陶成章、章太炎革命思想合论

在辛亥革命准备时期,同为光复会领袖的陶成章、章太炎两人的革命思想颇多共同之处:他们都以固有文化和浙东学派的传统为基础,因列强的侵略刺激而形成民族主义,渴望中国独立和民族自主,坚定地主张反清革命,批判反动统治者自利自救的"立宪";他们同样娴熟地运用历史知识,培养人们的爱国革命思想,又都运用了"进化论"的思想武器.但是在国内民族问题上,陶的认识较为固执,而章太炎则能与时俱进;在对待帝国主义的认识上,陶有幻想而章更清醒;在对待历史文化和进化论的态度上,陶只求应用,章则坚持应用与求真的统一,故对理论有较大贡献.上述比较反映出革命行动家和"有学问的革命家"的差异.

The Co-analysis of Tao Cheng-zhang and Zhang Tai-yan's Revolutionary Thoughts

Tao Cheng-zhang and Zhang Tai-yan were the leaders of Guan-fu Organization. Their revolutionary ideology was mainly based on nationalism with intrinsic cultural elements, and they carried forward the spirits of school in East Zhejiang. Tao and Zhang realized the aggressive ambitions of imperialism countries and the very grave crisis of China. They believed it was the first thing to overthrow decadent Qing Dynasty in order to have an effective remedy to China. To arouse the mass and motivate their emotions to the nation, they inculcated and inspired the common people writing books merged with historical knowledge. About the government's bogus constitutionalism, both of them kept a cooler head and criticized sham constitutionalism which was completely for Qing government's benefits and survival. And they absorbed evolutionism theory as elements of their revolutionary ideology. So their revolutionary ideology had much in common. However there still existed something different in their thoughts. For instance, in the problem of civil nations, Tao was stubborn because there were more thoughts of Great Han Nationality in his mind, while Zhang's opinion could change with the development of the times because he break through narrow racial view early. In the aspect of treating the capitalism, Tao still had some illusion, whereas Zhang was more clear-headed. Considering their attitudes towards the history culture and evolutionism, Tao simply paid close attention to application, but Zhang insisted on the consistency of application and pursuit of truth, which resulted in more contributions Zhang made to the theory than Tao. All of the above reflected the difference between the revolutionary actor and the learned revolutionist.