Chapter 79 Freedom to choose a king: the spontaneous impulse of the people at the bottom

"Freedom to choose the emperor" was a slogan put forward by local farmers in Siyugang, Nantong during the Revolution of 1911. Similar slogans include "freedom to choose the good."The combination of the two means that one chooses a good "lord".The reason why such a slogan was put forward, according to the documents of the post-revolutionary Nantong military sub-government, was that just at the time of the 1911 Revolution, Nantong asked the farmers along the banks to pay for the maintenance of the embankment, but the farmers in Siyugang refused, probably because they felt that The "jun" after the revolution was not very good, and he wanted to be in charge of his own family, so he organized a security association to resist.There is also a saying that in order to resist rent and tax, a peasant government was organized, with a commander-in-chief, a military and political chief, and a financial chief.However, the local guns and cannons of the peasant government or the Security Council, with big knives and spears, lost to the foreign guns and cannons of the Nantong Military Sub-Government, and were eventually suppressed.The revolutionary government did not give them a chance to choose a good king, and suppressed their wishes.

According to records, the peasants who called for the freedom to choose their monarch once gathered more than 5,000 people, each holding a knife and fork and a small triangular red flag, and from time to time they went to Tianhou Palace (Matsu Temple) and Dragon King Temple to burn incense and worship.Although it claims to be free, I still have no idea in my heart, and I still want to hope for the blessing of the gods. "Freedom to choose the king" and "Freedom to choose the good" are the "advertisements" posted by these peasants at gatherings.How could the peasants of this place come up with such a slogan?Nantong is Zhang Jian's hometown. Since the late Qing Dynasty, the New Deal was established and social transformation was vigorously promoted, and the people's wisdom was relatively open.The leaders of these peasants included Zhu Tianrong, a private salt dealer, Xia Kunwu, a veteran, and several local people's leaders.These people are well-informed and can imitate and organize a new type of government. Of course, they may also know a few new terms.

The idea of ​​free choice of monarch and free choice of good seemed absurd to the Nantong gentry at that time, but it was actually quite commendable.The revolutionaries overthrew the imperial system, established the Republic of China, and practiced democratic politics. In essence, they were free to choose their monarchs, and the monarchs were chosen for their good.Although it is said that the family members who are elected by popular votes are called public servants.But since the establishment of the democratic system, everyone knows that the so-called public servants are just a trick out of respect for the people.Even the president of the United States today is actually a family member, not a public servant. Americans who have always respected equality are still proud to see the president.The earliest Chinese looked at the American system and always believed that they were free to choose their ruler.Jun in the Chinese language, in addition to the monarch, also means being in charge of the family.Even if the monarch is the monarch, and the monarch can be freely chosen by the people, then it is naturally not the absolute monarch in the traditional sense that the monarch must die and the ministers have to die.Of course, with the level of understanding of the peasants at that time, they would not have thought of how to restrict the chosen "monarchy", and could not correspond to the thoughts of the Western thinker Locke.

Thousands of years of Chinese history, from feudalism to prefectures and counties, in terms of system, the monarchy has always been hereditary, and only in legends is the abdication of Yao, Shun and Yu.It is difficult to say whether such abdication existed, or whether they abdicated a position of power and honor.In actual history, the acquisition of the throne of the monarch is either hereditary by blood or robbery by violence. There is no third way.As for letting the people choose, I have never even thought about it.The word "freedom" also existed in ancient China, and was later used to translate freedom. Many people think that it is difficult to fully correspond.However, the ancient concept of freedom, in addition to the unclear meaning of individual rights, also has the meaning of personal choice.It’s just that in ancient times there was never any mention of free choice of ruler. People can do this and that freely, gain autonomy in mind and action, and travel in the sky like Zhuangzi said, but they dare not even think about free choice of ruler. Choosing goodness is also the old emperor's choice among his own sons, and no one else has anything to do with it.It has to be said that peasants' ability to make such a statement in the year of 1911 has something to do with the enlightenment of people with a heart, including the vernacular newspapers and vulgar newspapers that promote the concept of modern democracy and freedom.Therefore, it is not entirely true to say that the new trend of thought before and after the Revolution of 1911 has nothing to do with the people at all.

However, regardless of the local autonomy during the preparatory constitutional period in the late Qing Dynasty, including the election of the Consultative Council, or the election of the first Congress of the Republic of China, the peasants actually did not freely "choose". In most cases, they did not want to choose. When choosing but not giving up.The so-called elections were arranged by some gentry who presided over the elections.A few clerks held the ballot box, walked around the four townships, and then filled in the ballots according to the number of voters, and the voters were considered to have voted.

Of course, this kind of election has the problem of insufficient publicity, but it is true that the peasants do not have this awareness, that is to say, the vast majority of them do not want to choose their monarch freely.The squires represented them, though not expressly authorized, but actually sanctioned.But the problem is that some peasants really want to choose their ruler freely, but the country gentry and elites are not willing.It stands to reason that the post-revolutionary Nantong military sub-government was not elected by the people, and only a few gentry and teachers discussed it and became a family (of course we must respect the opinions of the gentry Zhang Jian).According to democratic principles, the legitimacy of the government they organized may not be higher than that of the Siyugang peasant government supported by more than 5,000 peasants.The peasants are not allowed to form their own government when the gentry form their own government. The way to solve the problem is not to negotiate, but to talk with guns and naked repression.Several leading farmers fled without dying, and their land and property were confiscated, even a dozen acres of sandy fields were not spared.Officials directly called these farmers bandits, and the incident was a bandit riot.

Therefore, it is not an exaggeration to say that the revolutionaries are Ye Gong’s lovers of democracy.Needless to say, the constitutionalists, most of them originally demanded a constitution in order to share power. Originally, they could ask the Qing government for democracy, and the people were not allowed to ask for democracy from them.And the Revolutionary Party was not very prepared for the democracy they were pursuing, and they hadn't thought about it theoretically.Really thinking about these issues is only possible after the failure of the second revolution.In their hearts, the revolutionaries still agree with elite politics and arranged elections. They don't like the spontaneous democratic impulse of the people at the bottom. As long as they find a government organized by farmers themselves, they will wipe it out.In this regard, like the constitutionalists, they have a huge preference for order and stability. For this preference, they do not hesitate to kill all demands from the bottom, even if these demands are reasonable and legitimate.