19世纪中日两国早期现代化比较研究

发布时间：2018-07-26 10:24

【摘要】：中国和日本两国大体上在19世纪60-90年代先后迈出了早期现代化的步伐,而两国发展的结局却大不相同。日本的维新是由天皇为首的明治政府主动在全国推行,明治政府为了集中政府权力,成立了专门负责引进、移植和发展资本主义企业的中央机构。这些中央机构,都以"激进改革派"人士执掌。而中国只是由地方上的几个大员,包括曾国藩、李鸿章、左宗棠以及其他对洋务有兴趣的总督或者巡抚在他们的辖区办理。洋务新政时期,未能建立任何一个推动资本主义改革、引进西方学术和技术以及机器设备的专门机构,没有一个机构来设计、制定有关推动洋务新政的方针政策。在发展资本主义企业的方向上,中日之间也有着本质的区别。在中国,洋务新政初期引进的军事工业,全部是官办,此后开设的民用工业项目,大多是官督商办,民办企业极难生长。清政府没有提出促进民营企业的任何政策。日本则实行了两个并举:引进资本主义企业与引进资本主义经济制度并举,举办官办企业与鼓励民营企业并举。尽管两国都具有早期现代化的特征,但与真正的现代化进程相比较,尚有距离。洋务新政与明治维新,实际上是不同历史发展阶段上的产物,难以作真切的比较。明治维新以后,明治政府逐渐采取一系列政策措施,对日本社会进行了资本主义改造,这些改造刺激了日本社会自由民权运动的发生,推动了日本社会向资产阶级宪政国家的转变,从而促进了日本产业政策向自由资本主义方向转换。这个转换,标志着日本资本主义社会的形成。可见,落后国家只有转换国家体制,才可能全力推进资本主义的产业政策和文化政策,才可能赶上现代化的潮流,而中国在19世纪内完全不具备这样的条件,所以只能在半殖民地半封建社会的泥淖中越陷越深,在现代化的道路上很难迈出大的步伐。
[Abstract]:China and Japan generally took the early steps of modernization in the 1960-90's, but the development outcomes of the two countries were very different. The reform of Japan was initiated by the Meiji government headed by the emperor. In order to centralize government power, the Meiji government set up a central organization specifically responsible for introducing, transplanting and developing capitalist enterprises. These central institutions are run by "radical reformists". China is handled only by several local governors, including Zeng Guofan, Li Hongzhang, Zuo Zongtang and other governors or governors interested in foreign affairs. During the New deal of Westernization, it failed to set up any special institution to promote capitalist reform, introduce western academic and technological, and machinery and equipment, and did not have a single organization to design and formulate the principles and policies for promoting the New deal of Westernization. In the development of capitalist enterprises, there are also essential differences between China and Japan. In China, the military industry introduced in the early days of the Westernization New Policy was all government-run, and since then most of the civilian industrial projects have been run by officials and supervisors, and private enterprises have been extremely difficult to grow. The Qing government did not put forward any policy to promote private enterprises. Japan has carried out two simultaneous efforts: introducing capitalist enterprises and introducing capitalist economic systems, setting up government enterprises and encouraging private enterprises. Although both countries have the characteristics of early modernization, but compared with the real modernization process, there is still a long way to go. The Westernization New deal and the Meiji Restoration are in fact the products of different stages of historical development, so it is difficult to make a true comparison. After the Meiji Restoration, the Meiji government gradually adopted a series of policy measures to transform Japanese society into capitalism, which stimulated the emergence of a free and civil rights movement in Japanese society. It promoted the transformation of Japanese society to bourgeois constitutional state, thus promoted the transformation of Japanese industrial policy to liberal capitalism. This transformation marks the formation of a capitalist society in Japan. It can be seen that only by transforming the state system can backward countries make every effort to promote capitalist industrial and cultural policies and catch up with the trend of modernization. China did not have such conditions at all in the 19th century. Therefore, we can only sink deeper and deeper in the quagmire of semi-colonial and semi-feudal society, and it is difficult to make great strides on the road of modernization.
【作者单位】：中国社会科学院近代史研究所;山东大学历史系;
【分类号】：K256;K313

【共引文献】