马克思生态思想从物质变换裂缝到生产关系批判的逻辑演进

The Logical Evolution from Metabolic Rift to Critique of Relations of Production in Marx’s Ecological Thought

摘要: “物质变换”是理解马克思生态思想的一条关键线索。以往研究多强调马克思对资本主义“新陈代谢断裂”的现象性批判，但对这一批判如何进一步上升为对生产关系的批判，相关讨论仍不够系统。本文从概念史与文本史结合的角度出发，考察“物质变换”由自然科学范畴转化为政治经济学批判工具的过程，指出马克思并未停留于一般性的生态价值倡议，而是通过揭示资本增殖对人与自然物质循环的持续干预，将生态危机的根源最终指向生产关系这一制度前提，从而实现了从价值性批判到前提性批判的重心转移。马克思生态批判的深层力量，不在于外在伦理劝说，而在于对制度内在矛盾的揭示。需要指出的是，这一重心转移并非简单的线性替代，价值性批判与前提性批判在马克思不同时期的文本中始终保持着复杂的互动与互补关系，二者共同构成了其生态思想的完整逻辑。在此基础上，文章进一步回应福斯特与斋藤幸平关于马克思生态思想的不同阐释路径，并说明这一逻辑深化对当代中国绿色转型实践的启示意义。重新确认生产关系批判在马克思生态思想中的核心地位。本文的贡献不在于“发现”了马克思对生产关系的批判，而在于通过分析两种批判范式的内在关联，更完整地重构了马克思生态批判的逻辑结构，为该领域提供了一个新的解释性工具。

Abstract: “Material metabolism” constitutes a key thread for understanding Marx’s ecological thought. Previous studies have largely emphasized Marx’s phenomenal critique of the “metabolic rift” under capitalism, but have not systematically examined how this critique further ascends to a critique of the relations of production. From the combined perspective of conceptual history and textual history, this paper examines the process by which “material metabolism” was transformed from a category of natural science into a tool of political-economic critique. It points out that Marx did not stop at general ecological value appeals; rather, by revealing capital accumulation’s continuous intervention in the material cycle between humanity and nature, he ultimately traced the root of ecological crisis to the institutional premise of the relations of production, thus achieving a shift in emphasis from value critique to premise critique. The deeper force of Marx’s ecological critique lies not in external ethical persuasion, but in the disclosure of the internal contradictions of the capitalist system. It should be noted that this shift in emphasis is not a simple linear substitution; value critique and premise critique always maintain a complex interplay and complementary relationship throughout Marx’s writings in different periods, jointly constituting the complete logic of his ecological thought. On this basis, the paper further responds to the different interpretive approaches of Foster and Kohei Saito regarding Marx’s ecological thought, and explains the implications of this logical deepening for China’s contemporary green transition practice. It reaffirms the core position of the critique of relations of production in Marx’s ecological thought. The contribution of this paper does not lie in “discovering” Marx’s critique of relations of production, but in more completely reconstructing the logical structure of Marx’s ecological critique by analyzing the internal connection between the two critical paradigms, thereby providing a new interpretive tool for this field.