奴役抑或解放?——波兰尼和他的《大转型》  

Slavery or Emancipation—A Review of Kari Polanyi's Great Transformation:The Political andEconomic Origins of Our Time

作　　者：郝娜[1] 

机构地区：[1]东南大学马克思主义学院

出　　处：《浙江社会科学》2014年第6期15-21,155,共7页Zhejiang Social Sciences

基　　金：东南大学高校基本科研业务费人文社科基础扶持基金(创新基金)项目(项目批准号SKCX20120028)的阶段性成果

摘　　要：本文以哈耶克和古典自由主义为参照,通过解读波兰尼对个体自由与社会保护、国家干预之必要性、自由主义与社会主义理论的共通性弊病的阐释,来反思今日中国的政治与经济困境。本文认为,哈耶克与波兰尼并不是理论上针锋相对的对手方,两人在个体自由与经济领域的市场制度上没有分歧,但哈耶克侧重在维护市场秩序,而波兰尼侧重在保护社会。波兰尼认为自由主义最大的问题,在于它否认权力与管制的现实,保持对自由这种虚幻概念的信念,进而否认社会的存在。他希望社会主义能既接受权力与强制的现实,并用它们来保证自由的重生,唯有如此,才能在最大程度上规避现代利益政治对个体自由与社会存续的危害。This article attempts to reflect on China's political and economic dilemma through referencing the ideas of F. A. Hayek and classical liberalism and interpreting Polanyi's explanation of the common theoretical problems in the relationship between individual freedom and social protection,the necessity of state intervention and the differences between liberalism and socialism. The author believes Hayek and Polanyi are not theoretical foes in that both share the same view of the market system that shapes individual freedom and economic development. What differentiates them is that Hayek puts emphasis on maintaining the market order and Polanyi leans on protecting the society. According to Polanyi,the cardinal problem of liberalism is that it denies the reality of power and regulation,maintains a strong belief in liberalism which is simply an illusion and denies the existence of the society. He hopes that socialism can accept the reality of power and enforcement and uses them to secure the rebirth of freedom. Only by so doing can it be possible to avert the harm to individual freedom and sustained existence of the society perpetrated by the interest-oriented politics.

关 键 词：个体自由 市场制度 社会保护 国家干预 

分 类 号：F091.3[经济管理—政治经济学]