Abstract: In his critique of modern political philosophy based on natural principles, Rousseau emphasizes that modern society and its unequal relationships have led people to spiritual poverty, and points out that private properties are the main cause of the contradiction between rich and poor and the state of slavery in the process of reconstructing the theory of social history. Although Rousseau focuses on criticizing the issue of wealth inequality caused by private property rights, he cannot escape the recognition of private properties but advocates the reconstruction of a moral and politicalcentered society on the basis of private property rights, thus forming the “Rousseaus paradox”. In inheriting while criticizing Rousseaus political philosophy, Marx not only recognizes the deep causes of human alienation, but also clarifies the ineffectiveness of moral and political theory from the perspective of the proletariat, and then points out that only by eliminating private ownership and rebuilding individual ownership can human liberation and the truly equality of social relationships be realized. This is not only Marxs transcendence of the “Rousseaus paradox”, but also the core essence of Marxs political philosophy.

Key words: moral politics, human liberation, Rousseaus paradox, political philosophy

摘要： 在对以自然原则为核心的近代政治哲学批判中，卢梭强调现代社会及其不平等关系使人陷入精神贫困之中，并且在重构社会历史理论的过程中指出私有财产是造成贫富矛盾以及奴役状态的主要原因。尽管卢梭着重批判了私有财产权所导致的贫富分化问题，但是他却无法摆脱对私有财产的承认，主张在私有财产权的基础上重建以道德政治为核心的社会，由此形成“卢梭悖论”。在对卢梭政治哲学的继承与批判中，马克思不仅认识到人的异化的深层原因，而且从无产阶级视角阐明道德政治的无效性，进而指出只有通过消灭私有制和重建个人所有制，才能实现人类解放和真正平等的社会关系。这既是马克思对“卢梭悖论”的超越，也是马克思政治哲学的核心要义。

关键词: 道德政治, 人类解放, 卢梭悖论, 政治哲学