社会杂志 ›› 2021, Vol. 41 ›› Issue (3): 1-38.

• 专题一: 《江村经济》:新视野与新材料 •    下一篇

《江村经济》:中国的农政问题与农政转型

叶敬忠   

  1. 中国农业大学人文与发展学院
  • 发布日期:2021-05-22
  • 作者简介:叶敬忠,E-mail:yejz@cau.edu.cn
  • 基金资助:
    本文为国家社会科学基金重点项目“城乡一体化进程中的农村变迁研究”(13ASH007)的阶段性成果。

Peasant Life in China: The Chinese Agrarian Question and Agrarian Transition

YE Jingzhong   

  1. College of Humanities and Development Studies, China Agricultural University
  • Published:2021-05-22
  • Supported by:
    The paper was supported by the National Social Science Fund of China (13ASH007).

摘要: 《江村经济》的核心主题是农政问题,而非土地问题。农政问题是考茨基在1899年以书名的形式正式提出的学术概念,关注的是在国家现代化发展和社会向更高形态转变的过程中,农业、农地、农民、农村的转型变迁。在《农政问题》中,作为正统马克思主义代表的考茨基认为,农政问题的理论分析必须以资本主义生产方式为基础,农政转型必须经由资本主义路径才能完成。在《江村经济》中,费孝通采用了正统马克思主义农政问题和农政转型的概念和框架,尝试探索中国农政转型的生计框架视角和生计多元化发展路径,以此对话和回应正统马克思主义的农政转型理论和道路选择。这一观点是在学界对《江村经济》已有的诸多共识性评价之外费孝通的又一重要学术贡献,也是《江村经济》成为著名学术经典的重要因素之一。

关键词: 《江村经济》, 农政问题, 农政转型, 马克思主义, 生计框架

Abstract: The central theme of Fei Xiaotong’s Peasant Life in China is the agrarian question, not the land question. The agrarian question is an academic concept, derived from Karl Kautsky’s book published in 1899. The concept refers to the transition and changes of agriculture, land, peasantry, and rural areas during the processes of modernization and development of nations, particularly the changes of agricultural production, land ownership, peasant differentiation, and rural governance. Kautsky’s book represents an orthodox Marxist theoretical analysis of agrarian question as well as a solution to the rural transformation that is based on capitalist mode of production, and can only be successfully achieved through agrarian capitalist development. A careful examination of Peasant Life in China revealed that Fei’s treatment of the Chinese rural issues and rural transition followed the concept and framework of orthodox Marxism. However, Fei attempted to explore a Chinese non-capitalist,livelihood-oriented and diversified development path of agrarian transition as an alternative response to the orthodox Marxist solution. Fei Xiaotong supported small-land ownership and cautioned against ownership concentration of means of production such as landed property. He believed that the Chinese rural labor division was largely based gender and generation, and there were no clearly defined classes in rural China and no employment institution playing a role in village economy. He was convinced that diversified family agriculture and village industry were the key measures to sustain family life. He considered that traditional forces were very important in social relation and social development. In contrast to Karl Kautsky, Fei Xiaotong’s analysis of agrarian question and his standpoint of agrarian transition constituted a quite different theoretical perspective and value orientation. Adding to the praise for Peasant Life in China widely shared by the academic community, this study once again demonstrated the important intellectual contribution that made Fei’s work a classical masterpiece.

Key words: Peasant Life in China, agrarian question, agrarian transition, Marxism, livelihood perspective