Why didn't the Qing Dynasty establish a constitutional monarchy like Japan? .

First of all, you should understand that the Qing Dynasty was a feudal system. Why can't constitutional monarchy be realized in modern China?

Constitutional monarchy: a short-lived political idea

One of the important contents of China's modern political reform is to end the traditional autocratic monarchy and transform into modern constitutional government. During the Reform Movement of 1898 and the following ten years, the constitutional monarchy was regarded as the best way to realize this political transformation by some celebrities and politicians such as Kang Youwei and Liang Qichao, and even recognized by the Qing court authorities. An important part of the "New Deal" in the late Qing Dynasty was to prepare for constitutionalism. However, until the outbreak of the Revolution of 1911, this important political system reform remained in the stage of "imitation" and no substantive progress was made. In the early years of the Republic of China, the debate on constitutional monarchy temporarily subsided for several years. However, with the political turmoil in the early Republic of China, political struggles and infighting, and partisan disputes, the country remained poor and weak. Disappointments caused some social and political figures to have some disappointment with the Republic, so in 19 15, monarchism appeared again. At this time, Yuan Shikai was secretly brewing the restoration of monarchy and creating public opinion. Jun Xian said it at the right time and naturally got Yuan's support. However, at that time, the media claimed that Jun Xian said that the most influential figures, such as Yang Du and others, were not entirely to cater to Yuan's political needs, but mainly their own understanding of China's political issues. With the failure of Yuan Shikai's restoration of monarchy, the theory of monarch and sage disappeared from China's political circles, but it still has its bosom friend from time to time in the theoretical and ideological circles. For example, Goodnow, an American political scholar, still insists that constitutional monarchy is the best way for China's political reform in his last book, Analysis of China (1927), and feels "sorry" for the failure to realize constitutional monarchy in the late Qing Dynasty, thinking that "if the Revolution of 1911 had not occurred, China would have been built by 19 17. In recent years, some scholars in academic circles hold similar views that the New Deal in the late Qing Dynasty was a gradual modernization reform. Without the Revolution of 1911, this gradual reform road is expected to lead China to the right track of modernization. Among them, the constitutional monarchy, as a non-violent way of revolutionary political change, should be fully affirmed.

The theory of constitutional monarchy is undoubtedly inspired and encouraged by the successful experience of constitutional monarchy countries such as Britain and Japan, and is also based on the historical lessons of political turmoil and frequent wars in the process of implementing republics in Latin America and other countries. The political chaos in the early years of the Republic of China really showed that Republican politics could not bring peace, stability and prosperity to the country immediately.

Jun Xian said that the greatest advantage of constitutional monarchy is that it can avoid political turmoil, especially irrational political phenomena such as bloodshed, violence and war. For China, a poor and weak country, this unreasonable phenomenon will keep the country in a vicious circle for a long time, without stability and development. In addition, the international environment faced by modern China was rather sinister, and long-term political turmoil was not allowed. Then, why is the constitutional monarchy conducive to ensuring political stability, rationality and order? The main reason is China's national conditions. China has a long tradition of absolute monarchy, the people's political quality is not high, and the idea of worship of imperial power and authority is deeply rooted. Therefore, it is inevitable to change from absolute monarchy to democratic republic at once, and constitutional monarchy is the best transition mode. The Preparatory Committee said: The sovereignty of the Republic belongs entirely to the people, and the power comes from the National Assembly. "If the people are not as knowledgeable as France and the United States, but they also have this supreme power, they will create trouble ... instead of trying to cure them, they will create trouble." Yang Du said: "If you want to be rich and strong, you must first seek constitutionalism; If you want to be constitutional, you must first ask for a gentleman. The reason why China can't be a constitutional republic like France and the United States is because the people in China are not as good as France and the United States. Taking the political struggle and the second revolution in the early years of the Republic of China as an example, it is said that under the Republican system, "I don't know when China's future war for the president will end" and "only the president is the king, making a head of state stand in an absolutely indisputable position. Goodnow also thinks: "China has been obsessed with the politics of absolute monarchy for thousands of years, lacking schools, most people's knowledge is not noble, and no one has ever heard of the government's actions, so they have no ability to study politics. Four years ago, it changed from autocracy to republic. This move is too sudden and it is difficult to expect good results. " He said that if China had not overthrown the imperial system of the Qing Dynasty, the effect of gradually developing constitutionalism under the imperial system would be better than it is now. In his view, the biggest danger of China's republic is that the change of power will easily lead to civil strife, which will eventually lead to the emergence of the worst form of government, namely military dictatorship, and the rationality of rebuilding the monarchy only lies in the fact that the monarchy can solve this problem more steadily. The conclusion is that "if China adopts a monarchy, it is better than a republic, there is no doubt about it." . Guy China must use constitutional politics if he wants to maintain his independence. Judging from China's historical habits, socio-economic conditions and relations with foreign powers, it is more difficult to establish a constitution of monarchy than a constitution of republic. ".

As a form of constitutionalism, constitutional monarchy has been successfully practiced in some countries in the modern world, such as Britain, Northern Europe and Japan. But in modern China, after all, it was only the political idea of a few people, and it was never realized. However, this does not mean that the constitutional monarchy itself is wrong. Theoretically, after all, Jun Xian said that constitutional government should be realized in China, and monarchy is only a means and form to serve this goal. Therefore, it is not appropriate to equate the theory of monarch with the maintenance of feudal autocracy. For example, when Goodnow published Republic and Imperialism in 19 15, Liang Qichao made it clear that as long as the political system is constitutional, it doesn't matter whether the country is a monarch or a republic. Therefore, he advocated constitutional monarchy when the imperial system existed in the late Qing Dynasty, and Republican (democratic) constitutional government when the Republic of China had been established for several years. In short, there is no need to toss about the state system. This view should be said to be more rational and fair. If we affirm that constitutionalism is the proper direction of political change in modern China, what needs to be questioned is not whether constitutional monarchy is necessary, but whether it is possible.

The contradiction between constitutionalism and monarchy

The fatal problem of the theory of monarch and sage lies in that it ignores the internal tension and profound conflict between constitutionalism and monarchy under the political and cultural background of China.

Jun Xian said that it was not easy to implement constitutionalism in modern China. The most difficult thing was the beginning of constitutionalism, that is, how constitutionalism was founded. As Yang Du said: "It is difficult to establish a constitution at the beginning, but it is easy to establish a constitution later. It is extremely difficult for people who create constitutionalism to put the train on the track by manpower; It is easier for constitutionalists to drive trains with machines and keep them on track. " Therefore, they hoped that a "king of the earth" like German William I and Japanese Emperor Meiji would come out to create a constitutional government for China. To this end, they did not hesitate to give such a "British Lord" the power of an autocratic monarch, imagining that he could "make good use of his autocratic power and promote the collapse of constitutionalism by coercive means." In Yang Du's view, authoritarian power is like a tool, which can be both good and evil, so it is said that "the husband is autocratic and arbitrary, suitable for his country; Constitutionalism with autocracy is beneficial to the country, and the so-called people who get twice the result with half the effort are also. " It can be seen that the theory of monarch is an attempt to take a constitutional shortcut with the help of monarch to maintain political stability and avoid irrational phenomena such as violent revolution. But in this way, the hope of constitutionalism is completely pinned on the so-called British Lord. Yang Du and others believed that the failure of constitutionalism in the late Qing Dynasty was due to "having a state system suitable for constitutionalism (referring to the monarch-leader) and being unable to implement the virtue and greatness of constitutionalism". Strictly speaking, this is actually just a variant of the so-called enlightened autocracy, which has long deviated from the original meaning of constitutionalism.

Enlightened autocracy is obviously incompatible with the real constitutional monarchy. The core of constitutionalism is to limit, restrict and standardize the power of rulers. A constitutional monarch is a monarch with limited power, even a virtual monarch who does nothing. Therefore, constitutional monarchy can never be carried out by an autocratic king with unlimited power. According to the concept of modern China monarchical school, enlightened and autocratic monarchies can only rely on themselves to restrict and restrain their power, which is tantamount to seeking fish from a tree. The so-called theory of seeking constitutionalism by enlightened autocracy actually regards constitutionalism as the great cause of saving the world of a few political elites, which is essentially the thinking of China's traditional sage politics and has nothing to do with real constitutionalism. In fact, no country that has successfully achieved constitutional monarchy relies on the so-called British monarch. On the contrary, their monarch is always in a negative position. For example, the modern British constitutional monarchy began with the glorious revolution of 1688, but this revolution was initiated by the British Parliament to replace the king. In this revolution, the king was only a political symbol and played a passive role completely. The Japanese emperor only acts as a political symbol in the constitutional monarchy.

The reason why monarchists advocate constitutional government by kings with unlimited power is fundamentally related to their understanding of constitutional government. In their view, constitutionalism is a means to stabilize political order and realize national prosperity. The essence of constitutionalism is that "the country has a certain legal system, and neither the head of state nor the people can act outside the law ... saints can't be good outside the law, and unscrupulous people can't be evil outside the law." Then, how can constitutionalism ensure that the head of state and the people of China can effectively abide by the legal system and act within the law? In fact, this is the most fundamental problem. The answer to this question directly reveals the essence of constitutionalism. Constitutionalism is to limit public power and protect civil rights through reasonable arrangements between state power and civil rights. Without this core issue, there would be no significance of the rule of law. This is the fatal point of the theory of monarch and sage: it completely avoids the problems of restricting public rights and protecting citizens' rights, and places the hope of protecting the legal system entirely on the rulers' compliance with the law. This is undoubtedly still the idea of rule by man.

Yang Du's constitutional view is a typical legal instrumentalism, which only measures the political and legal system by the material standard of the country's prosperity, so they have no firm belief in the rule of law itself. This can be clearly seen from their admiration for the German-Japanese constitutional model and their intentional neglect of the British model. Britain is the birthplace of modern constitutionalism and a typical constitutional monarchy country. However, what Yang Du particularly appreciates is the German-Japanese model rather than the British-Japanese model. The reason is that Germany and Japan were both rising powers at that time, and their economic development speed and national strength were catching up with Britain. Monarchists don't realize the inherent problems and crises of German and Japanese constitutional models. Later, the history of these two countries embarking on the path of militarism fully proved the fatal flaw of their constitutionalism. Constitutionalism is beneficial to the prosperity of a country in the long run. However, if the goal of constitutionalism is only to lock in the one-sided materialistic direction (rich Qiang Bing, or industrialization, etc.). ) From the beginning, and regard constitutionalism as a means and tool to serve economic development, and completely ignore the political, ethical significance and intrinsic value of constitutionalism itself, then the result will inevitably run counter to the basic spirit of constitutionalism. The fallacy of "promoting constitutionalism with authoritarian power" is actually the inevitable product of this shallow and vulgar instrumental thinking.

The disillusionment of China's theory of constitutional monarchy in modern times proves that it is completely political nonsense to realize constitutional monarchy with so-called enlightened autocracy. The purpose of preparing for constitutionalism in the late Qing Dynasty was only to maintain the permanence of the throne, but there was neither real understanding nor enthusiasm and sincerity about constitutionalism itself. Even the constitutionalists were deeply disappointed. Even without the Revolution of 1911, constitutional monarchy can only have a monarch without constitutionalism. As for Hongxian monarchy, Yuan Shikai, who was in charge, was simply practicing absolute monarchy in the name of Jun Xian.

To say the least, if we abandon the idea of enlightened autocracy, is it possible for modern China to realize a real constitutional monarchy? Yang Du and others' liberal autocratic tendency is absurd, but there is an important motive that can't be ignored in his constitutional monarchy theory, that is, he hopes to ensure that the throne will not be contested through the constitution, thus contributing to a stable and orderly political situation. Constitutional monarchs are different from autocratic monarchs, which have limited power and are even virtual monarchs. At the same time, it is also different from the general sense of the head of state or government, it is hereditary rather than elected. Therefore, constitutional monarchy is to establish a hereditary virtual monarch, which exists only as a symbol of the country to a large extent. Such a hereditary virtual monarch ensures political stability, and the premise of not competing for the throne is that the monarch enjoys unquestionable sacredness and must be universally recognized and supported by all the people. In this sense, such a virtual monarch can be understood as a "living bodhisattva" supported by the people. Its sanctity can only come from a certain religious belief, or from the long-standing political and cultural traditions of the nation, and it can never come from the monarch's own artificial propaganda and manufacture. Only in this way, it is difficult for anyone who usurps the throne to gain the recognition of the people, thus ensuring that no one dares to covet the throne. Therefore, if the constitutional monarchy can be realized in China, the first prerequisite is that the sacredness of the monarch must be supported by religious or political and cultural traditions, with an unquestionable solid foundation.

However, in modern China, neither the Qing emperor nor Yuan Shikai, nor any political figure, had unshakable sacredness as a "living bodhisattva". If they don't have absolute ruling power, it will be difficult to keep their own throne, and they simply don't have the sacred authority and status of the hierarch that all citizens in society generally admire. Therefore, their supreme status is always closely linked with absolute power, which also doomed them to be impossible to become virtual kings like living bodhisattvas. In fact, the rulers of China had to resort to absolute power if they wanted to ensure that their hereditary monarchy status was not violated, including playing tricks of enlightened autocracy; On the other hand, if we really want to implement constitutionalism and abolish autocratic power, we have to give up the national form of hereditary monarch at the same time. In a word, the fundamental reason why the constitutional monarchy did not work in modern China was that there were profound contradictions and conflicts between the monarchy and constitutionalism in China, which could not be coordinated and unified.

On the contrary, monarchs in countries with constitutional monarchy, such as Britain and Japan, can enjoy the sacred status and the prestige of the leader, which are universally respected by the people, without fear of being usurped.