to 三火兄:
《人权宣言》,《独立宣言》里面对基本人权以及自由都作了很深刻的阐释,小弟对人权与自由
的理解都没有超出此二者所言的。关于产权的问题小弟觉得这并不只是经济学上的一个基本问
题,它还具有哲学上的指导意义。小弟觉得保证产权是保证自由的前提,对个人的承认一定程度
上就等同于对其产权的承认。因为个人是个空乏的概念,而个人的拥有物(产权)却是一个明晰
的概念。这里哈大师有精彩的论述:(更多内容请参看我转贴的《戏侃马克思主义》系列)
哈耶克写到:
"What our generation has forgotten is that the system of private
property is the most important guaranty of freedom, not only for
those who own property, but scarcely less for those who do not.
It is only because the control of the means of production is
divided among many people acting independently that nobody has
complete power over us, that we as individuals can decide what
to do with ourselves. If all the means of production were vested
in a single hand, whether it be nominally that of "society" as a
whole or that of a dictator, whoever excercisses this control has
complete power over us."
“我们这一代已经忘记,私有财产体系是自由的最重要的保障。不单是对有产者,
这重要性对无产者也丝毫不少。正是因为生产资料掌握在众多的独立人手中,才
没有人能够彻底地控制我们,而我们作为个人才有可能决定自己的行为。一旦全
部生产资料集中到一只手上,无论这只手是名义上的全“社会”,还是属于一个
独裁者,谁掌握了这只手,谁就有了统治我们的全部权力。”
"Nobody saw more clearly than De Tocqueville that democracy as
an essentially individualist institution stood in an irreconcilable
conflict with socialism: 'Democracy extends the sphere of individual
freedom,' he said in 1848; 'socialism restricts it. Democracy
attaches all possible value to each man; socialism makes each man
a mere agent, a mere number. Democracy and socialism have nothing in
common but one word: equality. But notice the difference: while
democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in
restraint and servitude"
“没人比德·脱克维尔更清楚地看出,民主在本质上是个人主义的制度,它与社
会主义存在着不可调和的冲突:'民主扩展个人自由的空间',他在1848年说,'而
社会主义限制它。民主把所有可能的价值赋予每个人;而社会主义把每个人当做
一个工具,一个号码。民主和社会主义除了一个字眼以外毫无共同之处。这个字
眼就是:平等。但是注意这个区别:民主在自由中求平等,而社会主义追求平等
的手段是限制和奴役'”
j爷爷不知道有没有看过这本哈大师的《通往奴役之路》,但听说绵恒叔叔是米国的PH.D,博学如
他,一定是读过。否则他怎么前脚从香港回来,后脚就去了台湾?那两地方可都是万恶的资本主
义社会哦~~~~~~[wdb2][wdb2][wdb2]