K'ang Yu-wei, who was born near Canton in 1858 to a family of the gentry, was to become the most influential figure of the Reform Movement in the last days of the Ch'ing dynasty, He was educated in the classical manner and at only 15 years of age was starting to ask the questions that would make him a man of the modern world but in the Confucianist mold.
In his Autobiographical Chronology he was to write:
"My Master praised highly the writings of Han Yu and so I read and studied the collected works of Han and Liu (Tsung-yuan), emulating him in this as well. By this time I had read the books of the philosophers and had learned the methods of the Way. Thus I presented myself in person before the Master and said to him that Han Yu's methods of (seeking) the Way were shallow and that in searching for concrete substance in the writings of all the great names in scholarship down through the Sung, Ming and the present dynasty, (I had found) they were all empty and lacking in substance.
"I ventured to say that when one spoke of the Way, it should be like Chuang Tzu or Hsun Tzu; when· one spoke of governing, it should be like Kuan Tzu or Han Fei Tzu; while as regards medicine, the Su-wen would constitute a separate subject. But as to Han Yu, he was no more than a literary craftsman skilled in the undulation of broad and sweeping cadences which, while they appealed to the ear, had nothing to do with the Way. Thus his Yuan-tao was extremely superficial... The Master, who was usually correct and stern, in this case laughingly chided me for being wrong-headed. From the time he had first seen me he had often cautioned me about my undue feelings of superiority, and after this I was humble, but nevertheless my fellow-students came to be shocked at my intractability.
"With the arrival of autumn and winter, I had learned in their broad outlines the general meaning of the important books in the four divisions (of literature). My intelligence and comprehension became confused, for every day I was buried amid piles of old papers, and I developed a revulsion for them. Then one day I had a new idea. I thought: scholars engaged in textual research, such as Tai Chen, filled their homes with the books that they had written, but in the end what was the use of all this?
"Thus I gave it up and in my own heart I fancied seeking a place where I might pacify my mind and determine my destiny. Suddenly I abandoned my studies, discarded my books, shut my door, withdrew from my friends and sat in contemplation, nurturing my mind. My schoolmates thought me very queer, for there had been no one who had done this, inasmuch as the Master upheld the individual's actual practice (of the Confucian virtues) and detested the study of Ch'an (Buddhism). While I was sitting in contemplation, all of a sudden I perceived that Heaven, earth and the myriad things were all of one substance with myself, and in a great release of enlightenment I beheld myself a sage and laughed for joy; then suddenly I thought of the sufferings and hardships of all living beings, and I wept in melancholy. Abruptly I thought: why should I be studying here and neglecting my parent and that I should pack up immediately and go back to the thatched hut over my grandfather's grave. The students, observing that I sang and wept for no apparent reason, believed I had gone mad and was diseased in mind."
K'ang's withdrawal didn't last long. He was a man dedicated both to learning and improvement. He continued his study of the classics but at the same time began to read of the West. Visits to Hongkong and Shanghai impressed him with the order and the prosperity of Western civilization. As a reformer, he got his chance after China's defeat by Japan in 1894 95. He urged China to follow the example of Meiji Japan and was called to take charge of the government in June of 1898.
He wanted to move fast, and that, indeed, was necessary. His advocacies included those of a modernized bureaucracy, public school system, elected local government and the promotion of commerce, industry, banking, mining and agriculture. He also saw the need for reorganizing and streamlining the armed forces, and in this task he bumped into an entrenched system of local commanders who wanted to go on running their own shows. The Empress Dowager regained power before K'ang's reforms had taken firm hold. He fled abroad and remained a constitutional monarchist even after the republican victory of 1911.
K'ang Yu-wei built on a Confucian foundation in seeking institutional reform. He understood that Westernizing reformers were failing because they sought to superimpose another system on Chinese Confucianism. His solution was to enlarge Confucianism to make room for Western institutions and ideas that seemed to have value. In his Confucius as a Reformer, he argued that the Sage had written the Six Classics to promote reform in his own time.
"Confucius was the founder of a doctrine," K'ang wrote. "He was a godlike sage-king. He complements Heaven and earth and nurtures the myriad things. All men, things and principles are embraced in the Great Way of Cunfucius. He is, therefore, the most accomplished and perfect sage since the history of mankind began. And yet, concerning the Great Way of Confucius, one would search in vain for a single word under Confucius' own name). There are only the Analects, which was a record of the Master's sayings taken down by his disciples, and the Spring and Autumn Annals, which was a kind of old-fashioned gazette copied from ancient documents relative to public events and ceremonies. As to the Books of Odes, History, Rites, Music and Changes, they are regarded as the ancient records of Fu Hsi, the Hsia and Shang dynasties, King Wen and the Duke of Chou; thus they have nothing to do with Confucius. If this were true, Confucius would have been merely a wise scholar of later times, no better than Cheng K'ang-ch'eng of Chu Hsi (who wrote commentaries on the Confucian classics). How, then could he have been called the only model of the human race and the perfect sage of all generations?...Before the Han dynasty it was known to all that Confucius was the founder of the doctrine and the reformer of institutions, and that he was the godlike sage-king ... Wherein lies the reason for this? It lies in the fact that scholars knew the Six Classics were written by Confucius. This was the opinion of all before the Han dynasty. Only when a scholar recognizes that the Six Classics were written by Confucius can he understand why Confucius was the great sage, the founder of the doctrine and the model for all ages, and why he alone was called the supreme master. "
The K'ang theory of progress was expressed in terms of the Three Ages:
"The meaning of the Spring and Autumn Annals consists in the evolution of the Three Ages: the Age of Disorder, the Age of Order and the Age of Great Peace...The Way of Confucius embraces the evolution of the Three Sequences and the Three Ages. The Three Sequences were used to illustrate the Three Ages, which could be extended to a hundred generations. The eras of Hsia, Shang and Chou represent the succession of the Three Sequences, each with its modifications and accretions. By observing the changes in these three eras, one can know the changes in a hundred generations to come. For as customs are handed down among the people, later kings cannot but follow the practices of the preceding dynasty; yet since defects develop and have to be removed, each new dynasty must make modifications and additions to create a new system. The course of humanity progresses according to a fixed sequence. From the clans come tribes, which in time are transformed into nations. And from nations the Grand Unity comes about. Similarly, from the individual man the rule of tribal chieftains gradually becomes established, from which the relationship between ruler and subject is gradually defined. Autocracy gradually leads to constitutionalism, and constitutionalism gradually leads to republicanism. Likewise, from the individual man the relationship between husband and wife gradually comes into being, and from this the relationship between father and son is defined. This relationship of father and son leads to the loving care of the entire race, which in turn leads gradually to the Grand Unity in which there is a reversion to individuality.
"Thus there is an evolution from Disorder to Order, and from Order to Great Peace. Evolution proceeds gradually and changes have their origins. This is true with all nations. By observing the child, one can know the adult and old man; by observing the sprout, one can know the tree when it grows big and finally reaches the sky. Thus, by observing the modifications and additions of the three successive eras of Hsia, Shang and Chou, one can by extension know the changes in a hundred generations to come.
"When Confucius prepared the Spring and Autumn Annals, he extended it to embrace the Three Ages. Thus, during the Age of Disorder, he considers his own state as the center, treating all other Chinese feudal states as on the outside. In the Age of Order, he considers China as the center, while treating the outlying barbarian tribes as on the outside. And in the Age of Great Peace, he considers everything, far or near, large or small, as if it were one. In doing this, he is applying the principle of evolution.
"Confucius was born in the Age of Disorder. Now that communications extend through the great earth and changes have taken place in Europe and America, the world is evolving toward the Age of Order. There will be a day when everything throughout the earth, large or small, far or near, will be like one. There will be no longer any nations, no more racial distinctions, and customs will everywhere be the same. With this uniformity will come the Age of Great Peace. Confucius knew all this in advance...
"The methods and institutions of Confucius aim at meeting with the particular times. If, in the Age of Disorder, before the advent of civilization, one were to put into effect the institutions of Great Peace, this would certainly result in great harm. But if, in the Age of Order, one were to continue to cling to the institutions of the Age of Disorder, this, too, would result in great harm. The present time, for example, is the Age of Order. It is therefore necessary to propagate the doctrines of self-rule and independence, and to discuss publicly the matter of constitutional government. If the laws are not reformed, great disorder will result." This was a memorial submitted to the throne on January 29, 1898:
"A survey of all states in the world will show lat those states which undertook reforms became wrong, while those states which clung to the past perished. The consequences of clinging to the past and the effects of opening up new ways are thus obvious. If Your Majesty, with your discerning brilliance, observes the trends in other countries, you will see that we can change, we can preserve ourselves; but if we cannot change, we shall perish. Indeed, if we can make a complete change, we shall become strong, but we only make limited changes, we shall still perish. If Your Majesty and his ministers investigate the
source of the disease, you will know that this is the right prescription.
"Our present trouble lies in our clinging to old institutions without knowing how to change. In an age of competition between states, to put into effect methods appropriate to an era of universal unification and laissez-faire is like wearing heavy furs in summer or riding a high carriage across a river. This can only result in having a fever or getting oneself drowned ...
'"It is a principle of things that the new is strong but the old weak; that new things are fresh but old things rotten; that new things are active but old things static. If the institutions are old, defects will develop. Therefore, there are no institutions that should remain unchanged for a hundred years. Moreover, our present institutions are unworthy vestiges of the Han, T'ang, Yuan and Ming dynasties; they are not even the institutions of the (Manchu) ancestors. In fact, they are the products of the fancy writing and corrupt dealing of the petty officials rather than the original ideas of the ancestors. To say that they are the ancestral institutions is an insult to the ancestors. Furthermore, institutions are for the purpose of preserving one's territories. Now that the ancestral territory cannot be preserved, what good is it to maintain the ancestral institutions? …
"Although there is a desire to reform, yet if the national policy is not fixed and public opinion not united, it will be impossible for us to give up the old and adopt the new. The national policy is to the state just as the rudder is to the boat or the pointer is to the compass. It determines the direction of the state and shapes the public opinion of the country.
"Nowadays the court has been undertaking some reforms, but the action of the emperor is obstructed by the ministers, and the recommendations of the able scholars are attacked by old-fashioned bureaucrats. If the charge is not 'using barbarian ways to change China,' then it is 'upsetting the ancestral institutions.' Rumors and scandals are rampant, and people fight each other like fire and water. A reform in this way is as ineffective as attempting a forward march by walking backward. It will inevitably result in failure. Your Majesty knows that under the present circumstances reforms are imperative and old institutions must be abolished. I beg Your Majesty to make up your mind and to decide on the national policy. After the fundamental policy is determined, the methods of implementation must vary according to what is primary and what is secondary, what is important and what is insignificant, what is strong and what is weak, what is urgent and what can wait... If anything goes wrong, no success can be achieved.
"After studying ancient and modern institutions, Chinese and foreign, I have found that the institutions of the sage-kings and Three Dynasties (Hsia, Shang and Chou) were excellent, but that ancient times were different from today. I hope Your Majesty will daily read Mencius and follow his example of loving the people. The development of the Han, T'ang, Sung and Ming dynasties may be learned, but it should be remembered that the age of universal unification is different from that of sovereign nations. I wish Your Majesty would study Kuan Tzu (foreshadowing Legalist doctrines) and follow this idea of managing the country. As to the republican governments of the United States and France and the constitutional governments of Britain and Germany, those countries are far away and their customs are different from ours... Their changes occurred a long time ago and can no longer all be traced. Consequently, I beg Your Majesty to adopt the purpose of Peter the Great of Russia as our purpose and take the Meiji Reform of Japan as the model for our reform. The time and place of Japan's reform are not remote and her religion and customs are somewhat similar to ours. Her success is manifest; her example can be easily followed."
Two followers of K'ang Yu-wei were to take the philosophy of reform even further. One was T'an Ssu-t'ung, who died a martyr's death in 1898, and the other was Liang Ch'i-ch'ao, who was influential in his Japanese exile of the early 1900s. He lived until 1929.
T'an read widely in Christianity, Buddhism, Taoism and Confucianism only to conclude that China had to follow the West in modernization. At first a disciple of K'ang, he came to advocate republicanism rather than the reform of the monarchy. This is from his Study of Humanity:
"When Confucius first set forth his teachings, he discarded the ancient learning, reformed existing institutions, rejected monarchism, advocated republicanism and transformed inequality into equality. He indeed applied himself to many changes. Unfortunately, the scholars who followed Hsun Tzu forgot entirely the true meaning of Confucius' teaching, but clung to its superficial form. They allowed the ruler supreme, unlimited powers and enabled him to make use of Confucianism, not knowing that this was a system applicable only to the Age of Disorder. Even for the Age of Disorder, any discussion of the human relationships without reference to Heaven would be prejudicial and incomplete, and the evil consequences would be immeasurable. How much worse, then, for them recklessly to have added the three bonds, thus openly creating a system of inequality with its unnatural distinctions between high and low and making men, the children of Heaven and earth, suffer a miserable life....
"For the past 2,000 years the ruler-minister relationship has been especially dark and inhuman, and it has become worse in recent times. The ruler is not physically different or intellectually superior to man; on what docs he rely to oppress 400 million people? He relies on the formulation long ago of the three bonds and five human relationships, so that, controlling men's bodies, he can also control their minds. As Chuang Tzu said: 'He who steals a sickle gets executed; he who steals a state becomes a prince.' When Tien Ch'eng-tzu stole the state of Ch'i, he also stole the (Confucian) system of humanity, righteousness and sage wisdom. When the thieves were Chinese and Confucianists, it was bad enough; but how could we have allowed the unworthy tribes of Mongolia and Manchuria, who knew nothing of China or Confucianism, to steal China by means of their barbarism and brutality. After stealing China, they controlled China by means of the system they had stolen and shamelessly made use of Confucianism, with which they had been unfamiliar, to oppress China, to which they had been strangers. But China worshiped them as Heaven and did not realize their guilt. Instead of burning the books in order to keep the people ignorant, they more cleverly used the books to keep the people under control. Compared with them, the tyrannical emperor of the Ch'in dynasty was but a fool.
"At the beginning of the human race, there were no princes and subjects, for all were just people. As the people were unable to govern each other and did not have time to rule, they joined in raising-up someone to be the prince. Now 'joined in raising up' means not that the prince selected the people but that the people selected the prince; it means that there must be people before there can be a prince; the prince is therefore the 'branch' while the people are 'root.' Since there is no such thing in the world as sacrificing the root for the branch, how can we sacrifice the people for the prince? When it is said that they 'joined in raising up' the prince, it necessarily means that they could also dismiss him. The prince serves the people; the ministers assist the ruler to serve the people. Taxes are levied to provide the means of managing the public affairs of the people. If public affairs are not well managed, it is a universal principle that the ruler should be replaced....
"The ruler is also one of the people; in fact, he is of secondary importance as compared to ordinary people. If there is no reason for people to die for one another, there is certainly less reason for those of primary importance to die for one of secondary importance. Then, should those who died for the ruler in ancient times not have done so? Not necessarily. But I can say positively that there is reason only to die for a cause, definitely no reason to die for a prince.
"In ancient times loyalty meant actually being loyal. If the subordinate actually serves his superior faithfully, why should not the superior actually wait upon the subordinate also? Loyalty signifies mutuality, the utmost fulfillment of a mutual relationship. How can we maintain that only ministers and subjects should live up to it? Confucius said: 'The prince behaves as a prince, the minister as a minister.' He also said: 'The father should behave as a father, the son as a son, the elder brother as an elder brother, the younger brother as a younger brother, the husband as a husband, the wife as a wife.' The founder of Confucianism never preached inequality.
"As the evils of the ruler-minister relationship reached their highest development, it was considered natural that the relationships between father and son and between husband and wife should also be brought within the control of categorical morality. This is all damage done by the categorizing of the three bonds. Whenever you have categorical obligations, not only are the mouths of the people sealed so that they are afraid to speak up, but their minds are also shackled so that they are afraid to think. Thus the favorite method for controlling people is to multiply the categorical obligations.
"As to the husband-wife relationship, on what basis does the husband extend his power and oppress the other party? Again it is the theory of the three bonds which is the source of the trouble. When the husband considers himself the master, he will not treat his wife as an equal human being. In ancient China the wife could ask for a divorce, and she therefore did not lose the right to be her own master. Since the inscription of the tyrannical law (against remarriage) on the table at K'uai-chi during the Ch'in dynasty, and particularly since its zealous propagation by the Confucianists of the Sung dynasty-who cooked up the absurd statement that 'To die in starvation s a minor matter but to lose one's chastity (by remarrying) is a serious matter' - the cruel system of he Legalists has been applied to the home and the ladies' chambers have become locked-up prisons.
"Among the five human relationships, the one between friends is the most beneficial and least harmful to life. It yields tranquil happiness and causes not trace of pain - so long as friends are made with the right persons. Why is this? Because the relationship between friends is founded on equality, liberty and mutual feelings. In short, it is simply because friendship involves no loss of the right to be one's own master. Next comes the relationship between brothers, which is somewhat like the relationship between friends. The rest of the five relationships which have been darkened by the three bonds are like hell.
"The world, misled by the conception of blood relations, makes erroneous distinctions between the nearly related and the remotely related, and relegates the relationship between friends to the end of the line. The relationship between friends, however, not only is superior to the other four relationships, but should be the model for them all. When these four relationships have been brought together and infused with the spirit of friendship, they can well be abolished ...
"People in China and abroad are now talking of reforms, but no fundamental principles and systems can be introduced if the five relationships remain unchanged, let alone the three bonds."
Liang Ch'i-ch'ao escaped to Japan after failure of the Reform Movement. He published a fortnightly, A People Made New, in Yokohama from 1902 to 1905. Studying the West and influenced by Japan's progress, he became convinced that China's most pressing needs were nationalism and popular education. Nominally, Liang should have been a great leader of the Republican period. But he disliked violence and didn't want to turn Chinese nationalism against the Manchus. During the 1920s he was respected as a patriarch but his voice paled beside that of Sun Yat-sen. After World War I, he took consolation from the superiority of Chinese spirituality as contrasted with Western materialism. These are selections:
"Since the appearance of mankind on earth thousands of countries have existed on earth. Of these, however, only about a hundred still occupy a place on the map of the five continents. And among these hundred-odd countries there are only four or five great powers that are strong enough to dominate the world and to conquer nature. All countries have the same sun and moon, all have mountains and rivers, and all consist of people with feet and skulls; but some countries rise while others fall, and some become strong while others are weak. Why? Some attribute it to geographical advantages. But geographically, America today is the same as America in ancient times; why then do only the Anglo-Saxons enjoy the glory? Similarly, ancient Rome was the same as Rome today; why then have the Latin people declined in fame? Some attribute it to certain heroes. But Macedonia once had Alexander, and yet today it is no longer seen. Mongolia once had Genghis Khan, and yet today it hardly maintains its existence. Ah! I know the reason. A state is formed by the assembling of people. The relationship of a nation to its people resembles that of a body to its four limbs, five viscera, muscles, veins and corpuscles. It has never happened that the four limbs could be cut off, the five viscera wasted away, the muscles and veins injured, the corpuscles dried up, and yet the body still live. Similarly, it has never happened that a people could be foolish, timid, disorganized and confused and yet the nation still stand. Therefore, if we wish the body to live for a long time, we must understand the methods of hygiene. If we wish the nation to be secure, rich and honored, we must discuss the way for the people to be made new.
"The term 'people made new' does not mean that our people must give up entirely what is old in order to follow others. There are two meanings of made new. One is to improve what is original in the people and so renew it; the other is to adopt what is originally lacking in the people and so make a new people. Without one or the two, there will be no success.
"A nation which can maintain itself in the world must have some peculiar characteristics on the part of its nationals. From morals and laws down to customs, habits, literature and fine arts, all share an independent spirit which has been handed down from the forefathers to their descendants. Thus the group is formed and the nation develops. This is really the fundamental basis of nationalism. Our people have been established as a nation on the Asian continent for several thousand years, and we must have some special characteristics which are grand, noble and perfect, and distinctly different from those of other races. We should preserve these characteristics and not let them be lost. What is called preserving, however, is not simply to let them exist and grow by themselves and then blithely say: 'I am preserving them, I am preserving them.' It is like a tree; unless some buds come out every year, its withering away may soon be expected. Or like a well; unless there is always some new spring bubbling, its exhaustion is not far off.
"If we wish to make our nation strong, we must investigate extensively the methods followed by other nations in becoming independent. We should select their superior points and appropriate them to make up for our own shortcomings. Now with regard to politics, academic learning and techniques, our critics know how to take the superior points of others to make up for our own weakness; but they do not know that the people's virtue, the people's wisdom and the people's vitality are the great basis of politics, academic learning and techniques. If they do not take the former but adopt the latter, neglect the roots but tend the branches, it will be no different from seeing the luxuriant growth of another tree and wishing to graft its branches onto our withered trunk, or seeing the bubbling flow of another well and wishing to draw its water to fill our dry well. Thus, how to adopt and make up for what we originally lacked so that our people may be made new should be deeply and carefully considered.
"All phenomena in the world are governed by no more than two principles: the conservative and the progressive. Those who are applying these two principles are inclined either to the one or to the other. Sometimes the two arise simultaneously and conflict with each other; sometimes the two exist simultaneously and compromise with each other. No one can exist if he is inclined only to one. Where there is conflict, there must be compromise. Conflict is the forerunner of compromise.
"Those who excel at making compromises become a great people, such as the Anglo-Saxons, who, in a manner of speaking, make their way with one foot on the ground and one foot going forward, or who hold fast to things with one hand and pick up things with another. Thus, what I mean by 'a people made new' is not those who are infatuated with Western ways and, in order to keep company with others, throw away our morals, learning and customs of several thousand years' standing. Nor are they those who stick to old paper and say that merely embracing the morals, learning and customs of those thousands of years will be sufficient to enable us to stand upon the great earth.
"Among our people there is not one who looks on national affairs as if they were his own affairs. The significance of public morality has not dawned on us. Examining into it, however, we realize that the original basis for morality lies in its serving the interests of the group. As groups differ in their degree of barbarism or civilization, so do their appropriate morals vary. All of them, however, aim at consolidating, improving and developing the group… In ancient times, some barbarians considered it moral to practice community of women, or to treat slaves as if they were not human beings. And modern philosophers do not call it immoral because under the particular situation at the time that was the proper thing to do in the interests of the group. Thus morality is founded on the interests of the group. If it is against this principle, even the perfect good can become an accursed evil. Public morality is therefore the basis of all morals. What is beneficial to the group is good; what is detrimental to the interests of the group is bad. This principle applies to all places and to all ages.
"As to the external features of morality, they vary according to the degree of progress in each group. As groups differ in barbarism or civilization, so do their public interests and their morals. Morality cannot remain absolutely unchanged. It is not something that could be put into a fixed formula by the ancients several thousand years ago, to be followed by all generations to come. Hence, we who live in the present group should observe the main trends of the world, study what will suit our nation and create a new morality in order to solidify, benefit and develop our group. We should not impose upon ourselves a limit and refrain from going into what our sages had not prescribed. Search for public morality and there will appear a new morality, there will appear a people made new.
"Generally, those who talk about renovation may be divided into two groups. The lower group consists of those who pick up others' trite expressions and assume a bold look in order to climb up the official hierarchy. Their Western learning is stale stuff, their diplomacy relies on bribes and their travels are moving in the dark. These people, of course, are not worth mentioning. The higher group consists of those who are worried about the situation and try hard to develop the nation and to promote well-being. But when asked about their methods, they would begin with diplomacy, training of troops, purchase of arms and manufacture of instruments; then they would proceed to commerce, mining and railways; and finally they would come, as they did recently, to officers' training, police and education. Are these not the most important and necessary things for modern civilized nations? Yes. But can we attain the level of modern civilization and place our nation in an invincible position by adopting a little of this and that, or taking a small step now and then? I know we cannot.
"Let me illustrate this by commerce. Economic competition is one of the big problems of the world today. It is the method whereby the powers attempt to conquer us. It is also the method whereby we should fight for our existence. The importance of improving our foreign trade has been recognized by all. But in order to promote foreign trade, it is necessary to protect the rights of our domestic trade and industry; and in order to protect these rights, it is necessary to issue a set of commercial laws. Commercial laws, however, cannot stand by themselves, and so it is necessary to complement them with other laws. A law which is not carried out is tantamount to no law; it is therefore necessary to define the powers of the judiciary. Bad legislation is worse than no legislation, and so it is necessary to decide where the legislative power should belong. If those who violate the law are not punished, laws will become void as soon as they are proclaimed; therefore, the duties of the judiciary must be defined. When all these are carried to the logical conclusion, it will be seen that foreign trade cannot be promoted without a constitution, a parliament and a responsible government. Those who talk about foreign trade today blithely say: 'I am promoting it, I am promoting it,' and nothing more. I do not know how they are going to promote it. The above is one illustration, but it is true with all other cases. Thus I know why the so-called new methods nowadays are ineffectual. Why? Because without destruction there can be no construction... What, then, is the way to effect our salvation and to achieve progress? The answer is that we must shatter at a blow the despotic and confused governmental system of some thousands of years; we must sweep away the corrupt and sycophantic learning of these thousands of years."