{"title":"中国学者对《共产党宣言》“私有化”含义的三次争论","authors":"Zhao Sikong","doi":"10.1080/13569317.2021.1962146","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT After more than 20 years of the Chinese economic development initiated in 1978, the theoretical debates that had been discouraged by Deng Xiaoping’s pragmatic approach to Socialism resurfaced in the form of the discussions and controversies surrounding the Chinese translation of the phrase Aufhebung des Privateigentums from the Manifesto of the Communist Party. Since 2000, there have been three waves of debates. The first wave confronts scholars over translating Aufhebung by yangqi (‘sublation’) instead of xiaomie (‘abolition’) of private property. The second brings into focus the controversial interpretation of ‘abolition’ relating only to ‘bourgeois private property’ rather than ‘individual property based on one’s own labour’. The third wave advances the idea, perceived as radical by some Chinese scholars, that the inclusion of the term Aufhebung in the Manifesto was a fundamental error. The integration of these debates in their historical context reveals the indirect character of the Chinese scholarly debates on political issues.","PeriodicalId":1,"journal":{"name":"Accounts of Chemical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/13569317.2021.1962146","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Three waves of debates among Chinese scholars about the meaning of Aufhebung des Privateigentums in the Manifesto of the Communist Party\",\"authors\":\"Zhao Sikong\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13569317.2021.1962146\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT After more than 20 years of the Chinese economic development initiated in 1978, the theoretical debates that had been discouraged by Deng Xiaoping’s pragmatic approach to Socialism resurfaced in the form of the discussions and controversies surrounding the Chinese translation of the phrase Aufhebung des Privateigentums from the Manifesto of the Communist Party. Since 2000, there have been three waves of debates. The first wave confronts scholars over translating Aufhebung by yangqi (‘sublation’) instead of xiaomie (‘abolition’) of private property. The second brings into focus the controversial interpretation of ‘abolition’ relating only to ‘bourgeois private property’ rather than ‘individual property based on one’s own labour’. The third wave advances the idea, perceived as radical by some Chinese scholars, that the inclusion of the term Aufhebung in the Manifesto was a fundamental error. The integration of these debates in their historical context reveals the indirect character of the Chinese scholarly debates on political issues.\",\"PeriodicalId\":1,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":16.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-08-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/13569317.2021.1962146\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13569317.2021.1962146\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"化学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounts of Chemical Research","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13569317.2021.1962146","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Three waves of debates among Chinese scholars about the meaning of Aufhebung des Privateigentums in the Manifesto of the Communist Party
ABSTRACT After more than 20 years of the Chinese economic development initiated in 1978, the theoretical debates that had been discouraged by Deng Xiaoping’s pragmatic approach to Socialism resurfaced in the form of the discussions and controversies surrounding the Chinese translation of the phrase Aufhebung des Privateigentums from the Manifesto of the Communist Party. Since 2000, there have been three waves of debates. The first wave confronts scholars over translating Aufhebung by yangqi (‘sublation’) instead of xiaomie (‘abolition’) of private property. The second brings into focus the controversial interpretation of ‘abolition’ relating only to ‘bourgeois private property’ rather than ‘individual property based on one’s own labour’. The third wave advances the idea, perceived as radical by some Chinese scholars, that the inclusion of the term Aufhebung in the Manifesto was a fundamental error. The integration of these debates in their historical context reveals the indirect character of the Chinese scholarly debates on political issues.
期刊介绍:
Accounts of Chemical Research presents short, concise and critical articles offering easy-to-read overviews of basic research and applications in all areas of chemistry and biochemistry. These short reviews focus on research from the author’s own laboratory and are designed to teach the reader about a research project. In addition, Accounts of Chemical Research publishes commentaries that give an informed opinion on a current research problem. Special Issues online are devoted to a single topic of unusual activity and significance.
Accounts of Chemical Research replaces the traditional article abstract with an article "Conspectus." These entries synopsize the research affording the reader a closer look at the content and significance of an article. Through this provision of a more detailed description of the article contents, the Conspectus enhances the article's discoverability by search engines and the exposure for the research.