【摘要】：自由和平等一直是聚訟難決的兩個(gè)概念。英國(guó)歷史學(xué)家阿克頓說(shuō)：追求平等的熱情，令我們對(duì)自由的希望化為泡影。這句話是耶，非耶？在二十世紀(jì)前半葉的中國(guó)，自由主義者們一直為這個(gè)問(wèn)題爭(zhēng)論不休。在對(duì)抗專制集權(quán)，爭(zhēng)取言論自由方面，自由主義者們從來(lái)都是團(tuán)結(jié)一致的�？墒钦劶白杂膳c平等之間的關(guān)系為何，乃至于如何理解自由主義，就連自由主義的重要陣地——《觀察》雜志的撰稿人都一直在辯駁和討論，這個(gè)討論直到1948年《觀察》的�？栽诶^續(xù)。 吳恩裕是《觀察》的撰稿人，他明確地表示，自由是重要的，因?yàn)樽杂赏苿?dòng)了社會(huì)的發(fā)展和進(jìn)步，但平等卻是實(shí)現(xiàn)全民自由的基礎(chǔ)。自由和平等不沖突，一方面固然要爭(zhēng)取自由，另一方面也要促成平等，以為自由的基礎(chǔ)。他反對(duì)阿克頓的觀點(diǎn)，認(rèn)為全民普遍獲得自由是建筑在經(jīng)濟(jì)平等之上，必先取消經(jīng)濟(jì)上的不平等，才能實(shí)現(xiàn)全民的自由。而為了實(shí)現(xiàn)平等，必要先取消私有財(cái)產(chǎn)，然后施行計(jì)劃經(jīng)濟(jì)，走向社會(huì)主義。而只有暴力手段才能達(dá)成這一目標(biāo)。自由主義陣營(yíng)內(nèi)有許多人不同意吳恩裕的看法，有認(rèn)為固然要實(shí)行社會(huì)主義，卻不必采用計(jì)劃經(jīng)濟(jì)；或認(rèn)為要實(shí)行社會(huì)主義，也要采用計(jì)劃經(jīng)濟(jì)，卻不必用暴力手段。我們看到，雖然聲音有多種，但在中國(guó)要實(shí)行社會(huì)主義這一點(diǎn)上，許多自由主義者卻達(dá)成了一致。這并不奇怪，因?yàn)檫B自由主義的旗幟性人物胡適也曾對(duì)計(jì)劃經(jīng)濟(jì)表示出強(qiáng)烈的好感。 我們便要探尋，何以中國(guó)的自由主義者會(huì)傾心于社會(huì)主義，進(jìn)一步言，為了實(shí)現(xiàn)社會(huì)主義，自由主義者又如何接受了和平手段不可行這一突破自由主義底限的理念。包括儲(chǔ)安平在內(nèi)的許多自由主義者1949年選擇留在大陸，，從此失去了生存的土壤，這是因誤解而造成的悲劇，還是歷史的必然。本文選取吳恩裕進(jìn)行個(gè)案研究，就是因?yàn)閰嵌髟Ｗ鳛榱粲⒄螌W(xué)博士，在這一歷史進(jìn)程中的表現(xiàn)較具代表性。
[Abstract]:Freedom and equality have always been the two concepts of litigation. The British historian Acton said: the passion for equality has dashed our hopes for freedom. Is that a yes, no? In China in the first half of the twentieth century, liberals debated the issue. Liberals have always been United in fighting autocracy and freedom of speech. But when it comes to the relationship between freedom and equality, and even how liberalism is understood, even the authors of observation magazine have been arguing and discussing it. The discussion continued until 1948, when observation was suspended. Wu Enyu, a contributor to observation, made it clear that freedom is important because freedom promotes the development and progress of society, but equality is the basis for achieving freedom for all. Freedom and equality do not conflict. On the one hand, we must strive for freedom, on the other hand, we must promote equality as the basis of freedom. He opposed Acton's view that universal access to freedom for all is based on economic equality and must be eliminated before it can be achieved. In order to achieve equality, private property must be abolished, then planned economy to socialism. Only violent means can achieve this goal. Many people in the liberal camp disagreed with Wu Enyu, who thought that while socialism was to be practised, it was not necessary to adopt a planned economy; or to practise socialism, a planned economy was also needed, but no violent means were necessary. There are many voices, but many liberals agree on socialism in China. This is not surprising, because even the banner of liberalism Hu Shi has expressed a strong preference for the planned economy. We have to find out why Chinese liberals are inclined to socialism, and, in order to realize socialism, how liberals accept the idea that peaceful means are not feasible to break through liberalism. Many liberals, including Chu Anping, chose to stay on the mainland in 1949, and then lost the soil for survival. This was a tragedy caused by misunderstanding or a historical necessity. This paper chooses Wu Enyu as a case study, because Wu Enyu, as a doctor of political science in England, is representative in this historical process.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：中南民族大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號(hào)】：K26

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 李光遠(yuǎn);;個(gè)人自由與集體主義[J];高校理論戰(zhàn)線;2008年07期

2 夏繼森;;說(shuō)不盡的“現(xiàn)代性”——評(píng)《中國(guó)法學(xué)向何處去》[J];河北法學(xué);2006年12期

3 墨子刻;;當(dāng)代自由主義的困境——論哈耶克、約翰·頓、羅爾斯和羅蒂[J];華東師范大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2008年06期

4 劉瑛瑛;;“從平等到自由”的關(guān)聯(lián)與阻斷——盧梭平等思想的理路及其評(píng)價(jià)[J];華東政法大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2007年04期

5 周洪軍;拉斯基“民主的社會(huì)主義”——社會(huì)民主主義和民主社會(huì)主義的過(guò)渡階段[J];哈爾濱學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2005年06期

6 林里夫;;哀悼不幸早逝的吳恩裕同志[J];紅樓夢(mèng)學(xué)刊;1980年02期

7 肖克;;新自由主義與新保守主義的博弈——?dú)W美當(dāng)今主導(dǎo)政治思潮探討[J];南都學(xué)壇;2007年01期

8 茅盾;;追念吳恩裕同志[J];紅樓夢(mèng)學(xué)刊;1980年03期

9 陶建鐘;;古典自由主義理論體系中的“自由與權(quán)利”述評(píng)——從霍布斯到柏克[J];社會(huì)科學(xué)評(píng)論;2007年02期

10 呂勇;;當(dāng)代中國(guó)思想界對(duì)主體性的兩種討論——以李澤厚“主體性的人”與鄧正來(lái)“主體性的中國(guó)”為例[J];江漢大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(人文科學(xué)版);2010年01期

本文編號(hào)：2290000