![](\"images\/stories\/karl_marx.jpg\")
\u00d6NS\u00d6Z<\/p>\n\u00d6NS\u00d6Z<\/p>\n
Frans\u0131z-Alman Y\u0131ll\u0131klar\u0131’nda, Hegel’in Hukuk Felsefesinin bir ele\u015ftirisi bi\u00e7imi alt\u0131nda, hukuk bilimi ile siyasal bilimin ele\u015ftirisini haber vermi\u015ftim.[1]\u00a0 Elyazmas\u0131n\u0131 bask\u0131 i\u00e7in haz\u0131rlarken,[2]\u00a0 kurgusal felsefeden ba\u015fka bir konusu olmayan ele\u015ftiriyi,[3]\u00a0 \u00e7e\u015fitli konular\u0131n ele\u015ftirisine kar\u0131\u015ft\u0131rman\u0131n b\u00fcsb\u00fct\u00fcn (sayfa 91) yersiz oldu\u011fu, ve bu kar\u0131\u015f\u0131m\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131klamay\u0131 engelleyip anla\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 g\u00fc\u00e7le\u015ftirdi\u011fi ortaya \u00e7\u0131kt\u0131. Ayr\u0131ca, incelenecek konular\u0131n zenginlik ve \u00e7e\u015fitlili\u011fi, bunlar\u0131n tek bir yap\u0131t i\u00e7inde toplanmas\u0131na ancak \u00f6zdeyi\u015fler (aphorismes) bi\u00e7imi alt\u0131nda izin verirdi, ve bu t\u00fcrl\u00fc bir a\u00e7\u0131klama y\u00f6ntemi, keyfe ba\u011fl\u0131 bir sistemle\u015ftirme g\u00f6r\u00fcn\u00fc\u015f\u00fcne b\u00fcr\u00fcn\u00fcrd\u00fc. Bu nedenle, hukuk, sa\u011ft\u00f6re, siyaset, vb. ele\u015ftirisini, ayr\u0131 ayr\u0131 bro\u015f\u00fcrler bi\u00e7imi alt\u0131nda, ardard\u0131na verecek, ve tamamlamak i\u00e7in, \u00f6zel bir \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmada, b\u00fct\u00fcn\u00fcn zincirleni\u015fini, \u00e7e\u015fitli b\u00f6l\u00fcmlerin birbirleri aras\u0131ndaki ili\u015fkiyi kurmaya \u00e7al\u0131\u015facak, ve bitirmek i\u00e7in de, kurgusal felsefenin bu gere\u00e7 \u00fczerinde \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma bi\u00e7imini ele\u015ftirece\u011fim.[4]\u00a0 Bu nedenle, sunulan yap\u0131tta, ekonomi politi\u011fin devlet, sa\u011ft\u00f6re, uygar ya\u015fam ile ili\u015fkileri, ancak ekonomi politik bu konulara ex-professo[1*]
Ekonomi politik ile yak\u0131nl\u0131\u011f\u0131 bulunan okur i\u00e7in, daha ba\u015fta, sonu\u00e7lar\u0131m\u0131n, ekonomi politi\u011fin \u00f6zenli bir ele\u015ftirel irdelemesine dayanan tamamen deneyci (empirique) bir \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcmleme \u00fcr\u00fcn\u00fc olduklar\u0131n\u0131 s\u00f6yleme gereksinmesini duymuyorum.[5]
{[6]\u00a0 Buna kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131k, olumlu ele\u015ftiricinin kafas\u0131na, “\u00fctopyac\u0131 bo\u015f s\u00f6zler” form\u00fcl\u00fcn\u00fc, ya da “kesenkes kat\u0131ks\u0131z, kesenkes kararl\u0131, kesenkes ele\u015ftirel ele\u015ftiri”, “sadece hukuksal de\u011fil, ama toplumsal, tamamen toplumsal toplum”, “kaba ve t\u0131k\u0131z y\u0131\u011f\u0131n”, “kendilerini kaba y\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n s\u00f6zc\u00fcleri yapan s\u00f6zc\u00fcler” gibi bo\u015f s\u00f6zleri atarak eksiksiz bilgisizli\u011fi ile d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnce yoksullu\u011funu saklamaya \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan ele\u015ftiriciye ise, ilkin tanr\u0131bilimsel aile i\u015fleri d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda, d\u00fcnyasal i\u015flerde de s\u00f6yleyecek s\u00f6z\u00fcn\u00fcn bulundu\u011funun kan\u0131t\u0131n\u0131 vermesi kal\u0131yor.}[7] (sayfa 92)
Frans\u0131z ve \u0130ngiliz sosyalistlerinden ba\u015fka, elbette Alman sosyalistlerinin \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmalar\u0131ndan da yararland\u0131m. Bununla birlikte, bilimin bu b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcndeki \u00f6zl\u00fc ve \u00f6zg\u00fcn Alman \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmalar\u0131, \u2014Weitling’in[8]\u00a0 yap\u0131tlar\u0131 d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda\u2014, Hess’in 21 Yaprak’ta[9]\u00a0 ya\u015fanm\u0131\u015f makaleleri ile, Engels’in, benim de bu irdelemenin ilk \u00f6\u011felerini \u00e7ok genel bir taslak bi\u00e7iminde yay\u0131mlad\u0131\u011f\u0131m Frans\u0131z-Alman Y\u0131ll\u0131klar\u0131’ndaki “Ekonomi Politi\u011fin Bir Ele\u015ftiri Denemesi”ne[10]\u00a0 indirgenirler.
{Genel olarak olumlu ele\u015ftiri, \u00f6yleyse ekonomi politi\u011fin olumlu Alman ele\u015ftirisi de, ger\u00e7ek temelini, ekonomi politi\u011fi ele\u015ftirici bir bi\u00e7imde incelemi\u015f bulunan bu yazarlara oldu\u011fu kadar, Feuerbach’\u0131n bulgular\u0131na da bor\u00e7ludur; onun Gelece\u011fin Felsefesi[11]\u00a0 ve Anekdota’lardaki[12]\u00a0 “Felsefe Reformu \u0130\u00e7in Savlar”\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131, \u2014bunlardan sessiz sedas\u0131z yararlan\u0131lmas\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131n\u2014, kimilerinin soysuz k\u0131skan\u00e7l\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve kimilerinin de ger\u00e7ek \u00f6fkesi, ger\u00e7ek bir susku komplosu \u00f6rg\u00fctlemi\u015fe benzerler.}
Olumlu insanc\u0131 (humaniste) ve do\u011falc\u0131 (naturaliste) (sayfa 93) ele\u015ftiri, ancak Feuerbach ile ba\u015flar. Feuerbach’\u0131n yap\u0131tlar\u0131n\u0131n etkisi, ne kadar az g\u00fcr\u00fclt\u00fcc\u00fc ise, o kadar g\u00fcvenli, derin, geni\u015f ve s\u00fcreklidir, ve bunlar, Hegel’in G\u00f6r\u00fcng\u00fcbilim ile Mant\u0131k’\u0131ndan[13]\u00a0 bu yana, ger\u00e7ek bir kuramsal devrim i\u00e7eren tek yaz\u0131lard\u0131r.
Bu yap\u0131t\u0131n son b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcne, Hegel diyalekti\u011fi ve genel olarak Hegel felsefesinin ele\u015ftirel \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcmlenmesine gelince, ben, bunu, \u00e7a\u011f\u0131m\u0131z\u0131n ele\u015ftireltanr\u0131bilimlerine[14]\u00a0 kar\u015f\u0131t olarak, son derece zorunlu say\u0131yorum, \u00e7\u00fcnk\u00fc bu t\u00fcrl\u00fc bir \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma yap\u0131lmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r \u2014 bu, ka\u00e7\u0131n\u0131lmaz bir ciddilik yoksunlu\u011fudur, \u00e7\u00fcnk\u00fc ele\u015ftirici de olsa, tanr\u0131bilimci tanr\u0131bilimci olarak kal\u0131r; \u00f6yleyse, o ya bir yetke olarak felsefenin belirli konutlar\u0131ndan (postulats) yola \u00e7\u0131kacakt\u0131r, ya da, ele\u015ftiri s\u0131ras\u0131nda, ve ba\u015fkas\u0131n\u0131n bulgular\u0131 sonucu, e\u011fer felsefi konutlar\u0131 \u00fczerinde ku\u015fku duyarsa, onlar\u0131 korkak\u00e7a ve do\u011frulamaks\u0131z\u0131n iteler, bir yana b\u0131rak\u0131r, bu konulara olan ba\u011f\u0131ml\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ve bu ba\u011f\u0131ml\u0131l\u0131ktan duydu\u011fu cans\u0131k\u0131nt\u0131s\u0131n\u0131, art\u0131k ancak olumsuz, bilin\u00e7ten yoksun ve safsatac\u0131 bir bi\u00e7imde g\u00f6sterir.
{[II] \u0130ster kendi \u00f6z ele\u015ftirisinin ar\u0131l\u0131k g\u00fcvencesini durmadan yenilesin, ister, g\u00f6zlemcinin ya da kendinin g\u00f6z\u00fcn\u00fc, ele\u015ftirinin kendi k\u00f6keni ile \u2014Hegel diyalekti\u011fi ve genel olarak Alman felsefesi\u2014 zorunlu hesapla\u015fmas\u0131ndan, modern ele\u015ftiri i\u00e7in o kendi \u00f6z darl\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve ilkel do\u011fas\u0131 \u00fczerine y\u00fckselme zorunlulu\u011fundan \u00e7evirmek i\u00e7in, daha \u00e7ok ele\u015ftirinin kendi-kendisi d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda, ancak ele\u015ftirinin s\u0131n\u0131rl\u0131 bir bi\u00e7imi \u2014s\u00f6zgeli\u015fi 18. y\u00fczy\u0131l ele\u015ftirisi\u2014 ve y\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n s\u0131n\u0131rl\u0131 anlay\u0131\u015f\u0131 ile u\u011fra\u015fmaktan ba\u015fka yapacak bir i\u015fi olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 yan\u0131lsamas\u0131n\u0131 vermeye \u00e7al\u0131\u015fs\u0131n, [o] bunu ancak olumsuz ve bilin\u00e7ten yoksun bir bi\u00e7imde d\u0131\u015favurur. Son olarak, kendi \u00f6z felsefi konutlar\u0131n\u0131n do\u011fas\u0131 \u00fczerine bulgular yap\u0131ldi\u011fi zaman \u2014Feuerbach’\u0131n bulgular\u0131 gibi\u2014, ele\u015ftirel tanr\u0131bilimci ya kendine bunlar\u0131 (sayfa 94)kendi ba\u015f\u0131na ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirmi\u015f g\u00f6r\u00fcn\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fc verir, ve \u00fcstelik bu i\u015fi, bu bulgular\u0131n sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131, onlar\u0131 i\u015fleyememeksizin, belgiler bi\u00e7imi alt\u0131nda, hen\u00fcz felsefenin tutsa\u011f\u0131 bulunan yazarlar\u0131n kafas\u0131na atarak yapar. Ya da, belki Hegel’in diyalektik \u00f6\u011feleri aras\u0131ndaki, bu ele\u015ftiride [Feuerbach ele\u015ftirisi] bulamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 i\u00e7in \u00fcz\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fc ya da bunun ele\u015ftirel kullan\u0131m\u0131n\u0131n hen\u00fcz kendisine sunulmam\u0131\u015f bulundu\u011fu do\u011fru ili\u015fkiyi k\u0131namaya \u00e7al\u0131\u015farak ya da buna yetenekli olarak de\u011fil, ama bu bulgular\u0131, hegelci diyalekti\u011fin bu ele\u015ftirisine kar\u015f\u0131, \u00f6rne\u011fin kendi k\u00f6keni kendinde bulunan olumlu do\u011fruluk kategorisine kar\u015f\u0131 dolayl\u0131 tan\u0131t kategorisi gibi, kendine \u00f6zg\u00fc tikel bir bi\u00e7im alt\u0131nda, gizli kapakl\u0131, k\u0131l\u0131k de\u011fi\u015ftirmi\u015f, i\u00e7ten pazarl\u0131kl\u0131, ku\u015fkucu bir bi\u00e7imde ileri s\u00fcrerek, kendine bu bulgular \u00fczerindeki y\u00fcksekli\u011finin bilincini vermesini bilir. Ger\u00e7ekte tanr\u0131bilimsel ele\u015ftirici, kendini safl\u0131k \u00fczerinde, kararl\u0131l\u0131k \u00fczerinde, t\u00fcm ele\u015ftirel ele\u015ftiri \u00fczerinde geveze g\u00f6sterebilmek i\u00e7in, felsefi y\u00f6nde, her \u015feyin yap\u0131lacak olmas\u0131n\u0131 \u00e7ok do\u011fal bulur, ve e\u011fer raslant\u0131 sonucu Hegel’in bir \u00f6\u011fesinin Feuerbach’ta eksik oldu\u011fu duygusunu edinirse, kendi kendine felsefenin ger\u00e7ek fatihi oldu\u011fu izlenimini verir; \u00e7\u00fcnk\u00fc bizim tanr\u0131bilimsel ele\u015ftiricimiz, tinselci “Kendinin bilinci” ve “Tin” putataparl\u0131\u011f\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131n, duyguyu a\u015f\u0131p da bilince y\u00fckselemez.}
\u0130yi bak\u0131l\u0131rsa, tanr\u0131bilimsel ele\u015ftiri \u2014hareketin ba\u015f\u0131nda ger\u00e7ek bir ilerleme u\u011fra\u011f\u0131 (moment) olmu\u015f olmas\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131n\u2014 onun \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcmlemede, felsefenin ve \u00f6zellikle Hegel’in eski a\u015fk\u0131nl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n (transcendance) tanr\u0131bilimsel karikat\u00fcr\u00fcne kadar g\u00f6t\u00fcr\u00fclm\u00fc\u015f en sivri u\u00e7 ve mant\u0131ksal sonucundan ba\u015fka bir \u015fey de\u011fildir. Bir ba\u015fka olanakta, her zaman felsefenin \u00e7\u00fcr\u00fcm\u00fc\u015f k\u00f6\u015fesi olmu\u015f olan tanr\u0131bilimi, felsefenin olumsuz bozulmas\u0131n\u0131 \u2014yani koku\u015fma s\u00fcrecini de\u2014 kendinde orunlamaya atayan tarihin o ilgin\u00e7 t\u00fczesini, o tarihsel Nemesis’i[2*] ayr\u0131nt\u0131l\u0131 bir bi\u00e7imde g\u00f6sterece\u011fim. (sayfa 95)
{Buna kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131k, Feuerbach’\u0131n felsefesinin \u00f6z\u00fc \u00fczerindeki bulgular\u0131n\u0131n \u2014hi\u00e7 de\u011filse onlar\u0131 kan\u0131t olarak kullanmak i\u00e7in\u2014 felsefi diyalektik ile bir hesapla\u015fmay\u0131 her zaman ne \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde zorunlu k\u0131ld\u0131klar\u0131, a\u00e7\u0131klayaca\u011f\u0131m \u015feylerden anla\u015f\u0131lacakt\u0131r.} (sayfa 96) de\u011findi\u011fi kadar\u0131yla incelenecektir.<\/p>\n
Karl Marks \u00d6ns\u00f6z’\u00fcn Dipnotlar\u0131<\/strong><\/p>\n [1] Marx burada, Frans\u0131z-Alman Y\u0131ll\u0131klar\u0131’nda yay\u0131nlanm\u0131\u015f bulunan: “Hegel’in Hukuk Felsefesinin Ele\u015ftirisine Katk\u0131. Giri\u015f” (bkz: K. Marx, F. Engels, Din \u00dczerine Sol Yay\u0131nlar\u0131, Ankara 1976, s. 37-55) ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 makalesine an\u0131\u015ft\u0131rmada bulunuyor. \u00d6NS\u00d6Z Frans\u0131z-Alman Y\u0131ll\u0131klar\u0131’nda, Hegel’in Hukuk Felsefesinin bir ele\u015ftirisi bi\u00e7imi alt\u0131nda, hukuk bilimi ile siyasal bilimin ele\u015ftirisini haber vermi\u015ftim.[1]\u00a0 Elyazmas\u0131n\u0131 bask\u0131 i\u00e7in haz\u0131rlarken,[2]\u00a0 kurgusal felsefeden ba\u015fka bir konusu olmayan ele\u015ftiriyi,[3]\u00a0 \u00e7e\u015fitli konular\u0131n ele\u015ftirisine kar\u0131\u015ft\u0131rman\u0131n b\u00fcsb\u00fct\u00fcn (sayfa 91) yersiz oldu\u011fu, ve bu kar\u0131\u015f\u0131m\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131klamay\u0131 engelleyip anla\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 g\u00fc\u00e7le\u015ftirdi\u011fi ortaya \u00e7\u0131kt\u0131. Ayr\u0131ca, incelenecek konular\u0131n zenginlik ve \u00e7e\u015fitlili\u011fi, bunlar\u0131n tek […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[38],"tags":[],"class_list":{"0":"post-306","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","6":"category-elyazmalari-1844-karl-marx"},"yoast_head":"\n
1844 Elyazmalar\u0131
Ekonomi Politik ve Felsefe
Manuscrits de 1844 – Economie Politique et Philosophie (Editions Sociales, Paris 1962)
[T\u00fcrk\u00e7e bask\u0131, 1844 Elyazmalar\u0131, Ekonomi Politik ve Felsefe, s: 89-268, Sol Yay\u0131nlar\u0131, Temmuz 1976, \u00c7ev.Kenan Somer]<\/em><\/p>\n
[2] Marx’\u0131n burada 1843 yaz\u0131 i\u00e7inde yazd\u0131\u011f\u0131, ama ancak 1927’de yay\u0131nlanm\u0131\u015f bulunan Hegel’in Hukuk Felsefesinin Ele\u015ftirisine Katk\u0131’y\u0131 d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnmesi olas\u0131d\u0131r.
[3] Marx, kurgusal felsefeden (“kurgu” terimini de ayn\u0131 anlamda kullan\u0131r), Hegel felsefesini anlar.
[4] Bu plan hi\u00e7 bir zaman ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmedi, ama Kutsal Aile il>e Alman \u0130deolojisi, Hegel felsefesinin ele\u015ftirisine birer katk\u0131 da say\u0131labilirler.
[5] Marx, Paris’te, bir\u00e7ok iktisadi yap\u0131t inceledi. Not ve \u00f6zetleri, MEGA I, c. 3, s. 437-583 i\u00e7inde yay\u0131mland\u0131.
[6] Elyazmas\u0131nda Marx taraf\u0131ndan dikey bir \u00e7izgi ile \u00e7izilmi\u015f par\u00e7alar, burada {}aras\u0131ndad\u0131r.
[1*] \u00d6zellikle -\u00e7.
[7] Marx burada Allgemeine Literatur-Zeitung’u (Charlottenburg 1844) yay\u0131mlayan Bruno Bauer’den s\u00f6zediyor. T\u0131rnak i\u00e7indeki form\u00fcller, Bauer’in 1. ve 8. say\u0131lardaki makalelerinden al\u0131nm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bu gazete ile ele\u015ftirel Ele\u015ftiri toplulu\u011fu, ‘Kutsal Aile’de daha derinle\u015ftirilm\u0131\u015f bir polemi\u011fin konusu olacaklard\u0131r.
[8] Terzi Wilhelm Weitling, proletaryan\u0131n kurtulu\u015funu haber veren ilk Almanlardan biri oldu. Weitling, 1838’de Oldu\u011fu ve Olmas\u0131 Gerekti\u011fi Gibi \u0130nsanl\u0131k, 1842’de Uyum ve \u00d6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn G\u00fcvenceleri ve 1843’te de Yoksul Bir G\u00fcnahkar\u0131n \u0130ncili adl\u0131 yap\u0131tlar\u0131n\u0131 yay\u0131mlad\u0131.
[9] Z\u00fcrich’te, 1843 y\u0131l\u0131nda Georg Herwegh taraf\u0131ndan yay\u0131mlanan Einundzwanzig Bogen aus der Schweiz, M. Hess’den \u00fc\u00e7 makale i\u00e7eriyordu: “Sosyalizm ve Kom\u00fcnizm”, “Bir ve B\u00fct\u00fcn Bir \u00d6zg\u00fcrl\u00fck”, “Eylem Felsefesi”.
[10] Engels’in, Marx’ta ekonomi politi\u011fe kar\u015f\u0131 bir ilgi uyand\u0131rd\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u00f6ylenen \u00fcnl\u00fc makalesi. (Ad\u0131 ge\u00e7en makalenin \u00e7evirisi bu yap\u0131t\u0131n “Ekler” b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcnde sunulmaktad\u0131r.)
[11] Ludwig Feuerbach, Grunds\u00e4tze der Philosophie der Zukunft, Z\u00fcrich und Winterthur 1843.
[12] Anekdota zur neuesten deutschen Philosophie und Publizistik, Z\u00fcrich-Winterthur 1843. Ruge taraf\u0131ndan yay\u0131mlanan bu dergi, Alman Y\u0131ll\u0131klar\u0131 yaz\u0131kurulu sans\u00fcr\u00fc taraf\u0131ndan geri \u00e7evrilen t\u00fcm makalelere, sayfalar\u0131nda yer veriyordu. Bu makaleler aras\u0131nda, Feuerbach’\u0131n, \u00f6zs\u00f6zler bi\u00e7imi alt\u0131nda, sonradan Gelece\u011fin Felsefesi’nde geli\u015ftirilmi\u015f bulunan ba\u015fl\u0131ca fikirlerini sunan “Vorl\u00e4ufige Thesen zur Reform der Philosophie”leri de yer al\u0131yordu.
[13] Tinin G\u00f6r\u00fcng\u00fcbilimi, 1807’de; Mant\u0131k Bilimi, 1812’de yay\u0131mland\u0131.
[14] Marx, burada, Bruno Bauer’in, sol-hegelcili\u011fin idealist \u00f6\u011felerini biraraya getiren Allgemeine Literatur Zeitung’daki arkada\u015flar\u0131na an\u0131\u015ft\u0131rmada bulunur
[2*] \u00d6\u00e7 tanr\u0131\u00e7as\u0131. -\u00e7<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"