排日移民法案与孙中山的大亚洲主义演讲

关于孙中山的大亚洲主义演讲,前人多从孙中山本人的思想脉络中寻求解释,实则此事与1924年美国的排日移民法案关系密切。这一法案强烈的种族色彩,使得明治维新以来以脱亚入欧为目标的日本面临重新定位的抉择,各界人士从不同角度考虑是否应当回到亚洲的立场,与亚洲大国结盟的呼声渐起。然而,日本在东亚推行的强权侵略政策,令东亚各国对此反应冷淡。开始孙中山的态度也相当保留,直到日本国内出现反省的声音,而亚洲其他国家予以正面回应,为了实现国内统一,孙中山转而争取日方的支持。在向政府和政党求援不果后,孙中山将主要诉求对象转到日本国民方面,并以包括俄国在内的亚洲各国国民的结盟对抗列强的同盟以及日本政府和政客长期追随欧美列强的行为。因此,1924年底孙中山的大亚洲主义演讲,绝非投日本之所好,得到处在日本殖民统治下的有识之士的共鸣。他们对于孙中山大亚洲主义的解读,与当时的中日政坛乃至后来学人的看法,有着不小的距离。

The New Immigration Law and the Exclusion of Japanese and the Lecture on Great Asianism by Sun Yat-sen

Most scholars found explanations for Sun Yat-sen's lecture on Great Asianism from his ideological system.However,this lecture is close connected with The New Immigration Law and the Exclusion of Japanese, approved by the United States in 1924.It made Japan,the country aiming at leaving Asia and entering Europe,to face the choice of reorientation since Meiji Restoration.The Japanese people from all circles,began to think about whether they should return to Asia.Meanwhile,some voices of allying with the great country of Asia were getting more and more popular.However,the countries in East Asia were all lack of interest,for Japan implemented an aggressive policy in East Asia.At the beginning,Sun Yat-sen remained a quite reserved attitude.Till the voice of self-reflection appeared in the internal Japan,and other countries in East Asia had positive responses,Sun turned to strive for the support from Japanese government in order to unify China.But after failing in recourse to the Japanese government and parties,Sun turned to the Japanese people,and tried to unite all the Asian peoples,including the Russian,to counterwork the federation of power countries and the power countries adhered by the Japanese government and their politicians.So the lecture on great Asianism,delivered by Sun Yat-sen at the end of 1924,did not cater for Japan,but to aim at attaining the sympathy from the people who lived under the colonial rule by Japan.The understanding of those people on Sun Yat-sen's great Asianism,kept quite a distance to those of the politicians in China and Japan,as well as those of the subsequent scholars.