共和还是君主——重思民国初期关于国体问题的论争(1915-1917)

许纪霖认为,民初政治混乱的原因在于国家权威缺位,各方政治势力争夺的仅是权力,而一再错失重建国家权威的机会。沈洁认为,民初的多头权威,北洋与民党、北洋内部、民党内部的多重缠斗,致使政治走向无序和无休止的争端。宋宏认为,民国初年的君主立宪论即旨在回应国家权威缺位的问题,有相当的民意基础,然而面临着许多难以克服的现实困难,终归于失败。严泉梳理了民初要求地方分权的省宪主张,认为1923年民国宪法已经创设了一种体现中国特色的联邦分权制度,然而这种制度建构尝试很快被国民革命打断。瞿骏认为,现代中国国家认同塑造过程中,多看重民族主义之"可贵",并以各种各样的方式来全力使民众知晓民族主义之"可贵",却较少去普及民族主义之"可爱"。

Xu Jilin believes that the politics of the early stage of the National Period was at chaos because a lack of the authority of the state. What the political forces scramble was only the political power, resulting in the chance of re-construct the authority of state time and again. Shen Jie holds that it was the multiple authorities, i.e., a multi-layer scramble between warlords and KMT, between the warlords, and among KMT factions, caused endlessly political disorder. Song Hong puts up that the suggestion of constitutional monarchy had an obvious ground of public opinion, but it failed because of many difficulties in reality. Yan Quan mentioned the advocate of provincial constitution for local power in early national period, and believes that, in 1923, the National Constitution had created a federal power division system with Chinese characteristics, but it was soon disrupted by the national revolution. Qu Jun points out that in the process of molding a state identity in modern China, the 'treasure' of nationalism was attached importance to, and its 'loveliness' was neglected..