政治经济学季刊

政治经济学批判与历史唯物主义的内在整合是马克思主义学界长期聚焦的核心理论问题。宇野弘藏的三阶段论试图对这一问题作出回答。他将经济学与唯物史观相分离，把经济学作为证明唯物史观的外在经济基础来为之提供科学依据。在这一认识下，他在经济学层面分离了价值和使用价值，重构了资本逻辑，以资本的肯定辩证法表现资本的内在逻辑，进而阶段性地证明唯物史观。这一理论架构的结果是宇野经济学的“唯物不历史”与“历史不唯物”,其实质是在政治经济学批判中对历史唯物主义进行了拆分。宇野经济学的局限表明，政治经济学批判与历史唯物主义的内在整合首先必须是历史唯物主义作为不可分割的整体在政治经济学批判中得到证明，即在资本逻辑中，唯物主义与历史辩证法必须合为一体。只有这样，对资本的内在批判不仅具有社会基础，而且具有对资本进行历史否定的社会动力。

The integration of the critique of political economy and historical materialism has been an important theoretical issue in Marxist scholarship. Kozo Uno's three-stage(sandankairon)theory attempts to provide an answer to this question. He separates economics from the materialist conception of history, treating economics as an external economic foundation to provide scientific justification for the materialist conception of history. With this understanding, he separates value from use-value at the level of the principles of economics, reconstructs the logic of capital—that is, revealing its intrinsic logic through the affirmative dialectic of capital—and thereby progressively substantiating the materialist conception of history. The outcome of this theoretical framework is that Uno's economics is materialist yet ahistorical, and historical yet lacking materialism. Its essence lies in the dismemberment of historical materialism within the critique of political economy. This demonstrates that the intrinsic integration of the critique of political economy with historical materialism must first entail the demonstration of historical materialism as an indivisible whole within the critique of political economy. That is to say, within the logic of capital, materialism and historical dialectics must be united as one. Only thus can the intrinsic critique of capital possess not only a social foundation but also the social impetus for the historical negation of capital.