欢迎来到51Due,请先 | 注册
关注我们: 51due论文代写二维码 51due论文代写平台微博
英国论文代写,英国essay代写知名品牌微信

Essay代写范文

为您解决留学中生活、学习、工作的困难、疑惑
释放自我

Essay代写:The concept of property in the view of historical materialism

2017-12-04 | 来源:51due教员组 | 类别:Essay代写范文

下面为大家整理一篇优秀的essay代写范文- The concept of property in the view of historical materialism,供大家参考学习,这篇论文讨论了历史唯物主义视野中的财产观念。在《德意志意识形态》中,马克思坚定地站在历史唯物主义立场上与施蒂纳等人论战,批评后者把共产主义歪曲为“共同占有财产”,并指出财产的现实形态总是“取决于社会关系”。按照马克思的看法,亚当·斯密和黑格尔犯了同一个错误,那就是都把财产看作“一般”财产,而非“历史的”财产。

concept of property,财产观念,英国代写,essay代写,代写

What is the meaning of communism "total"? The issue is controversial both in academia and in the masses. On the whole, people mostly discuss the "social form" of property, that is, the problem of the property right of the communist is mainly regarded as the problem of the private property storage, the property system arrangement and so on. This kind of thinking is particularly easy to fall into the "dead End", because Marx criticizes both private ownership and does not agree with simple public ownership, so communism's "total" is the equivalent of challenging people's imagination.

We believe that only by examining the "property" from the perspective of historical materialism can we understand the true connotation of communism, otherwise it will inevitably fall into the dogmatism of simplification and vulgarity. Based on this, this paper attempts to set aside the "social form" of property and to interpret communism from the "social nature" of property, with a view to providing a new way of thinking for relevant research.

People usually understand "property" as material wealth, but philosophy is advocating the spiritual world, if the pure wealth is understood as material things, then it and the lofty spirit of the world will become contradictory. Thus, in ancient society, the moral family regarded the human's desire for wealth as a first-class scourge, and believed that it concealed the power of harm and destruction, which would corrode the noble warrior spirit.

Classical economics has broken the prevalent understanding of wealth, no longer regard wealth as pure "thing", but as the condensation of the subject's wisdom, which endows the property with positive social meaning and theoretical meaning. Muller, McCulloch and other people believe that "rich" not only without prejudice to virtue, but also to promote the self-cultivation and quality of individuals or countries, wealth not only for survival, and the prerequisite for the promotion of noble talent. "Without the peace and leisure of accumulated wealth, the pure and elegant learning that expands our horizons, our habits, and our status will not be achieved successfully." "But the legitimacy of property is not just derived from its" effectiveness, "it is fundamentally rooted in the concept of" Labor creates wealth. " In modern political philosophy, the concept of "labor to establish property rights", in classical economics there is "Labor value theory." In addition to the mercantilism, which regards money as the essence of wealth, the school of heavy agriculture, Adam Smith and Ricardo have all steadfastly regarded Labor as the source of value, and according to this view, wealth and substance cannot be equated, only by adding labor to the proper material, making them useful to people and then becoming wealth, so wealth is no longer " External possessions "is the result of the subjectivity of the outside. "The actual and only result of labour is the production of wealth by giving the existing substance a means of utility, which has been repeatedly proved." Marx also praised classical economics for revealing "the subject nature of wealth".

At the same time, we can also see that the "labor" of classical economics mainly refers to "natural labor", and wealth is regarded as the result of the material transformation between man and nature by Labor, and the content is mainly the "necessities, comforts and pleasures" of human life. Classical economics mainly inspects the "useful nature" of property, it regards the relation of property as the "possession" of wealth, but this "possessive desire" is no longer greedy and evil, but legitimate.

In refuting the criticism of Communism by Stirner and others, Marx explicitly objected to the view that property right should be regarded as a possessive relationship. He noted that although the two words eigentum and eigen were interrelated in the etymology of German, property was not "there". Stirner and others are based on the property as a "possession", the private property as "own" before the absurd criticism of communism. Because they think, no matter what society, there are always some things belong to themselves, the total elimination of private property is impossible. In response, Marx retorted that this refutation of Communism was nothing but "the fallacy of seeking refuge in the Zi study." "Stirner completely misused the concept of" property "," property "is not" there "," private property "is not synonymous with" own "meaning of" private goods. " Marx is on the basis of Hegel to talk about property issues, he absorbed the latter on the positive view of property, the property as the human essence of the object of power. Hegel also regards property as the condensation of labor, but he is more concerned about "spiritual labor", so for property, he examines not the "useful nature" of property, but the "spiritual nature" of property. Hegel has carried on the philosophical metaphysics investigation to the property, make it rise to a philosophy concept. In him, the relationship between man and property is no longer a possessive relationship, but an "object-related" relationship. According to Hegel, "ownership" is "the embodiment of his will in the matter", only "something belongs to Me" internal performance and will is not enough, but also must obtain possession of the object, will be able to get "fixed." The rationality of ownership is not to satisfy the need, but to discard the subjectivity of the subject. From the simple subjectivity of the person, the subject has unlimited free will, but if this kind of free will is not associated with him, can only be empty, the "I" will add to the "object", free will on the form of "fixed in". In Hegel's words: "When the thing is born to me, I give it different from its original soul, that is, I give my soul to it." So Hegel believed that the property not only has the anthropological significance, but also has the metaphysical significance, which makes my free will become the will of reality, which constitutes the true factor of the legitimacy of possession property. "If the need is to be the first thing, then, from the perspective of need, the possession of property is like a means to meet the needs." But the real point of view is that, from the point of view of freedom, property is the first place of freedom, and it is the purpose of nature. ”

Marx agrees with Hegel's philosophical definition of property, and also regards property as the outward nature of human freedom. Marx said: "In fact, if the narrow bourgeois form, then, wealth is not in the general exchange of personal needs, talents, enjoyment, productivity, and so on the universality?" Wealth is not the full development of the rule of nature, which is usually called ' natural ' force, but also of the human being. Is wealth not the absolute play of human creativity?

From this statement, we can also see that Marx's recognition of Hegel is limited, his series of praise of property need to add a qualification: "If the narrow bourgeois form is thrown away." It is this qualification that clearly shows the basic standpoint of Marx's critique of classical economics and Hegel, as well as the fundamental principles of Marx's investigation of property issues, namely, historical principles. By introducing the historical principle, Marx saved the property from materialism and idealism, and pulled it into the field of historical materialism.

On the whole, Marx neither inspected the "useful nature" of property, nor limited the "spiritual nature" of property, but focused on the "social nature" of property. As early as the 1844 manuscript of economic philosophy, Marx criticized classical economics for not seeing private property as an established fact, but as "a fact with historical form"; In the German ideology, Marx had firmly stood in the position of historical materialism and Stirner and other people to debate, Criticized the latter for distorting communism as "shared possession", and pointed out that the real form of property always "depends on social relations"; In the poverty of philosophy, Marx criticizes Proudon to define the title under "an Abstract and eternal concept", and the actual ownership always exists in the social relations of history. The definition of bourgeois ownership is nothing more than a description of the whole social relations of bourgeois production "; In the Communist Manifesto, Marx made it clear that" turning capital into a public property belonging to all members of the community is not to turn personal property into social property. " What is changed here is only the social nature of property "; In the Critique of political Economy, Marx answered the question of self questioning more than 10 years ago, and questioned the historical origin of private property by long text, and inspected the change of the social nature of property in different stages of history.

According to Marx, Adam Smith and Hegel made the same mistake of seeing property as "general" rather than "historical" property. Strictly speaking, classical economics, Hegel and Marx all agree that "the essence of property is Labor", the difference is that the former two understand the Labor is the individual labor, the latter is the labor understanding as social labor. In Marx's view, Robinson-style, isolated individual labor is only the "original state" of mankind, even if it existed, can not be used to explain any real society, the starting point of social research should be "a certain social nature of the production of individuals." As an individual labor, there is no difference in the nature of labor in different stages of history, it is the material transformation between man and nature, but as social labor, labor in different stages of history has the essential difference, because it always carries the specific social relations. Therefore, the property as the condensation of labor has always been a historical event, its realistic form of the specific social relations in the "special form"-Land, government rent, profits, capital and so on, divorced from the historical dimension of property rights is only an abstract right.

Marx attributed "property" to "relationship", and "social nature" of property means "the relationship between man and man" in labor. property is not equal to "thing", it is always the specific social relations in the history of the "things", private property is not equal to "private goods", but carrying the capitalist production relations of "property." We know that Marx distinguishes between "private property as Labor" and "private property as capital", the difference between the two is that the former is the general form of property, the latter is the special form of property that has obtained the historical stipulation. Any property is "labor", but only the private property carrying the capitalist production relations is "capital", "capital" is the special form and reality form of the property under the capitalist production relations. In refuting Stirner, Marx corrected the latter's concept of "private property" with the example of "My big dress". "My big dress" is my private property? Of course it is, because it is what I have, but in Marx's view, it can be called private property only when it is able to dominate the work of others as "the goods of Sale". Clearly, private property is defined by its social nature, and it is completely pointless to understand private property from "personal belongings" and Marx's critique of private property. According to Marx's thought of examining the "social nature" of property, as the private property of Labor is not Marx's research object, as the private property of capital is Marx's research object.

"The sanctity of private property" is the cornerstone of capitalist system, from Hobbes, Locke to Adam Smith, Ricardo, as the basis of bourgeois political, economic and legal order. In this tradition, private property is described as the center of personal freedom. Through the revelation of the social nature of private property, Marx exposes the deep fact that the "individual is subject to abstract domination" concealed by the capitalist freedom Cloak.

In the tradition of enlightenment, freedom and right are the same, property rights are stipulated as natural right, Hobbes and Locke are all from "natural state" to demonstrate individual rights. Hobbes described the "natural state" of mankind as the "suffering" of the war situation, "Everyone has the right to save themselves" as the most fundamental "natural law", the other laws from this natural law to the performance. On the basis of Hobbes, Locke further put the natural rights into the property right. He put forward two far-reaching views on the future, one is that "in the various rights of modern liberty, private property right is the most important right", the second is "Labor to establish property rights." In Locke's view, everyone has the right to protect himself, so he also has the right to do everything necessary for his own preservation. Property is the necessary means to maintain life, the protection of property is in accordance with natural law, that is, "rational." The right to property is a corollary to the fundamental right of self-preservation, which is not generated by contract and social behavior, but by natural law. In the original state, the natural things in a common state, is the individual labor to make them out of the common State, determine the individual for their property rights.

"His body is engaged in the labour and the work carried out by his hands, we can say, rightfully belongs to him." On the basis of this fundamental right, it can be deduced that the society established by the contract entered into by the laborer must regard the individual's ownership as the lawful behavior basis, so the private property becomes the foundation of the Capitalist "freedom". Smith's "Labor Value theory" regards labor as the source of value, thus affirming and developing the thought of "establishing the property right of Labor", becoming the rationality of political economy and the legitimacy foundation of capitalist economic system. Under the interpretation of modern political philosophy and plutonomy, property right is declared as "human rights", which conforms to the natural law and conforms to "human nature". Private property and personal freedom are equated, thus becoming solemn and sacred.

Through the historical investigation of private property, Marx reveals the social nature of private property, and illustrates the fact that under the condition of capitalist production, the private property is transformed from "right" into "power" and becomes the dominant power above the individual. Therefore, Marx completely deconstructed the legitimacy foundation of the capitalist system and laid a scientific foundation for the ideal of communism.

"Labor establishes the property right" has a key presupposition: the unification of labor and ownership, that is, the laborer is the owner directly. Marx keenly found that "the unity of labor and ownership" only works under the "Natural state", and once it has left this fictional state into the social reality, it becomes an illusion immediately. Therefore, the Natural legal act is a kind of abstract legal, must put "the property" in the specific production relations in order to make the essential sense of the investigation.

想要了解更多英国留学资讯或者需要英国代写,请关注51Due英国论文代写平台,51Due是一家专业的论文代写机构,专业辅导海外留学生的英文论文写作,主要业务有essay代写paper代写、assignment代写。在这里,51Due致力于为留学生朋友提供高效优质的留学教育辅导服务,为广大留学生提升写作水平,帮助他们达成学业目标。如果您有essay代写需求,可以咨询我们的客服QQ800020041

51Due网站原创范文除特殊说明外一切图文著作权归51Due所有;未经51Due官方授权谢绝任何用途转载或刊发于媒体。如发生侵犯著作权现象,51Due保留一切法律追诉权。

我们的优势

  • 05年成立,已帮助上万人
  • 24小时专业客服
  • 团队成员都毕业于全球著名高校
  • 保证原创,支持检测

英国站