The Principle Of Nationalism: Lecture One
Delivered
on January 27, 1924.
Speech
by Dr. Sun Yat-sen.
Translated
by Francis Wilson Price.(畢範宇 牧師)
GENTLEMEN:
I have come here to-day to speak to you about the San Min Principles(三民主義). What are the San Min Principles? They are, by the simplest definition, the principles for our nation's salvation. What is a principle? It is an idea, a faith, and a power. When men begin to study into the heart of a problem, an idea generally develops first; as the idea becomes clearer, a faith arises; and out of the faith a power is born. So a principle must begin with an idea, the idea must produce a faith, and the faith in turn must give birth to power, before the principle can be perfectly established. Why do we say that the San Min Principles will save our nation? Because they will elevate China to an equal position among the nations, in international affairs, in government, and in economic life, so that she can permanently exist in the world. The San Min Principles are the principles for our nation's salvation; is not our China to-day, I ask you, in need of salvation? If so, then let us have faith in the San Min Principles and our faith will engender a mighty force that will save China.
What is the Principle of Nationalism? I would say briefly that the Principle of Nationalism is equivalent to the "doctrine of the state." The Chinese people have shown the greatest loyalty to family and clan with the result that in China there have been family-ism and clannism but no real nationalism. Foreign observers say that the Chinese are like a sheet of loose sand. Why? Simply because our people have shown loyalty to family and clan but not to the nation-there has been no nationalism. The family and the clan have been powerful unifying forces; again and again the Chinese have sacrificed themselves, their families, their lives in defense of their clan. But for the nation there has never been an instance of the supreme spirit of sacrifice. The unity of the Chinese people has stopped short at the clan and has not extended to the nation.
My
statement that the principle of nationality is equivalent to the doctrine of
the state is applicable in China but not in the West. For the reason that
China, since the Ch'in(秦)
and Han(漢) dynasties, has been
developing a single state out of a single race, while foreign countries have developed
many states from one race and have included many nationalities within one
state. For example, England, now the world's most powerful state, has, upon the
foundation of the white race, added brown, black, and other races to form the
British Empire; hence, to say that the race or nation is the state is not true
of England. We all know that the original stock of England was the Anglo-Saxon
race, but it is not limited to England; the United States, too, has a large
portion of such stock. So in regard to other countries we cannot say that the
race and the state are identical; there is a definite line between them.
How
shall we distinguish clearly between the two? The most suitable method is by a
study of the forces which molded each. In simple terms, the race or nationality
has developed through natural forces, while the state has developed through
force of arms. To use an illustration from China's political history: Chinese
say that the wang-tao(王道),
royal way or way of right, followed nature; in other words, natural force was
the royal way. The group molded by the royal way is the race, the nationality.
Armed force is the pa-tao(霸道),
or the way of might; the group formed by the way of might is the state. Since
of old, no state has been built up without force. But the development of a race
or nationality is quite different: it grows entirely by nature, in no way
subject to force. Therefore, we say that a group united and developed in the
royal way, by forces of nature, is a race; a group united and developed by the
way of might, by human forces, is a state. This, then, is the difference
between a race or nationality and a state.
Again,
as to the origin of races. Man was originally a species of animal, yet he is
far removed from the common fowl and the beasts; he is "the soul of all
creation." Mankind is divided first into the five main race--white, black,
red, yellow, brown. Dividing further, we have many subraces, as the Asiatic
races--Mongolian, Malay, Japanese, Manchurian, and Chinese. The forces which
developed these races were, in general, natural forces, but when we try to
analyze them we find they are very complex. The greatest force is common blood.
Chinese belong to the yellow race because they come from the blood stock of the
yellow race. The blood of ancestors is transmitted by heredity down through the
race, making blood kinship a powerful force.
The
second great force is livelihood; when the means used to obtain a living vary,
the races developed show differences. The Mongolians' abode, for instance,
followed water and grass; they lived the life of nomads, roaming and tenting by
water and grass, and out of these common nomadic habits there developed a race,
which accounts for the sudden rise of Mongol power.
The third great force in forming races is language. If foreign races learn our language, they are more easily assimilated by us and in time become absorbed into our race. On the other hand, if we know the language of foreign countries, we are in turn easily assimilated by foreigners. If two peoples have both common blood and common language, then assimilation is still easier. So language is also one of the great forces for the development of a race.
The
fourth force is religion. People who worship the same gods or the same
ancestors tend to form one race. Religion is also a very powerful factor in the
development of races.
The
fifth force is customs and habits. If people have markedly similar customs and
habits, they will, in time, cohere and form one race. When, therefore, we
discover dissimilar peoples or stocks amalgamating and forming a homogeneous
race, we must attribute the development to these five forces--blood kinship,
common language, common livelihood, common religion, and common customs-- which
are products not of military occupation but of natural evolution. The
comparison between these five natural forces and armed force helps us to
distinguish between the race or nationality and the state.
Considering
the law of survival of ancient and modern races, if we want to save China and
to preserve the Chinese race, we must certainly promote Nationalism. To make this
principle luminous for China's salvation, we must first understand it clearly.
The Chinese race totals four hundred million people; for the most part, the
Chinese people are of the Han or Chinese race with common blood, common language,
common religion, and common customs--a single, pure race.
What
is the standing of our nation in the world? In comparison with other nations we
have the greatest population and the oldest culture, of four thousand years' duration.
We ought to be advancing in line with the nations of Europe and America. But
the Chinese people have only family and clan groups; there is no national spirit.
Consequently, in spite of four hundred million people gathered together in one
China, we are in fact but a sheet of loose sand. We are the poorest and weakest
state in the world, occupying the lowest position in international affairs; the
rest of mankind is the carving knife and the serving dish, while we are the
fish and the meat. Our position now is extremely perilous; if we do not
earnestly promote nationalism and weld together our four hundred millions into
a strong nation, we face a tragedy--the loss of our country and the destruction
of our race. To ward off this danger, we must espouse Nationalism and employ the
national spirit to save the country.
Now
compare the rate of increase of the world's populations during the last
century: the United States, 1,000 per cent; England, 300 per cent; Japan, also
300 per cent; Russia, 400 per cent; Germany, 250 per cent; France, 25 per cent.
The large gain has been due to the advance of science, the progress of
medicine, and yearly improvement of hygienic conditions, all of which tend to
reduce the death rate and augment the birth rate. What is the significance for
China of this rapid growth of other populations?
When
I compare their increase with China's I tremble. Within the next century the
world's population will surely multiply several times. When we compare the
total surface of the earth with the number of inhabitants, we see that the
world is already suffering from overpopulation. The recent European War, some
have said, was a fight for a "place in the sun." The European powers,
to a large extent, are near the frigid zone, so one of the causes of the war
was the struggle for equatorial and temperate land, a struggle indeed for more
sunlight. China has the mildest climate and the most abundant natural products
of any country in the world.
The
reason why other nations cannot for the present seize China right away is
simply because their population is yet smaller than China's. A hundred years
hence, if their population increases and ours does not, the more will subjugate
the less and China will inevitably be swallowed up.
Then
China will not only lose her sovereignty, but she will perish, the Chinese
people will be assimilated, and the race will disappear. The Mongol and the
Manchu conquerors of China used a smaller number to overcome a larger and tried
to make the larger number their slaves.
If the Powers some day subjugate China, it will be large numbers overcoming a smaller number. And when that time comes, they will have no need of us; then we will not even be qualified to be slaves.
