王局拍案｜“闭关锁国”，变“自主限关”了？这篇文章的前因后果什么来头？
Recently, an article published by the Chinese Academy of History is trending Because it invented a new term "autonomy limit custom"(Zi Zhu Xian Guan) As we all know, when describing the foreign policy of the Ming and Qing dynasties We generally call them "closed country" Four ports of commerce changed to one port of commerce, ships can not go to sea Foreigners doing business in China Can't do it directly with the Chinese, must go through the buyer Can't live in Guangdong during the winter, must return to Macau This is all from when we studied history textbooks as children The familiar historical narratives But today, this article talks about To say that this generalization is not accurate, should be called the autonomy limit custom This article was published on the official Weibo account of the Chinese Academy of History Also posted on its wechat public account Immediately after the publication, there was a very strong reaction in public opinion I guess many people are suspicious in their minds always feel as if this article was written at the order of someone Or maybe some people are speculating on the intention of the above and write so Because frankly everyone is now during the epidemic For the current policy of near seclusion should say that there are many complaints in everyone's heart And there's no telling how long it will last This article appears at this point of time Many people are worried about whether this policy will continue You see, it has taken the Ming and Qing dynasties kind of closed-custom All glorified as the autonomous limit custom Are we going to keep going too? I guess the public is to a large extent this mentality So where exactly did this article come from Let's tell the story of this article today This article appeared in the March, on "Historical Studies" this year Feature article, high level "Historical Studies" is the highest level of articles in Chinese history And it was published in the form of a feature article without a bylined author It is the subject group of a major commissioned project on foreign trade during the Ming and Qing dynasties We still looked up what the members of the group are The leader of the group is named Gao Xiang Gao Xiang is the vice president of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences He is also the director of the Chinese Academy of History He graduated from the Institute of Qing History of the Renmin University in 1993. A student of Mr. Wang Sizhi, who studied the Kang, Yong and Qian dynasties After graduation, he was basically in the CASS system. First in academia, then in administration Later, he became the head of the propaganda department of the provincial party committee in Fujian Province Then he returned to Beijing and became the deputy director of the State Internet Information Office He went back to the Academy of Social Sciences and became the vice president of the Academy of Social Sciences But he is a full minister level and is also the director of the Chinese Academy of History It should be said that the level is very high, is already a full ministerial level This subject group is a full ministerial person Titled to his name to do research project At the same time, more than 30 experts from China were netted to attend Of course, the main focus is based on experts from the Chinese Academy of History For example, like Zhang Shunzhi, who is a researcher in world history Wan Ming, a researcher of Ming history All are past directors, the lineup looks very strong It should be said that this article also uncovered some new historical facts I personally feel that there are a few points that I can tell you about First they found The word "closed country" does not come from an ancient Chinese saying This word did not exist in ancient China, but only in modern times Where did it come from? From Japan.
It was a Japanese scholar who first translated the history of Japan written by the Germans Used "Suo Guo" two words There was Closed-custom China in ancient times, but not the lockdown(Suo Guo) Later, modern Chinese scholars introduced the term to China As early as, say, around 1910 There was a journalist named Lin Baishui who used the words closed country Later on, slowly introduced to China So he said there was no such word in ancient times Secondly, he believes that Although the Ming and Qing dynasties had some restrictive measures on foreign trade But these restrictive measures have largely failed to limit trade For example, the numbers he cites It was around 1820 during the Daoguang period China's annual tariff was 15 million taels of silver But 100 years ago, in 1702 How much was the Qing government's tariff at that time? Only 50,000 taels, which is negligible Then think about why tariffs have increased over 100 years Definitely the trade volume has increased So he believes that although there are restrictions But it did not limit the growth of trade Then he went on to talk about In the field of ideology and culture, restricting the spread of Christianity in China Restrict the activities of these Christian missionaries in China This is based on national security considerations It is not based on the consideration of the exchange of ideas and cultures The exchange of ideas and cultures still existed at that time Basically, it's a narrative system like this, right? Then he thought This is actually inaccurate to summarize as a closed country Should be called the autonomous limit custom How should we read this article From my personal point of view There are basically two sets of narrative systems in modern Chinese history A system of narratives that is aggression and counter-aggression China is an autonomous central dynasty in East Asia After the Western society grew up, it wanted to invade China Turning China into a colony and a semi-colony That's why China has to oppose aggression This is a narrative system It is the Westerners who invaded China and the Chinese who opposed the invasion Another set of narrative system It's globalization and China's seclusion Such a narrative system Because as we all know, after the British Industrial Revolution Inevitably, this will lead to a globalization Then its economy has to be globalized Market to be globalized Then all those markets that used to be independently closed All face very big challenges China is no different In fact, the generalization of China as a closed country It is because with globalization as a frame of reference Then it is called a closed country Without the context of globalization No one actually treats China as a closed country Because China used to have a tribute system More than 60 countries have paid tribute to China The tribute brings some goods as well Do a little business in this part of China China thinks it's enough Because the agricultural society itself does not need so many foreign goods Not to mention the agricultural society Including at the beginning when China was trading with Britain The first few decades, a hundred years In fact, it is mainly Chinese goods that are exported to the UK For example, tea, silk, porcelain And those goods in the UK China's agrarian society has little need for So a large trade surplus Basically, it was maintained in the first 100 years or so So there was a large amount of silver imported back then This article also mentions So it's these two sets of narratives Constructed a narrative theory of modern Chinese history We used to be primarily an anti-invasion discourse But acknowledging that China faced the Opium War before It was a closed country policy This closed-country policy China has lost a valuable opportunity for its own development Thus, poverty and weakness were accumulated Extremely vulnerable to the invasion of the Western powers This is the logic of modern Chinese history in the past But this article, I personally think In fact, it is more of important to emphasize China's autonomous customs restriction at the time was based on national security considerations It is based on anti-invasion considerations And this anti-invasion has been somewhat effective In other words, the narrative logic of the first set of It is the logic of the narrative of aggression and counter-aggression that got further amplifies And such a narrative logic between globalization and China's seclusion Further compressed Objectively speaking, in fact, these countries in East Asia in the past Like Japan, more emphasis is placed on globalization and self-containment Such a narrative logic Their recent history is essentially told in this way They have no one to emphasize the so-called autonomous limit custom or anything It then thought that Japan was closed at that time So you see in the modern history of Japan To the American black ship incident, open the door of Japan Japanese people are full of gratitude They believe that it is because the Americans let Japan open its ports Bringing modern civilization to Japan So this is very different from the Chinese historical narrative This article, basically, is such a logic In my opinion, this is the first point Second point In terms of foreign policy, does it have any impact on cultural exchange I think it definitely still has a big impact For example, this article also talks about Western technological thinking came to China, China ignores Actually, it's not just technological thinking Cultural thinking is the main thing Without the enlightenment of those cultural ideas Those technological ideas come to China, and they will be familiar This article also talks about At that time, during the Qianlong Dynasty, Macartney Embassy came to China Brought British artillery technology and even fire ship models Chinese people are merely curious when they look at it But not interested in the motivation, the system, the culture behind the creation of these technologies So, back then such a system There are no restrictions on cultural exchange whether there is limit to the intellectual enlightenment in China I personally think there is still Here's my take on the article So why is the public particularly panicked about this article It's what I said at the beginning The timing of this is just too obvious Now on the one hand the epidemic is developing Then the measures to control the epidemic became more and more stringent On a national scale, it even gives the impression of being closed And then, people don't know how long this policy will last Will it last forever And such a policy Compared with the past 40 years of reform and opening up experience It is also the opposite So many people think that such an article is speculating on the meaning of the above It was even written on purpose of the above Isn't it? Let's analyze it After checking, this article is a major commissioned project for 2019 It should be said that there is no outbreak in 2019 So you can't say that because of the outbreak, these preventive and control measures show up Then came this article, then this conclusion Now from the point of time does not seem to be valid Moreover, the experts and scholars of these subject groups Many people have held this view in the past They wrote a lot of these articles in the 1990s and 00s So in academic terms It's not that they've changed their views after the outbreak write this intentionally However, it is true that at this point in time write it out and post it on the public Causes many people to associate Here's how I think the news happened But it doesn't end here, why As I said earlier, this article was established at the end of 2019 What happened at the end of the year 2019 At that time, Trump and China were fighting over trade disputes The conflict between China and the United States is very sharp In my opinion this article is not really an ordinary subject It was ordered from above But this matter was authorized from above, not against Seclusion resulting from the aftermath of the epidemic Rather, it was a response to the then U.S. and Chinese At a time when the trade war is in full swing To compete for the right to interpret China's discourse That is to say, should I be the main focus or should the Western narrative be the main focus Pay attention to what is repeatedly emphasized in this article It is in the course of the march of history Should the historical narrative of China be the central focus or centered on the Western historical narrative If the Western historical narrative is the center China's seclusion is all wrong But centering on the historical narrative of China then is not a closed country Called the autonomous limit custom It is a measure that must be taken to protect the security of the country So this article is still a commissioned article from above But either in response to a closed country or a phenomenon caused by the current epidemic Rather, it was in response to the international context of the confrontation between China and the United States at the time. And an article commissioned by above Also, the Institute of Chinese History is worth talking about As we all know, in the past, under the Academy of Social Sciences were all institutes Directly lead the Institute But there are research laboratories under the Institute January 3, 2019, dedicated to create the Institute of Chinese History This institute is a deputy ministerial level, we also talked about at the beginning Combined several institutes related to history It is the Institute of Chinese History, the Institute of World History, the Institute of Modern History, and the Institute of Archaeology An Institute of Historical Theory was also established, which was specifically set up Why the Chinese History Institute was established And when the Chinese Academy of History was established Xi Jinping also sent a special congratulatory letter to the Chinese Academy of History This was actually established at the request of the Chinese central leadership But why establish a Chinese History Institute? It is not that the importance of historical research The larger context is the competition for the right to interpret historical discourse We all know that in 2017 to 2018 There is a "three self-confidence" called China Road, China Model and China Discourse The Chinese discourse, in fact, is the construction of China's understanding of the Chinese way Self-explanation of the Chinese model And this explanation is partly derived from history This is a tradition in the history of our party Mao is attached to history, very, very important Of course his emphasis is not on historical research Rather, it is to misinterpret those things in the process of historical research then into an instrument of his political battle For example, after the fall of Lin Biao, he engaged in "criticizing Lin and criticizing Confucius" In fact, Confucius and Lin Biao have nothing to do with each other, what is the relationship? Why put them two together to criticize it In fact, the real history is that after Lin Biao ran away, Mao Jiawan raided the house A note written by Lin Biao was found during the house raid The words "Restrain Yourself and Restore Rites" were written Who wrote the phrase "Restrain Yourself and Restore Rites"? Confucius wrote it, right? So they want to criticize Confucius and Lin Biao together There is a larger context The phrase "criticizing Lin and criticizing Confucius" is followed by the phrase "criticizing Zhou Gong".
Who is "Zhou Gong"? "Zhou Gong" is Zhou Enlai Zhou Enlai was known as the great scholar of the Party And Confucius is the representative of Confucianism So the meaning of "criticizing Lin and criticizing Confucius" is to beat up Zhou Enlai So you see, Mao's power tactics Using history to perfection in the course of political battles And now the establishment of the Institute of Chinese History is a bit like that For example, after the establishment of the Chinese Academy of History Started a magazine called Historical Review This journal may not be known to the general public outside the academic community This journal is of a very high level, the same level as "Historical Research". It is not run by any institute under the Chinese Academy of History is sponsored by the Chinese Academy of History But you go to the magazine "Historical Review" There is nothing academic article, basically all are "war wolf"(Zhan Lang) level There is also a great deal of rehashing and reinterpretation of history I got a random copy of the Historical Review today, which says New China's Land Reform Policy as a Way for China to Modernize By the way, we haven't talked about land reform policy for many years Why? Because according to the Property Law The land reform in the early years of the country was basically illegal Landowners and rich farmers have land at home You went up there and took the land away and gave it to the farmers After the division and then a few years later to take back the people's commune According to the Property Law, is this illegal? So after the reform and opening up, there was a year There is a descendant of a landlord in the Northeast Say you're redistributing land to farmers now What's the point of stealing the land from our family back then? They asked the Communists to return it, and at that time they had to suppress this group of people Why, it's an explanatory paradox If the present Chinese law is used to face the problem of land reform back then It does not make any sense So the issue of land reform we have not talked about for a long time But the justification of the land reform policy was fully affirmed in the Historical Review Very, very left And let's take a look at the Weibo of the Chinese Academy of History The Chinese Academy of History's Weibo is not quite a history blogger Like that Weibo of the Central Committee of the Communist Youth League Dislike the United States, dislike the United States' one China policy and so on Then there is the commemoration of martyr Qiu Shaoyun Then there is the revision of some (events) in history It once posted an article about the Zhiqing's going to the mountains and the countryside It is a very important driving force for social progress What's "Go to the mountains and go to the countryside"? That's cultural revolution! Who is still positive about the youth movement to the countryside now? including the CCP, did not As part of the denial of the Cultural Revolution, this stuff has been concluded in history for a long time But the Chinese Academy of Historical Research has started a study of The youth in the Cultural Revolution went to the mountains and the countryside for re-evaluation The wind rises at the end of the green weeds(Feng Qi Yu Qing Ping Zhi Mo), what is the signal? Many friends in China who are engaged in historical research have sent me messages and called Worried so much Why, at that time, after the Historical Research was run It has been mailing to history schools across the country Piles and piles of unread No one treats it as a proper historical study But they say it's too much like the situation that occurred before the Cultural Revolution He told me that the only difference is Back then, not only did they write articles to criticize, but they also fixed people That is, if your point of view is not right, directly to lock you up as a person Sending to the cowshed, big criticism, writing big letters He said there is no "fixing person" now And there was no great critical essay But he said there was this sign Including junk magazines like The Historical Review, junk articles Hosted by the Chinese Academy of History, starting to deliver It's really an ominous sign He said he hoped it would not be the second Cultural Revolution A repeat of the scene in which history played a leading role What can I say, I can only say, I hope We all hope that history will not repeat itself English Sub: Zecheng
2022-09-01 00:33
