【洪濤】同與異的政治：梁漱一包養心得溟與毛澤東的兩次爭論

1. Two Controversies: In 1938 and 1953

70 years ago, Liang Shuming and Mao Zedong made their first serious dispute between them in a tile house in Yan’an. This debate is rarely mentioned tomorrow. Looking through historical works about that era, this discussion has hardly been recorded except for a few records about Liang Shuming’s life and thoughts. Indeed, for many historians, a battle can be much more important than a battle of thinking (especially this battle of thinking was just a tile house that occurred in Yan’an), and why did the discussions in this secretly 官网 have indeed not had any obvious impact on the historical process at that time and even China in the future. However, philosophical and political thinking researchers have not shown enough attention to it, which is surprising because the discussions between Mao Zedong and Liang Shuming are the representatives of the two major events in the 20th century China.

Maybe 70 years are too short, because we are still under the grand influence of the historical events that occurred 10 years after this debate: one side of the dispute—the new subjective reaction led by Mao Zedong and later The socialist reaction was to win the overwhelming victory, while the other party, even the most basic, was regarded as an enemy (in 1953, it was only interested in criticism and disinfection, but was not complete, but it was an enemy, but this allowed Liang Shuming to win a href=”https://twsugarhug.org/”>Including contractssome historic concerns). Under the influence of Mao Zedong’s success, the path of differences, or perhaps (only) the idea of ​​the path of the path, will either be defeated or can only be self-examination. And who is our history researchers willing to accompany the reviewers to check and listen to the stuttering words of the reviewers?

Compared with this quiet discussion in 1938, the 1953 debate was much more famous. The former occurred in a tile house in Yan’an City. It was late at night, one was very serious and one was talking about lice, only Liang Shuming and Mao Zedong. The latter occurred in the middle of Beijing, and was very impressive and in full view of the public at the stimulating meeting of the Standing Committee of the National Committee. Liang Shuming’s component has not changed much. From a member of the National Defense Commission’s Conference in 1938 to a member of the national political alliance in 1953, Mao Zedong’s component is worlds apart. Liang Shuming recalled in 1986 and talked with Mao Zedong six times in 38 yearsCaring Network, two of which At night, although “they couldn’t compete with each other until dawn, who didn’t convince anyone”, Mao Zedong was “easy and unforgiving. He was not arrogant or strong,… It was obviously a dispute between each other, which made you feel comfortable, like an old friend talking to you.”[1] What was discussed about the scene 15 years later was: “Because of my arrogance and pride, no one was seen, I did not regard Chairman Mao’s prestige as a leader. When the crowd collided with him, he prompted him to say a few things that were too hot on the head.”[2]

The latter argument is obviously more dramatic and eye-catching. At that time, Mao Zedong had the highest authority, and Liang Shuming dared to challenge him and asked for a dispute, which was very suitable for the spectators. Challenging authority is the last battle in modern society! When a power controls all other powers, it can also eliminate the power itself. At that step, modern energy will also come to the postmodern world safely. So, many years later, this debate won more attention from the previous one, and it was very natural to 官网. However, just think about it, in 1953, Liang Shuming had already checked his original position and admitted that his initial thought was wrong. So, what was the meaning of his argument with Mao Zedong at the 1953 meeting? In fact, Liang Shuming did not seek disputes because of differences in opinions with Mao Zedong. On the contrary, he asked for disputes because he was considered by the Supreme Leader to have differences in opinions with opinions. The reason for the disputes is not “difference”, but “sameness”. [3] Therefore, in terms of content, this debate is actually far from the general and what future generations think of it. However, is this debate difficult to be just a misunderstanding or an intrigue?

The emphasis of later generations on the second dispute was more due to Liang Shuming’s courage to challenge Mao Zedong, or perhaps saying that he dared to “break the superior”, rather than whether he and Mao Zedong could really have different and different characteristics. However, this habit of being praised for being “infringing the superior” is not actually a promise made by Liang Shuming. It is not said that it was opposed by him, and this habit is more related to Mao Zedong. The relationship between Liang Shuming and Mao Chengdong with the pattern like “Liang Shuming vs. Mao Chengdong” is just to explain the kind of conceptual behavior that Liang Shuming opposed and his career has become self-evident. Liang Shuming’s quarrel with Mao Zedong four days after September 18, 953, and his memories 33 years later were all “sassinated, apologized, regretful, and regretful” (1953), “arrogance, pride, and no one in his eyes” (Baoqing.com comparison1986). From these words, Liang Shuming we see clearly does not regard himself as the supervisor of the bureau, but on the contrary, he is more like a follower. It is precisely because of this kind of attitude that he thought of “injustice”, the 1980s “I should respect him more, not betray him” (Ai Yan interview), and the 1986s “I don’t care about Chairman Mao’s prestige as a leader” (Wang Donglin’s interview). What Liang Shuming checked was the method of the minister talking to the king.The question, not what he said. What later generations value is Liang Shuming’s “bone spirit”, but in terms of “bone spirit”, Liang Shuming said in his self-report at the end of September 1953 (that is, the few days after the incident), he said that he was “are angry but heartless” and “a person who likes happiness but has no heart to be confused” [4]. Of course, Liang Shuming did not deny that people should have “bone spirit”, regardless of the 1951 “What changes have I experienced in the past two years?” Liang Shuming held his opinion on the nature of modern China (non-level society), and never refused to accept Afu, let alone denied Confucius, and he would never deny Confucius. Liang Shuming checked “gas” but not “bone”. Liang Shuming seemed to have bones but no air, and it would not have air but no air.

The perspective of “Liang Shuming vs. Mao Zedong” reflects not the attitude of Liang Shuming, but the attitude of Mao Zedong. Decades of practice and teaching, and either-or thinking (the so-called “nemesis thinking”) have made people very accustomed to looking at problems from such an perspective. The relationship between Liang and Mao is neither an enemy nor an inconsistent relationship. The goal of the second dispute seemed to be to seek common ground, and the result was “d