Marx’s Criticism Of Proudhon’s Property And Its Enlightenment To The Present Age

The 14 th National Congress of the Communist Party of China established the goal of reforming the socialist market economic system in China.However,in recent years,with the advancement of the reform plan,Proudhon’s equal possession theory has gradually entered people’s vision,causing some people’s attention,and even some people regard it as an important way for the country to achieve common prosperity.There are beginning to appear in society some leftist ideologies and rightist elements who attempt to cross the primary stage of socialism and directly enter communism.This phenomenon indicates that people do not truly understand the significance of Marx’s criticism of Proudhon’s Property and the profound connotation of Marx’s property theory.Therefore,this article,based on a re study of the specific content and the significance of the times of Proudhon’s property,analyzes Marx’s basic attitude towards his theory and the reasons for its change,and interprets Marx’s criticism of Proudhon from four different aspects.This helps us understand Marx’s property theory,correctly understand contemporary property and distribution systems,and has significant guidance and inspiration for the country to explore the path of common prosperity for all.This article mainly studies Marx’s criticism of Proudhon’s Property,and the first chapter mainly expounds Proudhon’s Property and its historical significance.Proudhon discusses Property from the perspective of political and legal rights.He points out that property is created by humans in accordance with their own view of justice,and that all people have exclusive and absolute control over production tools and means of production.Therefore,they use their special status to freely occupy the value-added benefits generated by workers,which is essentially a theft.He did not link the origin of property with the development of productive forces and production relations,but analyzed the origin of property from a psychological perspective,believing that property was generated by people’s gradually expanding selfish psychology.In addition,the phenomenon of power and deception in society also contributed to the birth of property to some extent.He questioned some fundamental premises in the field of political economics and the arguments of political economists about the legitimacy of property,and on this basis Criticized bourgeois property.His thought had epoch-making significance at that time,and was a revolutionary thought.At the same time,his concept of "society" has played a certain role in enlightening Marx’s thought.The second chapter mainly discusses Marx’s criticism of Proudhon’s property theory from several aspects.Firstly,in terms of philosophical idealism,Marx pointed out that due to the influence of Hegelian idealism,Proudhon misunderstood the dialectical development relationship between social existence and social consciousness,that is,subjective and objective.He regarded the practical activities of the realistic history of human society only as the evolution process of absolute rational concepts,and used fictional concepts to interpret objective economic phenomena and relationships.Secondly,in terms of methodology,Marx criticized Pluto’s misuse of Hegelian dialectics,pointing out that Pluto’s use of contradictory equilibrium theory to understand property and treat real economic relations as abstract categories of metaphysics is very absurd.Then,in the field of political economics,Marx pointed out Proudhon’s ignorance of economics,and he mysteriously explored the origin of property outside the scope of economics.His theory of land rent is a misconception of Ricardo’s theory.He mistook feudal land property for bourgeois property and did not understand that land rent was generated in the feudal production relationship between landlords and serfs,and was a physical asset provided by land owners.He does not understand that the way in which capital generates income in interest bearing capital is the self appreciation of value,and does not understand the production process of residual value.Finally,in terms of political practice,he criticized the political practice of Proudhon’s theory,which was conceived from his petty bourgeoisie position.His equal possession is the use of bourgeois equality to transform the manifestations of inequality in the economic field,and is another application of the "principle of equal exchange.".He is still confined to the legal consciousness of the bourgeoisie and attempts to transform the bourgeois economic society using traditional political and economic concepts.The third chapter elaborates the enlightenment of Marx’s criticism of Proudhon to the contemporary era,specifically divided into two directions: property and distribution system.From the perspective of property,it is not as sacred and inviolable as Western countries say.It arises from the development of productive forces,but also dies out as they enter a higher stage of development.However,as China is still in the primary stage of socialism and the level of productivity development has not reached a stage where private property of property can be surpassed,we cannot blindly abolish private property of property,but fully recognize the long-term and complex nature of the property issue and take property seriously.From the perspective of the distribution system,Marx proposed that the distribution system should adapt to the development of productive forces,and there should be whatever kind of production relationship there is.Therefore,China should establish and improve an income distribution system that focuses on distribution according to work and coexists with various distribution methods,actively narrow the income gap,and expand the overall income of the whole people.