The original meaning of

by Marx and Engels is not like this, but the Chinese version has mistranslated it. In the German original version of the Communist Manifesto, what is used is not “elimination”, but “sublation”.

“the declaration of the Communist Party” the German version of

sublates private ownership rather than eliminates it. There is a sentence in the Chinese version of the declaration of the Communist Party: “Communists can summarize their theory in one sentence: eliminate private ownership.” (edited by the Bureau of compilation and compilation of works of Marx and Engels of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China: Selected Works of Marx and Engels, Volume 1, people’s publishing house, 1972, page 265.) This sentence has become the theoretical basis for eliminating the private economy before our reform.

the original meaning of Marx and Engels was not like this. It was the Chinese version that translated it wrong. In the German original version of the Communist Manifesto, what is used is not “elimination”, but “sublation”.

I don’t know German, and how do I know it? On December 22, 2000, I went to see Comrade Hu Deping. “Recently, Mr. Boris slawin, director of the political theory department of the Russian Pravda, published an article. He said that Marx wrote in the Communist Manifesto The question of “eliminating private ownership” mentioned in the German original version is not “eliminating” but “developing and discarding”. Please go to the Central Bureau of compilation and translation tomorrow to find researcher Yin Xuyi and ask him to help find out how this sentence is written in the German original? ”

then Hu Deping contacted him by telephone. As soon as I went to work the next day, I went to find Mr. Yin. Because Mr. Yin already knew my intention, as soon as he saw me, he quickly showed me the German version of the Communist Manifesto. He said, “you see, Marx doesn’t use abschaffung here, but Aufhebung!” Then, I copied the relevant paragraphs and took them back to Deping. When he looked at it and looked very excited after my explanation, he said, “this is very important, very important! We must write an article and publish it publicly!” When the article was written, he said: because this is a very important issue in Marxist theory and also involves major practical issues after the founding of the people’s Republic of China, we should ask the Publicity Department of the Central Committee for instructions. However, the reply given by the Central Propaganda Department after research is: at present, your article is not suitable for public publication, but can only be published in relevant internal journals. In this way, Hu Deping had to choose an internal publication for publication.

other works of Marx and Engels also prove that their positions and attitudes towards private ownership have always been “Sublating” rather than “eliminating”.

let’s first take a look at their relevant discussions on this issue before the Communist Manifesto was published.

in 1844, Marx wrote in the manuscript of economics and philosophy: “communism is private property, that is, the positive sublation of human self alienation”; The emergence of private ownership has “historical inevitability”, “from the actual development process, it is bound to produce the victory of the capital owner over the land owner, that is, the victory of the developed private property over the underdeveloped and incomplete private property”; “Capital must reach its abstract or pure expression in the process of its world development”, and it must develop to “the apex and highest stage of all private property relations”. (complete works of Mann, 42-120121.110106)

in 1845, Marx and Engels wrote in the Holy Family: “indeed, private ownership pushed itself to extinction in its own economic movement.” (ibid., 2-44)

in 1846, Marx and Engels wrote in the book “German Ideology”: “up to now, we have all taken the means of production as the starting point, which has shown that private ownership is bound to occur at a certain stage of industrial development”; “Different stages of the development of division of labor, that is, different forms of ownership”; “Private property is an inevitable form of communication at a certain stage of the development of productive forces. This form of communication will not be eliminated until private property becomes the shackle of emerging productive forces, and it is an essential condition for the production of direct material life.” (ibid., 3-74,25410)

in October 1847, Marx pointed out: “private ownership is not a simple relationship, nor is it an abstract concept or principle, but the sum of bourgeois production relations (not subordinate and declining, but the existing bourgeois private ownership)”, which is the product of the whole social activities, “A writer can devote himself to this historical movement and become its performer, but it goes without saying that he cannot create movement” (ibid., 4-352). This means that neither the proletariat nor anyone can eliminate or abolish private ownership according to their own wishes.

in November 1847, Engels wrote: “for the initial stage of the development of handicraft workshops and large industries, there can be no other form of ownership except private ownership, and there can be no other social system except the social system based on private ownership.” (ibid., 4-365) that is to say, at a certain stage of historical development, only bourgeois private ownership is most suitable for the development of productive forces, and only bourgeois private ownership can best promote the development of productive forces and social progress.

the above is the relevant discussion of Marx and Engels on the treatment of private ownership, especially on the issue of bourgeois private ownership, before the publication of the Communist Manifesto.

let’s take a look at Marx and Engels’ relevant discussions on this issue after the publication of the Communist Manifesto.

from 1857 to 1858, Marx wrote in the manuscript of criticism of Political Economy: “the development of material productivity will sublate capital itself at a certain time.” The capitalist production process is also a process of alienation, that is, the increasing of social wealth