Wednesday, November 29, 2006

大楚興百年序志

有鑒于民間盛傳的一句俗語﹕「二十年後﹐又是一條好漢﹗」我當以應此壯語﹐誠述吾在百年歷史迭蕩起伏中所可能作出的舉措﹕

1882年出生﹐我會加入北洋軍﹐志在組新軍以圖自強。

1902年出生﹐我會成為國民黨的一名忠實幹部﹐視其為畢生事業之載體。

1922年出生﹐我會如同我祖父母輩﹐加入中國共產黨﹐解放全中國。

1942年出生﹐我會成為極左狂熱的激進份子﹐並很有可能受「建設祖國邊疆」之宣傳號召﹐去最艱苦的邊遠山區作貢獻。

1962年出生﹐我會成為一自由主義的理想青年﹐並視八十年代的改革大潮的終極體表現為六‧四天安門學生運動而投身其民運事業。

1982年出生﹐我會成為我自己。在此陳述我的志願以及與我宿命息息相關的國運﹔站在二十一世紀的平臺﹐重新回顧吾國百年經驗﹐在西球畔作出更先見的抉擇。

茲為序志表。

Tuesday, November 28, 2006

Power politics 强权政治

From Wikipedia

Power politics is a state of international relations in which sovereigns protect their own interests by threatening one another with military, economic, or political aggression. Power politics is essentially a way of understanding the world of international relations: nations compete for the world's resources and it is to a nation's advantage to be manifestly able to harm others. It prioritizes national self-interest over the interest of other nations or the international community.

强权政治是一种国际外交的手段,凭藉军事,经济,或政治的对外胁迫与威慑力来保护国家自我的利益。了解强权政治的本质其实是一种国际关系在全球的运作方法: 国家竞争的实质是为了全球资源,故对一个国家而言则有必要显示他具备袭击他国的实力。强权政治使一国对自我利益取决于优先考虑,从而排挤了其他国家甚至国际团体。

Techniques of power politics include, but are not limited to, conspicuous nuclear development, pre-emptive strike, blackmail, the massing of military units on a border, the imposition of tariffs or economic sanctions, bait and bleed and bloodletting, hard and soft balancing, buck passing, covert operations, and asymmetric warfare.

强权政治的技术包括,但不被受限于,显现的核子发展,先发制人的攻击,勒索,在国界边境的军事集合与部署, 关税或经济制裁,引诱,流血事件,软硬实力的平衡施展,秘密行动,以及非常规战术。

The English term 'power politics' is derived from the German word Machtpolitik.

英文词语 '强权政治'(Power politics)起源于德国字Machtpolitik.

Saturday, November 25, 2006

《為戴季陶主義招魂》

戴季陶追隨國父孫中山及繼承其思想衣缽﹐可謂至誠之心﹐肝膽相照。故在孫中山去世之後﹐戴即更名為「戴傳賢」﹐意在傳國父之賢德﹐以昭世人。

戴季陶(1890-1949)乃國民黨初期主要理論家﹐他系統地闡述﹐辨證﹐及詳論三民主義哲學基礎﹐成為孫中山思想嫡系傳人﹐其學說亦被納為國民黨官方理論的主要依據﹐遂被時人稱之為「戴季陶主義」。他辯護三民主義「即民生哲學—民生為宇宙大德之表現﹔仁愛即民生哲學的基礎」。 並斷言孫中山思想「完全是中國正統思想﹐就是繼承堯舜以至孔孟而中絕的仁義道德思想」。 他認為先聖孔子「把古代文化用科學的方法從理論上整理起來﹐成為一種學術文化」。 孔子最先「組織了一個民生的哲學」﹐ 其系統可分為兩部份﹕「一部是《中庸》﹐為儒家原理論﹔一部為《大學》﹐為儒家方法論」。 孔子思想在戴季陶看來﹐亦可被譽為「社會連帶責任主義」﹐進而提出﹐孫中山「實在是孔子之後﹐中國道德文化上繼往開來之大聖」。

戴季陶又從與孫中山的「互助論」相悖的社會達爾文主義的「生存競爭」學說出發﹐認為人類本能的求生欲含有「獨佔性和排他性﹔又具有統一性和支配性」﹐以此反對共產主義唯物論及社會革命論的階級鬥爭說。由此認知為根據﹐戴季陶即成為國民黨初期最激進的反赤化支持者之一。其思想在上世紀二十年代曾受中共哲學教父瞿秋白的嚴厲抨擊﹐斥其思辯為脫離廣大勞動人民實際壓迫處境的「君子」、「精英」、「貴族」式的資產階級革命。 總而言之﹐與中共當年企圖發起的布爾什維克式的革命水火不容﹐被中共定性為「反革命和反動學說」。

在歷史受盡了百年歲月的洗禮後的今天﹐國共雙方的矛頭都已經不再如昔日那樣的尖銳﹐連宋於2005年訪問大陸的破冰之旅之形勢更顯示了détente (外交上緩和關係) 的趨勢。而如今中共大肆宣揚他昔日最唾棄的民族文化產業﹐特別是儒家正統思想﹐在全世界興建「孔子學院」的外交軟實力策略﹐以及全方面在其機關媒體CCTV里為中華文明頌讚歌﹐都明顯地區別開他往日毛時代的行徑。自鄧小平1979年改革開放以降﹐中共已在經濟與文化的政策上納入了許多有類於國民黨的政策。故更有人謂之今日中國共產黨已不再代表無產階級﹐更不是階級政黨﹐(佐證了其名之荒謬) 他已接受資本家參政如黨﹐罷黜了階級鬥爭論﹐並大搞國家資本主義。他的「三個代表」更直言不諱地宣稱他代表了全民﹐實為現世之[新] 國民黨矣﹗(語出台灣資深國民黨理論學者王曉波﹐著有《孫中山思想研究》。)

那麼﹐我們現在不禁要反思國父的遺訓是否已經完成﹐革命是否已經成功﹖筆者的答案是﹐不盡然﹗雖然國民已經獨立﹐國家已經自主﹐但是國家並未統一﹐政體尚且分裂﹗三民主義﹐顧名思義﹐曰﹕民族者、民生者、民權者﹐僅僅完成了第一項耳。其餘二項﹐民生與民權仍需同志努力完成﹗中共欺世盜名﹐挾持了國父接班人之頭銜﹐卻完全違背了國父遺訓所述的民主共和三部曲﹐即﹐軍政﹐訓政﹐及憲政。敢問今日中國﹐何來憲政可言﹖全不是他紅朝王土﹖難道他將無限期的實行訓政期﹐而如有類似六‧四事件﹐他就毫不留情地再倒退至武裝戒嚴的軍政時代﹖被戴季陶譽為“宇宙大德之表現而由仁愛為哲學基礎” 的民生主義僅靠他改革開放﹐計劃生育﹐一國兩制﹐「三個代表」及「和諧社會」就能完成的嗎﹖

台灣﹐即中華民國的民主奇跡應當為吾國人所崇﹐戴季陶主義﹐更應為吾國人所學習﹗中國的民主共和體制尚未完成﹐疆域尚且分裂﹐國民仍就生活在極權的專制下。所以﹐在二十一世紀的今天﹐我們廣大愛國人士必須從新再反思一下我們百年的歷史經驗與教訓﹐以及眾賢的經國緯世的學說﹐為此﹐筆者感到應是為戴季陶主義招魂的時候了。

大楚興
二○○六年十一月廿五日

Wednesday, November 22, 2006

往昔




故國山河今往昔
故人螫居西球畔
誰道乾坤已竟曉
浩宇天外數昆侖

Tuesday, November 21, 2006

Note on the 1927 White Terror Incident

The “White Terror” incident during the spring of 1927, epitomized as the 4-12 Incident(四·一二事件) has lead to several explanations. In Chang Jung’s version, it attributes the main cause to the Beijing Warlord, Zhang Zuolin’s(張作霖) raid upon Russian compound in Beijing, therefore exposed the COMINTERN’s treacherous and methodical intrigue to subvert and sovietize China. (The Reds’ godfather, Li Dazhao(李大釗) was among the ones being arrested, and was soon liquidated in his jail-cell upon Zhang’s order.) Whereas in Jonathan Fenby’s version, it didn’t address this issue at all, and seems to indicate that the great purge was preplanned to rid the KMT of Red faction, therefore it was a move towards consolidating Chiang’s control.

In order to formulate a credible explanation for this crucial event, one has to zoom-out his perspective to a higher and wider context, thus encompasses the whole scope for one to gain a comprehensive reckoning of the turbulent time it was staged in:

It was carried out in the midst of Northern Expedition (北伐)(1926-1928) by the KMT to unite China and rid her from warlord factionists. At the time China was still mired in a fragmented state with sectarian powers vying for dominance. On top of this, there were tremendous amount of pressure from international wire pullers, most notably the Russians and the Japanese, the former laid their Trojan Horse, the proxy CCP inside the KMT as a prerequisite for Soviet aid, and the latter whose unquenchable lust for expansionism into China poses as a constant threat. All of these menacing factors demand someone with a messianic might and a steel of resolution to redeem China out of her quagmires, and for a long time, Chiang felt he was to fill in this role, and any obstacle and cacophony was to be dealt with relentlessly. Like all Chinese rulers before him and after him, he saw internal unity as more essential than external danger.

Within the global arena, it was also the most turbulent heydays of Communist propagation worldwide. Many people, most notably from the blue-collar masses, were enchanted by the myth of Bolshevik Revolution, and sought after similar revolutionary victory in their own country led by all shades of daredevils. The 1920’s was a watershed stage, in which the ideological struggle and the philosophical divide between the Left and the Right was polarized to the most extremes, thus laid in an ever odious hatred by both parties who vowed for the elimination of the other. This vendetta was inevitable and it was just a question of when.

Therefore, Chiang, whose intuition was to prove accurate of Communist treachery and machination, felt oblige to eliminate the Reds, and it was better to nip it out of the bud, before it grew too ferocious to deal with. It was a desideratum at the time, and if one is to play with fire, one is sure to be advised with the consequences, all of which the CCP was proved to be a master at, and seemed to be long prepared for. the incident in turn had precipitated the Nanchang Soviet mutiny on Aug 1st(八一南昌起義), and the September Autumn Harvest Uprising(秋收起義) of the same year.

Friday, November 17, 2006

GRAND STRATEGY 《尚謀》

The Foreseeable Collapse of Chinese Communism and the Establishment of the Federal Republic of China

中国共产主义之可预知的垮臺中华联邦共和国之建立

By Dachuxing

大楚兴 著


Dedicated to the Future of China 僅以本書獻給中國的未來


CONTENTS 目录

PROLOGUE

前言

BOOK I 《卷一》

1. 概论

第一部:《中国简史一览》

第二部:《当代不同政治阵营之概况》

II Ossification and Stagnation of Modern Chinese Society

Part 1. Ossification

Part 2. Stagnation

2. 现代中国社会的僵化和淤塞

第一部:《僵化》

第二部:《淤塞》

III The Essence of CCP

3. 中国共产党的本质

BOOK II 《卷二》

4. 困境

5. 契机

6. 中国聯邦主義者

BOOK III 《卷三》

VII Metamorphosis

7. 蛻变

VIII Federal Republic of China in the Global Arena

8. 中华联邦共和国在世界舞台中的角色

9. 华夏文明的本性


EPILOGUE

结语


Wednesday, November 15, 2006

《戴季陶思想》


《借瞿秋白之口‧述戴季陶思想》

“戴季陶主義”的運動:理論上是所謂建立純粹三民主義的中心思想,實際上是反對左派,反對階級鬥爭,反對共產黨的跨黨,甚至於反對共產黨的存在之宣傳。

戴季陶等這種思想的根本點便是一種唯心論的道統[王道]說:所謂孫中山三民主義的哲學基礎,是仁慈忠孝的偉大人格,是繼承堯舜禹湯周孔的道統[王道] —戴季陶又繼承孫中山的道統!這是中國的特別文化,國民黨三民主義的責任[旨]在“發揚光大這種中國文化”。這完全是想把革命當做慈善事業,當做孫中山戴季陶等一些“君子”愛民的仁政。

現在戴季陶用所謂民生哲學的仁慈主義來解釋,便使中國民眾聯合戰線的國民革命變成了少數知識階級“伐罪救民”的“貴族革命”。他的主張,實際上是只要誘發“資本家仁愛的性能”和智識階級“智勇兼備以行仁政”的熱誠來引導農工民眾革命。

這種思想實質上是資產階級的民族主義,以國家民族文化為最高原則。其最終目的是締造中國資產階級的帝國主義。戴季陶對於帝國主義的解釋說:帝國主義者以為一國人口的增加必須擴張領土和對外的權力,所以“民族競爭的基本”是人口問題,中國現時反帝國主義運動也是一種民族競爭。

戴季陶不但反對階級鬥爭,而要拿三民主義的理論來解決中國的民生問題。那便是:“大工業和交通機關國有,獎勵小工業的自由發展,同時實行平均地權土地農有,以至於土地國有”,使中國人民“食衣住行育樂六種需要得到普遍均等的滿足”。到政治權力握在所謂三民主義青年(智識階級)手裏之後,自然會實現民生主義,工人農民的生活到那時自然會改良了。

戴季陶等所謂建立純正三民主義的運動,實際上是把國民革命變成國家主義-民族主義的目的,成了爭中國民族之“哲學思想”﹐“孔孫道統[王道思想]”﹐“國民文化”,甚至於“血脈”的長久和多量;要做民生主義和民權主義的運動,不許有階級鬥爭,只許為“民族和國家的利益”。

戴季陶的意思正是這樣:他要排斥共產黨,他要以純粹的“仁愛”為宗旨的絕不主張階級鬥爭的國民黨,即所謂單純的國民黨。戴季陶在組織問題上的結論,以為國民黨中不應當有“共信不立”的現象,以為團體[本身]是有“排拒性”的,所以主張共產黨退出。他說共產黨的唯物史觀和階級鬥爭會打破國民革命。戴季陶說:青年的民族觀念薄弱,殊不知世界革命的努力當以自己民族的存在和發展為基礎。他說共產主義不能實現,不適宜於中國,那么共產黨用不著存在。戴季陶要使國民黨成為中國唯一能救國的黨。他反對農工階級的階級鬥爭;戴季陶要以所謂中國的哲學思想為基礎,要用所謂仁慈主義誘發資本家的“仁愛”性能,如此消弭階級鬥爭,使世界人類進於大同。

他說共產黨自己不能公開,“心裏想著共產革命,口裏說的半共產革命,手上作的國民革命”,不把共產黨的{真實}名義拿出來。共產黨“只借國民黨的軀殼,發展本身組織”。季陶說,共產黨當國民黨是自己將來的敵人。他說,某某同志因是共產黨而使國民黨同志不信任他;某某同志因是共產黨所以雖有大才亦不能開展,又說那都是“縱橫家的中國列寧”一個人的主張,害了共產黨的青年。

總之,戴季陶的思想及主張是要想把國民黨變成純粹資產階級的政黨,而且盡量要把各階級的革命分子吸收去,使他們都變成季陶派--資產階級的民族主義者。

Sunday, November 12, 2006

中共革命元勛瞿秋白曰

"其實民權運動(democratic movement)是現時中國農工階級之階級鬥爭的一方面。現時中國的工人階級以實力來力爭民權,要求普選的國民會議,要求集會結社言論出版罷工等的政治自由。"

此論語出一九二五年八月﹕瞿秋白駁國民黨元勛戴季陶﹕《中國國民革命與戴季陶主義 》

此二君均為兩大陣營中的教父及思想理論家﹐前者為忠實的共產主義信仰者﹐其左傾之極一度曾致力毀滅漢字﹐並發明羅馬化拼音以代之。後者則為國民黨三民主義系統理論化的傑出佈道者。

且不論其他,只看共產黨在一九二五的理論基調﹐再看當今現實社會﹐就可知中共的無恥及其反復無常的陰險手段。 再看其論述中共政綱的終極目標,實乃地地道道的暴民奪政的詭辯﹕

"無產階級的階級鬥爭和獨裁制的理論才真是中國一般民眾現時要求民權及民生政策的實際政綱的方針和指導。如果沒有這個理論的指導,民權主義便是資產階級的"德謨克拉西" (democracy)的欺人政策,民生主義至多亦不過是資產階級性的“國家社會主義”(national socialism)罷了。"

此文撰於近八十年前﹐歷史已經毫無疑問的證實了孰為正義的一方。再看其對國民黨的民生主義的控訴﹐稱其為﹕“國家社會主義”(national socialism)罷了"。誠然﹐在二三十年代的國民政府在當時全球政體的某些借鑒上卻有錯誤地實施了此類政策。但是﹐敢問今日之中國﹐是誰在名副其實的在真正貫徹著”國家社會主義“呢﹖所謂“國家社會主義”者﹐一言以蔽之﹐過去者有法西斯意大利及納粹德國﹐皆為一黨專制而名義上實施所謂“社會主義”政策。現今中共即為此類政體的忠實繼承者也。

Thursday, November 02, 2006

The Chinese's Worst Enemy

After an enduring period of attentive observation upon the vicissitude of Chinese history with a profound self reflection and self examination (under the rigorous academic discipline as in “ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny”), I have come up with the following diction which some might find it to be deeply sinister and cynical, in spite of its ruthless practicality as well as its naked pertinence to reality:

“The Chinese are not very good at repelling foreign invaders, but they are incredibly adept at settling scores with their fellow kind whom they deem to be “heavenly enemy”, (天敌), for whom they “cannot afford to share the same firmament” (不共戴天) and thus vowed to eliminate one another until the bitter end. To wit, the Chinese is the Chinese’s worst enemy.”

With a poignant perspective along a piercing intuition when investigating the long history of our ever-belligerent nature, one finds that the Chinese actually harbors an ever odious antipathy towards a selection of his fellow-breed most venomously than anyone can possibly imagine, thereby he vows to eliminate him with all the energy and resources that’s at his disposal until the goal is finally accomplished. This fact can be demonstrated with our recorded history:

In 770 BC., when the Chinese of Chou Dynasty was under attacks from the barbarians of the Northwest, the story goes that it was a woman’s meddling (褒姒), (an interesting feature of a romanticized version of a moment of historical turmoil that always associates the pending catastrophe with a woman’s licentious seduction), which led to the downfall of West Chou Dynasty, and the capital sacked, but the fact is that all the surrounding dukes and princes were summoned to the emperor’s rescue, and nevertheless had been delinquent at their service, for they know that the foreigners will be gone sooner or later, and they better maintain their own strength for future strife against each other. Hence history starts off a new period known as the East Chou Dynasty with a retreat of the capital to the east and thus turning a new page to an ever-resounding epoch of Spring-Autumn and Warring States, in which the most vicious carnage and onslaught were carried out against each other for centuries to come.

Then there came along another great period which was highly romanticized more than half a millennium later, known as the period of the Three Kingdoms. The prelude commenced itself at the waning phase of the majestic Han Dynasty around 190 A.D., and there was the most notorious great general and statesman, Cao Cao (曹操), who eventually founded the Wei Dynasty, as one of the three kingdoms. Not surprisingly, his heavenly enemy was the other legendary figure, Liu Bei(刘备), and through out that tumultuous time period had fought many great battles against one another. The Barbarians on the north was simply neglected to be appeased, either with tacit territorial concession and condoning their growing power, or marrying off Chinese women to the princes of the nomads, another distinct feature that is to be one of the most shameless, intriguing, and emasculating way of Chinese diplomatic policy that is to retain a major role for centuries. Eventually the whole Northern China Proper was to fall under foreign nomadic powers, who actually claimed to be the most legit heir of China since their mothers were of royal blood of Han Dynasty. These foreign nomadic powers were to be sinonized just as their future counterparts, e.g., the Mongolians(蒙古人), the Tanguts(西夏人), the Khitans(契丹人), the Jurchens(女真人), the Manchus(满洲人), etc. whom collectively known as the Tartars, in a matter of few hundred years as the lord of China during different phases of history, and whose identity were eventually assimilated under the umbrella of the generic reference as the Chinese.

This mentality of a Chinese hates another Chinese the most has been inherited until the dawn of our modern era. As much as the Manchus would like to distinguish themselves as the privileged class, their empire was still known to be the Chinese Empire and their blue-blooded princes and royalties were to be educated in substantial quantity of classic Chinese culture. So when the real foreigners/barbarians were at their door steps, they were to retain the same-old tradition of typical Chinese mentality. After loosing two Opium Wars and capitulating to the British and the French, they were to fought allegedly, the bloodiest war of 19th century against Hong Xiuquan’s (洪秀全) Heavenly Kingdom Army, known as the Taipin Rebellion.

When the Manchu finally abdicated in 1911 to a republican China under its former premier and now president Yuan Shikai(袁世凯), the Chinese were to remain adherent to this age-old golden truth. Therefore, Yuan’s self-perceived heavenly enemy was to be the canonized father of the republic, Sun Zhongshan(孙中山), and vise-a-versa, who launched a so-called abortive and ill-hatched Second Revolution. The whole campaign was put down without much difficulty with Yuan’s army and ended with Sun’s exile to Japan. Despite Dr. Sun’s stringent criticism of foreign imperialism, he had spent his whole life fighting first, the Manchus, and then Yuan, and after Yuan’s death, the Beijing government who were the protégées of Yuan. Ironically, Dr. Sun had shown great sympathy toward the Japanese and the Russians, both proved to be the worst foreigners the Chinese had encountered, the former saw him as an asset against Yuan’s China, and the latter saw his clique as a potential agent to insert its own furtive subversion of China, which saw its materialization in the initial phase of CCP, who toed the Soviet line for well over a few decades.

After Dr. Sun’s abrupt death in 1925, his heir apparent, the world-renowned and one of the greatest statesmen of 20th century, Chiang Kai Shek, was to assume the role as the ultimate ruler of China. Despite the republican ethos and Dr. Sun’s egalitarian philosophy of the so-called Three-People-ism that his party espouses, his realpolitik approach on the implementation of his statecraft was ten-times worse than that of Yuan’s, his master’s heavenly enemy who was being accused of being dictatorial. Mr. Chiang’s heavenly enemy was destined to be Mao Zedong, another homey fellow compatriot, who likewise, saw Chiang as the worst adversary, contrary to popular belief that Japan, Soviet Union and United States were Mao’s greatest foes, a mythology propagated by CCP propaganda out of pure political necessity at different time period.

When China was to face her worst foreign invasion, the Japanese militarist aggression, both Chiang and Mao had conserved a great deal of energy and strength, to a greater and lesser degree, in order to complete the elimination of one another, quintessentially encapsulated in one of the most notable remarks in the old Chinese quip as “the Japanese are an ailment of the skin, while the [Chinese] Communists are the disease of the heart”, thus substantiates once again, the old Chinese Way without much explanation as history confers the fact itself.

I’d have to add that if, just a hypothetical speculation with no applicability to reality, that the Japanese Emperor Hirohito and his samurai militarists were to be captured at the height of Sino-Japanese War by either Chiang or Mao, they’d have given them an honorable death as in decapitation or their own style of hara-kiri (切腹) suicide. However, if they’d have captured one another, they’d have their foe chopped up to a thousand pieces, or worse, they’d have let the other lived, in perpetual suffering and humiliation as demonstrated in a few instances from our historical past. One of the most notorious one was the King of Wu(夫差) in the 5th century B.C., who had captured his neighboring kingdom Yue and its king(勾踐), he kept the King of Yue alive as his personal slave, whose responsibility was to clean up the stools of his master’s stable, and was said to have personally tasted his master’s feces to determine his health. The legend goes that the master was so flattered and satisfied, so that he disbarred the captive and let him return to his kingdom. The king of Yue was said to taste the bitter gallbladder of a pig everyday in order to retain a vigilance of his suffering inflicted by his heavenly enemy, and eventually had his vengeance fulfilled by vanquishing the kingdom Wu.

After Mao had took control of China in 1949, he was to practice the same old mentality, when he got Chiang nipped out of existence in China Proper, and found the conquering of the island of Taiwan militarily beyond his technological capacity, and thus left his foe alone in that tiny island. (This is proved to be a de facto victory in terms of historic context; one has to remember that when The Min Dynasty kicked out the Mongols, they still existed to the north of Mongolian Proper. And when the Manchus conquered China, the Chinese of Min Dynasty established themselves on the Island of Taiwan, formerly known as Formosa, and who kicked out the feeble Portuguese colonizers in due course.) The next stage of Mao’s rule was the infamous Red Terror which was to be decades-long campaign waged at fellow-compatriots. He was to devote most of his energy and time at eradicating bad elements from the common stock under different brands of condemnation at whim. The death toll of the Chinese killed under Mao’s regime was to reach an astronomical figure and thus testified once again the ever ominous thesis I have put forward in this essay:

The Chinese is, and continue will be, another Chinese’s worst and heavenly enemy.

Thus spake Dachuxing