Abstract: The theory of “Empire” proposed by Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri transcends the nation-state sovereignty framework of Lenin's theory of imperialism and Marx's material productionoriented paradigm, offering a novel interpretation of capitalist evolution under globalization. As a new form of global sovereignty, the core of “Empire” lies in the immaterial transformation of dominant production modes and the decentralization of power mechanisms. In production terms, “Empire” reconstructs labor subjectivity and exploitation patterns through immaterial labor and biopolitical production, transforming the working “multitude” into subjects embodying both productivity and exploitability under capitals real subsumption. In power terms, imperial sovereignty dissolves traditional geopolitical boundaries through capital's deterritorialization and hybrid political regimes, replacing them with micro-level penetration and comprehensive control via power networks that forge collusion between economic power and extra-economic power. The implicit exploitation and digital control in digital capitalism precisely epitomize this “Empire” logic: capital converts users into unpaid digital laborers through data monopolies and algorithmic hegemony, eroding the boundary between labor time and leisure time, thereby achieving comprehensive human domination. However, the theorys explanatory power is constrained by its deviations from Marxs materialist approach to production and Lenins imperialism theory. It thus becomes imperative to reexamine its theoretical limitations through historical materialism, thereby revitalizing both Marxism and the “Empire” theory and ultimately advancing research on production mode transformation and imperialist evolution in the digital capitalist era.

Key words: Empire, power, production, historical materialism, digital capitalism

摘要： 奈格里、哈特的“帝国”理论突破了列宁帝国主义理论的民族国家主权框架以及马克思以物质生产为核心的生产范式，重新诠释了全球化背景下资本主义的演变逻辑。“帝国”作为一种新型全球主权形态，其核心在于主导性生产方式的非物质转向和权力机制的去中心化转型，一方面，在生产维度上，“帝国”以非物质劳动和生命政治生产重构了劳动主体与剥削形式，劳动者“诸众”在资本实质吸纳下成为兼具生产性与被剥削性的主体；另一方面，在权力维度上，帝国主权通过资本的解域化和混合政体模式消解了传统地缘政治的界限，代之以权力网络的微观渗透和全面控制，形成了经济权力与超经济权力的共谋。而数字资本主义的隐性剥削与数字控制恰是“帝国”逻辑的现实投射：资本通过数据垄断与算法霸权将用户转化为无偿数字劳工，消解了劳动时间与自由时间的界限，从而实现了对人的全方位操控。但“帝国”理论对马克思物质生产范式和列宁帝国主义理论的偏离和误读一定程度上削弱了其解释效力，必须基于历史唯物主义重新审视这一理论的限度，从而敞开马克思主义和“帝国”理论的生命力，推进数字资本主义时代下的生产方式变革与帝国主义演进的现实研究。

关键词: 帝国, 权力, 生产, 历史唯物主义, 数字资本主义