1930年代中国农村合作运动讨论中的“商资归农”问题——以《大公报》社评及其所刊文章为素材的一个考察

On the commercial capital returned to agriculture in the discussion about cooperative movement of China's countryside in 1930s—— based on the articles and commentary published by Ta-kung Daily

20世纪30年代,随着中国农村复兴运动的高涨,农村合作实践中出现大量商资归农现象,并由此推动中国农村合作运动进入"极盛时期"或"农业合作社数量猛进和性质有所变更时期"。这一现象不仅为中国合作运动史上之新鲜事物,亦为"中国独有之现象",故在社会各界特别是知识界引发了一场关于"商资流入农村问题"或商资归农利弊关系的讨论。而当时重要的新闻媒体天津《大公报》或发表社论及报道或刊发有关人士对这一问题的评论文章,积极参与了这一理论与实践问题的探讨。其讨论的目的在于为中国农村合作事业寻找一条可行之路,并以此复兴农村、振兴民族。不过,由于这场讨论本身是"社会失序时期"理论界的一种反映,所以有时人曾讥讽其为"合作者不合作"。

In 1930s, along with the upsurge of Chinese countryside reconstruction, the village cooperation practice brought about the phenomenon that large quantity of commercial capital returned to agriculture, which pushed the Chinese village cooperation to the ＂very prosperous period＂or ＂the quantity-rapidly-rising and quality-altering period of agriculture cooperation agency＂. This phenomenon was not only a flesh thing in the history of Chinese agriculture cooperation, but also ＂a phenomenon that China possessed only＂.Therefore, in society, especially in the field of knowledge, it caused a discussion about ＂the issue of commercial capital returning village＂ or concerning the gains or losses of its returning to agriculture. But at that time important public opinion medium, Tianjin Ta-kung Daily, either announced editorials and reports, or published commentary articles of relevant personage as for this issue, positively participating the study of its theories and practice. The discussion aimed at finding a possible road for the Chinese village cooperation, and in this way renewing village, developing the race. However, because of this discussion itself is a reflection in the field of theories, of ＂a period of social disorder＂, hence at times it was laughed as＂cooperator＇s noncooperation＂.