《1844年经济学哲学手稿》中社会正义思想研究
A Study of Social Justice Thought in the Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844

《1844年经济学哲学手稿》虽未直接使用“社会正义”概念，但通过批判国民经济学的意识形态遮蔽、阐释异化劳动理论及揭示扬弃私有财产的历史路径，深刻揭示了资本主义非正义的根源，并勾勒出未来正义社会的实践图景。本文以文本分析为基础，从三重维度展开论证：其一，马克思批判国民经济学将私有制永恒化，指出其“形式正义”掩盖了劳动异化与剥削的实质，工人“生产的财富越多，他就越贫穷”的悖论，暴露出资本主义正义观的虚伪性；其二，通过阐释异化劳动理论，马克思揭露劳动产品、劳动过程、类本质及人际关系的异化，将社会正义的实质聚焦于自由、平等和公正，其三，马克思提出“对私有财产的积极扬弃”是解决社会正义历史任务的根本路径，共产主义作为“人和自然界、人和人之间矛盾的真正解决”，不仅是分配关系的变革，更是生产关系与人性本质的双重革命。《手稿》在马克思主义正义理论体系中具有承上启下的枢纽地位：既承接早期法权批判的遗产，又为历史唯物主义正义观奠定雏形，但其仍存在思辨哲学的方法论局限。
Although the Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844 did not directly use the concept of “social justice”, by criticizing the ideological masking of national economics, interpreting the theory of alienated labor, and revealing the historical path of abandoning private property, it deeply reveals the root of capitalist injustice and outlines the practical landscape of a future just society. This article is based on text analysis and argues from three dimensions: firstly, Marx criticized national economics for making private ownership eternal, pointing out that its “formal justice” conceals the essence of labor alienation and exploitation, and the paradox that workers “become poorer the more wealth they produce” exposes the hypocrisy of capitalist justice; Secondly, by interpreting the theory of alienated labor, Marx exposed the alienation of labor products, labor processes, class essence, and interpersonal relationships, focusing the essence of social justice on freedom, equality, and justice. Thirdly, Marx proposed that “actively abandoning private property” is the fundamental path to solving the historical task of social justice. Communism, as the “true resolution of contradictions between humans and nature, and between humans,” is not only a transformation of distribution relations, but also a dual revolution of production relations and human nature. The manuscript plays a pivotal role in the Marxist theory of justice, inheriting the legacy of early legal criticism and laying the foundation for the historical materialist view of justice. However, it still has methodological limitations in speculative philosophy.