论文部分内容阅读
继某省把12名私营企业老板评选为劳动模范之后,某大城市在今年五一节前,把2名私营企业老板评选为劳动模范。该市某位负责人就此连续发表两篇文章,极力推崇。他的主要观点是:第一,私企老板当劳模“在政治上是一个重大的突破”,“劳动者的称号,对于广大非公企业老板来说,也是当之无愧的”;第二,“两个人的当选澄清了一个重大的理论问题——非公有经济人士是社会主义劳动者的一部分”;第三,“建设者的称号,对于广大非公有企业老板来说是当之无愧的”。这些论点是否正确?回答只能是否定的。1.所谓私企老板当劳模是政治上的重大突破,这究竟是突破了过时了的旧框框,还是突破了经过长期实践证明为正确的政治结论?我认为,显然是属于后者而不是前者。无论是从我国《宪法》的明文规定,还是从党和国家重要领导人的一系列重要讲话中,我们都可以得出如下几条政治结论:一是私营企业主不是社会主义劳动者,不是工人阶级的一员。因而,他们根本没有资格当工人阶级中的优秀代表——劳动模范。二是私营企业主
Following the appraisal of 12 private-sector employers as model workers in a province, a large city named two private-sector employers as model workers before May 1 this year. A responsible person in this city published two articles in a row, highly respected. His main points of view are: First, the private-owned boss as a model worker is “a major breakthrough in politics” and “the title of laborer is well-deserved for the majority of non-public-sector employers.” Second, “two people The election has clarified a major theoretical issue - the non-public economy is part of the socialist laborers. ”Third,“ the builder's title is well deserved for the vast majority of non-public sector employers. ” Are these arguments correct? The answer can only be negative. 1. What is a private-owned boss When the model worker is a major political breakthrough, does this break through the outdated old frame or break through the political conclusion proved to be correct through long-term practice? I think it obviously belongs to the latter, not the former. Whether from the express provisions of the “Constitution” of our country or from a series of important speeches made by the important leaders of the Party and the state, we can draw the following political conclusions: First, the private entrepreneurs are not socialist laborers or workers A class member. Therefore, they are not qualified at all to be good representatives of the working class - working models. Second, private entrepreneurs