Chapter 36 4. The missing tradition

Let me talk about the Republic first. A republic is a form of government (republican system) and a proposition (republicanism).As a form of government, a republic is the opposite of a monarchy.In principle, it requires that its head of state and organs of power must be elected by regular elections, rather than hereditary.However, the abolition of the monarchy does not mean the realization of a republic; the retention of the emperor's position does not mean that the system remains the monarch.Some countries that retain their monarchs are actually republics (such as the United Kingdom); while some "republics" that have no king or emperor in name are actually "monarchies", an empire that is not an empire, and a kingdom that is not a kingdom ( such as Saddam Hussein's Iraq).In fact, in the "post-monarchy era", there are not a few countries that call themselves "republics".But this is just the result of the world trend, and it does not mean that everyone understands the essence of the republic, nor does it necessarily mean that all of them have really realized the republic.So, there are various "republics" in the world.Some are worthy of the name, and some are not.There are two kinds of names that are not worthy of their names.One has no real name (including "virtual republic" and "real republic"), and the other has no name.The latter is just a "false republic", while the former is true.From this point of view, whether or not a republic should be based on its reality rather than its name.

What is the reality of the republic?The first is the public, the second is the totality, and the third is peace (please refer to Liu Junning's "Republic, Democracy, and Constitutional Government"), that is, "the world is public, peaceful coexistence, and elections".The word "Republic" is "Republic" in English, and its core is "public". public has the meanings of public, public, public, public, public, and open to all.Specific to the political system, it means that state power is the public instrument of the world, and governing the country is a common cause.Therefore, political power must be shared by all members of society and be equally open to the whole society.Sharing means that power is not hereditary, monopolized, and can be transferred; openness means that anyone can participate in, discuss, and engage in politics, regardless of whether he is a minority or a majority, and whether he has the same political views as the authorities.Sharing and openness even means not excluding the possibility of various political forces compromising with each other and governing jointly and jointly.This is the total, also sum, that is, pubhc.

Obviously, this nature of the republic system is based on the premise of "being the public".It is precisely because "the world is public", that is, state power is the public instrument of the world (public power), only the regime is public, politics is public, the government must be public, and government affairs must be open and open to everyone (the public).This is "community" - sharing, co-governance, and sharing.A total is not an exclusive (monopolized, exclusive, dictatorial).Therefore, the ruler cannot never retire forever, nor can he be hereditary, but must have a certain term of office.Once the term of office is up, there will be re-election immediately.If elected, they can be re-elected, but there must be a time limit for re-election.As soon as the deadline is up, the shift will be handed over to the newly elected person.After the term of office or re-election expires, the newly elected person will hand over power to a newer elected person.Such periodic re-elections and a change of government, never hereditary, monopolized by one person, are the key points of a republic.

The nature of "public" and "public" in the republic determines that its characteristic must be "harmony".In other words, under a republic, the way of participating in political affairs and handling political disputes must be peaceful and must be peaceful.Because according to the republic system, it is entirely possible for anyone to gain the opportunity to govern through peaceful means (such as elections), which is their legitimate right.Of course, whether they deserve it is another matter (and they may not necessarily be successful), but they can think about it, they can fight for it, and there is hope.There is hope, so there is no need for an armed uprising; there is a right, so violence cannot be suppressed.Since the change of regime is carried out in a peaceful manner, what both the government and the opposition can do is peaceful coexistence and peaceful competition.Therefore, those who are "republican" must be "harmony" (peace, harmony, harmony) because of "community" (common ownership, sharing, and joint governance).

Such a system and tradition are unheard of and unprecedented in ancient Chinese history.Yes, we have a saying that "the world is for the public", and it is regarded as the highest political ideal (the journey of the great way also means that the world is for the public).It is a pity that it is only an ideal, not a reality, and it is an ancient memory that is not completely accurate to the primitive society. It is just like the so-called "five emperors and three emperors are sacred things, and they deceive the endless passers-by" (Mao Zedong's "Congratulations to the Bridegroom Reading History").Even if it is a fact, it is far from the modern sense of "the world is for the public" which is the premise of a republic."The world is public" in the republic system refers to political power (state power is owned by the public); in the imperial system, "the world is public" refers to property rights (land resources are owned by the state).Property rights cannot all be owned by the state.Because once this is the case, then whoever controls the power will occupy everything, just like the emperors or courts of all dynasties.Once a person, or a group, has everything, is he still willing to share it with others?impossible.

Therefore, in the traditional sense, "the world is for the public", it is impossible to lead to a republic, and in fact it cannot be achieved.Of course, "the end of the public world" must be said to be "since the beginning of Qin" (Liu Zongyuan's "On Feudalism"), and the Kuomintang will certainly advertise "the world is public, and the world is one."Moreover, they can only claim to be the agents of "the way of heaven" or "the will of the people", and they dare not openly claim that "the world is for themselves".After all, in theory, the world of the empire belongs to heaven; in name, the world of the Republic of China belongs to the people.However, Qin Shihuang, big and small, confidently monopolize the power of agency. They don't think that anyone else can act as their agent, and they can't tolerate others acting together with them.As a result, Qin Shihuang's empire was "the world is the public, and one person acts as an agent," and the KMT's party-state was "the world is the public, and one party acts as an agent," neither of which was a "republic" (joint agency or electoral agency).

Such a "one-person agency" or "one-family agency" system will never allow the existence of dissident political forces, let alone allow them to covet power.Therefore, the dynasties of the past dynasties will inevitably nip any possibility of subversion in the bud.Of course, in fact there is "taking turns to sit in the village", which is "change of dynasty".However, any new dynasty will only promote the rationality and legitimacy of its replacement, and will never admit that it will be replaced and can be replaced.On the contrary, they always repeatedly emphasize that any idea of ​​changing dynasties or taking turns to sit on the throne is treasonous and wishful thinking, which must also be nipped in the bud.Even whoever wants to build a small court and become an emperor will not do.The reason is very simple - "How can you allow others to snore and sleep on the side of the couch", so you can only send troops to "eliminate" them (such as the death of the Southern Tang Dynasty in the Song Dynasty).Of course, there is also the reverse, that is, those who were exterminated were exterminated (such as the death of the Ming Dynasty by Li Zicheng's Dashun or Dorgon's Daqing).Anyway, anyone who wants to advocate "the emperor takes turns doing it" has to show his fist.

Obviously, if there is no communism, there will be no harmony.In our political tradition, since there is no "republic" (election change) system and mechanism, there is only "revolution" (removal of the mandate of heaven), and all "revolutions" (replacement of dynasties) in Chinese history are "violent". action" (riot).Even the "abdication" of the Jin and Song Dynasties was actually backed by force.The logic of traditional Chinese politics is that the winner and the loser, you die and die, and power grows out of the barrel of a gun, because otherwise the revolution cannot succeed.Therefore, Sun Yat-sen, who advocated the republic, eventually had to run Whampoa and build a party and army.In short, in Chinese history, there are only "mutual struggles" and "surrender" after mutual struggles, and there is no "republic" (peaceful competition and sharing of political power).

In fact, almost all the dynasties in China, including the small dynasties between the two dynasties and their surroundings, were fought by armed forces.This tradition has been going on since at least the Zhou Dynasty.It was the result of the war that Zhou people had to be the "co-lords of the world".Although the Zhou people also hoped for peace after seizing the world, and created a "state system" similar to a federation or confederation, China did not move toward a republic, but continued toward war.Because this "federation" or "confederation" has a high "common master of the world" - the emperor.Everyone wants to be the "Pride of Heaven".Moreover, as long as the strength is strong enough, it is also worthy of it.So I had to fight again.First play the "Five Hegemons", then play the "Seven Heroes", and finally play a "First Emperor".Since then, China has embarked on the road of no return to seize power by armed force and change the dynasty.As the saying goes, "It's rare in this world to smile, and bow to each other on the battlefield. It's all over, the blood of the suburbs" (Mao Zedong's "Congratulations to the Bridegroom Reading History").

This made it impossible for these dynasties to implement a republic system.Because the essential feature of the republic system is peace, but what the dynasty believes in is force.This is the belief of the founding emperors, and it is also the common belief of the warlords and the "earth emperors" and "quasi-emperors" of all sizes.They do not believe that a political power can be established through negotiations, let alone that the political power they seized has any reason to be "republican" with others.What they believe in is "fighting the country and sitting on the country".In other words, since Lao Tzu has worked so hard to conquer this country, of course it should be exclusive to Lao Tzu, so why should he share it with others.Not only can it not be shared and shared, but all forces that may hinder its exclusive enjoyment must be wiped out by force.The final result, of course, can only be the unification of the world, the centralization of power, and even dictatorship.When all the opposing forces surrender and the world is truly unified, we can basically bid farewell to the "troubled world" and hope to enter the "government world".

Therefore, we don’t have to feel sorry for the lost opportunity of mutual protection in the southeast, the failure of inter-provincial self-government, the collapse of the KMT-Communist cooperation negotiations, and we don’t have to regret that before the founding of New China, there were only winners and losers and a change of dynasty.After all, history can only choose on the basis of tradition, and from Qin, Han, Sui, Tang, to Song, Yuan, Ming, and Qing, tradition only gave the Chinese two choices: either the world is unified, the king is dictatorship; or the warlords Melee, life lost.In comparison, the former option seems to be better.It's not really anyone's fault. In fact, ever since the abolition of the abolishment, the world has become a family, and in the history of states and empires, there has only been "change of dynasty", no "election change", and no "co-government". The word "republic" does exist.According to the records of "Historical Records Zhou Benji", in the Western Zhou Dynasty, King Li was violent and violent, and the people rebelled.The king fled, and the country had no king. Zhaogong and Zhougong were in power together, and they were called "Republic" for fourteen years.This is the so-called "Zhouzhou republic", which is often used to prove that China also had a republican tradition.Translating republic with the word "Republic" is derived from this.However, this historical fact is not only suspicious, but also short-lived.We know that there have always been two versions of the "Republic of the Western Zhou Dynasty".One is Sima Qian's "Historical Records Zhou Benji" (the administration of Zhao Gong and Zhou Gong, named Gonghe), and the other is "Jizhong Chronicle" and "Lu Lianzi" (the princes use "he" to act The matter of the Son of Heaven, the name is the Republic).According to the latter statement, there is no two ministers or ministers co-ruling at all, only a "Gongbo" named "He" (Gongbo Minghe) became the regent (Gongbo Heqian throne).Moreover, according to the first statement, after the death of King Li, Minister Zhao and Zhou Zhou jointly established the prince as king (that is, King Xuan) and returned the ruling power to him.It can be seen that even if "calling Zhou Gonghe" is true, it is only an expedient measure.On the contrary, their return of power to the monarch just proves that the monarchy is "authentic", and the republic is nothing but "heterogeneous", and it is unique. In fact it is unlikely to become routine.We know that there is a question of mandate whether a monarchy or a republic.The monarchy talks about "divine right of the monarch", while the republic talks about "administration of power by the people".Calling two prime ministers to govern jointly, but without the authorization of heaven, the people, or even the monarch, this is not only not a "republic", but a "tyrant" is suspected.This is the reason why they finally handed over their power - they are afraid of being regarded as "rebellious officials and thieves", and the whole world will punish them! In fact, "Zhao Zhou Gonghe" is not so much a "republic" as a "common photography" (joint regency).It cannot even be called a republic in name only, since the monarch has not been abolished.What's more, the so-called "republic" is far more than just co-government.If co-governance is not approved by the people, open to the whole society and restricted by the constitution, it is not a republic, but an oligarchy, and it just changes from "dictatorship by one person" to "dictatorship by many people".This is one of the reasons why the classical republic must fail and eventually become an empire (such as Rome).Therefore, a modern republic must have two elements at the same time, namely democracy and constitutionalism.The former solves the problem of authorization, and the latter solves the problem of government restriction.These two elements are also lacking in Chinese political tradition.