Encounter in the Void: Althusser’s Reading of Machiavelli and Trotsky’s Dual Theses
長期以來，阿圖塞和托洛茨基的思想不是被視為沒有交集，就是 彼此對立。本文藉由阿圖塞的〈馬基維利與我們〉和托洛茨基的雙重 命題，展示兩人實以同一種方式思考，共通處較其讀者或支持者所想 的多。阿圖塞文中前三節就社會形構、知識生產和政治實踐，分別討 論了馬基維利文本的三個特色：「極限思考」、「理論佈署」和「雙重 空位」。托洛茨基的命題之一「不平衡與綜合發展」凸顯了前兩個特 色，命題之二「不斷革命」則凸顯了第三個特色。阿圖塞（及其詮釋 的馬基維利）和托洛茨基皆以特定的歷史結構為前提，在易變的形勢 中靈活調動前人的理論，為困境指明出路：一個取決於偶然契機，因 而極端難成、近乎「烏托邦」的新東西。
Althusser’s and Trotsky’s thoughts have long been treated as either being short of intersection, or contradictive. Through Althusser’s “Machiavelli and Us” and Trotsky’s dual theses, this essay shows that they actually thought similarly, and they shared more commonalities than their readers or supporters have supposed. In terms of social formation, knowledge production and political practice, the first three chapters of Althusser’s essay respectively discussed three characteristics of Machiavelli’s texts: “ultimate thinking”, “theoretical dispositive” and “dual empty places”. One of Trotsky’s theses, “uneven and combined development,” highlights the first two characteristics, and another thesis, “permanent revolution,” highlights the third one. Althusser (and Machiavelli in his interpretation) and Trotsky both flexibly deployed their predecessors’ theories in variable conjunctures which were premised on certain structures of history, then presented the solutions for the predicaments: a new thing, nearly a “utopia”, which was extremely difficult to achieve and highly dependent on opportune moments.