雷蒙·阿隆,一个向来以古典自由主义者自居的哲学家,他坚守着“自由”与“人权”的理念,主张积极地抵抗以苏维埃为代表的共产主义思想。作为一个历史哲学家,他没有在本文中直接反驳马克思的历史决定论,以及由这一理论衍生出来的共产主义的历史优越性。他从马克思的后学——即存在主义者和结构主义者——关于马克思经典文本的诠释入手,分析了这些学派对马克思思想的继承与偏离。由此表明,即便在马克思主义的思想阵营中,仍然存在着彼此冲突的矛盾。在他看来,这些马克思后学的争论都有其合理的来源,这些不同的诠释都体现了马克思本人的丰富性和多样性。正是如此,他才得以在对马克思后学的有保留的认同中,实现了驳斥马克思主义历史决定论的意图。 Raymond Aron, a philosopher who has always stood as a classical liberal, sticks to the concept of “freedom” and “human rights” and advocates actively opposing the communist ideology represented by the Soviets. As a philosopher of history, he did not directly refute Marx’s historical determinism in this article and the historical superiority of communism derived from this theory. He starts with the interpretation of Marx’s classic texts from Marx’s later studies - existentialist and structuralist - and analyzes the succession and deviation of Marxism from these schools. This shows that even in the ideological camp of Marxism, there still exist conflicts that conflict with each other. In his view, these Marxist post-school debates have their own reasonable sources. All these different interpretations reflect the richness and diversity of Marx himself. Only in this way did he realize his intention to refute Marxist historical determinism in his reserved identity with Marx’s later studies.