Paper fix

LiangQichao.pdf

LIANG QICHAO

Liang Qichao (1873–1929), disciple of Kang Youwei and his coworker in the reform movement, escaped to Japan after the failure of Kang’s brief regime and there became perhaps the most influential advocate of reform in the years before the Revolution of 1911. His writings, in a lucid and forceful style, dealt with a wide range of political, social, and cultural issues. To thousands of young Chinese studying abroad (most of them in Japan) or reading his books and pamphlets on the mainland, he became an inspiration and an idol—a patriotic hero, whose command of Chinese classical learning together with a remarkable sensitivity to ideas and trends in the West, gave him the appearance of an intellectual giant joining Occident and Orient, almost a universal man.

The fortnightly journal Renewing the People (Xinmin congbao), which Liang published in Yokohama from 1902 to 1905, showed a great change in his thinking. He was now exposed far more to Western influences and enormously impressed by Japan’s progress in contrast to China’s repeated failures. Sensing the power of nationalism as the force that galvanized the Western peoples and the Japanese into action and realizing too the apathy and indifference of China’s millions toward the abortive palace revolution of 1898 (as, indeed, toward most public issues on the higher policy levels), Liang became fully convinced that popular education and the instillment of nationalism were China’s greatest needs. In these years everything in its past culture that

seemed an obstacle to national progress was to be cast aside. Instead of reinterpreting Confucianism to find a sanction for

progress, as he and Kang had done earlier, Liang now put forward a new view of world history strongly colored by social Darwinism: a struggle for survival among nations and races. Evolution of this fierce, competitive sort, rather than an optimistic view of inevitable progress toward the Grand Commonality, became the spur to drastic reform. In the 1890s he and Kang had urged going beyond the mere adoption of Western “methods” and “instruments” to basic institutional reform; now he argued that institutional change itself could only be effected through a more thoroughgoing transformation of the Chinese way of life— particularly its morals, always considered the very essence of Confucianism.

While the Qing regime lasted, Liang remained in favor of constitutional monarchy, but after 1911 he accepted the new republican order. Thus when Yuan Shikai attempted a restoration of the monarchy in 1916 Liang refused to support it, contending consistently that the need to respect the established constitutional order transcended the claims of any authority figure. As many early advocates of modernization, like Yan Fu, in later years experienced some disillusionment with the West and a loss of faith in wholesale Westernization, Liang sought increasingly to ground the modernization process in a strengthening of the rule of law and the building of a civil infrastructure, conducive to greater, informed participation of the people in government but also congenial to the more liberal of Chinese humanistic traditions.

RENEWING THE PEOPLE

Anyone familiar with the Neo-Confucian curriculum ubiquitous in premodern East Asia would recognize that Liang’s title draws upon the key expression “renewing the people” in Zhu Xi’s formulation of the Three Main Guidelines (san gangling) in the Great Learning, first in order of his Four Books. Liang thereby establishes his own doctrine squarely in relation to the dominant philosophy of education in traditional China, but he invests it with a new meaning. For Zhu Xi, xinmin meant renewing the people through universal self-cultivation, as the basis of the whole social, political, and cultural order. Individual self-renewal would transform “the people” (min) and lift them up from an illiterate, undisciplined, inarticulate mass. Thus Zhu’s key slogan: “Self- cultivation for the governance of men” (xiuji zhiren).

Here Liang’s sense of “a people” is of a “nation” informed by the Western (and Japanese)

sense of nationalism: “a” people as a nation (not just “the people” as commoners) would become an organic group with a consciousness of its own identity, actively participating in the determination of its national destiny in a world of many contending peoples. To this end he sees a need for corporate organization, an educational system and communication media, bridging the gap between educated elite and illiterate masses. This involves not just individual self- understanding and self-cultivation but one’s own group learning from other peoples and their cultures.

Since the appearance of mankind on earth, thousands of countries have existed on the earth. Of these, however, only about a hundred still occupy a place on the map of the five continents. And among these hundred-odd countries there are only four or five great powers that are strong enough to dominate the world and to conquer nature. All countries have the same sun and moon, all have mountains and rivers, and all consist of people with feet and skulls; but some countries rise while others fall, and some become strong while others are weak. Why? Some attribute it to geographical advantages. But geographically, America today is the same as America in ancient times; why then do only the Anglo-Saxons enjoy the glory? Similarly, ancient Rome was the same as Rome today; why then have the Latin people declined in fame? Some attribute it to certain heroes. But Macedonia once had Alexander, and yet today it is no longer seen; Mongolia once had Chinggis Khan, and yet today it can hardly maintain its existence. Ah! I know the reason. A state is formed by the assembling of people. The relationship of a nation to its people resembles that of the body to its four limbs, five viscera, muscles, veins, and corpuscles. It has never happened that the four limbs could be cut off, the five viscera wasted away, the muscles and veins injured, the corpuscles dried up, and yet the body still live. Similarly, it has never happened that a people could be foolish, timid, disorganized, and confused and yet the nation still stand. Therefore, if we wish the body to live for a long time, we must understand the methods of hygiene. If we wish the nation to be secure, rich, and honored, we must discuss the way for “renewing the people.” [13: 36b]

The Meaning of “Renewing the People”

The term renewing the people does not mean that our people must give up entirely what is old in order to follow others. There are two meanings of renewing. One is to improve what is original in the people and so renew it; the other is to adopt what is originally lacking in the people and so make a new people. Without both of these, there will be no success. . . .

When a nation can stand up in the world its citizens must have a unique character. From morality and laws to customs, habits, literature, and the arts, these all possess a certain unique spirit. Then the ancestors pass them down and their descendants receive them. The group becomes unified and a nation is formed. This is truly the wellspring of nationalism. Our people have been established as a nation on the Asian continent for several thousand years, and we must have some special characteristics that are grand, noble, and perfect, and distinctly different from those of other races. We should preserve these characteristics and not let them be lost. What is called preserving, however, is not simply to let them exist and grow by themselves and then blithely say, “I am preserving them, I am preserving them.” It is like a tree: unless some new buds come out every year, its withering away may soon be expected. Or like a well: unless there is always some new spring bubbling, its exhaustion is not far away. [12: 40a]

Is it enough merely to develop what we already have? No, it is not. The world of today is not the world of yesterday. In ancient times, we Chinese were people of villages instead of citizens. This is not because we were unable to form a citizenry but due to circumstances. Since China majestically used to be the predominant power in the East, surrounded as we were by small barbarian groups and lacking any contact with other large states, we Chinese generally considered our state to encompass the whole world. All the messages we received, all that influenced our minds, all the instructions of our sages, and all that our ancestors passed down qualified us to be individuals on our own, family members, members of localities and clans, and members of the world. But they did not qualify us to be citizens of a state. Although the qualifications of citizenship are not necessarily much superior to these

other characteristics, in an age of struggle among nations for the survival of the fittest while the weak perish, if the qualities of citizens are wanting, then the nation cannot stand up independently between Heaven and earth.

If we wish to make our nation strong, we must investigate extensively the methods followed by other nations in becoming independent. We should select their superior points and appropriate them to make up for our own shortcomings. Now with regard to politics, academic learning, and technology, our critics know how to take the superior points of others to make up for our own weakness; but they do not know that the people’s virtue, the people’s wisdom, and the people’s vitality are the great basis of politics, academic learning, and techniques. If they do not take the former but adopt the latter, neglect the roots but tend the branches, it will be no different from seeing the luxuriant growth of another tree and wishing to graft its branches onto our withered trunk, or seeing the bubbling flow of another well and wishing to draw its water to fill our dry well. Thus, how to adopt and make up for what we originally lacked so that our people may be renewed should be deeply and carefully considered. [12: 40b]

All phenomena in the world are governed by no more than two principles: the conservative and the progressive. Those who are applying these two principles are inclined either to the one or to the other. Sometimes the two arise simultaneously and conflict with each other; sometimes the two exist simultaneously and compromise with each other. No one can exist if he is inclined only to one. Where there is conflict, there must be compromise. Conflict is the forerunner of compromise.

Those who excel at making compromises become a great people, such as the Anglo-Saxons, who, in a manner of speaking, make their way with one foot on the ground and one foot going forward, or who hold fast to things with one hand and pick up things with another. Thus, what I mean by “renewing the people” does not refer to those who are infatuated with Western ways and, in order to keep company with others, throw away our morals, learning, and customs of several thousand years’ standing. Nor does it refer to those who stick to old

paper and say that merely embracing the morals, learning, and customs of these thousands of years will be sufficient to enable us to stand upon the great earth. [12: 41a]

On Public Morality

The main deficiency in our citizens is their lack of public morality. “Public morality” simply refers to that which allows people to form groups and nations. Humans are the species of animal who can best establish themselves through this morality (as the Western philosopher Aristotle noted). . . .

Among our people there is not one who looks on national affairs as if they were his own affairs. The significance of public morality has not dawned on us. Examining into it, however, we realize that the original basis for morality lies in its serving the interests of the group. As groups differ in their degree of barbarism or civilization, so do their appropriate morals vary. All of them, however, aim at consolidating, improving, and developing the group. . . . In ancient times some barbarians considered it moral to practice sharing of women or to treat slaves as if they were not human beings. And modern philosophers do not call it immoral because under the particular situation at the time that was the proper thing to do in the interests of the group. Thus morality is founded on the interests of the group. If it is against this principle, even the perfect good can become an accursed evil. Public morality is therefore the basis of all morals. What is beneficial to the group is good; what is detrimental to the interests of the group is bad. This principle applies to all places and to all ages.

As to the external features of morality, they vary according to the degree of progress in each group. As groups differ in barbarism or civilization, so do their public interests and their morals. Morality cannot remain absolutely unchanged. It is not something that could be put into a fixed formula by the ancients several thousand years ago, to be followed by all generations to come. Hence, we who live in the present group should observe the main trends of the world, study what will suit our nation, and create a new morality in order to solidify, benefit, and

develop our group. We should not impose upon ourselves a limit and refrain from going into what our sages had not prescribed. Search for public morality and there will appear a new morality, there will appear “a people renewed.” [12: 47a–b]

On Progress

Generally, those who talk about a “renewal” may be divided into two groups. The lower group consists of those who pick up others’ trite expressions and assume a bold look in order to climb up the official hierarchy. Their Western learning is stale stuff, their diplomacy relies on bribes, and their travels are moving in the dark. These people, of course, are not worth mentioning. The higher group consists of those who are worried about the situation and try hard to develop the nation and to promote well-being. But when asked about their methods, they would begin with diplomacy, training of troops, purchase of arms, and manufacture of instruments; then they would proceed to commerce, mining, and railways; and finally they would come, as they did recently, to officers’ training, police, and education. Are these not the most important and necessary things for modern civilized nations? Yes. But can we attain the level of modern civilization and place our nation in an invincible position by adopting a little of this and that, or taking a small step now and then? I know we cannot. [13: 32b]

Let me illustrate this by commerce. Economic competition is one of the big problems of the world today. It is the method whereby the powers attempt to conquer us. It is also the method whereby we should fight for our existence. The importance of improving our foreign trade has been recognized by all. But in order to promote foreign trade, it is necessary to protect the rights of our domestic trade and industry, and in order to protect these rights, it is necessary to issue a set of commercial laws. Commercial laws, however, cannot stand by themselves, and so it is necessary to complement them with other laws. A law that is not carried out is tantamount to no law; it is therefore necessary to define the powers of the judiciary. Bad legislation is worse than no legislation, and so it is necessary to decide

where the legislative power should belong. If those who violate the law are not punished, laws will become void as soon as they are proclaimed; therefore, the duties of the judiciary must be defined. When all these are carried to the logical conclusion, it will be seen that foreign trade cannot be promoted without a constitution, a parliament, and a responsible government. Those who talk about foreign trade today blithely say, “I am promoting it, I am promoting it,” and nothing more. I do not know how they are going to promote it. The above is one illustration, but it is true with all other cases. Thus I know why the so-called new methods nowadays are ineffectual. Why? Because without destruction there can be no construction. . . . What, then, is the way to effect our salvation and to achieve progress? The answer is that we must shatter at a blow the despotic and confused governmental system of some thousands of years; we must sweep away the corrupt and sycophantic learning of these thousands of years. [13: 33a–b]

[Xinmin shuo, in Yinbing shi wenji 12: 36b, 40a–b, 41a, 47a–b; 13: 32b–33b—CT]

THE CONSCIOUSNESS OF RIGHTS

Liang Qichao considered that the “new citizenry” possessed rights both individually and collectively. The term here translated as “rights” is quanli, a more literal rendering of which would be “power and profit.” The earliest use of the compound quan-li occurs in the Confucian classic Xunzi, where we read that when one has perfected one’s learning and self-cultivation, “quan-li cannot move one [to do wrong]” (Xunzi Index, 3/1/49). In other words, Xunzi considered quan-li to be something that we should not allow to influence us. Liang’s essay is representative of a movement toward reinterpreting and reevaluating quanli, propelled both by internal Confucian developments and by Western writings (translated into Chinese terms by the Japanese) that emphasized rights as empowerment.

All people have responsibilities toward others that they ought to fulfill, and all people have responsibilities to themselves that they ought to fulfill. Not fulfilling one’s responsibility to others is indirectly to harm the group, while not fulfilling one’s responsibility to oneself is directly to harm the group. How is this? Not fulfilling one’s responsibilities to others is like killing another; not fulfilling one’s responsibilities to oneself is like killing oneself. If someone kills himself, then the group is decreased by one person. If there were a group all of whose members killed themselves, that would mean no less than the entire group’s

suicide. What are one’s responsibilities to oneself? In giving birth to things,

Heaven endowed them with innate abilities to defend and preserve themselves; all living things are examples of this. The reason why humans are superior to the other myriad things is that they have not only a “physical” existence but also a “metaphysical” one. There is more than one requirement for metaphysical existence, but the most important of them is rights.

Thus animals have no responsibilities toward themselves other than preserving their lives, while in order for those who are called “human” to completely fulfill our self-responsibilities, we must preserve both our lives and our rights, which rely on one another. If we do not do this, we will immediately lose our qualifications to be human and will stand in the same position as animals. Thus all laws of Rome that saw slaves as equivalent to animals were, according to logical theory, perfectly correct. (If we used a logical syllogism to make the reasoning explicit, it would look like this: (1) those without rights are animals; (2) slaves have no rights; (3) therefore, slaves are animals.)

Thus while in a “physical” suicide, only one person is killed, in the case of a “metaphysical” suicide, a whole society is turned into animals. Furthermore, their descendants will reproduce endlessly. This is why I say that not fulfilling one’s responsibility to oneself is to directly harm the group. Alas! I really do not understand why so many of my fellow Chinese are willing to kill themselves!

Where do rights originate? Rights originate in strength. Lions and tigers always have first-class, absolute rights with respect to the myriad animals, as do chieftains and kings with respect to the common people, aristocrats with respect to commoners, men with respect to women, large groups with respect to small, and strong nations with respect to weak ones. This is not due to the violent evil of the lions, tigers, chieftains, and so on. It is Heaven’s nature that all humans desire to extend their own rights and never be satisfied with what they have attained. Thus it is the nature of rights that someone must first give them up before someone else can snatch them away.

For a human to be committed to strengthening himself through preserving his rights is an unparalleled method for firmly establishing

and improving his group. In ancient Greece there were those who made offerings to the god of justice. The statue of this god held a scale in its left hand and a sword in its right. The scale was for weighing rights, and the sword was for protecting the practice of rights. To have a sword but no scale would be mean and wicked, but to have a scale without a sword is to make “rights” empty talk and ultimately futile. . . .

If considering only humane government will not do, it goes without saying that cruel government is still worse. In general, that humans possess rights consciousness is due to innate good knowing and good ability. But why is it that there are great inequalities—some are strong while others are weak, some dormant while others disappear? Such differences always follow the history of a nation and the gradual influence of political circumstances. Mencius said it before me: “It is not that there were never sprouts [on the mountainside], but cattle and sheep continuously graze there, so that it becomes barren.” If one observes the histories of nations that have been destroyed—whether Eastern or Western, ancient or contemporary—one sees that in the beginning, there has always been some resistance against tyrannical rule to seek liberty. But as the government seeks repeatedly to eradicate opposition, the resistance gets steadily weaker, more despondent, and melts away until eventually the rigorous, intoxicating consciousness of rights comes increasingly under control and is increasingly diluted, to the point that any hope of its restoration is lost and the people come to accept repression. As the situation continuously worsens over the decades and centuries, rights consciousness completely disappears. . . .

The citizenry is an assemblage of individual persons. The rights of the state are composed of the rights of individuals. Therefore, the thoughts, feelings, and actions of a citizenry will never be obtainable without the thoughts, feelings, and actions of each individual member. That the people is strong means that the state is strong; that the people is weak means that the state is weak; that the people is rich means that the state is rich; that the people is poor means that the state is poor; that the people possesses rights means that the state possesses rights; and that the people is without shame means that the state is without shame. Is it rational to hope to establish the nation on

the basis of the three characters “nation without shame”? Is it rational? . . .

The state is like a tree, and the consciousness of rights is like its roots. If the roots are destroyed, the tree will wither and die no matter how strong its trunk or vigorous its leaves. If fierce winds and rains come, it will be smashed all the sooner. Or else the scorching heat of a drought will soon cause it to completely decay away. When a citizenry that lacks rights consciousness is confronted with foreign pressures, it is like a withered tree in a storm. Or if there are no foreign pressures, such a citizenry is like the tree in a drought. I see that of all the millions of inhabitants of the earth, except for the black savages of India, Africa, and Southeast Asia, no one has a weaker sense of rights than do we Chinese.

[Xinmin shuo, ch. 8, pp. 31–32, 38–39—PZ]

THE CONCEPT OF THE NATION

Liang Qichao’s concept of a “new citizenry” and “public morality” was directly correlated to his new conviction concerning the nation as the irreducible core of social organization and civilized life. In contrast to his former mentor Kang Youwei, whose universalistic, cosmopolitan ideal would subsume all human loyalties in the “Grand Commonality,” Liang argued the need for national loyalty. Like Zhang Binglin and Sun Yat-sen, he believed that the Chinese lacked a sense of nationalism; traditional Chinese loyalties had been more to self, family, and local community. This left China without the solidarity and cohesion needed to survive in the struggle among nations. A conscious effort was therefore needed to develop a sense of nationhood and to inculcate national loyalty among the people.

During the primitive stage of “human grouping,” there are only tribal peoples and no national citizens. The evolution from tribal peoples to national citizens divides barbarism from civilization. How different are tribal peoples and national citizens from one another! Groups of people who form clans to live together and naturally create their own customs are called tribal peoples. People who have a concept of the nation and can participate in politics themselves are termed “citizens.” Nowhere on earth can nations be established without citizens.

What is the concept of the nation? First, being aware of the nation in relation to the individual. Second, being aware of the nation in relation to the court. Third, being aware of the nation in relation to foreigners. Fourth, being aware of the nation in relation to the world.

What does “being aware of the nation in relation to the individual” mean? Humanity is superior to other creatures in that people can form groups. If individuals stood alone in nature, since they cannot fly as well as birds nor can they run as well as animals, the human race would have perished a long time ago. Therefore, in regard to the internal domain, in the age of Great Peace, cooperative efforts make things easy and the division of labor benefits everybody, in that it is impossible for individuals to do everything by themselves. In regard to the outside world, at a time of crisis, the group combines all their wisdom and strength and defends the walls against invasion, while it is totally impossible for individuals to protect themselves. Thus did nations arise.

The establishment of nations was inevitable. That is to say, everyone understood that only to rely on the individual was not feasible, thus leading them instead to associate together, to assist each other, to protect one another, and to benefit each other; they wanted the associations never to fall apart, the assistance never to fade, the protection never to miscarry, and the benefits never to fail. Therefore, everyone must realize that above the individual is something larger and more important. Whenever they have a thought, make an utterance, or undertake a task, they always pay attention to what is said to stand above the individual self. (There is nothing wrong even with considering this principle of impartial love as “egotism,” because it is a universal truth that without benefiting the group one cannot benefit oneself.) Otherwise, associations will never be formed and humanity will nearly disappear. This is the first principle of the concept of the nation.

What does “awareness of the nation in relation to the court” mean? If the nation is like a corporation, then the court is the corporate headquarters while those who control the court are the general managers. If the nation is like a town or a city, then the court is the lodge of fellow townsmen while those who control the court are its superintendents. The question whether the headquarters is established for the sake of the corporation or the corporation for the headquarters, or whether the lodge of fellow townsmen is established for the sake of the city or the city for the lodge, does not need to be debated to be clear. The natures of the two [nation and court] are different, and so their spheres of importance cannot be violated. Therefore, the remark

of the French king Louis XIV, “L’état c’est moi,” is still today considered to be the words of a traitor. Whenever children in the West hear of this, they all condemn him, while from the Chinese point of view there may be nothing strange in the remark. At the same time, consider this analogy: if the manager of a corporation says, “I am the corporation” or the superintendent of a city [lodge of fellow townsmen] says, “I am the city,” could the stockholders or the citizens accept this?

It is certain that a nation cannot exist without a court, and so it is necessary always to extend love of country to love of court. . . . Those who understand the concept of the nation generally love the court, but those who love the court do not necessarily possess the concept of the nation. Those courts that are established legally are the courts that represent the nation, and thus to love the court is to love the nation. Those courts that are not established legally are courts that betray the nation. Only if the court is legitimated can one speak of love of country. This is the second principle of the concept of the nation.

What does “awareness of the nation in relation to alien peoples” mean? The term “nation” appears in relation to the outside world. If the world consisted of just one nation, then the “nation” would not have been named. So “myself” appears when two selves stand side by side, “my family” appears when two families are adjacent, and “my nation” appears when two nations confront each other. For millions of years the human race has multiplied in separate places, and each people prospered. From language and customs to even concepts and legal systems, all differed in form and substance as well as in spirit, and thus peoples inevitably developed their own nations. Since under the universal law of the struggle for survival and natural selection, conflicts are unavoidable between people and between nations, “nations” were established to deal with other groups. Therefore, even if there were saintly wise men in foreign countries, true patriots would never be willing to live under the sovereignty of foreigners. They would rather make the people of the entire nation sacrifice life and limb until no one was left, rather than grant even the slightest of their rights to another people. Otherwise, the capacity for making the nation would soon collapse. Consider the analogy to a family. Even if one’s home is completely deserted, one still does not want anyone else to use it.

Awareness of oneself leads to one’s survival. This is the third principle of the concept of the nation.

What does “awareness of the nation in relation to the world” mean? . . . Competition is the mother of civilization, and if competition ceased even for a single day, the progress of civilization would halt at once. Through competition, families arise out of individuals, villages arise out of families, and nations arise out of villages. Nations are the largest units of association and the peak of competition.

If boundaries were abolished as nations merged—this is actually unattainable, but if it did happen—competition would cease, and so would not civilization soon vanish as well? Even more to the point is the fact that human nature is unable to exist without competition. That being so, after the Grand Commonality was established, it would not be long before something inevitably gave rise to competition in the Heavenly Kingdom, and then at that time the world would return to tribal competition instead of national competition. This would lead the people of the world back to barbarism. Those who study about such things today all know the excellence of this doctrine [of the abolition of national boundaries] but regard its excellence as pertaining to spiritual boundaries rather than historical ones. Therefore, it is with good reason that they remain content with the nation and not the world as the highest form of human association. However, for those who advocate universal love, the sacrifice of the interests of the individual for the sake of love for the family is permissible; and to sacrifice the interests of the family for the sake of love for the village is permissible; and to sacrifice the interests of the individual, the family, or the village for the sake of love of the nation is permissible. The nation is the standard of partial love; that the ultimate standard of universal love is therein either fallen short of or gone beyond is barbarism. Why? Because both situations are characteristic of tribal peoples instead of citizens of a nation. This is the fourth principle of the concept of the nation.

Alas, how diminished we are! We Chinese lack the concept of the nation. Inferior people care only about the prosperity of the individual and the family, while superior people airily deliberate philosophical

truths, turning their backs on practical things. . . . [However,] the search for how to truly benefit oneself, as well as

how to preserve one’s benefits without ever losing them, cannot be successful without cultivating the concept of the nation. My compatriots! Don’t say that it is enough to rely on the great size of our territory. At its zenith, the extent of the Roman Empire was no smaller than China today. Don’t say that it is enough to rely on the population. There are billions of natives in India. Don’t say that it is enough to rely on civilization. In the past, when Athens in Greece was an independent state, it claimed that its culture was the best in the world until it became subservient to other peoples, was unable to rise up, and eventually was shattered. And during the barbarian Yuan dynasty in China, the literati all learned Mongol (the “Notes on the Twenty-Two Histories” records this in detail), and learning nearly ceased.

Only the nation is our father and mother. Without a father, what can be relied on? Without a mother, what can

be relied on?

[If we are] Alone and desolate, who will pity us? As soon as the opportunity is lost, we are finished. Reflecting on this, so far we still have a chance. [Chuci]

[Xinmin shuo, ch. 6, pp. 16–18, 22–23—PZ]

LIANG QICHAO AND THE NEW PRESS

Liang Qichao was active in the development of the late Qing political press and became a prime molder of public opinion in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. In form these late Qing journals were most directly influenced by the Western missionary and commercial press that had operated in China from 1815. By the late nineteenth century, a number of foreign-managed Chinese-language commercial newspapers such as Shenbao (Shanghai Journal, founded 1872) were already in existence. In contrast, the new political press, which would become increasingly influential in the late 1890s, distinguished itself from these commercial newspapers in two ways: it was owned and managed by Chinese nationals, and its main emphasis

was on political commentary. While the origins of such political commentary can be traced back to newspapers founded by Western- influenced Chinese merchants, officials, and intellectuals in the 1870s through the 1890s (including Wang Tao’s Xunhuan ribao, founded in Hong Kong in 1873), the real turning point in late Qing press history came in 1895. In the wake of China’s defeat by Japan and its acceptance of the humiliating terms of the Treaty of Shimonoseki, Kang Youwei and several of his students, including Liang Qichao, founded China’s first new-style political journals. The most important of these was Shiwu bao (China Progress, 1886).

The changes in the late Qing press initiated by the events of 1895 were both qualitative and quantitative. Whereas in the early and mid- 1890s about a dozen newspapers were published in the chief port cities, between 1895 and 1898 some sixty newspapers were established, many of them outside of the foreign-dominated centers. The Guangxu emperor himself recognized the importance of this early reform press and encouraged its development during the Hundred Days of Reform. After the Empress Dowager’s coup on September 21, 1898, however, Kang, Liang, and the reform press were forced into exile in Japan.

This forced exile gave rise to one of the most important chapters in the development of late Qing political journalism. Two of the most influential reform organs were founded in Japan by Liang Qichao during this period: Qingyi bao (The China Discussion, 1898), and Xinmin congbao (Renewing the People, 1902). Thus young intellectuals who later became major actors in the early twentieth-century China-based press had an opportunity to develop their skills as reformists and publicists—skills that proved invaluable once reform was put back on the official agenda in Beijing, through the aforementioned Imperial Edict of January 29, 1901, which announced administrative reforms and opened up the possibility of more-substantial political reforms. Taking advantage of this opening, from the year 1904 reformists began to create newspapers and periodicals in China advocating the establishment of a constitutional monarchy. Their mission was to monitor the depth of the government’s commitment to reform,

encourage the development of politically aware constitutional citizens, and guide China to a position of strength in the world through legal and institutional reform.

The Eastern Times (Shibao) became the most important of these new reform journals. Its history began in the early spring of 1904 when Liang Qichao, still in exile, risked a visit to Shanghai in order to guide the preparations for its establishment. He chose the newspaper’s name, outlined its general regulations, and wrote the inaugural statement for its first edition (translated below). Eventually, it distanced itself from the Kang-Liang faction, but by 1909 it was the most widely circulated newspaper in the Shanghai region. Thus, in the absence of political parties and representative bodies, the new press became the institutional base of late Qing reformers and their principal mouthpiece.

INAUGURAL STATEMENT FOR THE EASTERN TIMES (SHIBAO)

Conscious of the need to raise people’s awareness of national issues and create active public opinion in regard to national policy, Liang joined in establishing this newspaper as a forum for the discussion of such issues. He wrote this inaugural statement for its first issue, June 12, 1904, to set forth its purposes and functions. It is a manifesto of reform, combining intellectual eclecticism with calls for a political middle course between conservatism and radicalism. Intent on finding a synthesis between Western learning—in this text specifically the ideas of Charles Darwin and Herbert Spencer—and the truths of the classical Confucian tradition, the editors attempted to forge a new constitutional course for China, seeing their role as mediators between old elites who opposed reform, young revolutionaries who advocated total Westernization, and impractical intellectuals whom Liang indirectly faulted for the failure of the Hundred Days of Reform.

Why publish the Eastern Times (Shibao)? The Record of Rites says, “A gentleman acts according to the golden mean.”17 It also says, “A man of profound self-cultivation and high learning uses his knowledge appropriately.”18 Therefore, in regulating the state and ordering society, nothing is more valuable than timeliness. It is not the Chinese teachings alone that emphasize this. In the West, Darwin first developed the principle of natural selection and the triumph of the strong. Spencer later replaced this principle with the theory of survival of the fittest. According to this theory, which constitutes the field of victory and defeat, that which is of superior quality but not adapted to the environment will eventually become inferior and that which is of inferior

quality but adapted to the environment will eventually become superior. Therefore, although the fur of a fox is very warm, it is of no use in the heat of summer, and although fine satin is very beautiful, it cannot protect against the cold of winter. That which is not appropriate to the time will certainly fail.

In China today, those in lofty and powerful positions and those who are reclusive hermits are all unaware of the general world situation. They believe that thousand-year-old politics and thousand-year-old learning are appropriate to the changes of today. According to an assessment of present conditions, however, this is not possible; one could knit one’s brow in worry for a whole day and still not be able to solve today’s problems with yesterday’s methods. As a result, when heroic young activists hear that Western nations have such and such a method of regulating chaos, such and such a method of self- strengthening, they all run and shout, “We too must do it this way! We too must do it this way!” While no one would deny that these methods are the reason the West can regulate chaos and strengthen itself, we simply do not know if these methods are appropriate to our times. As Confucius said, “To go beyond is as wrong as to fall short.”19 To fall short and apply methods that are no longer fitting to the times is a waste; every day corruption would increase and there would be no way to save the nation. At the same time, to go beyond the present situation and apply methods that are too advanced for the times, to yell and shout and wildly push forward, would not accomplish anything either. Moreover, proceeding in this way could give rise to new problems, and the nation would become unsalvageable. In sum, if the country should be lost, both kinds of people [conservatives and Western-oriented radicals] would be equally responsible.

There are also intelligent, broad-minded, and steadfast individuals who are committed to listening to both sides but choosing the middle course in order to plan the orderly progress of the people. It seems, however, that because their general knowledge is insufficient, their understanding of scientific theory weak, and their concrete investigations of the current situation lacking, when they speak in terms of general principles they have no tangible proof, when they try to manage matters they cannot manage them successfully, and when they

want to implement their ideas they are bewildered and do not know how to proceed. They vigorously apply themselves to do one or two things but because their methods are mistaken, they incessantly fail. Because everyone is aware of this and admonished by it they do not dare speak of reform again.20 Alas! Although there are numerous kinds of publicists and politicians in the nation, upon scrutiny all of them follow one of these three paths [of conservatives, radicals, or impractical reformists].

Alas! This is a dangerous time and we are deeply concerned. Therefore in founding this newspaper, we have named it shi—The Times (Shibao).21 While we of course wish to revere the essence of the nation, we believe that that which is not appropriate to the present should be put aside and forgotten. And while we of course admire Western civilization, we believe that that which is not appropriate to the level of Chinese development must be temporarily put aside. We will exert our knowledge to the highest possible level in order to resolve the major political and scholarly problems that arise in China and abroad. Using fair and honest discussions, we will analyze the positive and negative, advantageous and disadvantageous aspects of these problems. We will also investigate methods for delivering the nation from danger and coping with the current situation, while cooperating with the government and conferring with the citizens.

It is the duty of newspapers in advanced nations22 to report on the facts in the news, to follow the trend of international public opinion, to investigate conditions in the interior of the nation, to develop knowledge of politics and the arts, to introduce new ideas, and to provide materials for leisurely reading. We must drive ourselves on. We will use our writings to define and convey the will of the nation. We must also, however, take note of the saying of Western philosophers that “perfect things must be produced in perfect times.” Today, given that our nation is still young in terms of development, I realize that it is not appropriate for us to wish to place ourselves among the great newspapers of all of the nations in the world. But by taking one step after another, a distance of one thousand miles can eventually be overcome, and by joining together one hundred streams, the four seas could eventually be

formed. It is certain that, sooner or later, our newspaper’s trajectory will not only follow but parallel the progress of the nation. This is what we will assiduously work toward every day.

Our nation can take the highest position among the nations of the world. Therefore, this newspaper must seek to take the highest position among all of the newspapers in the world. The favor that the people of our nation will owe us is unlimited! The favor that the people of our nation will owe us is unlimited!

22. Wenming guo is translated here as “advanced nations,” according to the new meaning the term wenming took on in Meiji Japan in the late nineteenth century rather than in its classical meaning as a civilized cultural condition.

[Shibao, June 12, 1904; Xinmin congbao, #44–45—JJ]