This provided a direct theoretical entry point for Marx’s theory of surplus value. Marx developed the labour theory of value into the theory of surplus value, revealing from the perspective of the alienation of labour the essence of capitalist relations of production, achieving a theoretical leap from the analysis of economic phenomena to the critique of social relations, and greatly expanding the essential connotations of the emancipation of labour.

英国古典政治经济学确立了劳动价值理论框架，为马克思劳动解放思想奠定了政治经济学分析基础。威廉·配第首次将劳动从道德哲学领域引入经济分析的核心，使劳动成为理解社会财富生产与分配的关键变量。他明确提出：“所有物品都是由两种自然单位——即土地和劳动——来评定价值。”亚当·斯密则系统阐释了劳动价值论的双重性：一方面“劳动是衡量一切商品交换价值的真实尺度”，另一方面它在提升生产率的同时使劳动者陷入“迟钝与无知”的状态。斯密的这一矛盾分析为马克思理解资本主义生产方式的内在矛盾提供了重要启发——生产力的发展与劳动者的全面发展之间并不必然同步，反而可能在特定的生产关系下形成对立关系。大卫·李嘉图坚持劳动时间决定价值的单一性原则，提出“土地产品在支付地主和劳动者后的剩余部分必然会属于农场主，成为农场主的资本利润”。可见，在李嘉图看来，资本主义分配关系的对抗性本质体现为：劳动剩余部分的价值的产生不是技术问题，而是社会关系问题。这为马克思的剩余价值理论提供了直接的理论切入点。马克思将劳动价值论发展为剩余价值理论，从劳动异化角度揭示了资本主义生产关系的本质，实现了从经济现象分析到社会关系批判的理论飞跃，大大扩展了劳动解放的本质性内涵。

The Basic Core of Marx’s Thought on the Emancipation of Labour

马克思劳动解放思想的基本内核

Marx’s thought on the emancipation of labour profoundly reveals the intrinsic unity between labour and human emancipation, regarding labour as an important pathway for man to realize his self-worth and manifest his essential nature, and directing the theoretical purport toward the free and all-round development of man. This thought takes “the free and all-round development of man” as its goal, unfolding around core propositions such as “what is labour,” “how can labour be emancipated,” and “what is the path of emancipation.”

马克思劳动解放思想深刻揭示了劳动与人类解放的内在统一性，将劳动视为人实现自我价值和展示人的本质的重要途径，并将理论旨趣引向了人的自由全面发展。这一思想以“人的自由全面发展”为目标，围绕“劳动为何”“劳动何以解放”“解放路径何在”等核心命题展开。

Labour is the fundamental marker distinguishing man from animals and is man’s essential activity. Marx explicitly states: “Labour, this life-activity, this productive life itself, appears to man only as a means for the satisfaction of a need, the need to maintain physical existence. But productive life is species-life.” [6]6 Karl Marx, *Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844*, “Estranged Labour.” The translation follows the Chinese text’s phrasing. Labour, this life-activity and the productive life practice derived from it, may initially appear to man merely as a means to sustain the needs of physical existence. While creating material wealth, it also gives rise to complex systems of social division of labour and cooperation, promoting the development of many achievements of human civilization such as language, thought, science and technology, and art. Thus, labour becomes the essence of man’s “species-life”—that is, a social and creative mode of existence that transcends the level of individual survival—and ultimately liberates man from the shackles of nature, making him a subject with independent consciousness and autonomous capacity, capable of consciously and freely controlling his own activities. “Free, conscious activity is precisely the species-character of man.” [7]7 Ibid. This is Marx’s definition of the species-character of man. Through labour, man can objectify his own purpose and will into the object of labour, creating products that contain use-value. This process is essentially an active transformation of nature and a manifestation of the power of man’s essential nature and his self-transcendence.

劳动是人与动物相区别的根本标志，是人的本质性活动。马克思明确指出：“劳动这种生命活动、这种生产生活本身对人来说不过是满足一种需要即维持肉体生存的需要的一种手段。而生产生活本来就是类生活。”劳动，这一生命活动及由此衍生的生产生活实践，对于人类而言，最初可能仅被视为维系肉体存续需求的手段，其在创造物质财富的同时，也让人们形成了复杂的社会分工与合作体系，促进了语言、思维、科技及艺术等人类文明的诸多成就的发展，从而使劳动成为人类的“类生活”本质，即一种超越个体生存层面的社会性、创造性存在方式，并最终将人从自然的束缚中解放出来，成为具有独立意识和自主能力的主体，能够有意识地、自由地支配自己的活动。“自由的有意识的活动恰恰就是人的类特性。”通过劳动，人能够将自己的目的和意志物化到劳动对象中，创造出蕴含使用价值的产品，这一过程实质上是对自然界进行能动改造的过程，也是人类本质力量的展现与自我超越。

The emancipation of labour is the restoration of the right to free labour to the labourers themselves. Labour, as man’s essential activity, embodies man’s free and conscious nature. However, under the capitalist mode of production, labour encounters unprecedented alienation, concentratedly manifested as the total alienation of the labourer from his product of labour, from the labour process, from his species-essence, and from relations with other men. This state of alienation reduces labour to an “externalization of life”: the more wealth the labourer creates, the poorer he becomes; the more advanced labour becomes, the more degraded the labourer becomes. This alienated labour turns labour from man’s essential activity into a mere means of subsistence, and the labourer loses his subject position in the labour process. In labour, the labourer “does not affirm himself but denies himself.” [8]8 Ibid. This describes the experience of the labourer under alienated labour. What the labourer feels in labour is not freedom and happiness but pain and oppression. This alienated labour in capitalist society is a negation of man’s essence. It not only distorts the nature of labour but also profoundly affects the labourer’s state of existence, social relations, and even the structure of society as a whole. Therefore, alienation becomes the labour-form manifestation of the antagonistic contradictions of capitalist society, and labour becomes the real carrier of antagonistic social relations. To restore the right to free labour to the labourers and achieve the true emancipation of labour, it is necessary to fundamentally abolish the capitalist system and establish a socialist system, enabling labourers to freely associate and co-create, realizing the autonomy and creativity of the labour process, and making labour a pathway for labourers’ self-realization and all-round development.

劳动解放是将劳动自由的权利赋予劳动者自身。劳动作为人的本质活动，体现了人的自由自觉性。但在资本主义生产方式下，劳动却遭遇了前所未有的异化，集中表现为劳动者与其劳动产品、劳动过程、人的类本质以及人与人关系的全面异化。这种异化状态使劳动沦为“生命的外化”，劳动者创造的财富越多，自己就越贫困；劳动越进步，劳动者就越退化。这种异化劳动使劳动从人的本质活动沦为谋生的手段，劳动者在劳动过程中失去了主体地位，劳动者在劳动中“不是肯定自己，而是否定自己”。劳动者在劳动中感受到的不是自由和快乐，而是痛苦和压抑。资本主义社会中的这种异化劳动，是对人的本质性否定，不仅扭曲了劳动本质，更深刻地影响了劳动者的生存状态、社会关系乃至整个社会的结构。因此，异化成为资本主义社会对抗性矛盾的劳动形态表征，劳动成为对抗性的社会关系的现实载体。要将劳动自由的权利重新赋予劳动者，实现劳动的真正解放，就必须从根本上消灭资本主义制度，建立社会主义制度，使劳动者能够自由联合与共同创造，实现劳动过程的自主性与创造性，使劳动成为劳动者自我实现与全面发展的途径。

Vigorously developing the productive forces is an important means of achieving labor emancipation. The material foundation plays an extremely critical role in labor emancipation. “The realm of freedom actually begins only where labor which is determined by necessity and mundane considerations ceases.” [9]9 Karl Marx, *Capital*, Vol. 3, Chapter 48. Labor emancipation is built upon highly developed productive forces; only when the productive forces of society reach a sufficiently advanced level, creating abundant material wealth to meet people’s needs, can labor be transformed from a means of “making a living” into “the primary necessity of life,” thereby realizing the return of labor to its essence. “Directly reducing necessary social labor to a minimum, then, correspondingly, because time and means are created for all, the individual will develop in art, science, etc.,” [10]10 Karl Marx, *Grundrisse*, Notebook VII. and labor can truly become a free activity in which the essential powers of the human being are objectified. Under conditions of highly developed productive forces, workers are no longer confined to single, repetitive physical labor but can choose diversified forms of labor according to their own interests and talents, engaging in creative work. “The combination of productive labor with intellectual and physical education is not only one of the methods of increasing social production but also the only method of producing fully developed human beings.” [11]11 Karl Marx, *Capital*, Vol. 1, Chapter 15, Section 9. This diversified form of labor not only helps to improve labor efficiency but also stimulates workers’ creativity and initiative, making labor a pleasurable and fulfilling activity, thereby achieving the enhancement of self-worth and the enrichment of the spiritual world.

大力发展生产力是实现劳动解放的重要方式。物质基础对劳动解放发挥着极为关键的作用。“自由王国只是在必要性和外在目的规定要做的劳动终止的地方才开始。”劳动解放建立在高度发达的生产力之上，只有当社会生产力达到足够发达的水平，创造出丰富的物质财富以满足人们的需要时，劳动才能从“谋生”的手段转变为“生活的第一需要”，从而实现劳动的本质回归。“直接把社会必要劳动缩减到最低限度，那时，与此相适应，由于给所有的人腾出了时间和创造了手段，个人会在艺术、科学等等方面得到发展”，劳动才能真正成为人的本质力量对象化的自由活动。在高度发达的生产力条件下，劳动者不再局限于单一的、重复的体力劳动，而是能够根据自己的兴趣和特长，选择多样化的劳动形式，从事创造性的工作。“生产劳动同智育和体育相结合，它不仅是提高社会生产的一种方法，而且是造就全面发展的人的唯一方法。”这种多样化的劳动形式不仅有助于提高劳动效率，更能激发劳动者的创造力和主动性，使劳动成为一种愉悦的、富有成就感的活动，从而实现自我价值的提升和精神世界的丰富。

In contemporary society, science and technology are restructuring the forms of labor, the sharing economy is reshaping the distribution of value, and humanity is undergoing a great transformation from “dependence on things” to “free individuality.” Marx’s thought on labor emancipation not only profoundly indicates the path of transformation in the material relations of production in human society but also, through the confirmation of labor value and the restoration of subjectivity, enables “the essential powers of the human being to receive new confirmation and the essence of the human being to be newly enriched.” [12]12 Karl Marx, *Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844*, “Private Property and Communism.” Marx’s thought on labor emancipation provides theoretical support and an action guide for comprehensively advancing the practice of Chinese-path modernization with high-quality development, and it possesses distinct contemporary value.

在当代社会中，科学技术正在重构劳动形态，共享经济正在重塑价值分配，人类正在经历从“物的依赖性”向“自由个性”跃迁的伟大变革。马克思劳动解放思想不仅深刻指明人类社会物质生产关系的变革道路，更是通过劳动价值确证与主体性复归使“人的本质力量得到新的证明，人的本质得到新的充实”。马克思劳动解放思想为以高质量发展全面推进中国式现代化实践，提供了理论支撑和行动指南，具有鲜明的时代价值。

(Author: Yan Guohong, Associate Professor of the Philosophy Teaching and Research Department, Zhejiang Provincial Party School)

（作者：严国红，系浙江省委党校哲学教研部副教授）

Online Editor: Tongxin

网络编辑：同心