马克思主义经典文本中的剩余价值范畴再研究——兼评几种错误观点  

Does Capitalism Produce “Surplus Value”, “Economic Surplus” or Something Else?——Proof of “surplus value” from textual criticism

作　　者：王丰[1] WANG Feng

机构地区：[1]西南大学马克思主义学院

出　　处：《思想战线》2019年第5期112-119,共8页Thinking

基　　金：中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金项目“‘一带一路’倡议视域中资本主义世界体系演变研究”阶段性成果（SWU1909308）;国家社会科学基金青年项目“当代资本主义剩余价值生产与分割的新变化研究”阶段性成果（17CKS028）

摘　　要：由于受西方福利社会建设“表面现象”、资本关系全球扩张和新自由主义经济学理论观点的影响,学术界出现了修正剩余价值概念的趋向,并以“剩余产品”“经济剩余”,或者“剩余利润”等取而代之,导致当前资本主义研究的主要范式中出现了两种错误倾向,即以国家的作用和以流通领域为中心来阐释资本主义生产方式。由此,从恩格斯的《家庭、私有制和国家的起源》,到列宁的《帝国主义是资本主义的最高阶段》,再到当代西方马克思主义经济学著作,最后回到马克思的《资本论》《剩余价值学说史》的历史文本回路中,考据经典文本,为剩余价值正名,是正确理解和深刻把握当今资本主义新变化的关键。Due to the influence of the superficial phenomenon of Western construction of welfare society,the global expansion of capital relations and the views of neo-liberal economics,there has been a trend in the academic community towards revising the concept of“surplus value”and replace it with the concepts of“surplus product”,“economic surplus”or“surplus profit”.As a result,there are two erroneous tendencies in the main paradigm of capitalism research,namely,explaining the capitalist mode of production by focusing on the role of the state and the circulation field.In view of this,rectifying the gross distortion of surplus value is the key to understand the new changes of capitalism.To do that,it is essential to conduct textual research on classical texts on surplus value——from The Origin of the Family,Private Property and the State by Engels to Imperialism is the Highest Stage of Capitalism by Lenin to writings of contemporary Western Marxist economics and finally back to Capital and A Theoretical History of Surplus Value by Marx.

关 键 词：剩余价值 “经济剩余” 修正 资本主义社会 

分 类 号：F0-0[经济管理—政治经济学]