李克勤（jixuie）题记：读《毛泽东传》里——二十二、纠“左”的努力（上），发现1958年11月到12月毛主席在河南调查人民公社化情况时，老人家是“如饥似渴”的。可见，毛主席是充满激情在工作的。相信毛主席如此激情澎湃的工作，必定会影响身边的同志。请注意，这样的激情，是革命干劲——是激情的头脑，而不是那种头脑发热，而不是盲目蛮干，相反，正是老人家亲自深入细致的调查研究，才及时发现了大量问题，要不然会怎样？
1958年11月1日毛主席外出视察途中，在河南新乡火车站接见过杨贵。
毛主席握着杨贵的手说：“林县杨贵，我知道你，你治水很有一套。”
毛主席对林县大修水利的做法给予充分肯定，老人家说： “水利是农业的命脉，要把农业搞上去，必须大搞水利。”
主席接着和杨贵有了如下对话。
问杨贵：“林县有多少人？”
答“60多万。”
问：“林县有林吗？”
答：“山上土薄石厚，原有一部分自然林，这次大办钢铁砍了不少。”
问：“办钢铁你们上了多少人？”
答：“地委让我们上15万人，我们目前只上了五六万。”
问：“五六万人怎么住啊？”
答：“都住在野地里。”
这时候毛主席表情立刻严肃起来：“五六万人住在野地里，生病的多不多？”
杨贵说：“现在还不多，但已经有了苗头。”
毛主席做了一个不赞成的手势说：“天冷了，那么多人睡在野地里，冻病了怎么办？”
杨贵的心情很沉重，他还有更焦急的事情要向毛主席汇报：“林县经过兴修水利，今年的秋粮作物获得了大丰产，可惜不能全部收回来……”
毛主席追问道：“这是怎么回事儿啊？”
答：“精壮劳力出来办钢铁，庄稼顾不上收，棉花顾不上摘。群众住在野地里，大便都用棉花擦屁股，眼看着雪白的棉花被糟蹋了。”
毛主席这时把目光转向大家：“好不容易修了水渠和水库，长了好庄稼，却没有人收。这怎么能行呢？大炼钢铁不能再上人了，已经上去的留下少数人建设小高炉，其他人马上撤下来！一部分人收庄稼，一部分人搞水利，要知道水利是农业的命脉，要把农业搞上去，必须大兴水利。”
由此可见，毛主席不是走马观花的视察，而是作深入细致的调查研究，有了调查，有了研究，他才表明自己的观点，这样才能统筹解决问题。并且，毛主席始终尊重普通老百姓，把人放在第一位，他见不得那些不把普通人当回事的人和事。这才是无产阶级的以人为本！
参阅：
毛主席哺育红旗渠工程领导者建设者：挖掘精神潜力，迸发思想活力
01
—
调查研究要有激情
革命者从事共产主义事业，这种工作是离不开激情的。
马克思、列宁在他们的论述里，经常会谈到激情——工作的激情。
马恩原著的翻译也是在不断改进，例如《马克思恩格斯文集》第一卷“《黑格尔法哲学批判》导言”，有一句话“在同这种制度进行斗争当中，批判并不是头脑的激情，而是激情的头脑”。
过去这里“头脑”是译成“理性”的。当然，头脑比理性含义更加广一些。另外，“理性的激情”，不如“头脑的激情”更符合实际。
理性和激情本身就是头脑的两种表现。
从道器变通来讲，要变，更需要激情。可变要行得通，则不能没有理性。
批判，也是一种变的形式。
马克思的意思是，要批判就得有头脑，这个头脑既要有理性，也要有激情。
激情为阳的话，那么理性就为阴，一阴一阳谓之道。
所以，马克思这句话的最新翻译是有道理的。
马克思《青年在选择职业时的考虑》里的一段话。
上初中时，我们的语文课本有一篇列宁著作《青年团的任务》（在俄国共产主义青年团第三次代表大会上的讲话）（1920年10月2日）（节选）
你们读过和听说过：主要由马克思创立的共产主义理论，共产主义科学，即马克思主义学说，已经不仅仅是19世纪一位社会主义者——虽说是天才的社会主义者——的个人著述，而成为全世界千百万无产者的学说；他们已经运用这个学说在同资本主义作斗争。如果你们要问，为什么马克思的学说能够掌握最革命阶级的千百万人的心灵，那你们只能得到一个回答：这是因为马克思依靠了人类在资本主义制度下所获得的全部知识的坚固基础；马克里研究了人类社会发展的规律，认识到资本主义的发展必然导致共产主义，而主要的是他完全依据对资本主义社会所作的最确切、最缜密和最深刻的研究，借助于充分掌握以往的科学所提供的全部知识而证实了这个结论。凡是人类社会所创造的一切，他都有批判地重新加以探讨，任何一点也没有忽略过去。凡是人类思想所建树的一切，他都放在工人运动中检验过，重新加以探讨，加以批判，从而得出了那些被资产阶级狭隘性所限制或被资产阶级偏见束缚住的人所不能得出的结论。
例如，当我们谈到无产阶级文化的时候，就必须注意这一点。应当明确地认识到，只有确切地了解人类全部发展过程所创造的文化，只有对这种文化加以改造，才能建设无产阶级的文化，没有这样的认识，我们就不能完成这项任务。无产阶级文化并不是从天上掉下来的，也不是那些自命为无产阶级文化专家的人杜撰出来的。如果硬说是这样，那完全是一派胡言。无产阶级文化应当是人类在资本主义社会、地主社会和官僚社会压迫下创造出来的全部知识合乎规律的发展。条条大道小路一向通往，而且还会通往无产阶级文化，正如马克思改造过的政治经济学向我们指明人类社会必然走到那一步，指明必然过渡到阶级斗争，过渡到开始无产阶级革命。
我们不需要死记硬背，但是我们需要用对基本事实的了解来发展和增进每个学习者的思考力，因为不把学到的全部知识融会贯通，共产主义就会变成空中楼阁，就会成为一块空招牌，共产主义者也只会是一些吹牛家。你们不仅应该掌握知识，而且应该用批判的态度来掌握这些知识，不是用一堆无用的垃圾来充塞自己的头脑，而是用对一切事实的了解来丰富自己的头脑，没有这种了解就不可能成为一个现代有学识的人。如果一个共产主义者不下一番极认真、极艰苦而巨大的工夫，不弄清他必须用批判的态度来对待的事实，便想根据自己学到的共产主义的现成结论来炫耀一番，这样的共产主义者是很可悲的。这种不求甚解的态度是极端有害的。要是知道自己懂得太少，那就要设法使自己懂得多一些，但是如果有人说自己是共产主义者，同时又认为自己根本不需要任何扎实的知识，那他就根本不能成为共产主义者。
我们废除资产阶级社会内违反大多数人的意志而实行的强迫纪律，代之以工农的自觉纪律，工人和农民不但仇恨旧社会，而且有毅力、有本领、有决心团结和组织力量去进行这一斗争，以便把散居在辽阔国土上的分散而互不联系的千百万人的意志统一为一个意志，因为没有这样的统一意志，我们就必然会遭到失败，没有这样的团结，没有这样的工农的自觉纪律，我们的事业就毫无希望。不具备这些条件，我们就不能战胜全世界的资本家和地主。我们就会连基础也不能巩固，更谈不到在这个基础上建成共产主义新社会了。同样，我们否定旧学校，对旧学校怀着完全正当和必要的仇恨心理，珍视那种要摧毁旧学校的决心，但是我们应当了解，废除以前的死读书、死记硬背和强迫纪律时，必须善于吸取人类的全部知识，并要使你们学到的共产主义不是生吞活剥的东西，而是经过你们深思熟虑的东西，是从现代教育观点上看来必然的结论。
我们在谈论学好共产主义这一任务时就应该这样来提出基本任务。
The old schools provided purely book knowledge; they compelled their pupils to assimilate a mass of useless, superfluous and barren knowledge, which cluttered up the brain and turned the younger generation into bureaucrats regimented according to a single pattern. But it would mean falling into a grave error for you to try to draw the conclusion that one can become a Communist without assimilating the wealth of knowledge amassed by mankind. It would be mistaken to think it sufficient to learn communist slogans and the conclusions of communist science, without acquiring that sum of knowledge of which communism itself is a result. Marxism is an example which shows how communism arose out of the sum of human knowledge.
You have read and heard that communist theory -- the science of communism created in the main by Marx, this doctrine of Marxism -- has ceased to be the work of a single socialist of the nineteenth century, even though he was a genius, and that it has become the doctrine of millions and tens of millions of proletarians all over the world, who are applying it in their struggle against capitalism. If you were to ask why the teachings of Marx have been able to win the hearts and minds of millions and tens of millions of the most revolutionary class, you would receive only one answer: it was because Marx based his work on the firm foundation of the human knowledge acquired under capitalism. After making a study of the laws governing the development of human society, Marx realised the inevitability of capitalism developing towards communism. What is most important is that he proved this on the sole basis of a most precise, detailed and profound study of this capitalist society, by fully assimilating all that earlier science had produced. He critically reshaped everything that had been created by human society, without ignoring a single detail. He reconsidered, subjected to criticism, and verified on the working-class movement everything that human thinking had created, and therefrom formulated conclusions which people hemmed in by bourgeois limitations or bound by bourgeois prejudices could not draw.
We must bear this in mind when, for example, we talk about proletarian culture. We shall be unable to solve this problem unless we clearly realise that only a precise knowledge and transformation of the culture created by the entire development of mankind will enable us to create a proletarian culture. The latter is not clutched out of thin air; it is not an invention of those who call themselves experts in proletarian culture. That is all nonsense. Proletarian culture must be the logical development of the store of knowledge mankind has accumulated under the yoke of capitalist, landowner and bureaucratic society. All these roads have been leading, and will continue to lead up to proletarian culture, in the same way as political economy, as reshaped by Marx, has shown us what human society must arrive at, shown us the passage to the class struggle, to the beginning of the proletarian revolution.
When we so often hear representatives of the youth, as well as certain advocates of a new system of education, attacking the old schools, claiming that they used the system of cramming, we say to them that we must take what was good in the old schools. We must not borrow the system of encumbering young people's minds with an immense acount of knowledge, nine-tenths of which was useless and one-tenth distorted. This, however, does not mean that we can restrict ourselves to communist conclusions and learn only communist slogans. You will not create communism that way.
We have no need of cramming, but we do need to develop and perfect the mind of every student with a knowledge of fundamental facts. Communism will become an empty word, a mere signboard, and a Communist a mere boaster, if all the knowledge he has acquired is not digested in his mind. You should not merely assimilate this knowledge, but assimilate it critically, so as not to cram your mind with useless lumber, but enrich it with all those facts that are indispensable to the well-educated man of today. If a Communist took it into his head to boast about his communism becaused of the cut-and-dried conclusions he had acquired, without putting in a great deal of serious and hard work and without understanding facts he should examine critically, he would be a deplorable Communist indeed. Such superficiality would be decidedly fatal. If I know that I know little, I shall strive to learn more; but if a man says that he is a Communist and that he need not know anything thoroughly, he will never become anything like a Communist.
The old schools produced servants needed by the capitalists; the old schools turned men of science into men who had to write and say whatever pleased the capitalists. We must therefore abolish them. But does the fact that we must abolish them, destroy them, mean that we should not take from them everything mankind has accumulated that is essential to man? Does it mean that we do not have to distinguish between what was necessary to capitalism and what is necessary to communism?
We are replacing the old drill-sergeant methods practised in bourgeois society, against the will of the majority, with the class-conscious discipline of the workers and peasants, who combine hatred of the old society with a determination, ability and readiness to unite and organise their forces for this struggle so as to forge the wills of millions and hundreds of millions of people -- disunited, and scattered over the territory of a huge country -- into a single will, without which defeat is inevitable. Without this solidarity, without this conscious descipline of the workers and peasants, our cause is hopeless. Without this, we shall be unable to vanquish the capitalists and landowners of the whole world. We shall not even consolidate the foundation, let alone build a new, communist society on that foundation. Likewise, while condemning the old schools, while harbouring an absolutely justified and necessary hatred for the old schools, and appreciating the readiness to destroy them, we must realise that we must replace the old system of instruction, the old cramming and the old drill, with an ability to acquire the sum total of human knowledge, and to acquire it in such a way that communism shall not be something to be learned by rote, but something that you yourselves have thought over, something that will embody conclusions inevitable from the standpoint of present-day education.
That is the way the main tasks should be presented when we speak of the aim: learn communism.
李克勤小结：
读马恩列斯毛的原著，看来既是当务之急，也是长久之计。辨别真假马克思主义，在任何时候都不会是多余的。因此，经常性的感悟马克思之道，就显得格外重要。变道也许是难免的，但道变则是需要时刻警惕的。道器变通，作为一个哲学命题，作为一种实践模式的概述，我和越来越多的学生，有了共识。
相关文章
「 支持！」
WYZXWK.COM
您的打赏将用于网站日常运行与维护。
帮助我们办好网站，宣传红色文化！
欢迎扫描下方二维码，订阅网刊微信公众号
