Abstract: Within the framework of civil society principles, Hegel's thought on the cause of poverty has two problems. First, relative poverty can be produced by both natural differences of individuals and the social division of labor, but he only focuses on the former. He holds that the poor's discontent with the civil society is “arbitrariness” that is “against nature”, and regards this as a direct cause of the “poor rabble” (absolute poverty). Second, his thought on the “rich rabble” cannot explain why capitalists can obtain what they need without the exchange of equal values (oppression). In contrast, Marx gives up the civil society principles, and from the perspective of “class antagonism”, he argues that “oppression” and “being oppressed” derive from the class statuses of capitalists and workers, and poverty is produced by the socioeconomic structure, instead of individuals' natural differences or subjective factors such as “arbitrariness”. This objective understanding of history lays a solid social foundation for the poor to form their “class consciousness” and change their destiny.

Key words: Hegel, Marx, poverty, worker, capitalist

摘要： 在市民社会原则的框架下，黑格尔的贫困成因思想存在两个问题：第一，个体的自然差异和社会分工都能引发相对贫困，但他仅从前者出发，认为贫困者对市民社会的不满是“违背自然”的“任性”，并将之视为“贫困贱民”（绝对贫困）产生的直接原因；第二，他的“富裕贱民”思想，无法解释为什么资本家可以不通过等价交换就从工人那里获得所需（压迫）。与之相比，马克思则放弃了市民社会原则，通过“阶级对抗”的视角指出，“压迫”和“被压迫”根植于资本家与工人的阶级身份，贫困来源于社会经济结构而非个体的自然差异或“任性”等主观因素。这种对历史的客观把握，为贫困者形成“阶级意识”、改变自身命运，找到了坚实的社会基础。

关键词: 黑格尔, 马克思, 贫困, 工人, 资本家