We should insist on what kind of socialism

We should insist on what kind of socialism Summary: In this paper, mode of production and people’s perspective of the interpretation of the liberation of Marx’s socialism (communism), and made the following point: 1, the socialist nature of the production by the public and public ethical values constitute, Marx envisioned the ‘planned economy’ plus ‘social ownership’ plus ‘distribution according to need’ of socialism, is essentially a mode of production of public goods and production relations, its implementation subject to the level of development of productive forces and the degree of scarcity of social product. As the level of development of productive forces and the extent of the social product abundance is limited, so far it is still a future society, the assumptions and ideas. If we disregard the conditions of the limited development of productive forces, blind copy, not only can not be acceded to, it will have disastrous consequences, as evidenced by Stalin ended mode. 2, because without the full non-exclusive, shared ownership of the community of mankind to date, all the ‘public’ are 1 limited ‘public’, showing the characteristics of private property rights, which with ‘private ownership’ as subject to exclusive property rights provisions and constraint, therefore, regardless of production conditions, to take possession of ‘public’ or ‘private ownership’ must be set up corresponding define property rights, trade and protection system. 3, ‘public’ is just a means to an end. To build socialism should be based on liberating and developing productive forces and the corresponding human liberation as its ultimate aim. As the existing ‘public’ absolute exclusive external and internal conflicts limited sharing of management difficulties brought about, in the strengthening of the agent’s hard constraints, we must vigorously develop the non-public ownership economy to continue to restructure and adjust the field of competition The state-owned enterprises in order to reduce direct state-owned businesses. 4, the production of public goods, socialism is a long process, we should focus on the emancipation and development of productive forces has been vigorously promoting public ethics, to develop a market economy, the only way we can only produce more public goods, in order to Marx envisaged the 2 gradual approximation of absolute abundance of socialism. Keywords:: public ownership of public goods Public Ethics 1, of the problem The magnificent history of China’s reform has once again come to a critical juncture, reform ‘Capitalist Socialist’ and motivates people to ask again the most sensitive nerves. What is the correct direction of reform? What is socialism? Do not argue or ‘hit the left turn lights turn right’ style to avoid debate is impossible. Socialist thought is almost as old as capitalism, from Moore and his ‘utopian’ date has a history of 500 years; socialist thinking was introduced to China was a time when the late Qing dynasty, but the 100 years of history; China CPC and the Chinese people have chosen socialism, from the founding date, but 85 years from the date the founding of nothing but 60 years. However, it should be seen as a religion of socialism, once hundreds of thousands of people with lofty ideals, revolutionary predecessors fought for life, and not hesitate to shed blood where the vision and motivation; once the new generation of China, together with the New China growing source of generation and significance of life. As Christians worship ‘Millennium kingdom’, Buddhists aspire to 3 ‘Paradise’, the traditional Chinese scholar-officials look forward to ‘one world’, like, socialism has also been a passion of all times hundreds of thousands of intellectuals and young people’s conscience and youthful blood where ? . As a cognitive socialism, ‘the roar of cannons October Revolution brought us Marxism-Leninism’, revolutionary Marxism and Leninism, while leading the Chinese revolution, but we accept and believe in the Soviet-style socialism , in particular, is to limit the socialist commodity economy, the Stalinist model, we always exclude the non-Stalinist model of socialism in particular the Social Democrats believed in socialism. We have also experienced their own exploration of the theory of socialism, the ‘restrict bourgeois right’ and ‘also has lessons also worker-peasant army’ of the self-sufficient farmers in a socialist-style socialism as Marx paid homage, staged over The tragicomedy exploring the theory of socialism in China and even farce. As the practice of socialism, its exploration is more tragic. Generations of socialists to limit and eliminate the commodity economy (market economy) carried out a great epic attempt to explore the tragic human non-capitalist economy over the road; we tried to come out of their socialist road, not only 4 Stalin models accept as part of Marxism, but also ‘prefer socialism, grass, not capitalism, Miao’, in the elimination and limitation of ‘bourgeois right’ and the commodity economy (market economy) farther and farther down the road, So deeply embedded was referred to ‘the national economy to the brink of collapse’, into a shortage economy. Even eighties of the last century began well over the Stalinist model of reform, we still stick to his ‘two kinds of public ownership’ and cocoon. Today ‘socialist camp’ and the Stalinist model of socialism has long gone, and we talked about the ‘whole body of blood drips from every pore of’ capitalism did not collapse. Even more puzzling is the elimination of ‘the three major differences’, free education and health care, unlimited, universal suffrage, etc. The goal of socialists dreamed of even in the Western developed countries, to varying degrees to become a reality ? . This is good to all people who believe in socialism, raised a serious question: What is socialism? Why is the collapse of the Stalinist version of the ‘socialist camp’ rather than the Western ‘capitalist camp’? Do we have to adhere to what kind of socialism? Second, a correct understanding of Marx’s version of 5 socialism The word socialism comes from the Latin ‘socialis’, meaning social, public, common, collective, there are mutual aid, cooperation and community self-government implications. From the semantic point of view, socialism emphasized that the public, collective, and for the public welfare, and individual self-interest of the private as opposed to the color with the ethical. Socialism is a moral critique of capitalism produces, and its adherents are all rich in a spirit of sacrifice, moral, noble people with lofty ideals, they live in an imperfect society, but longed for and tried to design the perfect human society, in which Marx’s tentative ideas of socialism be called ‘perfect society’ typical ? . In today’s wide variety of socialism, how many schools there are that many of the socialist version of socialism, some people (such as Socialist Party leader Olof Palme, Sweden) said that the socialist concept (definition) there are dozens of titles as well, while claiming to believe in socialism, countries throughout Asia, Africa and Europe, has as many as 70. In sum, there is the First International and Second International tradition inherited from the Social Democratic Party, a socialist; a third since the Socialist International (Communist); a 6 ‘Fourth International’ Trotsky version of socialism, in addition to , as well as ethnic, ecological and other kinds of socialism. Or let us return to Marx it, after all, is from Marx toward socialism. (A) Marx’s vision of socialism Marx’s socialist ideas found in the writings of his life, especially ‘Das Kapital’ and manuscripts, ‘Critique of the Gotha Program’ and Engels ‘Anti-Duhring’ major writings, from the methodological perspective, mainly from the following two kinds of ‘perspective’ to observe and to think of. 1, ‘production’ perspective of the socialist Marx (including Engels, the same below) predictions and the theoretical framework of socialist ideas is historical materialism. Marx in productivity - production - historical movement of production relations and the capitalist mode of production within the framework of the evolution of analytical predictions and envisage the future of socialism. Thus, in Marx’s view, and indirect socialization (that is, currency exchange as a medium) in the capitalist mode of production the contrary, the socialist (communist synonym) is a direct social-oriented mode of production, its main features are as 7 follows : (1) Production of direct socialization. The height of the development of the productive forces and revolutionary evolution of production (including the organization of production, exchange, control, distribution, consumption and other functions) is no longer the market as a medium, but to take direct forms. The market (commodity money exchange) as a medium of indirect social production - commodity economy (ie, a market economy, the same below) no longer exist. Since taking direct form of social production, without going through a tortuous way, commercial labor, transaction costs equal to or tend to zero, its mode of production more efficient than capitalism. (2) possession of a worldwide community. As production of direct socialization, transaction costs equal to or tend to zero, ‘bourgeois rights’ sense of property rights have been unimportant or no longer kept, the worldwide social possession of a private right of ownership is no longer the exclusive nature of the in history to distinguish other public and private ownership. (3) free association of workers ? . As the combined individual - social possession of the means of production, the 8 country’s political functions disappear, replaced by a free association of workers. Unite workers planned proportional distribution of social labor and production. In its initial stage, commodities though the economic loss, but still can not according to the natural needs of human existence to the allocation of means of subsistence, but must equal the ‘bourgeois right’, through the exchange of labor - that is, by individuals working volume of distribution of means of subsistence, and only in its advanced stages - material wealth and constant Quan, the equality of human beings in order to ultimately eliminate the exchange of this ‘bourgeois rights’ remaining in the community, doing our best to write on the banner, on-demand distribution ? . 2, ‘human emancipation’ perspective of the socialist Marx’s starting from a young age is a radical humanist and humanist who’s liberation, the all-round development is the starting point of his thoughts. He envisaged a socialist full of fairness, justice, liberty and democracy, the liberation of color and others, especially in his early writings in the more obvious. In his view, in a capitalist society, regardless of the workers and capitalists are the social conditions of alienation and who are bound people. The capitalists as capital personified and as the 9 personification of the workers wage labor is not a full sense of the same person. To make people into their identities, the need to eliminate capital, wage labor, the capitalist mode of production into a socialist mode of production. Only in this way, human freedom can develop the natural talent and to meet their own needs rather than as ‘bourgeois rights’ are tied to the final out of the animal world and become truly free, thereby ending the period of human prehistory. As Marx pointed out, ‘Communism is private property, ie, human self-alienation of the active discarded and, therefore, through the people and for people against the true possession of human nature; so it is the person to a community of people that meet the people nature of people’s self-reversion, ... ... This communism, as the completion of naturalism, equals humanism, and as those who completed the humanistic equivalent to naturalism. ‘? may be that Marx’s theory about man’s liberation is included in freedom, democracy, equality, fraternity, and so has the universal value. Marx’s ridicule and criticism is freedom, equality, democracy and capitalism under the conditions of incomplete and superficial, and hypocritical, rather than those values themselves. In this sense, the ‘people’s liberation’ is the core of socialist 10 values. (B) the ‘science’ the difference between socialism and the other socialist Lenin once pointed out that Marxism derived from the classical German philosophy, French socialism and the political economy of the United Kingdom. In fact, Marx’s theory not only from the above three parts, but also inherited the legacy of the major civilizations of mankind. Marx (including Engels) on many of the ideas of socialism in other theories, even in the Bible to find the source, for example, like communism, the ‘total system’ and the distribution according to need ideas, in the ‘New Testament’ that there have been similar to description, is also reflected in the ancient Greek philosopher Plato’s ‘ideal state’, and Mohr and other writings of utopian socialism ? . Again, the planned economy and the distribution according to work is not Marx’s original, a number of utopian socialists have long been described. Against oppression and exploitation, the pursuit of the general welfare, as well as freedom and equality of socialism has long been rooted in the writings of the founding fathers from generation to generation. The value in the pursuit of socialist objectives, Marx and utopian socialism, and there is 11 not much difference, Engels of scientific socialism is even thought to rely on Saint-Simon, Fourier and Owen is established that these three thinkers together ? . The main difference between them lies in ‘how to achieve’ socialist path. In the utopian socialists view, capitalism is inhumane and full of evil, it should be through the creation of humane and rational social community of the cooperative economy to overcome. Community-wide could be as large as a national and even global, can also be as small as a village in a community. Utopian socialism tried to appeal and persuade people in a country within the framework of the implementation of ‘total system’ of the socialist economy, and within the framework of a small commune experiment of communism. As Plekhanov pointed out that the utopian socialists to wear the crown of the legislators called for socialism lies in the ‘chance’ on, even though the probability is extremely small, but they believe that constantly calls always successful. But their cries and sincere emotional appeal has not been the rulers of the response, along with their small-scale experiments, like eventually disappeared into the capitalist market economy continues to expand into. Only 12 the Marx considered in cooperation with socialist characteristics of various plants (including the workers, self-cooperatives) are still upright, like little islands in the vast ocean-like capitalist market economy. And the recourse to human reason and conscience of the utopian socialism On the contrary, Marxism holds that the capitalist mode of production, moral indignation or condemnation no matter how to fair and reasonable, but in science is of no avail. To wear the crown of the legislators called for the implementation of socialism could only wishful thinking. A mode of social production, the productivity capacity of all the play it is impossible not automatically die. Must be found inevitable demise of capitalism and socialism is bound to the birth of a secret grave-diggers of capitalism - the proletariat, and through the transition to a socialist dictatorship of the proletariat. In other words, Marx not only predict and envisage the future of socialism, but also found the realization of socialism ‘material carrier’ and in a way, so dream become a science. It is in this sense, Marx pointed out that scientific socialism ‘science’ is relative to the ‘utopian’ purposes. (C) the inherent contradictions of scientific socialism 13 However, the design of socialism and how to achieve socialism in Marx’s body is not entirely uniform. As a scholar of Marx and Marx as the soldiers are completely different. As a scholar of Marx, he tried to reveal the science and the capitalist mode of production evolved into the socialist mode of production process and the logic of the historical process; as a revolutionary Marxist, he was concerned about the reality of the revolutionary movement, concerned about the collapse of the capitalist process, he tried to personally see that he envisaged the arrival of socialism. The former Marx’s mind resonates with philosophers and economists in an orderly thoughts, whose body was burning Marx’s revolutionary passion. Marx a philosopher of mind both the German and the French revolutionaries mind. As Engels pointed out, Marx from the philosophy toward socialism (communism) is. But it is because of Marx’s revolution, eagerly look forward to, he also, like Kant ‘limited knowledge, to the belief in leaving the site’, for his own ‘logic’ left a gap can not be self-consistent. For example, he history of the trajectory of class struggle made the following deduction: In the struggle between masters and slaves in the die to produce a composition of feudal lords and the serfs of feudal society; 14 feudal lords and the serfs die fighting each other they produce out of the public class (the bourgeoisie) and the proletariat constitutes a capitalist society; this logic, the bourgeoisie and the proletariat’s struggle with each other die should produce a new free working group, by its completion of the socialist mission. However, the desire of the arrival of a new society leaving a gap in Marx himself, in his view, the proletariat in history class, but the last one with the ‘uniqueness’, by ‘the dictatorship of the’ eliminating its opposition to the completion of the bourgeois and their own history, mission - to establish a socialist. In order to witness the realization of socialism, Marx actually did not completely follow the Hegelian dialectics. ‘Thesis - antithesis - All questions’ in Hegel’s logical deduction at this discounted ? . However, Marx is not the only logical inference to Hegel’s prophecy of socialism, as a scholar of Marx always pay attention to the reality of capitalism movement. It is precisely because the capitalist mode of production are constantly changing, the new situation after another, ‘Das Kapital’ Volume I for nearly 20 years after the advent of time, there is not even compiled and published Marx ‘Das Kapital’ in second and third volumes. Marx’s empirical rigorous 15 scientific attitude so that it would prefer to delay the book do not want to hastily, which is from Engels in his later years some of the letters and manuscripts can glimpse. For example, the capitalist development and the joint-stock banks to bring the expansion of the socialization of property rights has aroused great concern of Marx and Engels. In addition, they also changed the views of some of the early years, for example, in his later years Engels argued that ‘Democratic Republic of the special form of socialism’, the proletariat and the Social Democrats can be fighting for the legitimate struggle of socialism, and so on. There must also be pointed out that Marx and Engels on the discussion and Stalin dictatorship of the proletariat dictatorship of the proletariat version of the view is different. They will essentially democratic government and the Paris Commune as a model of dictatorship of the proletariat. Engels also pointed out that in his later years, whether or voluntary surrender of property deprived the bourgeois elements of socialism in the future as an individual still has to vote and be elected citizenship. Why do we need it the dictatorship of the proletariat? Because of the need to deal with the resistance of the bourgeoisie, if the bourgeoisie abandoned property, dictatorship of the proletariat there exist 16 necessary? In Marx’s view, even through the dictatorship of the proletariat toward socialism, it is only ‘transitional’ state, the proletarian revolution and dictatorship of the only ‘midwife’ instead of ‘midwife’ in itself. The problem is that, if the fetus is not mature to give birth to such a dictatorship of the proletariat or revolutionary violence, midwife whether oxytocin a healthy ‘newborn’ do? (D) Why did not achieve the elimination of the socialist commodity economy Marx’s socialist vision of non-commodity economy has been more than 100 years ago, and unfortunately, this idea is still only a hypothesis, that is in the distant future - say 50 years or so bar, it may not be the complete elimination of the commodity economy and the realization of socialism envisaged by Marx. Why is that? Let us recognized from the following simple deduction of logic it: the demise of the commodity economy based on social possession (the means of production), social reason why the possession of the means of production because of the collapse of the capitalist mode of production; the collapse of the capitalist mode of production originated from polarization of capital and labor more and more a result of the proletariat - that is, a large number of 17 workers thrown into the ranks of the proletariat; the proletariat, it is because more and more private ownership of capital and production of the social contradictions of the intensification of resulting in the shell can not accommodate the new capital productivity in frequent economic crises, thus accounting for the majority of the proletarian society through revolution - violent seizure of power or the peaceful evolution of the regime (Engels in his later years that the developed countries like the United Kingdom through legal channels that can be parliamentary struggle to change); the proletarian revolution - violent and non-violent seizure of power after the realization of social tenure; possession of the commodity economy, the elimination of social and so on. Many people assume that the above-mentioned reasoning raised questions about some of the middle, for example, in the process of development of capitalism, the proletariat is not the growing number of people, even if the number is not less and less, or at least its share is significantly reduced in . In addition, the growing polarization in capitalist phenomenon did not happen, and even now can not see the capitalist mode of production there are signs of collapse. Even if we discard evidence (because the evidence to be a long test of history), this deduction is worth 18 rethinking the logic, because the commodity economy does not depend on the revolution can be eliminated, Marx himself realized, this is a logical difficulty he left behind . 1, Social and possession of ‘ownership’ and the relationship between the commodity economy Engels pointed out that the community once the possession of means of production, the commodity economy Jibei eliminate, this view shows Yu, non-community property share of the commodity economy and property relations between the incompatibility, but this relationship is not incompatible with a causal relationship, even if the use of Marx’s mode of production determines the production relations (property relations) in logical order, nor a social possession - ownership relations of commodity economy, the evolution of the mode of production, on the contrary, the commodity economy to non-commodity economy, the evolution of -- changes in the mode of production determined with the usual sense of ownership of property does not have property rights to the sense of ownership that social evolution of the possession of ownership. Thus, the commodity economy was not going through the dictatorship of the proletariat seized power in society, or possession or possession of the society to eliminate 19 the name of the country. 2, Social and possession and non-commodity economy, the relationship between the Engels ‘Once the possession of the information society, commodity production will eliminate’ point of view seems implicit in the social ownership of the possession of non-commodity economy, a prerequisite for the mode of production, which is determined by the above-mentioned production of the relations of production (ownership) is a contradiction. Not so much between them there is a causal relationship, as it is a set of compatible and mutually interdependent relationship between the two sides of the same social formation. With the context of historical materialism, social possession - that is, direct social ownership ‘adaptation’ in the direct social production approach - the non-commodity economy. On the other hand, the latter also ‘adapt’ the former. 3, Social possession of mode of production and non-commodity economy, the common premise of Social possession (ownership) and non-commodity economy is what determines it? Of their existence or to be a common prerequisite for achieving what is it? 20 From Marx’s analysis shows that people are the reason why the exchange through the market rather than through direct social labor, and distribution to meet the physical nature of each other’s needs, mainly because productivity and social product was not developed to the ‘infinity’ or tends to ‘infinity’ of the abundance levels. Therefore, the proprietary (or private) sense of ownership is inevitable, even if the means of production in the elimination of the exclusive possession of the society the primary stage of communism, if productivity does not meet enough of the highly developed, and the resulting social product of a very big rich, it can not eliminate the privately owned means of subsistence, must be implemented with the ‘bourgeois right’ residual distribution according to work, rather than the distribution of people’s natural needs. It can be reasoning, elimination of the commodity economy and the corresponding private ownership, to achieve the non-commodity economy and the associated social share a common premise that a highly developed productive forces and social product is extremely rich. Conversely, non-market economy of socialism has not been realized because of today’s advanced productive forces, the extent and level of social product of the abundance of 21 private property rights sufficient to lead to failure. Therefore, it can be counter-push, as long as humans can not overcome the scarcity of social resources and products of the commodity economy and the private nature of property rights - whether personal, collective, national ownership were all there exists a reasonable as well? You could say that resources (social product) is scarce (as opposed to people’s growing demand) is a history, whether public or private property rights, as well as the ultimate commodity economy is bound to happen Why? (E) Marx’s idea of social ownership of the re-vision If we acknowledge that, as long as possible to eliminate scarcity, then, as an effective tool to solve the scarcity of property rights there is reason to exist, it is impossible to deprive approach to eliminate ? . The scarcity of social resources and products of the constraints, even taken together the ‘social possession’ means of production, its possession ‘means of production’ also expressed as ‘property rights’ and pay for the use of compensation. Of social capital may be paid only through the use of the social product will gradually approaching the absolute abundance. Thus, even to the first stage of communism, the social means of production may still be expressed as possession of social capital and its 22 use is not any free laborers or unpaid, are required to calculate ‘interest’. While the means of subsistence and development of information it may continue to use the shift from paid to free use, that is, with increased productivity, ‘scarcity’ of luxury to keep the changes in the relative abundance of the necessities, but a necessity (whether spiritual products or Substances) has been provided to the community has the capacity and the free use of public goods changes in the breadth and depth of public goods will continue to grow accordingly. As a result, displayed in front of people’s socialist (communist) is a process, not just an ‘ultimate goal’ is a constant of human society from the scarcity of approaching affluence in the realm of freedom from the realm of approaching the process of ? . Third, the socialist re-understanding of (1) Stalin’s version of the experiences and lessons in the history of socialism The former Soviet-style socialism is a good imitation of mankind in accordance with some of the views of Marx, the capitalist road of non-classical exploration of the great tragic, but also could be regarded as backward countries catch up with advanced countries, unconventional ‘industrial model’ . 23 It has achieved a certain period of great success, but the price was high or even catastrophic. When the Soviet Union model of the Stalinist version of socialism has become history, the socialist movement, turned over a new page when we should clarify it with the difference between ideas of scientific socialism, and has also learned the lessons of history do? Reposted elsewhere in the paper for free download 1, two versions of the difference between From a planned economy, according to his work, the abstract form of public ownership of view, the two have in common, but a specific form of point of view, the difference is obvious. (1) the planned economy. Planned economy of Marx’s emphasis on voluntary association and self-coordination of the principles embodied in the participation of each member of the Community scheme; Stalin’s planned economy, emphasis on the country to impose compulsory administrative directive to configure the principle, embodied in a national bureaucratic control of the ‘mandatory plan’. The former is founded in the non-commodity economy, the basis of the joint labor, which is based on restricting the commodity economy, the national compulsory 24 ‘employment’ on the basis of labor. (2) according to his work. Marx’s version of the distribution according to work, refers to the distribution according to the amount of labor, there is no currency and commodity exchange; Stalin’s version of the distribution according to work is neither possible according to the amount of labor allocation, nor is it according to the labor force ‘value’ distribution, but rather by country hired labor mandatory price allocation. (3) public ownership. Marx’s idea of public ownership of social ownership, with a non-exclusive, shared nature of world. Stalin’s public ownership (whether national or collective ownership) is a country still bearing the ‘exclusive’ (ranked outside the scope of state and collective) ownership. Duhring Engels criticized the country that year ownership and possession of confused society, Engels said, not without laughing, if the tobacco is a socialist state, then Napoleon and Metternich could be classified as a founder of socialism. In a sense, an internal state ownership if the exclusion of members of the community participation and oversight can easily degenerate into name of ‘state’, and the actual possession of bureaucracy. 25 2, it should be lessons learned (1) can not blindly copy some of Marx’s socialist ideas. Engels repeatedly stressed that science and scientific socialism requires that people treat it or study it, that is, to treat socialism as a science. With the immediate context, science can study, criticism, proof, or falsification, and if neither prove nor falsify, only we should not doubt doctrine theology rather than science. Very disgusted with the doctrine of Marx and Engels as a theology worship together, but also oppose the use of historical materialism historical dogmatism arbitrary cut-style out of context. Thus, treatment of Marx’s theory of scientific socialism in the future vision first of all to oppose dogmatism, into a theological objection to Marx’s theory, it is necessary to find out about the future of the socialist ideas of Marx the material precondition for which is enough for the availability of advanced productive forces, but also not limited to, founders of scientific socialism of the nineteenth century experiments and some outdated concrete conclusions, realistic and innovative. If you blindly copy some of the ideas of Marx is bound to distort Marx’s theory brought about disastrous results. For example, feudal and semi-subsistence economy with an alternative vision of Marx’s direct 26 social-oriented non-commodity economy, and even ‘57 cadre’ style ‘is also lessons also worker-peasant army’ to pretend to eliminate three major differences between communism. (2) from reality with the times. Marx’s nineteenth-century capitalism and socialism in the future some of the conclusions and some of the ideas could not have been time constraints and vision limitations. If Marx is still alive, he would have amended many of the views at that time because the transition from classical capitalism, contemporary capitalism, during which much has changed, but also should be noted that capitalism and socialism is also absorb many ingredients in the certain aspects of the evolution towards socialism, socialist theory and practice is continually move forward, we must advance with the times to absorb all human civilization, including modern capitalist society, as well as of the latest achievements of socialist exploration, courage and be good at innovation, and must not stick to their predecessors left behind a certain conclusion. If you need to stick to, then that is socialism, universal values: with justice, fairness, freedom, democracy, love, and so were the liberation of socialism. (3) unswervingly push forward market-oriented reforms. 27 History has and will also prove that the commodity economy (ie, a market economy) is a historical mode of production provided it is insurmountable stages of social development, but also human so far the most efficient mode of production, any attempt to eliminate and limit the production of a market economy mode and its corresponding system of property rights is bound to the country and the people have disastrous consequences, restricting commodity economy (market economy) is not in advance of the Stalinist model of transition (to a market economy orbit) and the failures in particular, we should earnestly learn from . (B) re-understanding of public ownership in the socialist economy status Since socialism originated in classical capitalism and private ownership of the frustration and criticism, then public ownership in a socialist economy, occupies an extremely important position is self-evident, our textbooks and even them as the core and foundation of socialism and, by extension, the Stalinist model of ‘two kinds of public ownership’ as a non-transcendent, the sanctity of the ‘only’ the socialist system of ownership, but refused to recognize other than Stalin’s model of public ownership. In 28 fact, no matter what kind of public ownership, to what extent the public, it is merely constitute a socialist public ‘set’ in a kind of, rather than ‘only’. In addition, the public worship, especially worship of Stalin’s model two kinds of public ownership does not comply with Marxism, since its ultimate goal of socialism - the liberation of people, the public is a means. More importantly, the so-called public ownership, but all the different types of public ownership, an abstract and can not abandon their differences and ‘one pot’. Thus, whether the history of socialism is to sum up experience and lessons, or to explore the direction of reform in today’s re-thinking in the socialist public ownership and the position is obviously very necessary. 1, the meaning of ownership and public ownership It will be subject to the object of exclusive rights, as well as legal recognition and protection system known as the ownership. So it is usually the ownership is essentially exclusive, there is no exclusivity is no longer of ownership or property rights. However, the public sector by its very nature (properties), the non-exclusive and shared, that is often said that non-competitive, and it is defined with the economics of public goods is the same. It is from this point of view of 29 Marxism-definition and description of his ‘social possession’ of the public ownership concept. In his vision of a socialist society, each person is no longer exclusive to exclusive possession of the means of production, between them through joint sharing of the means of production, therefore, as a personal possession is reflected in the joint possession of the community into a collective. As a result, members of society, non-exclusive ‘possession’ to have lost the meaning of property rights, but not become all (system). If you follow the concept of ownership, their social ownership has not been the sense of exclusive ownership. From another perspective, Marx’s social occupy similar to the ancient Germanic commune of ‘total’, the difference is that German commune property rights only in-house with a non-exclusive and shared nature of foreign ownership is still showing the nature of the exclusive . Therefore, Marx believed that social possession of public ownership can not be completed within a country, regional or partial test of communism is impossible to succeed. Social possession must be universal, otherwise due to interaction with the outside community which led to the collapse or deformation within the public domain. 2, the duality of public and internal conflicts 30 If the possession of this purely from a social point of view of public ownership, to date, all human beings regardless of ownership, ‘public’ or ‘private’, whether collective or individuals, all of the country are private property rights sense of ownership, is within a certain range of the limited public or quasi-public ownership. If you from a single individual’s point of view, the two shall be ‘public’, a total of more than two can be called a ‘public’, a total of more people, the greater the scope of the public, non-exclusive and shared within the extent of sexual is also higher, up to a Marx envisaged in the possession of public ownership society.However, due to a total range of each community is limited, and therefore demonstrate the sharing of its internal and external non-exclusive and exclusive and competitive nature of the dual characteristics. On the one hand, due to people’s self-serving sexual orientation and the limited public resources and contradictions between nature and irresponsible (No cost )The abuse of public resources - Economics called the ‘Public Pond Products ‘Depletion brought ‘Tragedy of the Commons ‘Difficult to avoid the other hand, the lack of public oversight and participation at different levels is often the name of an agent ‘Public ‘Name, 31 by possession, income, sanctions (Including the transfer of )Various segments of the Huagongweisi, violating public property. Therefore, the human management of public property, private property is more difficult than the administration and called for a higher level and grade. 3, The position of public ownership In the socialist market economy, various forms and levels of public ownership although indispensable or irreplaceable, but we should not rigidly adhere to the state and farmers, both collective public ownership, even if the state ownership and collective farmers should be defined property rights, to prevent the violation of private rights against public rights. For example, if the steps similar to the German commune-style public ownership, it should implement the sovereign equality of members, so that joint decision of all members of collective property is used. Again, as to enlarge the scope of sovereignty similar to the German system of state ownership of the commune there are also in the definition of national and regional property rights under the premise of implementing the public property of citizens at all levels of ‘Sovereignty ‘And to supervise. Of course, public property can be taken according to copies of a total, joint-stock cooperative system, 32 as well as other forms. However, it should be noted, due to public ownership, particularly state-owned system of dual ownership and management complexity, should try to select the external nature of strong management is relatively simple (A high degree of standardization )As well as areas of national security, rather than too much emphasis on its ‘The dominant position of ‘Implemented in all areas. More importantly, the state should be mainly carried out on behalf of society and the economy ‘Macro ‘And socialization of supervision, without too much direct ownership of enterprises. In fact, even as the United States as a free capitalist economy is not entirely ‘Laissez-faire ‘, National (Including all levels of government )To ‘Public ‘The name of the direct control of its economy and influence the extent that more than one third, indirect influence to achieve 60%Above. Therefore, the state control should be mainly manifested in the effective use of state-owned resources, the control of, rather than control the percentage or proportion of state-owned enterprises. If too much emphasis on the dominant position of state-owned enterprises, then the result is bound to backfire and duplication of efforts. In this sense, the strengthening of state-owned resources, (Including the state-owned 33 property )Effective use of control areas in a competitive industry ‘Guotuiminjin ‘And relax restrictions on the property rights of state-owned enterprises to adjust, as well as the strategic restructuring of state-owned enterprises reform direction is undoubtedly correct. (Three )The essence of socialism and the basic functions of 1, The essence of socialism The so-called the essence of socialism is socialism, the basic requirements or core values, it is a common feature of all socialist of an abstract. In the past, we have varying degrees of misunderstanding of Marx’s socialism, and deviated from the socialist mainstream. We only recognize the Stalinist model of socialism other than to deny Stalin’s model of socialism. We will plan to Stalin’s model economy, according to his work, the public sector as pay homage to the provisions of the essence of socialism, but to deviate from those described as a revisionist and right, etc., which in theory has brought about tremendous confusion and chaos. Just as Deng Xiaoping pointed out, ‘Socialism is what Marxism is what, in the past we have not totally clear ‘. He also pointed out that the ‘The essence of socialism is liberation and development of productive forces, eliminate exploitation and polarization, and 34 ultimately achieve common prosperity ‘?. Deng Xiaoping’s remarks on the nature of socialism is clearly the spirit of Marx’s socialism is the same. Because the essence of Marx’s socialism is based on people’s liberation - that is, from the survival of animals, type of low-level competition demands, but also on the material conditions of people’s liberation - the liberation of public goods and human spiritual condition - the value of Public Ethics aspirations. It is in this sense, Marx proposed a society in the future of public goods - social possession of the means of production and means of livelihood (Including the development of information )Demand (Free )Distribution and the elimination of the three major differences such as the essential requirement of socialism. Therefore, the socialist core value from the production of public goods and the composition of public ethics. 2, The socialist basic functions The nature of the decision function, the nature of socialism provides the basic functions of socialism, that is, through the liberation of productive forces and the development of productive forces, by providing more public goods to meet the growing needs of members of society. For example, by 35 providing a free daily necessities and basic education to enable poor families to have a ‘The healthy development of personality ‘The material conditions and equal access to educational opportunities, providing social medical assistance, social pooling pension, in order to meet basic human needs of health and safety and so forth. Again, the prohibition of anti-human or inhuman market transactions of certain goods in order to meet the needs of the community’s public ethics and so on. Therefore, the basic functions of the embodiment of socialism, on the one hand can be covered by the social public goods, the breadth and depth to measure the other hand, can also be expressed as the popularity of public ethics and morality, rather than only public ownership, ‘Public Level ‘And the size measured. In a market economy under the conditions of modern property rights system in the form of - whether taken by public or private ownership should be adopted to the needs and level of development of productive forces to determine, and not artificially ‘Overstating ‘The public elements. It should be noted that the socialist construction is a lengthy process, especially in a underdeveloped country like ours to build socialism is a fairly long historical process, the supply of 36 public goods and deepening of the popularity of the social productive forces and by the level of economic development constraints, can not ignore society’s financial constraints, blindly copying Western countries engaged in the welfare model of public goods ‘The Great Leap Forward ‘, We must vigorously promote the socialist public morality and ethics. Fortunately, contains a harmonious society of public ethics and morality are deeply rooted among the publicity and education, social life-support system, social health insurance, Social Security building in the three bottom line is just beginning; accompanied by reform and opening up a market economy and modern property rights system and the rule of construction is being accelerated; economy is rapidly growing, the basic functions of socialism is increasingly showing. This is what we should adhere to socialism. Note: ? no matter how we define socialism, it is our Party in leading the revolution and reform and its source of legitimacy of the ruling. It is outside the scope of the ideals and beliefs written into the Constitution. In addition, from a traditional society to a modern society in transition, the need for a legal and legitimate ideology of socialism as an ideological role in 37 contemporary China, it is difficult to replace, but we should firmly reject the feudal socialism (Marx once quipped that ‘Buttocks with the feudal heraldry ‘Feudal socialism ). ? absorbed some aspects of capitalism to socialism, the socialist composition or the evolution of both the trend of historical development, but also with the Marxist critique of capitalism, there is the conscience of intellectuals and the working class struggle, as well as the existence of the ‘Of the socialist camp ‘Western ‘The capitalist camp ‘The pressure is inseparable. If socialism envisaged by Marx standards, we are still in the era of capitalism, rather than the abstract to say that confrontation between socialism and capitalism, rather than with the classical opposition of capitalism, but not with modern capitalism in some ways convergence. From this perspective point of view, socialism has always represented the ideal society for the future of mankind, the pursuit of perfect society and to criticize reality and the future vision of human non-cooperative game. ? Marx is a typical perfectionist, he envisioned communism (Socialism )Is about human beings ‘Perfect society ‘Description. In fact, we are always in a less perfect society, for it had been fanatical pursuit of the former leader of 38 Yugoslavia’s socialist ideals (Djilas )Very well. ? in Marx’s view, is an association of free labor capitalism beyond the form of a full range of direct democracy, it is in this sense, Marx criticized capitalism and democracy is not complete and not thoroughness, but it only a perfect vision of the future society. In today’s China, even if incomplete democratization is still a long process, not overnight. ? Marx repeatedly stressed that the establishment of equality on the basis of the exchange of power ‘Bourgeois rights (Rights )’Equality is impossible, because the ‘Equal powers ‘On its own terms, only because ‘Using the same scale ‘However, the same scale for different people ‘Inequality ‘, Even conflicting interpretations of communism, people paid labor and the demand is not the same, if an equal exchange of power to measure, is obviously a major ‘Inequality ‘The. Thus, Marx believed that his vision of socialism (Communism )Advanced stage, the elimination of the ‘Bourgeois rights ‘(That is no longer ‘Equal rights ‘Exchange )And beyond their narrow field of vision, back to the natural human society. But this could be a very distant ideal. In today’s society, it is necessary to establish the principle of equal exchange, we must establish and maintain 39 performance in exchange for this equality of rights ‘Bourgeois rights ‘System of property rights, any attempt to restrict and eliminate the system is catastrophic, of course, equal rights, the exchange of ‘Bourgeois rights ‘And the concept is not suitable for pure public goods and public ethics. ? Marx ‘1844Year of economics - and Philosophical Manuscripts ‘Article 73Pages, People’s Publishing House 1979No. 1Edition. ? ‘New Testament ‘‘Acts of the Apostles ‘Article 2Chapter, the original being :’The letter people are one, all things common; and sold the land with the family business, according to each of the points required for giving all of them ‘. ? ‘Complete Works of Marx and Engels ‘Article 18Volume 566Pages, People’s Publishing House, 1964Was published. ? of the proletariat, like the other classes, like history, it is impossible to own ‘Elimination ‘Own. Whether it can be envisaged :The future society, an alternative is the proletarians and bourgeois ‘Free labor ‘The so-called free workers, not only workers, but also bourgeois (In the possession of human capital as well as collective ownership of ‘Social Capital ‘)Through social ties that bind a free association of laborers. 40 The advent of the information society, seem to indicate such a possibility. ? property rights on the one hand is a scarce product, the other side also exists in the social relationship, if Robinson does not have an island in which other subjects of (People ), For example with ‘Friday ‘Do not exist, whether embodied in individual endowments of human capital or physical capital embodied in the means of production will not be expressed as ‘Property ‘, Or loss of ‘Property ‘The original meaning. ? any of the products are all ‘Cost ‘Or costs, the problem is :The need to calculate the cost of (When the absolute abundance or productivity is absolutely great, the cost has no meaning, is negligible ); Who will pay the costs? From the perspective of pay, private goods and public goods the only difference is that the former paid by the private sector, the latter by the community (Community groups, public bodies )Payment. A product is to become public goods, in addition to their nature, the primary productivity levels and incentive system considerations. Community should be maintained in private goods and public goods balance, to prevent the spread of public goods. Thus, public goods can only be less costly, the absolute necessity of abundant 41 produce, but not from the price higher, the relative scarcity of luxury. But as technology and productivity, on the one hand, the old luxury due to the increase in the number of public goods into necessities and even. On the other hand, emerged out of the new product will be the expensive luxury. ? ‘Selected Works of Deng Xiaoping ‘Article 3No. 2-3Page 63Page 137Page 261Page 292Page 373Page. Reposted elsewhere in the paper for free download 42