The Thought of Human Emancipation in *The German Ideology*

In *The German Ideology*, Marx and Engels not only thoroughly settled accounts with their “former philosophical faith,” but also, through a comprehensive critique of German ideology as represented by the Young Hegelians, completed a fundamental revolution in the conception of history. They firmly anchored the starting point of history in social, practical, concrete individuals, and on this basis formally elaborated the question of human emancipation. Here, Marx and Engels no longer appeal to abstract moral appeals or conceptual changes for human emancipation, but instead examine it within the objective laws of socio-historical development and the process of practice, thereby accomplishing a profound paradigm shift in theory.

在《德意志意识形态》中，马克思恩格斯不仅彻底清算了他们“从前的哲学信仰”，更通过对以青年黑格尔派为代表的德意志意识形态的全面批判，完成了历史观的根本性革命，将历史的出发点牢牢锚定在社会性的、实践的、具体的个人之上，并在此基础上对人的解放问题进行了正式的阐释。马克思与恩格斯在此不再将人的解放诉诸抽象的道德呼唤或观念变革，而是将其置于社会历史发展的客观规律与实践进程之中进行考察，完成了一次深刻的理论范式转换。

The Prerequisite for Human Emancipation: “Real Individuals”

人的解放之前提：“现实的个人”

Marx and Engels’ thought on “human emancipation” unfolds logically from the basis of “real individuals.” Individuals in the process of real activity are the foothold of Marx and Engels’ thought. Marx and Engels point out that the premise of history is “real individuals, their activity and the material conditions of their life.” [1]1 This phrase is a paraphrase of the concept of the “false community” (illusory community) in *The German Ideology*, where Marx and Engels describe the state as “the form of organization which the bourgeois necessarily adopt both for internal and external purposes, for the mutual guarantee of their property and interests.” “Real individuals” are neither isolated entities “living apart from society,” nor any abstract category such as “self-consciousness,” “species-essence,” or “the Unique One,” [2]2 This is a direct quotation from *The German Ideology* (Marx/Engels Collected Works, Vol. 5, p. 78). but rather living individuals situated in specific social relations and relations of production, engaged in actual productive activity, constrained by specific material conditions, and constantly changing these conditions. “Real individuals” are first of all natural beings of flesh and blood, who must satisfy basic survival needs through material productive activity, and are situated in the most plain and fundamental practice of producing the material means of subsistence. In material practice, the essential powers of the human being are objectified, and the subjectivity of the agent is concretely unfolded. In the process of material production, human beings not only transform nature, but also transform themselves, developing new needs, new capacities, and new social relations. Marx and Engels hold that “life involves before everything else eating and drinking, a habitation, clothing and many other things. The first historical act is thus the production of the means to satisfy these needs, the production of material life itself.” [3]3 This is a paraphrase of a passage from Marx’s *Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844* (MECW, Vol. 3, p. 300). They further argue that “the production of life, both of one’s own in labor and of fresh life in procreation, now appears as a twofold relation: on the one hand as a natural, on the other as a social relation.” [4]4 This is a direct quotation from Marx’s *Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844* (MECW, Vol. 3, p. 300). People are both the creators of these relations and are constrained by them. Therefore, Marx and Engels point out that “real individuals” must be individuals situated in specific relations of intercourse; the real essence of the human being is “the ensemble of the social relations.” [5]5 This is a paraphrase of a passage from *The German Ideology* (MECW, Vol. 5, p. 78). This breaks the shackles of idealist thought on human emancipation, and indicates that the question of human emancipation should be examined from the perspective of historical development, social development, and the development of production.

马克思恩格斯关于“人的解放”思想是基于“现实的个人”的逻辑展开的。现实活动过程中的人是马克思恩格斯思想的立足点。马克思恩格斯指出，历史的前提是“一些现实的个人，是他们的活动和他们的物质生活条件”。“现实的个人”，既不是“离群索居”的孤立体，也不是“自我意识”“类本质”“唯一者”或任何抽象范畴，而是处于特定社会关系和生产关系中、从事实际生产活动、受特定物质条件制约，并不断改变这些条件的鲜活个体。“现实的个人”首先是有血有肉的自然存在物，必须通过物质生产活动来满足基本的生存需要，身处于物质生活资料生产这一最朴实、最基础的实践之中。在物质实践中，人的本质力量得以对象化，主体的能动性得以现实地展开。物质生产过程中，人不仅改造自然，同时也改造自身，发展出新的需要、新的能力和新的社会关系。马克思恩格斯认为，“生命的生产，无论是通过劳动而达到的自己生命的生产，或是通过生育而达到的他人生命的生产，就立即表现为双重关系：一方面是自然关系，另一方面是社会关系”。人们既是这些关系的创造者，又受其制约。因此，马克思恩格斯指出，“现实的人”一定是处于特定交往关系中的人，人的现实本质是“一切社会关系的总和”，为人的解放打破唯心主义这一思想藩篱的束缚，指明人的解放问题，应当着眼于历史发展、社会发展、生产的发展来考察。

The Chains of Division of Labor, Private Property, and “Alienation”

分工、私有制与“异化”的锁链

Human emancipation means revolutionizing the material premises that constrain the all-round development of individuals, i.e., fundamentally changing the existing mode of production. Marx and Engels profoundly reveal that the root of the obstacles to human emancipation lies in the spontaneously formed, compulsory social division of labor and its necessary product—private property. They hold that “the division of labor is one of the principal forces of history up till now.” [6] The emergence and development of the division of labor promoted the development of society’s productive forces and relations of production, but at the same time, it also led to the fixation and one-sidedness of individual activity, as well as problems such as “the unequal distribution, both quantitative and qualitative, of labor and its products.” [7] This distributional relationship ultimately gave rise to private property. The division of labor and private property are the source of alienated labor. Once the division of labor appears, every person is confined to a specific, non-voluntarily chosen, socially imposed sphere, and their development is forced into one-sidedness. Marx and Engels point out that “as long as the division of labor arises naturally, not voluntarily, the individual’s own deed becomes an alien power opposed to him, which enslaves him instead of being controlled by him.” [8] Under private property, especially capitalist private property, labor becomes an alienating force. The labor of the proletariat is no longer the free exercise of the essential powers of the human being, but a means of survival and livelihood. Labor becomes an alien power that in turn dominates the worker. The alienation of the worker from their own labor, from the product of labor, and from the species-essence of the human being ultimately leads to the alienation of human beings from one another. The worker is reduced to an appendage of capital; the worker is enslaved by material means, the capitalist is enslaved by capital; the human being gradually loses autonomy and creativity. Only by breaking free from this alien power of constraint and enslavement can human beings move toward true emancipation and achieve the free and all-round development of the individual.

人的解放意味着对制约个人全面发展的物质前提进行革命，即从根本上改变现存的生产方式。马克思恩格斯深刻揭示了阻碍人类解放的根源，在于自发形成的、强制性的社会分工及其必然产物——私有制。他们认为，“分工是迄今为止历史的主要力量之一”，分工的出现和发展促进了人类社会生产力和生产关系发展，但同时，也导致了个人的活动固定化、片面化，以及“劳动及其产品的不平等分配”等问题，这种分配关系最终催生了私有制。分工和私有制，是异化劳动形成的源头。分工出现之后，任何人都被限定在一定的非自愿选择的、社会强加的范围之内，其发展被迫走向片面。马克思恩格斯指出，“只要分工还不是出于自愿，而是自然形成的：那么人本身的活动对人来说就成为一种异己的、同他对立的力量”。在私有制特别是资本主义私有制下，劳动成为一种异化的力量。无产阶级的劳动不再是人的本质力量的自由发挥，而是赖以生存和谋生的手段。劳动变为一种异己的力量反过来占有劳动者。劳动者与自身劳动、劳动产品以及人的类本质的异化最终导致了人与人的异化。劳动者沦为资本的附庸，工人被物质资料奴役，资本家被资本奴役，人逐渐丢失了自主性与创造性。只有挣脱这种束缚和奴役的异己力量，人才可能走向真正的解放，实现人的自由而全面的发展。

The Development of Productive Forces and the Revolutionary Proletariat

生产力的发展与革命的无产阶级

“Emancipation” is a historical activity. The absolutely necessary practical prerequisite for achieving “human emancipation” is the immensely abundant material wealth created by the high development of productive forces, along with the universal intercourse on a world scale that this brings. This provides the material basis for abolishing local limitations, forming world-historical individuals, and ultimately eliminating the old division of labor. In contrast to “alienated labor,” Marx and Engels propose the concept of “self-activity.” Self-activity points to an ideal state of human practice, an activity in which “the individual’s talents develop all-sidedly.” [9] In self-activity, labor is restored to its nature as the human being’s primary need and as free, conscious activity. Individuals are no longer bound by a fixed division of labor; they can freely engage in various creative activities according to their own interests and the needs of society, thereby achieving free and all-round development. The realization of self-activity depends on abolishing the division of labor under private property, the high development of productive forces, and the fundamental transformation of social relations. Marx does not regard self-activity as an unattainable utopia, but points to the real path for its realization—revolutionary practice. Through revolution, the severe constraints of private property and the division of labor on individuals are broken, the further development of productive forces and the rational adjustment of the mode of intercourse are promoted, and the emancipation of real individuals and the free development of all are achieved. Capitalist large-scale industry creates immense productive forces and universal world intercourse;

“解放”是一种历史活动。实现“人的解放”，绝对必需的实践前提，是生产力高度发展所创造的极大丰富的物质财富，以及由此带来的世界性普遍交往。这为消灭地域性的局限、形成世界历史性的个人并最终消灭旧式分工提供了物质基础。与“异化劳动”相对，马克思恩格斯提出“自主活动”这一概念。自主活动指向一种理想的人类实践状态，是“个人才能得到全面发展”的活动。在自主活动中，劳动恢复了其作为人的第一需要和自由自觉活动的本性。个人不再受固定分工的束缚，可以根据自己的兴趣和社会的需要，自由地从事各种创造性活动，从而实现自由而全面的发展。自主活动的实现，有赖于消灭私有制条件下的分工、生产力的高度发展以及社会关系的根本变革。马克思并未将自主活动视为可望而不可即的乌托邦，而是指出了实现它的现实路径——革命的实践。通过革命打破私有制和分工对个人的严重束缚，促进生产力的进一步发展和交往方式的合理调整，实现现实的人的解放以及一切人的自由发展。资本主义大工业创造巨大生产力和普遍的世界性交往，在制造普遍异化的同时，也锻造了克服异化的物质力量与主体力量。当现存生产关系成为生产力发展和交往方式进步的桎梏时，代表先进生产力的阶级的革命实践，便成为打破旧秩序、建立新社会的直接动力。作为资本主义社会中受压迫最深、最彻底的阶级，无产阶级通过革命运动夺取政权，更是为消灭一切阶级和阶级统治、为每个人的自主活动创造了条件。

The “true community” and the free and comprehensive development of the human being

“真正的共同体”与人的自由而全面发展

The emancipation of human beings is ultimately manifested in the free and comprehensive development of individuals in future society; it is the emancipation from the “one-sided person” to the “comprehensive person.” The free and comprehensive development of individuals depends on the emancipation of human beings on the basis of actual social conditions. Only by being liberated from the shackles of exploitation and oppression can the free development of the comprehensive or total person become possible. The future vision of human emancipation held by Marx and Engels is the voluntary and conscious formation of a “true community,” a completely new form of social organization. “The free and comprehensive development of the human person” can be truly realized only in communist society, and it is only under such social conditions that human beings can achieve thorough and genuine emancipation. Marx and Engels believed that the form of community in class society is in essence a “false community” that is “an association of one class against another.” [1]1 This phrase is a paraphrase of the concept of the “false community” (illusory community) in *The German Ideology*, where Marx and Engels describe the state as “the form of organization which the bourgeois necessarily adopt both for internal and external purposes, for the mutual guarantee of their property and interests.” Within it, individuals exist only as “members of a class,” the general interest is merely the particular interest of the ruling class, and individual freedom stands in opposition to the general interest of the community. Only when private property, classes, and compulsory division of labor are abolished can the “true community” be established. “In a true community, individuals obtain their freedom in and through their association.” [2]2 This is a direct quotation from *The German Ideology* (Marx/Engels Collected Works, Vol. 5, p. 78). Individuals are no longer objects managed and dominated by alien forces but are the conscious masters of social life. They are no longer constrained by a particular link or sphere of production; the free and conscious character of labor is restored, the individual and the community are truly reconciled, and the ideal of the emancipation of the human personality is realized. On the one hand, it transcends the opposition between individual interest and social interest under capitalism, making the community a condition for, rather than a restriction on, the free development of individuals. On the other hand, it preserves the richness and diversity of individual development, endowing society with vitality. This emancipation is “the complete emancipation of all human senses and attributes,” [3]3 This is a paraphrase of a passage from Marx’s *Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844* (MECW, Vol. 3, p. 300). a total emancipation at all levels—economic, political, cultural, and spiritual—in which “man appropriates his comprehensive essence in a comprehensive way.” [4]4 This is a direct quotation from Marx’s *Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844* (MECW, Vol. 3, p. 300). Individuals break free from dependence on persons and on things, liberate themselves from all alienated and enslaved social relations, give full play to their individuality, and obtain the conditions and possibilities for free and comprehensive development. Marx and Engels believed that “individuals can only develop themselves in and through society,” [5]5 This is a paraphrase of a passage from *The German Ideology* (MECW, Vol. 5, p. 78). and that all people share a common destiny. In universal world-historical intercourse, individuals transcend the limitations of nationality and locality, becoming “world-historical” individuals directly linked to world production, thereby gaining the possibility of fully developing their capacities and achieving a state of free and comprehensive development.

人的解放归根到底表现在未来社会个人的自由全面发展上，是由“片面的人”到“全面的人”的解放。个人的自由全面发展依赖于现实社会基础上的人的解放，只有从被剥削和压迫的桎梏中解放出来，全面的或总体的人的自由发展才能成为可能。马克思恩格斯关于人的解放的未来图景是自愿、自觉地结合成为“真正的共同体”，一种全新的社会组织形式。“人的自由而全面发展”只有在共产主义社会才能真正实现，人也唯有在这一社会条件下才能获得彻底的、真正的解放。马克思恩格斯认为，阶级社会的共同体形式在实质上是“一个阶级反对另一个阶级的联合”的“虚幻的共同体”。其中，个人仅作为“阶级的成员”而存在，普遍利益不过是占统治地位阶级的特殊利益，个人自由与共同体普遍利益处于对立状态，当私有制、阶级和强制分工被消灭之后，“真正的共同体”才得以建立。“在真正的共同体的条件下，各个人在自己的联合中并通过这种联合获得自己的自由。”个人不再是被异己力量管理、支配的客体，而是社会生活的自觉主人，不再受制于某一生产环节或生产领域，劳动的自由自觉特性得以复归，个体与共同体真正和解，人的个性解放的理想得以实现。一方面，它超越了资本主义社会个人利益与社会利益的对立，使共同体成为个人自由发展的条件而非限制；另一方面，它又保留了个人发展的丰富性和差异性，使社会充满活力。这种解放是“人的一切感觉和特性的彻底解放”，是在经济、政治、文化、精神等所有层面，“人以一种全面的方式，占有自己的全面的本质”的总体性解放。个体摆脱了对人、对物的依赖，从一切异化的、被奴役的社会关系中解放出来，个性得到充分的张扬，获得自由全面发展的条件和可能。马克思恩格斯认为，“个人只有在社会中并通过社会来获得他们自己的发展”，所有人命运与共。个人在普遍的世界性交往中，摆脱了民族与地域的局限，成为与世界生产直接联系的、“世界历史性的”个人，从而获得全面发挥其才能的可能，达到自由全面发展的状态。

The thought of human emancipation of Marx and Engels is a combination of a profound revolution in the conception of history and a sustained practical movement. Its theoretical brilliance, amid the complex social changes and ideological turbulence of the contemporary world, increasingly manifests its profound truth-force and powerful value for the times. This thought has completely broken with utopian fantasy and remains to this day a fundamental theoretical resource for criticizing capitalist modernity and exploring the future path of humanity, pointing the scientific way for the emancipation of the proletariat and all of humanity.

马克思恩格斯的人的解放思想是一场深刻的历史观革命与一场持久的实践运动的结合，其理论光辉在当代世界复杂的社会变革和思想激荡中愈发彰显出其深刻的真理力量和强大的时代价值。这一思想，彻底告别了乌托邦式的空想，至今仍是批判资本主义现代性、探寻人类未来出路的根本性理论资源，为无产阶级和全人类的解放事业指明了科学的道路。

(The author is a research fellow at the Jiangxi Normal University Research Center for the Practice of Civilization in the New Era.)

（作者系江西师范大学江西新时代文明实践研究中心研究员）