The Three Dimensions of Marx’s Critique of Political Economy

Marx’s study of political economy becomes a critical theory because it inherently contains and carries Marx’s reflections on the question of justice. Fundamentally, Marx’s critique of political economy is a critique of justice. Gould once stated explicitly, “In the critique of political economy, Marx uncovers the ethical substance of his theory of justice.” This suggests to us that Marx’s theory of the critique of political economy is the vehicle for his thought on justice, and the essence of the critique of political economy is a critique of justice. Furthermore, it is precisely because Marx’s theory of the critique of political economy focuses on the phenomena of alienation and exploitation under the capitalist system, as well as the comprehensive crisis of capitalist society, that it effectively reveals the substantive injustice hidden behind capitalist exchange justice and distributive justice. It is also precisely because Marx criticizes the unjust essence of the capitalist system that his critique of political economy manifests as a holistic, comprehensive, and developmental theory different from any traditional one.

马克思的政治经济学研究之所以成为一种批判性理论，是因为它内蕴着、承载着马克思对正义问题的思考，究其根本，马克思的政治经济学批判是一种正义批判。古尔德曾明言，“在对政治经济学的批判中，马克思揭开了其正义理论的伦理实质”。这启示我们，马克思的政治经济学批判理论是其正义思想的载体，政治经济学批判的本质是一种正义批判。进而言之，正是由于马克思的政治经济学批判理论关注了资本主义制度下的异化、剥削现象和资本主义社会的全面危机，才切实地开显出隐藏于资本主义交换正义和分配正义背后的实质性不正义；也正是由于马克思批判了资本主义制度的非正义本质，他的政治经济学批判才显现为不同于任何一种传统的整体性、综合性、发展性理论。

The Critique of Alienation in Marx’s Critique of Political Economy

马克思政治经济学批判中的异化批判

In the debate on “Marx and Justice” in the 1970s, many scholars regarded alienation as an important reason for Marx’s critique of the injustice of the capitalist system. However, the question is: why, for Marx, can alienation constitute the content of injustice? A survey of Marx’s texts reveals that there is no obvious, self-evident connection between the critique of alienation in Marx’s critique of political economy and his judgment on the just nature of the capitalist system. It is clearly inappropriate to directly assert that “alienation is injustice.” Therefore, we need to base ourselves on the theoretical and practical background in which Marx expounded the problem of alienation, analyze his specific discussions on alienation in his texts, and then answer the question: “How does alienation constitute the reason for the injustice of the capitalist system?”

在20世纪70年代那场关于“马克思与正义”的讨论中，不少学者将异化视为马克思批判资本主义制度不正义的一个重要原因。但是问题在于，为什么对于马克思来说，异化可以成为不正义的内涵？纵观马克思的文本可以发现，在马克思政治经济学批判中的异化批判与其对资本主义制度正义性质的审判之间，并不存在显而易见、不证自明的关联，直接认定“异化即不正义”显然并不合适。故此，我们需要立足于马克思阐发异化问题的理论和现实背景，分析其在文本中对异化问题的具体论述，进而回答“异化何以构成资本主义制度不正义的原因”这个问题。

Generally speaking, alienation refers to a state of opposition between subject and object, that is, the object produced by the subject becomes an alien force dominating the subject. Although in his early years Marx also discussed political alienation and the self-alienation of man, after delving into the field of the critique of political economy, alienation specifically refers to the alienation of labor. Marx points out that alienation is not merely “the objective indifference of the objective conditions of labor to living labor capacity”; fundamentally, alienation is the relationship of capital’s domination over labor, and this relationship of domination is itself produced by labor. However, capitalism certainly does not publicly disclose the fact of alienated labor; it often uses the exchange process as a cover for the production process, using free and equal exchange to conceal the fact of alienated labor in the sphere of production, thereby presenting capitalist society as a scene of peace and prosperity. But in reality, the more the capitalist system develops, the more persistent and irresolvable alienated labor becomes, and the capitalist system increasingly becomes an institutionalized, systematic mode of control centered on capital.

大体来说，异化是指主客体间的对立状态，即主体产生的客体成为一种支配主体的异己力量。尽管在早年间，马克思也曾谈论过政治异化和人的自我异化问题，但深入到政治经济学批判领域之后，异化就具体地指向了劳动的异化。马克思指出，异化不仅仅是“劳动的客观条件对活劳动能力的客观的漠不相干性”，究其根本，异化是资本之于劳动的支配关系，而这一支配关系本身又是劳动自己生产出来的。然而，资本主义当然不会公开上述异化劳动的事实，他们往往以交换过程作为生产过程的掩蔽，以自由平等的交换去掩盖生产领域中异化劳动的事实，使得资本主义社会呈现出一片平和、繁荣的景象。可事实上，资本主义制度越是发展，异化劳动就越是持续而不可自解，资本主义制度也就越发成为以资本为核心的制度化、系统性的控制模式。

Thus, alienation under the capitalist system “is not merely an economic phenomenon”; rather, alienation points to capital’s institutional, structural, and irresolvable domination over labor, and the resulting constraint of the entire capitalist system on the free and comprehensive development of man. Therefore, we can understand the relationship between alienation and the injustice of the capitalist system in Marx’s discourse from two aspects: “critique external to the capitalist system” and “critique internal to the capitalist system.” From the external perspective, Marx points out that in capitalist society, capital unidirectionally dominates labor, labor is helplessly dependent on capital, and this dependence further forms fetishism; the fetishistic character of bourgeois political economy leads it to tend to naturalize historical social relations. According to Marx’s determination of social justice, such social relations are clearly unjust. From the internal perspective, Marx discovers the contradiction between the sphere of exchange and the sphere of production in capitalism, that is, capitalism’s fundamental violation and alteration of its own property rights make it inconsistent with the standards of justice it had earlier established for itself.

可见，资本主义制度下的异化“不仅仅是一种经济现象”，毋宁说，异化指向的是资本对劳动制度性、结构性、不可自解的支配性，以及由此产生的整个资本主义制度对人的自由全面发展的制约性。所以，我们可以从“外在于资本主义制度的批判”和“内在于资本主义制度的批判”两个方面，来理解马克思话语体系中异化与资本主义制度非正义性之间的关系。从外在角度来说，马克思指出，资本主义社会中的资本单向度地支配劳动，劳动无能为力地依赖资本，这种依赖进一步形成拜物教；而资产阶级政治经济学的拜物教特征，导致它倾向于使历史性的社会关系自然化。根据马克思对社会正义的认定，这种社会关系显然是不正义的。从内在角度来说，马克思发现了资本主义交换领域和生产领域之间的矛盾，即资本主义对自身所有权的根本违背和改变使得它不符合自身早先确立的正义标准。

In summary, according to the critique of alienation in Marx’s critique of political economy, alienation in capitalist society and the rule of fetishism that develops from it cause social relations between people to appear as relations between things, and the domination of labor by capital becomes a self-evident, eternal natural law. It can be said that the law of domination represented by alienation and the ahistorical nature of this law, as well as the internal contradictions of the capitalist system discernible through alienation, constitute the reasons for the injustice of the capitalist system. Thus, the critique of alienation in Marx’s critique of political economy is also a critique of justice.

总之，根据马克思政治经济学批判中的异化批判，资本主义社会中的异化及其发展而来的拜物教统治使得人与人之间的社会关系表现为物的关系，劳动受到资本的支配成为理所应当的、永恒的自然法则。可以说，异化所表征的支配性法则和这一法则的非历史性，以及由异化可窥知的资本主义制度的内部矛盾，构成了资本主义制度不正义的原因。于是，马克思政治经济学批判中的异化批判也便是一种正义批判。

The Critique of Exploitation in Marx’s Critique of Political Economy

马克思政治经济学批判中的剥削批判

Since the “Tucker-Wood thesis” was proposed, “exploitation” has attracted widespread attention in discussions related to “Marx and Justice.” However, the text of *Capital* shows that Marx did not give a clear definition of the concept of exploitation but directly applied it to the description and analysis of the living conditions of workers under the capitalist mode of production; moreover, Marx always uses expressions such as extortion, oppression, and devastation to convey meanings similar to or identical with exploitation.

自“塔克—伍德”命题提出以来，“剥削”就在“马克思与正义”的相关讨论中引起了广泛的关注。而《资本论》文本显示的却是，马克思并未对剥削概念给出明确的定义，而是将其直接运用于对资本主义生产方式下工人生存状况的描述和分析中；并且，马克思总是以榨取、压迫、摧残等表述来表达与剥削相似、相同的含义。

In terms of its manifestation, capitalist exploitation appears as the oppression of labor by capital or of workers by capitalists. This oppression runs through the entire process of the emergence and development of capitalism and also runs through the entire process of workers’ production, making it a structural social oppression. Moreover, each round of exploitation becomes the condition for the next round, and capitalist exploitation intensifies in this process, gradually becoming fixed and permanent. In the process of analyzing the “transformation of the laws of commodity production into the laws of capitalist appropriation,” Marx treats his critique of capitalist exploitation, and thereby of the entire capitalist system, as a critique proceeding from the standpoint of justice.

从表现上来看，资本主义剥削表现为资本对劳动力或资本家对工人的压迫，这种压迫贯穿于资本主义产生和发展的全过程，也贯穿于工人进行生产的全过程，因此是结构性的社会压迫。不仅如此，每一轮剥削还会成为新一轮剥削的条件，资本主义剥削就在此过程中愈演愈烈，并且逐渐固定化、永久化。马克思是在分析“商品生产所有规律转变为资本占有规律”的过程中，将其对资本主义剥削、进而对整个资本主义制度的批判处理为一种从正义出发的批判。

Viewed in this way, the exploitation of labor by capital and the alienated labor analyzed above become two sides of the same process: on the side of labor, the capitalist production process is a process of labor alienation; on the side of capital, this process can be seen as the process of capital’s unpaid appropriation of the products of labor, that is, the process of exploitation. Thus, from the connection between Marx’s critique of alienation and his thought on justice, we can further deduce the connection between Marx’s critique of exploitation and his thought on justice. Based on the critique of exploitation in Marx’s critique of political economy, the capitalist system is unjust because, within it, “the exploitation of labor by capital” is a coercive, dominating, fixed, and therefore eternally existing and irresolvable law; moreover, capitalism forms a contradiction between its sphere of exchange and its sphere of production, violating the principles of justice that capitalism itself established.

如此看来，资本对劳动力的剥削与前文所分析的异化劳动成为同一过程的两个侧面：在劳动这个侧面，资本主义生产过程是劳动异化的过程；在资本的侧面，这一过程又可被视为资本无偿占有劳动产品，也即剥削的过程。于是，从马克思异化批判与其正义思想之间的关联中，我们也可以进一步引申出马克思剥削批判与其正义思想之间的关联。基于马克思政治经济学批判中的剥削批判，资本主义制度是不正义的，是因为在其中，“资本剥削劳动力”是一个具有强制性、支配性、固定性，因而永恒存在、不可自解的法则；不仅如此，资本主义还在其交换领域与生产领域之间形成了矛盾，违背了资本主义自身确立的正义原则。

In conclusion, capitalist exploitation and the capital accumulation it achieves are inevitably incompatible with Marx’s conception of a just society—the non-exploitative and non-coercive nature of social structure, the consistency between theory and reality, and the historical character of the mode of production. In this sense, it can be considered that capitalist exploitation constitutes one reason for the injustice of capitalism, and the critique of exploitation in Marx’s critique of political economy is a critique of justice that carries Marx’s thought on justice. In fact, the scope and breadth of the impact of capitalist exploitation far exceed its immediate task—capital accumulation—and, together with other processes such as alienation, form a fixed pattern of “capital ruling everything”; at the level of social and historical reality, this pattern manifests as unemployment, marginalization, inequality, poverty, stratification, violence, ecological imbalance, and environmental degradation, that is, the comprehensive crisis of capitalist society. Therefore, next, this article will examine the relationship between the critique of crisis in Marx’s critique of political economy and his thought on justice.

总而言之，资本主义剥削及其达成的资本增殖必然无法与马克思对正义社会的设想——社会结构的非剥削性和非强制性，理论与现实的一致性，生产方式的历史性——相匹配。在这个意义上，可以认为，资本主义剥削构成了资本主义不正义的一个原因，马克思政治经济学批判中的剥削批判是一种承载了马克思正义思想的正义批判。而事实上，资本主义剥削所影响的范围和广度远远超出了它的直接任务——资本增殖——并与异化等其他进程一起形成了一种“资本统治一切”的固定模式；在社会历史现实层面，这种模式就表现为失业、边缘化、不平等、贫困、分层、暴力、生态失衡和环境退化，即资本主义社会的全面危机。因此接下来，本文要考察马克思政治经济学批判中的危机批判与其正义思想之间的关系问题。

The Critique of Crisis in Marx’s Critique of Political Economy

马克思政治经济学批判中的危机批判

As a matter of common sense, people tend to associate a reality of frequent institutional crises with its “injustice,” that is, to judge the just nature of the institution at the level of value based on its performance at the factual level. However, if the outbreak of a crisis means that the institution is unjust, does delaying the outbreak or surviving the crisis mean that the institution is just? Clearly, Marx’s critique of the capitalist system runs through his theory of the critique of political economy and does not change with the outbreak or subsidence of the crisis; and, insofar as “the critique of political economy is a critique of justice,” Marx’s critique of the injustice of the capitalist system also does not change with the outbreak or subsidence of the crisis. In Marx’s critique of crisis, it is not the state of comprehensive social collapse caused by the capitalist crisis at the moment of its outbreak, but the logic of capital operation that causes, conceals, and attempts to maintain this state of comprehensive collapse, that constitutes the reason for the injustice of the capitalist system.

就常理而言，人们往往会将一种制度危机频发的现实与其“不正义性”关联在一起，即就这种制度在事实层面的表现来判断它在价值层面的正义性质。可是，如果危机的爆发意味着制度是不正义的，那么，延缓爆发或者度过危机是否就意味着制度是正义的呢？显然，对资本主义制度的批判贯穿于马克思的政治经济学批判理论中，并不因危机的爆发或消退而改变；而就“政治经济学批判是一种正义批判”而言，马克思对资本主义制度非正义性的批判，也不因危机的爆发或消退而改变。在马克思的危机批判中，不是资本主义危机在爆发的当下造成的社会全面崩坏状态，而是造成、掩蔽并企图维持全面崩坏状态的资本运行逻辑，构成了资本主义制度不正义的原因。

Today, academic research on Marx’s theory of capitalist crisis mostly focuses on the economic sphere. However, this article argues that it is precisely this approach of understanding crisis from the economic sphere that obscures the real relationship between capitalist crisis and the capitalist system, and also obscures the essence of the systemic injustice of capitalism. Since, within Marx’s theoretical horizon, capitalist society is a holistic social system in which the economic base and the superstructure emerge as twins, intertwine, and cannot be separated, the capitalist crisis discussed by Marx is not merely a crisis occurring in the economic sphere, but should be a comprehensive crisis of capitalist society. So, how does Marx view the root cause of capitalist crisis? On this, the academic consensus is: the crisis originates from the fundamental contradiction of capitalism, namely the contradiction between productive forces and relations of production, the contradiction between socialized production and the private appropriation of the means of production. Furthermore, the sole purpose of the capitalist mode of production is the continuous valorization of capital, not the development of productive forces; thus, when productive forces develop to a certain level, the rate of profit falls, existing capital depreciates while new independent capital finds it difficult to form, the surplus of production, capital, and population intensifies, and the capitalist civilizational paradigm and value paradigm encounter difficulties, which leads to a comprehensive crisis of capitalism.

如今，学界对于马克思资本主义危机理论的研究大都集中于经济领域，但本文认为，正是由于这种立足于经济领域理解危机的方式，掩盖了资本主义危机与资本主义制度之间的真实关系，也掩盖了资本主义制度性不正义的本质。由于马克思理论视域中的资本主义社会是一个经济基础与上层建筑孪生出现、相互纠缠、无法分离的整全性社会体系，因此，马克思所讨论的资本主义危机就不仅仅是经济领域发生的危机，而应是资本主义社会的全面危机。那么，马克思如何看待资本主义危机产生的根源？对此，学界的共识是：危机根源于资本主义的基本矛盾，即生产力与生产关系之间的矛盾，生产社会化与生产资料私人占有之间的矛盾。进而言之，资本主义生产方式的唯一目的是资本不断增殖，而非生产力的发展；于是，生产力发展到一定程度时，就会使利润率下降，现有资本贬值的同时新兴独立资本也难以形成，生产、资本、人口的过剩加剧，资本主义文明范式和价值范式也遭遇困顿，这就引起了资本主义的全面危机。

So, how does the logic of capital constitute the reason for the injustice of the capitalist system? Looking back at history, one finds that crises always periodically undergo a process of emergence, expansion, and subsidence. To clarify the relationship between the logic of capital and the just nature of capitalism, the crisis must be interpreted within the entire cycle of capitalist operation. Although capitalist crises always cause a comprehensive interruption of the reproduction of capitalist society during their emergence and expansion, historically, capitalism always manages to survive the crisis to some extent. Precisely because of this, capitalism habitually uses the argument that “prosperity will always return” to preach the eternal justice of capitalism and the “end of history.” [2]2 “The end of history” refers to the thesis popularized by Francis Fukuyama in 1989, arguing that the end of the Cold War signaled the universalization of liberal democracy as the final form of human government. Therefore, to clarify the hidden question of “the just nature of the capitalist system,” one should break free from the cycle of capitalist operation and ask how the capitalist crisis is ultimately resolved and where the capitalist system will head in the future.

那么，资本逻辑又如何构成了资本主义制度不正义的原因呢？放眼历史就会发现，危机总是周期性地经历着产生、扩展和消退的过程，要想厘清资本逻辑与资本主义之正义性质的关系问题，还需将危机置于整个资本主义运行周期中予以解读。虽然资本主义危机总是在产生和扩展的过程中造成资本主义社会再生产的全面中断，但就历史现实而言，资本主义总能在某种程度上度过危机。正因如此，资本主义惯以“繁荣总会再次到来”为由，鼓吹资本主义永恒正义和“历史终结论”。因此，要想厘清隐藏其后的“资本主义制度的正义性质”问题，就应摆脱资本主义运行周期的循环，追问资本主义危机最终如何消解、追问资本主义制度在未来将走向何方。

According to Marx’s view, although the capitalist crisis is still temporarily in a cyclical pattern, with the development of the capitalist mode of production and the further deepening of capitalism’s internal contradictions, the capitalist crisis will be resolved along with the demise of the capitalist system. On the one hand, the resolution of the capitalist crisis is a process of capitalism’s self-collapse from within, a process dominated by economic replacement. On the other hand, the resolution of the capitalist crisis is a process where the proletariat breaks the capitalist system from the outside through revolution, a process dominated by political transformation. It must be emphasized that the overthrow of the capitalist system is a comprehensive process in which multiple factors jointly play a role. Among these, capitalism’s self-collapse and the proletariat’s violent revolution are the two most important factors, but they intertwine and function together with other marginal or secondary factors, thereby promoting the development and evolution of human social history.

根据马克思的观点，尽管资本主义危机暂时还处于周期循环之中，但随着资本主义生产方式的发展和资本主义内部矛盾的进一步深化，资本主义危机将随着资本主义制度的灭亡得以消解。一方面，资本主义危机的消解是资本主义从内部自我崩溃的过程，是以经济更替为主导的过程。另一方面，资本主义危机的消解是无产阶级通过革命从外部打破资本主义制度的过程，是以政治变革为主导的过程。需要强调的是，资本主义制度的颠覆是一个诸多因素共同发挥作用的综合性过程，其中，资本主义自我崩溃和无产阶级暴力革命是两个最主要的因素，但它们相互交织并与其他边缘的或次生的因素共同发挥作用，这才促成人类社会历史的发展演进。

As stated above, the capitalist crisis originates from capital and its logic. Furthermore, capital and its logic not only cause a comprehensive crisis but also strive to conceal and attempt to maintain this state of comprehensive collapse, in order to achieve the maximum valorization of capital and the end of history in capitalism. According to the emphasis on historicity in Marx’s thought on justice, the logic of capital operation that causes, conceals, and attempts to maintain the state of comprehensive collapse constitutes the reason for the injustice of the capitalist system. In this regard, the critique of crisis in Marx’s critique of political economy is a critique of justice, and the comprehensive crisis constitutes the reason for the injustice of the capitalist system.

前文言明，资本主义危机根源于资本及其逻辑，进而论之，资本及其逻辑不仅造成了全面危机，更是竭力掩蔽并企图维持这种全面崩坏状态，以达成资本最大限度增殖、历史终结于资本主义的目的。根据马克思正义思想对历史性的强调，造成、掩蔽并企图维持全面崩坏状态的资本运行逻辑，就构成了资本主义制度不正义的原因。就此而言，马克思政治经济学批判中的危机批判就是一种正义批判，而全面危机就构成了资本主义制度不正义的原因。

By analyzing the critique of alienation, the critique of exploitation, and the critique of crisis in Marx’s critique of political economy, it can be seen that Marx’s critique of political economy is a critique of justice that carries the thought of justice. It is precisely within the horizon of the critique of political economy that Marx criticizes capitalism as an unjust system. As mentioned earlier, within Marx’s theoretical horizon, capitalist society is a holistic system. In this regard, Marx’s critique of the justice of the capitalist system is also conducted in a holistic sense—alienation, exploitation, and crisis are each merely one basis or element of Marx’s critique of the justice of the capitalist system. What Marx ultimately criticizes is the logic of operation of the capitalist system. Within this, whether it is the actual manifestations of alienation, exploitation, and crisis, or the hidden transformation “from the laws of commodity production to the laws of capitalist appropriation,” [3]3 This phrase refers to Marx’s argument in *Capital* that the capitalist appropriation of surplus value, while appearing to follow the laws of commodity exchange (equal exchange of equivalents), in fact transforms these laws into their opposite, resulting in the appropriation of unpaid labor. they are all means and paths to achieve the purpose of the capitalist system—the infinite valorization of capital and the perpetual development of the capitalist system. Thus, Marx’s critique of political economy as a critique of justice appears as a special holistic, comprehensive, and developmental theory; Marx studies capitalism and criticizes it as an unjust system because it uses coercion, deception, and various other means to form a structural system of domination and oppression within the entire society, and attempts to make this system transcend history and exist eternally.

通过分析马克思政治经济学批判中的异化批判、剥削批判和危机批判，可以看出马克思政治经济学批判是一种承载了正义思想的正义批判，正是在政治经济学批判视域中，马克思批判资本主义为不正义的制度。前文提及，马克思理论视域中的资本主义社会是一个整全性体系，就此而言，马克思对资本主义制度的正义批判也是在整全性的意义上进行的——异化、剥削和危机都只是马克思对资本主义制度进行正义批判的依据或要素之一，马克思最终批判的是资本主义制度的运行逻辑。在其中，不论是现实表现出的异化、剥削和危机，还是隐藏于其后的“商品生产所有规律向资本占有规律”的转变，都是达成资本主义制度的目的——资本无限增殖和资本主义制度永续发展——的手段、路径。于是，作为正义批判的马克思政治经济学批判就显现为一种特殊的整体性、综合性、发展性理论；马克思研究资本主义并批判其为不正义的制度，是因为它运用强制、欺骗等多种手段，在整个社会中形成了结构性的支配和压迫体系，并企图使这种体系超越历史、永恒存在。

Online editor: Paul

网络编辑：保罗