這個世界會好嗎？Has Man a Future? –Dialogues with the Last Confucian

作者簡介：梁漱溟，著名思想家、教育家、社會活動家。艾愷，美國哈佛大學博士，師從費正清、史華慈，當代最活躍、最有影響力的漢學家之一，芝加哥大學歷史系教授。

內容簡介：1980年美國漢學家艾愷采訪中國著名的思想家、哲學家、現代新儒家的早期代表人物梁漱溟的談話實錄，并由艾愷譯成英文；品評李大釗、陳獨秀、毛澤東、周恩來、蔣介石、胡適等風云人物，回顧了任教北大、從事鄉建運動、創建民主同盟等傳奇經歷。

My intercourse with Mao Zedong: different ideas of China’s future與毛澤東相交：對中國前途的認識

Liang: You know, I went to Yan’an in 1938, six months after the Marco Polo Bridge Incident and the outbreak of the war. Our dialogue began then. We both had a great desire to talk together, and both of us were very interested in each other’s ideas. Why did I go to Yan’an almost immediately after the war broke out? That was because after the Japanese came, the entire country collapsed. For example, right after the Marco Polo Bridge Incident, in the South in Shanghai, on August 13, a battle started. But we didn’t have any capacities of resistance. Shanghai fell, and we pulled back to Nanjing. Nanjing fell and we pulled back to Wuhan. In the North, Beijing and Tianjin fell. All of Shandong fell. People were running in all directions to get away from the Japanese. It was a complete collapse, as though no one was in charge. It was obvious that Chiang’s government had no way, no capacity to do anything about the situation. I was extremely disappointed in the performance of the Nanjing government.梁： 盧溝橋事變 6 個月我就去了延安，很早。從那個時候起，從那開頭吧，好像彼此都很愿意談話，彼此交談都很有興趣。我記得我第一次到延安，盧溝橋事件剛剛 6 個月，我為什么那么早去延安呢？就是因為日本人來了之后，全國有一種崩潰之象，北方就是盧溝橋七七事變，南方上海是“八一三”打起來。就是都不行了，上海退南京，南京退武漢，北京、天津都淪陷了，山東也淪陷了。全國人都是在逃難，你逃難，我逃難，大家各自逃難，崩潰，好像無主了。蔣的政府眼看沒有什么能力，沒有什么辦法。我對他很失望，對南京政府很失望。

Alitto: Oh, because in those several months, the Japanese occupied a lot of places, and the Nanjing government had no way of stopping it, you went to Yan’an then….艾： 噢，就因為這幾個月，日本人占領那么多地方，南京政府沒有辦法，您就到延安去??

Liang: When we reached Wuhan, where the national government had retreated to, I got Chiang’s approval to go take a look at Yan’an. Before I visited Yan’an, I was extremely downcast and pessimistic. What to do perplexed me. Everyone was fleeing. The Nanjing government was totally incompetent.What to do? So, I thought I’d go see if the Communist Party had any way of dealing with the situation. So, with this mind, I went to see Mao, and found that Mao was not the least bit pessimistic. He told me, “China must undergo this great disaster. But the Japanese should not be joyful too soon. I expect they will be defeated.” At the time I went to see him, he was in the midst of writing “On Protracted War,” so he told me in effect the contents of his essay. He said that the Japanese had overrated their own strength. They were dreaming vainly of swallowing up China. A vain dream, a joke. China was a big country, too big, and Japan was just too small. Moreover, it wasn’t just a Sino-Japanese question. The world powers would not stand idly by and watch Japan annex China. “An unjust cause draws meager support. A just cause draws myriad support.” Later the world powers all stood againt Japan. 梁： 退到武漢的時候，我取得蔣的同意，我說我要到延安去看看。到延安去看的時候，我心里是很悲觀的，不知道怎么好，大家都在逃難，南京政府毫無能力，怎么好啊？怎么辦呢？我就想看看共產黨是不是有辦法，我就這樣去。一去，看到他完全不悲觀，我是悲觀地去的，他告訴我：沒有問題，中國非有這樣一天不可，非有這樣一個大災難不可，不過日本人他不要高興太早。??這個時候，他正在寫《論持久戰》，把《論持久戰》的話講給我聽，他說日本人是不自量，他想吞并中國，那是妄想、笑話。中國是大國，太大了，它太小了。也不是中日兩國，世界列強不能看著日本人來侵吞中國。“失道寡助，得道多助”，后來列強都反對它。

…We of course had to discuss Old China, our view of it and our theories about it, and it was in this area that our opinions differed. The most important disagreement was on the question of class. He maintained that China had always had class struggle, and I said that in Old China, from the Qin-Han period on—we were unclear of the society before then, so I wouldn’t address it especially in the last 600 years since the Ming-Qing period, although there naturally were differences between rich and poor, there was circulation and communication between high and low . These distinctions were not like classes in the West, which were fixed and fully formed. In China, society and social groups were loose, unorganized and fluid. Because of this mobility, society was fluid and unorganized, and so the struggles were not all that intense or sharp. It was not a situation of two opposing classes—aristocrats versus serfs, as in the Western Middle Ages, or capitalists versus workers in capitalist society. China didn’t have any such thing. Chinese like harmony and compromise. Yes, there was struggle, but it was not habitual, nor did it have any great dynamic force. Mao could not completely deny this. We debated for a long time. ??他對老中國的看法跟我的看法不一致。主要的一個問題是什么問題呢？就是階級問題。他是階級斗爭，我就說中國的老社會，秦漢以后的社會，特別是從明代、清代 600年以來的社會——早的社會我們不太清楚、不大敢說——明清以來的這個社會，在我看，貧富貴賤當然有，可是貧富貴賤可以上下流轉相通，它不是像外國那樣的一個階級——很固定，很成型，沒有固定成型，而是上下流轉相通。中國社會散漫，流轉相通呢，它就散漫。散漫就斗爭不激烈，不像兩大階級，一個貴族，一個農民或農奴——中世紀的，或者后來的資本主義社會——資本家跟工人兩大階級，中國缺乏那個東西。中國人喜歡調和，斗爭還是有，不過不大習慣斗爭，斗爭的兩面，強大的也沒有。我說這個話，他也不能完全否認。

Finally he said, “Mr. Liang, you are overly emphasizing the peculiar, distinctive nature of Chinese society, but Chinese society is still a human society, and so still has its qualities which it shares with all human societies.” I answered, “I completely agree with you. I completely agree with you that Chinese society has qualities in common with other human societies, but I insist that its peculiar or distinctive features are more important. For example, let’s say we are speaking of a person. You say, I ‘know’ that person. Only if you can say what the special characteristic of that person is, what is distinctive about him, can you then say you ‘know’ him. If you speak about the person only from the aspect of his characteristics that he has in common with others—that he is a male, middle-aged, and so on, it won’t do. You must speak of his special features as an individual, and only then can you really know him.” So, I told Chairman Mao, “Your approach is not as good as mine. I grasp the special, distinctive features of Chinese society and so really know her better than you.” Well, because of this kind of disagreement, we reached an impasse, and our discussions were concluded.辯論很久了，他最后就說了：梁先生，你過分強調中國社會的特殊性，但是中國社會還是一個人類的社會，還有它的一般性嘛。我說對，你說的話，我完全同意。不過，正因為我完全同意你說中國有它的一般性，也有它的特殊性這樣子，可是我要強調特殊性要緊。比如說，一個人，你說你認識這個人，你要說這個人的特色是怎么樣一個人，那么算是認識了這個人。不能從“一般的”去說，說這個人是個人，或者這個人是個男人，這個人是個中年人，這都不行，你得說出這個人的特點，你才算是認識了這個人。因此，我說你這個不如我，我是抓住中國社會的特色的一面。談話就結束了，說不下去了，一般性跟特殊性的比較是這樣。

I am different from the others engaged in political activities. 我和其他政治活動家的不同

Alitto: Could you give your views on the relationship between the Democratic League, the smaller political parties, and the process of national construction?艾： 請您就民主同盟或者以前別的小的政黨和國家建設之間的關系，或者重要性，作個評論。

Liang: I think that I am, and was, somewhat different from the others [non-Communist Party and non-Nationalist Party intellectuals who engaged in political activities]. Almost all the others vainly hoped for the establishment of British-style rule by political parties. That is, in the national assembly, there would be two large parties; when one was in power, the other would supervise the governance. If the party in power made any mistakes, or did something that was objectionable to the party out of power, the latter would then take power. So the two parties would take turns being in power. This is the situation in England, and to an extent, in the U.S.A. So the others all dreamed of establishing this kind of government. I said that this kind of government did not meet the needs of China, because economically, industrially in particular, China was so different from the Western countries. China was not an industrialized, developed country, so this kind of government would not work. China’s most urgent task was to develop economically as quickly as possible. In order to accomplish this, China needed a truly national, central political authority to adopt a fixed, definite guiding principle, a fixed course of action. This fixing of a definite course of action would be through a national governmental power or regime, and should maintain stability for several decades. Only in this way would China be able to develop economically and catch up with the foreign countries. So, I felt and feel that this alternating of political parties in power simply would not work because the national course of action would change whenever the other political party out of power came into power. So, today one policy, tomorrow another. That just won’t work. 梁： 我跟其他跟我以外的、搞政治活動的人有一點不同，就是他們幾乎都是夢想英國式的政黨政治：在議會里頭主要是兩個大黨，這個黨上臺，那個黨在底下，監督著這個政府；或者上臺的那個，有什么做錯的，或者不得人心的，下臺，它就上去了，兩黨輪流執政，這就是英國的情況。我以外的人他們都是夢想這個東西。英國，美國也是兩黨。我就是說，這個不合中國的需要，因為中國在物質文明上、在經濟建設上，主要說是在工業上，同國外比較，差得太遠了，太落后了。這樣一個太落后的中國，那非趕緊、趕快、急起直追，把這個缺欠把它補上去不成。要補上這個事情，必須是有一個全國性的政權，采取一定的方針路線，依靠這個全國性的政權，確定一個方針路線，幾十年的穩定的局面貫徹去搞、去建設，才能夠把那個補回來。不能夠你上來，我下去，你上來，我下去，這樣子就不行啊！這樣今天是這樣方針計劃，明天又那樣子，那不行。

I maintained this view consistently. The others all disagreed with me, as they all had in mind an Anglo-American style of a two-party political system. Later, the situation in China, astonishingly enough, ended up precisely the way that I thought it would.The Nationalist Party was driven out, and the Chinese Mainland was united. The CCP took power and did accomplish some things in these years. It’s too bad that during those decades of control, there were several periods of political and social turmoil. But now, it looks as though these periods of turmoil are over and will not recur, so that from now on China can stride forward rapidly. So, as I said, I am very optimistic about the future. This is my view, and this is my hope.所以我一個人總是夢想這個樣子，可是旁人，就是說我以外的其他的黨派，他們都不是這個意思，他們都是想學英、美，學兩大黨。可是后來嘛，局面居然落到我所想的，把國民黨趕出去了，大陸上統一了，統一了，共產黨掌握政權，一直掌握幾十年，剛好做了不少事。可惜這里頭還有些動亂，可惜在這個過去的30年里，還有些個動亂，可惜。可是看現在這個樣子，動亂過去了，今后可以邁大步前進，所以我很樂觀。這是我的一個看法，我的希望。

…For example, during the War of Resistance against Japan, I went rushing around between the two major parties to avoid civil war. Well, I did it. My plan was successful. I founded the Democratic League. Other people thought that I wanted to found a party, but that was not my intention. My own feeling was that China didn’t need any new political party, like America or England. So, although I founded the Democratic League, my purpose was for this organization to represent society in general, in between the two major parties, and to make the two parties compromise with each other and to further the war against Japan and the building of the nation. Finally, when I felt that the organization was no longer needed, I withdrew. So, the Democratic League and the China Democratic National Construction Association still exist, and I don’t belong to them.??比如我本來抗戰起來之后，就奔走于兩大黨之間，事情都做了，也還都算是順利。發起民主同盟，旁人以為我是想搞一個黨派，我的意思不是，我的意思是中國不需要什么黨派，不像英國、美國那樣。所以我雖然發起同盟，主要是在大黨之間代表廣大社會來牽扯著它們，不要它們兩個打架、斗爭，而推動或者抗戰、或者建國。隨后我覺得不需要了，我就退出了。現在民盟、民建都還有，我沒有參加。

推薦：

他只有中學文憑，卻被蔡元培請到北京大學任教；他成長于京城，卻長期致力于鄉村建設；他一生研究儒家學說，然而內心向往佛家生活……“梁先生有些類似于甘地這樣的圣者，通過自己的不斷奔走感化大地，于改造人生與社會中踐履一己的感悟”

梁漱溟 艾愷 艾愷外語教學與研究出版社