论“人民主权”的二律背反--对马克思的波拿巴主义批判的康德式重构  

On the Antinomies of"Popular Sovereignty"--A Kantian Reconstruction of Marx's Bonapartism Critique

作　　者：王时中[1] WANG Shi-zhong(The Faculty of Philosophy,Nankai University,Tianjin 300350,China)

机构地区：[1]南开大学哲学院,天津300071

出　　处：《理论探讨》2023年第4期125-133,共9页Theoretical Investigation

基　　金：国家社会科学基金重大项目“马克思主义哲学与中国古典哲学的比较与汇通研究”(16DA097)。

摘　　要：马克思通过对1848年至1852年法国阶级斗争局势与条件的细致分析,破解了波拿巴的复辟之谜。如果以马克思的《路易·波拿巴的雾月十八日》为研究对象、以“立法权”与“行政权”之间的拉锯为线索,从康德的“先验的幻相”与波拿巴的“皇帝的新装”之间的类比切入,则可以显示出“人民主权”观念的“二律背反”。如果以“人民主权”的“二律背反”为线索、以康德关于“先验理念”与“超验理念’”的区分为参照,对马克思的波拿巴主义批判予以康德式的重构,则不仅可以显示马克思社会研究的方法论特征,而且还能为揭示中国传统社会的特征提供积极的参照。马克思对波拿巴主义的批判,不但深刻地揭示了“资产阶级专政”的内在困境,而且为中国社会的现代转型提供了充分的支持与发展的空间。Marx solved the mystery of Bonaparte's restoration by carefully analyzing the situation and conditions of the class struggle in France from 1848 to 1852.If we base the research on The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte and start from the"illusion"of Bonaparte's restoration and take the adhesiveness between the Administrative Power and the Legislative Power as a clue,it's clear to show the Antinomies of"Popular Sovereignty".Take the clue of the Antinomies and the reference of difference between the Transcendental Ideal and the Transcendent Ideal of Kant,we can reconstruct Marx's Bonapartist critique in a Kantian way which will not only illustrate the methodological characteristics of Marx's social studies definitely,but also provide positive references for revealing the characteristics of the Traditional Chinese society.Marx's critique of Bonaparist not only demonstrated the dilemma of the dictatorship of the Bourgeoisie,but also offer the broad development space for the modern transformation of Chinese Society.

关 键 词：人民主权 马克思 波拿巴主义 康德 中国传统社会 

分 类 号：A811[哲学宗教—马克思主义哲学]