The founder of the theory of labor ownership is British philosopher John Locke。Locke in his political philosophy "Government Theory"，For the first time, the point of view of "labor gives ownership" was explicitly put forward。Locke believes: "People are their own masters，The owner of your own and your own action or labor，Itself has the basic basis of property。"" That is to say，Workers as their own owners，and the owner of the labor carried out by your own body，It should have the result of the result of this labor, that is, the ownership of the labor product。That's it，Locke established the internal connection between capitalist private ownership and labor，"the same nature of ownership and labor"，This same nature constitutes the core argument of its theory of labor ownership。Because of this，Marx's criticism of the theory is to be based on "the same nature of ownership and labor"。

The so -called "separation of ownership and labor" 

An opinion widely circulated in the current academic community，The reason why Marx does not agree with Locke's use of "the same nature of ownership and labor" to demonstrate the practice of capitalist private ownership，Because Marx discovered，The above -mentioned "the same sex" in the capitalist society no longer exists，or more precisely，It has dialectically transformed into its opposite side, that is, "separation of ownership and labor"。Because of this，Locke's theory of labor ownership as a theory that is disconnected from the actual situation can no longer reach a defense of capitalist private ownership。For example，Japanese scholar Wangyue Kiyoshi said，According to Marx's judgment "the same nature of ownership and labor", it has become a "illustrated illusion" in a capitalist society。That is to say，If this "the same nature" is called "the first one has a regular"，So，As the remaining capital bet365 best casino games continues to generate，This law has been replaced by "the second leading law", that is, "the ownership and labor is completely separated"，The latter means "labor manifestation as a denied ownership，or，The ownership is the negation of the alienity of the labor of others "。

The reason why the academic community refers to the positive view of Marx，It is because the latter really talks about this separation in too many places in too many places。Where，The most famous is undoubtedly the following expression: "The ownership was originally manifested as based on its own labor。Now the ownership is manifested as the right to occupy the labor of others，It is manifested as labor cannot occupy its own product。Ownership with labor，Further say，Full separation between wealth and labor，Now it is manifested as the results of the laws of their same sex as the starting point。”

This paragraph not only appeared in "Political Economics Criticism (1857-1858 Manuscript)"，And almost appeared in "Political Economics Criticism (1861-1863 Manuscript)"，Finally, a little modification still appears in the first volume of "Capital" (German first edition、The second edition and the German third edition of the German 3，English、German 4th Edition)。other，Marx also mentioned in nearly ten places in the manuscript group of "Capital", which mentioned similar to "separation of labor and ownership", "separation of ownership with labor", "absolute separation between labor and ownership", "between labor and ownership Separation、Break and opposition "and other expressions。

Does this mean，The main point of criticism of Marx's theoretical theory of Locke's ownership，means the phenomenon of "separation of ownership and labor" in the capitalist society，And this also refuted the practice of Locke's use of "the same nature of ownership and labor" to demonstrate the private ownership of capitalist private ownership? Things may not be as simple as you see on the surface。

The French version of the first volume of "Capital" is rarely noticed，The Bet365 lotto review most famous of the above Marx on the "separation of ownership and labor"、Repeated expressions are deleted in the last version of the first volume of the first volume of the "Capital theory" revised during his lifetime。

Specifically，In the first version of "Capital Theory", the second edition of German "Chapter 22 The remaining value is transformed into capital 1. The capitalist production process expanded in scale。The law of ownership of commodity production is transformed into laws of capitalist possession "in a small title -including" separation of ownership and labor，It seems to be an inevitable result that seems to be the rules of the same sex as the starting point "，In the French version of "Chapter 24 of Chapter Twenty -Four, the remaining value is converted into capital 1. The reproduction of the scale expanded。How to transform the ownership of commodity production into capitalist possession is completely deleted，The only sentence is replaced: "Here，Even the equivalent exchange exchange、The illusion of the exchange of labor products of the exchange is not visible。”

The important thing is，This deletion is not accidental。On the contrary，Marx's last two modification opinions forms — "Amendment Opinion Form for the First Volume of Capital" and "Amendment Form for the First Volume of Capital" and a write The second edition of the second edition of the full annotation is repeatedly emphasized，Further revision of this part in the future must be "translated" or "processing" in accordance with the French version。other，"Capital" German first edition、Another similar expression in the second edition "separation of labor products and labor itself" is also a new expression of "separation of products and producers" in the French version。Similarly，This part of the modification is also confirmed in the two "Modification Opinions" and the second edition of the German second edition。

That is to say，The expression of "separation between ownership and labor" "separation of products and labor" expressions，Bet365 lotto review Either was deleted，Either the separation of "separation of products (that is, owners) and producers (ie, workers)"。These modifications indicate，If Marx wrote "Political Economics Criticism (1857-1858 Manuscript)", "Political Economics Criticism (Period of 1861-1863)" and even "Capital" German first edition、In the second edition, there is still existence of labor、Mixing of concepts of workers and other concepts，So，During the revision of the French version，Marx's use of the above concept has reached accurate level。At this time，He clearly realizes，The so -called "separation of ownership and labor (in capitalist society)" is not accurate，Or strictly speaking, it is wrong。

"The same nature of ownership and labor" in the new connotation of capitalist society 

The point of real belonging to Marx is，In a capitalist society，The ownership and labor are not separated，On the contrary，"The same nature of ownership and labor" is still established in form。but，This "same nature" has changed in connotation，It is no longer as Locke claims in the theory of labor ownership，Same as workers，Instead, the opposite of the workers is the capitalist。Marx pointed out，This kind of identity consists of "two special phenomena"，The first is "labor belongs to capitalists"，Second, "the product is the owner of the capitalist"。

First is the first phenomenon，In capitalist production，Labor is a capitalist。This is Marx's major assertion on modern labor characteristics。This assertion does not occasionally appear in individual places in its works，Instead, it is stacked in "Political Economics Criticism (1857-1858 Manuscript)" No. Ⅲ Notebook p. 42、No. 4 Notebook page 47，"Political Economics Criticism (1861-1863 Manuscript)" No. 34、36、49、52 pages、No. Ⅱ Notebook 59、74 pages、No. III Notebook 95a/a、No. 152、No. 425、No. Ⅲ Notebook page 1111、No. 1310、1323 pages、No. 1396，"Capital Theory (1863-1865 Manuscript)" 1st volume 24、462、466、469A、469h、469k、469m pages and the first bet365 live casino games volume of "Capital" (Pass Version) 147、148、156、499、547 pages, etc.，That is to say，Dozens of times in "Capital" and its manuscript groups。

So，How to understand "labor belongs to capitalists"? Marx distinguishes two concepts，"Labor bearer" and "owner of labor"。Very true，Under any social form，Workers are all undertakers of labor，but，This does not mean that he must be the owner of the labor。In the capitalist production method，Labor is an existence of the attributes of labor products，More precisely，It exists as the use value of labor commodities。Labor products have two attributes of exchange value and use value as any other products。From the moment the capitalist purchase labor products，He has obtained its use value by paying the exchange value of this product，"The value of labor is the value of labor itself"。So，After the labor sale，"Labor no longer belongs to the worker before the start of labor"; when the workers really start working，"The value of his labor force，The use of labor force，Labor，It belongs to the capitalist "。

Followed by the second phenomenon，In capitalist production，The product is the owner of the capitalist。This phenomenon is the inevitable result of the first phenomenon。Since all the elements of the labor process -not only labor information、Labor object，and the labor itself by the worker — all of which are the owners of the capitalist，So，This labor process is nothing more than a process that the capitalist uses "now all the labor" to handle "all his production materials" and transform the latter into a new product，So，The result of this process is that the labor product is "taken for granted"。

Marx pointed out，It is the real connotation of the two special phenomena above that constitute the proposition of "the same nature of ownership and labor" in the capitalist method: "Workers complete this labor，But his labor belongs to capital ... and this labor object turns the product，It is a new form that capital is expressed。"" In short bet365 best casino games words，The ownership is the same as the capitalist，or，The ownership and labor are the same as capitalist，The same nature of the two is "the same nature between ownership and labor (realized on the capitalist)"。

Decisive criticism of the theory of Locke's ownership of labor 

"The same nature between ownership and labor (realized on the capitalist)"，The core argument that constitutes the theory of Marx's opposition to Locke's ownership of labor。

From Marx's view，The error of Locke's theory of labor ownership is not，The "ownership of the ownership and labor" that it advertises has been separated from the actual actual "separation of ownership and labor"，It is that its interpretation of "the same nature of ownership and labor" has been separated from the actual situation of the capitalist society。

This is because of，The "labor give ownership" proposed by this theory is an attempt to use the same nature between "ownership and labor (realized on workers) legality。but，Marx pointed out，In the small production of previous capitalist society，"The sameness between ownership and labor (realized on the workers) is indeed established，but but，In capitalist production，Although "the same nature of ownership and labor" is still established in form，But in terms of connotation, it has transformed into "the same sex between ownership and labor (realized on the capitalist)"，and this new identity of ownership and labor，It means "separation between ownership and workers"。

Therefore，The essence of Locke's theory of labor ownership is，Under the vague concept of "the same nature of ownership and labor"，Use the "same nature" with previous capitalist nature with the ownership and labor (person)，to cover up the separation of ownership and workers in a capitalist society。This is to mix the different implementation forms of labor in different production methods，The explanation of the ownership of the small production directly grafted the defense of the private ownership of the capitalist，"Moving the ideology of private ownership based on labor is hard on the ownership of the deprivation of direct producers"。So，This theory is "not obtained by laborers in the capitalist society，The winner is completely bankruptcy。

　　bet365 best casino games

(The author is a researcher at the Cultural Development and Cultural Zhejiang Research Center of the Party School of the Zhejiang Provincial Party Committee of the Communist Party of China)