The Historical Significance of the *Outlines of a Critique of Political Economy*

In the *Outlines of a Critique of Political Economy*, Engels not only reveals the alienation of economic categories but, more importantly, finds the logical starting point for dispelling the mystical system of Hegel’s speculative philosophy: turning from the immediate, indeterminate determinacy toward the reality of concrete human beings, thereby laying the foundation for historical materialism.

恩格斯在《国民经济学批判大纲》中不仅对经济范畴的异化进行揭示，更重要的是，他找到了去蔽黑格尔思辨哲学神秘体系的逻辑开端：从直接性的无规定的规定性转向具体的人的现实，为唯物史观奠定了基础。

The Logical Starting Point of the *Outlines of a Critique of Political Economy*

《国民经济学批判大纲》的逻辑开端

Objectifying activity, philosophically manifested as the sensuous activity of sensuous social-interaction subjects, and in the critique of political economy as objectifying labor, is precisely the self-activity of the real subject. Philosophy and the critique of political economy possess logical consistency: through the concrete-real → theoretical abstraction → theoretical concrete, and then back again into the concrete-real, the cycle of “concrete—abstract—concrete” in objectifying activity finds the locus of history’s emergence, completing the dialectic of thought and history within objectifying activity. Its logical starting point is precisely the “sensuous—objectivity” that Engels establishes in the *Outlines of a Critique of Political Economy* through the critique of the economic base of sensuous entities. For Engels, like Feuerbach, inverts Hegel’s speculative dialectic, which proceeds from the mystical, indeterminate determinacy, to sensuous certainty, and then to rational certainty and truth—the logical system of “abstract—concrete—abstract.” In the deployment of this logical system, Hegel, through the unity of “consciousness” possessing object-consciousness and “self-consciousness” withdrawn from object-consciousness, enables rational self-consciousness to achieve its own certainty and truth through itself, moving toward the “thing itself.” Engels, consistent with Feuerbach’s line of thought, holds that the logical starting point of dialectics must be re-determined in its certainty, namely “sensuous—objectivity.” Only within the logical starting point of “sensuous—objectivity” can one penetrate into the concrete bourgeois society and dissect the various alienated realities of capitalist private property.

对象化活动，在哲学上表现为感性的社会交往主体的感性活动，在政治经济学批判上表现为对象化劳动，这正是实在主体的自我活动。哲学与政治经济学批判具有逻辑一致性，通过现实具体—理论抽象—理论具体，复又回归到现实具体之中，对象化活动的“具体—抽象—具体”的循环为历史找到逻辑发生地所在，在对象化活动中完成思与史的辩证法。其逻辑开端正是恩格斯在《国民经济学批判大纲》中通过感性实体的经济基础批判确定的“感性—对象性”，因为恩格斯和费尔巴哈一样颠倒了黑格尔思辨辩证法从神秘的无规定的规定性出发，到感性的确定性，再到理性的确定性和真理性的“抽象—具体—抽象”的逻辑体系，黑格尔在这一逻辑体系的布展中，通过具有对象意识的“意识”和从对象意识中收回的“自我意识”的统一，使理性的自我意识通过自己本身实现自身的确定性和真理性，走向“事情自身”。恩格斯和费尔巴哈的思路保持一致，辩证法的逻辑开端必须重新确定其确定性，那就是“感性—对象性”。只有在“感性—对象性”的逻辑开端中，才能深入具体的资产阶级社会，剖析资本主义私有制的诸异化现实。

In 1843–1844, Feuerbach’s thought, through sensuous intuition, reversed Hegel’s rational theology, pointing out the fourfold representation of the “City of God.” [1]1 “City of God” (上帝之城) refers to Feuerbach’s critique of Hegel’s philosophy as a rationalized theology, analogous to Augustine’s heavenly city, which Feuerbach argued was a projection of human essence. In an era when Hegelian philosophy held sway, Feuerbach’s bold attempt was truly earth-shattering. This down-to-earth doctrine laid bare the defects of speculative philosophy’s profundity and obscurity. Engels was influenced by Feuerbach’s logical approach of sensuous intuition. In the *Outlines of a Critique of Political Economy*, Engels says: “It is precisely this inversion that constitutes the essence of abstraction. On this point, see the works of Feuerbach.” [2]2 This is a direct quotation from Engels’ *Outlines of a Critique of Political Economy* (1844), referencing Feuerbach’s works. In *The Holy Family*, he says: “Yet who, after all, revealed the secret of the ‘system’? Feuerbach. Who destroyed the dialectic of concepts, the war of the gods that was known only to philosophers? Feuerbach. Who, not ‘the meaning of man’ (as if man had any other meaning besides being human) but ‘man’ himself, replaced the rubbish including ‘infinite self-consciousness’? Feuerbach, and only Feuerbach.” [3]3 This is a direct quotation from Marx and Engels’ *The Holy Family* (1845), Chapter 6, Section 2. Undoubtedly, Engels was influenced by Feuerbach: “Spirit, thought, the idea is the primary thing, and the actual world is only a copy of the idea. This starting point has already been discarded by Feuerbach.” [4]4 This is a paraphrase of Engels’ later assessment of Feuerbach’s role, likely from *Ludwig Feuerbach and the End of Classical German Philosophy* (1886). Thus, to fully shake off the spiritual magic of Hegel, Engels acknowledged Feuerbach’s merit in inverting the relationship between idea and reality, and took Feuerbach’s “sensuous—objectivity,” which reversed Hegel’s speculative logic, as the logical starting point to unfold his critique of political economy.

在1843—1844年，费尔巴哈思想通过感性直观反转了黑格尔的理性神学，指出了“上帝之城”的四重表象。在黑格尔哲学占据统治地位的时代，费尔巴哈的大胆尝试可谓石破天惊。这种接地气的学说把思辨哲学的艰深晦涩的缺陷烘托得一览无余。恩格斯受到费尔巴哈感性直观的逻辑影响。在《国民经济学批判大纲》中，恩格斯说道：“正是这种颠倒构成了抽象的本质。关于这点，请参看费尔巴哈的著作。”在《神圣家族》中，他说道：“然而，到底是谁揭露了‘体系’的秘密呢？是费尔巴哈。是谁摧毁了概念的辩证法即仅仅为哲学家们所熟悉的诸神的战争呢？是费尔巴哈。是谁不是用‘人的意义’（好像人除了是人之外还有什么其他的意义似的）而是用‘人’本身来代替包括‘无限的自我意识’在内的破烂货呢？是费尔巴哈，而且仅仅是费尔巴哈。”无疑，恩格斯受到了费尔巴哈的影响，“精神、思维、观念是本原的东西，而现实世界只是观念的摹写。这种出发点已经被费尔巴哈摒弃了”。可见，为全面摆脱黑格尔的精神魔力，恩格斯认可费尔巴哈颠倒观念与现实的功劳，并把费尔巴哈颠倒黑格尔思辨逻辑的“感性—对象性”作为逻辑起点，展开对国民经济学的批判。

Critique of Capitalist Production

对资本主义生产的批判

Engels’ *Outlines of a Critique of Political Economy* opens the path of critique against bourgeois political economy, revealing that the moral hypocrisy, division of value, and accumulated labor brought about by private property inevitably lead to social contradictions: “Wherever we turn, private property leads us into contradictions.” [5]5 This is a direct quotation from Engels’ *Outlines of a Critique of Political Economy*. Engels successfully unearthed the pathology of capital within its physiology—a thunderous revelation. In the *Outlines of a Critique of Political Economy*, Engels’ analysis of concepts such as the factors of production (nature and man), capital and labor, private property and competition, overproduction of productive forces, and economic crises opens a new direction for the critique of the social reality of sensuous entities. Engels identifies the two factors of substantive production, namely “nature” and “man,” and establishes the two inseparable factors of communist production as the characteristic of the harmonious coexistence of man and nature. “We thus have two factors of production—nature and man, and the latter includes his physical activity and mental activity.” [6]6 This is a direct quotation from Engels’ *Outlines of a Critique of Political Economy*. Engels identifies the substantive characteristic of capital as “accumulated labor,” defining the essence of capital as labor; without labor, there would be no capital nor its series of derivatives. “Capital and labor are identical, for the economists themselves admit that capital is ‘accumulated labor.’” [7]7 This is a direct quotation from Engels’ *Outlines of a Critique of Political Economy*. By revealing how “price” conceals “value,” Engels uncovers theft within exchange of equivalents. Through the philosophical inversion of abstract things over concrete social reality, he determines that, under the premise of private property, the principle of exchange of equivalents arising from competition among entities is a hidden principle of theft. “The difference between actual value and exchange value is based on the fact that the value of an article differs from the so-called equivalent given for it in purchase and sale; that is, this equivalent is not an equivalent. This so-called equivalent is the price of the article.” [8]8 This is a direct quotation from Engels’ *Outlines of a Critique of Political Economy*. Engels clarifies that “overproduction” resulting from increased productive forces is the root of social crisis. “Overproduction” shatters the false physiological discourse of bourgeois political economists, demonstrating the deeply inverted essence hidden beneath the mask of appearances in real society. “In the course of development of production, there must come a stage at which productive forces become so greatly overabundant… prosperity and crisis, overproduction and stagnation, alternate with each other.” [9]9 This is a direct quotation from Engels’ *Outlines of a Critique of Political Economy*. Engels’ attempt to re-invert the economic activities of an inverted world is of profound significance.

恩格斯《国民经济学批判大纲》开启了对资产阶级政治经济学的批判之路，揭开私有制带来的道德的伪善、价值的分割、积累的劳动等必然导向社会矛盾：“不管我们转向哪里，私有制总会把我们引到矛盾中去。”恩格斯成功地在资本的生理学中发掘了资本的病理学，这是振聋发聩的。在《国民经济学批判大纲》中，恩格斯对生产要素（自然与人）、资本与劳动、私有制与竞争、生产力过剩和经济危机等概念的分析，开启了对感性实体的社会现实批判的新方向。恩格斯确定了实体性的生产的两个要素，即“自然”与“人”，确定了共产主义的不可分割的两个生产的要素，是人与自然和谐共处的特征。“我们就有了两个生产要素——自然和人，而后者还包括他的肉体活动和精神活动。”恩格斯确定了实体性的资本特征是“积累的劳动”，界定了资本的本质是劳动，没有劳动，也就没有资本及其一系列衍生物。“资本和劳动是同一个东西，因为经济学家自己就承认资本是‘积蓄的劳动’。”恩格斯通过揭示“价格”对“价值”的掩盖，发现了等价交换中的盗窃。他通过哲学上的抽象事物对具体的社会现实的颠倒，确定了私有制前提下因竞争而产生的实体间的等价交换原则是隐藏着的盗窃原则。“实际价值和交换价值之间的差别基于下述事实物品的价值不同于人们在买卖中为该物品提供的那个所谓等价物，就是说，这个等价物并不是等价物。这个所谓等价物就是物品的价格。”恩格斯明确了因生产力提高产生的“生产过剩”是社会危机的根源。“生产过剩”粉碎了资产阶级的政治经济学家们的资本生理学虚假演说，论证了现实社会中躲藏在表象面具下深层次的颠倒本质。“在生产发展过程中必定会出现这样一个阶段，在这个阶段，生产力大大过剩……繁荣和危机、生产过剩和停滞反复交替。”恩格斯对颠倒世界的经济活动进行再颠倒的尝试极具深远意义。

Essential Critique of Capitalist Private Property

对资本主义私有制的本质批判

The *Outlines of a Critique of Political Economy* provides a profound theoretical critique of capitalism. Engels criticizes the real society of private property: capitalist private property is the source of all evil. Capital is self-valorizing, reality is brutal, and exploitation is systematic. First, he establishes that the pre-existing real premise is the private ownership of the means of production. Engels points out: “The term ‘national wealth’ came into being only through the efforts of liberal economists to generalize. As long as private property exists, this term has no meaning. The English have much ‘national wealth,’ yet they are the poorest nation in the world. One must either discard this term entirely or adopt some premises that give it meaning. The same applies to the terms national economy, political economy, public economy, etc. Under present circumstances, this science should be called private economics, for in this science, social relations exist only for the sake of private property.” [10]10 This is a direct quotation from Engels’ *Outlines of a Critique of Political Economy*. Second, capitalist private property necessarily exploits labor. In analyzing exploitation, Engels profoundly points out the cruel reality that the products of labor cannot be possessed by the laborers, and the inverted phenomenon of living labor being enslaved by dead capital. “We can also see from the economists’ own exposition that capital is the result of labor, and in the process of production it immediately becomes the substrate of labor, the material of labor; thus the momentary separation of capital and labor is immediately dissolved in their unity; but the economists still separate capital and labor, still insist on this division.” [11]11 This is a direct quotation from Engels’ *Outlines of a Critique of Political Economy*. In the system of capitalist private property, the unity of labor and capital is acknowledged only in the definition of capital as “accumulated labor.” The division of capital and labor caused by private property results in “the division of labor itself.” [12]12 “Division of labor itself” (劳动本身的分裂) refers to the splitting of labor into separate, alienated forms under private property, as analyzed by Engels.

《国民经济学批判大纲》对资本主义做出了深刻的理论批判。恩格斯批判私有的现实社会：资本主义私有制是一切罪恶的源泉。资本是增殖的，现实是残酷的，剥削是有体系的。首先，确定先行在场的现实前提是生产资料私有制。恩格斯指出，“国民财富这个用语是由于自由主义经济学家努力进行概括才产生的。只要私有制存在一天，这个用语便没有任何意义。英国人的‘国民财富’很多，他们却是世界上最穷的民族。人们要么完全抛弃这个用语，要么采用一些使它具有意义的前提。国民经济学，政治经济学，公共经济学等用语也是一样。在目前的情况下，应该把这种科学称为私经济学，因为在这种科学看来，社会关系只是为了私有制而存在”。其次，资本主义私有制必然要剥削劳动。在剖析剥削时，恩格斯深刻指出劳动产品不能为劳动者占有这一残酷现实，活劳动被死资本奴役这一颠倒现象。“我们从经济学家自己的阐述中也可以看到，资本是劳动的结果，它在生产过程中立刻又变成了劳动的基质、劳动的材料；可见，资本和劳动的短暂分开，立刻又在两者的统一中消失了；但是，经济学家还是把资本和劳动分开，还是坚持这两者的分裂。”在资本主义私有制体系中，只有在资本是“积蓄的劳动”这个定义中才承认劳动和资本的统一。而由私有制造成的资本和劳动的分裂，造成了“劳动本身的分裂”。

Engels further criticizes the exploitative relations of capitalist society: the worker is an appendage of things, living labor is dominated by dead labor. The expansion of capital requires the formation of a fixed system of social relations as an exploitative system. Engels points out that at the center of this exploitative system is labor, causing living, breathing human beings to be dominated by lifeless, dead things. Labor produces value, yet value does not belong to the laborer. Engels explicitly identifies the predatory nature of the capitalist; under private ownership, the law of concentration of property inevitably leads to the differentiation of social strata. “This concentration of property is a law inherent in private property, like all other laws. The middle class must increasingly disappear, until the world is split into millionaires and paupers, great landowners and poor day laborers. Any law, any division of landed property, any accidental splitting of capital, is of no avail; this result must and will come to pass, unless there is a comprehensive transformation of social relations beforehand, a fusion of opposing interests, and the abolition of private property.” [13]13 This passage is a direct quotation from Engels’s “Outline of a Critique of Political Economy” (1844), which influenced Marx’s early economic writings. The original German text uses the term “Mittelstand” (middle estate/class), rendered here as “middle class.”

恩格斯进一步批判资本主义社会的剥削关系：工人是物的附庸，活劳动被死劳动统治。资本增殖要求形成固定的社会关系体系的剥削系统。恩格斯指明了处于剥削系统中心地位的是劳动，使有生命的活生生的人被无生命的死的物统治。劳动产生价值，但是价值却不归劳动者所有。恩格斯明确指出资本家的掠夺本性，私有制下的财产的集中规律必然导致社会阶层的分化。“这种财产的集中是一个规律，它与所有其他的规律一样，是私有制所固有的 中间阶级必然越来越多地消失，直到世界分裂为百万富翁和穷光蛋、大土地占有者和贫穷的短工为止。任何法律，土地占有的任何分割，资本的任何偶然的分裂，都无济于事，这个结果必定会产生，而且就会产生，除非在此之前全面变革社会关系、使对立的利益融合、使私有制归于消灭。”

The evils brought by private ownership can only be eliminated through the abolition of private ownership. Engels points out that private ownership is the precondition for society to carry out equivalent exchange, and exchange is the necessary stage for capital to generate value and realize exploitation: “Without the abolition of private property, it is impossible to abolish the opposition between the actual utility inherent in things and the determination of this utility, as well as the opposition between the determination of utility and the freedom of the exchanger. Once private property is abolished, there will be no need to talk about exchange as it now exists.” Engels analyzes the essence of human society and points out the future direction of social development, which is the path of public ownership that breaks through private ownership.

私有制带来的弊端唯有通过消灭私有制才能解除。恩格斯指出，私有制是社会赖以进行等价交换的前提，交换是资本产生价值和实现剥削的必经阶段：“不消灭私有制，就不可能消灭物品固有的实际效用和这种效用的规定之间的对立，以及效用的规定和交换者的自由之间的对立而私有制一旦被消灭，就无须再谈现在这样的交换了。”恩格斯对人类社会的本质进行剖析，指出了社会发展的未来方向，这就是突破私有制的公有制道路。

Online editor: Paul

网络编辑：保罗