The Civilizational Implications of *The Communist Manifesto*

*The Communist Manifesto* (hereinafter referred to as the *Manifesto*) marks the public advent of Marxism. As a programmatic document of Marxism, the *Manifesto* employs the basic viewpoints of historical materialism to reveal the historical significance and inherent maladies of modern capitalist civilization, and to elucidate the historical inevitability of human civilization entering a new communist civilization, thus possessing rich civilizational implications. The *Manifesto* emphasizes that the bourgeoisie “creates a world after its own image,” that is, the world of modern “bourgeois civilization”; at the same time, it also creates the gravedigger of this modern “bourgeois civilization,” namely, the proletariat. It can be said that the *Manifesto* is both a critique of modern capitalist civilization and a declaration of a new communist civilization.

《共产党宣言》（以下简称《宣言》）标志着马克思主义的公开问世。作为马克思主义的纲领性文献，《宣言》运用历史唯物主义的基本观点，揭示了现代资本主义文明的历史意义和内在弊病，阐释了人类文明进入共产主义新文明的历史必然性，具有丰富的文明意蕴。《宣言》强调，资产阶级“按照自己的面貌为自己创造出一个世界”，即现代“资产阶级文明”世界；同时也创造出这个现代“资产阶级文明”世界的掘墓人，即无产阶级。可以说，《宣言》既是一部现代资本主义文明的批判书，又是一部共产主义新文明的宣言书。

A Critique of Modern Capitalist Civilization

现代资本主义文明的批判书

In the *Manifesto*, Marx and Engels not only highly affirm the historical significance of modern capitalist civilization but also profoundly analyze its inherent maladies. In the view of Marx and Engels, the modern bourgeois society that emerged from the ruins of feudal society is itself a product of long-term historical development, and the modern bourgeoisie that created modern capitalist civilization itself “has played a most revolutionary part” in history. In terms of material productive forces, modern capitalist civilization greatly mobilized people’s productive enthusiasm and promoted the rapid development of social productive forces. With the establishment of the modern machine-based large-scale industrial mode of production, the productive forces latent in social labor were immensely unleashed. “The bourgeoisie, during its rule of scarce one hundred years, has created more massive and more colossal productive forces than have all preceding generations together.” In terms of social relations of production, modern capitalist civilization established modern relations of production, namely, wage-labor relations. With the innovation of old modes of production and exchange, the modern bourgeoisie “has pitilessly torn asunder the motley feudal ties that bound man to his ‘natural superiors,’ and has left remaining no other nexus between man and man than naked self-interest, than callous ‘cash payment.’” It has “drowned the most heavenly ecstasies of religious fervour, of chivalrous enthusiasm, of philistine sentimentalism, in the icy water of egotistical calculation.” It has “resolved personal worth into exchange value, and in place of the numberless indefeasible chartered freedoms, has set up that single, unconscionable freedom — Free Trade.” In one word, “for exploitation, veiled by religious and political illusions, it has substituted naked, shameless, direct, brutal exploitation.” The bourgeoisie “has torn away from the family its sentimental veil, and has reduced the family relation to a mere money relation.” On the basis of wage labor, capital achieves its self-valorization, which objectively promotes the generation and development of modern society, bringing the social production process into a new epoch. The rapid improvement of instruments of production and the immense facilitation of means of communication constantly drive the modern bourgeoisie to rush around the world to “find new markets,” and also gradually break down “the old local and national seclusion and self-sufficiency.” Due to the opening up of the world market, “all old-established national industries are destroyed or are daily being destroyed. They are dislodged by new industries, whose introduction becomes a life and death question for all civilised nations, by industries that no longer work up indigenous raw material, but raw material drawn from the remotest zones; industries whose products are consumed, not only at home, but in every quarter of the globe. In place of the old wants, satisfied by the productions of the country, we find new wants, requiring for their satisfaction the products of distant lands and climes. In place of the old local and national seclusion and self-sufficiency, we have intercourse in every direction, universal inter-dependence of nations.” “The intellectual creations of individual nations become common property. National one-sidedness and narrow-mindedness become more and more impossible, and from the numerous national and local literatures, there arises a world literature.” The formation of this world history makes “national one-sidedness and narrow-mindedness become more and more impossible,” and also “compels all nations, on pain of extinction, to adopt the bourgeois mode of production; it compels them to introduce what it calls civilisation into their midst, i.e., to become bourgeois themselves. In one word, it creates a world after its own image.” In the view of Marx and Engels, the inherent maladies of modern capitalist civilization are rooted in the logic of capital’s valorization. As the “all-commanding economic power” of modern bourgeois society, capital is both the starting point and the endpoint of modern capitalist civilization; as “a property that exploits wage-labour,” capital is “a property that can only increase by constantly producing new wage-labour to exploit.” That is to say, although capital plays an important role in the generation and development of modern bourgeois society, its logic of valorization also creates imbalances in the development of modern bourgeois society. This imbalance is mainly manifested in the following three aspects. First, the inequality of social status among people. Due to the existence of wage labor and wage relations, modern bourgeois society “is more and more splitting up into two great hostile camps,” namely, the bourgeoisie as the oppressor and the proletariat as the oppressed. Marx and Engels clearly point out that as “a social force,” capital “has independence and individuality, while the living person has neither independence nor individuality.” That is to say, the bourgeoisie, as the personification of capital, possesses so-called “independence and individuality” and has the social power to dominate and enslave others, while the proletariat, as living labor, possesses no such “independence and individuality”; they are merely “a means of increasing already accumulated labour,” “slaves of the bourgeois class and of the bourgeois state,” and “mere appendages of the machine.” The exchange relations of equivalents between things in modern capitalist civilization essentially represent the brutal antagonistic relations between people.

在《宣言》中，马克思恩格斯不仅高度肯定了现代资本主义文明的历史意义，而且深刻剖析了现代资本主义文明的内在弊病。 在马克思恩格斯看来，从封建社会的灭亡中所产生的现代资产阶级社会本身就是历史长期发展的产物，创造现代资本主义文明的现代资产阶级本身也“在历史上曾经起过非常革命的作用”。在物质生产力方面，现代资本主义文明极大调动了人们的生产积极性，促进了社会生产力的快速发展。随着现代机器大工业生产方式的确立，社会劳动中所蕴藏的生产力被极大地激发了出来。“资产阶级在它的不到一百年的阶级统治中所创造的生产力，比过去一切世代创造的全部生产力还要多，还要大。”在社会生产关系方面，现代资本主义文明确立了现代生产关系，即雇佣劳动关系。随着旧的生产方式和交换方式的革新，现代资产阶级把“一切封建的、宗法的和田园诗般的关系都破坏了”，揭开了“罩在家庭关系上的温情脉脉的面纱，把这种关系变成了纯粹的金钱关系”。在雇佣劳动的基础上，资本实现了自我增殖，客观上又促进了现代社会的生成与发展，使社会生产过程进入了一个新时代。生产工具的迅速改进和交通的极大便利，不断驱使着现代资产阶级奔走于世界各地以“扩大产品销路”，也使得“过去那种地方的和民族的自给自足和闭关自守”的状态被逐渐打破。由于世界市场的开拓，“一切国家的生产和消费都成为世界性的了”，“各民族的各方面的互相往来和各方面的互相依赖”变得日益普遍，“历史也就越是成为世界历史”。这一世界历史的形成，使得“民族的片面性和局限性日益成为不可能”，也使得“一切民族甚至最野蛮的民族都卷到文明中来了”。 在马克思恩格斯看来，现代资本主义文明的内在弊病根源于资本增殖逻辑。作为现代“资产阶级社会的支配一切的经济权力”，资本既是现代资本主义文明的起点又是其终点；作为一种“剥削雇佣劳动的财产”，资本是“只有在不断产生出新的雇佣劳动来重新加以剥削的条件下才能增殖的财产”。也就是说，虽然资本在现代资产阶级社会的生成和发展过程中扮演了重要的角色，但其增殖逻辑也造成了现代资产阶级社会发展的不平衡性。这一不平衡性主要体现在以下三个方面。 其一，人与人社会地位的不对等。由于雇佣劳动和雇佣关系的存在，使得现代资产阶级社会“日益分裂为两大敌对的阵营”，即作为压迫者的资产阶级和作为被压迫者的无产阶级。马克思恩格斯明确指出，作为“一种社会力量”，资本“具有独立性和个性，而活着的人却没有独立性和个性”。也就是说，作为资本人格化身的资产阶级具有所谓的“独立性和个性”，具有支配和奴役其他人的社会权力，而作为活劳动的无产阶级却没有所谓的“独立性和个性”，他们只不过是“增殖已经积累起来的劳动的一种手段”，是“资产阶级的、资产阶级国家的奴隶”和“机器的单纯的附属品”。现代资本主义文明中物与物之间的等价交换关系，实质上表征的是人与人之间的野蛮对抗关系。

Second, the asynchrony of the development of nation-states. With the development of social productive forces and the establishment of the modern bourgeois mode of production, modern capitalist civilization creates a new kind of dependency relationship worldwide, namely, “it makes barbarian and semi-barbarian countries dependent on civilised ones, nations of peasants on nations of bourgeois, the East on the West.” That is to say, nation-states that have first established the modern bourgeois mode of production possess the social power to enslave and oppress nation-states that still adopt traditional modes of production, and the development of different nation-states is asynchronous. Furthermore, Marx and Engels clearly point out that the logic of capital’s valorization will bring “the epidemic of over-production” and periodic economic crises to modern bourgeois society, which will further exacerbate the asynchrony of the development of different nation-states.

其二，民族国家发展的不同步。随着社会生产力的发展和现代资产阶级生产方式的确立，现代资本主义文明在世界范围内创造出了一种新的从属关系，即“使未开化和半开化的国家从属于文明的国家，使农民的民族从属于资产阶级的民族，使东方从属于西方”。也就是说，优先确立现代资产阶级生产方式的民族国家，具有奴役和压迫仍旧采用传统生产方式的民族国家的社会力量，不同民族国家的发展具有不同步性。此外，马克思恩格斯还明确指出，资本的增殖逻辑会给现代资产阶级社会带来“生产过剩的瘟疫”和周期性的经济危机，这将进一步加剧不同民族国家发展的不同步性。

Third, the disharmony in the relationship between humans and nature. The profit-driven nature of capital drives the modern bourgeoisie to seek and plunder raw materials worldwide, constantly opening up world markets and expanding the territory of modern capitalist civilization. Accompanying the expansion of capital is ecological expansion; the rapid development of modern capitalist industry and commerce has caused global environmental problems and ecological crises, intensifying the tense relationship between humans and nature. In the view of Marx and Engels, the root cause of global environmental problems and ecological crises lies in the modern bourgeois mode of production; overproduction and the outbreak of economic crises also represent a waste and destruction of natural resources.

其三，人与自然关系的不协调。资本的逐利本性使现代资产阶级在世界范围内寻找和掠夺生产原料，不断开辟世界市场，扩大现代资本主义文明的版图。伴随着资本扩张而来的是生态扩张，现代资本主义工商业的快速发展造成了全球性的环境问题与生态危机，加剧了人与自然的紧张关系。在马克思恩格斯看来，全球性环境问题和生态危机的根源在于现代资产阶级生产方式，生产过剩的出现和经济危机的爆发也是对自然资源的一种浪费和破坏。

A Declaration of a New Communist Civilization

共产主义新文明的宣言书

Through a profound analysis and critique of the inherent maladies of modern capitalist civilization, Marx and Engels elucidate the future orientation of human civilization, namely, a new communist civilization.

通过对现代资本主义文明内在弊病的深刻剖析和批判，马克思恩格斯阐明了人类文明的未来定向，即共产主义新文明。

In the third section of the *Manifesto*, “Socialist and Communist Literature,” Marx and Engels critique previous “socialist (communist)” ideas for their critique of modern capitalist civilization, holding that they all missed the point. In the view of Marx and Engels, “reactionary socialism (communism),” because it “completely fails to comprehend the course of modern history,” can only wage either a “war of words,” a “cowardly lamentation,” or a “philosophical fantasy” in its critique of modern capitalist civilization; “conservative or bourgeois socialism (communism),” because it does not alter the relationship between capital and wage labor, can only offer “administrative reforms” in its critique of modern capitalist civilization; and “critical-utopian socialism and communism,” although it attacks “the whole foundation of existing society,” nevertheless “rejects all political, and especially all revolutionary, action,” so its critique of modern capitalist civilization amounts to nothing more than “small-scale, and of course unsuccessful, experiments.” Marx and Engels clearly state that these so-called “socialist (communist)” critiques of modern capitalist civilization are reactionary and conservative in stance and utopian in form, and are not genuine “communism.” Grounded in the basic viewpoint of historical materialism, Marx and Engels emphasize that socialist (communist) society emerges and develops within the womb of modern bourgeois society and represents a positive supersession of it; socialist (communist) civilization is a higher stage of modern capitalist civilization and an immanent transcendence of it. That is to say, the new communist civilization of human society must both fully absorb the positive achievements of modern capitalist civilization and at the same time overcome and transcend its inherent maladies.

在《宣言》第三部分“社会主义的和共产主义的文献”中，马克思恩格斯批判了以往的“社会主义（共产主义）”思想对现代资本主义文明的批判，认为它们都未得要领。在马克思恩格斯看来，“反动的社会主义（共产主义）”由于“完全不能理解现代历史的进程”，因而它对现代资本主义文明的批判要么只是一种“文字斗争”，要么只是一种“怯懦的悲叹”，要么只是一种“哲学幻想”；“保守的或资产阶级的社会主义（共产主义）”由于不改变资本和雇佣劳动的关系，因而它对现代资本主义文明的批判只是一种“行政上的改良”；“批判的空想的社会主义和共产主义”虽然抨击了“现存社会的全部基础”，但它“拒绝一切政治行动，特别是一切革命行动”，因而它对现代资本主义文明的批判只是一种“小型的、当然不会成功的试验”。马克思恩格斯明确指出，这些所谓的“社会主义（共产主义）”对现代资本主义文明的批判在立场上具有反动性和保守性，在形式上具有空想性，都不是真正的“共产主义”。立足于历史唯物主义的基本观点，马克思恩格斯强调，社会主义（共产主义）社会是在现代资产阶级社会的胎胞里形成和发展起来的，是对现代资产阶级社会的积极扬弃；社会主义（共产主义）文明是现代资本主义文明发展的高级阶段，是对现代资本主义文明的内在超越。也就是说，人类社会的共产主义新文明既要充分吸收现代资本主义文明的积极成果，同时又要克服和超越现代资本主义文明的内在弊病。

Constrained by the logic of capital valorization, human beings exist in a state of alienation within modern bourgeois society. In the *Manifesto*, Marx and Engels clearly state that in the new stage of communist civilization, people will truly break free from the condition of being enslaved, oppressed, and dominated by the logic of capital valorization, truly take possession of their human essence, achieve complete emancipation, and realize their own free and comprehensive development. Unlike the stage of modern capitalist civilization, where “living labor” (i.e., the worker) is merely a means to valorize “accumulated labor” (i.e., capital), in the new stage of communist civilization “accumulated labor” (i.e., capital) is a means to expand, enrich, and enhance the life of “living labor” (i.e., the worker); unlike the stage of modern capitalist civilization, where “the past dominates the present,” in the new stage of communist civilization “the present dominates the past.” Marx and Engels emphasize that in the historical development of human civilization, modern capitalist relations of property have a certain historical significance (such as enhancing people’s productive initiative and promoting the development of productive forces), but also have their historical limitations (such as causing periodic economic crises and social polarization). The new communist civilization, built upon modern capitalist civilization, has as its fundamental characteristic “not the abolition of property in general, but the abolition of bourgeois property”; it “does not deprive anyone of the power to appropriate the products of society; it only deprives him of the power to subjugate the labor of others by means of such appropriation.” In the view of Marx and Engels, the achievement of the new stage of communist civilization must be realized through actual communist movements, i.e., the communist revolution that involves “the most radical rupture with traditional property relations.” Through the violent revolutionary destruction of the entire existing modern bourgeois social system, the new communist civilization marks “the genuine resolution of the conflict between human beings and nature and between human beings and human beings,” will realize the true and complete emancipation of humanity, and will create “an association, in which the free development of each is the condition for the free development of all.”

囿于资本增殖逻辑，人在现代资产阶级社会中处于一种异化的生存状态。在《宣言》中，马克思恩格斯明确指出，在共产主义新文明阶段，人将真正摆脱受资本增殖逻辑的奴役、压迫和宰制的样态，真正占有人的本质，获得彻底的解放，并实现自身的自由全面发展。与在现代资本主义文明阶段“活劳动”（即工人）只是增殖“已经积累起来的劳动”（即资本）的一种手段不同，在共产主义新文明阶段“已经积累起来的劳动”（即资本）是扩大、丰富和提高“活劳动”（即工人）的生活的一种手段；与在现代资本主义文明阶段是“过去支配现在”不同，在共产主义新文明阶段是“现在支配过去”。马克思恩格斯强调，在人类文明的历史发展进程中，现代资本主义所有制关系具有一定的历史意义（如提高人们生产的积极性和促进生产力的发展等），但也有其历史局限性（如造成周期性的经济危机和社会的两极分化等）。奠基于现代资本主义文明之上的共产主义新文明，它的根本特征“并不是要废除一般的所有制，而是要废除资产阶级的所有制”，它“并不剥夺任何人占有社会产品的权力，它只剥夺利用这种占有去奴役他人劳动的权力”。在马克思恩格斯看来，共产主义新文明阶段的达成，必须诉诸现实的共产主义运动，即“同传统的所有制关系实行最彻底的决裂”的共产主义革命。通过暴力革命对全部现存的现代资产阶级社会制度的摧毁，共产主义新文明标志着“人和自然界之间、人和人之间的矛盾的真正解决”，将实现人的真正彻底解放，并创造出“这样一个联合体，在那里，每个人的自由发展是一切人的自由发展的条件”。

Online editor: Paul

网络编辑：保罗