Lu Xun once reminded young people to read less Chinese books and more books from all over the world; I have to read all kinds of books, and I don't stick to literary books.
When I was in my 20s, I didn't quite understand what Lu Xun meant, and even felt that he was a little narrow-minded. Because in our normal perception, Chinese culture is broad and profound, how can we recommend not reading Chinese books?
Later, as my horizons gradually broadened, I finally had the ability to look at Chinese culture from the perspective of world culture, and I truly understood what Lu Xun meant.
First of all, Lu Xun's suggestion is mainly aimed at young people, that is, people whose worldview and values are being shaped; Secondly, Lu Xun said that he should read less Chinese books because most people only had the opportunity to read Chinese books in that era.
Most of the Chinese books in Lu Xun's era were so-called ancient classics, in fact, they were mainly used to promote values such as the Three Principles and Five Constants, loyalty and filial piety.
To this day, I think it is still necessary to read a variety of books, but it is certainly okay to read Chinese books as part of it. So this topic can be narrowed down a bit, and it is better to talk about why you should read less Chinese history books.
There was a time when I loved reading Chinese history. Because China's history is long enough, there are too many things happening, and there are many things worth learning from today.
Just like the uprisings of the Sui and Tang dynasties, there are many enlightenments for young people about the personal fate of the turbulent era, the development of heroes, and the assessment of the situation in the face of major choices.
The officialdom struggle, the game between monarchs and ministers, and the national reform in the history of the Ming Dynasty brought more enlightenment.
But the more I read more Chinese history, the more I realized that my values were becoming "social Darwinist". One day I finally realized this and began to reflect.
I find that many of my actions have been increasingly shaped by the values in Chinese history books.
To sum it up, it is roughly as follows: from a personal point of view, keen on the competition between people, keen on concepts such as "strategy" and "Tao"; From the perspective of the state, it only focuses on the duality and integration between the individual and the state.
I found that the biggest problem brought about by only reading Chinese books is the simplification of values and perspectives. Because Chinese culture itself is extremely monotonous in terms of values and ways of thinking.
Chinese history is a projection of Chinese culture; Therefore, Chinese history is also extremely monotonous.
Some people may be unconvinced: how can Chinese history be said to be monotonous? There are so many dynasties, so many characters, so many complex conflicts......
But the complicated history of China can be summed up in just eight words: dynastic change, flattery of power.
The so-called wonderful history is nothing more than the renaming of bloody dynasties again and again; The so-called strategy is nothing more than the minions who rack their brains to flatter the emperor's power, and they are intriguing.
There is basically no real institutional change, a change and evolution of the social structure.
From an individual point of view, apart from learning about life-and-death competition, that is, social Darwinism, it does not provide more modern values, such as fairness, justice, checks and balances of power, social games, and so on.
So from the Qin and Han dynasties to the Qing dynasty, Chinese history was nothing more than a constant copy-paste, self-circulating.
Isn't that the case with foreign history, one might say?
Of course not.
Just like Rome, which shaped the Western world today, the struggle over republics or empires alone is magnificent enough. Why do Westerners always talk about Caesar's struggle with the Senate? Because this struggle has profoundly shaped the thinking of the world today, and it is also the foundation for mankind to emerge from the age of slavery.
But this kind of game is blank in Chinese history.
Of course, it cannot be said that there is no power game in China, such as the struggle between power and imperial power in the Han Dynasty, and the struggle between imperial power and the cabinet in the Ming Dynasty. However, China's power game and the West are completely different concepts: China has always revolved around the absolute power of the king, but with some fine-tuning within the absolute imperial power, the minister is the absolute vassal of the emperor in any era, and the dual structure of the monarch and the minister is unchanged.
The West, on the other hand, has always been engaged in a multi-layered game. Rome had already experimented with a complete republic, and although imperial power was later restored, the dualistic structure of "monarch and minister" remained fragile; Even in the dark Middle Ages, there were games of different power centers such as kingship, divine power, chambers of commerce, guilds, and artisan alliances.
It is these games that have gradually moved mankind out of class slavery and absolute control of power, and towards the framework of modern society such as equality for all, social justice, and the authority of the rule of law.
It is precisely because of the difference in the nature of Chinese and Western history that reading Chinese and Western history books has become two completely different experiences.
Looking at Western history books, the status of strategy has declined, and the focus is on the changes in the social structure on the basis of the evolution of the productive forces. With the shift in the center of gravity of power, the structure of society is also undergoing radical changes.
Another dimension is the evolution of the global social structure brought about by the history of Western colonization. Colonization is not a derogatory term in the usual sense, but a reshaping of political, economic, and cultural structures under the trend of globalization.
However, Chinese history books are just a constant retelling of China's "monarch and minister" structure and "family and state" structure.
Just like the civil official group after the Song Dynasty, the so-called game is just a redistribution of some interests within the scope of the power granted by the emperor; Externally, it is a constantly circulating "national humiliation narrative", and the stories of Yue Fei and Qin Huan are the ceiling of Chinese's external imagination.
Like these examples in European history: the Vikings "invaded" and integrated and influenced the civilizations of the European continent; The Arab civilization strongly shaped the ancient civilization of Europe; how the shadow of the "republic" echoed from Greece and Rome to England during the Glorious Revolution; How did the rise of the middle class after the Industrial Revolution shape the modern world...... These involve changes in the deep structure of politics that are not found in Chinese history.
As for the dynastic cycle, it is more like a shame that lasts for thousands of years: after countless cycles, the imagination of the Chinese is still only the option of "who will be the emperor".
I think this is the reason why young people should read less about Chinese history – when you are unconsciously shaped by this singular view of history, you will also become an animal that only chases power, or only submits to power.
And the justice and righteousness of modern civilization can no longer enter your head.
