“亚细亚生产方式”概念历史演变的考察之三

马克思、恩格斯的“亚细亚生产方式”概念是一个历史性概念,在他们社会形态理论形成的四个不同时期,涵义并不相同。本考察的是最后两个时期的思想。笔认为,第三时期(以《资本论》为代表的时期)的思想,与第二时期大体相同。在这一时期,马克思、恩格斯尚未放弃亚洲社会特殊论,但已把以“亚细亚生产方式”为基础的社会放到了人类发展序列中的第一阶段。在第四时期(摩尔根发表《古代社会》一书以后的时期),马克思、恩格斯明确作出了以“亚细亚生产方式”为基础的社会是原始社会的最后阶段的结论,并且用原始社会取代了以“亚细亚生产方式”为基础的社会在人类发展序列中的位置,最后完成了五种社会形态理论。学术界有人认为五种社会形态理论不是马克思、恩格斯创立的,而是斯大林创立的。这种主张是不恰当的。

Three of the Considerations for Development Historical "Asian Mode of Production"

The "Asian mode of production" in Marx and Engels' works is a historical concept, the implications of which are not exactly the same in different phases of the development of their social formation theories. This paper makes a discussion of the implications in the last two periods. The writer holds that, Marx and Engels' ideas at the third stage (represented by On Capital) are basically the same as that at the second. In this period, they hadn't given up the theory about the speciality of Asian societies, but they had put the societies based on the "Asian mode of production" at the initial stage of human development. At the fourth stage (the period after Morgen's publication of Ancient Society), Marx and Engels made the definite conclusion that societies based on the "Asian mode of production" were the final stage of the primitive society. They also replaced the position of these societies with the primitive society in the sequence of human development, and finally accomplished the five theories about social formations. There is a viewpoint in the academic circle that the five theories were founded by Stalin rather than by Marx and Engels, which, the paper holds, is improper.