In recent years, research on the labor theory of value in the context of artificial intelligence has become a focus of social attention. A new round of discussion, centered on topics including "value creation in the context of artificial intelligence," "the applicability of the labor theory of value in the era of artificial intelligence" and "the development trend of artificial intelligence and human labor" is under way in academic circles. The core issue is whether the classical labor theory of value has become obsolete in the era of artificial intelligence. At the same time, consensus remains lacking on a number of major theoretical issues. In light of this the present study, which sets out to trace history on a problem-awareness basis, finds that since the 1980s the economics community has responded scientifically to the assertions, made in the context of the new technological revolution, that "machines create value" and that "the classical labor theory of value is no longer valid." Over the years, new ideas and explanations have been put forward. Reviewing the classics, and basing itself on the theoretical framework of Marxist political economy, this article re-examines the significance of the labor theory of value in the era of artificial intelligence, with a view to deepening understanding of Marx's labor theory of value, clarifying doubts concerning its validity, and enhancing the practical explanatory power of its content.
From capital’s scramble for land resources in the steam era, to its construction of geographical landscape in the electrical era, and to its reconstruction of cyberspace in the Internet era, the process of capital profitability has always been accompanied by the development of science and technology and the expansion of human production and living space.From the perspective of capital profitability, from labor commodity to social division of labor, from fragmented labor and standardized labor to flexible employment, the historical evolution of space reconstruction is accompanied by the whole process of capital binding and controlling workers.At the current stage, capital is committed to creating traffic and saving labor time through the reconstruction of cyberspace, so as to increase more free time for people to use cyberspace.At the same time, capital exerts more cruel and hidden exploitation of workers through cyberspace.Since then, cyberspace has made workers completely lose the object of resistance.
Since the 1970s,zoonotic diseases have become increasingly prevalent around the world.This trend is not accidental;rather,it is the consequence of unstoppable violation of ecological boundaries by human activities.From a political economy perspective and drawing on the 2014-2016 Ebola outbreak in West Africa,this study analyses the chain mechanism in which international financial capital and transnational agricultural enterprises overstep the boundaries of forest ecosystem,promote industrial monoculture,and trigger public health crisis in less developed countries.Evidence shows that there is an endogenous conflict between the production mode of neoliberal capitalism and ecology/population health.Policy makers should incorporate the prevention of capital from eroding the country's ecological"red line"into national health priorities;otherwise,it is impossible to prevent the next pandemic solely by developing new vaccines and drugs.
In the past 20 years,the impact of financial openness on income inequality and income gap has received increasing attention.This paper reviews existing literature on the definition and measurement of financial openness,the impact of capital account openness on income inequality,channels via which financial openness affects income inequality,and the impact of exchange rate and exchange rate reform on income gap.Based on the review of the literature in the recent 20 years and China's reality,the paper poses future research agenda,including case study about China,the opening of foreign exchange market on income gap and the relation between financial openness and income gap based on China's institutions and dual circulation.
Since the reform and opening up,China's transportation infrastructure construction has gone through four development stages,including serving industrialization stage,serving new-type industrialization stage,serving new-type urbanization stage and serving new development pattern stage.It constantly improves its adaptability to transportation demand,and provides a solid foundation for building a country with great transportation strength.The main characteristics of a country with great transportation strength in the new era and new journey include improving the quality of transportation,developing a tightly woven transportation network,and pushing on sustainable transportation.Building a country with great transportation strength plays an important role in supporting the realization of Chinese path to modernization,which is mainly reflected in serving the people's better life,promoting common prosperity for all the people,strengthening the material foundation of modernization,achieving harmonious coexistence between mankind and nature,and maintaining peace and development.In order to give full play to the role of building a country with great transportation strength in supporting Chinese path to modernization,it is necessary to solve the problem of unbalanced and inadequate development of transportation infrastructure,optimize the spatial layout of transportation,promote the integrated development of urban and rural transportation,build a green transportation system,and improve the cross-border transportation system.
"New quality productivity"is a new economic concept put forward by China based on the zeitgeist of economic development.This paper explains the logic,theoretical connotation and multidimensional significance of this concept,emphasizing that the proposal of"new quality productivity"in China stems from the remarkable performance of economic development and the profound understanding of the law of productivity development,as well as from the profound changes in China's environment for development and the new challenges it brings to the development of productivity.Based on the contradictory and motive laws between productivity and relations of production in Marxist political economy,this paper proposes an analytical framework for understanding the connotation of"new quality productivity".Based on this framework,this paper explains the meaning of new quality productivity in the dimensions of results,factors,factor combinations,industrial forms and guarantees,and then compares the connotation of"new quality productivity"with that of productivity in general.Based on the elaboration of the connotation of"new quality productivity",this paper further explores the significance of the concept at the practical and theoretical levels,pointing out that the proposal of"new quality productivity"provides an important opportunity for China to promote high-quality development in practice and accelerate the construction of socialist political economy with Chinese characteristics in theory.
Exerting the driving effect of consumption on the economy is of great significance for unblocking the domestic circulation.Based on Marx's theory of reproduction and macroeconomic growth model,this paper analyzes the functions of consumption and its effects on boosting economic growth in the correlations among production,distribution,circulation and consumption.This paper also measures China's consumption potential since 1979 by combining Marx's two-part economic growth model and the potential output model with structural variables,and forecasts the future consumption potential until 2035 to explore the intrinsic relationship between consumption potential and economic growth.The study shows that the trend of China's consumption potential is generally stable,with neither a strong rebound nor a significant stall;the main problem facing China's economic growth is a mainly structural,and to some extent cyclical;the impediment to China's economic growth is that the consumption potential has not been fully released.This paper accordingly proposes several countermeasures.
The new quality productivity represents the innovation and future development direction of productivity,and there is an urgent need to deeply understand its theoretical,historical,and practical"triple"logics.Developing productivity is one of the important themes of economics and a core theme in the history of economic thoughts,providing important theoretical logic for new quality productivity.History and practical logics indicate that the formation and development of new quality productivity require difficult exploration,which is a long-term process closely related to the development of social productivity and changes in social systems.Since the development of human society,it has gone through two stages:traditional productivity and new quality productivity.Now,it is moving towards the direction of new quality productivity,which is an inevitable historical trend.In today's world,whoever takes the lead in achieving breakthroughs in key disruptive technologies and developing new quality productivity can shape new advantages for future development and win the initiative in the new round of global development.In order for China to gain advantages,initiative,and future,it is necessary to develop new quality productivity,regard scientific and technological innovation as the inexhaustible driving force and source for development and the key to building the country's core competitiveness.
Material wealth and spiritual wealth are the fundamental requirements of socialist modernization,and the all-round enrichment of materials and the all-round development of people are the long-term goals of Chinese path to modernization.The Chinese road is a road that continuously promotes the all-round development of people on the basis of following Marx's general law of human development and integrating Chinese characteristics.The basic features of promoting all-round development of people in the new era are as follows:"taking people as the center"to better meet the needs of people for a better life,promoting the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation through Chinese path to modernization,addressing the problem of unbalanced and inadequate development through common prosperity,and promoting the common development of people of all countries with the vision of a shared future for mankind.China's practice shows that the all-round development of people is a practice process that conforms to the law and goals,and has characteristics including wholeness,comprehensiveness,historicity and periodicity.To promote the all-round development of people,it is necessary to respect the development law of the mode of production,insist on the subject position of people,and achieve a high degree of unity of material development and spiritual development in the process of collaboration and interaction between the community and individuals.The new development stage means that we have entered a new realm in promoting all-round development of people and in the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation through Chinese path to modernization,which has important theoretical and practical significance in enriching and developing the essence thoughts of socialism,the theory of socialist production objectives,the socialist market economic system,and the orientation of policy paradigm.
The purpose of this paper is to examine a long-debated issue in economic community in China:whether Chinese state-owned enterprises(SOEs)have obtained monopoly profits by their monopoly position.Based on the characteristic that Marxist economics attaches importance to economic circulation and reproduction,this paper innovatively uses the linear production analysis framework of Marxist economics to measure the degree of the deviation between market prices and production prices,which places industries in the process of the division of labor and circulation of the national economy,and measures the extent to which different industries use monopoly power to obtain monopoly profits with the control of technical factors in the reproduction process in order to examine the relationship between the share of SOEs and industrial monopoly profits.This paper compares China's situation with that of major developed capitalist countries including the United States,Japan,Germany and France,finding that industries with a higher share of SOEs in China have a lower level of monopoly profits compared with the United States and Japan,while the level of monopoly profits is similar to that of Germany and France.On this basis,this paper empirically investigates the relationship between the share of domestic SOEs and the acquisition of industrial monopoly profits by building an econometric model based on Chinese data.The results show that SOEs not only do not obtain monopoly profits through their monopoly power,but also depress the prices of products in their industries,subsidizing non-SOEs through market prices below the equilibrium price and increasing the profits of other enterprises through lower price levels.From the perspective of the overall cycle of the national economy,SOEs not only do not rely on monopoly profits to compete with the non-SOEs,but also provide a better accumulation environment for them.In this sense,SOEs effectively promote the overall development of the national economy.
发展阶段的本质是生产关系与生产力矛盾运动所规定的.因而,对于发展阶段的判断根据主要在于生产力与生产关系矛盾运动的特征;进而,发展阶段的判断是否科学,从根本上涉及对一定历史条件下社会生产力的性质、发展要求、基本特点的认识;在此基础上进一步涉及基于生产力性质和水平的对生产关系的性质、特点及运动规律和趋势的认识.所以说,发展阶段问题是政治经济学的重要命题,对于中国特色社会主义政治经济学而言,更是一个不可或缺的基本问题.
The continuous emergence of new viruses has triggered scholars to explore the social mechanism of virus transmission,and some scholars put forward the"Structural One Health"theory based on Marx's materialist method to explore the relationship between global capital circulation,especially the international agricultural monopoly capital movement,and public health.From the perspective of historical evolution,capitalist industrialization has brought about profound changes in the mode of agricultural production.Especially since the implementation of neoliberal policies in the 1970s,international agricultural monopoly capital has controlled the industrial chain and value chain of global agriculture by promoting the privatization,liberalization and marketization of agricultural production,agricultural products processing and marketing,global trade of agricultural products and other fields,and pursued profit maximization by expanding land scale and intensive production,resulting in the erosion and destruction of ecosystems,the continuous release of new pathogens and their rapid spread with the global supply chain of agriculture.It brings the possibility and inevitability of public health crisis.
The failure of American economic governance is rooted in the intensification of contradictions in its economic basis.The political chaos in which the two parties fight each other is just the concentrated expression of the intensified contradictions in the economic basis in political life.Since the 1990s,the US economy has gradually shown a trend of financialization,which not only worsens the social conditions for labor reproduction,but also erodes the industrial foundation of technological innovation.As a result,domestic industrial capital accumulation in the United States faces an insurmountable dilemma,and the reproduction of capitalist production relations faces a huge risk of rupture,which has become the direct cause of the failure of American national economic governance.From a long-term historical perspective,the financialization trend of the US economy is the inevitable result of the contradictions between capital and wage labor,between capital accumulation and social consumption,and between industrial capital and financial capital.The essence of a capitalist state is to maintain the existence of capitalist production relations,which fundamentally determines the institutional boundaries of American national economic governance.The accumulation and deepening of the triple contradictions have severely squeezed the policy space of economic governance,making American fall into an institutional failure of focusing on one thing and losing sight on the other.
转移支付与区域平衡发展是宏观经济学领域的重要议题,也是国民收入分配的现实关切.自改革开放以来,中国经济发展取得了巨大成就,但与此同时也引发了区域发展不平衡、收入差距凸显等一系列矛盾,这显然是当前共同富裕目标实现的瓶颈.财政转移支付制度作为一种区域补偿政策载体,是实现区域间均衡发展战略的重要手段,更是筑牢边疆安全、维护社会稳定、加强民族团结的有力举措.但在实践中,我国的转移支付制度建设仍存在不足之处,在促进均等化等方面尚未达到令人满意的政策预期,由此备受国内学者的关注.本文通过对相关文献的梳理发现,既有研究搭建了转移支付推动区域平衡发展的基本分析框架,重点聚焦于转移支付对公共服务均等化、地方政府行为以及经济协调发展等方面的影响,并以转移支付的财力均衡效应、地方官员偏好等因素为抓手对内在作用机制做出了进一步的剖析.不可否认的是,我国的转移支付制度在推动区域平衡发展上取得了一定的成效,整体呈现出基本公共服务均等化效应长期趋好的特征,对口支援等具有横向转移支付性质的措施更是充分彰显了中国特色.但是,转移支付在促进区域经济协调发展等方面的功能发挥还有待提升,因此有必要在立足于我国国情和实际的基础上,借鉴国际上的成功经验以健全我国的财政转移支付体系、增强转移支付的精准性和提高资金使用效率.
劳动力商品理论是马克思经济学理论体系的重要基石之一,劳动力商品化是马克思劳动力商品理论的重要内涵.在《资本论》中,马克思全面分析了劳动力转化为商品的前提条件、历史过程和多种状况,为我们科学认识当代资本主义生产方式提供了理论基础和重要启发.数字技术的广泛应用,推动发达资本主义国家数字经济和建立在数字平台基础上的零工经济与零工劳动现象蓬勃发展.在零工经济和零工劳动中,资本控制劳动的方式发生了新的变化,但并没有改变资本主义生产方式和生产关系的本质.零工经济和零工劳动的发展,扩大了劳动力商品化的范围,加剧了劳动力商品化的不稳定性,从而更加有利于资本增殖和资本积累.必须坚持以马克思经济学理论为指导,科学认识数字化时代资本主义经济的发展规律和历史趋势.
随着第四次工业革命的到来,世界经济秩序在动态中不断调整,全球经济新格局正在形成."大政府"取代"大市场",贸易保护取代贸易自由,全球价值链的本土化、区域化取代全球化,数字经济取代传统经济.全球价值链本身是一个资本逻辑统领的结构化的分工体系,中国新型工业化的逻辑起点应是国家自主创新能力的重构.为了解决当前的发展困境,我国需要继续实施多边主义构筑制造业升级机遇,努力实现制造业转型升级的高质量发展,着重推动制造业关键核心技术的新型举国体制以及加快培育完整内需体系的系统化环境生成.
当代西方马克思主义者接过马克思的接力棒,重新开启了资本主义劳动过程研究,创建了当代西方马克思主义劳动力市场理论."劳动控制""劳动分化""劳动后备"构成当代西方马克思主义劳动力市场理论的三大支柱.资本主义生产组织形式不同,劳动力市场分割的方式、劳动控制的手段和劳动压榨程度也各不相同,但其目的和后果基本一致,即都是为资本追求更多的剩余价值服务,都造成工人阶级的分化,都以维持和扩大产业后备军为手段.自改革开放以来,中国劳动力市场呈现出多元化的发展格局,劳动力市场分割日益明显,失业问题也日趋严重.当前,我国需进一步加强统一规范的劳动力市场建设,打破各种形式的劳动力市场分割,完善劳动保护相关法律法规,构建劳资合作共赢关系,为经济增长创造更好的微观基础.
中国特色社会主义政治经济学理论体系研究是中国特色社会主义政治经济学理论研究的重要内容,是中国特色社会主义政治经济学学科建设的关键诉求.中国资本积累的社会结构(CSSA)理论是在资本积累的社会结构(SSA)理论基础上结合国情而构筑的中国化理论,承袭其基本理论框架,衍生出"资本—劳资—政府—意识形态—生态—国际"六大核心利益关系,为中国特色社会主义政治经济学理论体系构建拓展了研究思路,提供了一个立体化、多元化的分析框架.由此,文章形成了构建中国特色社会主义政治经济学理论体系的基本思路:纵向逻辑以"九专题"为线索,即从发展阶段问题出发,分别探讨生产、交换、分配、消费、发展、国家宏观以及国际"七过程",落脚到基本经济制度演变;横向逻辑在对七过程进行分析时引入六大利益关系框架,分别构建基于CSSA的生产理论体系、交换理论体系、分配理论体系、消费理论体系、生态理论体系、发展理论体系、国家宏观理论体系和开放理论体系.横纵逻辑之间交互作用,共同组成中国特色社会主义政治经济学理论体系的整体脉络.
20世纪西方凯恩斯主义福利国家的建立与发展为资本主义带来了繁荣,同时也导致了严重的社会危机.对国家问题的重新审视在20世纪60年代末由密利本德—普兰查斯之争拉开序幕,直接影响了 20世纪70年代英国关于马克思主义国家理论的辩论.这场辩论为我们透视资本主义国家在处理"积累"与"合法化"之间的两难境地提供了理论棱镜.辩论大致分为两个阶段:第一阶段是1970-1975年,该时期主要聚焦于新李嘉图主义与原教旨主义关于国家支出危机的异见,以高夫为代表的新李嘉图主义者认为国家支出主要是生产性的,危机发生在分配领域;以亚菲、布洛克、法因和哈里斯等为代表的原教旨主义者认为国家支出是非生产性的,危机主要发生在生产领域,尤其是利润率下降趋势.第二阶段是1975年后,出现了以阶级斗争为分析核心的新进路,以霍洛威、皮乔托、克拉克等为代表,并将其运用于对工人阶级与福利国家之间矛盾和斗争的案例和经验研究.马克思主义政治经济学中的国家理论是当前学术研究的一个薄弱环节,"回顾英国CSE辩论"有助于理论界深入思考今后如何重构马克思主义国家理论.
本文以马克思主义理论为基础,从国家形式与资本形态内在逻辑关系出发,构建国际经济秩序周期性演进的分析框架.本文认为,国际经济秩序的周期性演进反映了资本逻辑从内在于民族国家到实现全球化的动态过程,由不同形态的资本在不同历史阶段的国家形式下通过对国家结构和职能的塑造来表达其总体性权力,并决定了这一阶段国际经济秩序的物质内容.本文对国际经济秩序的英国周期和美国周期进行对比研究,发现美国周期相对于英国周期资本逻辑更为深化,美国周期本质上是英国周期金融扩张阶段的延续.在资本逻辑下构建的国际经济秩序再生产出了自身的反对力量使危机无法避免,只有超越资本逻辑推进人类命运共同体才能解决当前的全球治理困境.
