Chapter VII: The Programs of Min Shêng (4)

302 Wittfogel, _Sun Yat-sen_, cited, p. 329. “Genossen, die hier
Versammelten sind alle Arbeiter und stellen eine Teil der Nation
dar. Auf den chinesischen Arbeitern lastet eine grosse Verantwortung
und wenn ihr dieser Aufgabe entsprechen werdet, so wird China eine
grosse Nation und ihr eine mächtige Arbeiterklasse.”

303 Wittfogel, _Sun Yat-sen_, p. 329. “Ausser dem wirtschaftlichen Kampf
für die Kürzung des Arbeitstages und die Erhöhung der Löhne stehen
vor Euch noch viel wichtigere Fragen von politischem Charakter. Für
die politischen Ziele müsst ihr meine Drei Prinzipien befolgen und
die Revolution unterstützen.”

304 Putnam Weale, _The Vanished Empire_, London, 1926, pp. 145-147. The
same observation had been made to the Russian ambassador,
Vladislavich, sent by Catherine I to Peking in 1727. The Chinese
said at that time, “ ... that foreign trade had no attraction for
the people, who were amply supplied with all the necessaries of life
from the products of their own country.” Sir Robert K. Douglas,
_Europe and the Far East 1506-1912_, New York, 1913, pp. 28-29.

305 See above, p. 47 ff.

_ 306 International Development_, cited, p. 237.

_ 307 International Development_, p. 12.

_ 308 International Development_, p. 21.

309 Wou Saofong, cited, gives an excellent summary of the plan, pp.
184-202. There is no particular reason, however, why the work by
Sun, which he wrote in fluent and simple English, should not be
consulted. The American edition is so well put together with maps
and outlines that a layman will find it comprehensible and
stimulating.

_ 310 International Development_, pp. 220-221.

_ 311 International Development_, pp. 6-8.

_ 312 International Development_, p. 198.

_ 313 International Development_, p. 199. Sun Yat-sen discussed only two
of these essentials (food, clothing) in his lectures on the _San Min
Chu I_. According to Tai Chi-tao, he was to have continued to speak
on the topics of “Housing,” “Health,” “Death,” “Conclusions on
Livelihood,” and “Conclusions on the San Min Doctrine,” but the only
person who may know what he intended to say on these subjects is
Mme. Sun Yat-sen. (See Hsü translation, “The Basic Literature of
Sunyatsenism,” pp. 39-40.)

314 This is based upon statements made by Judge Linebarger to the
author. According to him, Sun Yat-sen had few of the prejudices of
class, one way or the other, that affect the outlook of so many
Western leaders. He did not believe that the only possible solution
to the problem of livelihood was the Marxian one, and was confident
that the Chinese Nationalists would be able to solve the problem.
This question was to him paramount above all others; the life of the
masses of Chinese citizens was the life of China itself.

_ 315 International Development_, p. 11.

316 The same, p. 11.

317 d’Elia translation, cited, p. 326. The discussion of Bismarck runs
from p. 322 to 326; the length of the discussion shows what Sun
thinks of Bismarck’s acuteness, although he disapproved of
Bismarck’s anti-democratic stand.

_ 318 International Development_, p. 4.

319 d’Elia translation, cited, p. 426.

320 Price translation, pp. 434-435. In the d’Elia translation, pp.
465-466. The Price translation has been quoted in this instance
because Father d’Elia translates _min shêng_ as “the economic
Demism,” which—although interesting when used consistently—might not
be clear in its present context. Sun Yat-sen’s courteous use of the
word “communism,” in view of the Canton-Moscow entente then
existing, has caused a great deal of confusion. The reader may judge
for himself how much Sun’s policy constitutes communism.

321 One or two further points concerning the land policy may be
mentioned. In the first place, it is the land which is to be taxed.
A tax will be applied, according to this theory, on the land, and
the increment will also be confiscated. These are two separate forms
of revenue. Furthermore, lest all land-holders simply surrender
their land to the government, Sun makes clear that his taxation
program applies only to land. It would consequently be quite
advantageous for the owner to keep the land; the buildings on it
would not be affected by the increment-seizure program, and the land
would be worth keeping. “The value of the land as declared at
present by the landowner will still remain the property of each
individual landowner.” (d’Elia translation, p. 466; Father d’Elia’s
note on this page is informing.) The landowner might conceivably put
a mortgage on the land to pay the government the amount of the
unearned increment, and still make a handsome enough profit from the
use of the land to amortize the mortgage.

322 Linebarger, _Conversations_, Book III, p. 25.

323 Wittfogel, _Sun Yat-sen_, p. 328. “Die chinesischen Kapitalisten
sind nicht so stark, dass sie die chinesischen Arbeiter unterdrücken
könnten.”

324 d’Elia translation, cited, p. 469. Italics omitted. For the
discussion of the relation of the program of _min shêng_ to
capitalism, see d’Elia’s various footnotes and appendices dealing
with the subject. Father d’Elia, as a devout Catholic, does a
thorough piece of work in demonstrating that Sun Yat-sen was not a
Bolshevik and not hostile to the Roman Catholic Church, and had a
warm although infrequently expressed admiration for that
organization. Li Ti-tsun, in “The Sunyatsenian Principle of
Livelihood,” cited, tries to find the exact shade of left
orientation in _min shêng_, and digests the main policies. Wou and
Tsui, both cited, also discuss this point.

_ 325 International Development_, pp. 36-39.

326 By an irony of fate, the most conspicuous example of the realization
of any one of these plans was the beginning of the port of Hulutao,
which was to be “The Great Northern Port” of Sun’s vision. The
National Government had already started work on this port when the
Japanese, invading Manchuria, took it. There is so much pathos in
Sun’s own life that this frustation of his plans after his death
seems disappointing beyond words to his followers. In his own trust
in mankind, in the eagerness and the sincerity of his enthusiasms,
in the grandeur of his vision—here are to be found the most vital
clues to the tragedy of Sun Yat-sen. Like the other great founders
of the earth’s ideals, he charted worlds within the vision but,
perhaps, beyond the accomplishment of ordinary men.

327 Hsü translation, cited, p. 440; Price translation, p. 444; d’Elia
translation, cited, p. 476. The first has been preferred purely as a
matter of style. The Chinese words _min shêng_ and _San Min Chu I_
have been used instead of the English renderings which Hsü gives,
again as a pure matter of form and consistency with the text.

328 The author is indebted to Mr. Jên Tai for the clarification of this
ideal of dual continuity—of the family system, preserving the flesh,
and the intellectual tradition, preserving the cultural heritages.

329 d’Elia translation, cited, p. 538.