“Where is China going ?” (Publication, 1927)
Year
1927
Text
Russell, Bertrand. Where is China going ? In : Forward. English section ; 13. Febr. (1927). (Russ256)
Type
Publication
Contributors (1)
Russell, Bertrand
(Trelleck, Monmouthsire 1872-1970 Plas Penrhyn bei Penrhyndeudraeth, Wales) : Philosoph, Logistiker, Mathematiker, Literaturnobelpreisträger ; Dozent Cambridge, Oxford, London, Harvard University, Chicago, Los Angeles, Beijing
Subjects
Philosophy : Europe : Great Britain
/
References / Sources
Chronology Entries (1)
| # | Year | Text | Linked Data |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1927.02.13 |
Russell, Bertrand. Where is China going ? [ID D28382]. Immediate future of China is very doubtful, though it is certain that in the long run the nationalists will achieve complete independence for their country. To an Occidental reader, misled by the propaganda which is being telegraphed from China, it may well seem as if that country were in a state of mere chaotic turmoil. That, however, is not the case, any more than it was in America in the years 1861-65 when the fate of slavery was being decided by force. But in order to understand the situation a few facts about Chinese history are necessary. The Manchus, a warlike northern tribe of foreign conquerors, acquired Peking and the empire in 1644, but during the 15th century they fell gradually in disrepute, partly because they could not oppose a successful resistance to the foreigners (especially English and French), partly because of their extreme difficulty in coping with the Taiping rebellion, which cost as many lives as the Great War cost to all the belligerents together. The Boxer rising of 1900 was a blind outburst of anti-foreign conservatism, in which the most ignorant elements made a last frantic attempt to preserve the old order. The Empress Dowager, having finally sided with the Boxers, shared the disgrace of their fall. The next move came from the South, which has long been the most progressive part of China. Under the leadership of Sun Yat-sen, a new movement grew up, patriotic but progressive, anti-Manchu but not anti-foreign, and aiming at the regeneration of China by the adoption of Western ideas and institutions. In the Revolution of 1911, this party triumphed, the Manchu fell and China became (at least nominally) a democratic parliamentary republic, with Sun Yat-sen as first President. Unfortunately, the price of victory was the placating of Yuan Shi-kai, Commander-in-Chief of the northern armies, who demanded and obtained the retirement of Sun Yat-sen in his favor. He soon quarreled with the Parliament and took to governing by military force. After his death in 1916, his lieutenants quarreled with each other and started the confused personal struggles between militarists which have continued ever since. In these struggles the military leaders have been guilty of every kind of depradation and violence ; moreover they have shown themselves willing to sacrifice the interests of their country in order to obtain assistance from foreigners. Foreigners (other than Americans) have continued in public to bewail the anarchy in China, while nevertheless some among them have kept it alive by timely surreptitious assistance to this or that Chinese general. Meanwhile in the South the progressive democratic movement continued. After various vicissitudes, Sun Yat-sen was in 1920, declared President of the Republic of Canton, though at first the authority of his government extended no further than the one province of Kwantung. The British from the first bitterly opposed him, both because the development of Canton might injure the shipping interests of Honkong, and because in that part labor troubles developed as a result of the ferment produced by the pro-labor attitude of the Canton government. After years of struggle, during which Honkong was nearly ruined by the Chinese boycott, the British had to give way so far as the relations of Honkong and Canton were concerned. But this experience made the British authorities more than ever desirous of preventing any increase in the area controlled by the Canton government, and thus led them into a general opposition to all that is liberal and progressive in China – an opposition as short-sighted as it is wicked. Since the Washington Conference, only one Power has shown any sympathy with the best elements in China, or any understanding of China's needs. That one Power is Soviet Russia. America, from fear of Bolshevism, has hesitated to support the South, and while refraining from doing harm, has not taken any initiative in doing good. The restoration of Shantung to China as a result of the Washington Conference was a service of great importance for which the Chinese have to thank America ; but since that event active assistance has been left to the Russians. Organization and propaganda have been largely directed by Borodin, a man who has had an adventurous career in many countries. From Spain he went to Mexico where he helped to bring about the present admirable regime. From Mexico, as a Mexican, he entered the United States ; thence he went to Glasgow, where he called himself Mr. Brown and took part in all the most advanced labor movements. The British Parliament deported him to Russia, and the Russian government sent him to help the Cantonese. No doubt his energy and skill in propaganda have contributed to their spectacular success in acquiring control of nearly all China south of the Yangtze, together with the great city of Hankow on its northern bank. It must not be supposed that the contest is really one between North and South, though that is its genealogical form. In the North, as in the South, public opinion is on the side of the Cantonese ; no one is on the side of the northern generals except themselves and the foreigners. Propaganda has repeatedly succeeded in winning their troops to the side of the South and this, more than military prowess, has been the cause of the southern victories. It follows that if the Cantonese can win they can establish a stable popular government and unify China. The Cantonese are not anti-foreign, in the sense in which the Boxers were. They are on the best possible terms with the Russians and are willing to be friends with any foreigners who will respect China's claims to independence. They are not communists and there is no chance to China becoming communistic : The alliance with Russia is only political. But their outlook on all domestic questions is completely enlightened. They do everything in their power to improve the status and remuneration of labor. They favor education on western lines. There is nothing in the programme that can be objected to by any decent person or approved by the present British government. From the British imperialist point of view the struggle in China is part of the secular struggle between England and Russia for control of Asia. For ten years, from 1907 to 1917, this struggle was suspended to deal with the Germans ; but at the Bolshevik Revolution it broke out again, without waiting for the end of the war. Although the catchwords are new, the contest is essentially the old context between two imperialisms ; and it is noteworthy that, in spite of losses in the West, the Russian Empire is larger now than before the war. But whereas, before the war Russia stood for reaction, now throughout Asia, Russia stands for progress and for everything that enlightened Asiatics desire. Consequently England has been led by imperialistic motives into support of everything old, reactionary and corrupt, and into opposition to everything that represents new growth. In the long run there can be no doubt whatever that the Chinese Nationalists will win and will achieve for their country the same independence of the West as is enjoyed by Japan. But it is impossible to foretell the immediate future. As I write, the British government is sending powerful natal forces to China, presumably for the protection of Shanghai. British interests in Shanghai are so important that they will certainly not be surrendered without a firs-class struggle. And Shanghai, unlike Hankow, can easily be held from the sea. Whether it is possible to compel the Chinese to trade with us by shouting down a sufficient number of them, remains to be seen ; so far, the results of this policy have not been encouraging from a business point of view. The Labor Party is doing its utmost to rouse public opinion against the government policy and it is still possible that it will succeed in preventing a war which would be as disastrous as it would be immoral. But the present British Government – which, I am happy to say, represents a minority of the votes cast at the last election – appears to be as blind to the true national interest as it is to considerations of decency and humanity. Fortunately, it has lost whatever popularity it once possessed and is likely to be swept away next year in a wave of indignation. Will that be too late to redress the evil that will have been wrought in China ? No man can say. |
|
Cited by (1)
| # | Year | Bibliographical Data | Type / Abbreviation | Linked Data |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2000- | Asien-Orient-Institut Universität Zürich | Organisation / AOI |
|