Wang, Jun: From rights movements to democratic China
|
|
Date: 12/2/2011 12:48:52 PM
Sender: Wang, Jun
|
Wang, Jun: From rights movements to democratic China
Review from 21st century, 20th century was a continuous disaster and nightmare for China. It started from the Boxer Uprising in 1900 and smoke of the Eight-Power Allied Forces and confusion and slaughter was lasted until 1989; state of flux didn’t stop until now. China in 20th century could be called as the pronoun of “misery” and it was listed into “top of the world” with the huge sacrifice of revolution and war. In term of the meanings of systematic civilization and spirit civilization, this was an indigent and infertile century, but the destruction caused by it needed at least one or two centuries to bridge it. Only in term of meaning of “psychological civilization”, the tragedy of 20th century provided certain “constructive” for China, in other words, it created certain “new, barbaric national traits”; as for the new national trait was good or bad, different people had different views and it was hard to lump together.
In the beginning of 20th century, China almost became political colony due to the battle achievement of “Eight-Power Allied Forces”. Only several decades thousands expeditionary forces became decisive strength and Manchu’s “Great Qing Dynasty” existed in name only; only in order to eradicate this disgraceful name, it took revolutionists eleven years. However, 1905, between 1900 and 1911 and obtaining vital role, was a particular year, having close relationship to what we would talk below, so I had to ask for attention ahead of time.
In December of that year, Qing Dynasty dispatched “five ministers” such as Duan, Fang, Dai, Hongci to investigate constitutionalism in other countries, posturing the pose of attending reform. Foreign presses considered China had been “awaken” and “both people in city or village and scholars or businessmen were so happy and told each other about it”. “Scholars made poems and military preformed military music and businessmen prepared firecrackers”, which prepared to warmly send off five ministers going abroad to investigate politics. From then on, constitutionalism in China had been constructed for a hundred years (except Taiwan), but effect of Chinese constitution was not very valid.
In the beginning of 20th century, Manchu had to admit Chinese weakness was on account of system through devastation and wipeout of Eight-Power Allied Forces and Tan, Sitong’s “No political reform to self-improvement” had become common acknowledge in the court. Treaty of Shimonoseki and Boxer Protocol came in succession, which wakened muddleheaded Chinese people so that Tz’uhsi region behind the curtain also recalled a painful experience and made a crime having been imperial with the name of emperor.
On Jan 29, 1901, Manchu’s “Order Reform” was the beginning of the third new deal in late Qing Dynasty, with the name of “New Deal of Late Qing”. The leading force of New Deal in Late Qing was still Weaternization Groups and they had become constitutionalists with the changing times. People such as Zhang, Zhidong, Sheng, Xuanhuai and so on put up with request of reforms, and even the representative of moderates Li, Hungchang also admitted “as for basic plan was relied on reform”. In 1904 abroad minister in France Sun, Baoqi submitted to royal court to “call for the royal court to imitate the system in England, Germany and Japan of constitution”, which could be called as minister of Qing Dynasty’s first propose of Chinese constitutional reform. So the event of “five ministers going abroad to investigate” happened in 1905. In Chinese modern history, 1905, 100 years ago, was an important time in fact. Three political forces of Manchu, constitutionalists and revolutionaries fought with each other complexly in Chinese political stage.
At first, 1905 was very important for Manchu. Tz’uhsi promulgated the order of agreeing with “reform” on the way of western in 1901, only changing the name of “Tsungli Yamen” into “department of foreign affairs”, cooking cold rice of “foreign affairs” and “reform” to drag out an ignorable existence, but after several years, “New Deal” didn’t have effect. But until 1905, Qing Dynasty was forced to go ahead at last under the pressure of constitutionalists. Its significant action was “abolishing imperial examination”. Modern new education had appeared in China for decades of years, and system of imperial examination constrained new education and scientific development, but nobody came up with abolishing imperial examination formally. In September, 1905, Zhang, Zhidong and so on submitted together, saying “If don’t abolish imperial examination, it will be difficult to go after reform.” Qing Dynasty several hundreds years ago was the same as current CCP, and it paid more attention to social reform than political reform, so it commanded to abolish system of imperial examination existing for 1200 years in that month of 1906. And people considered its importance was the same as “abolishing feudalism in ancient time”.
Second, 1905 was very important for constitutionalists. Since the failure of reform in 1898 and Kang and Liang’s escaping to abroad, movement of reform to establish constitution went into hard times. After several years’ conduction, it had no improvement. But situation changed suddenly in 1905, because the stimulation of Russo-Japanese War caused the upsurge of constitutional movement and became national political movement. On Feb 6, 1904, Japan attacked Russian fleet, who occupied Chinese Lvshunkou, and then Russo-Japan War erupted in fact. Manchu declared on 12th that it was friend of Russia; therefore it stayed “neutral”.
At that time, weak constitutionalists realized this war would lead people’s ideas move towards political reform, considering Japan with constitutional monarchy would overcome Russia with absolute monarchy. In the third day of Russia-Japan War, “China and foreign daily” of constitutionalists published editorial, considering whites could defeat yellows for a long time and whites made colonial domination; However, this war would make people realize “division between strong and weak was relied on system instead of race”. So it put forward definitely that the strength of a country was relied on system, and there was article predicting Japan would defeat Russia and then people’s ideas in our country would be quite different from that at present. And even someone considered this war would lead people “acknowledging the trend of politics of the world, attending inside information of country to touch the nightmare of general society, so Russia-Japan War could not be called the luck of China”. Because “covering autocracy and constitution were Chinese big matter; if Russia defeated Japan, it was our luck and we could regard the reason of Chinese weakness was due to invalidity of autocracy instead of not establishment of constitution”. Based on this, Chinese constitutional reform would be more difficult.
On the contrary of constitutionalists’ hoping Japan failed, Manchu wished Russia would win and formulated foreign policy of pro-Russia. They considered Japan was an island country and not the opponent of Russia, Japan carried out “giving power to people” of constitutional monarchy and soldiers just paid attention to their lives, so it was difficult to win the war; however, Russian monarchy possessed the right of military, so Qing Dynasty predicted Russia would win. Constitutionalists thought that strength or weakness of a country was relied on its mental status instead of territory. Although Japan was small, it was fueling; “Russia was big, but its corruption was equal to us”.
In January, 1905, Russian military, settling in Lvshunkou surrendered. Between February and March, two parties of Japan and Russia expanded Shenyang Battle with 0.6 million military and Russia bite the ground; Russia dispatched fleets from Europe to the east urgently, but they were wiped out at Tsushima Strait in May. Russia-Japan War, lasting more than one year, the result was Japanese won at last. Constitutionalists pointed out the result that “it was competition of politics instead of military. With the result of Japanese winning in the war, autocracy or constitution, which one is effective, that is obvious.” “This was the battle between autocracy between constitution instead of battle between Japan and Russia.” “Using small to fight big and using Asia to constrain Europe were obviously against the examples of history, and it could not be explained by constitution or not, but it was the result without any reason.”
For modern China falling into peril, attraction of “constitution” was not the limitation of monarchy’s power, but “saving” or not. Russia-Japan War caused people believe constitution could make country wealthy, save the country and change of public opinion and ideas, so constitution was like flood that could not control”. Even certain conservative personages opposing constitution originally changed to support constitution. This was what we should value an important point when we reviewed and summarized the events in 1905.
“Constitution” was like protecting rights, which was reform in the system instead of revolution, so constitution constitutionalists paid attention to instigating the ministers of Qing Dynasty to request constitution together. Under their instigations, many bigwigs acknowledged the importance of constitution and submitted in succession. These memorials didn’t move Qing Dynasty but aroused huge social influence, causing more and more ministers’ agreeing on constitution. Until the failure of reform of constitution movement inner the system, basic content of Chinese modern history was on the side of extremity of “continuous reform” and launched “new long march” over and over. Its wide domain, deep degree, fierce means and serious result composed not only Chinese “unprecedented dramatic change” and there was no precedent in the history. Various Chinese volunteers died disastrously in order to pursue national outlet. All of these horrifying deaths were supported, accepted and even welcomed by “branches of Darwinism”. Because no matter “reformers”, “revolutionaries”, “constitutionalists”, “extremists” and even “CCP”, these ideological and political factions opposing to each other called on with the name of “save the nation from extinction”. This was after it.
Peculiarly, Tz’uhsi agreed to open constitutional conference in 1905, which was only seven years later than Hundred Days’ Reform, but it was very difficult to retrieve public supports in the end. Due to time and situation waiting for nobody, development of the society was usually relied on the progress of social psychology and a miss was as good as a mile. Later constitution of Qing Dynasty’s delay made most of outstanding persons and social forces disappointed and mistrustful of it and then these people walked towards the road of reform in succession; some of them stayed neutrality at least and didn’t support one party autocrat oligarchic group any longer. State of Qing Dynasty was collapsed due to this social mentality. Therefore, when we predict the successful possibility of any course, we should observe its precondition at first, which means whether it can attract the most viable people to participate or not? If yes, it will succeed; if no, it will fail. Let’s see what movements that the most viable and talented people participate in, and the future of the society is clear as a glance. If most “talented persons” are out of course of reform, only valuing money and enjoy eating or drinking, this country will not have a promising future.
In my opinion, “rights movement” arising recently is an important link of constitutional construction in China, and it will play a role in the history in the future. Just because of it, I always pay close attention to it and participate in it, because I believe rights movement is the road towards democratic China as the newest stage of hundred-year constitutional construction in China. Furthermore, rights movement can not only promote constitution, also only constitution can guarantee the depth of rights movement. Just due to this, in order to promote rights movement better, it needs to review and summarize the success and failure of hundred years (1905-2005) to go ahead.
王军：从维权运动到民主中国
从二十一世纪回顾，二十世纪对中国来说是一场连续不断的灾难、一场连续不断的恶梦。它以1900年义和团暴动和八国联军的滚滚硝烟作为开幕式，纷扰杀戮直到1989年，内忧外患迄今未已。二十世纪的中国，堪称“苦难”的代名词，它以革命和战争的巨大牺牲得以列入“世界之最”。从技物文化、制度文化、精神文化诸意义看，这是一个贫乏的、没有生育能力的世纪；而它造成的破坏却需要至少一两个世纪方能弥合。惟独在“心理文化”的意义上，二十世纪的惨剧却向中国提供了某种“建设性”，也就是说，它创造了某种“新的、野蛮的国民性”，至于这新的国民性是好是坏，则见仁见智，众说纷坛，更难一概而论。
二十世纪伊始，中国就因为“八国联军”的战功，而差点沦为政治殖民地。区区数万的远征军，成为扭转中国乾坤的力量，1900年，满鞑的“大清”就名存实亡了，只是为了铲除这个可耻的名义，又花了革命党人十一年的工夫。而在1900年和1911年之间居于关键地位的1905年（清光绪三十一年），又是一个特殊的年份，和我们下面要谈的问题密切相关，不得不预先提请注意。
这年12月，满清派出端方、戴鸿慈等“五大臣”分赴各国考察宪政，摆出一副咸与维新的架式。有外国舆论认为中国已经“如梦方醒”，而“京内京外，学界商界，欣然色喜，群相走告”；“学界谱诗歌，军界演军乐，商界则预备金花彩烛”，准备热烈欢送五大员出洋考察政治。然而从那时以来，中国（除台湾以外）的宪政建设已经历时百年，但是中国的宪政成果却乏善可陈。
二十世纪伊始，经过八国联军的蹂躏和扫荡，满清不得不承认中国积弱是制度使然，谭嗣同“不变法不足以自强”，已经成为朝野共识。马关条约和辛丑条约相继而来，使昏聩的国人猛醒，连垂帘听政的慈禧也痛定思痛，以皇帝的名义下了罪己诏。
1901年1月29日，满清“诏令变法”，开始晚清第三次新政，史称“清末新政”。清末新政的主导力量仍是洋务派，随时局演进，他们已经成为立宪派。张之洞、盛宣怀等人也提出变法要求，甚至连稳健派的代表李鸿章也承认“至于根本大计，尤在于变法自强”。1904年驻法公使孙宝琦上书清廷，“吁恳圣明仿英德日本之定制为立宪整体之国”，堪称是满清大员第一次明确提出中国的宪政改革。这样就有了1905年（光绪三十一年）的“五大臣出洋考察”。
在中国近代史上，百年前的1905年，确实是个重要时刻。满清与立宪派、革命派等三股政治力量在中国政治舞台上错综复杂地彼此角力。
首先对满清来说，1905年非常重要。1901年慈禧在西逃途中颁谕同意“变法”，只是将“总理衙门”改为“外务部”之类，炒炒“洋务”和“维新”的冷饭，苟且偷生，几年下来“新政”并无进展。但到了1905年，满清终于在立宪派的压力下，被迫前进。其重大举措就是“废科举”。近代新式教育在中国出现已经几十年，科举制明显束缚新式教育和社会发展，但无人正式提出废除科举。1905年9月，张之洞等人会衔上奏说：“科举不停，学校不广，士心既莫能坚定，民智复无由大开，求其进化日新也难矣。”百年前的清廷像百年后的中共一样，对社会变革的态度比政治变革积极，当月即谕令从1906年开始废除已有一千二百余年的科举制度。当时人们认为其重要“无异于古之废封建”。
其次对立宪运动来说，1905年非常重要。自1898年维新运动失败、康梁逃往海外，维新立宪运动进入低潮。经过几年经营，并无起色。但1905年情况突变，日俄战争的刺激使得立宪运动高涨，发展成全国性的政治运动。1904年 2月6日，日本对占领中国旅顺口的俄国舰队发动突然袭击，日俄战争实际爆发。满清则在12日宣布自己与日俄声称“彼此均系友邦”，因此“局外中立”。
此时仍然弱小的立宪派感觉到这场战争会使国人的思想趋于政治改革，他们认为君主立宪的日本可以战胜君主专制的沙俄。就在日俄宣战后三天，立宪派的《中外日报》即发表社论，认为长期以来都是白种人打败黄种人，白种人对非白种人进行殖民统治，而这次战争将使人认识到“国家强弱之分，不是由于种而是由于制”。明确提出：一个国家的强弱，其关键在于制度，而不在其他因素。还有文章预料日本将战俄国，而这之后“吾国人之理想必有与今天大异者矣”。甚至还有人认为这次战争将使国人“悟世界政治之趋势，参军国之内情，而触一般社会之噩梦，则日俄之战不可谓非中国之幸”。因为“盖专制、立宪，中国之一大问题也。若俄胜日败，则我政府之意，必以为中国所以贫弱者，非宪政之不立，乃专制之未工。”这样，中国的立宪改革将更加困难。
与立宪派希望日本获胜相反，满清则希望俄国获胜，且制定了亲俄的外交方针。他们认为日本岛国，远非俄国对手，而日本实行的君主立宪“以权与民”，其士兵在战场会“各顾其命”，难打胜仗；而俄国君掌大权，军队令行禁止，因此预期俄胜日败。立宪派则认为国家强弱不在大小，而在精神状态。日本虽小，但精神蓬勃，“俄国虽大，而腐败之气象与我国等”。
1905年1月，盘踞旅顺口的俄国守军投降。2、3月间，日俄双方以六十万兵力展开沈阳会战，俄军也一败涂地，俄国从欧洲急调舰队东驶，结果5月在对马海峡也被日军全歼。历时一年多的日俄战争，终以日本大胜告终。立宪派指出这个结果“非军队之竞争，乃政治之竞争。卒之日胜而俄败，专制立宪，得失皎然”。“此非日俄之战，而立宪、专制二政体之战也。”“以小克大，以亚挫欧，赫然违历史之公例，非以立宪不立宪之义解释之，殆为无因之果。”
“立宪”对陷入危亡的近代中国来说，其吸引力其实不是限制君权，而在可以“救亡”。日俄一战使得国人相信立宪可以富国强兵、救亡图存，舆论和观念大变，立宪“乃如万顷洪涛，奔流倒注，一发而莫之或遏”，甚至某些原先反对立宪的守旧人物也转而倾向支持立宪。这是我们今天回顾总结1905年的时候，需要注意的一个重点。
“立宪”犹如维权，不是革命，而是体制内改革，所以立宪派注重策动清政府内的王公大臣、封疆大吏，共同要求立宪。在他们多方策动下，许多权要也认识到立宪的重要性，纷纷上书。这些奏折并未打动清廷，却引起巨大社会反响，赞同立宪的大臣越来越多。直到立宪运动在体制内改革的企图彻底失败后，中国近代史的基本内容才趋向“不断革命”的极端状态，发起一次又一次“新的长征”。其领域之宽与程度之深、方式的激烈、后果的严重，不仅构成中国“古今末有之变局”，且在世界历史上没有先例。形形色色的中国志士，为寻求民族的出路悲惨地死去。这一切惨烈的死亡，受到了“达尔文主义各支派”的一致支持、普遍接受甚至热烈欢呼。因为，不论“维新派”、“革命党”、“立宪派”、“过激党”甚至“共产党”，这些互相敌对的思想政治派别，都是以“救亡”为号召的。这是后话。
奇怪的是，慈禧在1905年同意召开立宪会议，仅比戊戌变法的百日维新晚了七年，但其势已去，人心最终无可挽回。因为时间不等人，形势不等人，社会的发展常常取决于社会心理的进程，失之毫厘，谬以千里。后来满清的宪政一再拖延，使得多数优秀份子、社会中坚，对清廷失望与不信任，而相继走上革命道路，至少是保持中立，再也不支持这个宗社党一党专政的寡头集团。满清政权因此社会心态而覆灭。所以，我们看任何事业的成功可能，首先要观察其前提条件，即，能否吸收社会上最有活力的人们参加？能，就成；不能，则败。大家看看，社会上最活跃、最有才干的人在参与什么活动，社会的前途就一目了然了。如果绝大多数“优秀分子”都游离在改革事业之外，只顾拼命捞钱，不择手段地吃喝嫖赌，这个国家不会有光明的前途。
在我看来，近年来兴起的“维权运动”，是中国宪政建设的重要一环，将来必在历史上有其一页位置。正因为如此，我一直关注维权运动并积极参与其间，因为我深信，维权运动作为中国百年宪政建设的最新阶段，是通向民主中国的道路。进一步说，维权运动不仅可以促进宪政，而且也只有宪政才能保障维权运动的深入。也正因为这样，为了更好的推进维权运动，也就需要回顾并总结百年（1905年－2005年）来的种种得失，以便继续前进。
|
|
| |
