Statism And1920s’ Cultural And Political Trend Of Thoughts

As a political trend of thought,Statism boomed in16thand17thcentury’s West.Itstheory could derive from State Purpose Concept in Ancient Greece,and its extensivehistroical basis lied in the formation of Modern West Nations. Conforming to thetransit of China form Ancient Empire to Modern Nation,Statism was rather popular inmodern history of China.In the latter half of19thcentury,Statism was introduced intoChina in the course of west learning spreading to the East. Besides,combining withChinese traditional cultural and ethnic concept,Statism was one of the most influentialtrend of thought in modern history of China.This article is to study on the relationbetween statism and cultural and political thoughts in1920s. The research objectivelies in revealing and summarizing the core value idea of statism. The concept of1920s refers to1918-1930.The concept of Cultural&Political Thoughts includescultural conservatism,nationalism,liberalism,Marxism as well as the Three People’sPrinciples.This article consists of seven chapters.Chapter One explores the west learning origin of statism and the historical context ofthe circulation of Statism into China.Generally speaking,Statism belongs to the fieldof political science,and it is contradictory to Liberalism.The theoretic basis of Statismincludes State Purpose Concept and State Sovereignty Concept.The soil oftransplantation of State into China was fertile because asking for sovereignty andintegrity was Statism’s basic proposition.From the point of view of etymology,theperiod of Statism first used in Chinese Literature was in the late19thcentury and theearly20thcentury when China’s semi-colonial course was sharplydeepening.However,as it was introduced into China, Statism was confronted with adifferent historical context and cultural tradition,which not only provided thetransplantation of Statism with soil,but also made it appear theoreticvariations.Statism was developing into a political trend of thought in1920s.This trend began in Chinese students studying in Japan Returning to China Movement inMay,1918.The establishment of Chinese Youth Self-Improvement Organization,GreatRiver Group as well as Awakening Lion Newspaper during1923-1925marked therise of this trend.May30thMovement in1925brought this trend to climax.Theoutburst of North Expedition in June1926poured cold water to this prevailingtrend,and made it appear some new characters.Chapter Two studies the writers’identity,aggregation approach and differentiation ofthe Lion Camp Weekly.On the whole, Lion Camp Weekly’s writers were bornbetween1890and1900.They attended urban new type of school during their juvenileperiod.and pursued their learning in domestic higher institutions or aboard,and theiroccupation sectors focused on new type of liberal professions, such as college,newspaper office and press.It was through common interest and belief in Statism thatthe writes walked together.The appearance of this new type of aggregation approachwas associated with the transformation of society and culture in modern China,andclearly reflected the rise of new types of ways of communication and identity in thepost-era of Imperial Examination. However, the writers had different key point aboutStatism.Zeng Qi considered Statism as an political signboard.Wang Guang-qi and YuJia-ju deemed the revival of national culture necessary.He Bing-song and DengShu-yun were devoted to elaborating the theoretical basis of Statism.During the two-years of running process（1924-1926），as Lion Camp Weekly changed its assertionand National Revolution burst,the writers group inevitably split.Chapter Three is an academic investigation of cultural conservative thought of Statismin the1920s from the modernity angle of view. The concept of Oriental cultural Savethe World, which prevailed among European Intellectual after World War Ⅰ, thecriticism Traditional Chinese Culture suffered from the New Culture Movement, andthe argument of Westernization proposed by the New Culture Group, urged LionCamp Party to be cultural conservatives. In Lion Camp Party’s view, tradition was notan absolutely indivisible homogeneity entirety, so rejection of tradition wasincomprehensible. Lion Camp Party accepted Western modernity, but that acceptationwas some kind of fusion based on Traditional Chinese Culture. Lion Camp Party pointed out the inherent defect of Modern Western Culture, andelaborated the modern significance of traditional Chinese Culture, so passivereception of Modern Western Culture was wrong. Overall, Lion Camp Party’s attitudetoward Western modernity was complex, including both approval and denial. Thatcomplex attitude was common among cultural conservatives in Modern History ofChina.Chapter Four examines Lion Camp Party’s reaction to the thought current of NationalSelf-Determination,and reveals the relationship between Statism and Nationalism.National Self-Determination concept is one of the theoretical cornerstones ofnationalism trend in the modern history of the west. During the First World War andpostwar, the thought trend of national self-determination rose worldwide. The LionCamp Party, standing on the outside of the Kuomintang and the Communist Party, didintensive study on the National Self-Determination concept, and devisedself-determination scheme according Chinese condition. In their view, the only roadto self-determination was the militarization of people of all ethnic groups, instead ofpermitting Mongolia or Tibet split. However, their theoretical predicament lied intension between militarism and cosmopolitism, as well as between the concept ofNation and Citizen. From their discourse about National Self-Determination concept,it is obvious that Statism advocated by them was close to Civic Nationalism.Chapter Five studies the relation between Statism and Liberalism. During1920s,therelationship between statism and liberalism is complicated.That is to say, they haveopposition side as well as integration side.After World War Ⅰ,cosmopolitanism wasprevailing,but the international community was still dominated by power instead ofjustice.Both liberal intellectuals and statists advocated reconciling nationalism andcosmopolitanism. Their view was identical. The New Culture Movement put forwardthe issue of Chinese culture development.Liberal intellectuals proposed that Chineseculture should be westernized,while statists persisted cultural conservatism.It wasdifficult for them to reconcile their opinions. In1920s there appeared in successiontwo authoritarian regimes, liberal intellectuals insisted on reform,while statismadhered to revolution.They used to negotiate,but eventually each went their own way.Only through intensive analysis,can we understand the complicated relationbetween statism and liberalism.Chapter Six studies the relation between Statist and Marxist during1921-1926.Chinese Communist Party established the policy of DemocraticRevolution United Front,and Statist to some extent identified with this policy becauseof socialist ideological trend during the May Fourth period.However,as theestablishment of Kmt-cpc cooperation and the rise of the movement of workers andpeasants,class struggle and dictatorship of the proletariat were contradictory to StateTranscending Classes put forward by Statist,who refused to join in DemocraticRevolution United Front.Meanwhile,Marist put more importance on the workingclass,and the value of Statist was declining.But Marist still tried to get alliance withstatist until the North Expedition,after which Marist and Statist split up.Chapter Seven researches the Lion Camp Party’s discourse and its evolvement aboutthe Three People’s Principles in1925-1930. Taking the April12thIncident as the lineof demarcation,we could divide the Lion Camp Party’s discourse about the ThreePeople’s Principles into two historical stages.During the previous stage,because ofpolitical need for allying Kuomintang and resisting the Communist Party,the LionCamp Party clarified the differences between the Three People’s Principles andCommunism,and achieved theoretical union between the Three People’s Principlesand Statism,and kept inheriting and positive attitude towards the Three People’sPrinciples.During the later stage,because of political need for opposing Kuomintang’smonopoly,the Lion Camp Party took part in the discussion of the Three People’sPrinciples’ontology,and kept criticizing and negative attitude towards the ThreePeople’s Principles. The course of the change was closely related with changeablepolitical situation.All the Lion Camp Party’s discourses about the Three People’sPrinciples were concentrated on his political interests and proposals.As a result of thevariety of political situation,the Lion Camp Party changed his political proposalsduring different historical stages,and consequently changed his view towards theThree People’s Principles.The Conclusion summarizes the core value concept of Statism as State Supreme,and generalizes the different points between Modern Chinese Statism and WesternStatism.First,the origin of west learning of Modern Chinese Statism was not limited inWestern Statism,Second,Modern Chinese Statism adopted the strategy of JoeAncient.Third，Modern Chinese Statism had three frames of reference while WesternStatism just had two.The last but the most important,the future of Modern ChineseStatism is pacifism and cosmopolitanism while Western Statism eventually developedinto militarism and fascism.In a word,Modern Chinese Statism assumed the characterof sinicization, the basic content of which is for the self-determination andindependence of the Chinese Nation.