The Political Doctrines of Sun Yat-sen: An Exposition of the San Min Chu I.
by Paul Myron Anthony Linebarger.
FOREWORD.
The importance of introducing Western political thought to the Far East has long been emphasized in the West. The Chinese conception of a rational world order was manifestly incompatible with the Western system of independent sovereign states and the Chinese code of political ethics was difficult to reconcile with the Western preference for a reign of law. No argument has been necessary to persuade Westerners that Chinese political philosophy would be improved by the influence of Western political science.
The superior qualifications of Sun Yat-sen for the interpretation of Western political science to the Chinese have also been widely recognized in the West, particularly in the United States. Dr. Sun received a modern education in medicine and surgery and presumably grasped the spirit of Western science. He read widely, more widely perhaps than any contemporary political leader of the first rank except Woodrow Wilson, in the literature of Western political science. He was thoroughly familiar with the development of American political thought and full of sympathy for American political ideals. His aspiration to build a modern democratic republic amidst the ruins of the medieval Manchu Empire, Americans at least can readily understand.
What is only beginning to be understood, however, in the West is, that it is equally important to interpret Chinese political philosophy to the rest of the world. Western political science has contributed a great deal to the development of political power. But it has failed lamentably to illuminate the ends for which such power should be used. Political ethics is by no means superfluous in lands where a government of law is supposed to be established in lieu of a government of men. The limitation of the authority of sovereign states in the interest of a better world order is an enterprise to which at last, it may be hoped not too late, Westerners are beginning to dedicate themselves.
As an interpreter of Chinese political philosophy to the West Dr. Sun has no peer. Better than any other Chinese revolutionary leader he appreciated the durable values in the cla.s.sical political philosophy of the Far East.
He understood the necessity for preserving those values, while introducing the Western political ideas deemed most proper for adapting the Chinese political system to its new place in the modern world. His system of political thought, therefore, forms a blend of Far Eastern political philosophy and Western political science. It suggests at the same time both what is suitable in Western political science for the use of the Far East and what is desirable in Far Eastern political philosophy for the improvement of the West.
Dr. Linebarger has a.n.a.lyzed Dr. Sun"s political ideas, and also his plans for the political rehabilitation of China, with a view to the interests of Western students of politics. For this task his training and experience have given him exceptional competence. The result is a book, which not only renders obsolete all previous volumes in Western languages on modern Chinese political philosophy, but also makes available for the political scientists and politicians of the West the best political thought of the Far East on the fundamental problems of Western politics.
ARTHUR N. HOLCOMBE _Harvard University_
PREFACE.
This book represents an exploration into a field of political thought which is still more or less unknown. The Chinese revolution has received much attention from publicists and historians, and a vast number of works dealing with almost every phase of Chinese life and events appears every year in the West. The extraordinary difficulty of the language, the obscurity-to Westerners-of the Chinese cultural background, and the greater vividness of events as compared with theories have led Western scholars to devote their attention, for the most part, to descriptions of Chinese politics rather than to venture into the more difficult field of Chinese political thought, without which, however, the political events are scarcely intelligible.
The author has sought to examine one small part of modern Chinese political thought, partly as a sample of the whole body of thought, and partly because the selection, although small, is an important one. Sun Yat-sen is by far the most conspicuous figure in recent Chinese history, and his doctrines, irrespective of the effectiveness or permanence of the consequences of their propagation, have a certain distinct position in history. The _San Min Chu I_, his chief work, not only represents an important phase in the revolution of Chinese social and political thought, but solely and simply as doctrine, may be regarded as a Chinese expression of tendencies of political thought current in the Western world.
The personal motives, arising out of an early and rather intimate family relationship with the Chinese nationalist movement centering around the person of Sun Yat-sen, that led the author to undertake this subject, have their advantages and disadvantages. The chief disadvantage lies in the fact that the thesis must of necessity treat of many matters which are the objects of hot controversy, and that the author, friendly to the movement as a whole but neutral as between its factions, may seem at times to deal unjustly or over-generously with certain persons and groups. The younger widow of Sun Yat-sen (nee Soong Ching-ling) may regard the mention of her husband and the Nanking government in the same breath as an act of treachery. Devoted to the memory of her husband, she has turned, nevertheless, to the Left, and works on cordial terms with the Communists.
She said: "... the Nanking Government has crushed every open liberal, democratic, or humanitarian movement in our country. It has destroyed all trade unions, smashed every strike of the workers for the right to existence, has thrown hordes of criminal gangsters who are simultaneously Fascist "Blue Shirts" against every labor, cultural, or national revolutionary movement in the country."(1) The author, from what he himself has seen of the National Government, is positive that it is not merely dictatorial, ruthless, cruel, treacherous, or historically unnecessary; nor would he, contrarily, a.s.sert that the National Government lives up to or surpa.s.ses the brilliant ideals of Sun Yat-sen. He seeks to deal charitably with all factions, to follow a middle course whenever he can, and in any case to state fairly the positions of both sides.
The advantages may serve to offset the disadvantages. In the first place, the author"s acquaintance with the Nationalist movement has given him something of a background from which to present his exposition. This background cannot, of course, be doc.u.mented, but it may serve to make the presentation more a.s.sured and more vivid. In the second place, the author has had access to certain private ma.n.u.scripts and papers, and has had the benefit of his father"s counsel on several points in this work.(2) The author believes that on the basis of this material and background he is justified in venturing into this comparatively unknown field.
The primary sources for this work have been Sun Yat-sen"s own works. A considerable number of these were written originally in the English language. Translations of his major Chinese works are more or less fully available in English, German, French, or Spanish. The author"s highly inadequate knowledge of the Chinese written language has led him to depend almost altogether upon translations, but he has sought-in some cases, perhaps, unsuccessfully-to minimize the possibility of misunderstanding or error by checking the translations against one another. Through the a.s.sistance of his Chinese friends, he has been able to refer to Sun"s complete works in Chinese and to Chinese books on Sun wherever such reference was imperatively necessary. A list of the Chinese t.i.tles thus made available is included in the bibliography. The language difficulty, while an annoyance and a handicap, has not been so considerable as to give the author reason to suppose that his conclusions would have been different in any significant respect had he been able to make free and continuous use of Chinese and Russian sources.
The author has thought of the present work as a contribution to political theory rather than to sinology, and has tried to keep the discussion of sinological questions at a minimum. In the transliteration of Chinese words and names he has adhered more or less closely to the Wade system, and has rendered most terms in the _kuo yu_, or national language. Despite this rule, he gives the name of President Sun in its more commonly known Cantonese form, Sun Yat-sen, rather than in the _kuo yu_, Sun I-hsien.
In acknowledging a.s.sistance and encouragement received, the author must first of all turn to his father, Judge Paul Myron Wentworth Linebarger, Legal Advisor to The National Government of China, counsellor to and biographer of Sun Yat-sen during the latter"s lifetime. Without his patient encouragement and his concrete a.s.sistance, this book could neither have been begun nor brought to a conclusion after it was started. The author desires, however, to make it perfectly clear that this work has no relation to the connections of Judge Linebarger with the Chinese Government or with the Nationalist Party. No information coming to the knowledge of Judge Linebarger in the course of his official duties has been here incorporated. Anxiously scrupulous to maintain a completely detached point of view, the author has refrained from communicating with or submitting the book to Chinese Government or Party officials, and writes purely as an American student of China.
Professor James Hart, formerly at The Johns Hopkins University and now at The University of Virginia, Professor Arthur O. Lovejoy, The Johns Hopkins University, Professor Harley Farnsworth MacNair and Dr. Ernest Price, both of The University of Chicago, have rendered inestimable a.s.sistance by reading the ma.n.u.script and giving the author the benefit of their advice.
Professor Hart has criticized the work as an enterprise in political science. Professor Lovejoy a.s.sisted the author by reading the first third of the work, and selections of the later parts, and applying his thorough and stimulating criticism; the author regrets that he was unable to adopt all of Professor Lovejoy"s suggestions in full, and is deeply grateful for the help. Professor MacNair read the book as a referee for a dissertation, and made a great number of comments which have made the book clearer and more accurate; the author would not have ventured to present this work to the public had it not been for the rea.s.surances and encouragement given him by Professor MacNair. Dr. Ernest Price, while at The Hopkins, supervised the composition of the first drafts; his judicious and balanced criticism, based upon sixteen years" intimacy with the public and private life of the Chinese, and a sensitive appreciation of Chinese values, were of great value to the author in establishing his perspective and lines of study. The author takes this opportunity to thank these four gentlemen for their great kindness and invaluable a.s.sistance.
It is with deep regret that the author abbreviates his acknowledgments and thanks for the inspiration and the favors he received in his study of Chinese politics from Dr. C. Walter Young; Professor Frederic Ogg, of The University of Wisconsin; Professors Kenneth Colegrove, William McGovern, and Ikuo Oyama, of The Northwestern University; Dr. Arthur Hummel, of The Library of Congress; Professor Frederick Dunn, of Yale University; Professor Arthur Holcombe, of Harvard University; Professor Quincy Wright, of The University of Chicago; and Dr. Wallace McClure, of The Department of State. Many of the author"s Chinese friends a.s.sisted by reading the ma.n.u.script and criticizing it from their more intimate knowledge of their own country, among them being Messrs. Miao Chung-yi and Djang Chu, at The Johns Hopkins University; Professor Jen T"ai, of Nankai University; and Messrs. w.a.n.g Kung-shou, Ch"ing Ju-chi, and Lin Mou-sheng, of The University of Chicago, made many helpful suggestions. The author must thank his teachers at The Johns Hopkins University, to whom he is indebted for three years of the most patient a.s.sistance and stimulating instruction, in respect of both the present work and other fields in the study of government: Dr. Johannes Mattern; Dr. Albert Weinberg; Mr. Leon Sachs; and Professor W. W. Willoughby. Finally, he must acknowledge his indebtedness to his wife, Margaret Snow Linebarger, for her patient a.s.sistance in preparing this volume for the press.
PAUL M. A. LINEBARGER.
December, 1936.
INTRODUCTION.
The Problem of the _San Min Chu I_.
The Materials.
Sun Yat-sen played many roles in the history of his times. He was one of those dramatic and somewhat formidable figures who engage the world"s attention at the very outset of their careers. In the late years of the nineteenth century, he was already winning some renown in the West; it was picturesque that a Cantonese, a Christian physician, should engage in desperate conspiracies against the Manchu throne. Sun became known as a political adventurer, a forerunner, as it were, of such mutually dissimilar personages as Trotsky, Lawrence, and Major-General Doihara.
With the illusory success of the revolution of 1911, and his Presidency of the first Republic, Sun ceased being a conspirator in the eyes of the world"s press, and became the George Washington of China. It is in this role that he is most commonly known, and his name most generally recalled.
After the world war, in the atmosphere of extreme tension developed, perhaps, by the Bolshevik revolution, Sun was regarded as an enigmatic leader, especially significant in the struggle between Asiatic nationalisms allied with the Soviets against the traditional capitalist state-system. It was through him that the Red anti-imperialist policy was pushed to its greatest success, and he was hated and admired, ridiculed and feared, down to the last moments of his life. When he died, American reporters in Latvia cabled New York their reports of Russian comments on the event.(3) More, perhaps, than any other Chinese of modern times, Sun symbolized the entrance of China into world affairs, and the inevitable confluence of Western and Far Eastern history.
It is characteristic of Sun that he should have appeared in another and final role after his death. He had been thought of as conspirator, statesman, and ma.s.s leader; but with the advent of his party to power it became publicly apparent that he had also been a political philosopher.
The tremendous prestige enjoyed by him as state-founder and party leader was enhanced by his importance as prophet and law-giver. His doctrines became the state philosophy of China, and for a while his most zealous followers sought to have him canonized in a quite literal fashion, and at one stroke to make him replace Confucius and the Sons of Heaven. After the extreme enthusiasms of the Sun Yat-sen cult subsided, Sun remained the great national hero-sage of modern China. Even in those territories where the authority of his political heirs was not completely effective, his flag was flown and his doctrines taught.
His doctrines have provided the theories upon which the Nationalist revolution was based; they form the extra-juridical const.i.tution of the National Government of China. When the forces hostile to Sun Yat-sen and his followers are considered, it is amazing that his ideas and ideals should have survived. An empire established with the aid of j.a.panese arms, and still under j.a.panese hegemony, controls Manchuria; parts of north China are ruled by a b.a.s.t.a.r.d government, born of a compromise between enemies; a largely unrecognized but powerful Soviet Republic exists in outer Mongolia; the lamaist oligarchy goes on in Tibet; and somewhere, in central and western China, a Soviet group, not quite a government but more than a conspiracy, is fighting for existence. It is quite probable that nowhere else in the world can there be found a greater variety of principles, each scheme of principles fostered by an armed organization struggling with its rivals. In this chaos the National Government has made the most effective bid for authority and the greatest effort for the reestablishment of order; through it the principles of Sun Yat-sen rule the political life of a population greater than that of the United States or of the Soviet Union.
It is difficult to evaluate the importance of political doctrines. Even if _The Three Principles_ is judged by the extent of the population which its followers control, it has achieved greater results in practical politics in fifteen years than has Marxism in ninety. Such a criterion may well be disputed, but, whatever the test, it cannot be denied that the thought of Sun Yat-sen has played a major part in the political development of his native land. It may continue into the indefinitely remote future, or may succ.u.mb to the perils that surround its advocates; in any case, these doctrines have been taught long enough and broadly enough to make an impress on the age, and have been so significant in political and cultural history that they can never sink into complete obscurity.
What are these doctrines? Sun Yat-sen was so voluminous a writer that it would be impossible for his followers to digest and codify all his writings into one neat and coherent handbook; he himself did not provide one. Before printing became common, there was a certain automatic process of condensation which preserved the important utterances of great men, and let their trivial sayings perish. Sun, however, must have realized that he was leaving a vast legacy of materials which are not altogether coherent or consistent with one another. Certain of his works were naturally more important than others, but, to make the choice definitive, he himself indicated four sources which his followers might draw upon for a definitive statement of his views.(4)
His _Political Testament_ cites the _Chien Kuo Fang Lo_ (_The Program of National Reconstruction_), the _Chien Kuo Ta Kang_ (_The Outline of National Reconstruction_), the _San Min Chu I_ (_The Triple Demism_, also translated as _The Three Principles of the People_), and the _Manifesto_ issued by the first national congress of the Party.(5) These four items differ quite sharply from one another in form. No one of them can be relied upon to give the whole of Sun"s doctrines.
The _Chien Kuo Fang Lo_ (_The Program of National Reconstruction_) is in reality three works, only remotely related to one another. The first item in the trilogy is the _Sun Wen Hsueh She_ (_The Philosophy of Sun Wen_); it is a series of familiar essays on the Chinese way of thought.(6) The second is the _Min Ch"uan Ts"u Pu_, _The Primer of Democracy_, which is little more than a text on parliamentary law.(7) The third is the _Shih Yeh Chi Hua_, known in English as _The International Development __ of China_, which Sun wrote in both English and Chinese.(8) These three works, under the alternate t.i.tles of "The Program of Psychological Reconstruction," "The Program of Social Reconstruction," and "The Program of Material Reconstruction" form _The Program of National Reconstruction_.
The _Chien Kuo Ta Kang, The Outline of National Reconstruction_, is an outline of twenty-five points, giving the necessary steps towards the national reconstruction in their most concise form.(9)
The _San Min Chu I_ is Sun"s most important work. It comprises sixteen lectures setting forth his socio-political theories and his programs. The t.i.tle most commonly used in Western versions is _The Three Principles of the People_.(10)
The last doc.u.ment mentioned in Sun Yat-sen"s will was the _Manifesto_ of the first national congress of the Kuomintang. This was not written by himself, but was drafted by w.a.n.g Ch"ing-wei, one of his closest followers, and embodies essentially the same ideas as do the other three items, even though Borodin-the emissary of the Third International-had been consulted in its preparation.(11)
Sun undoubtedly regretted leaving such a heterogeneous and ill-a.s.sembled group of works as his literary bequest. Throughout the latter years of his life he was studying political science in the hope that he might be able to complete a great treatise which he had projected, an a.n.a.lysis and statement of the programs of the Chinese nationalists. One attempt toward actualization of this work was frustrated when Sun"s ma.n.u.scripts and a great part of his library were burned in the attack launched against him by Ch"en Ch"iung-ming in 1922. His apology for the makeshift volume on the _San Min Chu I_ is pathetic: "As I had neither time to prepare nor books to use as references, I could do nothing else in these lectures but improvise after I ascended the platform. Thus I have omitted and forgotten many things which were in my original ma.n.u.script. Although before having them printed, I revised them, added (pa.s.sages) and eliminated (others), yet, those lectures are far from coming up to my original ma.n.u.scripts, either in the subject matter itself, or in the concatenations of the discussion, or in the facts adduced as proofs."(12) Sun was in all probability a more a.s.siduous and widely read student of political science than any other world leader of his day except Wilson; he studied innumerable treatises on government, and was surprisingly familiar with the general background of Western politics, in theory and practice. He was aware of the shabby appearance that these undigested occasional pieces would present when put forth as the bible of a new China, and earnestly enjoined his followers to carry on his labors and bring them to fruition.(13)
The various works included in the _Chien Kuo Fang Lo_, while satisfactory for the purposes Sun had in mind when he wrote them, are not enough to outline the fundamentals both of political theory and a governmental plan.
The familiar essays have an important bearing on the formation of the ideology of a new China; the primer of democracy, less; the industrial plan is one of those magnificent dreams which, in the turn of a decade, may inspire an equally great reality. The outline and the manifesto are no more suited to the role of cla.s.sics; they are decalogues rather than bibles.(14) There remains the _San Min Chu I_.
The _San Min Chu I_ is a collection of sixteen lectures delivered in Canton in 1924. There were to have been eighteen, but Sun was unable to give the last two. Legend has it that Borodin persuaded Sun to give the series.(15) Whatever the cause of their being offered, they attracted immediate attention. Interest in Sun and in his ideas was at a fever heat; his friends turned to the printed lectures for guidance; his enemies, for statements which could be turned against him. Both friends and enemies found what they wanted. To the friends, the _San Min Chu I_ presented a fairly complete outline of Sun"s political and social thought in such a form that it could be preserved and broadcast readily. There was danger, before the book appeared, that the intrinsic unity in Sun"s thinking would be lost sight of by posterity, that his ideas would appear as a disconnected jumble of brilliant inspirations. The sixteen lectures incorporated a great part of the doctrines which he had been preaching for more than a generation. To the enemies of Sun, the work was welcome. They pointed out the numerous simplifications and inconsistencies, the frequent contradictions in matters of detail, the then outrageous denunciations of the economic and political system predominant in the Far East. They ridiculed Sun because he was Chinese, and because he was not Chinese enough, and backed up their criticisms with pa.s.sages from the book.(16)
When Sun gave the lectures, he was a sick man. He carried an ivory-headed sword cane with him on the platform; occasionally, holding it behind him and locking his arms through it, he would press it against his back to relieve the intolerable pain.(17) The business awaiting him after each lecture was vitally important; the revolution was proceeding by leaps and bounds. The lectures are the lectures of a sick man, given to a popular audience in the uproar of revolution, without adequate preparation, improvised in large part, and offered as one side of a crucial and bitterly disputed question. The secretaries who took down the lectures may not have succeeded in following them completely; Sun had no leisure to do more than skim through the book before releasing it to the press.