1942-1945年间《群众》周刊对“战国策派”的批判

发布时间：2018-04-26 02:37

  本文选题：《群众》周刊 + 战国策派　； 参考：《武汉大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：《群众》周刊是抗日战争时期和解放战争时期,中国共产党在国民党统治区和香港地区唯一公开出版的理论刊物,是中国共产党的党刊。本文立足于《群众》周刊对"战国策派"批判的文本,在简要介绍"战国策派"的出现及其主张的基础上,尝试就《群众》周刊批判"战国策派"的原因、主要观点、历史作用与局限等做一番粗浅的讨论。文章的第一部分为导论,主要交代了选题的缘起及研究价值、研究现状、研究方法和研究的重点、难点、创新点。文章的第二部分主要概述了"战国策派"的出现及其主张。在"战国策派"的出现上,主要讲述了"战国策派"的概念和"战国策派"主要代表人物;在"战国策派"的主张上,主要介绍了文化形态史观、"战国时代重演"论、尚"力"、推崇尼采及其意志哲学、"狂飙运动"的借鉴及"五四新文化"反思和"民族文学运动"。文章的第三部分主要归纳分析了《群众》周刊对"战国策派"的批判文章及其主要作者群体。在简述《群众》周刊的创刊、宗旨和与《新华日报》关系的基础上,归纳分析了《群众》周刊批判"战国策派"的13篇相关文章和5位主要作者。文章的第四部分主要探讨了《群众》周刊对"战国策派"批判的原因。本文认为《群众》周刊对"战国策派"批判的原因主要有五点:第一,"战国策派"的英雄史观和中国共产党群众观的对立;第二,"战国策派"污蔑了社会主义运动和苏联;第三,中国共产党应对国内外政治形势的现实需要;第四,"战国策派"是"法西斯主义的";第五,《群众》周刊办刊方向向思想理论斗争的转变。文章的第五部分主要论述了《群众》周刊批判"战国策派"的主要观点。本文从"法西斯的哲学"、"歌颂暴力"的宇宙观、"历史循环论"、"法西斯主义"的政治观、"法西斯思想的文艺观"等五个方面进行了梳理。文章的第六个部分总结了《群众》周刊批判"战国策派"的历史作用与局限。本文认为《群众》周刊对"战国策派"的批判具有较大的历史作用,主要表现在驳斥了"战国策派"不利于抗战的言论,宣传了唯物史观。同时,《群众》周刊对"战国策派"批判也有一定的历史局限,主要表现在批判带有简单化的倾向和部分论证存在问题。
[Abstract]:Mass Weekly is the only theoretical publication published publicly by the Communist Party of China in the Kuomintang and Hong Kong areas during the War of Resistance against Japan and the War of Liberation. Based on the text of the criticism of the "warring States Strategy School" by the "masses" Weekly, and on the basis of a brief introduction to the emergence of the "warring States Strategy School" and its propositions, this paper attempts to make a major point of view on the reasons why the "warring States Policy School" was criticized by the "masses" Weekly. The historical function and limitation are discussed briefly. The first part of the article is an introduction, mainly explains the origin and research value of the topic, research status, research methods and research emphasis, difficulties, innovation points. The second part of the article mainly summarizes the emergence of the warring States Strategy School and its propositions. On the emergence of the "warring States Strategy School", it mainly describes the concept of "warring States Strategy School" and the main representative figure of "warring States Strategy School", and mainly introduces the historical view of cultural form and the theory of "the replay of warring States period" in the proposition of "warring States Strategy School". Still "the force", respected Nietzsche and his will philosophy, "the violent movement" use for reference, "May 4th new culture" introspection and "the national literature movement". The third part of the article mainly summarizes and analyzes the critical articles of the Weekly Weekly on the warring States Policy School and its main author groups. On the basis of a brief introduction to the establishment, purpose and relationship with Xinhua Daily, 13 articles and 5 main authors of the Weekly magazine criticizing "warring States Policy School" are summarized and analyzed. The fourth part of the article mainly discusses the reason why the Weekly Weekly criticizes the warring States Policy School. This paper holds that there are five main reasons for the criticism of the "warring States Strategy School" by the "masses" Weekly: first, the antagonism between the heroic historical view of the "warring States Strategy School" and the mass view of the Communist Party of China, the second, the vilification of the socialist movement and the Soviet Union by the "warring States Strategy School"; Third, the Communist Party of China meets the practical needs of the political situation at home and abroad; fourth, the "warring States Policy School" is "fascist"; and fifthly, the direction of running the weekly "masses" has changed to ideological and theoretical struggle. The fifth part of the article mainly discusses the main viewpoints of the Weekly magazine criticizing the warring States Policy School. This paper combs from five aspects: the philosophy of fascism, the cosmological view of "praising violence", the theory of historical cycle, the political view of "fascism" and the view of literature and art of fascist thought. The sixth part summarizes the historical function and limitation of the criticism of the warring States Policy School by the Mass Weekly. This paper holds that the criticism of the warring States Strategy School by the Mass Weekly has a great historical function, mainly in refuting the argument that the warring States Strategy School is unfavorable to the War of Resistance against Japan and propagating the historical materialism. At the same time, there are some historical limitations in the criticism of the "warring States Strategy School" by the "masses" Weekly, which is mainly manifested in the tendency of the criticism to be simplistic and the problems in some argumentation.
【学位授予单位】：武汉大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D231

【参考文献】

相关期刊论文 前10条

1 林燕喜;;试析抗战时期战国策派遭受批判的原因[J];莆田学院学报;2014年01期

2 胡逢祥;;抗战中的“战国策派”及其史学[J];史林;2013年01期

3 袁继锋;;战国策派研究述评[J];重庆大学学报(社会科学版);2010年05期

4 周若清;;危亡变局下的理想、传承与功利——浅议“战国策”派产生的原因[J];长沙大学学报;2010年03期

5 潘汉琼;;《群众》周刊的风雨历程[J];武汉文博;2008年02期

6 余永和;;廿年来的战国策派研究[J];辽宁行政学院学报;2007年05期

7 胡尚元;;史学界的“大右派”——雷海宗[J];文史精华;2006年09期

8 朱鹏飞;“绵延”说与柏格森生命哲学的兴衰[J];西南民族大学学报(人文社科版);2005年09期

9 王学振;战国策派思想述评[J];重庆师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版);2005年01期

10 漆志平;政治观念与现实选择的冲突——解读战国策派的政治理念[J];东莞理工学院学报;2003年02期

相关博士学位论文 前5条

1 叶金辉;“古典”与“浪漫”的非常态融合—陈铨思想与作品研究[D];南开大学;2013年

2 范生彪;中国马克思主义文学批评话语模式研究[D];华中师范大学;2013年

3 袁英;话语理论的知识谱系及其在中国的流变与重构[D];华中师范大学;2012年

4 路晓冰;文化综合格局中的战国策派[D];山东大学;2006年

5 唐正芒;论南方局领导的大后方抗战文化运动[D];中共中央党校;1998年

相关硕士学位论文 前10条

1 马鸥亚;简析战国策派的人格哲学[D];中共北京市委党校;2015年

2 项淳一;中苏论战中中国共产党的话语研究[D];云南大学;2014年

3 林燕喜;战国策派的文化形态史观研究[D];福建师范大学;2014年

4 皮娇阳;抗战时期重庆的中共报人群体研究[D];南昌大学;2013年

5 严志;抗日战争时期战国策派的民族复兴思想[D];湖南师范大学;2013年

6 温小平;抗战后期国共两个中国之命运论战研究[D];海南大学;2012年

7 李建华;中西交融、返本开新[D];华东师范大学;2010年

8 朱法娟;20世纪30年代的北方左翼文化运动研究[D];中共中央党校;2008年

9 王晓晶;林同济史学思想述评[D];首都师范大学;2007年

10 梁庇寒;“战国策”派政治思想研究[D];中国政法大学;2007年

，

本文编号：1804124