至于社会主义经济制度，共产主义作为其中的一部分，与资本主义相互矛盾。社会主义的大部分思想出现于十九世纪。社会主义者强烈反对自由主义学派的观点，即他们与资本主义经济制度展开了激烈斗争。社会主义之所以迅速兴起，是由于社会在资本主义之下所遭受的不公，以及资本主义自身的诸多谬误与缺陷。考察各社会主义学派的思想可以发现，它们在三个问题上达成一致，这三点使其有别于其他经济学派。

As for the Socialist economic system, with Communism being a part of it, it contradicts Capitalism. Most of the Socialist ideas appeared in the Nineteenth century. The Socialists fought fiercely against the opinions of the liberal school of thought i.e. they fought the Capitalist economic system. The powerful emergence of Socialism was due to the iniquity which the society suffered under Capitalism and owing to its many fallacies and inadequacies. By reviewing the Socialist schools of thought, it appears that they agree on three issues, which distinguish them from other economic schools of thought.

1. 实现某种实际的平等。

1. Achievement of a type of actual equality.

2. 完全或部分废除私有财产。

2. Abolition of private property either completely or partially.

3. 通过全体人民来组织商品和服务的生产与分配。

3. The organisation of production and distribution of the commodities and services by means of all of the people.

然而,尽管他们在这三个问题上达成一致,但在许多观点上存在根本分歧,其中最重要的包括:

However, despite their agreement over these three issues, they have fundamental differences over many points, the most important of which are:

首先:社会主义的各个学派在其最终所要实现的平等形式上存在分歧。一派主张算术平等,即在每一项有益之物上都平等分配,因此每个人得到的数量完全相同。另一派提出普遍平等,即在分配工作时考虑每个人的能力,在分配产品时考虑每个人的需要。在他们看来,当应用以下原则时,平等便得以确立:“各尽所能,按需分配”,即“各人按其力量,也就是按其能力(指他所完成的工作)付出,每人按其需要(指生产物的分配)获取。”第三派则采取生产资料上的平等。由于资源不足以满足所有个体的需要,分配的依据便成为:“各人按其力量,也就是按其能力付出,每人按其工作获取。”因此,当每个人都获得与他人相同的生产资料时,平等便得以实现。

Firstly: The Socialist schools of thought differ in the form of the eventual equality they aim to achieve. One group advocates arithmetic equality which means equality in every thing of benefit, thus each person is given an identical amount. Another group suggests common equality, which means observing the ability of everyone when distributing work and looking at the needs of every individual when distributing products. Equality in their view is established when the following principle is applied: “From each according to his strength i.e. his ability (meaning by this the work which He performs), and to each according to his need (meaning the distribution of production).” A third group adopts equality in the means of production, since the resources are not sufficient to meet the needs of all individuals, the basis of distribution becomes: “From each according to his strength i.e. his ability, and to each according to his work.” So equality is achieved when each person is facilitated of the means of production the same as others.

其次:社会主义各学派在应当废除的私有财产范围上存在分歧。一派主张完全废除私有财产,这就是共产主义。另一派主张废除与生产资料相关的私有财产,即所谓资本,也就是工厂、铁路、矿山之类,因此禁止拥有任何用于生产的商品。于是,人们不能为出租而拥有房屋,也不能拥有工厂或土地,但可以拥有某些用于消费的财产。允许他们拥有自己所消费的一切东西,例如可以拥有自己居住的房屋,以及土地和工厂所产出的物品,但不能拥有土地或工厂本身。这被称为资本社会主义。另一派不主张废除私有财产,只主张废除与农业土地相关的私有财产,他们就是农业社会主义者(农业改革者)。还有一派认为,每当公共利益需要将私有财产转为公共财产时,都应当进行研究。他们主张在许多领域通过立法对私有财产实行限制所有权,设定利息和地租的最高限额、工资的最低限额,并努力使工人分享资本。这被称为国家社会主义。

Secondly: The Socialist schools of thought differ in the quantity of private property which is to be abolished. One group adopts the abolition of private property completely, which is Communism. Another suggests the abolition of private property related to the means of production which is called capital i.e. factories, railways, mines and the like. Thus they prohibit the possession of any commodity which is used for production. Hence, one cannot own a house for the purpose of leasing it, nor a factory, nor a piece of land, but they may keep certain types of property for the purpose of consuming them. It is allowed for them to own everything they consume, so for example they can own a house to live in, and what the land and factories produce but not the land/factory itself. This is called Socialism of Capital. Another group does not advocate the abolition of private property except that which is relevant to agricultural land, these are the Agrarian Socialists (Agrarian Reformers). Yet another group says that every case in which public interest invites the transforming of a private property to public property, has to be studied. They call for restricted ownership of private property in many areas by putting laws for the maximum limit of interest and rent, a minimum limit for wages, and strive to give workers a share in the capital. This is called State Socialism.

第三：社会主义各学派在实现其目标所采取的手段上有所不同。革命社会主义（革命工团主义）依靠所谓的直接行动来解放劳动力，即劳动者自身的努力，例如破坏性罢工、破坏机器，以及在工人中宣传总罢工的思想。他们围绕这一思想动员工人，直到时机成熟、能够实施总罢工，从而使经济活动陷于瘫痪，最终导致现行经济制度的崩溃。至于马克思主义社会主义者，他们相信社会发展的自然演化规律，并认为仅凭这一规律就足以摧毁现行制度，届时它将被建立在社会主义基础之上的另一种制度所取代。

Thirdly: The Socialist schools of thought differ in respect of the means they adopt to implement their objectives. Thus, revolutionary Socialism (Revolutionary Syndicalism) depends upon liberating the labour force by what it calls direct action i.e. the efforts of the labour force themselves, such as disruptive strikes, sabotage of machinery, and propagating the ideas of a General Strike amongst workers. They work to mobilise them around this idea, until the time comes when they are able to implement a General Strike, thus paralysing economic activity, which would eventually result in the demolition of the present economic system. As for the Marxist Socialists, they believe in the natural law of evolution in society and believe that this alone is sufficient to destroy the current system, which will then be replaced by another system built on Socialism.

至于国家（政府）社会主义的倡导者，他们实现其思想的手段是立法。通过颁布法规，他们主张维护公共利益，改善劳动力的状况。此外，通过征收税款，尤其是对资本和遗产实行分阶段递增的税收，他们表明将缩小私人财产之间的差距。

As for the advocates of State (Government) Socialism, their means to implement their thoughts is through legislation. So, by issuing canons they warrant the preservation of public interests and improvement in the conditions of the labour force. Additionally, by levying taxes, particularly phased-in taxes on capital and inheritance, they suggest that they will close the gap between private properties.

第四，社会主义各学派在社会主义制度中管理各项事业所需的结构问题上存在分歧。例如，资本社会主义者主张将生产与分配的组织工作交给政府（国家），而工团主义者则主张将管理权交给有组织的劳工群体，由其领袖率领（行会社会主义）。

Fourthly: The Socialist schools of thought differ with respect to the structure which is needed to administer the projects in the Socialist system. For example the Capital Socialists want to assign the organisation of production and distribution to the government (State), while the Syndicalists want to confer management to organised groups of labour, headed by their chiefs (Guild Socialism).

在社会主义的各种理论中，最著名、影响最大的是德国人卡尔·马克思的理论。他的理论主导了整个社会主义世界，俄国的共产党和苏维埃社会主义共和国联盟（USSR）正是在这些理论的基础上建立起来的。直到今天，他的理论仍然产生着深远的影响。

The most famous and influential among Socialist theories are those of the German, Karl Marx. His theories have dominated the Socialist world, and upon them the Communist Party and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) in Russia were established. His theories continue to have a great impact until today.

马克思最著名的理论之一是价值理论。他从资本主义的思想家那里汲取了这一理论，并借此来攻击资本主义。亚当·斯密被视为英国自由学派的领袖，被认为是奠定政治经济学即资本主义经济制度基础的人。他对价值的定义是："任何商品的价值取决于其生产中所耗费的劳动量（数量）。"因此，生产需要两小时的商品，其价值是只需一小时生产的商品的两倍。 李嘉图继亚当·斯密之后出现，在定义价值时阐述了他的劳动理论，他说："决定商品价值的，不仅是直接用于生产该商品的劳动量，还包括过去在生产过程中制造所用工具和机器时所耗费的劳动。"这意味着李嘉图认为，商品的价值取决于生产过程中产生的各项开支。他把这些开支归结为一个要素，即劳动。

One of the best known theories of Karl Marx is the theory of value, which He took from the thinkers of Capitalism, and upon which He attacked Capitalism. Adam Smith, who is considered the leader of the Liberal School of Thought in England and is viewed as the person who put the basis of the political economy i.e. the Capitalist economic system, defined value by saying: ‘The value of any commodity depends on the magnitude (quantity) of effort spent in its production.’ So the value of the commodity whose production needs two hours is worth twice the value of the commodity whose production needs only one hour. Ricardo who came after Adam Smith, explained his theory of work, when He defined value, saying: ‘What determines the value of the commodity is not only the quantity of work spent directly in its production, but also the work spent in the past, in producing the tools and machines used in the production process as well.’ This means that Ricardo believed that the value of the commodity depends on the expenses incurred during production. He referred these expenses to one element, which is the work.

在此之后,卡尔·马克思利用李嘉图的价值理论作为武器,攻击私有财产的概念以及整个资本主义。他认为,价值的唯一来源是生产某种商品所耗费的劳动。资本家金融家以不超过维持工人生存并使其能够继续劳动所必需的限度的工资,购买工人的劳动能力。随后,金融家通过让工人生产商品来剥削其劳动能力,而这些商品的价值远远超过支付给工人的报酬。卡尔·马克思将工人所生产的价值与其实际所得报酬之间的差额称为"剩余价值"。他断定,这一价值代表了地主和商人以利润、收益或资本回报率的名义,从工人的权利中攫取的部分,而他并不承认这种做法是正当的。

After this, Karl Marx used Ricardo’s theory of value in Capitalism as a weapon to attack the concept of private property and Capitalism as a whole. He said that the only source of value is the work spent in a commodity’s production, and that the Capitalist financier buys the energy of a worker with a wage that does not exceed the limit necessary to keep Him alive and able to continue working. The financier then exploits the energy of the worker by making Him produce commodities, whose value greatly exceed that which is paid to the worker. Karl Marx called the difference between what the worker produces and what He is actually paid, the ‘surplus value’. He determined that this value represents what the landlords and the business people usurp from the worker’s rights, in the name of revenue, profit or rate of return on capital, a matter which He did not acknowledge as valid.

卡尔·马克思认为，在他之前的社会主义学派，都以为其思想能否成功取决于人天生的本性，即人对公正的热爱和对被压迫者的支持。这些学派习惯于采用它们所信奉的新方法，将其应用于社会，并把这些思想呈献给统治者、商人和开明人士，敦促他们付诸实施。然而，卡尔·马克思并没有以这一想法作为其学说的基础，也没有遵循这种做法。他将自己的学说建立在一种被称为历史进化理论的哲学学说之上，这一理论也被称为辩证法理论。他设想新制度在社会中的建立，是通过经济规律的运作以及社会演进规律的作用而实现的，无需管理者、立法者或改革者的干预。卡尔·马克思将这种社会主义称为“科学社会主义”，以区别于在他之前的、被称为“空想社会主义”的各种社会主义方法。卡尔·马克思的社会主义理论概括如下：

Karl Marx was of the opinion that the Socialist schools which came before Him had envisioned the success of their ideas to be dependent upon the inherent nature of the human being in his love for justice and support for the oppressed. These schools used to adopt new methods which they believed in, for their application upon society, and they presented these ideas to the governors, business people, and the enlightened people, urging them to implement their ideas. Karl Marx however, did not build his school of thought on this idea nor did He follow this approach. He built his school of thought on the basis of a philosophical doctrine known as the Theory of Historical Evolution, which is referred to as the Dialectic Theory. He conceived the establishment of the new system in society through the functional operation of the economic laws, and as a result of the law of evolution in society, without the intervention of a manager, a lawmaker, or a reformer. Karl Marx called this type of Socialism ‘Scientific Socialism’, to differentiate it from the Socialist methods that came before it and which were called ‘Utopian Socialism’. The Socialist theory of Karl Marx is summarised as follows:

社会制度在任何时代都是经济状况的产物。影响这一制度的种种变革,都源于各阶级为改善自身物质处境而展开的阶级斗争。历史告诉我们,这种斗争的结局,总是人数较多、处境较差的阶级战胜人数较少、较为富裕的阶级。他将此称为社会进化规律,并认为它既适用于过去,也适用于未来。因此,在早先的时代,这种斗争存在于自由人与奴隶之间,随后存在于贵族与平民之间,再后来存在于封建领主与农奴(农民)之间,以及教派秩序中的领袖与首领之间。这场斗争总是以人数较多的被压迫阶级战胜人数较少的压迫阶级而告终。然而,被压迫阶级取得胜利之后,又转而成为保守的压迫阶级。自法国大革命以来,这种斗争存在于资产阶级与工人阶级之间。前者掌握了经济事业,成为资本的所有者,并趋于保守;与之对立的是几乎不占有任何资本、但人数众多得多的工人阶级。因此,这种局面导致两个阶级之间的利益冲突,而其根源在于经济原因。 今天的生产方式已不再与所有制相适应。生产不再像过去那样是个体性的,即由一个人单独完成,而是变得具有协作性,即由众人共同进行。然而与此同时,所有制却没有改变。于是,个人所有制仍在延续,并且依然是当今社会制度的基础。 因此,参与生产的工人阶级并不拥有资本的所有权,只能听凭资本家(资本的所有者)摆布,而这些资本家本身并不参与生产。资本家剥削劳动力,只支付仅够维持生计的工资,而工人别无所有、仅靠自身劳动维生,因而不得不接受这样的条件。产品价值与劳动工资之间的差额,即马克思所称的剩余价值,构成了资本家独占的利润,而公正原则本应使这部分利润归属工人。

The system of the society in any age is a result of the economic situation. The transformations which affect this system all come as a result of a class struggle to improve their material situation. History tells us that this struggle ends with the victory of the class which is greater in number and worse in condition, over the wealthier class which is fewer in number. He called this the law of social evolution. It applies to the future as well as the past. So, in previous ages this struggle existed between the freemen and the slaves, then between the nobles and the subjects, then later on between the nobles and the serfs (peasants), and between the leaders and chiefs in the order of sects. This struggle always ended with the victory of the oppressed class, which was greater in number, over the oppressor class, which was smaller in number. But after its victory the oppressed class turned to become a conservative oppressor class. Since the French revolution this struggle existed between the middle class (Bourgeoisie) and the working class. The first class became the masters of the economic projects, the owners of the capital, and became conservative. Facing it was the working class which owned nothing of the capital, but was much greater in number. Consequently, this situation led to a conflict of interest between the two classes, the origin of which was based on economic reasons. The production fashion today, does not conform to the system of ownership. Production no longer remains individualistic i.e. being performed by the person alone, as it was in past ages, but rather has become associative i.e. conducted by individuals together. At the same time however, the system of ownership has not changed. So individual ownership continues and is still the basis of the system in current society. As a result of this the working class, which participates in production, does not have a share in the ownership of the capital, and remains under the mercy of the Capitalists (the owners of the capital), who do not by themselves participate in production. The Capitalists exploit the labour force, paying it only subsistence wages, and the workers are compelled to accept it since they have nothing but their efforts to sustain themselves. The difference between the value of the product and the labour wage, which Marx calls the surplus value, constitutes the profit which the Capitalist monopolises, while justice assumes it should be the share of the workers.

因此，这两个阶级之间的冲突将持续下去，直到所有制制度与生产制度相适应，也就是所有制变为社会主义或集体所有制为止。根据社会发展的进化规律，这场斗争将以工人阶级的胜利告终，因为工人阶级是受压迫的阶级，而且人数更多。

So the conflict would continue between these two classes until the system of ownership conforms with the system of production i.e. when ownership becomes Socialist or collective. This struggle will end with the victory of the working class according to the law of evolution in society, since it is the oppressed class and is greater in number.

关于工人阶级将如何取得胜利以及其成功的原因，这是基于社会进化规律的。当前的经济生活体系本身孕育着即将到来的社会的种子，而这一现行体系将因其所受经济规律的作用而消亡。曾经有一段时间，中产阶级战胜了贵族，并在经济生活中发挥了重要作用，因为它成为了资本的所有者。然而，按照这一论断，它的作用已经终结，时候已到，它应当让出自己的位置，交给工人阶级。 迫使它如此做的，是集中规律和自由竞争的过程。在集中规律的作用下，资本家（资本的所有者）的数量减少，而工人阶级的数量增加。通过自由竞争的作用，生产超出了一切限度，生产的数量超过了工人阶级消费者凭借其低工资所能购买的数量。这导致了危机，使一些所有者失去资本，进入劳动力市场。随着这一体系的发展，危机的强度不断增加，两次危机之间的间隔不断缩短，资本家的数量也逐渐减少。接着，不久之后就会爆发一场比以往所有危机都更大的危机，其规模之大，足以摧毁资本主义经济体系的支柱，社会主义制度将在资本主义的废墟上建立起来。马克思认为，共产主义的出现是历史演进的最后阶段，因为它消灭了私有财产，因而，由于阶级之间不再有差别，社会中阶级冲突也就不再有存在的理由。

Regarding the manner in which the working class will succeed, and the reasons for its success, this is based on the law of evolution in society. The current system of economic life bears within itself the seeds of the forthcoming community, and this current system will vanish due to the effects of the economic laws to which it is subjected. There was a time when the middle class conquered the nobles and played an important role in economic life, since it became the owner of the capital. However, as the argument goes, its role has ended, and the time has come for it to relinquish its position to the working class.What obliges it to do so is the law of concentration and process of free competition. By the effect of the law of concentration the number of Capitalists (owners of the capital) diminishes, and the number of the working class increases. Through the effects of free competition, production surpasses every limit, and the quantity of production exceeds that which the consumers of the working class can buy with their low level of wage. This leads to a crisis causing some of the owners to lose their capital and enter the labour market. As the system progresses the intensity of crises increases, the gap between their occurrences closes, and the number of Capitalists decreases gradually. Then it is not long before a crisis greater than all the preceding crises occurs, of such major proportions that it demolishes the pillars of the Capitalist economic system, with the system of Socialism to be then established upon the Capitalist ruins. Marx conceived the emergence of Communism to be the last stage in the historical evolution, because it demolishes private property, and hence no more reason exists for the conflict of the classes in society, due to the absence of differences between them.

卡尔·马克思阐明了集中规律是资本主义经济的一部分。概括地说，劳动力和资本会从一些项目迁移到另一些项目，因此有些项目不断扩大，而另一些则不断缩小。所有这些情形都表明生产中存在集中现象。如果有人调查某一工业生产部门中的项目数量，例如巧克力工厂，就会发现项目数量随着时间逐渐减少，而每个项目中的平均生产工人数量却在增加。这证明该生产部门发生了集中，因为规模较大的生产取代了规模较小的生产。因此，如果工厂数量原为十家，那么随着时间推移，它们将变成四到五家大型工厂，其余的则会消失。

Karl Marx illustrated that the law of concentration was a part of the Capitalist economy. In summary, there is a migration of work and capital from some projects to others, so that some increase while others decrease. All these are scenarios which show the occurrence of concentration in production. If one investigated the number of projects in one branch of industrial production, such as chocolate factories for example, one would find that the number of projects had diminished gradually, over time, while the average number of the production work force increased in every project. This is an evidence that concentration occurred in this branch of production, since the greater sized production replaces the smaller production. So if the number of factories were for example, ten, they will in time become four or five large factories, and the rest will disappear.

马克思对自由竞争的界定，指的是工作自由的原则，即每个人都有权以自己喜欢的方式生产自己喜欢的任何东西。

Marx’s determination of free competition meant the principle of the freedom to work, which means that every person has the right to produce whatever He likes in the way He likes.

根据马克思的观点，经济危机适用于任何突然扰乱经济均衡的情况。具体危机则包括某一特定生产部门所遭遇的各类危机，其原因在于生产与消费之间的失衡。此类事件的发生，或是由于生产过剩或生产不足，或是由于消费过度或消费不足。

The economic crises, according to Marx, apply to every sudden disturbance that affects the economic equilibrium. The specific crisis includes all the kinds of crises which befall a particular branch of production, due to the imbalance between production and consumption. This incident occurs either due to overproduction or underproduction, or due to over-consumption or under-consumption.

至于周期性的重大危机，它以剧烈震荡的形式出现，动摇整个经济体系的支柱，并成为经济繁荣期与经济萧条期之间的分界点。繁荣期的长度在三至五年之间，萧条期亦然。周期性的重大危机有其独特的特征，这些特征可归纳为三个主要品质，即： 第一，普遍性。这意味着在一个国家中，危机波及经济繁荣的各个方面，或至少是其中大部分。这种普遍性的危机首先出现在某一国家并在那里占据主导地位，然后蔓延到其他与之存在某种持久联系的主要工业国家。 第二，周期性。这意味着危机以反复且循环的方式出现。相隔于一次危机与另一次危机之间的时间在七至十一年之间波动。虽然危机具有周期性，但其发生并非在固定的时间。 第三，生产过剩。大型项目的所有者在销售其产品方面面临巨大困难，因而许多产品的供给超过需求，从而导致危机。

As for the recurrent (periodic) major crisis, it appears in the form of violent convulsions which shake the pillars of the whole economic system, and becomes the point of separation between the period of economic boom and the period of economic depression. The periods of boom vary between three to five years in length, as do the periods of depression. Recurrent, major crises have special characteristics which distinguish them. These characteristics fall under three main qualities, which are: Firstly, the quality of generalisation. This means that in one country, the crisis hits all aspects of economic prosperity, or at least most of them. This general crisis appears at first in one country where it dominates, and then spreads to other leading industrial countries which were linked together by some permanent relations. The second quality is that it is recurrent. This means that the crisis occurs in repetitive and cyclical periods. The period which separates between one crisis and another fluctuates between seven and eleven years. Its occurrence is not over a fixed time although it is recurrent. The third quality is that of excessive production, such that the owners of the large projects face great difficulty in disposing of their products, so the supply exceeds demand for many products leading to the crisis.

卡尔·马克思认为，这些重大危机会迫使一部分人失去资本，因此资本所有者的数量减少，而工人的数量增加。这些现象最终将导致社会的重大危机，从而摧毁旧的制度。

Karl Marx considered that these major crises force some people to lose their capital, so the number of owners diminishes and the number of workers increases. These occurrences are what will lead finally to the major crisis in the society which demolishes the old system.

这是一篇关于社会主义（包括作为其形式之一的共产主义）的摘要。从这篇摘要来看，社会主义各学派，包括共产主义者，都力图在个人之间实现真正的平等：或是利益的平等，或是生产资料的平等，或是绝对的平等。任何此类平等都是不可能实现的，它不过是一种假设。它不切实际，因此无法实现。这是因为平等本身并不真实，因而不切实际。人们按照其被造时的本性，在身体和智力能力上各不相同，在满足各自需求方面也各有差异。因此，他们之间的平等无法实现。即使通过强制手段将商品和服务平均分配给人们，他们在运用这些财富进行生产或使用时，也不可能完全平等；他们在满足各自需要所需的数量上，也不可能相等。所以，他们之间的平等只是一种臆测和假设性的设想。

This is a summary of Socialism including Communism as one of its forms. From this summary it appears that the Socialist schools of thought including the Communists, strive to achieve real equality amongst the individuals; either equality in benefits, equality in the means of production, or absolute equality. Any kind of such equality is impossible to achieve, and it is nothing but a hypothetical assumption. It is impractical and therefore impossible. This is because equality in itself is unreal, and thus impractical. People by the very nature with which they were created vary in their physical and mental capabilities, and they vary in the satisfaction of their needs. So equality amongst them cannot be achieved. Even if one distributed equal shares of commodities and services among the people by force, it would be impossible for them to be equal in using this wealth in production or utilisation. And it would be impossible for them to be equal in terms of the quantity they need to satisfy their respective needs. Therefore, equality between them is a speculative and hypothetical concern.

此外,人们之间的单纯平等,即便他们在力量和能力上存在差异,被认为远非社会主义者声称要实现的公正。人们在所有权和生产资料方面的差距是不可避免的,也是十分正常的。任何追求平等的尝试都注定失败,因为它与人类之间天然存在的差异相矛盾。

Moreover, equality by itself amongst people, while they are different in strength/power, is considered far from the justice which the Socialists claim they try to achieve. The disparity between people in terms of ownership, and in the means of production, is inevitable and quite normal. Every attempt at achieving equality is destined for failure as it contradicts with the natural disparity existent amongst human beings.

关于彻底废除私有财产的主张，这与人的本性相矛盾，因为所有权是生存本能的体现，而这种本能在人身上确实存在。它是人天生的、人的一部分，是人自然能量的表现，因此无法被消除，因为它是本能的。只要人还活着，人身上任何本能的东西都无法被从他身上剔除。任何废除私有财产的企图，都不过是对人类天性本能的压制，只会导致焦虑。因此，应当顺应并组织这一本能，而不是试图消除它。

Regarding the complete abolition of private property, this contradicts with man’s nature, because ownership is a manifestation of the survival instinct, which is definitely existent in man. Being natural in him, a part of him, and a manifestation of his natural energy, it is impossible to be eliminated since it is instinctive. Anything that is instinctive in man cannot be eliminated from Him as long as He is alive. Any attempt to abolish private property is nothing but a suppression of the human beings natural instincts, and can only lead to anxiety. Therefore, it is natural to organise this instinct rather than trying to eliminate it.

关于部分废除所有权一事，需要加以研究。若其含义是为可拥有的财物数量设定上限，那么这便是数量上的限制，是错误的，因为它限制了人的活动，阻碍了他的努力，并减少了他的生产。禁止人们拥有超过某一水平的财产，实际上就是把他们停在这个限度上，中断了个人的活动，从而使社会无法从这些个人的活动中获益。

With regard to the partial abolition of ownership, it has to be studied. If what is meant by this is to put a ceiling on the magnitude of commodities that can be owned, then this would be a limitation in quantity, which is wrong, since it limits the activity of man, obstructs his efforts, and reduces his production. By preventing people from owning that which exceeds a certain level, this effectively stops them at that limit, interrupting the individuals from their activities, and thereby depriving the community from benefitting from the activities of these individuals.

然而，如果对商品和服务的所有权只是限定在某种方式上，而对所拥有的数量不加限制，那么这是可以接受的，因为它并不妨碍人的活动。这种做法规范了个人之间的财产所有权，并鼓励他们付出更多努力、增加活动。

However, if ownership of commodities and services is restricted to a certain manner without restriction in the quantity owned, this would be acceptable, as it does not obstruct the activity of man. This approach organises the ownership of property among individuals, and encourages them to expend more effort and increase activity.

如果"部分废除所有权"意味着个人被禁止拥有某些财产,而其他财产则可以无限量地拥有,那么这一点需要加以考察。若这些财产的益处无法由个人单独享有,除非剥夺公众对该财产的使用,那么自然应当禁止个人拥有该财产,例如公共道路、城市广场、河流、海洋及类似之物。这一限制是由财产的性质决定的。因此,禁止个人拥有那些具有共同受益性质的财产,并无不妥,因为这种所有权的限制本身是由财产的性质所决定的。

If the partial abolition of ownership means that the individual is prevented from owning certain properties, whilst other properties can be owned without any limit over the quantity, this has to be examined. If the beneficial nature of these properties cannot be enjoyed by the individual alone, except by depriving the public of that property, then it is natural to prevent the individual from owning that property individually; such as public roads, town squares, rivers, seas, and the like. The restriction is decided by the nature of the property. There is, therefore, nothing wrong in banning the individual ownership of those properties which are of associative benefit, because this ownership was determined by the nature of the property itself.

如果财产的性质并不要求禁止个人所有，仍应进一步分析；若该财产可归入第一类，即个人占有会剥夺社会公众利益的财产，例如水和矿产资源，那么禁止其个人所有便无可非议。使这类财产归入第一类的原因在于，就其性质而言，若被个人占有，就会剥夺社会对它的享用。然而，如果占有该财产并不会剥夺社会对它的享用，那么对其所有权便不应设置任何限制。否则，就会无缘无故地对所有权造成不公正的限制。这就好比按数量限制所有权，其结果只会限制人的活动，阻碍他的努力，降低他的产出，并在他达到规定的所有权上限时使他停止工作。

If the nature of the property does not require prohibition of individual ownership, further analysis should still be conducted; if the property can be included under the first type i.e. properties whose individual ownership would deprive the community, such as water and mineral resources, then there is nothing wrong in banning their individual ownership. The issue which makes this type of property included under the first type is that by its nature if it was owned individually it would deprive the community of it. However, if owning the property does not deprive the community of it, then there should be no restriction on its ownership. To do so would unfairly limit ownership for no reason. This would be like limiting the ownership by quantity which will only result in restricting man’s activities, interrupting his efforts, reducing his production, and stopping Him from work when He reaches the set limit of ownership.

社会主义中对所有权的部分废除，是从数量上限制所有权，而不是从所有权的方式和途径上限制。它禁止拥有某些财产，而这些财产依其性质和来源本应归个人所有。社会主义要么在规模上限制所有权，例如将土地所有权限制在一定面积之内；要么限制对某些财产的所有权，例如生产资料。这类财产中有许多依其性质本可以归个人所有。对这类财产的所有权限制，无论是由法律预先规定的，例如禁止继承、禁止拥有矿山、铁路或工厂；还是交由国家视具体情况决定，在公共利益需要时禁止占有，都是对个人活动的限制，因为这些财产依其本质完全可以由个人所有。

The partial abolition of ownership in Socialism is a limitation of ownership by quantity, rather than by the ways and means of ownership. It prevents ownership of some properties, which by their nature and by the nature of their origin should be individually owned. Socialism either limits ownership in magnitude, such as limiting ownership of land up to a certain area, or it limits ownership of certain properties such as the means of production. Many of these properties, by their nature, could be owned by individuals. Ownership restrictions of this type of property restricts activity whether the restriction was pre-specified by the law, such as preventing inheritance, ownership of mines, railways, or factories; or if it were left to the State to decide, on a case by case basis, to prevent possession wherever public interest requires it to do so. All this is restriction of the activity of individuals, for these properties by their very nature can be owned by individuals.

生产与分配的组织若要通过民众来实现，就不能（也不应当）靠煽动人们的骚乱与忧虑，或挑起他们之间的仇恨来达成。这只会导致混乱，而不是组织。此外，社会中生产的组织也无法自然地通过让工人阶级感受到资本家的压迫来实现，因为资本家可能足够精明和机敏，能够满足劳动力的需求，美国的工厂工人便是如此。因此，工人阶级并不在劳动成果被剥削这一意义上感受到压迫。如此一来，能够更好地组织生产与分配的演进也就不会发生。这种组织应当通过恰当的法律和解决方案来实现，而这些方案必须建立在明确的基础之上，并且针对问题的真实本质。社会主义依赖于组织生产与分配，无论是靠煽动工人阶级之间的紧张与骚乱，还是靠社会中自然的进化规律，抑或是通过不源于某一明确基础或信条的人为（Wadh’iya）立法与法规。因此，这种组织从其根基上就是错误的。

The organisation of production and distribution through people cannot (and should not) be achieved by inciting disturbances and anxiety amongst people, or by inciting hatred between them. This can only lead to anarchy, rather than organisation. Furthermore, the organisation of production in the community cannot be achieved naturally by making the working class feel the oppression of business people, since the business people could be smart and ingenious enough to satisfy the needs of the labour force, as is the case with the factory workers in the United States. So the working class do not feel the oppression in terms of having the fruits of their efforts exploited. In this way the evolution which would better organise production and distribution would not occur. This organisation should come through proper laws and solutions which are built on a definite basis that deals with the real nature of the problems. Socialism relies on organising the production and distribution, whether by inciting tension and disturbances amongst the working class, or by the natural law of evolution in society, or through manmade (Wadh’iya) legislation and canons that do not emanate from a definite basis or creed. Therefore this organisation is false from its basis.

这本书概述了社会主义的谬误。就卡尔·马克思的社会主义而言，其谬误主要体现在三个方面：

This outlines the fallacies of Socialism. With regard specifically to the Socialism of Karl Marx, its fallacy appears in three aspects:

首先：他关于价值理论的观点是错误的，也与现实不符。他认为商品价值的唯一来源是生产该商品所耗费的劳动，这与现实不符，因为所耗费的劳动只是其价值的来源之一，而非唯一来源。除劳动之外，还有其他因素进入商品的价值之中。例如，有进行劳动所作用的原材料，也有对商品效用的需求。原材料本身可能蕴含超过其获取劳动的价值，比如狩猎的情形。商品的效用也可能在市场上没有需求，或被禁止出口，比如穆斯林所禁止的葡萄酒。因此，将劳动视为价值的唯一来源是不正确的，也不符合商品的实际情况。

Firstly: His opinion on the theory of value is erroneous and disagrees with reality. The opinion, stating that the only source for the value of the commodity is the work spent in its production, disagrees with reality since the spent work is only one but not the only source of its value. There are other elements, besides the work, that enter in the value of the commodity. There is the raw material upon which the work was carried out, or the demand for the benefit of the commodity as well. The raw material could contain a benefit that exceeds the work spent in its procurement such as in hunting for example. The benefit of the commodity could have no demand in the market, and be forbidden for export, such as wine for Muslims. So putting work as the only source of value is incorrect, and does not conform to the reality of the commodity as it is.

其次:他的观点认为,任何时代存在的社会秩序都是经济状况的产物,而这一制度所经历的各种变迁都源于同一个原因,即各阶级为改善自身物质处境而展开的斗争。这一观点是错误的,没有根据,并且建立在一个可疑而假设性的前提之上。它的错误以及与现实的不符,从历史事件和当前局势中显而易见。 我们看到,俄国转变为社会主义,并非由于唯物主义的演进,也不是由于阶级斗争导致制度的改变。相反,是某一群体通过血腥革命夺取了政权,然后开始将其思想施加于民众,并改变了制度。中国的社会主义道路也是如此。社会主义在东德而非西德、在东欧而非西欧的实行,也不是任何阶级斗争的结果,而是由一个社会主义国家征服这些国家,并将其制度强加给被征服的民族所致。资本主义国家、伊斯兰国家以及其他任何制度的情况,也都与此类似。 此外,这一规律所预言将通过阶级斗争而改变制度的国家,即德国、英国和美国,都是资本主义国家,那里资本所有者和工人人数众多。它们并不像沙皇俄国或中国那样以农业为主而非工业为主,那些国家的资本所有者和工人人数与西方相比要少得多。尽管两个阶级在西欧和美国大量存在,这些国家并没有转向社会主义,至今仍然实行资本主义。这两个阶级(即资本所有者和工人)的存在,并未对它们的制度产生任何影响。 仅此一点，就足以从其根基上驳倒这一理论。

Secondly: His opinion states that the social order existing at any time, is a product of the economic situation, and that the various transformations which befall this system are all due to one reason, which is the struggle of the classes for the objective of improving their material situation. This opinion is erroneous, baseless, and built upon a doubtful and hypothetical assumption. The reason for its error and disagreement with reality is obvious from historical events and the current situation.We see that the transformation of Russia into Socialism did not occur due to a materialistic evolution, nor due to a class struggle that led to the change of the system. Rather, a group took over through a bloody revolution, and started to apply its thoughts upon the people, and changed the system. The same happened in Socialist China. The application of Socialism in East Germany rather than West Germany, and Eastern Europe rather than Western Europe did not occur as a result of any class struggle. Rather it occurred through the conquering of these countries by a Socialist State which imposed its system upon the conquered nations. The same occurred with the Capitalist states, with the Islamic State, and with any other system. Furthermore, the countries which this law predicted would change their system through class struggle, namely Germany, England, and the United states, are all Capitalist countries where the owners of capital and workers are many. They were not Czarist Russia or China, which were agricultural rather than industrial, and where the number of owners of capital and workers were much fewer in comparison to the West. Despite the overwhelming presence of the two classes in Western Europe and the United states, they were not converted to Socialism, and they all still apply Capitalism till this day. The presence of these two classes (i.e.capital owners and workers) did not have any effect on their system. This alone is enough to refute this theory from its basis.

马克思理论中的第三个错误,出现在他关于社会演进规律的论断上。他认为,经济生活体系注定要被控制它的经济规律所消灭;曾经战胜贵族阶级(即资本的拥有者)的中产阶级,最终也会因集中化规律而把自己的位置让给劳动阶级。马克思这一理论所依据的生产集中论,即他由此推导出劳动者人数增加、资本拥有者人数减少的理论,是错误的。这一理论之所以错误,是因为生产集中存在一个它无法超越的界限。它达到某一限度便会停止,因此不再是马克思所设想的那种演进的催化剂。而且,生产集中在主要生产部门之一即农业中根本不存在。那么,社会中的演进规律又如何能够发生呢? 此外,马克思断言,生产集中之后必然是财富(资源)的集中,这导致金融家人数减少,而一无所有的工人人数增加。这一观点同样是错误的,因为生产集中完全可能导致资本拥有者人数增加,并使工人阶级成为资本的持有者。由大型公司主持的重大项目,其股东通常就包括工人阶级,这便是驳斥该理论的一个例证。另外,工厂中的许多工人薪资很高,例如工程师、化学家和管理人员,他们能够储蓄其薪资的很大一部分,从而自己成为投资者,而无需另行创办独立的企业。因此,马克思关于工人与社会演进所提出的主张,并不适用于他们。

The third appearance of error in Karl Marx’s theory appears in what He said about the law of social evolution, that the system of economic life is destined for extinction by the effect of the economic laws which control it, and that the middle class which won the battle against the class of the nobles i.e. the owners of the capital will ultimately evacuate their place for the labour class, due to the law of concentration. The theory of Karl Marx concerning concentration of production, on which He builds the increase in the number of the workers and the decrease in the number of the owners of capital, is false. This theory is false because there is a limit which concentration of production cannot overstep. So it arrives at a certain limit and stops and thus will no longer be a catalyst in the evolution imagined by Marx. Moreover, concentration of production does not exist at all in one of the main branches of production, namely agriculture. How then can the law of evolution occur in society? Besides, Karl Marx asserts that concentration of production is followed by concentration of wealth (resources), which results in a reduction in the number of financiers, and an increase in the number of workers, who own nothing. This view is erroneous, since the concentration of production could result in an increase in the number of capital owners, and could result in the working class becoming capital holders. The major projects, which are conducted by the large Corporations, usually have shareholders from the working class, which is an example that refutes this theory. Moreover, many of the working class in the factories have high salaries, such as engineers, chemists and managers, thus being able to save a great part of their salaries, and becoming investors themselves, without the need to establish independent projects. Therefore, what Karl Marx propounded about workers and evolution does not apply to them.

这只是对资本主义和社会主义（以及由社会主义演变而来的共产主义）经济制度所依据原则的简要考察。通过这一考察，这些原则中存在的谬误便显而易见。另一方面，这两种制度既与伊斯兰解决问题的方法相抵触，也与伊斯兰教本身相抵触。

This is but a brief examination of the principles upon which the Capitalist and Socialist, from which came the Communist, economic systems are established. From this examination the fallacies present in these principles are apparent. This is on the one hand; on the other hand, both systems are contradictory to the Islamic method in addressing the problems and contradictory to Islam itself.

至于它们与伊斯兰解决问题的方法相矛盾之处，可以发现，伊斯兰解决经济问题的方法，与它解决其他任何人类问题所用的方法完全相同。伊斯兰的通用方法是：研究经济问题的现实，理解它，然后在研究沙里亚经文之后，从这些经文中推导出该问题的解决方案，并确保这些经文适用于该特定问题。这不同于资本主义和社会主义的方法。在资本主义中，由问题所造成的现状被用作解决方案的来源（实用主义）。在社会主义中，解决方案取自人们想象存在于问题之中的假设性前提，并依据这些假设来设定解决方案。这两种方法都不同于伊斯兰的方法，因此穆斯林不得采纳它们。

As to their contradiction to the Islamic method of solving the problems, one finds that the Islamic method in solving the economic problem is the very same method Islam uses in solving any of the other human problems. The common approach of Islam is to study the reality of the economic problem, understand it, and then deduce a solution for the problem from the Shari’ah texts after studying these texts, and to ensure that they apply to that particular problem. This is different from the Capitalist and Socialist method. In Capitalism, the situation which resulted from the problems, is used as a source for the solutions (pragmatism). In Socialism the solutions are taken from hypothetical assumptions which are imagined to be existent in the problem, and the solutions are put according to these assumptions. Each of these two methods is different to the method of Islam, so it is not allowed for a Muslim to adopt them.

资本主义与社会主义经济，以及由此而来的共产主义经济，与伊斯兰之间的矛盾在于：伊斯兰将其解决方案作为源自立法依据的神圣法则（Ahkam Shari’ah）加以采纳，而资本主义和社会主义的经济解决方案并非神圣法则，而是出自一套kufr（不信）的制度。依据它们来裁决事务，即是以非真主所降示的来统治，任何穆斯林都不允许以任何方式采纳。若采纳者并不相信它们，其采纳便是公开的罪过（Fisq）。但如果他相信它们才是正确的准则，并认为伊斯兰的律例不适合现代，不能为当今的经济问题提供解决方案，那么这就是kufr，愿真主（SWT）保佑我们免于此事。

The contradiction of the Capitalist and Socialist, and from it the Communist, economies to Islam is that Islam adopts its solutions as divine rules (Ahkam Shari’ah) derived from the legislative sources while the Capitalist and Socialist economic solutions are not divine rules, but are from a system of Kufr. Judging on things according to them means ruling with other than what Allah has revealed, which is not allowed for any Muslim to adopt in any way. Their adoption is an open sin (Fisq) if their adopter does not believe in them. But if He believed that they are the proper rules and that Islamic rules do not suit the modern age and do not offer solutions to the current economic problems, then this is kufr, may Allah (swt) protect us from it.