The Political Doctrines of Sun Yat-sen: An Exposition of the San Min Chu ILinebarger, Paul Myron Anthony
History
The Political Doctrines of Sun Yat-sen: An Exposition of the San Min Chu I
Linebarger, Paul Myron Anthony
Sun, Yat-sen, 1866-1925. San min zhu yi
Sun Yat-sen wrote, of the significance of philosophy in action: “What is a
principle? A principle is an idea, a belief, a force. As a rule, when men
search for the truth of a thesis, they first reflect upon it, then their
reflections grow into a belief, and that belief becomes a force. Hence in
order to be firmly established, a principle must pass through the
different stages of idea, belief, and force.”(222) No more definite
statement of the ideological consequences of thought could be found. Sun
Yat-sen appreciated this, and realized that, in the carrying out of his
ideology, the first necessity was the adoption of the ideology itself. All
other steps must be secondary. The grouping of the important steps in the
fulfillment of the program of nationalism may have differed from time to
time,(223) but the actual work of Sun Yat-sen was based upon the method
indicated: the establishment of at least the preliminary notions of the
ideology as a prerequisite to effective social action. (In this
connection, and in anticipation of further discussion, it might be pointed
out that the advantage of the Moscow-Canton entente was not one gained
from the superior appeal of the Communist ideology, but from the superior
agitation techniques which the Nationalists learned from the Communists,
and which enabled them to bring into play the full latent social force in
Sun Yat-sen’s ideas.) But if mere national-consciousness were insufficient
of itself, what else was needed?
Loyalty was necessary. Being aware of themselves as Chinese would not help
them, unless they united and were loyal to that union. “To say that what
the ancients understood by loyalty was loyalty toward the emperor, and
that, since we no longer have an emperor, we (need no longer) speak of
loyalty, and to believe that we can act as we please—that is a grave
error.”(224) Sun Yat-sen thus points out one of the most tragically
perplexing of the problems of the new China.
He was urging return to the ancient morality. The ancient code of loyalty
was one built up to the emperor. Although the emperor did not have much
power, in comparison with some despots who have changed history, he was
nevertheless the man at the apex of society. The Confucian society was one
built in general upon the grand design of an enormous family; a design
which was, nevertheless, flexible enough to permit the deposition of a
wicked or mad emperor—something which the Japanese order of things could
not in theory, although it did in fact, tolerate. Filial piety was piety
toward one’s own family head; loyalty was piety toward the family head of
all civilized society.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account