“Political Philosophy” in the Perspective of Marxist Philosophy

Although Marx firmly opposed the construction of any abstract theoretical system divorced from reality, his philosophical critique of political reality and his revolutionary struggle always went hand in hand, and he regarded philosophy as the spiritual weapon of the proletariat in its resolute struggle against political reality. In this sense, the form of philosophy in Marx’s perspective is also a “political philosophy”; the key is to accurately understand the theoretical role that “political philosophy” in the perspective of Marxist philosophy is to play and the historical mission it is to fulfill.

尽管马克思坚定反对任何脱离现实的抽象理论体系构建，但他对政治现实的哲学批判和革命斗争从来都是并驾齐驱的，并认为哲学是无产阶级对政治现实进行坚定斗争的精神武器。在此意义上，马克思视域中的哲学形态也是一种“政治哲学”，关键是要准确认识马克思主义哲学视域中的“政治哲学”所要扮演的理论角色与所要完成的历史使命。

Scientific Critique of Political Reality

对政治现实的科学批判

Although Marx denounced the speculative critique of political reality and its illusory nature carried out by German idealists represented by the Young Hegelians, and pointed out that “the weapon of criticism cannot, of course, replace criticism by weapons,” he never entirely negated the importance and necessity of the “weapon of criticism”; on the contrary, he regarded philosophical critique as a theoretical tool for transforming and changing reality. During the period of the *Deutsch-Französische Jahrbücher* [1]1 The *Deutsch-Französische Jahrbücher* (German-French Annals) was a short-lived radical journal edited by Marx and Arnold Ruge in 1844, in which Marx published early critiques of Hegel and developed his materialist conception of history., Marx formed a unique understanding of “political philosophy” through his critique of Hegel’s philosophy of right. In his view, Hegel regarded the political state as the “earthly deity,” reducing political relations to the self-unfolding of absolute spirit; this political philosophy, divorced from its real foundation, ultimately degenerated into an ideology defending the existing system. Later, when reviewing this experience, Marx pointed out more profoundly that “legal relations, as well as forms of state, are to be grasped neither from themselves nor from the so-called general development of the human mind, but rather have their roots in the material conditions of life, the totality of which Hegel, following the example of the English and French of the eighteenth century, summarizes as ‘civil society.’” This judgment established the real foundation of Marx’s “political philosophy,” drawing a clear line of demarcation between it and traditional speculative political philosophy.

尽管马克思斥责过以青年黑格尔派为代表的德国观念论者对政治现实所进行的思辨式批判及其虚妄性，并指出“批判的武器当然不能代替武器的批判”，但他从未全盘否定“批判的武器”的重要性和必要性，反而将哲学批判视为改造和变革现实的理论工具。在《德法年鉴》时期，马克思通过对黑格尔法哲学的批判而形成了对“政治哲学”的独特认知。在他看来，黑格尔将政治国家视为“地上的神物”，把政治关系归结为绝对精神的自我展开，这种脱离现实基础的政治哲学，最终沦为为现存制度辩护的意识形态。后来，马克思在回顾这一经历时更加深刻地指出，“法的关系正像国家的形式一样，既不能从它们本身来理解，也不能从所谓人类精神的一般发展来理解，相反，它们根源于物质的生活关系，这种物质的生活关系的总和，黑格尔按照18世纪的英国人和法国人的先例，概括为‘市民社会’”。这一论断奠定了马克思“政治哲学”的现实根基，使其与传统思辨的政治哲学划清了界限。

Marx’s emphasis on political philosophy is reflected in his regarding it as a weapon of critique to open fire on political systems that are “below the level of history,” and he held that “the struggle against the German political present is the struggle against the past of the modern nations, and the echoes of this past still oppress them.” In his view, even modern political states that have completed “political emancipation” still harbor hidden defects—the separation of state and society, the alienation of public interest, the hollowing out of individual rights, etc.—all of which are external manifestations of the internal contradictions of modern civil society. The task of political philosophy is to penetrate the surface of political reality, reach the deep-seated crisis of civil society, and elucidate the root causes of modern political problems and the paths to their resolution. Through his critique of Hegel’s philosophy of right and German state philosophy, Marx established a critical analytical path starting from civil society: “Criticism is no longer an end in itself, but only a means. Its essential sentiment is indignation, its essential work is denunciation.” This political philosophy, which struggles against political reality, possesses not only theoretical criticality but also practical revolutionary character, becoming the theoretical self-awareness and spiritual weapon of the proletariat in understanding its own historical mission.

马克思对政治哲学的重视，体现在将其视为向“低于历史水平”的政治制度进行开火的批判武器，并且认为“对德国政治现实的斗争就是对现代各国的过去的斗争，而过去的回音依然压抑着这些国家”。在他看来，即使是完成了“政治解放”的现代政治国家，也仍存在隐蔽的缺陷——国家与社会的分离、公共利益的异化、个体权利的虚化等——这些都是现代市民社会内在矛盾的外在表现。而政治哲学的任务就是穿透政治现实的表象，抵达市民社会的深层次危机，阐明现代政治的问题根源与解决路径。马克思通过批判黑格尔法哲学和德意志国家哲学而确立了从市民社会出发的批判分析路径，“批判已经不再是目的本身，而只是一种手段。它的主要情感是愤怒，主要工作是揭露”。这种对政治现实进行斗争的政治哲学，不仅具有理论上的批判性，更具有实践上的革命性，成为无产阶级认识自身历史使命的理论自觉和精神武器。

The Necessity of the Intervention of “Political Philosophy”

“政治哲学”介入的必要

In Marx’s view, the necessity of “political philosophy” arises from the “limits of political emancipation,” and the “limits of political emancipation” are the essence of the symptoms of modern politics, whose root lies in the crisis of modern civil society. With the rise of capitalism, civil society separated from the political state, becoming an independent sphere based on private ownership. This separation had historical progressive significance, as it broke the bonds of feudal hierarchy on people and established the subjective status of “man as citizen, that is, as a sensuous, individual, immediate being.”

在马克思看来，“政治哲学”的必要性源于“政治解放的限度”，而“政治解放的限度”是现代性政治征候的本质所在，其根源则在于现代市民社会的危机。随着资本主义兴起，市民社会从政治国家中分离出来，成为以私有制为基础的独立领域。这一分离具有历史进步意义，其打破了封建等级对人的束缚，确立了“人作为市民，就是具有感性的、单个的、直接存在的人”的主体性地位。

However, the mutual separation of civil society and the political state also gave rise to a profound internal crisis, whose essence is the total alienation engendered by capitalist private ownership—especially the reduction of relations between people to naked relations of interest, and the alienation of the human essence into the “citizen” who pursues private gain, thereby giving rise to the symptoms of modern politics. First, the alienation of the political state. The political state should originally be the embodiment of the public spirit and the representative of the public interest, but in reality, “in the state, where man is regarded as a species-being, he is the imaginary member of an imaginary sovereignty; he is robbed of his real individual life and filled with an unreal universality.” This is because, under the domination of the profit-seeking logic of civil society, the political state degenerates into a tool for safeguarding private interests, especially the rights of the bourgeoisie. Second, the opposition between “human rights” and “the rights of the citizen.” The “(freedom of) human rights” championed by modern civil society is essentially a right to freedom based on private profit-seeking, and the private freedom of profit-seeking creates a crisis of social fragmentation. “Liberty as a human right is not founded upon the relation of man to man, but rather upon the separation of man from man. It is the right of this separation, the right of the restricted individual, withdrawn into himself,” which is entirely different from and even opposed to the “rights of the citizen,” which pertain to participation in public political life and belong to the category of political freedom. Thus, the profit-seeking logic of modern civil society erodes the public spirit, reducing the political state and political life to a hollow existence. “The relation of the political state to civil society is just as spiritual as the relation of heaven to earth.” It is precisely these symptoms of modern politics that make the intervention of “political philosophy” necessary: “Theory is capable of gripping the masses as soon as it demonstrates *ad hominem*, and it demonstrates *ad hominem* as soon as it becomes radical.” This proclaims that “political philosophy” must assume a special theoretical task—to provide a critical path of thought for dispelling the symptoms of modern politics and thereby resolving the crisis of civil society.

然而，市民社会与政治国家的相互分离也催生了深刻的内在危机，其本质上是资本主义私有制催生的全面异化——特别是人与人之间的关系沦为赤裸裸的利益关系，而人的本质更被异化为追逐私利的“市民”，从而引发现代性政治征候。一是政治国家的异化。政治国家本应是公共精神的体现和公共利益的代表，但实际上“在国家中，即在人被看作是类存在物的地方，人是想象的主权中虚构的成员；在这里，他被剥夺了自己现实的个人生活，却充满了非现实的普遍性”。这是因为在市民社会的逐利逻辑支配下，政治国家沦为维护市民私利特别是资产阶级权利的工具。二是“人权”和“公民权”的对立。现代市民社会所崇尚的“（自由）人权”，本质上是建立于私人逐利之上的自由权利，而私人的逐利自由造成了社会撕裂的危机。“自由这一人权不是建立在人与人相结合的基础上，而是相反，建立在人与人相分隔的基础上。这一权利就是这种分隔的权利，是狭隘的、局限于自身的个人的权利”，与参加公共政治生活和属于政治自由范畴的“公民权”截然不同乃至对立。于是，现代市民社会的逐利逻辑侵蚀了公共精神，使政治国家和政治生活沦为虚化的存在。“政治国家对市民社会的关系，正像天国对尘世的关系一样，也是唯灵论的。”正是这些现代性政治征候使“政治哲学”的介入成为必要，“理论在一个国家实现的程度，总是取决于理论满足这个国家的需要的程度”。这宣告“政治哲学”必须承担特殊的理论任务——为祛除现代性政治征候进而破解市民社会危机提供批判性的思考进路。

Realizing the “Abolition” of “Political Philosophy” Itself

实现“政治哲学”自身的“消灭”

Marx maintained that “philosophy finds its material weapons in the proletariat, just as the proletariat finds its spiritual weapons in philosophy.” Philosophy, as a spiritual weapon, provides the proletariat with the theoretical guidance for criticizing politics and transforming society. In Marx’s view, the philosophy that criticizes politics is “political philosophy,” but “political philosophy” should not be satisfied with the critique of political reality; it must further critique civil society and reveal the general root of the symptoms of modern politics. Only then can it elucidate the historical position of the proletariat as “a class with radical chains” and “a sphere of society having a universal character because its sufferings are universal, and which claims no particular right because no particular wrong but *wrong generally* is perpetuated against it.” “Political philosophy” must enable the proletariat to shake off the obscurantism of bourgeois ideology, to realize that its suffering is not an absolute fate but a necessary product of the capitalist system, and thereby establish the revolutionary goal of overthrowing capitalist private ownership and achieving human emancipation. Without the spiritual weapon of “political philosophy,” the revolutionary struggle of the proletariat can only be blind, unable to form a conscious force for transforming the old world. Corresponding to “political philosophy” as the spiritual weapon, the proletariat serves as the material weapon, transforming the theoretical principles of “political philosophy” into real revolutionary action. In other words, the value of “political philosophy” is ultimately to be tested through practice. The proletariat is a product of large-scale industry, possessing a high degree of organization and revolutionary character, capable of overthrowing bourgeois rule through class struggle and thereby abolishing private ownership, the root of the crisis of civil society. When private ownership is abolished, the opposition between civil society and the political state is thereby dissolved, “the contradiction between the individual’s sensuous particular existence and his species-being will be eliminated,” and the symptoms of modern politics will be fundamentally dispelled. At that point, “political philosophy,” as a means of revealing the crisis and guiding transformation, will lose the real basis for its existence—it will no longer be needed to provide theoretical critique for resolving the crisis of modern civil society and dispelling the symptoms of modern politics. This means that the “limits of political emancipation” will be overcome, and a more thorough “human emancipation” will be ushered in. “The head of this emancipation is philosophy, its heart is the proletariat. Philosophy cannot be realized without the abolition of the proletariat; the proletariat cannot be abolished without the realization of philosophy.” However, this “abolition” is not the extinction of “political philosophy,” but the completion of its historical mission, and also the realization of its highest value as the spiritual weapon of the proletariat.

马克思主张，“哲学把无产阶级当作自己的物质武器，同样，无产阶级也把哲学当作自己的精神武器”。哲学作为精神武器，为无产阶级提供了批判政治和改造社会的理论指导。在马克思看来，批判政治的哲学就是“政治哲学”，但“政治哲学”不应满足于对政治现实的批判，还应进一步对市民社会进行批判，揭示现代性政治征候的总根源，如此才能阐明无产阶级作为“被戴上彻底的锁链的阶级”和“具有普遍性质的因而是解放全人类的力量”的历史地位。“政治哲学”务必使无产阶级摆脱资产阶级意识形态的蒙蔽，意识到自身的苦难并非绝对命运，而是资本主义制度的必然产物，从而确立推翻资本主义私有制、实现人类解放的革命目标。没有“政治哲学”这一精神武器，无产阶级的革命斗争只能是盲目的，无法形成改造旧世界的自觉力量。相应于“政治哲学”作为精神武器，无产阶级则为物质武器，其将“政治哲学”的理论原则转化为现实的革命行动。换言之，“政治哲学”的价值最终要通过实践来检验。无产阶级是大工业的产物，具有高度的组织性和革命性，能够通过阶级斗争推翻资产阶级统治，进而消灭私有制这一市民社会危机的根源。当私有制被消灭，市民社会与政治国家的对立便随之消解，“人的个体感性存在和类存在的矛盾将被消除”，现代性政治征候也将随之得到根本祛除。此时，作为揭示危机、指引变革的“政治哲学”便失去了其存在的现实基础——不再需要为破解现代市民社会危机和祛除现代性政治征候提供理论批判——这意味着“政治解放的限度”得到克服，并将迎来更为彻底的“人类解放”。“这个解放的头脑是哲学，它的心脏是无产阶级。哲学不消灭无产阶级，就不能成为现实；无产阶级不把哲学变成现实，就不可能消灭自身。”然而，这种“消灭”不是“政治哲学”的消亡，而是其历史使命的完成，也是其作为无产阶级精神武器的最高价值之实现。

In sum, from Marx’s perspective, “political philosophy” is the spiritual weapon with which the proletariat wages resolute struggle against political reality, yet Marx’s lofty conviction of achieving “human emancipation” must always keep the critical horizon trained on modern civil society. Hence, “the limits of political emancipation” make the intervention of “political philosophy” both inevitable and necessary, but “political philosophy” does not thereby become Marx’s “first philosophy.” Nevertheless, this does not mean that Marx has no “political philosophy” but only a “social philosophy.” As discussed above, “political philosophy,” in its commitment to overcoming “the limits of political emancipation” and to realizing “human emancipation,” will inevitably cause itself to lose the real foundation of its existence and move toward “abolition.” The “political philosophy” that moves toward “abolition” is by no means the end of human political wisdom; rather, it is the realization of its highest value as the spiritual weapon of the proletariat, and also its glorious historical mission.

总而言之，在马克思看来，“政治哲学”是无产阶级对政治现实进行坚决斗争的精神武器，但马克思致力于实现“人类解放”的崇高信念又必须始终将批判视域对准现代市民社会。于是，“政治解放的限度”使“政治哲学”的介入成为必然和必要，但“政治哲学”并没有因此而成为马克思的“第一哲学”。然而，这并不意味着马克思没有“政治哲学”而仅有“社会哲学”。如上所述，“政治哲学”致力于对“政治解放的限度”之克服以及对“人类解放”的实现，必将使其自身失去存在的现实基础而走向“消灭”。走向“消灭”的“政治哲学”绝不是人类政治智慧的终结，而是其作为无产阶级的精神武器之最高价值的实现，也是其荣耀的历史使命。

(The author is a research fellow at the Institute of Marxist Philosophy and China’s Modernization, Sun Yat-sen University)

（作者系中山大学马克思主义哲学与中国现代化研究所研究员）