In Citizen Marx, Bruno Leipold argues that, contrary to certain interpretive commonplaces, Karl Marx’s thinking was deeply informed by republicanism. Marx’s relation to republicanism changed over the course of his life, but its complex influence on his thought cannot be reduced to wholesale adoption or rejection. Challenging common depictions of Marx that downplay or ignore his commitment to politics, democracy, and freedom, Leipold shows that Marx viewed democratic political institutions as crucial to overcoming the social unfreedom and domination of capitalism. One of Marx’s principal political values, Leipold argues, was a republican conception of freedom, according to which one is unfree when subjected to arbitrary power.
Placing Marx’s republican communism in its historical context—but not consigning him that context—Leipold traces Marx’s shifting relationship to republicanism across three broad periods. First, Marx began his political life as a republican committed to a democratic republic in which citizens held active popular sovereignty. Second, he transitioned to communism, criticizing republicanism but incorporating the republican opposition to arbitrary power into his social critiques. He argued that although a democratic republic was not sufficient for emancipation, it was necessary for it. Third, spurred by the events of the Paris Commune of 1871, he came to view popular control in representation and public administration as essential to the realization of communism. Leipold shows how Marx positioned his republican communism to displace both antipolitical socialism and anticommunist republicanism. One of Marx’s great contributions, Leipold argues, was to place politics (and especially democratic politics) at the heart of socialism.
0 有用 又是想开的一天 2025-08-20 11:21:14 安徽
1.作者马克思的政治思想放在共和主义与社会主义的交织点,这一点是认同的。但是对于恩格斯其实不敢苟同,尤其是在对于“政治终结”问题上认为最终恩格斯期待的“物的管理”依然是对自然的机器化解读,这尽管不是退回到共和主义但也并不是把主体彻底交给无产阶级,这样就能解释第二国际对恩格斯思想的极端化发展。2.在政治领域串马克思对自由思想的理解这一点有启发性。3.显然马克思将政治有意分为“政治实践”与“政治反思”... 1.作者马克思的政治思想放在共和主义与社会主义的交织点,这一点是认同的。但是对于恩格斯其实不敢苟同,尤其是在对于“政治终结”问题上认为最终恩格斯期待的“物的管理”依然是对自然的机器化解读,这尽管不是退回到共和主义但也并不是把主体彻底交给无产阶级,这样就能解释第二国际对恩格斯思想的极端化发展。2.在政治领域串马克思对自由思想的理解这一点有启发性。3.显然马克思将政治有意分为“政治实践”与“政治反思”,对后者的拒绝使他区分于共和主义者与部分社会主义者,对实践本体论依然要保持重视啊。 (另外封面马克思旁边没头的是拉萨尔) (展开)
0 有用 熊猫奶冻批发 2025-12-26 16:41:42 上海
对马克思主义和共和主义之间关联点的关注,有助于考察二十世纪的革命史(资产阶级民主革命与社会主义领导权的交叉),也有助于理清我们当下的政治议程(各种解放议题和进步运动如何实现“交叉性”)。从这个角度来说,作者帮助我们更加开放地马克思主义与政治的关系。本书相当的篇幅花在对“激进共和主义”传统的叙述上,实际上他们在之后的马克思主义史上扮演着非常重要的角色(如俄国的民粹主义-社会革命党,或者第三世界的左翼... 对马克思主义和共和主义之间关联点的关注,有助于考察二十世纪的革命史(资产阶级民主革命与社会主义领导权的交叉),也有助于理清我们当下的政治议程(各种解放议题和进步运动如何实现“交叉性”)。从这个角度来说,作者帮助我们更加开放地马克思主义与政治的关系。本书相当的篇幅花在对“激进共和主义”传统的叙述上,实际上他们在之后的马克思主义史上扮演着非常重要的角色(如俄国的民粹主义-社会革命党,或者第三世界的左翼民族运动,再比如今天的激进社会左翼,其政治社会主张仍然有共和主义底色),本书告诉我们的是,简单地用“正统马克思主义”去驳斥和否定ta们显然有失公允。最后,本书的话题或许可以继续下去,也即马克思与共和主义在国际运动(特别是民族解放运动上)的关系,毕竟这也正是本书中缺位的巴枯宁对马克思发出的挑战。 (展开)