Moscow, Nauka Publishing House. 1974. 416 pp. The print run is 3,600. Price 1 rub. 61 kopecks.

The author of the peer-reviewed monograph, Professor of Leningrad University, Doctor of Historical Sciences G. V. Efimov, has been purposefully studying the political life of China in the late 19th and early 20th centuries and the participation of the revolutionary democrat Sun Yat - sen in it for almost 40 years .1 The new book by G. V. Efimov summarizes the research of Soviet historians on the problems of the Xinhai Revolution of 1911-1913 and the role of Sun Yat-sen in it.-

1 G. V. Efimov. Sun Yat-sen in the struggle for an independent China. Istoricheskiy Zhurnal, 1937, no. 1; it. The history of China in the era of imperialism. "China. History, economy, culture, heroic struggle for national independence". M.-L. 1940; it is the same. The Revolution of 1911-1913 in China and Sun Yat-sen. "Scientific Notes" of the Leningrad Pedagogical Institute named after M. N. Pokrovsky, vol. 5, issue I. 1940. On the question of the formation of the Chinese nation. Voprosy Istorii, 1953, No. 10; izd. The Revolution of 1911 in China, Moscow, 1959. The Xinhai Revolution in China and the British government. "New and recent History", 1969, N 5; his. To Lenin's assessment of the Revolutionary Democrats of China. "V. I. Lenin and problems of the history of the countries of the East", L. 1970.

page 170

In particular, the Russian and foreign archive materials (in particular, the London Foreign Office Archives). The book is based on a wide range of sources, documents and literature in Russian, Chinese and English, as well as Russian and foreign periodicals of 1911-1913. Some materials are being put into scientific use for the first time.

G. V. Efimov paid special attention to Lenin's assessments of the political history of China. By quoting Lenin's thesis that " the European class-conscious worker already has Asian comrades, and the number of these comrades will grow by leaps and bounds,"2 the author shows that China has not fallen out of the general world revolutionary process, and emphasizes the importance of international solidarity of the workers of Asia and Europe. To analyze the class essence of Sun Yat-sen's ideology and policy, G. V. Efimov also made extensive use of Lenin's article "Democracy and Populism in China"3 . The author has demonstrated the inconsistency of the constructions of some bourgeois interpreters of Sun Yat-sen's ideology and policy, attempts to downplay the positive historical role of Sun Yat-sen's ideology and policy and raise moderate constitutional elements and the liberal bourgeoisie to the shield.

The book emphasizes that the Russian revolution of 1905 - 1907 was an inspiring stimulus for the rise of national movements in oppressed countries. In this regard, the facts presented in the monograph about the influence of the Russian revolution on Chinese workers, about the revolutionary propaganda of the Bolsheviks who worked for the CER, about the solidarity of Chinese and Russian workers on the CER are extremely valuable. Subsequently, some Chinese workers were transferred from this road to Central China, where "they played an important role in the revolution of 1911" (p. 24-25). G. V. Efimov rightly states that "1905 was an important milestone in the history of the revolutionary struggle of the Chinese people" (p. 7). August 20 in Yokohama (Japan) there was a merger of revolutionary organizations into the Chinese Revolutionary United Union of Zhongguo Gamin (tongmenghui), headed by Sun Yat-sen. The Union adopted a program that called for the overthrow of the Manchu Qing Dynasty and the establishment of a republican system in the country.

The author gives a clear description of the class alignment in the revolution of 1911-1913, which he considers to be a consequence of the deep contradictions between the Manchu dynasty that dominated the country and the feudal landlords and official bureaucracy that supported it, on the one hand, and the Chinese bourgeoisie, the peasantry, the urban petty bourgeoisie and the working class that opposed them, on the other. The young Chinese bourgeoisie, both economically and politically heterogeneous, was united by the contradiction between it and the feudal-bureaucratic anti-national regime of the Qing and the medieval regulations imposed by it, which hindered the development of entrepreneurial initiative and, on this basis, sharpened the national feelings of the bourgeoisie. Its "political mouthpiece" was the intelligentsia, which most painfully experienced the backwardness of the country and the anti-patriotic line of the ruling circles.

Since the acuteness of these contradictions was felt differently by different strata of the bourgeoisie, the level of its objectively progressive opposition to the regime was also different in its content and organizational forms. Hence the two opposing political lines. One-the left-represented the revolutionary-democratic bourgeoisie, which aimed to overthrow the monarchy and establish a republic, the other - the right-reflected the interests of the liberal-constitutional bourgeoisie, ideologically connected with the liberal-reform movement of the late nineteenth century, and socially with the landowner-Shenshi elements, who set themselves the task of introducing a constitutional monarchical regime in China. mode.

The national-political consciousness of the Chinese bourgeoisie, which was awakened earlier than that of other classes of Chinese society, promoted it to the role of hegemon of the national and anti-feudal movement. But, as G. V. Yefimov correctly notes, the Chinese bourgeoisie, since its entry into the arena of political struggle, "has shown with undeniable conviction its inconsistency" (p.195), which was revealed when deciding on the strategic goal of the struggle. In the realization of this goal, the bourgeoisie could rely on the peasantry, which made up the overwhelming majority of the population and was the "most active" part of the population.

2 V. I. Lenin. PSS. Vol. 17, p. 179.

3 V. I. Lenin. PSS. Vol. 21.

page 171

an important revolutionary force" (p. 70), which repeatedly opposed the Manchu government and its proteges. Although these speeches were local and did not have a political program, they spoke about the activation of the revolutionary forces of the Chinese countryside. Both the right and left wings of the bourgeoisie sought to win them over. Despite the contradictory nature of the agricultural program of the United Union, its slogan "equalization of land rights", which provided for the breakdown of feudal relations, pushed the peasants towards the bourgeois democrats and their leader Sun Yat-sen. "The numerous urban petty bourgeoisie also had great fuel for the hostility of feudal power" (p.14). Describing the small Chinese" working "class (about 650,000 people), the author notes that although it joined anti-government protests, and in some cases even initiated them, it still remained a "class in itself", capable of " taking part in the political struggle with proper leadership..." (page 14).

The pages of the monograph devoted to political parties in the revolution are informative. At that time, the United Union was the most ideologically formed one, which had "a significant impact on the political situation in the country. It was the main organization that systematically prepared the revolutionary overthrow of the existing government" (p.63). In terms of its social composition, the union was heterogeneous, with "bourgeois and petty-bourgeois elements, the Shenshi intelligentsia, and the military coming from the landlords and peasants" (p.49). Not being a mass party, it focused on a narrow circle of people loyal to the revolution and, in fact, ignored working among the masses. Although the peasant movement, the main social pillar of the revolutionary bourgeoisie, was supported by the union, the majority of them "remained outside the sphere of influence of the revolutionary democrats" (p.275). The Union was not connected with the working class either. Moreover, when the Shanghai workers "organized the first class association, the Shanghai Arsenal Mechanics 'Federation," in early March 1912, it was soon broken up by one of the leaders of the United Union, Chen Chi - mei (p.261). The union was also not distinguished by its political solidity. And although Sun Yat-sen was its leader, this did not mean, G. V. Efimov emphasizes, that "his ideas and his will were indisputable" (p.49). The Union was torn apart by contradictions between the right and left currents, which weakened its unity and struggle.

As for the constitutional liberals, they, as the author writes, "played a certain positive role in the development of patriotic feelings in the Chinese people, but the main focus of their activities was anti-revolutionary" (p.63). There was a struggle between the two leading bourgeois parties for hegemony in the revolution.

The book examines the nature and direction of the revolution, and the role of the masses in it. Expressing disagreement with the assessment of the Chinese revolution of the period under review as "top-notch" (p. 354) and dismissing the speculations of bourgeois scholars who consider it an "army uprising" (p. 186) and a "conservative movement" (p. 189), allegedly inspired by high-ranking officials in the center and in the field, G. V. Efimov, after carefully analyzing the documents, he came to the conclusion that the revolution was "a process that more or less engulfed the whole country" (p. 193), that it was a mass "people's revolutionary movement" (p. 193, 194) in the forms of peaceful and armed struggle, the transfer of the army to the side of the revolution, the creation of detachments of revolutionary troops, etc., that is, it was distinguished by a high level and different forms of participation of the masses in it.

But is it legitimate to consider the participation of the masses in the Xinhai Revolution as evidence of its popular character? V. N. Kuchumov, one of the first Soviet researchers of it, defined it as bourgeois in character as early as 1934 (p. 350). In subsequent years, Soviet historians generally adhered to this assessment. G. V. Yefimov, taking into account new data, confirmed that in China "historical reality put on the agenda a bourgeois revolution in its social content" (p. 352). But bourgeois revolutions can differ from each other in the degree of mass character of the revolutionary forces, organization, and readiness of the masses to meet social, economic, and political demands. V. I. Lenin, comparing the bourgeois revolutions of the early twentieth century (Turkish, Portuguese, and Russian), wrote that "the Portuguese and Turkish revolutions will, of course, have to be recognized as bourgeois. But neither one nor the other is" popular", because ... -

page 172

the great majority of the people actively, independently, with their own economic and political demands, do not noticeably take part in either revolution. " 4 In this sense, the Chinese Revolution of 1911-1913 was also not popular, it cannot be " compared... on the role of the masses of the first Russian revolution", since "the masses did not independently come forward with their program demands, although they played a huge role in the revolution, in achieving victory over the feudal Manchu regime" (p. 355). In this connection, G. V. Efimov rightly notes that the tendency of bourgeois historiography to belittle the role of the masses and democracy in the revolution of 1911-1913 lacks any real basis (p. 357).

In the Soviet literature of the 60s, the question of "whether the anti-Manchurian program of the Chinese revolutionaries was connected with the tasks of the struggle against imperialist domination in China"was widely discussed. (p. 9). G. V. Efimov gives a positive answer to this question. He sees the peculiarity of the Xinhai Revolution in that it was "bourgeois in its social content and at the same time national, anti-Manchu" (p. 14). The anti-feudal and anti-imperialist orientation of the revolution was given by the fact that it opposed the Qing dynasty, which was patronized by foreign powers. The ideological basis of the anti-imperialist orientation of the revolution was the nationalism of the oppressed nation, which contained a progressive tendency to fight for an independent and free China.

Considering the ideology and politics of Sun Yat-sen, G. V. Efimov does not idealize this figure, analyzing both the positive and negative aspects of his program. As the author emphasizes, the principle of nationalism-the struggle for a free and strong China - played an important role in Sun Yat-sen's ideology and policy. Contrary to the common view in bourgeois historiography that nationalism is not connected with the class struggle and does not have a class character, since it puts forward the interests of the entire nation, G. V. Efimov notes that the development of nationalism in China "took the form of a revolutionary liberation movement and had a class character" (p.14). This movement was under the leadership of the bourgeoisie and set itself the task of establishing a bourgeois system in China. On January 1, 1912, Sun Yat-sen assumed the post of President of the Republic of China. In domestic politics, he took "certain steps to implement bourgeois-democratic transformations in the country", calling for the elimination of autocracy, the establishment of a republic, ensuring the people's welfare, and establishing national unity by proclaiming the equality of all nations (Han, Manchu, Mongol, Huizu, and Tibetan), thereby rejecting "all tendencies to Great Han chauvinism". (p. 222-223).

But neither Sun Yat-sen nor his closest associates were prepared to rely on the revolutionary army, on the peasantry, to launch a war against the Beijing government of the militarist Yuan Shih-kai. In his foreign policy, Sun Yat-sen sought to preserve peace and strengthen the bonds of "friendship with states friendly to China" (p. 224), and at the same time recognized all the treaties concluded by the Manchurian government, its obligations for external loans. In achieving a free and strong China, Sun Yat-sen "pinned his hopes on help... England, France, the United States, Japan... "(p. 312). G. V. Efimov concludes that Sun Yat-sen's foreign policy judgments were clearly erroneous. He and his entourage did not see, for example, the imperialist nature of Japan's policy, its aggressive plans for China (p.314), naively hoping that the imperialists would help them create a strong and democratic China.

On April 1, 1912, Sun Yat-sen resigned as interim President of the Republic of China, relinquishing it in favor of Yuan Shih-kai. Despite its ineffectiveness, "Sun Yat-sen's government proved to be the first revolutionary power in Chinese history" (p. 250). Sun Yat-sen was the first revolutionary democrat in Asia to raise the question of socialism in China (p. 270). His understanding of socialism, formulated in the principle of national welfare, was very far from scientific socialism. He "did not go so far as to recognize the class struggle as the driving force of the historical process, did not understand the essence of modern capitalism" (p.358), and even tried to "avoid capitalism" by transferring rent to the state (p. 18). In general, he "stayed".-

4 V. I. Lenin. PSS. Vol. 33, p. 39.

page 173

"The inconsistency and indecisiveness of the revolutionary democrats led by Sun Yat-sen, reflecting their weakness and disbelief in the creative capabilities of the masses, and their fear of imperialist intervention" (p. 253), G. V. Yefimov writes, pushed them to move closer to the reactionary movement. North. The inability of the bourgeoisie to become the true hegemon of the revolution and the fact that the masses, who had received nothing from it, were disappointed in the United Union and its leaders, led to the victory of Yuan Shih-kai (pp. 239, 338).

In conclusion, we will make some comments. The author does not always give strictly defined and historically justified stages and periods of the Xinhai Revolution. In one case, he writes that "by the beginning of April 1912, an important stage of the Chinese revolution was completed: the revolutionary democrat Sun Yat-sen was replaced by the reactionary and traitor Yuan Shih-kai" (p. 254), in another - "from April 1912, the Yuanshikai period of presidency began" (p. 257). With this division, it is difficult to grasp the sequence of stages and periods, their qualitative difference from each other, and, most importantly, the strategic orientation of the stages.

In the historiography of the issue, the relevance of the question of Sun Yat-sen's ideology and policy should be emphasized more strongly. The author correctly writes that unlike other bourgeois revolutionaries, Sun Yat-sen, "overcoming considerable mistakes and errors, came to friendship with the USSR, to an alliance with the workers and peasants, to cooperation with the Communists" (p. 51). Therefore, his name is very popular not only among the Chinese people, but also some leaders of the modern national liberation movement in developing countries are drawn to him and use his ideas to varying degrees. In contrast, bourgeois ideologues, while emasculating the revolutionary content of Sun Yat-sen's principles, promote reactionary features of Sun Yat-sen's concepts.

Sun Yat-sen deserves Soviet Sinology to emphasize his progressive role and place in the Chinese revolutionary movement of modern and contemporary times. But when I say this, I would like to keep in mind that objectively, from the point of view of historical perspective, the Chinese revolution of modern times was guided not by the bourgeois-democratic ideas of Sun Yat-sen and the experience of the Xinhai Revolution, but by the ideas of Marxism-Leninism and the experience of the Russian revolution. It is important that Sun Yat-sen should not overshadow the Chinese Communist internationalists (Li Da-zhao, Qu Qiu-bo, Peng Bai, Wang Ming, etc.), who aimed their people at scientific socialism and the experience of the Great October Socialist Revolution.

Written at a high professional level, the monograph by G. V. Yefimov, who took a new look at many well-known facts, is a relevant study that leads to an understanding of some of the features of the development of modern China.

page 174

Permanent link to this publication: