本文簡述黑格爾《法律哲學大綱》一書的內涵、要點，與馬克思對黑格爾國家學說的批評。全文共分為九段。首先析述黑格爾並非保守的法政哲學家，也非普魯士的御用學者。他反對君權神授的說法，但有限度接受當代自由主義的思潮。接著本文檢視《法律哲學大鋼》的結構，觀察當中黑格爾對於政府、國家、憲法的設計。其中他認為政府包含皇冠（君王）、行政（中央政府）與立法（等級議會），而等級議會則採兩院制，不過他卻反對藉由公開選舉的民主政制。在1843年青年馬克思先對黑格爾《法律哲學大鋼》涉及倫理生活的部分進行批判，而這篇批判的長稿成為他後半生研究的起點，他也在此由唯心主義轉向唯物主義，由哲學人類學轉向政治經濟學。有別於部分學者認為這是青年與成年馬克思學說的分野，甚至是他本人「認識論的斷裂」，我們則認為他並未因遭逢普魯士的迫害而全然轉向，而是對黑格爾的學說與社經實狀有了更明確的認識，進而對黑格爾的國家理論提出批判。他攻擊黑格爾錯將主詞和述語誤置。藉由費爾巴哈的轉型批判法，馬克思批評黑氏理論中的長子繼承制，也揭穿他頭腳倒立的錯誤。他主張人是「種類之物」，也是「政治動物」。他指出現代國家的特徵是將民間社會與政治社會合而為一消弭社會與個人利益的衝突，但反對黑格爾所指四種導致國家統一的制度或機關，特別是長子繼承制。馬克思認為和產的正面取消（揚棄），是全人類獲得解放的先決條件。他也認為國家應當逐漸消亡。有別於黑格爾認為國家是理性的體現和本質與誤認官僚體系是普遍階級，馬克思對普勞階級的社會地位予以肯定與寄予開創歷史的厚望，進而提出經由普勞階級革命、奪取政權，做為求取全人類的解放之手段。其後在《巴黎手稿》(1844)中，他分辨粗糙的共產主義與揚棄和產的和異化的共產主義，他認為真正的共產主義是各種人類衝突「真正的解決」，也是「人類歷史之謎的解答」，顯見他深受費爾巴哈哲學人類學的影響。青年馬克思在1843-1844年間的心路歷程之歷練，可說是思維上的摸索與探察，是黑格爾思維體系的深化。最後，馬克思並未全然拋棄黑格爾的唯心主義。反之，在他的思想體系，乃至其後的西方馬克思主義，我們都發現黑格爾觀念論扮演重要的角色。其中對黑氏學說的批判，萌生馬克思產生取消和產與克服異化的觀點，也是他走上哲學的共產主義之開端。

This essay deals with the main content, structure and purpose of Hegel's principal political work-The Philosophy of Right (1821)-and Marx's criticism. It consists of nine parts. At first, the authors points out that Hegel despite his speculative philosophy and his guarded support of Christian tenets, is not a conservative, let alone a reactionary political thinker. He was opposed to the divine right of the monarch and inclined toward the liberalism then prevailed in Western Europe. In his major political and legal writing he designed the ideal form of government and the state, in which the crown, executive and Estates respectively played a vital role. He disapproved the universal suffrage as the direct way to establish democracy. The distinction between civil and political society characterizes the modern national state. For him the Assembly of Estates represents the aggregate interests of civil society. In the summer of 1 843 the young Marx started to write a lengthy book aiming at the critique of Hegel political doctrine, which, however, remained throughout his lifetime as unpublished manuscripts. The manuscripts were unearthed and have been available after the end of the World War Two. Thus, we encounter Marx's early writings including the piece of "Critique of Hegel's Doctrine of the State." Based on the German original text and its English translation, we are able to analyze the main thrusts of Marx's criticism. Basically, he criticizes how Hegel inverts reality by deriving empirical institutions (family, civil society and the state) from philosophical idea (Geist). Put in other words, the young Marx attempts to expose Hegel's mysticism. By means of textual analysis and comparison, he shows the internal inconsistencies or contradictions in Hegel's argument. Marx did not concur with Hegel's unity and synthesis of political and social life, common and individual interests. He contested the labeling of the truly universal class for the bureaucracy. He called for unrestricted suffrage to heal the schism in society. Marx's attack on the traditional institution of the primogeniture (The inheritance of landed property passes automatically to the first-born son) and his critique of Hegel's support of such an unfair system led him to look seriously into the subject matter of private property. Through his discovery of German proletariat (poor peasants and workers) and his novel idea of combination of German philosophy with German working class, Marx arrived for the first time at the concept of establishing communism by the abolition of private property. Thus Hegel's political and legal doctrine paved way for the young Marx to adopt a philosophical kind of communism. Despite of the recent scholars' assertion that the importance of Hegel for Marx has been declining, the present authors insist that Hegelianism still exerts a tremendous and profound impact on Marx and Marxism.