The Critique of the Logic of Capital from the Perspective of Marx’s Theory of World History and Its Contemporary Significance

As the overarching logic of modern society, the logic of capital has profoundly influenced world history and human development. Then, what is the logic of capital? Why can the logic of capital dominate modern society? How can the logic of capital be broken? This series of questions has made the study of *Capital* and the logic of capital a sustained focus of academic attention both domestically and internationally, yielding rich scholarly results. Building on previous research, this article attempts to adopt a new research perspective—taking Marx’s theory of world history as its horizon—to explore the logic of capital and its critique in *Capital*. In other words, it studies the logic of capital and its critique within the framework of the theory of world history. This is based primarily on two considerations: on the one hand, the logic of capital is a fundamental issue concerning the theory of world history, concentrated in the fact that the logic of capital dominates the formation of world history and human development—a major practical subject that must be addressed; on the other hand, the theory of world history contains the roots of the generation of the logic of capital, its historical limits, and the path to its sublation, constituting the theoretical basis for Marx’s critique. Therefore, from the perspective of Marx’s theory of world history, this article explores the logic of capital and its critique in *Capital* and its manuscripts from three aspects: the world-historical generation of the logic of capital, the world-historical dimension of Marx’s critique of the logic of capital, and the world-historical implications contained in this critique.

作为现代社会的统摄逻辑，资本逻辑对世界历史与人的发展产生了深刻影响。那么，何为资本逻辑？资本逻辑为何能统摄现代社会？如何破解资本逻辑？这一系列问题使《资本论》和资本逻辑问题研究成为国内外学术界持续关注的重点，并产生了丰硕的学术成果。在前人的研究基础之上，本文尝试采用新的研究视角——以马克思世界历史理论为视域，探讨《资本论》中的资本逻辑及其批判，换言之，本文是将资本逻辑及其批判置于世界历史理论进行研究。这主要基于两个方面的考量：一方面，资本逻辑是关乎世界历史理论的根本性问题，集中表现为资本逻辑统摄着世界历史的生成与人的发展，这是必须关注的重大现实课题；另一方面，世界历史理论蕴藏着资本逻辑的生成根源、历史限度及扬弃路径，构成了马克思展开批判的理论根据。因此，本文基于马克思世界历史理论视域，从资本逻辑的世界历史生成、马克思资本逻辑批判的世界历史向度，以及这一批判蕴含的世界历史意蕴三个方面，探讨《资本论》及其手稿中的资本逻辑及其批判。

I. The World-Historical Generation of the Logic of Capital from the Perspective of the Theory of World History

一、世界历史理论视域下资本逻辑的世界历史生成

Marx’s theory of world history is the intellectual achievement through which Marx revealed the world-historical generation of the logic of capital. In his view, the logic of capital, as the immanent law of “production based on capital,” constitutes the essential character and real foundation of modern society. In order to scientifically explain and profoundly reveal this objective law, and thereby unlock the secret of “real history,” Marx delved deeply into the reality of capitalist society, fully researched and appropriated real materials, and comprehensively presented the immanent laws of motion of this “complex social form” in *Capital* and its manuscripts, deeply grasping the essence of the logic of capital in world history, thereby providing “decisive evidence” for the critique of the logic of capital.

马克思世界历史理论是马克思揭示资本逻辑世界历史生成的思想成果。在他看来，作为“以资本为基础的生产”之内在规律的资本逻辑，构成了现代社会的本质特征和现实基础。为了科学阐释和深刻揭示这一客观规律，进而解开“现实的历史”的秘密，马克思深入资本主义社会现实，充分地研究和占有现实材料，在《资本论》及其手稿中全面呈现了这一“复杂的社会形式”的内在运动规律，深入把握住了世界历史的资本逻辑实质，为资本逻辑批判提供了“有决定意义的证据”。

(A) The World-Historical Premise of the Logic of Capital

（一）资本逻辑的世界历史前提

The formation of world history is the real premise for the logic of capital to break through regional and national boundaries and unfold. This means that the logic of capital that dominates world history and human development is neither a natural product nor eternally existing, but rather the operational logic presented under specific conditions by capital, a historical product, running through the entire process of capital’s development. How, then, does capital arise? This precisely constitutes the basic question that must be answered to deeply grasp the historical formation of the logic of capital and subsequently to launch a critique of it.

世界历史的形成是资本逻辑突破地域和民族范围得以展开的现实前提。这便意味着，统摄世界历史和人的发展的资本逻辑并非天然产物，亦非永恒长存，而是资本这一历史产物在特定条件下呈现的运行逻辑，贯穿资本发展进程的始终。那么资本又是如何产生的呢？这恰恰构成了深入把握资本逻辑的历史形成，以及之后展开对资本逻辑批判所必须回答的基本问题。

In *Capital* and its manuscripts, Marx discusses the historical origin, historical premise, and historical conditions of capital, thereby answering the basic question of “where capital comes from.” In terms of historical origin, Marx traces it back to the primitive accumulation of capital. Primitive accumulation of capital does not mean a “mere change of form” from slave to wage laborer, but rather “the dissolution of private property based on the labor of its owner.” In this process, capital forcibly seized peasants’ land and plundered vast amounts of gold and silver wealth through violent means steeped in crime, ultimately completing a history of expropriation written in blood and fire. On this, Marx points out: “Capital comes into the world dripping from head to foot, from every pore, with blood and dirt.” But “capital comes into the world” has a certain historical premise, and this premise is precisely “commodity production and developed commodity circulation, i.e., trade.” The emergence of trade successfully unveiled the modern history of life that capital had not yet revealed. However, “the existence of commodity circulation and money circulation by no means constitutes the historical conditions for the existence of capital. Capital arises only when the owner of the means of production and subsistence finds free workers selling their labor power on the market.” That is to say, due to “the separation of the worker from the conditions of labor,” propertyless workers, in order to maintain their own and their families’ survival, have no choice but to sell their labor power. The capitalist who purchases this labor power will then demand and compel the worker to produce as much surplus value as possible. Behind this seemingly equal and free exchange lies the capitalist’s domination and control over the wage laborer. Thus, under the system of wage labor, the wage labor of the worker, who “lives solely to increase capital,” becomes the necessary means for capital’s self-valorization and therefore the real foundation for the existence and development of the capitalist mode of production.

在《资本论》及其手稿中，马克思论述了资本的历史起源、历史前提和历史条件，从而解答了“资本从哪儿来”这一基本问题。就历史起源来看，马克思追溯为资本的原始积累。资本原始积累并非意味着直接从奴隶转化为雇佣工人的“单纯的形式变换”，而是“以自己劳动为基础的私有制的解体”。在这一过程中，资本通过充满罪恶的暴力手段强制占有农民的土地，并掠夺大量的金银财富，最终完成了以血和火书写的资本剥夺史。对此，马克思指出：“资本来到世间，从头到脚，每个毛孔都滴着血和肮脏的东西。”但“资本来到世间”具有一定的历史前提，这一前提正是“商品生产和发达的商品流通，即贸易”。贸易的出现成功揭开了资本不曾展现的现代生活史。可是，“有了商品流通和货币流通，决不是就具备了资本存在的历史条件。只有当生产资料和生活资料的占有者在市场上找到出卖自己劳动力的自由工人的时候，资本才产生”。也就是说，由于“劳动者同劳动条件的分离”，一无所有的工人为了维持自己及家人的生存，除了出卖自己的劳动力之外别无选择。而购买了劳动力的资本家则会要求并促使其尽可能多地生产剩余价值。这种表面看似平等自由的交易背后，实则蕴藏着资本家对雇佣工人的支配与控制。于是，在雇佣劳动制度下，“仅仅为增殖资本而活着”的雇佣工人的雇佣劳动成了资本自我增殖的必要手段，因而成为资本主义生产方式得以存在和发展的现实基础。

Capital, as a relation of production under a specific social form, presents a state of motion in constant pursuit of surplus value; the unfolding of this law of motion constitutes the so-called logic of capital. Needless to say, as long as capital exists, the logic of capital will inevitably function. Thus, driven internally by the logic of capital, the bourgeoisie, as the personification of capital, in order to obtain boundless profit and limitless wealth, rushes around the world, establishes extensive connections, and ultimately creates a world market dominated by the logic of capital, pulling back the curtain on the transformation of history into world history.

资本作为特定社会形态下的生产关系，呈现不断追求剩余价值的运动状态，这一运动规律的展开就形成了所谓的资本逻辑。不消说，资本只要存在，资本逻辑就会不可避免地发挥作用。于是，在资本逻辑的内在驱动下，作为资本人格化的资产阶级为了获得无止境的利润和无限度的财富，在世界各地到处奔走、广泛建立联系，最终建立了一个以资本逻辑为主导的世界市场，拉开了历史向世界历史转变的序幕。

(B) The World-Historical Expansion of the Logic of Capital

（二）资本逻辑的世界历史拓展

The establishment of the world market, nurtured in the process of world history, marks the full unfolding of the logic of capital across the globe. With the world expansion of the logic of capital, the face of world history is gradually revealed, which in turn provides a broader stage for the world market. At the same time, the continuously expanding world market further exhibits the evolution of world history. This interactive development between the world market and world history is precisely unified in the dual expansion of the logic of capital in time and space.

世界历史进程中孕育的世界市场的建立，标志着资本逻辑在世界各地的全面展开。随着资本逻辑的世界扩张，世界历史的面貌得以逐步呈现，并反过来为世界市场提供了更为广阔的舞台。同时，不断拓展的世界市场又进一步展现了世界历史的演进。这种世界市场与世界历史间的互动发展，正是统一于资本逻辑的时空双拓展。

Specifically, in order to achieve greater valorization and pursue larger profits, capital, on the one hand, strives to abolish all local restrictions and spatial boundaries, shaping the entire world into its market; “on the other hand, it strives to annihilate space with time, i.e., to reduce to a minimum the time spent in moving commodities from one place to another. The more capital develops, the more the market in which it circulates expands, the more the spatial road of capital circulation expands, the more capital simultaneously strives to expand the market spatially and to annihilate space with time.” In this way, spatial barriers are thoroughly broken through and constantly recast under capital’s expansionist instinct. With this compression of time and annihilation of space by capital—i.e., the “disembedding” of capital in time and space—the full presentation of the logic of capital and the comprehensive establishment of its dominant position are ultimately promoted, and a “universally useful system” is created in capital’s own image. This system not only constitutes the real foundation of capitalist world history but also lays the groundwork for the logic of capital to establish its dominant position worldwide.

具体而言，为了实现更多的增殖和追求更大的利润，资本一方面致力于消灭一切的地方限制和空间界限，将整个世界塑造为它的市场；“另一方面，它又力求用时间去消灭空间，就是说，把商品从一个地方转移到另一个地方所花费的时间缩减到最低限度。资本越发展，从而资本借以流通的市场，构成资本流通空间道路的市场越扩大，资本同时也就越是力求在空间上更加扩大市场，力求用时间去更多地消灭空间。”如此一来，空间屏障在资本的扩张本能下被彻底冲破并不断重铸。随着资本这种对时间的压缩和对空间的消灭即资本的时空“脱域”，最终推动了资本逻辑的充分呈现及其统治地位的全面确立，并按自己的面貌创制了“普遍有用的体系”。这一体系不仅构成了资本主义世界历史的现实基础，更为资本逻辑在世界范围内确立主导地位奠定了基础。

It can be seen that while the logic of capital creates ever more surplus labor, it simultaneously creates ever more sites of exchange. Therefore, “in its essence, … the tendency to create the world market is directly given in the concept of capital itself.” With the infinite expansion of capital and the continuous opening up of the world market, the logic of capital, as the “illuminating light” and “special ether,” gradually penetrates all spheres of social life, becoming the highest standard for judging all things. Likewise, people are inevitably enveloped under the domination of this ever-expanding alien force, the logic of capital. However, Marx casts his gaze beyond this envelopment, soberly revealing that this historically necessary logic of capital also has its historical limits of development.

可以看到，资本逻辑在创造越来越多剩余劳动的同时，也随之创造出越来越多的交换地点。因此，其“从本质上来说，……创造世界市场的趋势已经直接包含在资本的概念本身中”。随着资本的无限扩张和世界市场的不断开拓，资本逻辑作为“普照的光”和“特殊的以太”，逐步渗入社会生活的各个领域，成为评判万物的最高标准。同样，人们亦不可避免地被笼罩在资本逻辑这一日益扩大的异己力量的支配之下。但是，马克思将目光跳出这一笼罩之下，清醒地揭示出，这一具有历史必然的资本逻辑同时也有其发展的历史限度。

(C) The World-Historical Limits of the Logic of Capital

（三）资本逻辑的世界历史限度

Although the logic of capital has established its dominant position within the scope of world history by virtue of its power, it is not, as classical economists believed, eternal. Based on economic facts and delving into the essence of history, Marx clearly points out the developmental paradox of the logic of capital, thereby profoundly revealing its world-historical limits.

资本逻辑虽凭借其权力在世界历史范围内确立了统治地位，但并非像古典经济学家认为的那样会永恒存在。马克思立足经济事实，深入历史本质，明确指出了资本逻辑的发展悖论，进而深刻揭示了资本逻辑的世界历史限度。

Marx points out: “Capital is a living contradiction.” The contradiction is first manifested as “the means—the unconditional development of the productive forces of society—comes continually into conflict with the limited end, the self-expansion of existing capital.” In order to create more surplus value, the capitalist continuously improves production technology and raises production efficiency. However, as the level of science and technology and the level of productive forces rise, the organic composition of capital rises accordingly, which brings not a rise in the rate of profit on capital but a continuous decline, thus inevitably producing a contradiction with capital, which is committed to realizing the self-expansion of value. Yet this is not the whole of the matter; probing deeper into its interior, one can discover that “the process of the self-expansion of value of capital … simultaneously presents itself as the process of the devaluation of capital.” There is no doubt that realizing its own self-expansion is the inherent and sole life-instinct of capital. Driven by this instinct, the quantity of products produced greatly exceeds the demand of the whole society, thus inevitably causing a general overproduction. And once general overproduction is caused, it also leads to a general devaluation of value, so that an economic crisis inevitably breaks out. The outbreak of an economic crisis “is, in its essence, a real reflection of the internal contradictions of capitalist society,” that is, a real reflection of the contradiction between “the concentration of the means of production and the socialization of labor,” which fundamentally exposes the fact that crisis is inherent in the concept of capital itself. It can be seen that a series of inherent and irreconcilable internal contradictions of capital itself fundamentally determine the historical limits of the logic of capital. However, these limits not only highlight its negativity but also manifest its positivity. For they not only portend the inevitability of the end of the logic of capital but also nurture the historical conditions for a higher social form that transcends the logic of capital.

马克思指出：“资本是一个活生生的矛盾。”矛盾首先体现为“手段——社会生产力的无条件的发展——不断地和现有资本的增殖这个有限的目的发生冲突”。为了创造更多的剩余价值，资本家不断改进生产技术、提高生产效率。可是，随着科学技术水平和生产力水平的提高，资本有机构成随之提高，由此带来的不是资本利润率的上升，而是不断下降，这就与致力于实现价值增殖的资本不可避免地产生了矛盾。然而，这并非问题的全部，深入其内在可以发现，“资本的价值增殖过程……同时表现为资本的价值丧失过程”。毫无疑问，实现自身增殖是资本固有且仅有的生活本能。在这一本能的驱使下，生产产品的数量大大超过整个社会的需求，从而不可避免地造成普遍的生产过剩。而一旦导致普遍的生产过剩，也就导致了价值的普遍丧失，从而经济危机不可避免地爆发。经济危机的爆发“究其实质是资本主义社会内在矛盾的现实反映”，即“生产资料的集中和劳动的社会化”相矛盾的现实反映，这也就从根本上揭露了危机蕴藏于资本概念本身的事实。可见，资本自身固有的不可调和的一系列内在矛盾从根本上决定了资本逻辑的历史限度。但是，这一限度不单单凸显其所具有的消极性，同时也彰显了其所具有的积极性。因为其不仅预示着资本逻辑终结的必然，更孕育着超越资本逻辑的更高社会形态的历史条件。

In summary, a series of contradictions and conflicts inherent in capital “exist in the facts, objectively, outside us, and even independently of the will or actions of those who cause these conflicts.” They fundamentally reveal the possible boundaries and historical limits of the expansion of the logic of capital, which contains a tendency toward self-negation, as well as the historical inevitability of its turning into its opposite.

概言之，资本内蕴的一系列矛盾和冲突“是存在于事实中，客观地、在我们之外、甚至不依赖于引起这种冲突的那些人的意志或行动而存在着”。其从根本上揭示了内含自我否定趋势的资本逻辑扩张的可能边界和历史限度，以及走向自身反面的历史必然。

(IV) The World-Historical Influence of the Logic of Capital

（四）资本逻辑的世界历史影响

The self-reflexivity of capital determines the self-reflexivity of the logic of capital, and thus also indicates the historical limits of the logic of capital. However, one must by no means therefore ignore the “great civilizing role” that the logic of capital has brought to the capitalist world history. On this basis, Marx affirms the positive role of the logic of capital from three aspects: productive forces, social relations, and the succession of social forms.

资本的自反性决定了资本逻辑的自反性，因而也就表明了资本逻辑的历史限度。但是，决不能因此忽视资本逻辑为资本主义世界历史带来的“伟大的文明作用”。基于此，马克思从生产力、社会关系及社会形态更替三个方面，肯定了资本逻辑的积极作用。

In terms of productive forces, the logic of capital has realized “the universal appropriation by the members of society of both nature and social relations themselves,” creating an unprecedented enormous productive force. In Marx’s view, the logic of capital, like a “sorcerer,” used its spells to break through existing limits and fetters, achieving the conquest of nature and human society, and in less than a hundred years, it achieved unprecedented development “at an unheard-of speed and on an unheard-of scale.” As for social relations, the logic of capital overcame “the phenomenon of the deification of nature,” old ways of life, national boundaries and prejudices, promoting the renewal of social relations and their related concepts. For where the logic of capital dominates, rigid feudal relations and the traditional ideas they produced are dissolved; people can only and must re-examine their mutual relations and life positions with a sober eye. In terms of the succession of social forms, the logic of capital “facilitates the creation of the elements of a higher new form.” Just as feudal society nurtured the seeds of capitalism, so capitalism also nurtures the conditions for the formation of a higher social form. The endless pursuit of surplus value by capital drives the continuous progress of productive forces, so that the whole society can, on the one hand, possess universal wealth in less time, and on the other hand, people no longer need to spend time and energy as before on those labors that things can perform and replace. In this way, people can use the saved time to develop themselves comprehensively, promoting “the most comprehensive development of each individual producer while ensuring the extremely high development of the productive forces of social labor.”

就生产力而言，资本逻辑实现了“社会成员对自然界和社会联系本身的普遍占有”，创造了前所未有的巨大生产力。在马克思看来，资本逻辑就像“魔法师”一样用法术打破了既有的限制和束缚，实现了对自然界和人类社会的征服，并在不到一百年的时间里，“以前所未闻的速度和前所未闻的规模”获得了前所未有的发展。对于社会关系，资本逻辑则是克服了“把自然神化的现象”、旧有的生活方式、民族界限与偏见，推动了社会关系及其相关观念的更新。因为在资本逻辑统摄的地方，僵化的封建关系及其产生的传统观念都被消解，人们只能并且必须以冷静的眼光重新审视他们之间的相互关系和生活地位。在社会形态更替方面，资本逻辑“有利于更高级的新形态的各种要素的创造”。正如封建社会内部孕育了资本主义萌芽，资本主义内部也孕育着更高社会形态的形成条件。资本对剩余价值的无止境追求驱使生产力的不断进步，以致整个社会一方面可以用较少的时间占有普遍财富，另一方面使人们不用再像以往那样花费时间和精力从事那些物可以从事和替代的劳动。这样，人们可以利用节省下来的时间全面发展自身，推动“在保证社会劳动生产力极高度发展的同时又保证每个生产者个人最全面的发展”。

Admittedly, the great historical role of the logic of capital is worthy of affirmation, but Marx’s discussion of its historical rationality is precisely to argue that it has already lost its actual rationality in the present. Therefore, it is necessary to see “the extent to which capital, while having the tendency to increase productive forces without limit, also makes the main productive force, namely man himself, one-sided, restricted, etc.” In other words, besides containing the “civilizing tendency of capital,” the logic of capital also implies an increase in the power of capital over labor, because “all progress of civilization, or in other words, every increase in the productive forces of society … does not enrich the worker but only enriches capital, that is, only increases the power that dominates labor.” As the power of capital grows, man becomes increasingly alienated. This developmental paradox shows that the logic of capital not only rules people’s material world but also controls their spiritual world, inevitably plunging people into the predicament of modernity. Therefore, in order to liberate people from the enslavement and domination of the logic of capital, Marx, having seen through the essence of the logic of capital, launched a critique of it at a principled height.

诚然，资本逻辑的伟大历史作用值得肯定，但马克思论述其具有历史合理性，恰恰是要论证其在当下已然失去现实的合理性。所以，需要看到“资本在具有无限度地提高生产力趋势的同时，又在怎样程度上使主要生产力，即人本身片面化，受到限制等等”。换言之，资本逻辑除了蕴含着“资本的文明化趋势”之外，还意味着资本支配劳动的权力的增大，因为“文明的一切进步，或者换句话说，社会生产力的一切增长，……都不会使工人致富，而只会使资本致富，也就是只会使支配劳动的权力更加增大”。随着资本的权力愈大，人反而愈加异化。这种发展悖论表明，资本逻辑不仅统治着人们的物质世界，同时还控制着人们的精神世界，使人不可避免地陷入了现代性困境。因此，为了将人从资本逻辑的奴役和统治下解放出来，看清了资本逻辑本质的马克思对其展开了具有原则高度的批判。

II. The World-Historical Dimension of the Critique of the Logic of Capital in *Capital*

二、《资本论》中资本逻辑批判的世界历史向度

Marx’s theory of world history is not only the intellectual outcome of his revelation of the world-historical generation of the logic of capital but also constitutes the theoretical horizon of his critique of the logic of capital. Marx saw that world history under the domination of the logic of capital, while achieving unprecedented great accomplishments, was more subjected to the alienated rule of the logic of capital. In response, he neither, like classical economists, justified the logic of capital as having “natural necessity and eternal rationality,” nor, like the utopian socialists, merely engaged in external subjective critique. Instead, he placed the critique of the logic of capital within the operation of world history, unfolding an immanent critique of the logic of capital itself, achieving the unity of critiquing the “old world” and discovering the “new world,” thereby presenting a world-historical dimension that his predecessors had failed to grasp deeply.

马克思世界历史理论不仅是其揭示资本逻辑世界历史生成的思想成果，同时亦构成其资本逻辑批判的理论视域。马克思看到，资本逻辑统摄之下的世界历史在获得了前所未有的伟大成就的同时，更多的是遭到资本逻辑的异化统治。对此，其既不像古典经济学家认为资本逻辑“具有自然的必然性和永恒的合理性”而为其正名，又不同于空想社会主义者只是进行外部的主观批判，而是将资本逻辑批判置于世界历史的运思之中，展开了对资本逻辑本身的内在批判，实现了批判“旧世界”与发现“新世界”的统一，进而呈现了前人未能深入把握的世界历史向度。

(I) Marx’s Dialectics in Critiquing the Old World History

（一）马克思在批判旧世界历史中的辩证法

With the deepening development of capitalist world history, critiques of the logic of capital and the society it drives arose accordingly, thus presenting multiple critical approaches. However, because they failed to hit the substance and the crux, these so-called critical philosophies not only failed to achieve the redemption of reality but instead fell into metaphysical self-consistency. Marx, who once called his own theory a “critical philosophy,” can be said to have regarded the critique of capitalism as his lifelong revolutionary cause. On the basis of his practice-based critical philosophy, he placed greater emphasis on unfolding a dialectical and scientific critique of the present reality in the process of the practical development of world history. This critique, which changed the foundation of critical philosophy, also changed the methodology of critical philosophy; it is an immanent critique built on the foundation of dialectics. This critical approach not only fundamentally distinguished Marx from other critics in terms of essential principles but also helped him make a scientific diagnosis that hit the crux of the real problems of capitalism.

随着资本主义世界历史的深入展开，对资本逻辑及其推动的社会批判便随之而起，也因此呈现多种批判进路。但由于未能切中实质和要害，这些所谓的批判哲学不仅未能实现对现实的救赎，反而落入形而上的自洽之中。而曾将自己的理论称为“批判的哲学”的马克思，可以说是把对资本主义的批判视为终生的革命事业。他在以实践为基础的批判哲学的基础上，更注重在世界历史发展实践的过程中展开对当下现实之辩证的科学批判。这种改变了批判哲学地基的批判也改变了批判哲学的方法论，是建立在辩证法基础之上的内在批判。这一批判进路不仅从根本上将马克思同其他的批判者在本质原则上区别开来，更帮助他作出切中资本主义现实问题症结的科学诊断。

As is well known, dialectics is a precious legacy that Marx critically inherited from the “giant thinker” Hegel, implying that “in its positive understanding of what exists, it simultaneously contains a negative understanding of what exists.” However, it must be emphasized that this negation is not a simple external negation of things, but a dialectical internal negation of things, that is, the self-negation of things themselves. The so-called scientific critique emphasizes starting from reality itself, objectively and deeply grasping the inherent laws and operational trends of the development of things, revealing their own contradictions and developmental limits, in order to find the real possibility of changing things. Specifically with regard to the logic of capital, Marx’s critique of the logic of capital is neither an abstract speculation detached from historical reality nor a simple external negation. Rather, it penetrates deeply into the concrete reality of world history, discerns the operational laws and trends of capitalist world history, grasps the self-negativity of capital from its irreconcilable internal contradictions, and thereby reveals the historical inevitability that the capitalist world history dominated by the logic of capital will inevitably be replaced by a communist world history that sublates the logic of capital. In short, Marx discovered the real possibility of a new world history in revealing the self-negation of the logic of capital. This scientific critique, which follows the principle of objectivity and is based on the self-negativity of things themselves, not only helped Marx accurately discern the ills of capitalist society but also enabled him to scientifically propose a realistic remedy.

众所周知，辩证法是马克思从“巨人般的思想家”黑格尔那里批判继承的宝贵遗产，其意味着“在对现存事物的肯定的理解中同时包含对现存事物的否定的理解”。但要强调的是，这一否定并非对事物简单地外在否定，而是对事物辩证的内在否定，即事物自身的否定。而所谓的科学批判就是强调从现实本身出发，通过客观深入地把握事物发展的内在规律和运行趋势，揭示其自身的矛盾和发展界限，以找到改变事物的现实可能性。具体就资本逻辑而言，马克思对资本逻辑的批判不是脱离于历史现实的抽象思辨，也不是简单地外在否定，而是深入世界历史的具体现实，洞察到了资本主义世界历史的运行规律和趋势，并从其不可调和的内在矛盾中把握到了资本的自我否定性，进而揭示出由资本逻辑主导的资本主义世界历史必将被扬弃资本逻辑的共产主义世界历史所代替的历史必然。简言之，马克思在对资本逻辑自我否定的揭示中发现了新世界历史的现实可能。这种遵循客观性原则并基于事物自身否定性的科学批判，不但帮助马克思准确洞察到了资本主义社会的弊病所在，而且使其科学地提出了现实的疗愈良方。

This remedy is precisely determined by the dialectical foundation of Marx’s philosophical critique and achieved through the critical path of “discovering the new world by criticizing the old world.” This path precisely highlights the essential difference between Marx and previous critics. From the perspective of Marx’s theory of world history, world history is a constantly evolving historical process, which includes both the capitalist society that initiated world history, i.e., the old world history dominated by the logic of capital, and the communist society that represents the future of world history, i.e., the new world history that sublates the logic of capital. However, the new world history is not a complete denial of capitalist society but a real product of its positive sublation. In other words, the new world history is precisely the possible space generated internally in the process of criticizing the old world history, thus providing Marx with a theoretical focus and real possibility for criticizing the logic of capital and thereby capitalism. In this sense, it is precisely the scientific critique based on dialectics that enables Marx to fulfill the theoretical requirements and real mission of profoundly exposing and scientifically criticizing the old world history while actively exploring and fully realizing the new world history.

这一良方正是马克思哲学批判的辩证法基础决定的、通过“批判旧世界发现新世界”的批判路径达成的，而这一路径恰恰凸显了马克思同以往的批判家的本质区别。在马克思世界历史理论视域下，世界历史是不断生成的历史过程，其既包括开启世界历史的资本主义社会，即资本逻辑主导的旧世界历史，又指向代表世界历史未来的共产主义社会，即扬弃资本逻辑的新世界历史。但新世界历史并非对资本主义社会的完全否认，而是对其进行积极扬弃的现实产物。换言之，新世界历史正是在批判旧世界历史过程中内在生成的可能空间，因而，也就为马克思对资本逻辑进而对资本主义展开批判找到了理论着力点和现实可能性。在此意义上，正是基于辩证法基础上的科学批判，使马克思达成深刻揭露和科学批判旧世界历史与积极探索和全面实现新世界历史的理论要求和现实使命。

That is to say, Marx first established a new standpoint different from “civil society,” namely “human society or socialized humanity,” and only then began to discuss the new philosophy of “changing the world.” In *Capital* and its manuscripts, based on the standpoint of “human society,” Marx, from the height of world history, combined the analysis and critique of the logic of capital with the future of all humanity and world history. He not only discerned that the critique of the logic of capital is a key lever for profoundly criticizing world history but also realized that the critique of the logic of capital is a powerful real weapon for changing world history. Thus, it can be said that it is precisely in the unity of criticizing the old world history and discovering the new world history that Marx’s critique of the logic of capital truly unfolds, thereby fully highlighting its significance.

也就是说，马克思首先是在确立了不同于“市民社会”的“人类社会或社会化的人类”这一新的立足点之后，才开始谈论“改变世界”的新哲学的。在《资本论》及其手稿中基于“人类社会”立场，马克思立足世界历史高度，把对资本逻辑的分析和批判同整个人类和世界历史的未来前途结合在一起。他不仅洞察到资本逻辑批判是深刻批判世界历史的关键抓手，更意识到资本逻辑批判是改变世界历史的强大现实武器。因而可以说，马克思正是在批判旧世界历史与发现新世界历史的统一中，使资本逻辑的批判得以真正展开，进而使其意义得以全面凸显。

(II) The Critique of the Logic of Capital Is the Key to Unraveling the Riddle of the Old World History

（二）资本逻辑批判是揭示旧世界历史之谜的锁钥

The logic of capital is the real foundation and essential basis of capitalist world history. Therefore, the essence and secret of bourgeois society lie in the abstract domination of human society by the logic of capital. Based on this, the critique of the logic of capital constitutes the key for Marx to profoundly reveal the “riddle of capitalist world history.”

资本逻辑是资本主义世界历史的现实基础和本质根据，因而，资产阶级社会的实质和秘密就蕴藏于资本逻辑对人类社会的抽象统治之中。基于此，资本逻辑批判构成了马克思深刻揭示资本主义“世界历史之谜”的锁钥。

First, the real critique of the logic of capital. Abstraction is the masterpiece of the logic of capital, just as the logic of capital endows commodities, money, and capital—these “things”—with a “fetishistic character” they do not inherently possess, thereby shaping the entire world history into an abstract reality full of fetishistic properties. In such an abstract reality, “social relations between people mediated by things” are inverted into relations between things, and the meaning they acquire is regarded by people as an inherent attribute of these abstract things themselves. Thus, the “mysteriousness” bestowed by people becomes a force they worship and believe in. Especially in modern society dominated by the logic of capital, “this enchanted and perverted world” has developed even more rapidly. Social relations of production “begin to dominate the individual laborers who are in fact the source and creators of wealth. People and their social relations are dominated by things, or, as Marx says, begin to be ‘dominated by abstractions.’” This universal power of abstraction, while abstracting everything in the real world, also constructs a social framework with false equivalence and incorporates people into it. In this regard, Marx points out that the so-called freedom and equality people enjoy within it are merely the freedom and equality of capital itself as an abstraction, thereby exposing the lie of capitalism. Therefore, compared to classical economists who strive to justify this distorted world, Marx, by penetrating appearances and clearing away the fog, launches a more profound and essential real critique.

第一，资本逻辑的现实批判。抽象是资本逻辑的杰作，正如资本逻辑赋予了商品、货币和资本这些“物”本身并不具有的“物神性”，从而将整个世界历史塑造为一个充满拜物教性质的抽象现实。在这样的抽象现实中，“以物为中介的人和人之间的社会关系”被颠倒为物与物之间的关系，并使其获得的意义被人们视为这些抽象物本身所固有的属性。于是，被人们赋予的“神秘性”反倒成为人们崇拜和信仰的力量。尤其是在资本逻辑主导的现代社会中，“这种着了魔的颠倒的世界”得到了更加迅猛的发展。社会生产关系“开始支配那些事实上作为财富源泉和创造者的劳动者个人。人和他们的社会关系被事物所支配，或正如马克思所说，开始被‘抽象所支配’”。这种抽象的普遍力量在实现了对现实世界一切事物的抽象的同时，还架构了一种具有虚假等同性的社会框架，并将人们纳入其中。对此，马克思指出人们在其中享受的所谓自由与平等不过是资本这一抽象的自由与平等，从而戳穿了资本主义的谎言。所以，相比为这个扭曲世界力证合理性的古典经济学家，马克思则是透过表象、拨开迷雾，展开了更为深刻且本质的现实批判。

Second, the historical critique of the logic of capital. Marx points out that “possessing abstract wealth” as much as possible is the “sole motive” of capital. However, “the universality that capital irresistibly pursues encounters limits in the very nature of capital itself.” Faced with these limits and contradictions, capitalist production always adopts various means of reform to try to overcome the limits inherent in itself and irreconcilable. Although these reforms have achieved results, it must be understood that “the means it uses to overcome these limits only cause these limits to reappear before it on a larger scale. The true limit of capitalist production is capital itself.” Therefore, fundamentally, the limits of capital determine the developmental limits of the logic of capital, indicating the temporariness of capitalist world history and the inevitability of realizing a higher form of world history. With the retreat of capitalist world history, the logic of capital can only end in “nihilistic collapse.” In this regard, Marx’s historical critique of the logic of capital is actually a pathological “verdict” on capitalism, which, while declaring the end of capitalism’s life, shatters the eternal illusion about capitalism.

第二，资本逻辑的历史批判。马克思指出，尽可能多地“占有抽象财富”是资本的“唯一动机”。但是，“资本不可遏止地追求的普遍性，在资本本身的性质上遇到了限制”。面对这些限制和矛盾，资本主义生产总是采取各种手段进行改革，以尽力克服其本身所固有的且无法调和的限制。尽管这些改革取得了成效，但要知道的是，“它用来克服这些限制的手段，只是使这些限制以更大的规模重新出现在它面前。资本主义生产的真正限制是资本自身”。所以从根本上看，资本的限度决定了资本逻辑的发展限度，这种限度表明了资本主义世界历史的暂时性和实现更高级形态世界历史的必然性。随着资本主义世界历史的退位，资本逻辑只能落得“虚无的崩溃”。就此而言，马克思对资本逻辑的历史批判其实是对资本主义的病理学“宣判”，即在宣告资本主义生命尽头的同时，破除了关于资本主义的永恒幻想。

Third, the value critique of the logic of capital. From the perspective of subjectivity, the logic of capital is a logic “based on the expropriation and impoverishment of the broad masses of producers,” causing the one-sidedness, homogenization, and abstraction of people. Its emergence and expansion have brought about tremendous changes to the entire world, profoundly affecting the living conditions of modern and contemporary humanity. Especially in modern society under the grip of the logic of capital, capital’s insatiable drive for surplus value leaves no connection between people other than the cold relationship of money, “suppressing the diverse productive aptitudes and talents of workers,” flattening people’s diverse personalities and individual differences, making “all individuality, all distinctiveness negated and eliminated into a general thing.” In a word, the logic of capital shapes people into alienated beings “dominated by abstraction.” In this way, “real individuals” have no freedom; there is only the “freedom of capital.” “Capital has independence and individuality, while the active individual has none.” Capital, which should serve people, becomes the object of people’s service, becoming an “abstract force” ruling people in modern society. It can be said that the relationship between capital and people is completely inverted. Thus, while world history under the domination of the logic of capital fully highlights the subjectivity of capital, it dissolves human subjectivity, and the history of human development is surreptitiously replaced by the history of capital’s development.

第三，资本逻辑的价值批判。资本逻辑从主体性来看是一种“以广大生产者群众的被剥夺和贫穷化为基础”，造成人的片面化、同质化和抽象化的逻辑。它的出场和扩张使整个世界发生巨大变化，深刻影响了近现代人类的生存状况。尤其是在资本逻辑钳制下的现代社会中，资本对剩余价值无止境的追求本性使人与人之间除了冷漠的金钱关系再无任何其他联系，“压抑工人的多种多样的生产志趣和生产才能”，抹平了人的多样个性和个体差异，使“一切个性，一切特性都已被否定和消灭的一种一般的东西”。一言以蔽之，资本逻辑将人塑造为“受抽象统治”的异化存在。这样一来，“现实的个人”没有自由，有的只是“资本的自由”，“资本具有独立性和个性，而活动着的个人却没有”，本该为人服务的资本成了人服务的对象，成了现代社会统治人的“抽象力量”。可以说，资本与人的关系被完全颠倒。于是，资本逻辑统摄下的世界历史在全面凸显资本主体性的同时，使人的主体性被消解，人的发展史被偷换为资本的发展史。

From this perspective, through the multi-dimensional critique of the logic of capital—real, historical, and value-based—Marx achieves a scientific critique of capitalist world history. However, it must be seen that this is not the ultimate goal of Marx’s critique of the logic of capital, but rather, through this critique, to discover the new world history inherent within it, in order to realize human liberation and freedom.

由此看来，通过对资本逻辑展开的现实、历史及价值的多维批判，马克思达成了对资本主义世界历史的科学批判。但要看到，这并不是马克思展开资本逻辑批判的最终目的，而是要通过这一批判，发现内蕴在其中的新世界历史，以实现人的解放与自由。

(III) The Critique of the Logic of Capital Is Undertaken in Order to Discover a New World History

（三）展开资本逻辑批判是为了发现新的世界历史

The realization of a true world history, i.e., communist society, constitutes not only the value destination of Marx’s theory of world history but also the ultimate aim of Marx’s critique of the logic of capital. In *Capital* and its manuscripts, Marx, through his critique of political economy, scientifically demonstrated the possibility of realizing this new world history, communism. In his view, the new world history is not two separate, unrelated parts completely cut off from the old world history; on the contrary, the new world history is gestated within the old world history. And as the Archimedean point for criticizing the old world history, the logic of capital simultaneously contains the limits of the old world history and the seeds of the new world history. On this basis, Marx sought, through a scientific critique of the logic of capital and the old world history it dominates, to discover the new world history that is immanently generated within the old world history.

实现真正的世界历史即共产主义社会，不仅构成了马克思世界历史理论的价值归宿，也成为马克思资本逻辑批判的最终目的。在《资本论》及其手稿中，马克思通过政治经济学批判，科学证明了共产主义这一新的世界历史的实现可能。在他看来，新的世界历史并非同旧的世界历史完全分隔开来的两个不相干部分，恰恰相反，新的世界历史孕育于旧的世界历史之中。而作为批判旧世界历史的阿基米德点，资本逻辑同时蕴藏着旧世界历史的界限和新世界历史的萌芽。基于此，马克思试图通过展开对资本逻辑及其主导的旧世界历史的科学批判，发现内在地生成于旧世界历史之中的新世界历史。

Regarding the new world history, Marx opposed both dogmatic predictions and the fanciful flights of the utopian socialists; instead, he sought to explore and establish a new world history by dissecting and criticizing the old capitalist world history. Under capitalist world history, the logic of capital, which once, like a “sorcerer,” [16]16 A reference to Marx’s description of the bourgeoisie in the *Communist Manifesto*: “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. … It is like the sorcerer who is no longer able to control the powers of the nether world whom he has called up by his spells.” conjured up immense civilization with its spells, could no longer control the “demons” it had summoned, causing the ever-growing productive forces to gradually encounter their own developmental limits. But “every limit appears as a barrier to be overcome”; [17]17 Karl Marx, *Grundrisse* (Penguin, 1973), p. 408. in other words, the limits of the logic of capital imply the overcoming and sublation of the logic of capital itself, and this overcoming and sublation is possible precisely because within the logic of capital there gestates the real conditions for transcending it. On the one hand, the logic of capital creates an unprecedented and astonishingly vast productive force, providing a solid material foundation for advancing to a higher stage of communist world history; on the other hand, it forms the revolutionary masses who oppose the old society—the proletariat—and, in the unfolding process of world history, this proletariat achieves a world-historical unity. Only as a world-historical existence can the proletariat realize the communist cause it shoulders. With the realization of this cause, people will place “social relations under their own control,” [18]18 Karl Marx, *Grundrisse* (Penguin, 1973), p. 158. thereby successfully dissolving the abstract rule of the logic of capital as a “non-sacred image.” [19]19 A reference to Marx’s concept of the “non-sacred image” (*das unheilige Bild*) as the alienated social power of capital, contrasted with the “sacred image” of religious alienation; see Marx, *Contribution to the Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Law*. At that point, the whole of world history will thoroughly achieve human liberation and freedom.

对于新的世界历史，马克思既反对进行教条式的预测，也反对像空想主义者那样天马行空，而是试图通过剖析和批判资本主义旧世界历史，以探索和建立新的世界历史。在资本主义世界历史下，曾经如同“魔法师”用法术创造出巨大文明的资本逻辑不再能控制自己召唤的“魔鬼”，使得不断强大的生产力逐渐触及其自身发展的界限。但“任何界限都表现为必须克服的限制”，换言之，资本逻辑的界限意味着对资本逻辑本身的克服和扬弃，而这种克服和扬弃之所以可能，恰恰在于资本逻辑内部孕育着超越资本逻辑的现实条件。资本逻辑一方面创造了前所未有的惊人的巨大生产力，为迈向更高阶段的共产主义世界历史提供了坚实的物质基础；另一方面形成了反抗旧社会的革命群众——无产阶级，并且其在世界历史的展开过程中获得了世界历史性联合。无产阶级唯有作为世界历史性的存在，其肩负的共产主义事业才有可能实现。随着这一事业的实现，人们便将“社会联系置于自己支配之下”，从而成功消解资本逻辑这一“非神圣形象”的抽象统治。到了那时，整个世界历史都将彻底实现人类的解放与自由。

Marx’s critique of the logic of capital, undertaken from the perspective of world history with a principled height, both reveals the historical transience of the capitalist era and demonstrates the real possibility of transcending the capitalist era and moving toward the communist era. This means that modern society, dominated by the logic of capital, is merely a product of world history at a specific stage of development. With the high development of productive forces and the universal formation of intercourse, it will inevitably move from a world history where capital enslaves people to a true world history where capital serves people.

马克思基于世界历史视域对资本逻辑展开的具有原则高度的批判，既揭示了资本主义时代的历史暂时性，又表明了超越资本主义时代、迈向共产主义时代的现实可能性。这便意味着，以资本逻辑为主导的现代社会只是世界历史在特定阶段的发展产物，随着生产力的高度发展和交往的普遍形成，必将从资本奴役人的世界历史进入资本服务人的真正世界史。

In sum, as the real foundation of modern society, the logic of capital harbors the great secret of capitalist society, and the critique of the logic of capital is the key with which Marx discerns and reveals this secret. By delving into the reality of capitalist society and unfolding a multi-dimensional critique of the logic of capital—real, historical, and value-based—Marx, while profoundly exposing the ills of capital, points out that the capitalist world history dominated by the logic of capital is doomed to be unable to realize the free and comprehensive development of the human person. Therefore, this critique not only signifies Marx’s dual grasp—theoretical and practical—of capitalist world history but also provides theoretical wisdom for the present era to draw upon in breaking the logic of capital and examining modernization. As Dirlik states: “As long as the capitalist mode of production continues to exist, Marxism remains meaningful.” [20]20 Arif Dirlik, *After the Revolution: Waking to Global Capitalism* (Wesleyan University Press, 1994), p. 1. By the same token, as long as the logic of capital continues to spread globally, Marx’s critique of the logic of capital will retain its world-historical significance.

总之，作为现代社会的现实根据，资本逻辑蕴藏着资本主义社会的巨大秘密，而资本逻辑批判则是马克思洞察和揭示这一秘密的锁钥。马克思通过深入资本主义社会现实，展开对资本逻辑的现实、历史与价值的多维批判，在深刻揭露资本弊病的同时，指出受资本逻辑主宰的资本主义世界历史注定无法实现人的自由全面发展。因而，这一批判不仅意味着马克思达成对资本主义世界历史之理论与现实的双重把握，而且为当下时代破解资本逻辑、审视现代化发展提供了可资借鉴的理论智慧。正如德里克所述：“只要资本主义的生产方式继续存在，马克思主义就还有意义。”同理，只要资本逻辑还在全球蔓延，马克思资本逻辑批判就还有世界历史意义。

III. The World-Historical Significance Contained in Marx’s Critique of the Logic of Capital

三、马克思资本逻辑批判蕴含的世界历史意义

*Capital* and its manuscripts show that Marx placed the critique of the logic of capital at the height of world history, presenting the unity of “criticizing the old world” and “discovering the new world” in a multi-dimensional critique—real, historical, and value-based. In this critique, Marx consistently linked the logic of capital with world history and human development, pursuing the true realization of world history and the free and comprehensive development of the human person, thereby manifesting a great and rich world-historical significance.

《资本论》及其手稿表明，马克思把资本逻辑批判置于世界历史高度，在现实、历史、价值多维批判中呈现了“批判旧世界”与“发现新世界”的统一。在这一批判中，马克思始终将资本逻辑与世界历史和人的发展联系在一起，追索着世界历史的真正实现和人的自由全面发展，彰显了伟大且丰富的世界历史意义。

(I) Clarifying the Essence of the Logic of Capital and Gaining Insight into Changes in Contemporary Capitalism Is the Theoretical Effect of Marx’s Critique of the Logic of Capital

（一）澄明资本逻辑实质，透视当代资本主义变化，正是马克思资本逻辑批判的理论效应

With the deepening advance of world history and the universal development of digital technology, the logic of capital and digital technology have jointly presented a new form of capitalist reality—digital capitalism. This form can be said to be a product of the era under the continuous reshaping of crises and capitalism’s self-salvation. Faced with these new changes in capitalism, some scholars regard digital capitalism as capitalism’s “savior.” In their view, digital capitalism can not only help it escape crisis but, more importantly, can change its inevitable fate of moving toward socialism. But upon deeper reflection, it becomes clear that this is not the case. As Marx stated, the logic of capital is a logic of exploitation that maximizes the appropriation of surplus value at the cost of the impoverishment of the broad masses. The universal linkage of the logic of capital with digital technology causes digital capitalism to form a more concealed and mysterious ruling force, as well as new forms of exploitation in the digital age. For example, in the realm of nature, nature has without exception become an object for the profitable pursuit of digital capital logic, thereby exacerbating the collapse of ecosystems and the outbreak of crises; regarding social development, digital capital logic controls all fields of social development, not only failing to change the “inverted” reality caused by the logic of capital but making it even more distorted; as for human beings themselves, under the “magic” of digital capital logic, it not only “abolishes all moral and natural limits of the working day” [21]21 Karl Marx, *Capital*, Volume I (Penguin, 1976), p. 375. but also blurs the boundary between work and life, causing people to mostly complete “self-exploitation” without being aware of it. It can be seen that the exploitative essence of the logic of capital has not actually changed as a result. In other words, the present era, having entered the digital age, still belongs to the era of the rule of the logic of capital identified by Marx, i.e., the logic of capital still pervades every corner of the world in a “ghostly” real form and has become the dominant force ruling everything. The difference is that the logic of capital has been endowed with a digital form, so that labor, technology, data platforms, etc., are all inevitably incorporated into the global expansion logic of digital capital. This means that the rule of the logic of capital has not been weakened but, on the contrary, has been strengthened through an increasingly “demonized” and “mystified” mode of expansion—digital expansion.

随着世界历史的深入推进和数字技术的普遍发展，资本逻辑与数字技术联袂呈现了一种新的资本主义现实样态——数字资本主义。这一形态可以说是在危机的不断重塑和资本主义自我拯救之下的时代产物。面对资本主义的新变化，一些学者将数字资本主义视为资本主义的“救世主”。因为在其看来，数字资本主义不仅能够帮助其摆脱危机，更重要的是，可以改变走向社会主义的必然命运。但若更深一步思考就可以发现，事实并非如此。正如马克思所言，资本逻辑是一种以广大群众的贫穷为代价最大化占有剩余价值的剥削逻辑。资本逻辑与数字技术的普遍联动使数字资本主义形成一种更加隐蔽和神秘的统治力量，以及数字时代的新剥削形式。譬如，在自然界方面，自然界毫无例外地成为数字资本逻辑有利可图的对象，从而加剧了生态系统的崩溃与危机的爆发；关于社会发展，数字资本逻辑掌控了社会发展的各个领域，不仅没有改变资本逻辑造成的“颠倒”现实，反而使其更加扭曲；就人自身而言，在数字资本逻辑的“魔法”下，不仅“消灭了工作日的一切道德界限和自然界限”，更模糊了工作与生活的界限，使人们大多是在不自知中完成了“自我剥削”。可见，资本逻辑的剥削本质实际上并未因此有所改变。换言之，步入数字时代的今天仍然处于马克思所指认的资本逻辑统治的时代，即资本逻辑仍以一种“幽灵般”的现实形式遍布在世界的各个角落，并成为统治一切的主导力量。不同的是，资本逻辑被赋予了数字化的形式，像劳动、技术、数据平台等都不可避免地被纳入数字资本的全球扩张逻辑之中。这便意味着，资本逻辑的统治不是削弱了，反而是以一种愈加“妖魔化”和“神秘化”的扩张方式——数字化扩张——增强了。

Marx, having seen through the essence of the logic of capital, did not stop there but subjected it to a profound and comprehensive critique, making private ownership an important premise of this critique. Digital capitalism, as a formal transmutation of capitalism in the contemporary era, already had the foundation of private ownership objectively existing from the moment of its emergence. This fundamentally determines that as long as digital capitalism remains a form of exploitation built on the basis of private ownership, the logic of capital will continue to function, and the critique of the logic of capital will remain worthy of attention. At the same time, based on Marx’s reasonable analysis of the finite destiny of the logic of capital, it must be recognized that digital capitalism is neither the only choice for the combination of digital technology and social reality nor the final form of human social development; the fissures and contradictions of capitalism that it breeds internally doom it to a historical trend toward a higher form. Therefore, the positions, viewpoints, and methods of Marx’s critique of the logic of capital are conducive not only to revealing and grasping the laws and contradictions of capitalism in its own era but also to deeply discerning the inner essence of the logic of capital’s global expansion in the contemporary era, and even more so to comprehensively penetrating the development trend of digital capitalism, fully demonstrating the theoretical effect of Marx’s critique of the logic of capital.

看清资本逻辑实质的马克思并非就此止步，而是对其展开了深刻而全面的批判，并将私有制作为这一批判的重要前提。数字资本主义作为资本主义在当代现实的形式嬗变，在其出场之时私有制基础就已客观存在。这就从根本上决定了只要数字资本主义仍是建立在私有制基础上的剥削形式，那么资本逻辑就仍会发挥作用，资本逻辑批判就仍然值得重视。与此同时，基于马克思对资本逻辑有限命运作出的合理分析，要看到，数字资本主义不是数字技术与社会现实结合的唯一选择，也不是人类社会发展的终结形态，其内部滋长的资本主义裂隙和矛盾注定了其将走向更高级形态的历史趋势。因此，马克思资本逻辑批判的立场、观点和方法既有利于揭示和切中其所处时代的资本主义规律和矛盾，也有助于深刻洞察资本逻辑在当代全球拓展的内在实质，更有益于全面透视数字资本主义的发展趋势，充分展现了马克思资本逻辑批判的理论效应。

(II) Grasping the Composition of the Logic of Capital and Assisting the Construction of Socialism with Chinese Characteristics Is the Practical Path of Marx’s Critique of the Logic of Capital

（二）把握资本逻辑构成，助力中国特色社会主义建设，正是马克思资本逻辑批判的实践理路

In Marx’s view, the expansion of capital and its logic has a dual character: as a factor of production, capital creates the civilizing aspect of productive forces, and as a relation of production, capital negates the destructive aspect of human development. Regarding the former, the civilizing aspect of capital in creating enormous productive forces is actually inherent in capital itself, constituting the legitimate reason for capital’s existence. At the same time, capital’s promotion and enhancement of productive forces not only achieves the universal appropriation of nature and society but also unconsciously provides the material conditions and possible space for the free and all-round development of human beings. People no longer need to produce those material conditions that can be replaced by things, thereby having more free time to develop themselves. Hence, capital and its logic have also become an important element in human society’s march toward modernization. The latter refers to the alienated existence of human beings caused by capital, under the specific bourgeois form, based on the infinite exploitation and appropriation of surplus value. This unequal relation of production between capital and labor fundamentally shapes the inversion of the “world of things” and the “world of human beings.” In response, Marx launched a critique of capital and the modern society it dominates at a principled height, revealing the inherent paradox of the development of capital and its logic, and sought from within a development path that, based on drawing on the civilizing achievements of capital, “positively” sublates capital.

在马克思看来，资本及其逻辑的扩张具有二重性作用，即作为生产要素的资本创造生产力的文明面和作为生产关系的资本否定人的发展的破坏面。就前者而言，资本创造巨大生产力的这种文明面实际上内蕴在资本本身之中，构成资本存在的合法性理由。同时，资本对生产力的促进和提高不仅实现了对自然界和社会的普遍占有，而且不自觉地为人的自由全面发展提供了物质条件和可能空间。人们不再需要生产那些可以由物代替生产的物质条件，进而拥有更多自由的时间发展自身。因而，资本及其逻辑也成为人类社会走向现代化的重要要素。后者则是资本在特定的资产阶级形式下，基于对剩余价值的无限剥削和占有所造成的人的异化存在。资本同劳动的这种不平等的生产关系从根本上塑造了“物的世界”同“人的世界”的颠倒。对此，马克思对资本及其主导的现代社会展开了具有原则高度的批判，揭示了资本及其逻辑发展的内在悖论，并试图从中寻求以借鉴资本文明成果为基础的“积极式”扬弃资本的发展路径。

This means that Marx’s analysis of the problem of capital and its logic is neither an abstract judgment of speculative thought nor a superficial “reasonable defense,” but a dialectical analysis that penetrates reality. This dialectic is manifested in the fact that Marx’s critique of the logic of capital is by no means a total negation of capital and its logic, but only a profound critique of its aspect as a relation of production that dominates labor, while pointing out that the sublation of alienation must be built on the full development of capital. Moreover, Marx further indicates that capital as a factor of production is by no means the exclusive preserve of capitalist society; if it can shed its narrow capitalist form, the wealth brought by capital will have universality. Therefore, it is necessary to rationally regulate and overcome the negative factors of the logic of capital, and to fully utilize and grasp its positive factors. Only in this way can capital be transformed from a tool that enslaves human beings into a means that serves them.

这便意味着，马克思对资本及其逻辑问题的分析既不是头脑思辨的抽象判断，也不是流于外在的“合理辩护”，而是深入现实的辩证分析。这种辩证体现为，马克思对资本逻辑的批判绝非对资本及其逻辑的全盘否定，仅是对其作为支配劳动的生产关系方面的深刻批判，同时指出异化的扬弃需要建立在资本充分发展的基础之上。不仅如此，马克思更是表明资本作为生产要素绝不是资本主义社会的唯一专属，若能摆脱狭隘的资本主义形式，资本带来的财富将具有普遍性。因而，需要对资本逻辑的消极因素进行合理规制和克服，对其积极因素进行充分利用和把握。唯有此，才能将资本由奴役人的工具变为服务人的手段。

For a socialist society with Chinese characteristics that is still in the primary stage of socialism, developing the productive forces is an extremely urgent and important practical task, and “developing the productive forces of social labor is the historical task and reason for existence of capital.” [22]22 Karl Marx, *Capital*, vol. 3, in *Marx and Engels Collected Works*, vol. 25 (Beijing: People’s Publishing House, 2009), p. 288. Therefore, on the one hand, our country treats capital as “an important force for promoting the development of social productive forces” and “an important factor of production in the socialist market economy,” fully activating the positive side of capital. On the other hand, to prevent the disorderly expansion of capital, its scope of activity is demarcated, and its development is guided under socialist conditions, regulating the negative side of capital, thereby deepening the understanding of the theory of capital under the conditions of the socialist market economy. In this sense, Marx’s scientific critique of the logic of capital precisely explains the rationality of capital’s existence in a socialist society with Chinese characteristics, and answers the necessity of “regulating and guiding the development of capital under the conditions of the socialist market economy.”

对于正处于社会主义初级阶段的中国特色社会主义社会，发展生产力正是非常急迫和重要的现实任务，而“发展社会劳动的生产力，是资本的历史任务和存在理由”。所以，我国一方面将资本作为“促进社会生产力发展的重要力量”，以及“社会主义市场经济的重要生产要素”，充分激活资本的积极面。另一方面，为了防止资本的无序扩张，对其活动范围进行划定，并在社会主义条件下引导其发展，规制资本的消极面，从而深化了对社会主义市场经济条件下资本理论的认识。在此意义上，马克思对资本逻辑的科学批判恰恰解释了资本在中国特色社会主义社会存在的合理性，以及回答了在“社会主义市场经济条件下规范和引导资本发展”的必要性。

(3) Breaking the myth of the logic of capital and exploring new possibilities for modernization development is precisely the realistic concern of Marx’s critique of the logic of capital.

（三）破除资本逻辑迷思，探索现代化发展新可能，正是马克思资本逻辑批判的现实观照

As an endogenous driving force, the logic of capital broke through local constraints, propelled the transformation of history into world history, and thereby opened up an entirely new social formation. Marx, keenly capturing this change, not only called it “modern society” to distinguish it from previous societies, but more importantly, by delving into social-historical reality, he profoundly revealed the essential logic constituting this society—the logic of capital. Regarding the logic of capital, bourgeois economists treat capital as a natural and eternal category, thereby creating the myth of the enduring nature of the logic of capital and its society, legitimizing the modern society they represent. In contrast, Marx “does not depict capital in rose-colored hues,” [23]23 Karl Marx, “Preface to the First German Edition,” *Capital*, vol. 1, in *Marx and Engels Collected Works*, vol. 5 (Beijing: People’s Publishing House, 2009), p. 10. but instead, by penetrating social reality, grasped the laws of capital’s movement, and mercilessly criticized the abstract logic of capital that enslaves human beings, revealing that the development of capital is merely a natural-historical process, thereby pronouncing the limited lifespan of the logic of capital, and, more importantly, discovering the realistic path to break the myth of capitalism.

资本逻辑作为内生动力，冲破了地方束缚，推动了历史向世界历史的转变，进而开辟了一个全新的社会形态。敏锐捕捉到这一变化的马克思不仅将其称为“现代社会”，以示与以往社会的不同，更为重要的是，深入社会历史现实的他深刻揭示了构成这一社会的本质逻辑——资本逻辑。关于资本逻辑，资产阶级经济学家将资本视为天然存在的永恒范畴，从而打造了资本逻辑及其社会经久不衰的神话，以为其所代表的现代社会正名。与此相反，马克思“决不用玫瑰色描绘”资本，而是通过深入社会现实，把握到了资本运动的规律，并对资本奴役人的抽象逻辑进行了无情批判，揭示了资本的发展只是自然历史过程，从而宣判了资本逻辑的有限期限，更为重要的是，发现了破除资本主义神话的现实道路。

The logic of capital and its unfolding constitute the essence of modernization. On the one hand, the logic of capital dominates everything in modern society, making everything subordinate to it. On the other hand, the logic of capital compels all nations to adopt its mode of production—if they do not wish to perish—and, according to its own needs and ideas, establishes the basic structure and universal order of modern society on a global scale, making “barbarian and semi-barbarian countries dependent on civilized countries, making peasant peoples dependent on bourgeois peoples, making the East dependent on the West.” [24]24 Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, “Manifesto of the Communist Party,” in *Marx and Engels Collected Works*, vol. 2 (Beijing: People’s Publishing House, 2009), p. 36. This coercive nature of the logic of capital fundamentally creates the singularity of modernization development, as if there is no alternative to modernization except through the capitalist path. But Marx transcended the limitation of equating Westernization with modernization. While historically critiquing the logic of capital, he found within the logic of capital the possibility of transcending it. Although capitalist modernization is the initiator of world history, it is not the end of world history. In other words, capitalist modernization is not the only choice or necessary path to modernization. The possibility of realizing a new type of civilization’s modernization lies precisely in the self-negating movement of the logic of capital—the essential foundation of capitalist modernization. Therefore, it can be said that this highly constructive path of critiquing the logic of capital, opened up by Marx, precisely points us toward a direction and destination of development that is different from and superior to capitalist modernization.

资本逻辑及其展开构成了现代化的本质。一方面，资本逻辑凌驾于现代社会的一切之上，使得一切从属于资本逻辑。另一方面，资本逻辑要求一切民族采用其生产方式——如果不想灭亡的话，并按照自己的需求和想法在世界范围内建制了现代社会的基本结构和普遍秩序，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”。资本逻辑的这种强制性从根本上造成了现代化发展的唯一性，仿佛现代化除了通过资本主义道路实现外别无选择。但马克思跳出了西方化即现代化的局限，在对资本逻辑进行历史批判的同时，在资本逻辑内部寻找到超越资本逻辑的可能性。资本主义现代化虽是世界历史的开启者，但并非世界历史的终结者。换言之，资本主义现代化并非通向现代化的唯一选择和必经之路。新文明类型的现代化的实现可能性恰恰在于资本主义现代化之本质基础——资本逻辑的自我否定运动之中。因此可以说，马克思开辟的这条极具建构意义的资本逻辑批判道路，恰恰为我们指明了一条不同于资本主义现代化又高于资本主义现代化的发展方向和归宿。

Based on this, Marx is both a critic of modernization dominated by the logic of capital and a constructor of modernization that transcends the logic of capital. Through his critique of the logic of capital, he reveals its historical limits, breaks the myth of the eternal existence of the logic of capital and the modern society it dominates, negates the uniqueness of capitalist modernization, and provides an alternative line of thought for exploring new possibilities for modernization development. Hence, the comprehensive and profound critique of the logic of capital that Marx unfolds in *Capital* and its manuscripts has important practical value for us today in breaking the myth of the logic of capital and exploring new possibilities for modernization development.

基于此，马克思既是资本逻辑主导现代化的批判者，也是超越资本逻辑现代化的建构者。他通过对资本逻辑的批判，揭示了资本逻辑的历史限度，打破了资本逻辑及其主导的现代社会之永恒存在的迷思，否定了资本主义现代化的唯一选择，并为探索现代化发展新的可能提供了别样的致思理路。因而，马克思在《资本论》及其手稿中对资本逻辑展开的全面而深刻的批判，对于我们当下破除资本逻辑迷思、探索现代化发展新可能具有重要的现实价值。

(4) Overcoming the drawbacks of the logic of capital and promoting the free and all-round development of human beings is precisely the epochal appeal of Marx’s critique of the logic of capital.

（四）克服资本逻辑弊端，促进人的自由全面发展，正是马克思资本逻辑批判的时代诉求

Realizing the free and all-round development of human beings is both the goal of Marx’s critique of the logic of capital and the destination of Marx’s theory of world history. In *Capital* and its manuscripts, Marx situates the critique of the logic of capital within the operation of world history and human development, explores the dual impact of the logic of capital on world history and its subjects, and, from within the contradictions and fissures of the logic of capital, finds new realistic possibilities for the free and all-round development of human beings that transcend the logic of capital.

实现人的自由全面发展既是马克思资本逻辑批判的目的，也是马克思世界历史理论的归宿。在《资本论》及其手稿中，马克思将资本逻辑批判置于世界历史与人的发展运思中，探讨了资本逻辑对世界历史及其主体的双重影响，并从资本逻辑的矛盾和裂隙之中为人的自由全面发展寻找到了超越资本逻辑的新的现实可能性。

Marx believed that capital logic has a dual impact on world history, and this duality of impact stems precisely from the duality of capital logic itself, namely, the civilizational logic of capital creating enormous social productive forces and the logic of capital’s valorization pursuing the maximization of surplus value. These two logics are closely integrated and jointly act on human development: on the one hand, driven by capital logic, productive forces develop at an unprecedented scale and speed, promoting further human development; on the other hand, due to its profit-driven nature, capital continuously extracts surplus labor and treats the personification of surplus labor—the wage worker—as a means and tool for capital’s valorization, which not only leads to the worker’s extreme poverty but also deprives them of freedom and individuality. This exploitative logic, based on oppressing others, brings a so-called “independence” that, far from granting people genuine independence and individuality, instead draws them into dependence on things like capital. In other words, while capital logic certainly breaks the shackles of “relations of personal dependence,” fundamentally it re-anchors “personal independence” on the foundation of “dependence on things.” Therefore, in modern society dominated by capital logic, people are inevitably swept along by capital, which demands constant valorization at every moment. Once brought under capital’s rule, people’s alienated existence is thereby formed. In this way, the goal of realizing human freedom dissolves into a bubble and vanishes without a trace. In response, Marx launched a “ruthless critique” of capital logic, but this critique does not simply aim at the complete negation of capital logic; it also seeks the possibility of transcending it from within capital logic itself. Just as “the supersession of self-alienation follows the same path as self-alienation,” capital logic creates the conditions for its own supersession: as “the development of the material productive forces—and at the same time the development of the power of the working class—reaches a certain point, it will supersede capital itself.” This indicates that, on the basis of superseding capital logic—that is, both actively appropriating the civilizational achievements of capital logic and striving to overcome its drawbacks—it is possible to establish a higher social formation that transcends capital logic, ultimately realizing communist society. Only then can people truly attain the freedom and comprehensive development that make them human, and the value and significance of world history can be highlighted. From this perspective, Marx’s critique of capital logic fully demonstrates how capital logic, while obstructing people’s realization of freedom and liberation, simultaneously nurtures the conditions for achieving that freedom and liberation, thereby revealing the finite historical destiny of capital logic and the possible space for realizing people’s free and comprehensive development.

马克思认为，资本逻辑具有双重的世界历史影响，而这一影响的双重性正是源于资本逻辑的双重性，即资本创造巨大社会生产力的文明逻辑与资本追求最大化剩余价值的增殖逻辑。这两重逻辑紧密结合并共同作用于人的发展：一方面，在资本逻辑的推动下，生产力以前所未有的规模和速度发展，推动了人的进一步发展；另一方面，由于逐利本性使然，资本不断榨取剩余劳动，并将剩余劳动的人格化——雇佣工人视为资本增殖的手段和工具，不仅导致了工人的赤贫，更是剥夺了人的自由与个性。这种建立在压迫他人基础之上的剥削逻辑带来的所谓“独立性”，非但没有使人获得真正的独立性和个性，反而将人带入了对资本这样的物的依赖之下。换言之，资本逻辑固然打破了“人的依赖关系”束缚，但从根本上来看，其使“人的独立性”再次依附于“物的依赖性”这一基础之上。所以，在资本逻辑主导的现代社会，人们注定会被这个要求每时每刻都增殖的资本所裹挟。而一旦被资本纳入其统治之下，人们的异化存在便就此形成。这样一来，实现人的自由目标就幻化为泡影，消失得无影无踪。对此，马克思对资本逻辑展开了“无情的批判”，但这一批判并非单纯指向对资本逻辑的完全否定，也包含从资本逻辑内部寻找超越的可能性。正如“自我异化的扬弃同自我异化走的是同一条道路”，资本逻辑为其自身的扬弃创造了条件，随着“物质生产力的发展——同时又是工人阶级力量的发展——到一定时候就会扬弃资本本身”。这表明，在扬弃资本逻辑即既积极占有资本逻辑文明成果又努力克服资本逻辑弊端的基础上，有可能建立超越资本逻辑的更高级的社会形态，并最终实现共产主义社会。到那时，人才能真正获得成其为人的自由与全面的发展，世界历史的价值意义方能得以凸显。就此看来，马克思对资本逻辑的批判充分展示了资本逻辑如何在阻碍人实现自由与解放的同时，又孕育着实现人的自由与解放的条件，进而揭示资本逻辑有限的历史命运与实现人的自由全面发展的可能空间。

IV. Conclusion

四、结语

Standing at the height of world history and the dimension of human development, Marx provided an interpretation based on historical materialism and a profound and thorough critique of capital logic, thereby transcending previous abstract speculation confined to form and external “reasonable justifications.” In his view, capital logic is the inherent law of capital, as a specific relation of production, ceaselessly pursuing surplus value, constituting the essential foundation of world history characterized by modernization. Under world history dominated by capital logic, the bourgeoisie, in order to maximize surplus value, establishes trade connections everywhere, promotes its own mode of production and civilization everywhere, and achieves the reshaping and transformation of the entire human society. Thus, with the unfolding of world history, capital logic and its universal power permeate every aspect of human society. This abstract universal power not only forms an unequal pattern of “domination-subordination” across the world, constructing a social framework with false equivalence, but also imposes abstract equivalence on the real world and individuals, erasing the differences in historical development and people’s individuality and freedom. In such an abstract world, people are no longer masters of nature, society, or themselves; instead, they become appendages of machines and slaves of capital. Human subjectivity is thus lost, replaced by the subjectivity of capital. In this way, the history of human development is usurped as the history of capital’s development.

立足世界历史高度与人的发展向度，马克思对资本逻辑进行了唯物史观阐释和深刻而彻底的批判，实现了对以往拘于形式的抽象思辨和流于外在的“合理辩护”的超越。在他看来，资本逻辑是作为特定生产关系的资本所呈现的不断追求剩余价值的内在规律，构成了以现代化为表征的世界历史之本质基础。在资本逻辑主导的世界历史之下，为了追求剩余价值最大化的资产阶级到处建立贸易联系，到处推广自身的生产方式及其文明，实现了对整个人类社会的重塑与改造。于是，伴随着世界历史的展开，资本逻辑及其普遍力量渗透到人类社会的方方面面。这种抽象的普遍力量既在整个世界形成了“统治—支配”的不平等格局，架构了一种具有虚假等同性的社会框架，还对现实世界及个人进行抽象等同，抹杀了历史发展的差异性与人的个性和自由。人们在这样的抽象世界之中不再是自然、社会和自身的主人，反而成了机器的附庸与资本的奴隶。人的主体性便由此丧失，取而代之的是资本的主体性。这样一来，人的发展史便被篡夺为资本的发展史。

In response, Marx believed that the essence and secret of bourgeois society lie in the abstract domination of human society by capital logic. Capital, based on private ownership and relying on its advantage in possessing the means of production, seeks by every means to appropriate others’ surplus labor, gratuitously stealing the surplus value created by workers, in order to achieve its own valorization. It is precisely this inequality in relations that grants capital the power to dominate and rule over people, realizing the wholesale deprivation of the matrix of human life, the comprehensive manipulation of people’s inner needs, and the universal encroachment on people’s free time, among other things. In short, capital achieves its domination and enslavement of people through its exploitative logic of maximizing the appropriation of surplus value at the cost of the poverty of the broad masses. On this basis, capital logic becomes the absolute force governing the generation of world history and human development. Marx, who had a deep understanding and scientific grasp of the essence of capital logic, placed it within the framework of world history and carried out a multidimensional critique concerning reality, history, and value. Among these, the critique of reality, primarily based on a perspective on the inverted real world, reveals the abstractness of capital logic. This abstractness determines that capital logic inevitably leads to the homogenization and one-sided development of people, thus constituting the basis for Marx’s critique of value. The critique of value, which targets capital logic’s anti-human nature, implies that world history dominated by capital logic cannot achieve human liberation and freedom and must be replaced by a world history that supersedes capital; this finitude of capital logic becomes an important content revealed by Marx’s critique of history. Thus, these three aspects of Marx’s critique of capital logic are closely interlinked and organically unified. It is precisely through this ruthless critique based on the essential principle of dialectics that Marx achieved the theoretical exploration and practical pursuit of profoundly insighting and systematically analyzing the “old world” while actively seeking and scientifically constructing the “new world.”

对此，马克思认为，资产阶级社会的实质和秘密就蕴藏于资本逻辑对人类社会的抽象统治之中。建立在私有制基础之上的资本凭借其对生产资料的占有优势，想方设法占有他人的剩余劳动，无偿窃取工人创造的剩余价值，以达到增殖自身的目的。正是这种关系的不平等给予资本对人的统治和支配权力，实现了对人的生命基质的整体剥夺、对人的内在需要的全面操控及对人的自由时间的普遍侵占，等等。简言之，资本通过其以广大群众的贫穷为代价最大化占有剩余价值的剥削逻辑，实现对人的统治与奴役。基于此，资本逻辑成了统摄世界历史的生成与人的发展的绝对力量。对资本逻辑实质有着深入认识和科学把握的马克思，将其置于世界历史的运思之中，开展了关涉现实、历史及价值的多维批判。其中，现实批判主要是基于对颠倒的现实世界的透视，揭示了资本逻辑的抽象性。这种抽象性决定了资本逻辑必然造成人的同质化与片面化发展，从而构成了马克思对其展开的价值批判。资本逻辑反人性的价值批判意味着以资本逻辑为主导的世界历史无法实现人的解放与自由，必将由扬弃资本的世界历史所代替，而这种资本逻辑的有限性成为马克思历史批判所昭示的重要内容。可见，马克思对资本逻辑展开的这三方面批判环环紧扣、有机统一。也正是基于辩证法这一本质原则的无情批判，使马克思达成深刻洞察和系统剖析“旧世界”与积极探寻和科学构建“新世界”的理论探索和现实追求。

Furthermore, Marx, who took human liberation as his lifelong mission, revealed the historical transience of the “old world” in his dialectical critique of the logic of capital, while at the same time demonstrating the historical inevitability of the emergence of a “new world.” The theoretical effects, practical pathways, realistic concerns, and epochal demands contained in this thought, which combines the critique of reality with the promise of the future, are precisely the concentrated embodiment of its contemporary significance. First, the exploitative essence of the logic of capital expounded by Marx provides theoretical support for examining the contemporary digital form of capitalism. According to Marx’s exposition, the logic of capital, which takes self-valorization as its instinct, is a logic of exploitation that maximizes the appropriation of surplus value at the cost of the impoverishment of the majority and ultimately dominates and enslaves people. This exploitative essence fundamentally determines that no matter what formal changes it undergoes, it cannot change the actual state of exploiting people or the historical destiny of capitalism. Second, the constituent elements of the logic of capital analyzed by Marx provide practical strategies for advancing the construction of socialism with Chinese characteristics. In Marx’s view, the logic of capital has both the civilizing aspect of capital as a factor of production that creates productive forces and the destructive aspect of capital as a relation of production that negates human development. This indicates that in the process of socialist development, in order to transform capital that enslaves people into capital that serves people, it is necessary to reasonably regulate its negative elements and fully utilize its positive factors. Third, the inherent contradictions of the logic of capital revealed by Marx provide a realistic possibility for seeking a new path of modernization. Marx believed that when capital can no longer contain the enormous productive forces it has conjured up with its own magic, it will change from a promoter of productive forces into an obstacle and gradually move toward its end. This logic of capital’s self-negation shows that, as a natural historical process, it also has a certain historical limit. In this sense, capitalism dominated by the logic of capital is not the only form combined with modernization, nor is it the final form of world historical development. Finally, the path of sublation of the logic of capital proposed by Marx provides epochal guidance for realizing the free and comprehensive development of human beings. Marx, who carried out a profound critique of the logic of capital, did not simply negate it, but found the possibility of development within the logic of capital itself, that is, on the basis of actively appropriating the civilizational achievements of capital and reasonably overcoming the drawbacks of the logic of capital, to reach the communist society that realizes the comprehensive development of human beings.

进言之，以人的解放为毕生使命的马克思在对资本逻辑的辩证批判中揭示了“旧世界”具有的历史暂时性的同时，昭示了“新世界”产生的历史必然性。这一批判现实与昭示未来并存的思想所蕴含的理论效应、实践理路、现实观照与时代诉求正是其当代意义的集中体现。首先，马克思阐发的资本逻辑剥削实质，为审视资本主义的当代数字化样态提供了理论支撑。依据马克思的论述，以增殖自身为本能的资本逻辑是一种以多数人的贫穷为代价，最大化占有剩余价值，并最终对人进行统治和奴役的剥削逻辑。这种剥削实质从根本上决定了其无论发生什么样的形式变化，都无法改变剥削人的现实状况以及资本主义的历史命运。其次，马克思剖析的资本逻辑构成要素为推进中国特色社会主义建设提供了实践方略。在马克思看来，资本逻辑既有着作为生产要素的资本创造生产力的文明面，又有着作为生产关系的资本否定人的发展的破坏面。这便表明，在社会主义发展进程中，要想将奴役人的资本转化为服务人的资本，必须合理规制其消极要素，充分利用其积极因素。再次，马克思揭示的资本逻辑内在矛盾为寻求新的现代化道路提供了现实可能。马克思认为，当资本无法再容纳自己用法术召唤出来的巨大生产力时，其将从生产力的推动者变为阻碍者，并逐步走向生命的尽头。这种资本的自我否定运动逻辑表明，其作为自然历史过程同样有着一定的历史期限。在此意义上，以资本逻辑为主导的资本主义并非与现代化结合的唯一形式，更不是世界历史发展的最终形式。最后，马克思提出的资本逻辑扬弃路径为实现人的自由全面发展提供了时代引领。对资本逻辑展开深刻批判的马克思不是对资本逻辑进行一味否定，而是在资本逻辑内部找到了发展的可能，即在积极占有资本文明成果与合理克服资本逻辑弊端的基础上，通达实现人的全面发展的共产主义社会。

In a word, Marx’s critique of the logic of capital in *Capital* and its manuscripts is incisive and penetrating, becoming a pathology of capital with world-historical significance. Today, when the logic of capital affects the development of the current world history in a more extensive way, it remains not only a keyword and deep driving force of world historical development, but also a problem domain and an important link in Marx’s theory of world history. In this sense, the critique of the logic of capital has more important and more direct theoretical value and practical significance than ever before. Therefore, we must actively absorb the rich and profound theoretical resources and philosophical wisdom contained in Marx’s critique of the logic of capital, to better penetrate the new changes of contemporary capitalism, assist in the construction of socialism with Chinese characteristics, explore new possibilities for modernization development, and thereby promote the free and comprehensive development of human beings.

一言以蔽之，马克思在《资本论》及其手稿中对资本逻辑的批判鞭辟入里，成为具有世界历史意义的资本病理学。在资本逻辑以一种更加广泛的方式对当下世界历史的发展造成深刻影响的今天，其不仅仍是世界历史发展的关键词和深层动力，也是马克思世界历史理论的问题域和重要环节。在此意义上，资本逻辑批判具有比以往更为重要和更加直接的理论价值和现实意义。因而，我们要积极汲取马克思资本逻辑批判中蕴含的丰富而深刻的理论资源和哲学智慧，更好地透视当代资本主义的新变化，助力中国特色社会主义建设，探索现代化发展的新可能，进而促进人的自由全面发展。

Online editor: Paul

网络编辑：保罗