Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T09:32:18.158Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Li Ta-Chao and the Chinese Communist Treatment of the Materialist Conception of History

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 February 2009

Maurice Meisner
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The traditional alliance between politics and scholarship that Professor Fitzgerald has referred to as “characteristically Chinese” has become a most explicit alliance in contemporary China. Not only is scholarship to serve immediate political interests, but it must do so within the frame-work of an all-pervasive ideology. In no field of scholarship is this union more explicit than in the study of history. The application of Marxist-Leninist theory and the “thought of Mao Tse-tung” to the study and understanding of the Chinese past is the appointed task of Chinese Communist historians, and they would no doubt be the first to acknowledge that historiography cannot, and indeed should not, be separated from ideology. The most relevant portion of this body of ideology for historians is, of course, the materialist conception of history. It is from the assumptions of this theory that the Chinese Communist interpretation of history ostensibly begins.

Type
Research Article
Information
The China Quarterly , Volume 24 , December 1965 , pp. 141 - 169
Copyright
Copyright © The China Quarterly 1965

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Fitzgerald, C. P., China: A Short Cultural History (London: Crescent Press, 1950), p. 389Google Scholar.

2 “Being” for Marx, of course, is essentially economic being; that is, the stage of the development of the productive forces of society and the manner in which these forces are organised. These productive forces constitute the economic “base” upon which is erected the legal, political and ideological “superstructure.” Marx's description of the process of historical change in his “Preface” to The Critique of Political Economy is generally regarded as the classic statement of the materialist conception of history.

3 Feuerwerker, Albert, “China's History in Marxian Dress,” American Historical Review, Vol. LXVI, No. 2, 01 1961Google Scholar.

4 Ta-chao, Li, “Shih-kuan” (“Historical Interpretation”), Li Ta-chao Hsuan-chi (Peking: Jen-min Ch'u-pan She, 1959), p. 297Google Scholar. (Hereafter cited as Hsuan-chi.)

5 Ta-chao, Li, “Fa-O ko-ming chih pi-chiao kuan” (“A Comparison of the French and Russian Revolutions”), Chung-kuo Chin-tai Ssu-hsiang-shih Tsan-k'ao Tzu-liao Chien-pien (Source Materials for the Study of the History of Modern Chinese Thought) (Peking: San-lien, 1957), p. 1204Google Scholar.

6 Ta-chao, Li, “Yen-shih-hsin yü tzu-chueh-hsin” (“Pessimism and Self-Consciousness”), Hsuan-chi, pp. 28–35Google Scholar.

7 Ta-chao, Li, Shih-hsueh Yao-lun (The Essentials of Historical Study) (Shanghai: Shang-wu Yin-shu-kuan, 1924)Google Scholar.

8 Ta-chao, Li, “Wo-ti Mak-k'o-ssu-chu-i kuan” (“My Marxist Views”), Hsin Ch'ingnien (New Youth), Vol. 6, No. 5 (05 1919)Google Scholar.

9 Shih-hsueh Yao-lun op. cit., p. 5.

10 Michel, Robert, First Lectures in Political Sociology (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota 1949), p. 21Google Scholar.

11 Marx, Karl. Selected Writings in Sociology and Social Philosophy, edited by Bottomore, T. B. and Rubel, Maximillian (London: Watts, 1956), p. 63Google Scholar.

12 “Wo-ti Ma-k'o-ssu-chu-i kuan,” op. cit., p. 534.

13 Ta-chao, Li, “Wei-wu shih-kuan tsai hsien-tai shih-hseuh-shang ti chia-chih” (“ The Value of the Materialist Conception of History in Contemporary Historical Study”). Chung-kuo Chin-tai Ssu-hsiang-shih, pp. 1245–1248Google Scholar.

14 Ibid. pp. 1248–1249.

15 ibid. p. 1249.

16 “Shih-kuan,” op. cit., p. 287.

17 Ibid. p. 288.

18 Ibid. pp. 290–291.

19 Ta-chao, Li, “Shin” (“Time”), Hsuan-chi, pp. 488–489Google Scholar.

20 Shih-hsueh Yao-lun, op. cit., pp. 1–2.

21 Ta-chao, Li, “Yen-chui li-shih ti jen-wu” (“The Responsibilities of Studying History”), Hsuan-chi, p. 480Google Scholar.

22 Ibid. p. 483.

23 Shih-hsueh Yao-lun, op. cit., p. 8.

24 Ibid.

25 ibid. pp. 8–9.

26 “Shih-kuan,” op. cit., p. 287.

27 Shih-hsueh Yao-lun, op. cit. p, 9.

28 Ta-chao, Li, “Ma-k'o-ssu ti li-shih che-hsueh” (“The Historical Philosophy of Marx”), Hsuan-chi, p. 294Google Scholar.

29 Ta-chao, Li, “K'ung-tao-hsi ti li-shih kuan” (“The Historical View of Condorcet”), She-hui k'o-hsueh chi-k'an (Social Science Quarterly), Vol. II, No. 1 (11 1923), p. 60Google Scholar.

30 ibid. p. 62.

31 Ibid. pp. 61–62.

32 Ta-chao, Li, “Sang-hsi-men ti li-shih kuan” (“The Historical View of Saint-Simon”), Hoi, pp. 466–467Google Scholar.

33 Ibid. p. 471.

34 Ibid. pp. 469–471.

35 See the discussion of Condorcet, Saint-Simon, Comte, and Vico in Shih-hsueh Yao-lun, op. cit., pp. 54–58.

36 “K'ung-tao-hsi ti li-shih kuan,” op. cit., p. 63.

37 Marx, Karl, “Theses on Feuerbach,” in Marx, and Engels, , The German Ideology (New York: International Publishers, 1947,) pp. 197–198Google Scholar.

38 “Sang-hsi-men ti li-shih kuan,” op. cit., p. 465.

39 Weber, Max, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1958), pp. 111–112Google Scholar.

40 For a discussion of the influence of the “Realists” on Lenin, see Haimson, Leopold, The Russian Marxists and the Origins of Bolshevism (Harvard, 1955), pp. 9–11, 98–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

41 “Wo-ti Ma-k'o-ssu-chu-i kuan,” op. cit., p. 534.

42 Ta-chao, Li, “She-hui-chu-i ti ching-chi tsu-chih” (“The Economic Organisation under Socialism”). Hsuan-chi, p. 428Google Scholar.

43 See Li's essays: “Ch'ing-chun” (“Spring”), Hsin Ch'ing-nien, Vol. II, No. 1 (09 1, 1916)Google Scholar, and “Chin” (“ Now ”), ibid., Vol. IV, No. 4 (April 15, 1918).

44 Ta-chao, Li, “‘Chin’ yü ‘ku’” Hsuan-chi, p. 433Google Scholar.

45 Ibid. pp. 433–444.

46 Ibid. p. 446.

47 “Shih,” op. cit.. p. 485.

48 Ibid. pp. 485–486.

49 Ibid. p. 486.

50 ibid. pp. 487–488.

51 Letter of Karl Marx to P. V. Annekov (December 28, 1946), Selected Correspondence of Karl Marx and Frederick Engels (Moscow: Foreign Languages Publishing House, 1953), p. 40Google Scholar.

52 Mannheim, Karl, Ideology and Utopia (New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1952), p. 219Google Scholar.

53 Ta-chao, Li, “Yuan-jeo she-hui yü wen-tzu shu-chi-shang chih wei-wu ti fan-ying” (“The Material Reflection of Primitive Society in Literary Documents”), Hsuan-chi, pp. 341–355Google Scholar.

54 Letter of Marx, Karl to the editors of Otechestvenniye Zapiski (11 1877)Google Scholar, Selected Correspondence of Marx and Engels, op. cit., pp. 354–355.

55 Mo-jo, Kuo, Chung-kuo Ku-tai She-hui Yen-chiu (A Study of Ancient Chinese Society) (Shanghai: Chung-ya Shu-chü, 1930)Google Scholar. Kuo began with the premise that “on the whole, the history of mankind has everywhere been the same.…”

56 Opposition to the unilinear view was expressed in the Communist debates on the question of the “Asiatic mode of production,” which continued into the 1930s. For an account of these debates by a participant, see Wittfogel, Karl, Oriental Despotism (New Haven: Yale, 1957), pp. 401–412Google Scholar.

57 Ta-chao, Li, “Yu ching-chi-shang chieh-shih Chung-kuo chin-tai ssu-hsiang pien-tung ti yuan-yu,” (“An economic explanation of the changes in modern Chinese thought”), Hsin Ch'ing-nien, Vol. 7, No. 2, pp. 48–49Google Scholar.

58 Ta-chao, Li, “Tu-ti yu nung-min” (“Land and the Peasants”), Hsuan-chi, p. 523Google Scholar.

59 Shih-hsueh Yao-lun, op. cit., pp. 37–39.

60 Ta-chao, Li, “Yu ching-chi-shang chieh-shih Chung-kuo chin-tai ssu-hsiang pien-tung ti yuan-yin,” op. cit., pp. 47–48Google Scholar.

61 Marx, , The German Ideology, op. cit., p. 7Google Scholar.

62 Marx, , Capital, Vol. II (Chicago: Kerr, 1912), p. 176Google Scholar.

63 Plekhanov, George, Fundamental Problems of Marxism (New York: International Publishers, 1930), p. 34Google Scholar.

64 Marx's, most complete statement of the theory of the “Asiatic mode of production” is in his essay “The British Rule in India,” which originally appeared in The New York Tribune, 06 25, 1853Google Scholar.

65 “Wo ti Ma-k'o-ssu-chu-i kuan,” op. cit., p. 532.

66 See Meisner, Maurice, “The Despotism of Concepts: Wittfogel and Marx on China,” The China Quarterly, No. 16 (10–12 1963)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

67 The theory of “Asiatic society” does appear in Capital which Li Ta-chao read.

68 “yu ching-chi-shang,” op. cit., pp. 48–51.

69 The following statement, for example, appears in a booklet by Li published in January 1923: “Democracy originated in Europe and spread to America, and recently, by means of the power of the machine gun, the steamship, the newspaper, and the telegraph, it has brought a thunderous sound to awaken Asia, which has slumbered deep in despotism for several thousand years.” P'ing-min-chu-i (Democracy), (Shanghai: Shang-wu Yin-shu-kuan, 1923), p. 1Google Scholar.

70 See, for example, Ta-chao, Li, “Ma-k'o-ssu ti Chung-kuo min-tsu ko-ming kuan” (“Marx's Views on the Chinese National Revolution”), Hsuan-cht, p. 545Google Scholar; and “Sun Chung-shan Hsien-sheng tsai Chung-kuo min-tsu ko-ming shih-shang chin wei-chih” (“Mr. Sun Yat-sen's Place in the History of the Chinese National Revolution”), Hsuan-chi, pp. 537–544.

71 “Sun Chung-shan Hsien-sheng,” op. cit., p. 537.

72 Ta-chao, Li, “Chung-shan-chu-i ti kuo-min ko-ming yu shih-chieh ko-ming” (“ The Sun Yatsenist National Revolution and the World Revolution”), Hsuan-chi, p. 562Google Scholar.

73 Ibid. p. 562.

74 Ta-chao, Li, “Ma-k'o-ssu ti Chung-kuo minjtsu ko-ming kuan” (“Marx's Views on the Chinese Nationalist Revolution”), Hsuan-chi, pp. 545–555Google Scholar

75 Feuerwerker, op. cit.

76 Po-tean, Chien, “Some Present Problems in the Teaching of History,” Joint Publications Research Service (Washington: Department of Commerce), 07 29, 1959, pp. 46–48Google Scholar.

77 Ibid. p. 40–41.

78 Shou-i, Pai, “The’ ‘Past’ and the ‘Present’ in the Teaching of History,” JPRS, 08 11, 1959Google Scholar.

79 Plekhanov's celebrated The Role of the Individual in History sets forward the generally accepted Marxist view on this subject.

80 Chien Po-tsan, p. 40.

81 Pai Shou-i, p. 29.

82 I-jang, Hsu and Ching-yao, Lin, “Subjective Dynamism and the Superstructure Can under Certain Conditions Produce Decisive Results,” Hsin Chlenshe (New Construction), 03, 1959, pp. 44–46Google Scholar.

83 Ch'un-fang, Chiang, “Ma-k'ossu-chu-i tsai Chung-kuo” (“Marxism in China”), Lishih Yen-chiu (Historical Research), 12, 1958, p. 19Google Scholar.