知识分子“在场”与社会秩序“表征”——基于20世纪二三十年代乡村改造思想比较分析

The Presence of Intellectuals and the Representation of Social Order——Based on the Comparative Analysis of Rural Reform Thoughts in the 1920s and 1930s

五四运动爆发导致中国民族主义高涨,“到民间去”发现新问题、找寻新路径、实现新作为成为知识分子的经世之选。晏阳初从平民个体教育入手,尝试通过个体“公民化”改造以形成集体共识和社会合力,进而自发自动完成民族再造。费孝通从江村田野调查出发,指出受世界市场冲击,城市流向农村的资本断裂而导致手工业衰败,冀由新士绅发展乡土工业以解决农民生产生计问题。与他们不同,托尼基于英国工业化经验与中国土地调查,从经济学视角提出城乡关系实为一种“金融关系”,应以农业工业化重塑城乡产业格局,而这需要培养大批高等教育人才以确保国家机器的高效运转。与此同时,梁漱溟在传统儒家文明与西方文明比较之上,提出中国的出路在于农村,可经由乡约礼俗构建一种团契精神以实现工业化。比较而论,尽管知识分子的乡建方案不尽一致,各有侧重,但都带有明显的“社会性”和“主体性”指向,通过知识社会化和社会知识化双向度转化以确认新秩序,经由“现代改造”或“内生调适”以期重振乡村经济,重建乡村秩序,重启社会可能。

The outbreak of the May 4th Movement led to the upsurge of Nationalism in China,and it became the choice of intellectuals to“going to the folk”to find new problems,find new paths and realize new achievements.Yan Yangchu started with the individual education of common people,and tried to form collective consensus and social synergy through individual“citizenship”transformation,and then spontaneously and automatically completed the national reconstruction.Starting from the field investigation of Jiangcun,Fei Xiaotong pointed out that due to the impact of the world market,the capital flowing from cities to rural areas was broken,which led to the decline of handicraft industry.He hoped that the new gentry would develop local industry to solve the problems of farmers’production and livelihood.Different from them,based on the experience of British industrialization and China’s land survey,Tony proposed from an economic perspective that the urban-rural relationship is actually a“financial relationship”,and that agricultural industrialization should be used to reshape the industrial pattern of urban and rural areas,which requires the cultivation of a large number of educated talents to ensure the efficient operation of the state machine.At the same time,Liang Shuming,based on the comparison between traditional Confucian civilization and Western civilization,proposed that the way to solve China’s problems lies in the countryside,and that a spirit of fellowship can be constructed through local conventions and customs to realize industrialization.Comparatively,although intellectuals’rural construction schemes are not consistent and have different emphases,they all have obvious“sociality”and“subjectivity”orientation.They confirmed the new order through the two-way transformation of academic knowledge and social knowledge,and tried to revitalize the rural economy,rebuild the rural order and reopen the possibility of society through“modern transformation”or“endogenous adjustment”.