“益友”? “恶友”?——以樽井藤吉及其《大东合邦论》为中心

“Good Friend”?“Bad Friend”?——Tarui Tokichi and His Daito Gapporon as the Center

樽井藤吉及其《大东合邦论》作为所谓早期亚洲主义的典型代表,其中的思想构成与亚洲主义的"健全原型"直接对应。但是,其近代主义的侧面起初便与脱亚论在同一轨道上,对于西洋威胁的强调也与福泽谕吉若合符节,至于合邦的操作方式和理想模版同样都是渡来。合邦的理论前提与合邦中的指导地位除了有赖于从西洋导入的近代文明,也部分源自前近代的非合理的国体神话,这种不存在任何平等自主空间的连带可以说在原初阶段便与通常所说的大亚细亚主义高度相似。此外,樽井在用西洋原理对抗西洋的同时,反过来却用日本替代了东洋,当这样一种他者缺失的视角叠加在平等缺失的观点基础上,就更容易得出对东洋邻国的蔑视情绪。最后需要提及的是,樽井合邦论中的任何思想元素都不是孤立存在的,在把他和福泽谕吉、民权论者等相联系相比较的同时,这本身就提示出亚洲主义原型不健全的原因有着更为复杂的脉络。

As typical representatives of the so-called early Pan-Asianism,the ideological structure of Tarui Tokichi and his Daito Gapporon directly correspond to the"Positive Factors"of Pan-Asianism.However,modernism was on the same track as the theory of De-Asianism from the beginning.The emphasis on Western threats was also in line with Fukuzawa Yukichi’s ideas.As for the operation methods and ideal models of Gapporon,they are also stolen.In addition to relying on modern civilization imported from the West,Gapporon’s theoretical premises and Gapporon’s guiding position are also partly derived from pre-modern irrational national myths.This kind of association,which does not have any equal and independent space,can be said to be highly similar to what is commonly referred to as greater Asianism at the initial stage.In addition,while adopting Western principles against the Western Oceans,Tarui Tokichi conversely referred to Japan as representing the East;when such a perspective of the lack of the other is superimposed on the perspective of lack of equality,it is easier to derive Japan’s contempt for its neighbors in the East.The last thing to be mentioned is that none of the thought elements in Tarui Tokichi and his Daito Gapporon exist in isolation.While comparing Tarui Tokichi with Fukuzawa Yukichi,civil rights critics,etc.,this in itself suggests that the reasons for the"Negative Factors"of Pan-Asianism have a more complicated context.