Chapter 5 Chapter 4 Looking back at the Reform Movement of 1898 in a hundred years

In the more than 100 years of modern Chinese history, our suffering Chinese people have undertaken countless "revolutions", large and small, and two major "reforms"-the "Reform of 1898" initiated by Kang Liang, and the "Reform of 1898" led by Deng Xiaoping. "Xiaoping Reform".Roughly speaking, "revolution" is easy but "reform" is difficult.To cover revolutionaries is to revolutionize the lives of others.To revolutionize the life of others, the enemy and the enemy are clearly defined, the target is obvious, and the means are simple.Those who reform the law change their own law.In the law of changing oneself, the object is unclear, the enemy and the enemy are indistinguishable, and the means are ever-changing.Mao Zedong said nothing: "Contradiction" is different from the contradiction between the enemy and ourselves and the contradiction among the people.Conflicts between the enemy and ourselves can be settled with one shot; conflicts among the people can be cut off with a knife, and the ripples will never end. Those who "reform" are also a kind of "contradictions among the people".

Don't you see that during the changes of 1898, there were disputes between old and new, emperors and empresses, mothers and children, and even mothers-in-law and daughters-in-law.In the imperial party there is the queen party; in the queen party there is also the imperial party.Open the yamen, close the yamen, endless entanglement?Not to mention, when Xiaoping reformed, Deng Gong Xiaoping was both Guangxu and Cixi; he became a son and then a mother.Hu (Yaobang) and Zhao (Ziyang) were reused, and Hu Zhao was forced to leave.Advocating "openness" but also "persistence"; insistence can't be firm, openness can't let go..., and the result is that the old lady is really annoying; it's also contradictory to death bro!

Reader Xianda: You think I am not loyal.Can't share the worries for Mr. Deng, and still talk sarcasticly from the sidelines?No.At present, we really don't know what Lao Deng is doing.Mr. Deng himself does not know everything. Didn't Su Dongpo also say that?I don't know the true face of Lushan Mountain, just because I am in this mountain.In fact, Su Zi didn't fully explain what he said.Talking about current affairs and commenting on the current dynasty; the authorities are obsessed, and the bystanders may not be clear.If you don't believe me, go to the newsstand and look through it. How many famous writers are there, who don't talk to themselves, or even talk nonsense?

But there are really reforms in the world that the sky does not know and the earth does not know, no.The time factor is not enough!Wait a hundred years for it.Looking back, it will be as transparent as a crystal ball. Let's put Xiaoping aside for now; let's talk about Kangliang a hundred years ago. The author writes this point just in time for TV reports that the second superpower in the world today, the "Federation of Soviet Socialist Republics", has died without a shot being fired, without sound or smell.This is really a strange and great event that has never been seen in the 8,000-year history of human civilization.No wonder the New York Times carried it with a hurdled headline story.But this headline news, in the eyes of readers, is far less exciting than the rape case of Senator Kennedy's nephew, Master Smith, on the vice-page of the same day, which attracted a lot of readers.

The Soviet Union, the motherland of Marxism.Su Di died in such a useless manner that even Marx looked dull.In contrast, old Mr. (Adam) Smith, the father of capitalism, is youthful, immortal, and alive.Really, the old horse who once had the same majesty as Genghis Khan has now fallen into peace, not even a lecherous little grandson of Kennedy?In the eyes of our world history teachers, this is premature. Marxism, at least the history of Marxism, like other major theories, also has some unique features that cannot be overthrown at once.Historians of the Ma School believe that the development of human society progresses in five "stages", and each stage has its own different social "types".When these five stages are progressing one after another, there will be a "transition period" between the two stages, and the transition between the two types before and after.Since the development and transformation of history is an "inevitable" procedure, why bother to "make revolution" and "engage in class struggle". The disciples of the Ma family said that the purpose of making revolution and engaging in class struggle is to shorten this inevitable A "transition period" takes place.If this transformation phenomenon is allowed to develop naturally, the time may be dragged on for a long time; it may even be dragged on indefinitely. ——Marxist revolutionaries, reasoning based on this theory, believe that short-term pain is worse than long-term pain.It should be spawned by violence, so that social transformation can be accomplished overnight.Therefore, all Marxist-Leninists are "one-time revolutionists." ——Lenin was like this, and Mao Zedong had to say it.

Of course, there are many problems with this Marxist-Leninist historiography!Historians of all schools, based on the historical experience of various nationalities, have criticized it, which can be said to be overwhelming.The author does not learn, but also tries to follow the end of the group of sages, and writes an article to deny it based on the experience of the historical development of the Chinese nation.This article will not be repeated. But, just like other major theories—Toynbee's "challenge response," Dewey's "experimentalism," and the "economic development" theory that dominated major United Nations policy after World War II—it is not. "All right" is not "all wrong".The main conclusions of each school can be found in Chinese history.It is wrong for historians to fully affirm any school (such as the absolute recognition of Marxism-Leninism in the early days on the mainland), or to deny it completely.

For example, the theory of "type" and "transformation" in the historiography of the Ma School have their merits.We disproved its "absolutism" which is divided into five sections.But we cannot deny that there have indeed been two "transitional periods" in the course of China's social development over the past three thousand years. ——What happened in ancient times was the "Shang Yang Reform" that lasted for more than 130 years; what happened in modern times is what we have personally seen since the "Opium War" (1839-1842) , a period of more than 150 years of modern history.

The "transformation" of ancient Chinese society was indeed the result of the evolution of internal factors in the development of our country's society, as the Historiography of the Ma School said.Transformation is "automatic".The transformation process of modern Chinese society is, as Tang’s historiography put it, a “response” to a “challenge” from external causes.The transformation process is "passive".But when this "transition period" draws to a close, both the government and the opposition, regardless of whether they are black or white, are all looking at "money."Everyone knows that if the economy cannot "fly", another "stereotype" cannot emerge.Today, the model of the "Chiang family regime" in Taiwan is gone forever; while Mr. Deng on the mainland continues to "listen to politics behind a curtain", isn't it because of "money"?Wait until the mainland can also break through the shackles of "developing" and move towards the "developed" stage.One country, one system on both sides of the Taiwan Strait.Our "transition period" is officially over.A new "stereotype" will emerge.The development of this last stage is the focus of the third and fourth schools of historiography mentioned above—you don’t pay attention to practical results, and you can’t make it economically. You have to keep your mouth shut, and you have nothing to say.It’s okay to go back and engage in your dictatorship. If you get the air of Stalin, you will inevitably flog the corpse and subjugate the country.

The "transformation" of ancient Chinese society was indeed the result of the evolution of internal factors in the development of our country's society, as the Historiography of the Ma School said.Transformation is "automatic".The transformation process of modern Chinese society is, as Tang’s historiography put it, a “response” to a “challenge” from external causes.The transformation process is "passive".But when this "transition period" draws to a close, both the government and the opposition, regardless of whether they are black or white, are all looking at "money."Everyone knows that if the economy cannot "fly", another "stereotype" cannot emerge.Today, the model of the "Chiang family regime" in Taiwan is gone forever; while Mr. Deng on the mainland continues to "listen to politics behind a curtain", isn't it because of "money"?Wait until the mainland can also break through the shackles of "developing" and move towards the "developed" stage.One country, one system on both sides of the Taiwan Strait.Our "transition period" is officially over.A new "stereotype" will emerge.The development of this last stage is the focus of the third and fourth schools of historiography mentioned above—you don’t pay attention to practical results, and you can’t make it economically. You have to keep your mouth shut, and you have nothing to say.It’s okay to go back and engage in your dictatorship. If you get the air of Stalin, you will inevitably flog the corpse and subjugate the country.

Say it a thousand times, and return to the family with one word.The nature of the events in China in the past century and a half has been a phenomenon of "social transformation" that occurs only once in two thousand years.In the trend of history, the "transition period" is a bottleneck, the Three Gorges.The Yangtze River passing through the Three Gorges is full of high shoals, turbulent waves, and dangerous situations.In this torrent and dangerous shoal, there are many stories about the big and small boatmen and helmsmen who rowed their boats and sailed down the river. Hanyang tree, fragrant grass and luxuriant parrot island", you will have peace of mind and enjoy a sense of freedom without fear.Therefore, at the end of this transformation period, looking back at the historical facts of a century, we can know that a "modern Chinese history" is really a "modern Chinese history" that shifts from the medieval oriental social pattern to the modern Western social pattern. The History of Social Transformation” can also be called the “History of China’s Modernization Movement”!The roles played by Kang and Liang masters and apprentices in this historical trend are the two boatmen in the above-mentioned small boat in the Three Gorges.Among the rapids and dangerous shoals, the wind and lightning, down the current, and finally hit the rocks and sank - it's sad and ridiculous, that's all.

However, during the 150-year transitional period that we have seen personally today, our old social pattern—this social pattern that left-wing historians always call “semi-feudal”—has not been recognized today. Completely "turn" away.Let's take the "emperor" system as an example!After the Revolution of 1911, although we no longer have emperors, there are many "emperors in disguise".Friends, can you say that Yuan Shikai, Jiang Zhongzheng, and Mao Zedong are not "emperors in disguise"?How can the emperor have the power to judge the three of them! Therefore, historical facts have proved that the theory of "one revolution" is wrong.In our "History of the Republic of China", it took more than 70 years to "turn" from the "emperor" of Hong Xian before "turning" to "President" Lee Teng-hui.Therefore, the process of our "transformation" in social development is very complicated, with twists and turns, three steps forward and two steps back, left forward and right backward, up and down backward..., sometimes even standing at attention and turning backward, what a trick Many—but from a long-term perspective, the general direction of development remains unchanged; at the same time, there are distinct stages. Let's not talk about the big stage for now, let's just look at the "Xiaoping Reform" in the last ten years. It started in 1979 and rushed forward for eight years.When Hu Yaobang was deposed, he began to brake.And "June 4th" in 1989, suddenly came to stand at attention and turned back, bleeding profusely.Over the past two years, it has wanted to continue opening up and peaceful evolution; it has also opposed peaceful evolution.Nor can we see how it opposes "peaceful evolution".Compared with Mao Zedong's "Great Leap Forward", Mao is a rabbit and Deng is a tortoise.But history also proves that tortoises can climb faster than devils.The "general direction" of China's development is still moving towards transformation. (See my book "Hu Shi's General Directions and Small Frames"). Some people may think that our "transformation" (or "modernization") is too slow.Don't you see that the transformation of Japan can be completed in only 30 to 50 years?In fact, Japan's transformation is an exception (discussed in detail in the next section). The transformation of other nationalities and societies takes three to two hundred years before they can see the skin. The Shang Yang Reform in ancient my country began in 350 BC, and ended in 221 BC, the 130th year of Shi Huang's unification, when "Qin Fazheng" (Mao Zedong's words) came into being.But Emperor Qin "had too much punishment" (in Gu Yanwu's words), and continued to "turn" forward.After more than a hundred years of experimentation, it was not until Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty that the centralized civil service system of "Overlord and Daozazhi" (in the words of Emperor Xuan of the Han Dynasty Liu Xun) and the "stereotype" of the Great Emperor's Garden, which emphasized agriculture and despised business, were slowly developed. .The "fixed shape" of the Han family system, once "fixed" is two thousand years.Basically, there is no principled change—so Mao Zedong told Guo Moruo: "For a thousand years, you will still follow the Qin law and government."——Between the two stereotypes before Shihuang and after Emperor Wu, the "transition period" was extended to more than 300 years ! The "transformation" of modern European society actually began with the "Renaissance" in the early fourteenth century (1300).It took more than 300 years to turn around, and it was not until the end of the 17th century (1600) that it gradually "finalized"; it became a "capitalistic" society based on free individuals and a source of wealth produced by large-scale machines. ) of the "nation state" (nation state) and the "representative government" (representative government or parliamentary government) with the "middle class" as the main body.This "stereotype" of the modern West has been maintained for more than four hundred years.However, at the end of 1991, the Soviet Empire collapsed, and the states of the former Soviet Union agreed to form a confederacy.At the same time, Western European countries are also vigorously pursuing their "common currency", and a new "transition period" of Western political society has begun to appear. ——The social transformation of modern China still has a long way to go, while contemporary Western society has begun to transform. This is probably the inevitable consequence of the rapid development of modern science and technology! In the history of social transformation in the modern world, Japan is the fastest.After the "Meiji Restoration" in 1868, within a generation, Japan had become one of the advanced powers in the world.This may be because before the Restoration, Japan's feudal system was very close to the basic "type" of medieval European feudal system. Therefore, once Japan implements "Europeanization" (European modernization), if the social development process is in line, so it is It was a blockbuster; the other point is the relationship between the island and the small state.The modernization of the West, especially the "economic take-off", was implemented from the "small state" (small state) [and now it is gradually moving towards a large economic commonwealth (economic commonwealth)]. A confederation of small states?Aren't the "four little dragons" in Asia now the four "small states"? Our China is a big country with a special history and an "Asiatic Society" background. Once we start "Western-style" "modernization" (referred to as "Westernization"), if we don't vote, there will be no such thing as Japan's Westernization. It’s easy. When we engage in “Westernization”, especially the “overall Westernization” that has been reborn, we have to crawl forward in a roundabout way, stage by stage. ——The Kangliang reform is this time There is a short section of crawling; Hu Shi, who is engaged in "total westernization", is the leader of the other small section. How scary is the slogan "Total Westernization"!Hu Shi originally advocated total westernization.However, under the curse of ten eyes and ten fingers, this very conciliatory enlightenment master changed his words to say "full Westernization" and "full globalization".In fact, the slogan "full globalization" has a lot of language problems, and it even doesn't make sense. The slogan "Total Westernization" may sound scary, but if we look at the daily life of the people on both sides of the Taiwan Strait, as well as the textbooks for primary and secondary schools under the jurisdiction of the Kuomintang and the Communist regimes, except for the small things that we continue to eat with chopsticks Besides, how much "inherent culture" is left?Over the past hundred years, in education and in daily life, friends, we have really "fully westernized" almost unconsciously.In politics and society, although we still have some remnants of our inherent culture, such as the totalitarian system of the central government and the blind marriage system in the countryside, etc., those are just dross that need to be eliminated. But is our inherent culture really useless? —How can you say that? "China's inherent culture" can at least compete with "Western inherent culture", or even account for half of the "world's inherent culture".How can it be said that nothing is worthwhile?Just adding the word "culture" to "inherent" belongs to the former type or the medieval type of culture.It has to go through a painful wash of Western-style "modernization" (it was only called "Westernization" before World War II) before it can belong to the next or modern form after the transformation period.Take traditional Chinese medicine as an example!The traditional medicine of our country is the treasure of the world, not only "national treasure"?However, if "Chinese medicine" (especially obstetrics and gynecology and pediatrics) does not undergo "modernization" cleaning procedures (the so-called integration of traditional Chinese and Western medicine), it will be a murderous executioner.What about culture? (After the Japanese Restoration, Chinese medicine was strictly prohibited for several to a hundred years. The National Government also banned Chinese medicine in the early days.) Let’s talk about the most popular "Qigong" on both sides of the Taiwan Strait today!If it does not go through some modern treatment, it will be superstitious; the "Yihe boxing bandits" are also invulnerable.Wouldn't it be shameful to call it an inherent Chinese culture? By analogy, the moral standards, values, Confucianism and Mencius, the four dimensions and eight virtues in our country's inherent civilization can be adapted to the next generation without the treatment of "modernization" (including "scientization" and "democratization"). type of society.May Day can be made public to all mankind (globalization) without modernization.Therefore, the so-called "Western civilization" is not essentially superior to my "Oriental civilization".The reason why the west wind has been able to overwhelm the east wind in the past three hundred years—including the ability of western novels to overwhelm oriental novels—is the difference between "inherent" and "modern".The so-called "Western civilization" that we have seen in the past hundred years is also "modern civilization".They go through this "modernization program".It was three hundred years earlier than ours; and the "Oriental Civilization" we keep saying is still stagnant in the "inherent civilization" of the "modernization" dynasty. "Inherent civilization" pales in comparison to all "modern civilizations".When the two "inherent civilizations" of the East and the West have completed their respective modernization procedures, then the two "modern civilizations" will be able to compete with each other by making up for each other's strengths. But if we want to modernize all "Chinese inherent civilization", it will not be achieved overnight.It progresses in stages without knowing it.The "1898 Reform Movement" led by Kang Youwei, Liang Qichao and others was just a short section of this "stage-by-stage" "modernization movement" - a short section focused on "political modernization". But which section of the entire "modernization movement" was this "short section" led by Kang Liang? Said: Judging from the two thousand years of Chinese general history, it is the "second stage" in the second "transition period", that is, the "political reform stage".Borrowing the latest term of "post-Cultural Revolution" on the mainland, Gai can also be called "the fifth modernization". "Political reform" in the late Qing Dynasty had two schools of "rapid progress" and "slow progress".The radical group was headed by Sun Wen.What they are engaged in is "expelling the Tartars and establishing the Republic of China"; a violent revolution, using the United States as a teacher.The slow progress faction was headed by Kang Youwei.They advocated "reform and reform, constitutional monarchy"; peaceful evolution, excluding violence, and aiming at the British system. ——The simultaneous rise of these two factions and the same goal by different routes were all influenced by the defeat of the Sino-Japanese "Jiawu War" (1894-1895) and the loss of power and humiliation of the Qing court.Prior to this, the two factions originally hoped that during the period of "Tongzhi ZTE" (1861-1875-1894), ZTE's famous ministers mainly promoted technology.The New Deal with ships, guns, roads, and mines as its connotations is the so-called "Westernization Movement." This early "New Deal" was in fact the "first stage" of my country's "modernization movement": that is, the stage of "science and technology modernization."Let’s use the newest term, then call it the “Four Modernizations”! In fact, the ancestors who engaged in these four modernizations were not Li Hongzhang and other "famous ministers of ZTE"!Certainly not Deng Xiaoping and Chen Yun.Its two ancestors were Lin Zexu (1785-1850) and Xu Jiyu (1795-1873), especially the former.His staff member Wei Yuan (1794-1857) began to call for reform during the Opium War, to "learn from the barbarians' skills to control the barbarians" (see Daoguang 22 years? 1842 edition "Hai "National Maps and Annals Preface").Wei Zhi's so-called "barbarian's strong skills" are, in the current language, "science and technology of advanced Western countries"; that is, "scientific and technological modernization", that is, "four modernizations." ——After more than 140 years, the history of our "Westernization" has just "repeated" once again. After the modernization of science and technology was initiated by Mr. Lin and Xu, it became a prominent study in Tongzhi Zhongxing.At that time, the New Deal was surging and talents came forth in large numbers. Famous ZTE officials such as Zeng Guofan, Li Hongzhang, Shen Baozhen, Chen Baozhen, Zhang Zhidong, Liu Kunyi, Sheng Xuanhuai, etc., really made the four modernizations vivid and colorful.Although our historians have been cursing the faint-hearted Empress Dowager Cixi for spending tens of millions of taels of money to build the navy and railway (Tianjin to Shenyang) to repair the Summer Palace.Even so, our navy at that time surpassed Japan in size; not to mention the resources of road mines.Since the defeat of the Opium War (1842), we have worked hard to carry out the "four modernizations" for 52 years; even if we counted from the "Tongzhi Zhongxing", it has been 32 years. During the "Sino-Japanese War" (1894-1895), those pots and jars were destroyed by Japanese ghosts in a few shots. Our defeat in the Sino-Japanese War (1895) was not due to inadequacy of equipment, limited resources, or lack of human resources.Our failure lies in our outdated, corrupt and incompetent political system!Our "ancestral system" is the old system of the former type.Having engaged in "strong boats and sharp guns" for decades, the government and the public have only just woken up from a big dream.It turns out that there is no political system that catches up with the times, even if there are super strong ships and guns, and new wine in old bottles, it will not help.This is why my little fellow Mr. Wei Jingsheng believes that the "four (technical) modernizations" are not enough; he would rather go to jail than insist on the "fifth modernization" (political modernization). ——What Wei Jingsheng wants to change is the "ancestral system" of the CCP. More than 80 years before Wei Zi was imprisoned, this was also the unanimous voice of the government and the public in the late Qing Dynasty. The general direction of "reform and reform" they insisted on at that time was just like the "open policy" in the mainland today. The spirit of the "new stage" of the times.Except for the most ignorant, old-fashioned and selfish few Dong Hong, basically no one opposed it (including the Empress Dowager Cixi).Therefore, in the period between Jiawu and Wuxu (1894-1898) at the end of the Qing Dynasty, the theories and memorials advocating reform and system reform were really like a storm and snowflakes.Among such documents at that time, the most painful thing we read was the "letter of persuasion" issued by the victors of Japan to the vanquished of our country. In the late period of the Sino-Japanese War of Sino-Japanese War of 1895, when my country's most modern "Northern Fleet" was almost wiped out by the Japanese, the remaining few wrecked ships were taken by the Japanese in February 1895. Ding Ruchang, Admiral of the Navy (Navy Commander-in-Chief), led the retreat to Weihaiwei, and was surrounded by Japanese ships, desperate.When Admiral Ding and his senior naval officer Zhang Wenxuan were preparing to commit suicide and die for the country, he received a letter of persuasion from the enemy general.This persuasion book is worth reading.To embarrass the country, to aspire to mourn.Here are some excerpts from the original text: Lieutenant General Ito Yuhiro, Commander-in-Chief of the Japanese Navy, wrote a letter to Ding Junmen Ruchang, Admiral of the Beiyang Navy of the Qing Dynasty: The current situation has changed, and your servant and Your Excellency are engaged in the battlefield. What is so unfortunate?However, today's affairs are state affairs, not personal enmity; the warmth of friendship between the servant and your lordship is just like yesterday. Is this letter just to persuade the admiral of the Qing Dynasty to surrender?In all affairs of the world, the authorities are confused, and the bystanders are judged. ... The reason why the Qing army and the army fought successively to the north, if you can observe it with an open mind and a calm mind, it is not difficult to immediately see the reason for its defeat.With Your Excellency's wisdom, the trial of the known is solid.In the Qing Dynasty, there are today's losers. It is certainly not the fault of the king and prime minister himself.Husbands and scholars must pass examinations, and examinations must be conducted by literature and art. Therefore, the ministers in power, who are in power and uphold the constitution, must be promoted by literature and art.Today's time is like the past, although it is not unbeautiful, but if the Qing Dynasty can go independently, it will not be able to do it today? [The last sentence may have been copied out, otherwise it may be caused by the translator's lack of smoothness, so the original letter is in English. ]Thirty years ago, the state affairs of Japan have suffered so much, and those who can be saved from dying, you can know what your Excellency knows.At this time, our country is in a hurry to get rid of the old rule, adapt to the current situation, and introduce a new policy, thinking that it is one of the main reasons for the country's survival.Now your country can't help but make the old plan a top priority, and urgently change it.If you follow it, the country can live in peace; otherwise, how can you avoid the number of ruins?In a war with Japan, it will inevitably lead to a situation of defeat [death], and it will not wait for a tortoise. It has been determined for a long time... Publishing, Volume II, pp. 197-198.) Ito wrote this letter on January 23, 1895, according to the Gregorian calendar.Ten days later (February 12), Ding Ruchang committed suicide. Although Ito's "Letter of Persuasion to Surrender" is not an important document of my country's reform and reform in the late Qing Dynasty, this book was written by the enemy general who wiped out both our navy and army. , It is simply a "shock therapy" (shock therapy), which makes the people of the defeated countries realize that "political reform" is far more important than "scientific and technological reform".Because before that, there were many people who advocated legal reform and system reform. ——Kang Youwei wrote for the first time calling for system reform, just six years before the Sino-Japanese War.Before Kang, there were Feng Guifen, Rong Ban and others.But the speaker is earnest and the listener is contemptuous.There is no shortage of sympathizers; serious ones are rare.But this time it was defeated by the Japanese younger brother, and the situation is different.In addition, Yidong's persuasive and ironic persuasion letter, once it was published, was a great shock to the ancient Qing Empire.Since then, the cry for "reform and reform" has been irresistible like a violent storm.Kang Liang's master and apprentice will take the lead in the meeting of wind and clouds.Why did Kang Liang's master and apprentice have such luck?In the next part, let's dissect Lao Kang and see for ourselves. *Originally published in the third issue of Volume 60 of "Biographical Literature" in Taipei.