历史的暴政,抑或现代性的危机

Historical Tyranny or Modern Crises

本文通过批判与评述《历史的暴政 :中国危机的根源》 ,展开对中国历史、文化和政治的自我认识 ,特别是中国的困境和现代性危机的认识。文章首先从方法论角度来审视该书 ,作者断定 ,对于将中国作整体性危机的判断根源于文化主义方法论是个根本性错误。这种方法论片面地将中国的历史书写和汉语作为危机的最为重要的渊源 ,从而得出完全倒置的结论。文章在驳斥简纳的“中国历史观”之后指出 ,简纳按照民族—国家模式解读中国的危机时 ,颠倒了危机的根源与危机的表象关系。作者认为 ,民族—国家的危机不是产生于文化和民族的多样性这一无数社会共同体的常态 ,而是产生于民族—国家这一导源于欧洲帝国及其崩溃的政治模式本身。在文章最后 ,作者指出 ,简纳关于克服中国危机的动力因素 (以城市对抗乡村、以沿海放逐内地、以开放抵制封闭、以资本主义市场取代国家的控制 ) ,忘记了讨论高度的权力集中与发展资本主义经济的关系 ,探讨中国的困境与现代性危机不能够越过构成危机的社会条件 ,这也许是中国危机的根源所在。

This paper critically comments on “Historical Tyranny: Origins of Chinese Crises” in order to reevaluate Chinese history, culture and politics, and especially to gain insights into the Chinese predicament and modern crises. The article first looks at the book from a methodological point of view and decides that it is radically wrong to interpret the overall Chinese crises on the basis of culturalism methodology which believes unilaterally that Chinese history and the Chinese language are the major origins of crises. After refuting Gellner’s “view of Chinese history”, the author points out that when he interpreted Chinese crises in terms of the nation-state model, Gellner reversed the positions of the origins of the crises and their manifestations. The author believes the nation-state crisis arises from the very nation-state political model which resulted in the European empires and led to their collapse, rather than arising from the culture and nationality diversity which is the common characteristic of numerous communities. At the end of the article, the author points out that Gellner neglected the relationship between highly centralized power and the development of capitalist economy when he suggested adopting the momentum factors (to counterbalance the countryside by the city, to help the interior regions with the coastal areas, to repel containment with the open door policy and to replace state control with capitalist markets) to overcome the Chinese crises. Social conditions in which the roots of Chinese crises lie shouldn’t be neglected in exploring Chinese predicament and modern crises.