Fairbank
In 1966, John King Fairbank was very active. At a hearing on China policy convened by the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee in March of that year, he was invited to present his views on China in his capacity as director of the Center for East Asian Studies at Harvard University. He collaborated with another famous "China expert" Bao Dake (a. Doak Barnett) jointly urged the United States to change its policy of isolating China and to enhance communication and engagement with Chinese mainland. Shortly after the meeting, Mr. Fei's hearing speech was published in The Atlantic Monthly under the title "New Thinking on China" ( " . This year, he worked very hard. In addition to publishing his speech at the hearing, he also published articles in newspapers and periodicals such as the New York Review of Books, the Diplomatic Quarterly, and Life, expounding his view of China.
Bao Dake
Fairbank caused trouble
The China expert's policy advice to U.S. officials immediately caused an uproar in Taiwan. Under the manipulation of the Kuomintang government, the academic circles and public opinion circles criticized and criticized them, and they rose up in droves to besiege The "appeasementist elements" in the United States, Fairbank, and attacked the "appeasement and countercurrent." On May 16, the Central Daily and other Taiwanese newspapers published an "Open Letter to the American People," initiated by Hu Qiuyuan, Zheng Xuejia, and Xu Gaoruen, and signed by more than a thousand cultural workers, including Taiwan University President Qian Siliang, publicly denouncing Fairbank for "launching organized propaganda in the United States in the name of 'China experts' and advocating recognition ... CCP regime". Subsequently, the anti-Fee camp took "China Magazine" (founded by Hu Qiuyuan) and "Modern" magazine as the main position, organized a series of criticisms, and for a while there was a lot of commotion. In response to the political and personal attacks on The Taiwan side, Fairbank expressed his serious dissatisfaction. Later, due to the pressure exerted by the United States on the Kuomintang government from all sides, the movement finally came to an end.
Qian Siliang
Time has changed, and the "anti-fee" farce brewed under the Cold War pattern has long become a thing of the past. Through this historical episode, however, what piqued our interest was the controversial Fairbank view of China, or more precisely, his understanding of Chinese mainland revolution and regime. At that time, Mr. Fei aroused strong resentment from the Taiwan side, not only because he was politically "anti-China and pro-communist" and advocated that the United States should engage with the mainland regime and "contain and not isolate" (originally proposed by Bao Dake), but also because he advocated that the Chinese communist revolution should be placed in the long-term perspective of Chinese history. What is particularly intolerable to anti-communist scholars in Taiwan is that Fairbank dared to associate Maoism with Confucius and his enlightened Confucian cultural tradition. The "Open Letter" refutes Fei Zhengqing's "false propaganda", holding: "Chinese tradition, since ancient times, relatives and respect for the sages, benevolence and love of things, vigorous reverence for courtesy and forgiveness, and yearning for peace and harmony. ...... When Professor Fairbank says that communism inherits the Chinese tradition, he only means that he is ignorant of both Chinese tradition and communism. In short, in the view of anti-communist scholars in Taiwan, communism and Chinese tradition are incompatible and fundamentally opposed. This was also the view of some overseas Chinese studies scholars who held the so-called totalitarian theory at that time. For example, George E. Taylor, director of the Institute for Far Eastern and Russian Studies at the University of Washington in Seattle, made a similar point at the hearing, arguing that the Chinese communist worldview represents a radical break with China's past.
Fairbank believed that communist China inherited the history and cultural heritage of traditional China in many ways. In his commentary, he deliberately referred to the People's Republic of China as the "Middle Kingdom of the People," a clear expression of this view (fairbank, "the people's middle kingdom," foreign affairs, vol. 44, no.4, july, 1966）。 Even in the second half of 1966, Fairbank pointed out: "When Mao wanted to overthrow this tradition, he could only find a traditional way." China's long history has trapped him like quicksand — and the more he struggles, the more he becomes trapped in the attitudes and dreams inherited from China's past. ”（fairbank, “a nation imprisoned by her history,”life, september, 1966）
fairbank, “the people's middle kingdom”
Back to the hearing. In particular, Fairbank pointed out that in view of the fact that Sino-Soviet separatism and international communism are no longer integrated, attention should be paid to examining the chineseness displayed by Chinese communism and grasping the Chinese characteristics of Beijing's political behavior. To this end, in his statement, he briefly sorted out some characteristics of traditional Chinese political culture, such as the self-superiority of Sinocentrism, the ideological orthodoxy of the Confucian ritual order, the wisdom of the wise and the foolish, and the selection of the best and the best. Particularly controversial is his so-called "the myth of rule by virtue" theory.
Focusing on the question of the legitimacy of political power in traditional China, Fairbank devoted a section to the statement to discuss the "myth of rule by virtue". He argues that China has always been dominated by "a great Confucian political fiction, the myth of the rule of virtue." According to this concept,
A good person, acting in accordance with the right principles, sets an example. This example inspired others and earned their respect and loyalty. In particular, the correct actions of the emperor, as the most perfect example of mankind, were considered to be able to influence all subjects. His virtue earned the loyalty of his subjects, of course, on the premise that they also understood the principles of correct conduct established in the scriptures. And those who are stupid and stubborn are dealt with by means of rewards and punishments. （fairbank, senate testimony on china, march 1966）
In other words, according to Confucian beliefs, the rulers of traditional China claimed to rule the world by example of virtue and behavior. In order to make it easier for American audiences to understand its importance, Mr. Fei compared China's concept of moral governance with the concepts of the supremacy of law and natural human rights that run through Western political life.
Income Fei's China: The People's Middle Kingdom and the U.S.A.'s New Thinking on China (this edition is abridged compared to the speeches at the hearing).
Fairbank also pointed out that China's rulers have further extended the creed of internal affairs under the rule of virtue into the field of diplomacy. The traditional tributary system reinforced the Chinese myth that the rulers of foreign States were inspired by the virtues of the Chinese emperor to "surrender" to the center of civilization. Even when the state was weak, China maintained its fictitious status as a superior by maintaining etiquette and historical records. The voluminous diplomatic chronicles left by Chinese historians clearly demonstrate the importance of the political myth of the heavenly kingdom and the rule of virtue.
It was along the lines of this general understanding of China's political and cultural traditions, the separation of name and reality, that Fairbank made a judgment on the diplomatic strategy he Chinese mainland at the time. He believes that the blueprint of the world revolution is nothing more than the self-affirmation of the Chinese Communist Party's virtue as an example of the world revolution. "Tokuji demanded that the rulers proclaim their teachings that they would win over the whole world, even if they were unable to sustain it in practice." Therefore, it is not comparable to the evil crazy attempts to conquer the world. This judgment forms the basis for the new thinking on China policy proposed by the fee.
It is worth pointing out that although Fairbank Chengqing regarded the rule of virtue (mythology) as the basic political logic that ran through China's ancient and modern domestic and foreign affairs, the Taiwanese academic circles at that time were not actually familiar with the term rule by virtue. Some translate it as "rule by virtue" and some translate it as "rule by virtue." Tao Baichuan, who sympathized with Fei, proposed: "Translated as lizhiism, it is more in line with Professor Fei Zhengqing's statement." Liang Hejun, who was disgusted with Fei, commented: "Virtue rule is only etiquette, and Mr. Fei may only have a taste of Chinese culture, so he will use this unfamiliar term." ”
The controversy over the issue of "rule by virtue" is over
The term "virtue rule" is a modern term, but it was not coined by Fairbank. In the early 1920s, when Liang Qichao discussed the political thought of pre-Qin Confucianism, he put forward the term "moral governance". However, it was not discussed in depth. Relatively speaking, he paid more attention to the elaboration of the confucian meanings of "rule by man" and "ritualism" (as opposed to the "materialism" and "rule of law" of the Legalists). Xiao Gongquan's theory of pre-Qin Confucian political thought continued Ren Gong's theory of "rule by man". In addition, he emphasized Confucius Shangren, so his political thought can be described as "benevolent rule". Of course, Xiao Gongquan clearly pointed out in his analysis: "The teachings of Confucius are intended to take the position by virtue. However, he also did not use "rule by virtue" as a basic conceptual tool to grasp the core of Confucian political thought.
Xu Fuguan (third from right) and Mou Zongsan (first from left) and Xiong Shili (seated)
As far as the author can see, scholars who really systematically expound "rule by virtue" as the essence of Confucian political thought should push Xu Fuguan. This "halfway monk" scholar did not hesitate to enter Xiong Shili's door after he was too old to be confused, determined to abandon politics and study and carry forward Chinese culture. In the early 1950s, he proposed in an article exploring the structure of Confucian political thought that "virtue rule" is the "highest principle" of Confucian political thought. Its basic starting point is "respect for people" and "trust in human nature". Mr. Xu quoted the sentence "The people's Bing Yi, good is Yi De" in the "Poetry daya and Yan Min", indicating that the key to the rule of virtue lies in:
He who governs must first do his best, and thus make everyone do his best. Between the ruler and the ruled, there is a relationship of virtue and virtue, not a relationship of power and coercion. The common ground for the people of Tonai is human. Everyone can do his or her own virtues, that is, everyone is in the common basis of human beings, and each other is healthy, which is the purpose of politics, and it is the ultimate of politics. (Xu Fuguan: The Structure of Confucian Political Thought and Its Transformation)
Xu Fuguan: Between Academia and Politics
Mr. Xu also quoted the so-called "YiLun Youshu" in the "Book of Hongfan" to illustrate the idea of rule by virtue. He pointed out: "This kind of political thought is an internal political thought, and the internal work of the ruler is often more important than external restriction and establishment. The ruler does not stand on the top of power and uses power to limit something, but mainly stands on his own sexuality and does the work of inner sainthood. ...... The basic intention of the rule of virtue is to integrate the relationship between each other from the inner virtue of each person, and not to use power, or even to use artificial laws to bind people together or maintain them together. Further: "The rule of virtue is an internal politics, so that the emphasis between people is not on restraining them from the external interrelationship, but on inducing and cultivating them according to the inherent nature of man, so that he can be reflexive and self-conscious, so as to fulfill his obligations." ”
When Xiong Shili discussed the Confucian "rule of virtue and etiquette" in his "Instructions for Reading the Scriptures", he pointed out the fundamental difference between it and the "rule of law": "The rule of law is bound by the legal system from the relationship between one person and others or a group, and the responsibility must be obeyed, so that it is accustomed to nature. This is also from the outside. If you wear a cow's nose and a horse's head, will you follow the nature of a cow and a horse? Man wears his own strength through the network. If the people are virtuous, they are guided by the inherent nature of man, so that he knows himself. Mr. Xiong regards "virtue" as "inherent in human nature", so it is also called "moral virtue". It is not difficult to see from this that Xu Fuguan's exposition of "rule by virtue" and his emphasis on guiding virtue by nature are basically inheriting the rational path of his teacher.
All in all, Xu Fuguan was convinced: "The Chinese Confucian proposition of rule by virtue is the most practical proposition of a kind of political poverty, which is not mysterious or broad-based. ”
Xu Fuguan was home to Tunghai University in 1963
Therefore, when Fairbank proposed that "rule by virtue" was a Chinese political myth, Xu Fuguan, then a professor at Tunghai University, immediately decided to respond and refute it. This Kuomintang major general officer at that time, after abandoning politics and studying, has always been committed to the anti-communist cause. Fairbank's remarks, in his view, are the present manifestations of Western "colonialism" colluding with the mainland and opposing traditional Chinese culture centered on Confucius. Therefore, in the midst of the crowd's criticism of fees, Xu Fuguan specially wrote an article entitled "Confucius's Thought on Virtue Rule", which specifically debated the issue of "Rule by Virtue".
Xu Fuguan: A Collection of Treatises on the History of Chinese Thought
First of all, Mr. Xu fully agrees that virtue rule is indeed the essence of Confucius and even the entire Confucian political thought. This time, he expounded the idea of Dezhi, and he paid special attention to the Analects and used it as basic ideological material. Taking the phrase "for the government and morality" as the guideline, Mr. Xu interprets "morality" as "normative behavior that is consistent inside and outside", that is, "virtue". In this regard, he believes that Fairbank's understanding of virtue is not wrong. Further, Xu Wen discussed the background and basis of Confucius's proposal of virtue rule. Based on the information contained in the Analects of Lu Aigong, Ji Kangzi, and others, he deduced that the contradictions between the rulers and the people at that time had reached a level that disturbed the rulers. In this case, rulers often tend to strengthen the demands and control of the people through punishment. In view of this, Confucius "must first make the ruler demand from the people, first demand it from himself, and first realize it from himself." In other words, the contradiction between the ruler and the ruled "must be resolved from the ruler himself." Through this "turning back" to the ruler himself, the people can be brought to virtue and the punishment rendered useless. As for the basis on which Confucius could trust the effect of virtue, Mr. Xu emphasized that this was based on trust in human nature. On the contrary, Fairbank believed that the idea of virtue rule was a myth because he "lacked basic confidence in man himself." Third, in sharp opposition to Mr. Fei's mythological theory, Mr. Xu also quoted the scriptures to reveal the positive content of virtue governance, such as appointing officials and appointing people ("straightening out mistakes"), listening to words and accepting advice ("Shun is good at asking questions, but good at observing rumors"), and "rich people" and "teaching people"). In short, "the idea of rule by virtue actually constitutes a complete system of Confucius's political thought."
Xu Fuguan was in a classroom at Tunghai University in 1967
Xu Fuguan's dissatisfaction with Fairbank was not only due to his belief that Fei's myth of virtue rule was against Confucius and Chinese culture, but what was even more intolerable to him was that Fei dared to "describe Mao Zedong, who opposed Confucius most thoroughly, as inheriting Confucius's tradition." He angrily pointed out: "This is a clever tactic used by Fei to overthrow traditional Chinese culture." To this end, Xu Fuguan gave Fairbank a political hat of "colonialism" and told him: "No matter how China changes, it is absolutely impossible to change to colonialism, and this is what the Fairbank clan and those who rely on the Fairbank clan for food should find out." ”
With regard to the political criticism and personal attacks of Taiwan's political and academic circles, Fairbank was both seriously dissatisfied and very dismissive. However, xu Fuguan's scholar of magnitude has launched an academic debate on the issue of moral governance, which may have somewhat shaken him. The following year, when Fairbank published a collection of his essays, he deleted the controversial passages about the myth of dezhi in the article "New Thinking on China".
Writings of Xu Fuguan
Civilization and Revolution
In the dispute over the "rule of virtue" half a century ago, Fairbank, who was not familiar with Chinese classics, seemed to have fallen behind. However, when we look back on this controversy today, the most interesting thing is not Xu Fuguan's scriptural interpretation of "rule by virtue", but precisely the historical theory of The Chinese nature of the Chinese communist revolution that Fairbank borrowed from "rule by virtue".
Fei Weimei, Lin Huiyin, Fei Zhengqing, Liang Sicheng
Needless to say, as Xu Fuguan revealed, Fairbank's understanding of traditional Chinese political culture is shallow and even biased. However, I believe that his analysis of the deep continuity of Chinese communism and Chinese civilization touches on the real question. As early as 1948, Fairbank pointed out: "The communist movement that took place in China was not only a real communist movement, but also a real Chinese-style movement." (Fairbank: Memoirs of China) Since then, he has long devoted himself to the study of the Chinese communist movement. In order to achieve a deeper understanding, he paid great attention to the influence of Chinese tradition on the CCP revolution and the conscious or unconscious inheritance of the communist movement's heritage of civilization. As he put it during a question-and-answer session at the 1966 hearing, Chinese culture is so unique that Chinese communists are "destined to be different from other communists." On the grand question of the relationship between civilization and revolution, Mr. Fei is not a lone traveler. It is an issue of concern to generations of overseas Chinese scholars, from Fei Zizhi and Ni Dewei to Schram and Wei Feide, and is also the concern of generations of mainland scholars since the founding of the People's Republic of China, from Liang Shuming and Fei Xiaotong to Li Zehou and Liu Xiaofeng.
Xu Fuguan
In contrast, although Xu Fuguan's theory of rule by virtue has made great achievements at the level of scripture, it is almost helpless for us to understand the CCP revolution historically. Mr. Xu's spiritual world at that time was heavily influenced by the ideology of the Cold War. He studies and promotes Chinese culture and has a strong sense of the world. After going to Taiwan, he pretended to be the contemporary Lu Xuangong, explored China's governance, and worked hard to find a way to communicate with modern democratic politics. He believed: "To connect Chinese political thought with democratic politics is only to objectify the 'morality' of politics and condense it into a feasible system for everyone." Mr. Xu's exposition of "rule by virtue" is closely related to the duality of democracy and totalitarianism. His political stance made it impossible for him to face up to the civilized connotations of the Chinese communist revolution in a balanced manner.
However, Fairbank's theory of rule by virtue, while being crude and biased, has effectively unearthed a clue to the analysis of the history of civilization that understands the Chinese communist revolution. To understand revolutionary China, we cannot but observe its historical inheritance of traditional China in terms of system, values, and behavior. We can learn from Fei's analytical approach without having to accept his specific views on Chinese culture. The stone of the mountain can attack the jade also. In fact, even Xu Fuguan admitted at the end of his article "Confucius's Thought on Virtue": "Fairbank believes that the mainland, including the Communist Party, will be influenced by traditional culture in any case, which is correct." ”