《五四運動在上海》陳曾燾 著/ 陳勤譯，台北：經世書局，1981
The May Fourth Movement in Shanghai. Front Cover · Joseph Tao Chen. Brill Archive, 1964 - China - 588 pages. 0 Reviews ... Basis for the Making of a Popular Movement. 26. The
Volume 4, Issue 1
January 1970 , pp. 63-81
The May Fourth Movement Redefined*
Joseph T. Chen (a1)
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0026749X00010982
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 November 2008
Extract
The May Fourth Movement of 1919 was an epochal event in modern Chinese history. It marked the beginning of China's modern revolutionary era, and a new stage after the Republican Revolution of 1911. It was both anti-imperialist and anti-warlord, and represented the reaction of the Chinese people to the turbulent new forces unleashed by the First World War. In specific protest against the terms of the Versailles Peace Treaty as they affected China, and against the terms of Japan's infamous ‘Twenty-one Demands’, huge student demonstrations were held in Peking on 4 May 1919 to denounce the pro-Japanese Peking government. This revolutionary tide soon spread rapidly throughout China, spearheading a rapid growth of mass consciousness and cultural change, and culminating in the founding of the Chinese Communist Party in 1921, in the reorganization of the Kuomintang in 1924, and the establishment of a united front between the Kuomintang and the Chinese Communist Party. It is the very importance of the May Fourth Movement (MFM) as well as its manifold repercussions and ramifications, which have complicated the problems of defining, interpreting, and evaluating the movement per se. The definition of its true nature and character, the clear identification of its actual leadership, and the realistic appraisal of its scope and achievements have all become matters of dispute. Ideological commitment, political ties, or professional interest have too often clouded the objectivity of individuals who have studied the movement—and hence their interpretations of it.
Export citation Request permission
Copyright
COPYRIGHT: © Cambridge University Press 1970
References
1 To a certain degree, the characteristics of China's new culture movement resembled those of the European Renaissance, namely: (a) both faced semi-medieval economic and social conditions; (b) both faced the vernacular problem; (c) both expressed the need to emancipate the individual from the bondage of traditional ideas, institutions and customs. See Tse-tsung, Chow, The May Fourth Movement, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1960, pp. 338–9.Google Scholar
2 Huang remarked that ‘the basic ideals of world thought must be related to the life of the average man. The method seems to consist in using simple (plain) and simplified language and literature for wide dissemination of the ideas among the people. Have we not seen that historians regard the Renaissance as the foundation of the overthrow of mediavalism in Europe?’ Ibid., p. 272.
3 Both Ch'en Tu-hsiu and Hu Shih, through their writings during the period 1915–18, expressed in Hsin ch'ing-nien (New Youth) their feelings that a Chinese Renaissance was in the making, and they pointed out the similarity between the current Chinese literary movement and the Renaissance in Europe.Google Scholar
4 The designation ‘New Culture Movement’ gained common usage in the half-year following the May Fourth Incident. The editor of New Tide, in 12 1919, did indicate that their movement was a ‘culture movement’.Google Scholar By the beginning of 1920, the term became popular. Ibid., p. 194.
5 Ibid., p. 2.
6 See Ch'ang-chih, Li, Welcome to the Chinese Renaissance, Chungking, 1944, p. 12.Google ScholarCited in Chow, , op. cit., p. 4.Google Scholar
7 Tsun-p'eng, Pao, Chung-kuo ch'ing-nienyūn-tung shih, Taipei, 1954, p. 119.Google Scholar
8 Chow, , op. cit., p. 5.Google Scholar
9 Selected Works of Li Ta-chao, Peking, 1962, p. 255.Google ScholarChow, , op. cit., p. 347.Google Scholar
10 Ibid., pp. 347–8. However, Ch'en may either have failed to recognize the social significance of the movement, or may simply have wished to stress the intellectual aspect of the movement. He not only identified the MFM with that of the NCM, but also noted that ‘the MFM had had the defect of being mainly carried on by young intellectuals and not by the working masses’. Ibid., p. 348. Actually, as we know, the movement did have a popular base, particularly in its Shanghai phase. The National Student Union, writing in 1926, remarked that the MFM was ‘the first time we engaged in a courageous popular movement’. (The italics are mine.) See Chungkuo hsüeh-sheng, No. 25, 1 May 1926, p. 167.Google Scholar
11 He was also among the first to recognize several other significant aspects of the movement at this early stage; e.g., the importance of the coalition and mobilization of the various social forces to form a united front against Japanese imperialism and Peking warlordism; the importance of the intellectuals' leadership of the proletariat; and the importance of the students and teachers as the great reservoir of the Chinese revolution.
12 Mao's interpretation of the MFM as anti-imperialist and anti-feudal may contain little that is original. Prior to 1926 (the Northward Expedition) the two terms commonly used by Chinese writers to denote the two arch-enemies of the Chinese people were: ‘brute force’ (ch'iang-ch'üan) and ‘militarism’ (wu-li wan-neng chu-i). But since 1926, the terms ‘imperialism’ and ‘feudalism’ were clearly adopted by Chinese writers to replace the old terms. Interview with Professors T'ao Hsi-sheng and Kan, Lao in Los Angeles, 5 05 1967.Google ScholarSee also Wu, Mu, ‘Wu-yueh ti-i-chou’, Chungkuo hsüeh-sheng, No. 24, 24 04 1926, p. 156;Google Scholar and Lin, Chung, ‘Wu-ssu yu Chung-kuo min-tsu yun-tung’, Chung-kuo hsüeh-sheng, No. 25, 1 05 1926, p. 177. Both writers writing in 1926 had already regarded the MFM as an anti-imperialist, anti-warlord and anti-traditional popular movement led by the students.Google Scholar
13 According to Mao, during the Revolution of 1911, there was a total lack of mass participation, whereas the MFM had the support of the masses. See Tse-tung, Mao, ‘Min-chung ti ta-lien ho’, Hsiang-chiang p'ing-lun, first issue, 07 1919.Google Scholar Cited in Wu-ssu shih-ch'i ch'i-k'an chieh-shao, Peking, 1958.Google Scholar
14 Mao Tse-tung hsüan-chi, Peking, 1961, Vol. 2, p. 545.Google Scholar Also Selected Works of Mao Tse-tung, New York, 1954, Vol. 3, p. 9.Google ScholarMao stated that in the Chinese democratic revolution, the intelligentsia was the first awakened element, but ‘the intelligentsia will accomplish nothing if they do not unite with the workers and the peasants’. Mao Tse-tung hsüan-chi (hereafter cited as Mao), p. 546.Google Scholar
15 Ibid., p. 692. Selected Works of Mao, p. 145.Google Scholar
16 Chow, , op. cit., pp. 350–1.Google ScholarMao, p. 689.Google Scholar
17 Mao, pp. 665–6.Google ScholarSelected Works of Mao, p. 116.Google Scholar
18 According to Mao, this new culture of the pre-May Fourth era of China was then serving the interest of the bourgeois-democratic revolution. Selected Works of Mao, pp. 143–5.Google Scholar
19 Selected Works of Mao, p. 145.Google Scholar
20 Chow, , op. cit., p. 352.Google Scholar
21 Kang, Hua, Wu-ssu yün-tung shih, Shanghai, 1951, p. 198.Google Scholar Although in this paragraph he did not define clearly what constituted the ‘mass’, it appeared that he was willing to accept a general broad view of the term ‘ch'ün-chung’ as meaning ‘people’ with the exception of the bourgeois intellectual class. Ibid., p. 197.
22 Having recognized the impact of the NCM upon the Chinese society, Sun called for thought change within his party as the first step toward bringing about successful consummation of the Republican Revolution. Sun Chung-shan ch'üan-shu, Shanghai, 1933, 2nd ed., Vol. 4, Letters, p. 27.Google ScholarPao, , op. cit., p. 119.Google Scholar
23 Pao, , op. cit., p. 117.Google ScholarChow, , op. cit., p. 195.Google Scholar Also Wang, Y. C., Chinese Intellectuals and the West, 1872–1949, Durham, N.C., 1966, pp. 333–4.Google Scholar
24 In a lecture commenting on the student strike of 1924, he said: ‘Having absorbed the idea of liberty, the students can find no place to practise it except in their schools. Insurrections and strikes followed, under the dignified guise of fighting for “liberty”. The liberty which Westerners talk about has its strict limitations and cannot be described as belonging to everyone. When young Chinese students talk about liberty, they break down all restraints. Because no one welcomes their theory in the society outside, they can only bring it back into their schools, and constant disorders result. This is abuse of freedom.’Google ScholarSee Wang, , op. cit., p. 335.Google Scholar
25 Kai-shek, Chiang, China's Destiny, New York, 1947, p. 71.Google Scholar
26 Chow, , op. cit., p. 343.Google Scholar
27 Chiang, , op. cit., pp. 97–9.Google Scholar
28 He considered the new culture ‘simple’, ‘cheap’ and ‘dangerous’. Chow, , op. cit., p. 344.Google Scholar
29 Ibid.
30 Shih, Hu, ‘Twenty-eighth Anniversary of “May Fourth”‘, L'Impartial, Shanghai, 4 05 1947, p. 1.Google Scholar Chow, Ibid., p. 3.
31 Interview with Professor T'ang Te-kang who co-authored with Dr Hu Shih the forthcoming book Autobiography of Hu Shih, in New York, 6 02 1968.Google Scholar
32 See this author's Ph. D. thesis, 1964, The May Fourth Movement in Shanghai, University of California, Berkeley. The movement actually included the participation of intelligentsia, students from various colleges, high schools and elementary schools, young Chinese women, merchants, industrialists, workers, as well as the lumpen proletariat (e.g., beggars, sing-song girls and prostitutes).Google Scholar
33 Chang Kuo-t'ao, one of the early Communist leaders, called the movement definitely a political movement. See his article, ‘Hsüeh-sheng yun-tung ti wo-chien’, Hsiang-tao, No. 17, 24 01 1923, p. 139.Google Scholar The National Students Union, in ‘A letter to fellow students in commemoration of the May Fourth Movement’, also unequivocably called the movement a political movement led by the Chinese students. See Chung-kuo hsüeh-sheng, No. 25, 1 05 1926, p. 169. P'an Kung-chan, an important student leader during the Shanghai May Fourth Movement, told the author in a personal interview held in his New York residence in July 1962, that he too considers the MFM purely a political movement. He noted that the movement subsided as soon as the political demands of the people were realized. Mr Pan's views were also shared by Professor Kumano Shohei, an eye witness of the Shanghai MFM. He told the author in a private interview held in his Tokyo residence in August 1965, that he also regarded the MFM as primarily a nationalistic movement in China in contrast to the NCM.Google Scholar
34 Fu Ssu-nien, writing in October 1919, stated: ‘After the MFM, the social trend in China is changed. There is a large increase of the “awakened” people. Hereafter is a [new] era for social reform movement.’ Ssu-nien, Fu ‘Hsin-ch'ao chih hui-ku yü ch'ien-chan’, Hsin-ch'ao, II: 1, 1919, p. 203.Google Scholar
35 However, one exception to this fact was that Ch'en Tu-hsiu's interest at this period was centred primarily on political and social affairs. The founding of the Weekly Critic was to serve Ch'en's political purpose. Chow, , op. cit., p. 7.Google Scholar
36 Commenting on the Tsingtao Problem, the Editor of Shen Pao (Shanghai) wrote on 9 May 1919 in a short editorial entitled ‘The National Humiliation’: ‘We must not allow these humiliations to blemish our glorious historical past.’ (The italics are mine.) Shen Pao, 9 05 1919, p. 11.Google Scholar The Shanghai Student Union, in its proclamation issued on 9 May 1919, also stated that: ‘We students have studied the worb of our ancient sages, and have come to understand and respect their great teachings on “righteousness”. We hereby solemnly vow to live or die with the Republic of China.’ (The italics are mine.) Pao, Shen, 10 05 1919, p. 10.Google Scholar
37 Ta-k'ai, Chin, ‘Wu-ssu yun-tung ti she-hui pei-ching’, Min-chu p'ing-lun, XV:, 1 05 1964, p. 202.Google Scholar
38 Yuan-p'ei, Ts'ai, writing in Kuo-min in 01 1919, advised the students that their main task was ‘to love [their] country and to engage [themselves] actively in the task of saving the nation’. He pointed out that their obligations to the country were three-fold: ‘to arouse the majority [of the people] who are apathetic to national affairs; to aid the minority [of the people] who are patriotic; and to oppose any action which will betray the Nation'.Google Scholar See Yuan-p'ei, Ts'ai, ‘Prologue’, Kuo-min, I:I, 10 01 1919, p. 1.Google Scholar Hsu Te-heng, a student leader of the Peking May Fourth Movement, wrote in the same periodical calling for direct actions on the part of the Chinese people. He stated that ‘public utterances are not sufficient to influence the nation’. He pointed out that often ‘words are spoken but not heard; heard but not understood; and understood but not acted upon’. See ‘Wu so-wang yü chin-hou chih kuo-min che’, Ibid., ‘General Discourse’, p. 1. Yang Ch'ang-chi, another student writing in the same period called for ‘the awakening of the people’, but added that ‘after their awakening, they must quickly carry it through by direct action. [In this way], knowing (thought) and doing (action) become one’. See Yang Ch'ang-chi, ‘Kao hsüeh-sheng’, Ibid., p. 3.
39 Chung, , op. cit., p. 177. T'ao Hsi-sheng also concurred with this view. Personal interview with Professor T'ao in Los Angeles, 5 May 1967.Google Scholar
40 Hsi-sheng, T'ao, ‘Ts'ung Wu-ssu tao Liu-san’, Tzu-yu t'an XIII:5, 1 05 1962, p. 10.Google ScholarThe same article was also published in Chung-yang jih-pao, 6 and 7 05 1962, p. 4.Google Scholar See also Schwartz, Benjamin I., Chinese Communism and the Rise of Mao, New York, 1967, pp. 17–18.Google Scholar
41 Chin, , op. cit., p. 202.Google Scholar
42 See page 76 and footnote No. 40.
43 T'ao Hsi-sheng, then a junior in Peking University, took part in the 4 May and 3 June demonstrations in Peking. He noted that at the time of the May Fourth uprising, Hu Shih had already gone to Shanghai (to welcome John Dewey). According to T'ao, with the exception of Ts'ai Yuan-p'ei, who exhorted the students during the uprising, none of the Faculty and staff members of Peita had taken a part in the movement throughout the entire May Fourth period. In his opinion there was definitely a lack of communication between Faculty and students outside the classroom. Interview with Professor T'ao in Los Angeles, 5 May 1967. See also T'ao, , op. cit., p. 10.Google Scholar
44 Pao, , op. cit., pp. 115–17. Wu-ssu yun-tung tzu-liao t'e-chi, Nanking, 1947, pp. 6–7, 13.Google ScholarChow, , op. cit., pp. 356–7.Google Scholar
45 T'ien-fang, Ch'eng, ‘Li-kung-tz'u ssu-nien’, Ch'üan-chi wen-hsüeh, I:7, 12 1962.Google Scholar According to Ch'eng, Sun actually endorsed Shanghai students' boycott of Japanese goods as an effective means to strangle the Japanese economy. See also T'ien-fang, Ch'eng, ‘Wo ch'u-tz'u yeh-chien Tsung-li’, Wu-ssuyun-tung tzu-liao t'e-chi, Nanking, 1947, pp. 6, 13.Google Scholar
46 Ch'eng T'ien-fang, one of the leading student leaders of the Shanghai MFM, in a personal interview with the author held in Taipei in July 1965, reiterated his viewpoint which he had previously expressed in his letter to the author dated 28 March 1963, that neither the Kuomintang nor Sun was actually behind the Shanghai movement. In fact, he said, none of the responsible officers in the Shanghai Student Union during the movement was a member of the Party. The Party endorsed the students' patriotic movement (such as the boycott of Japanese goods), but did not initiate nor promote the movement at that time.Google Scholar
47 Sun was then taking political refuge in Shanghai's French Settlement, and had to remain ostensibly inactive lest his stay in the city be revoked by the French authority. Interview with Kung-chan, P'an, New York, 07 1962.Google Scholar
48 Hua, , op. cit., pp. 200–1.Google Scholar
49 Mao, p. 693.Google Scholar
50 Hua, , op. cit., p. 160.Google ScholarCited by Chow, also, op. cit., p. 356.Google Scholar
51 Chow, , op. cit., p. 353.Google ScholarSnow, Edgar, Red Star Over China, London, 1937, p. 149.Google Scholar Also Scalapino, Robert A. and Yu, George T., The Chinese Anarchist Movement, Berkeley, 1961, p. 1.Google Scholar
52 Mao, p. 693.Google Scholar
53 T'ao, , op. cit., p. 10.Google Scholar
54 Mao, p. 693.Google Scholar Also see Chiao-mu, Hu, Thirty Years of the Communist Party of China, Peking, 1959, p. 7.Google Scholar
55 Chow, , op. cit., p. 347.Google Scholar
56 Ch'ü did join the movement and was arrested and imprisoned for three days. See Hsia, T. A., ‘Ch'ü Ch'iü-pai's autobiographical writings: the making and destruction of a “Tender-hearted” Communist’, The China Quarterly, No. 25, 01–03 1966, p. 187.Google Scholar
* Much of the research upon which this paper is based was made possible by a summer research grant from the Joint Committee on Contemporary China of the Social Science Research Council (1965).
† Joseph T. Chen is Associate Professor in the Department of History at the San Fernando Valley State College, California.
一、五四運動之背景[編輯]
中國加入歐戰時，全國國民，皆抱負極大希望，以為從此以後，對外賠款，可以停付——至少可以停付五年；治外法權，可以廢止；關稅主權，可以收回。當時，日本人已先中國數年，加入戰爭，派遣軍艦，專與東方的德國勢力為難；接收青島，續辦膠濟路，所有德國人在華的勢力，居然落到他們手中去了。彼時中國人尚不如何着急，因為日本政府曾有表示，望此次接收，不過暫時之事，將來「終究歸還中國」；不料到了第二年——1915年，日本非獨不把山東方面的權利，交還中國，抑且變本加厲，增制許多條件，向中國下「哀的美敦書」，強迫中國承認，中國無法，只能於5月9日簽字承認。於是中日二國的感情，越弄越壞，壞到不可收拾了。
中國正式加入歐戰，是1917年。前此之時，雖有華工協助協約國與德國開釁；但未經中國政府正式表示，到了1917年，中國政府，公然向德絕交，向德開戰。翌年11月11日，德國終於失敗了，一種代表軍國主義和武力侵略主義的勢力，終於被比較民治化的勢力屈服了，歐戰遂此告終。全世界人皆大慶祝此雙十一節，中國自亦受其影響。5月17那一天，所有北京城內的學校，一律停課，數萬學生，結隊遊行，教育部且發起提燈大會，四五萬學生手執紅燈，高呼口號，不可謂非中國教育界第一創舉。影響所及，遂為以後的「五四運動」下一種子；故雖謂五四運動，直接發源於此次五六萬人的轟轟烈烈的大遊行，亦無不可。非獨此也，教育部且於天安門一帶，建築臨時講台，公開演講。事後北大停課三天，要求教育部把此臨時講台，借給北大師生，繼續演講三天。演講時間，每人限以五分鐘，其實，每人亦只能講五分鐘，因為彼時風吹劇烈，不到五分鐘，講員的喉嚨，已發啞聲，雖欲繼續，亦無能為力了。因此，各人的演詞，非常簡括，卻又非常精采。此後在《新青年》雜誌上所發表的如蔡元培的《勞工神聖》和我的《非攻》等篇，皆為彼時演詞之代表。但有人要問，我們為什麼要如此做呢？原來彼時北京政府，「安福俱樂部」初自日本借到外債六萬萬元，一時揚武耀威，非常得意。我們見之，雖有非議，亦無法可想，彼時既有教育部首先出來舉行公開演講，我們亦落得藉此機會，把我們的意見，稍微發泄發泄。後來，我因母喪離開北京，故未得親自參加這個大運動的後半劇。
1919年1月18日，交戰諸國開和平會議於法國Versailles宮中，中國人參加者，有政府的代表，有各政黨的代表，又有用私人名義去參加者，以為美國威爾遜總統的十四點，必可實行，中國必能在和會之中，佔據許多利益；至少，山東問題，必能從和會中得着滿意的解決。然而威爾遜畢竟是一個學者的理想家，在政治上玩把戲，那裡敵得過英國的路易喬治（David Lloyd George）及法國的克列孟梭（Clemenceau）這一班人呢？學者遇着「老虎」，學者惟有失敗而已！
二、五四運動之發生[編輯]
4月28日，國際聯盟條文，正式成立，尚覺有點希望。過了二天，到了4月30日那一天，和會消息傳出，關於山東方面的權利，皆付與日本，歸日本處理。消息一到，前此滿腔熱望，如此完全失望了！全國憤怒，莫能遏制，於是到了5月4日那一天，學生界發起北京全體學生大會，開會以後，到處遊行（外傳北京學生會曾向東交民巷各公使館表示態度說不確）。後來，奔到趙家樓胡同曹宅，撞破牆壁，突圍而進，適遇章宗祥在那裡躲避不及，打個半死，後腦受着重傷；當場即被捉去學生二三十人，各校皆有，各校校長暨城內紳縉名流，皆負責擔保。後來消息傳到歐洲，歐洲代表團，亦大受感動，同時更用恐嚇手段，打電報給我國出席總代表陸征祥，如果他糊裡糊塗的在山東問題條文中簽了字，他的祖宗墳墓，一概將被掘；外交團迫於恐嚇，自不敢輕意簽字了。於是在5月14日那一天，中國代表團，又在和會內重新提出「山東問題」，要求公平辦法，始終沒有得着好的結果，而中國代表亦始終沒有簽字，所以然者，實因當時留歐中國學生界，亦有相當的運動，包圍中國公使館不許中國官員擅自簽字之故。可是這樣一來，當時辦教育的人，就棘手了，好在他們亦不欲在這種腐敗的政府下供職，於是教育部中幾個清明的職員及北大校長蔡先生等人，相繼辭職。那時，政府正痛惡那一班人，他們既欲辭職，亦不挽留。然而當時的學生界怎能任這一班領袖人物，輕輕引退呢？於是大家主張挽留。為欲營救被捕的學生，為欲挽留被免的師長，同時又要繼續偉大的政治運動，故自5月20日起，北京學校，一律罷課，到處演講，諸如前門大街等熱鬧地方，皆變成學生的臨時講場了；對於城內交通，不無影響，於是北京軍警，大捕學生。但軍警捕捉學生越着力，學生的氣焰，越加熱烈，影響所及，全國學生，相率罷課，天津的學生界，於5月23日起，宣布罷課；濟南的學生界，於24日宣布罷課；上海的學生界，於26日宣布罷課；南京的學生界，於27日宣布罷課；後來連到軍閥的中心勢力所在的保定學生界，亦於28日決議罷課；向者為北京學生界的愛國運動，今其勢力，已風動全國學生界，而變成全中國的學生運動了。同時北京被捕的學生亦益發增多，城內的拘留所，皆拘滿了，一時無法，就把北大第三院，改成臨時拘留所，凡遇着公開講演的學生，軍警輒把槍一揮，成群的送入北大第三院內，院之四周，堅築營盤，昏夜看守。後來第三院的房子內住不下了，又把第二院一併改為臨時拘留所。斯時杜威博士適到北京，我領他去參觀就地的大監獄，使他大受感動。後來，忽有一天，到了6月3號那一天，院外的營盤，忽然自動撤銷了，看守的軍警，各自搬場了，一時不知其故，後來才明白上海學生界，即在6月3號那一天，運動商界，一律罷市三天，並要求政府罷免曹、陸、章三人的職務。政府見來勢洶險，無法抵抗，終於屈服下來；自動撤銷營盤，自動召回軍警，即是政府被人民屈服的證據，而曹、陸、章三人，亦於同日被政府罷免掉了。此為5月4日到6月3日幾近一月中間的故事，最後的勝利，終于歸屬學生界了。
三、五四運動之影響[編輯]
如今且約略考究五四運動的影響，它的影響，計有二方面：一為直接的影響，一為間接的影響。直接的影響，能使全國人民，注意山東問題，一面禁止代表簽字；一為抵制日貨，抵制日貨的結果，許多日本商人，先後破產，實予以重大打擊，故日本野心家，亦漸生戒懼之心了；再加上其他友國的幫助，故於1921年「華盛頓會議」中，當中國代表重新提出山東問題時，中國着實占點便宜。其結果，日本終於把山東方面的權利，「終究交還中國」了。
至於間接的影響，那就不能一樣一樣的細說了！
第一，五四運動引起全國學生注意社會及政策的事業。以前的學生，不管閒事，只顧讀書，政治之好壞，皆與他們無涉。從此運動以後，學生漸知干預政治，漸漸發生政治的興趣了。
第二，為此運動，學生界的出版物，突然增加。各處學生皆有組織，各個組織皆有一種出版物，申述他們的意見。單說民國八年一年之內，我個人所收到的學生式的豆腐乾報，約有四百餘份之多，其他可無論了。最奇怪的，這許多報紙，皆用白話文章發表意見，把數年前的新文學運動，無形推廣許多。從前我們提倡新文學運動，各處皆有反對，到了此時，全國學生界，亦顧不到這些反對，姑且用它一用再講，為此「用它一用」的觀念的結果，新文學的勢力，就深深占入學生界的頭腦中去了，此為五四運動給予新文學的影響。
第二，五四運動更予平民教育以莫大影響。學生注意政事，就因他們能夠讀書，能夠看報之故。欲使平民注意政事，當亦使他能夠讀書，能夠看報；欲使平民能夠讀書，能夠看報，唯一的方法，就在於教育他們。於是各學校中，皆創立一個或數個平民學堂，招收附近平民，利用晚間光陰，由各學生義務教授；其結果，平民教育的前途，為之增色不少。
第四，勞工運動亦隨五四運動之後，到處發生。當時的學生界，深信學生一界，勢力有限，不能做成大事，欲有偉大的成就，非聯合勞工各界，共同奮鬥不可。但散漫的勞工，不能發生何種勢力，欲借重之，非加以組織不可，於是首先與京漢路北段長辛店的工人商議，勸其組織工會，一致奮鬥。一處倡之，百處和之。到了今日，各處城市，皆有工會組織，推原求本，當歸於九年以前的五四運動。
第五，婦女的地位亦因五四運動之故，增高不少。五四運動之前，國內無有男女同學之學校，那時，婦女的地位，非常低微。五四運動之後，國內論壇，對於婦女問題，漸生興趣，各種怪論，亦漸漸發生了；習而久之，怪者不怪，婦女運動，非獨見於報章雜誌，抑且見諸實事之上了！中國的婦女，從此遂跨到解放的一條路上去了。
第六，彼時的政黨，皆知吸收青年分子，共同工作。例如進步的黨人，特為青年學生，在他們的機關報上，辟立副刊，請學生們自由發表意見。北京《晨報》的副刊，上海《民國日報》之「覺悟」，即其實例。有的機關，前時雖亦有副刊，唯其主要職務，不外捧捧戲子，抬抬妓女，此外之事，概非所問；五四以後，他們的內容，完全改變了；諸如馬克思、蕭伯納、克魯泡特金等名詞，皆在他們的副刊上，占着首席地位了。其在國民黨方面，此種傾向，益覺顯著。論日報，則有《民國日報》的各種副刊；論周報，則有《星期評論》；論月刊，則有《建設》雜誌等等；其影響於青年學生界者，實非微事。非獨此也，他們並於民國十三年中國國民黨改組之際，正式承認吸收少年分子，參加工作，此種表示，亦因受着五四運動的影響之故，就中尤以孫中山先生最能體驗五四運動的真意義。彼於1920年正月9日那一天，寫信給海外黨部，囑以籌金五十萬，創辦一個最大的與最新式的印刷機關，其理由，則為：
自北京大學學生發生五四運動以來，一般愛國青年，無不以革新思想為將來革新事業之預備；於是蓬蓬勃勃，發抒言論，國內各界輿論，一致同倡，各種新出版物，為熱心青年所舉辦者，紛紛之偽政府，猶且不敢攖其鋒。此種新文化運動，在我國今日，誠思想界空前之大變動，推原其故，不過由於出版界之一二覺悟者，從事提倡，遂至輿論放大異彩，學潮瀰漫，全國人皆激發天良，誓死為愛國之運動。倘能繼長增高，其將來收效之偉大且久遠者，可無疑也。吾黨欲收革命之成功，必有賴於思想之變化，兵法攻心，語曰革心，皆此之故；故此種新文化運動，實為最有價值之事。
——孫中山先生《致海外國民黨同志書》
孫先生看出五四運動中的學生，因教育的影響，激於義憤，可以不顧一切而為國家犧牲；深信思想革命，在一切革命中，最關緊急；故擬創辦一個最大的與最新式的印刷機關，盡量作思想上的宣傳工夫；即在他自身的工作上，亦可看出這一點來。民國八年以前，孫先生奔走各處，專心政治運動，對於著作上的工作，尚付闕如，只有《民權初步》及《》實業計劃》二部分的著作，於民國八年以前作成；民國八年以後，他的革命方向，大大轉變了，集中心力，專事著作，他的偉大著作，皆於此時告成。這是什麼緣故呢？就因為他認定思想革命的勢力，高過一切，革命如欲成功，非先從思想方面入手不可，此種傾向，亦就因為受着五四運動的影響的結果。
五四運動為一種事實上的表現，證明歷史上的一大原則，亦可名之曰歷史上的一個公式。什麼公式呢？
凡在變態的社會與國家內，政治太腐敗了，而無代表民意機關存在着；那末，干涉政治的責任，必定落在青年學生身上了。
這是一個最正確的公式，古今中外，莫能例外。試現中國的歷史，東漢末年，宦官跋扈，政治腐敗，朝廷上又無代表民意的機關，於是有太學學生三萬人，危言正論，不避豪強；其結果，終於造成黨錮之禍，牽連被捕死徙廢禁的，不下六七百人。又如北宋末年，金人南犯，欽宗引用奸人，罷免李綱以謝金人，政治腐敗，達於極點，於是有太學生陳東及都人數萬，到闕下請復用李綱，欽宗不得已，只好允許了。又如清末「戊戌政變」，主動的人，即是青年學生；革命起義，同盟會中人，又皆為年青的學生；此為中國歷史上的證據。又觀西洋歷史，中古時代，政治腐化，至於極點，創議改革者，即為少年學生；1848年，為全歐革命的一年，主動的人皆為一班少年學生，到處拋擲炸彈，開放手槍，有被執者，非遭死戮，即被充軍，然其結果，仍不能壓倒熱烈的青年運動，亦唯此種熱烈青年運動，革命事業，才有成功之一日。是以西洋的歷史，又足證明上面所說的一個公式。
反轉來講，如果在常態的社會與國家內，國家政治，非常清明，且有各種代表民意的機關存在着；那末，青年學生，就無需干預政治了，政治的責任，就要落在一班中年人的身上去了。試觀英美二國的青年，他們所以發生興趣，只是足球、籃球、棍球等等，比賽時候，各人興高采烈，狂呼歌曲；再不然，他們就去尋找幾個女朋友，往外面去跳舞，去看戲，享盡少年幸福。若有人和他們談起政治問題，他們必定不生興趣，他們所作的，只是少年人的事。他們之所以能夠安心讀書，安心過少年幸福者，就因為他們的政治，非常清明，他們的政治，有中年的人去負責任之故。故自反面立論，又足證實上面所講的歷史上的公式。
自從五四運動以來，中國的青年，對於社會和政治，總算不曾放棄責任，總是熱熱烈烈的與惡化的掙扎；直到近來，因為有些地方，過分一點，當局認為不滿，因而喪掉生命的，屢覯不鮮。青年人的犧牲，實在太大了！他們非獨犧牲學業，犧牲精神，犧牲少年的幸福，連到他們自己的生命，一併犧牲在內了；而尤以25歲以下的青年學生，犧牲最大。例如前幾天報上揭載武漢地方，有二百餘共〔產〕黨員，同時受戮，查其年齡，幾皆在25歲以下，且大多數為青年女子。照人道講來，他們應該處處受社會的保障，他們的意志，尚未成熟，他們的行動，自己不負責任，故在外國，偶遇少年犯罪，法官另外優待，減刑一等，以示寬惠。中國的青年，如此犧牲，實在犧牲太大了！為此之故，所以中國國民黨在第四次全體會議中所議決的中央宣傳部宣傳大綱內有一段，即有禁止青年學生干預政治的表示。意謂年青學生，身體尚未發育完全，學問尚無根底，意志尚未成熟，干預政治，每易走入歧途，故以脫離政治運動為妙。
（本文為1928年5月4日胡適在上海光華大學的演講，由文滸筆記，原載1928年5月5日上海《民國日報•覺悟》副刊）
| Full reference | Tang Zhenchang 唐振常 et al., Shanghai shi 上海史 (History of Shanghai) (1989) |
| Type | Book |
| Author(s) | Tang Zhenchang 唐振常 et al. |
| Title | Shanghai shi 上海史 (History of Shanghai) |
| Year | 1989 |
| Place of publication | Shanghai |
| Publisher | Shanghai renmin chubanshe |
| Language | Chinese |
| Subject | History |
| Keywords | political |
| Support |
中國飲食文化散論
中文書 , 唐振常 著 , 台灣商務 , 出版日期: 1999-02-15
優惠價: 95 折, 209 元
蔡元培傳
簡體書 , 唐振常 , 上海人民出版社 , 出版日期: 2018-04-01
優惠價: 87 折, 303 元年在香港病逝。唐振常先生所著《蔡元培傳》於1985年在我社出版，后於1999年重版，贏得了較好的學界反應和讀者反響，成為蔡元培研究領域的重要學術成果，也可資中國近現代思想文化、教育、政治等研究參考借鑒。本次收入人物傳記系列叢書，重新制作出版...... more
近代上海繁華錄
中文書 , 唐振常 , 台灣商務 , 出版日期: 1993-09-15
優惠價: 95 折, 898 元
蔡元培傳
簡體書 , 唐振常 , 上海人民出版社 , 出版日期: 2016-05-01
優惠價: 87 折, 251 元
饔飧集
簡體書 , 唐振常 , 遼寧教育出版社 , 出版日期: 1995-03-01
優惠價: 87 折, 42 元，發人深省的妙文，讀者一路看下去，大概不待終卷，就能感受到這一點的。 唐振常，四川成都人，生於一九二二年，逝於二零零二年，享年八十。出身於成都著名大戶。燕京大學畢業。早年從事新聞及文學工作，任上海、香港等地大公報記者、編輯、采訪主任，上海電影劇本...... more- "Hoover Library & Archives recently acquired the personal papers of Tang Zhenchang (1922-2002), a celebrated Chinese intellectual whose areas of interest encompassed history, journalism, cinema, screenwriting, and literature. The Tang Zhenchang papers include photos, manuscripts, correspondences, and personal diaries."
沒有留言:
張貼留言