|
烏蘭察布翻譯公司關鍵字：metaphysical fantasy and law." In China, at present, although there are some comrades of these two words gives the Marxist interpretation, but there are other comrades, especially the part of the younger comrades, that so far, Marxist economics call " system "and" ownership "(in the current" Das Kapital "is sometimes translated as the Chinese version of" ownership "), and Western New Institutional Economics of the" theory of institutional change "and" property rights theory "seems to be" connected "or" similar " of. This fact is mentioned that the Western part of the superstructure of economics side of things, naively as the economic and social development motivation. But in fact they are merely some "reflects the economic relations of the right relationship or the relationship will", that is, the relationship between law. The "will of the relationship" content, "is determined by the economic relations", rather than the reverse.
Such examples abound. In my opinion, so far, even in China's Marxist economists, many comrades are very clear understanding does not understand. Let alone non-Marxist economists and non-economic circles. The concept and scope of these studies and research, some comrades, but they seem to be "Jin Jin in some of the chores." In fact, this is also "related to the party and the country's development as a whole." So, I think, the central government in the prosperous development of philosophy and social science aspects of the implementation of a series of key projects, including re-translated Marxist classics, etc., but very correct and wise.
(C) a scientific attitude towards the "Soviet paradigm ', while affirming that it is" consistent with Marxism "things under the premise of which continue to remove those" out of Marxism "and" misunderstanding "and" additional error. "
For Stalin's "Soviet socialist economy 'and the former Soviet Union" Political economics textbooks "as the representative of the" Marxist economics "of the theoretical system, where some economists in China, now known as the" paradigm of the Soviet Union . " While this theoretical system, Comrade Mao Zedong had made a brilliant assessment, he said: "can not say that this book is not Marxism, because the book has many ideas of Marxism; can not be said that Marxism, Because the book is left with many ideas of Marxism. "particular part of socialism, in general," is the point of view there are a number of serious errors, in part, is seriously out of Marxism, but also can not say is completely out of Marxism, we can say there is a serious error of Marxist books. "In our theory, economic circles, on the one hand, this textbook system in the mistaken view that the impact has been far from been completely" Clear "; the other hand, some comrades have already put on the so-called 'Soviet paradigm' criticism extends to the entire" Marxist economics "itself. We now work to be done, on the one hand, to continue to clear the theoretical system does not meet the wrong point of view of
|