找回密码
 立即注册
搜索
查看: 5318|回复: 2

冯客(FrankDikötter)新书即将出版

[复制链接]

1

主题

8228

回帖

2万

积分

管理员

积分
27245
发表于 2013-9-21 20:43:27 | 显示全部楼层 |阅读模式
@荷兰在线:历史学家冯客(Frank Dikötter)新书《《解放的悲剧:中国革命史(1949-1957)》即将出版,书中他将中国的解放战争称为“精心计划的恐怖与系统性的暴力”。通过对此前机密资料的研究,冯克在书中描绘了战争后的8年内,恐怖是如何被美化为“解放战争”的.


另,@liubinyan The Tragedy of Liberation: A History of the Chinese Revolution 1945-1957 http://www.amazon.com/dp/1620403471/ref=tsm_1_fb_lk … 《毛时代的大饥荒》作者冯客(Frank Dikotter)新书将于9月24日发行
回复

使用道具 举报

1

主题

8228

回帖

2万

积分

管理员

积分
27245
 楼主| 发表于 2013-9-21 20:44:43 | 显示全部楼层
China at the liberation

The road to serfdom

A new history lays bare the violent heart of Mao's revolution

Sep 7th 2013|From the print edition

Tweet

The Tragedy of Liberation: A History of the Chinese Revolution, 1945-57. By Frank Dikotter. Bloomsbury; 400 pages; $30 and £25. Buy from Amazon.com, Amazon.co.uk

THE first years of the People's Republic under Mao Zedong were a golden age, according to Chinese Communists and many in the West. After all, "liberation" in 1949 brought to an end a period encompassing two brutal and overlapping wars: Japan's invasion and occupation of China and the Chinese civil war with the Nationalists. A decade later, China was charging into the Mao-made Utopian catastrophe of the Great Leap Forward, in which tens of millions were worked or starved to death, and the horrors of the Cultural Revolution were still to come. According to this view, the years from the republic's founding to, roughly, the so-called Hundred Flowers Campaign in 1956 were constructive, even benign in a paternalistic way. The party took a chaotic state in hand, and out of a shattered citizenry forged a "New China".

In this section

The road to serfdom

Hardly a unifying church

A man for all seasons

Kiss of death

Nice change

Negotiating world peace

Reprints

Related topics

Amazon

History

World history

China

Frank Dikotter, a Dutch-born historian at the University of Hong Kong, destroys this illusion in his new book, "The Tragedy of Liberation". With a mixture of passion and ruthlessness, he marshals the facts, many of them recently unearthed in party archives. Out of these, Mr Dikotter constructs a devastating case for how extreme violence, not a moral mandate, was at the heart of how the party got to power, and of how it then governed.

Towards the end of the civil war, word of how the Communist armies waged war went before them. In Manchuria alone, some 500,000 civilians had fled the Communist advance and sought shelter in the city of Changchun. Lin Biao, the general laying siege to it, called for it to be turned into "a city of death". In all, 160,000 civilians died, mainly of hunger, many trapped in a killing zone outside the city walls.

So when Mao's peasant-soldiers marched into Beijing and Shanghai, fear and resignation as much as hope were the predominant emotions. There was also mutual bewilderment. Townsfolk stared at these tough bumpkins, most of whom had never seen sophistication before. Some of the soldiers attempted to light their cigarettes with light bulbs; others washed their rice in lavatory bowls, upset that the grains disappeared when they pulled the chain.

After the choreographed victory parades, the Communist Party began its violence. First in line were country "landlords". Wanting nothing to stand between the people and the party, Mao and his colleagues set out to smash the ties between country folk and their local leaders. "Land reform" meant overthrowing an evil class.

Much was wrong in the Chinese countryside, especially after decades of war, but the _junker _class which the Communists attacked happened not to exist. Nor was village life across China feudal. Most Chinese were small landowners, with little variation in wealth. Tenants were not much poorer than owners, since only fertile land could be let. In the rice-growing south tenants were more prosperous than owners on the hardscrabble plains of the north.

No matter. Work teams fanned out, calling interminable meetings at which villagers were divided into a system of five artificial classes borrowed from the Soviet Union: "landlords", "rich peasants", "middle peasants", "poor peasants" and "labourers". Members of these last two, those who stood to inherit land confiscated from the rich, were urged to "turn hardship into hatred", as Mr Dikotter puts it. Old grudges were dug up, and greed played a powerful part. Occasionally, whole villages stood bravely behind those accused of being landlords. For the most part, as the indoctrination of the work teams ground on, close-knit communities disintegrated.

The genius of communist violence was to implicate ever more people in it. After landlords were tried in front of village tribunals, then beaten and shot, land and possessions were divided up among the crowd. It was an incentive to find new victims, many of whom were burned or buried alive. But the more victims, the greater the fear of reprisals from distraught families. So the tribunals kept on killing. Children were not spared. By the end of 1952 up to 2m Chinese had been murdered.

A parallel terror was waged against those deemed to be counter-revolutionaries, Nationalists or foreign spies, some as young as eight, with new victims trucked daily to execution sites. Throughout these orgies of violence, Mao and other leaders coolly laid down quotas--up to four deaths for every thousand Chinese was considered appropriate. In the three provinces under the jurisdiction of Deng Xiaoping, known today for having been open-minded, 150,000 had been executed by November 1951. The total number of deaths will never be known. But in late 1952 Bo Yibo (father of Bo Xilai, whose recent trial has caused a sensation) said, approvingly, that 2m had been executed.

Not everyone could be killed, Mao acknowledged. So a vast gulag was born, swallowing up counter-revolutionaries, vagabonds, prostitutes, capitalists, marketeers, foreigners and, later, intellectuals. The population in the "reform through labour" camps quickly reached about 2m. The relentless indoctrination, one inmate later said, was nothing less than the "physical and mental liquidation of oneself".

The country was, as Mr Dikotter puts it, well down "the road to serfdom"--literally so for farmers. All the landlord blood spilled was supposed to empower peasants. But the upheaval had devastated the countryside. Draught animals, fertiliser and skills were in short supply. The markets and other networks on which farmers had long depended were destroyed. Farming risked being branded the work of the evil landlord, yet the state demanded ever more grain from farmers in tax. Hardships multiplied. Villagers sold their children.

The party's answer was to move faster towards wholesale collectivisation, just as it had nationalised all private business. Open rebellions broke out. Once they were put down, peasants were bound into collectives, forbidden to travel. In a few years the state had enslaved a people it claimed to be setting free.

By 1956, with popular dissatisfaction growing, Mao's own prestige within the party was at a low ebb. It had not helped that Mao had lost his mentor, Joseph Stalin, three years earlier. Mao had loyally followed Stalin's directives, and depended on Soviet aid. Now Nikita Krushchev was denouncing his predecessor's reign of terror. But at this point, Mao's genius for the moment came into play.

With unrest in Poland and open revolt in Hungary, Mao positioned himself as advocating a more humane kind of socialism than even the Hungarian reformists. He called for popular grievances against the party to be aired: the Hundred Flowers Campaign. Criticisms, slow at first in coming, snowballed, shocking even Mao. But then he struck back. More than half a million Chinese were branded as "rightists". He himself was firmly back at the head of the party, and his colleagues now knew how he could turn the people against them. He was ready to lead the country into the giant experiment of the Great Leap Forward. Mr Dikotter has already written about that in "Mao's Great Famine", which this book only betters. The final volume of his planned trilogy will be on the Cultural Revolution, bringing the curtain down on a truly disastrous period.

China at the liberation

The road to serfdom

A new history lays bare the violent heart of Mao's revolution

Sep 7th 2013|From the print edition

Tweet

The Tragedy of Liberation: A History of the Chinese Revolution, 1945-57. By Frank Dikotter. Bloomsbury; 400 pages; $30 and £25. Buy from Amazon.com, Amazon.co.uk

THE first years of the People's Republic under Mao Zedong were a golden age, according to Chinese Communists and many in the West. After all, "liberation" in 1949 brought to an end a period encompassing two brutal and overlapping wars: Japan's invasion and occupation of China and the Chinese civil war with the Nationalists. A decade later, China was charging into the Mao-made Utopian catastrophe of the Great Leap Forward, in which tens of millions were worked or starved to death, and the horrors of the Cultural Revolution were still to come. According to this view, the years from the republic's founding to, roughly, the so-called Hundred Flowers Campaign in 1956 were constructive, even benign in a paternalistic way. The party took a chaotic state in hand, and out of a shattered citizenry forged a "New China".

In this section

The road to serfdom

Hardly a unifying church

A man for all seasons

Kiss of death

Nice change

Negotiating world peace

Reprints

Related topics

Amazon

History

World history

China

Frank Dikotter, a Dutch-born historian at the University of Hong Kong, destroys this illusion in his new book, "The Tragedy of Liberation". With a mixture of passion and ruthlessness, he marshals the facts, many of them recently unearthed in party archives. Out of these, Mr Dikotter constructs a devastating case for how extreme violence, not a moral mandate, was at the heart of how the party got to power, and of how it then governed.

Towards the end of the civil war, word of how the Communist armies waged war went before them. In Manchuria alone, some 500,000 civilians had fled the Communist advance and sought shelter in the city of Changchun. Lin Biao, the general laying siege to it, called for it to be turned into "a city of death". In all, 160,000 civilians died, mainly of hunger, many trapped in a killing zone outside the city walls.

So when Mao's peasant-soldiers marched into Beijing and Shanghai, fear and resignation as much as hope were the predominant emotions. There was also mutual bewilderment. Townsfolk stared at these tough bumpkins, most of whom had never seen sophistication before. Some of the soldiers attempted to light their cigarettes with light bulbs; others washed their rice in lavatory bowls, upset that the grains disappeared when they pulled the chain.

After the choreographed victory parades, the Communist Party began its violence. First in line were country "landlords". Wanting nothing to stand between the people and the party, Mao and his colleagues set out to smash the ties between country folk and their local leaders. "Land reform" meant overthrowing an evil class.

Much was wrong in the Chinese countryside, especially after decades of war, but the _junker _class which the Communists attacked happened not to exist. Nor was village life across China feudal. Most Chinese were small landowners, with little variation in wealth. Tenants were not much poorer than owners, since only fertile land could be let. In the rice-growing south tenants were more prosperous than owners on the hardscrabble plains of the north.

No matter. Work teams fanned out, calling interminable meetings at which villagers were divided into a system of five artificial classes borrowed from the Soviet Union: "landlords", "rich peasants", "middle peasants", "poor peasants" and "labourers". Members of these last two, those who stood to inherit land confiscated from the rich, were urged to "turn hardship into hatred", as Mr Dikotter puts it. Old grudges were dug up, and greed played a powerful part. Occasionally, whole villages stood bravely behind those accused of being landlords. For the most part, as the indoctrination of the work teams ground on, close-knit communities disintegrated.

The genius of communist violence was to implicate ever more people in it. After landlords were tried in front of village tribunals, then beaten and shot, land and possessions were divided up among the crowd. It was an incentive to find new victims, many of whom were burned or buried alive. But the more victims, the greater the fear of reprisals from distraught families. So the tribunals kept on killing. Children were not spared. By the end of 1952 up to 2m Chinese had been murdered.

A parallel terror was waged against those deemed to be counter-revolutionaries, Nationalists or foreign spies, some as young as eight, with new victims trucked daily to execution sites. Throughout these orgies of violence, Mao and other leaders coolly laid down quotas--up to four deaths for every thousand Chinese was considered appropriate. In the three provinces under the jurisdiction of Deng Xiaoping, known today for having been open-minded, 150,000 had been executed by November 1951. The total number of deaths will never be known. But in late 1952 Bo Yibo (father of Bo Xilai, whose recent trial has caused a sensation) said, approvingly, that 2m had been executed.

Not everyone could be killed, Mao acknowledged. So a vast gulag was born, swallowing up counter-revolutionaries, vagabonds, prostitutes, capitalists, marketeers, foreigners and, later, intellectuals. The population in the "reform through labour" camps quickly reached about 2m. The relentless indoctrination, one inmate later said, was nothing less than the "physical and mental liquidation of oneself".

The country was, as Mr Dikotter puts it, well down "the road to serfdom"--literally so for farmers. All the landlord blood spilled was supposed to empower peasants. But the upheaval had devastated the countryside. Draught animals, fertiliser and skills were in short supply. The markets and other networks on which farmers had long depended were destroyed. Farming risked being branded the work of the evil landlord, yet the state demanded ever more grain from farmers in tax. Hardships multiplied. Villagers sold their children.

The party's answer was to move faster towards wholesale collectivisation, just as it had nationalised all private business. Open rebellions broke out. Once they were put down, peasants were bound into collectives, forbidden to travel. In a few years the state had enslaved a people it claimed to be setting free.

By 1956, with popular dissatisfaction growing, Mao's own prestige within the party was at a low ebb. It had not helped that Mao had lost his mentor, Joseph Stalin, three years earlier. Mao had loyally followed Stalin's directives, and depended on Soviet aid. Now Nikita Krushchev was denouncing his predecessor's reign of terror. But at this point, Mao's genius for the moment came into play.

With unrest in Poland and open revolt in Hungary, Mao positioned himself as advocating a more humane kind of socialism than even the Hungarian reformists. He called for popular grievances against the party to be aired: the Hundred Flowers Campaign. Criticisms, slow at first in coming, snowballed, shocking even Mao. But then he struck back. More than half a million Chinese were branded as "rightists". He himself was firmly back at the head of the party, and his colleagues now knew how he could turn the people against them. He was ready to lead the country into the giant experiment of the Great Leap Forward. Mr Dikotter has already written about that in "Mao's Great Famine", which this book only betters. The final volume of his planned trilogy will be on the Cultural Revolution, bringing the curtain down on a truly disastrous period.

http://article.yeeyan.org/compare/377694
回复

使用道具 举报

1

主题

8228

回帖

2万

积分

管理员

积分
27245
 楼主| 发表于 2013-9-21 20:45:07 | 显示全部楼层
解放中的中国

走向农奴制

一段新的历史暴露了毛泽东所谓革命的暴力本质

解放的悲剧:1945—1957的中国革命史 作者 Frank Dikotter

在中国共产党人和很多西方人眼里,毛泽东领导下的共和国一开始的那几年是段黄金期。毕竟1949年的解放结束了当时中国同时遭受的两大残酷战争:日本侵华战争,和与国民党的内战。10之后,中国快速进入到了毛一手缔造的大跃进的灾难当中,数千万的人被强迫劳动至死或是被饿死,文革的恐怖依然要到来。依据这种观点,从中华人民共和国成立,大约到所谓的1956年百花齐放这一段时间是有建设成果的,从封建家长制的方面甚至可以说是有利中国发展的。共产党接管的是个灾难深重的国家,它要带领穷困潦倒的中国人缔造一个“新中国”。

这都是共产党自说自话,编造的谎言,出生丹麦,现工作于香港大学的历史学家Frank Dikotter在自己的新书“解放的悲剧”中驳斥到。作者的创作既有激情,又不留情面,他将各种事实--很多都是共产党的党史馆里刚刚才肯公开的---一罗列在一起。通过这些事实中,作者构建了一个让人心痛的事实:共产党上台,以及接下来的统治,所有这一切说到底就是极端暴力,而不是什么道义上的使命。

内战快要结束,共产党军队还没有发动大反攻,这时就有人到处在谈共产党军队是如何如何打仗的。仅在满洲里一个地方,有大约50万居民抢在共产党先头部队到来之前逃到长春去避难。当时负责包围滿洲里的总指挥官林彪,放话说要将滿洲里变成一座“死亡之城”。总计一下,平民死亡的有16万,(大多数人是被饿死的,)很多人被困在城市围墙外面的军事屠杀带里,不能出去而死的。

因此当毛的农民军队向北京和上海进发时,老百姓占主导的情绪一方面是觉得害怕,一方面又听天由命,心存希望。双方也有对彼此搞不明白的地方。城里人瞪着这些彪悍粗野的乡巴佬,这些人中大多数人从来都没见过什么世面。有些士兵想用灯泡来点香烟,还有人在抽水马桶里淘米,还着急怎么一拉冲马桶的链子,粮食都没有了。

在精心彩排过的胜利大阅兵之后,共产党的暴力嘴脸显露了。首先被上纲上线的是中国的“地主们”。毛和他的同仁们要的是党和人民之间没有第三者,任何老百姓和他们当地领导人之间的纽带都要被打碎。“土地革命”就是要推翻一个邪恶的阶级。

这种做法在中国的农村,特别在经过了数几十年的战争之后,可以说在很大程度上都是错误的。然而碰巧的是共产党要打击的那贵族阶层在中国又不存在。就中国整个农村生活来说也不是封建式的。大多数中国人就是小的土地所有者,彼此之间财富差异并不大。比起地主,佃户们也不差不到哪里,因为只有肥沃的土地才有人租。比起北方贫瘠的土地所有者们,南方种水稻的佃户要富足的多。

共产党才不管这些。工作小组分派到各地,没完没了的开会,会上借鉴苏联的做法,人为地把农民分为五大类:地主,富农,中农,贫农和雇农。这个等级里的后两者可能会分得从富人那里没收来的土地,共产党号召他们“把苦痛化成仇恨”,正如作家所说。于是开始挖祖坟、翻旧账,痛说革命仇恨,这其中贪婪起了很大的作用。偶而也会有全村的人胆子大敢替那些被打成地主的人说两句直话。但大部分的时候,随着工作小组日以继夜地不停教化,原先那种联系紧密的村民关系解体了。

共产党用暴力,精明就精明在要把更多的群众拉进这场运动之中。先是地主被抓到农村临时审理委员会的面前来审判、暴打,再枪决,随后,他们的土地和家财就会由大家分了了事。这等于是鼓励大家去找新的受害者,受害者中很多被活活烧死或是活埋。但受害人越多,共产党也就越害怕被整得支离破碎的家庭里的人会出来报复。因而临时审理委员就不断的杀下去。就连孩子也不放过。到1952年底,被处死的中国人就达到了200多万。

同样的恐怖行径也施加到了那些被视为反革命分子、国民党分子或是外国间谍的人身上,小的只有八岁,每天都会用卡车把新的受害人送到处决点去。在整个无所不用极的暴力恐怖中,毛和其它的领导人还冷血地定下了指标---每一千个中国人中死它四个以上也不算过分,可以接受。当时邓小平管的三个省,现如今认为在当时还是比较开明的,到1951年底,被处决掉的人就达到了15万个。到底总共死了多少人这永远无法知道了。但到1952年晚些时候为止,被处决的人达到了200万,对这个数据。薄一波(薄熙来的父亲,最近对薄熙来的审理案件想起了巨大的轰动)是认可的。

不是所有的都该杀头。这一点毛也承认。随即一个庞大的劳改营出现了,反革命分子,无业游民,妓女,资本家,买卖人,外国人,到后来还有知识分子都被关在这里。劳改营里的人快速达到了200万,一个曾被关押过的人后来说,无休止的改造说穿了就是让人从肉体和思想上清洗自己。

正如作者Dikotter所说的,当时整个中国正走向农奴制----至少对农民来说是这样。一切地主身上溅出的血理应当换取农民更大的权力。但过去的战乱已经让农村受到了很大的破坏。牲畜没有饮用水,田地没有肥料,农民没有技术。农民长期依赖的市场和其它交换方式都被破坏了。你想去种田,就会被说成是万恶的地主。可是政府需要农民交税要得到更多的粮食。日子越发的艰苦,农民们开始卖儿卖女。

面对这些问题,共产党的解决之道是,就象把所有私营企业都收归国有一样,整个中国农村的要更快地集体化。公开的叛乱出现了。一旦这些反叛被镇压,农民们必然和集体捆在一起,不得随意迁移。不出几年的时间,共产党就把自己夸口说解放了的民众都变成了奴隶。

到1956年,由于民众的不满之声日益高涨,毛本人在党内的声望也一度降到很低。就是三年前毛的导师斯大林死了也没能挽回毛的名声。毛一直忠实地遵循斯大林的方针,依靠苏联的帮助。现在赫鲁晓夫正谴责斯大林的恐怖统治。但到这个节骨眼上,毛的掌控时局的聪明才智登场,发挥作用了。

当时波兰有骚乱,匈牙利有公开的反叛,毛这时赶紧找准自己的位置,倡导中国要有比匈牙利的改革派更人性化的社会主义。他号召说各位对党有什么不满可以公开地讲嘛:就是百花齐放运动。批评的声音,一开始有些畏缩迟疑,慢慢地如同滚雪球似的,越来越多,多得就连毛本人也感到吃惊。但他接下来开始反击了。有超过五十万的中国人被打成了右派。他本人则重新牢牢掌控了共产党的一切大权,现在他的同僚们知道毛有本事把自己变成人民的敌人。毛已经准备要领导这个国家进入大的实践--大跃进。作者Dikotter已经写成了《毛一手制造的大饥荒》一书----比起我们现在介绍的这本要稍逊些。他打算是写三卷,最后一卷写文化大革命,以这场浩劫来为中国的这个非常浩劫期降下帷幕,收个场。
回复

使用道具 举报

您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

本版积分规则

手机版|文革与当代史研究网

GMT+8, 2024-11-24 13:11 , Processed in 0.026545 second(s), 19 queries .

Powered by Discuz! X3.5

© 2001-2024 Discuz! Team.

快速回复 返回顶部 返回列表