陈灿普
摘 要：卢梭的财产学说似乎存在着悖论：一方面将私有财产权视为最神圣的权利以及文明社会与正义的基础，但另一方面却大力抨击它，认为它是不正义的源泉。在现有解释中，部分认为卢梭并没有一贯的财产理论，而部分则认为上述悖论只是表面的，是卢梭在不同语境条件下的表达结果。本文赞同后一种观点，但认为它忽视了对私有财产权自身内涵的讨论，从而也错失了在这个表面的悖论背后卢梭对私有财产权的真正担忧。私有财产权是建立在自尊之上的一种主体权利。现代政治只能建立在私有财产权的基础之上，但私有财产权在自尊的驱使下却注定无法支撑起现代政治的大厦。任何的遏制措施都不是根本性的，私有财产权仍然时刻有可能颠覆它所建立的现代政治。文章最后总结了这些理论讨论的思想史意义，指出了卢梭是在商业社会的背景下理解私有财产权与现代政治的。
关键词：私有财产权；自尊；现代政治；卢梭
【作者】陈灿普，巴黎第八大学圣丹尼经济学实验室（L.E.D）博士生。
【Title】Private Property in Modern Politics :A Study on Rousseau’s Paradox of Property
Abstract: Rousseau’s life and his work are paradoxical. This undoubtedly applies to his work on property which contains a powerful denunciation of private property ( Second Discourse ) and an affirmation of private property as the most sacred of all citizens’ rights ( Discourse on Political Economy ). This leads some scholars to believe that Rousseau has no coherent theory of private property, while others still insist that this paradox does not exist in fact. This article agrees with the later opinion, but criticizes that those scholars have omitted to investigate into private property itself. Rousseau takes private property right as a subjective right based on “amour-propre”. Modern politics lays its foundations on private property, but private property cannot support the building of modern politics since “amour-propre” inside private property will introduce inequality and wars. This is the reason why Rousseau denounces private property. Any measure aiming to contain private property cannot tackle the problem by the root: it haunts in modern politics forever.
Key words: Private property, Amour-Propre, Modern politics, Rousseau