Professor Fang sincerely praised China's political system monarchy for thousands of years, calling it "the only system that effectively promoted social progress, national unity and production development at that time". There is nothing wrong with Professor Fang's saying "under the conditions at that time", but how long is the term of "under the conditions at that time"? Does this package include the modern history of China? Professor Fang did not make it clear. The enlightenment from his later articles, such as "It's a pity that the worship of western values for more than a century has made many people forget these spiritual traditions that have promoted the Chinese nation to strive for self-improvement for thousands of years (namely," respect for the king ","loyalty to the monarch "and" three cardinal guides "). ) is still an important driving force for our continuous progress until today. " Another example is that "democratic politics characterized by party struggle and mass politics does not conform to China culture characterized by collectivism and relationship standard, and Confucian virtuous politics will remain the core or cornerstone of China's political culture in the future". We can clearly know that Professor Fang's so-called "conditions" are not out of date until today! This is a big problem. Almost everyone knows that the national awakening in modern China began in the pain and humiliation of backwardness and beatings. When foreign powers invaded, the people of China were forced to walk out of the closed state and open their eyes to see the world, only then did they realize step by step that they were completely behind a historical era in western society. 1923 Liang Qichao said in "An Introduction to the Evolution of China in Fifty Years" that in the past 50 years, China people have gradually realized their own shortcomings. The realization of this concept can be regarded as both the cause and the result of learning progress. In the first stage, I felt inadequate from the tools. We think foreign ships are better than us, so we gradually set up Fujian Ship Administration School and Shanghai Manufacturing Bureau. In the second period, I felt inadequate from the system. Ever since we lost a war against Japan, it's like a bolt from the blue in our sleep. Because we thought that the reason why China declined to such a field was because the political system was not good, so we started a movement in the society under the banner of "Reform and Reform". The third period is the fundamental lack of culture. I feel that social culture is a whole set, and it is impossible to apply the new system with the old psychology. I gradually asked for the consciousness of the whole personality and summoned up the courage to do the movement of complete liberation. The last two or three years have been a new period. Liang Qichao's "new period" is the May 4th Movement. Since then, "Mr. De" (democracy) and "Mr. Sai" (science) have been recognized and accepted by more and more people in China. As Liang said, the people's political consciousness is indeed more obvious day by day, and it is expanding day by day. "Hanging signs of the Republic of China will never be removed in Qian Qian. If you are as wise as Yao Shun, as violent as Qin Shihuang and Ming Taizu, and as cunning as Cao Cao and Sima Yi, no one will agree. " Liang Qichao said firmly here, because he has the facts of his personal experience as the basis. 19 15, Yuan Shikai's ambition to restore the monarchy appeared, and Goodnow, a foreign consultant hired by the Beijing government, published a long article "Harmony with Jun", advocating that "the monarchy is more suitable for China's national conditions". Yang Du and others organized a "security meeting" and even sang praises for the monarchy with ulterior motives. Liang Qichao was furious at this scandal and wrote an article "The So-called National Movement Problem" to expose it. Then he refused Yuan Shikai's heavy purchase and insisted on publishing this article, risking his life to sneak into Yunnan, where his student Cai E led the troops, and launched a war to protect Yuan. As a result, the whole country responded in succession. Yuan Shikai only had an emperor dream for 83 days, and then sighed. Liang refuted Yang Du and others in the article Alien: "It is said that harmony will be chaotic, and the monarch can cure it. How can the world be better? " China didn't elect a president during the Five Lakes, Sixteen Countries, Five Dynasties and Ten Countries, and the chaos was cruel for hundreds of years. How to explain it? Compared with the speculative mentality of Yang Du and other domestic scholars, it is more scholarly. At that time, he stated in the English "Beijing Gazette" that he disagreed with the conclusion that domestic scholars in China simply thought that the monarchy was superior to the * * * system, and emphasized that everything was based on "conditions". "For some countries with suitable conditions, the * * * system is the best form of government ... On the contrary, in countries with different national conditions from the United States and France, the monarchy is often more suitable." Gu's defense did not let him get rid of the imperial scandal, and the voice of public opinion was endless. Jiayin magazine criticized: "Do not hesitate to reverse the right and wrong of the world and drum up the eyes and ears of the world"; "Losing the virtue of independence is the reputation of scholars". I hope others can learn from it. Professor Fang criticized the dichotomy of "democracy or autocracy" for many times, and said that he wanted to "recognize the diversity of human political system", but he did not explicitly say whether the ancient monarchy in China was an autocracy. If he doesn't think this is an authoritarian system, he has to speak with evidence, not in such a vague way. Anyone who knows a little about China's history knows that the autocratic monarchy abused China for more than 2,000 years from the Qin Dynasty and reached its peak in the Ming Dynasty. Tyrants and bad kings brutally rule and strive to shed blood on earth by force. The disasters of consorts and eunuchs have repeatedly caused the ruin of people's lives, periodic social unrest and stagnant development. Long before the introduction of modern western theories, the progressive thoughts in China's traditional culture criticized the autocratic monarchy, pointing out that it violated the Confucian people-oriented concept, with the focus on changing "the public world" into "the private world". Professor Fang praised Fang Xiaoru, a famous figure in Ming Dynasty, for defending the system of succession to the throne at the cost of his life. On the surface, Fang's thought seems to respect the monarch, but in his bones, he insists on Mencius' teaching and people. He believes that "heaven is the king for the people", "the future generations know that the position of the people depends on clothing, but they don't know that the position of the king cares about raising the people, so that those who seek details for the people will never repair." He even said, "Simin, as for Qin, it's a riot." People died in later countries, which affirmed the people's struggle against tyrants to some extent. Famous thinkers in the late Ming and early Qing Dynasties, such as Huang Zongxi and Gu, all expressed their opposition to absolute monarchy. They criticized the emperors after Qin as thieves who regarded the world as their own, poisoned the liver and brain of the world, and tore the bone marrow of the world, pointing out that "the great harm in the world is only the monarch." He also firmly denied that "the monarch is a minister" and declared that "my official career is also for the world, not for the monarch." For the people, not for a surname. "With the introduction of modern western theories, the progressive ideological circles in China finally realized clearly that the fundamental drawback of the country's weakness and poverty lies in the autocratic monarchy. Zou Rong said: "The so-called twenty-four histories of China are actually a history of great slavery. "To save the country, we must completely eradicate the' slave root'. Liang Qichao said: "Therefore, China, a late husband, did not make progress in group governance, which was caused by the people's disregard for public welfare;" "People ignore public welfare because they are slaves and thieves; It makes a living by stealing slaves. It is the property of a tyrant's private sector, and stealing slaves is also done by our people. " Tan sitong said, "The husband and thief are happy in the name of the Three Cardinal Principles and the Five Permanent Principles, and all criminal law systems are based on this." Since its establishment, Mingjiao has been poisoned, but it is also obedient and does not dare to moan, which makes people lose equality and the society tends to be corrupt. Therefore, if we want to reform today, we must first change the name of the Three Cardinals and the Five Permanent Members. He proposed that the national spirit should "break the net of monarchies" and "break the net of ethics". It can be said that opposing absolute monarchy is the mainstream of China's modern progressive thought. It is not the product of the dichotomy of "democracy and autocracy" mentioned by Professor Fang, but the aspiration of generations of people with lofty ideals. This origin directly led to the transformation of our modern society today. I remember that 30 years ago, it was a group of historians such as Li Shu who criticized the autocratic monarchy and reflected on the historical experience and lessons, which started the ideological emancipation movement in the new period. We now advocate the inheritance of traditional culture and the revitalization of Chinese studies. We can't confuse the essence with the dross, black and white with right and wrong, can we? Professor Fang said: "Democratic politics is only a specific institutional arrangement under specific social and historical conditions, not a universal and effective political system that can transcend specific historical and cultural situations." The use of two "particularities" in one sentence is to emphasize that democracy has no universality in human history. Like the previous statement about monarchy, Professor Fang's so-called "specific historical and cultural situation" also extends to today's world. This view comes from a well-informed scholar who often gives lectures abroad, which is really surprising. Yes, the original form of democracy was born only in Athens, the ancient Greek city-state. However, no historian can deny that with the development and progress of human society, democracy, like basic norms such as freedom, human rights and the rule of law, has finally been generally accepted by the international family and become a common value concept of people all over the world. As early as 19 16, Dr. Sun Yat-sen, the forerunner of China's democratic revolution, famously said: "The world trend is vast, if you follow it, you will prosper, if you go against it, you will die." Sixty years ago, the producer of China sang the song "Let all undemocratic systems die" and established a new China. The United Nations, established after the war, currently has 192 member countries (China is both an initiator and a permanent member of the Security Council). The Charter of the United Nations and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights further authoritatively interpret the Charter, clearly stating that "everyone has the right to participate in the governance of his own country directly or through freely chosen representatives"; "The will of the people is the basis of government power; This will should be expressed through periodic and genuine elections, which should be based on universal and equal voting rights and conducted by secret ballot or equivalent free voting procedures. " Isn't this democracy? Most countries in the world, including China, agree with this. How can you say it's not universal? It should be pointed out that in contemporary times, democracy belongs to the category of basic human rights, not just the category of specific culture. It is totally untenable and wrong to replace the concept of basic human rights with the concept of specific culture. Professor Fang also said, "Since World War II, few countries and regions have achieved democratization from East Asia to South Asia and from Asia to Latin America." Is this a fact? From East Asia to South Asia, does it refer to Japan, South Korea, China, Taiwan Province Province or India? The success of democratic politics in these places should be decided by the local people, and it seems a bit arbitrary to let others draw conclusions for them. As for Professor Fang's statement that "I have to die if the monarch wants to die" and "I have to die if the judge wants to die", it is very unprofessional to deny that the former is the rule of man and the latter is the fundamental difference between the rule of law. If you teach this kind of thing, it will mislead others' children. After praising and criticizing the imperial system and democratic politics, Professor Fang expressed his own opinion: he advocated "Confucian-style virtuous politics" as "the core or cornerstone of China's political culture in the future". This will certainly arouse his students' thirst for knowledge. It's a pity that Professor Fang stopped here and didn't give a thorough and extensive explanation. I want to ask a few more questions: Does this "Confucian talent politics" need power restriction? Do you want the rule of law? Do you want to protect the basic rights of citizens? If so, what is the difference between it and democracy? If not, how can it be "virtuous"? Han Changli said: people are not born knowing, how can they not be confused? If you are confused and don't follow the teacher, you will be confused and you will never understand. Please also ask Professor Fang for advice.