馬克思支持英國鴉片戰爭侵略中國。（Getty Images）
【新唐人2010年11月7日訊】英國殖民主義宣傳者史密斯辯稱，人類的進步是依靠大英帝國的擴張、在全球散佈“自由市場”來推動的。
另一種為英國殖民主義所作的類似辯護則是由卡爾·馬克思推動的。馬克思被稱為英帝國主義的反對者，是名不符實的，因為他的著作故意利用人們的不滿來煽動、操縱群眾。馬克思30歲時從德國移民到英國，並成為一個被英國首相Palmerston愚弄的人。
馬克思是大英帝國的“全球化”的辯護者，這一點，在他為大英帝國對印度的掠奪辯護時，便已十分明顯了。馬克思以馬基維利主義（Mandevillian）來作辯護，即，因為“資本主義” 優於“東方的專制政治”，雖然英國殖民主義的行動和意圖是邪惡的，英國的殖民主義卻使印度受益！
更為明顯的是馬克思為英國的第一次鴉片戰爭辯護。在許多關於世界革命可能性的虛張聲勢中，馬克思讚美鴉片戰爭把中國投入大混亂狀態。他聲稱英國是在推進中國的文明，通過消滅中國的古老文化，打開中國的門戶來迎接國際經濟。他甚至讚許地報導，英國的政策造成了中國這麼多失業人口，這樣中國難民才能被用來在全世界做奴隸工。
卡爾·馬克思在1853年7月22日紐約每日論壇報的一篇文章中寫道：
“無論他們認為是什麼社會、宗教、朝代、或國家形態的原因，導致了中國過往十年來的慢性反抗，以及現在聚為一體的強大變革，這個暴動的發生，無疑得益於英國的大砲將一種名叫鴉片的催眠藥品強加給中國。在英國的武力面前，滿清王朝的權威倒下成為碎片；天朝永恆的迷信破碎了；與文明世界隔絕的野蠻和密封被侵犯了；而開放則達成了，這才有了在加州和澳洲黃金吸引下急速開展的交流活動（指中國奴工被“賣豬仔”到外國採金礦）。與此同時，大英帝國的生命血液— 銀幣，便開始被吸取到英屬東印度了。
在當時的英國，主流民眾狂熱地支持第一次鴉片戰爭（而對於第二次鴉片戰爭則有遊行示威反對），作為此等種族主義的反映，馬克思為英國強迫中國吸毒一事辯護道：
“看來，歷史要先讓這些人民全部染上毒癮，然後才能讓他們從世襲的愚蠢中醒來。”
馬克思甚至辯稱，中國人有一種對鴉片的愛好：
“真的，中國人放棄鴉片，比德國人戒掉煙草更難。”
英文：
Smith, a propagandist for British colonialism, argued that human progress was advanced with the spread of this “free market” globally, through the expansion of the British Empire.
A similar defense of British colonialism was also advanced by Karl Marx. Marx has an undeserved reputation as an opponent of British imperialism, because his writings were designed to appeal to, and manipulate people, based on their grievances. Marx emigrated from Germany to England at age 30, where he became a dupe of British Prime Minister Lord Palmerston.
Marx’s role as an apologist for the British Empire’s “globalization" is explicit in his defense of the British Empire’s rape of India. Marx advanced a Mandevillian argument, that, because “capitalism" is superior to “oriental despotism", even though the intent and actions of British colonialism were evil, British colonialism benefitted India!
Even more explicit is Marx’s defense of Britain’s first Opium War. Amidst much bravado about the potential for world revolution, Marx praised the Opium War for throwing China into chaos. He claimed that Britain was advancing civilization in China, by destroying China’s old culture, and opening up China to the international economy. He even reported, approvingly, that British policies were causing such unemployment in China, that displaced Chinese workers were being used as slave labor throughout the world.
Karl Marx wrote in a July 22, 1853 article in the New York Daily Tribune:
“Whatever be the social causes, and whatever religious, dynastic, or national shape they may assume, that have brought about the chronic rebellions subsisting in China for about ten years past, and now gathered together in one formidable revolution, the occasion of this outbreak has unquestionably been afforded by the English cannon forcing upon China that soporific drug called opium. Before the British arms the authority of the Manchu dynasty fell to pieces; the superstitious faith in the Eternity of the Celestial Empire broke down; the barbarous and hermetic isolation from the civilized world was infringed; and an opening was made for that intercourse which has since proceeded so rapidly under the golden attractions of California and Australia. At the same time the silver coin of the Empire, its life-blood, began to be drained away to the British East Indies.”
Reflecting the racism which dominated England, where the majority of the population enthusiastically supported the first Opium War (there were popular demonstrations against the second Opium War), Marx defends the British-forced addiction of China:
“It would seem as though history had first to make this whole people drunk before it could rouse them out of their hereditary stupidity.”
Marx even argued that the Chinese had a disposition for opium:
“The Chinese, it is true, are no more likely to renounce the use of opium than are the Germans to forswear tobacco.”
注：
本文英文摘自：
Adam Smith and Karl Marx: Apologists for the Empire’s “Globalization”
& Karl Marx Defends British Opium War
http://american_almanac.tripod.com/opium.htm
* 卡爾·馬克思（Karl Marx）30歲時從德國移民到英國。
──轉自《阿波羅網》
