中国医生的偶像应该是谁？

http://www.mitbbs.com/article_t/Medicalpractice/56225.html

发信人: Aplusplus (Hakuna Matata), 信区: Medicalpractice
标  题: 中国医生的偶像应该是谁？
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Thu Feb 28 00:04:14 2013, 美东)

中国医生有偶像吗？ 我觉得够呛，中医可以有李时珍什么的，中国的西医们不会把希
波克拉底当偶像吧？

最近因为externship的事与韩国人有一些接触，我知道中国人似乎对韩国人对中国古代
文化的说法有非议，但这个韩国医生实在让我另眼相看，他说他从小崇拜孙中山，我的
老中朋友是不信的，觉得是忽悠，但看看他给我的这个文章，他能不崇拜孙中山吗？

这个讲话时是孙中山100年前在日本的一个讲话， 难怪中国有中山医学院，但有几个人
知道孙中山的这个讲话？

Gentlemen: I highly appreciate this cordial reception with which you are
honoring me today. The topic of the day is "Pan-Asianism," but before we
touch upon the subject, we must first have a clear conception of Asia's
place in the world. Asia, in my opinion, is the cradle of the world's oldest
civilization. Several thousand years ago, its peoples had already attained
an advanced civilization; even the ancient civilizations of the West, of
Greece and Rome, had their origins on Asiatic soil. In Ancient Asia we had a
philosophic, religious, logical and industrial civilization. The origins of
the various civilizations of the modern world can be traced back to Asia's
ancient civilization. It is only during the last few centuries that the
countries and races of Asia have gradually degenerated and become weak,
while the European countries have gradually developed their resources and
become powerful. After the latter had fully developed their strength, they
turned their attention to, and penetrated into, East Asia, where they either
destroyed or pressed hard upon each and every one of the Asiatic nations,
so that thirty years ago there existed, so to speak, no independent country
in the whole of Asia. With this, we may say, the low water mark had been
reached.

When Asia reached this point, the tide started to turn, and the turn meant
the regeneration of Asia. It started thirty years ago when Japan abolished
all the Unequal Treaties that she had entered into with the foreign
countries. The day when the Unequal Treaties were abolished by Japan was a
day of regeneration for all Asiatic peoples. After the abolition of the
Unequal Treaties, Japan became the first independent country in Asia. The
remaining countries, such as China, India, Persia, Afghanistan, Arabia, and
Turkey were not independent, that is to say, they were still dominated, and
treated as colonies, by Europe. Thirty years ago, Japan was also a colony of
the European countries. But the Japanese were far-sighted. They realized
that the only way to power was to struggle with the Europeans and to abolish
all Unequal Treaties, which they did, thus turning Japan into an
independent country. Since Japan has become an independent country in East
Asia, the various nations in this part of the world have been buoyed up with
a new hope. They realized that since Japan has been able to achieve her
independence through the abolition of the Unequal Treaties, they could do
the same. So once again they have mustered courage to conduct their various
independent activities with the hope of shaking off the yoke of European
restriction and domination and regaining their own rightful position in Asia
. This has been the prevailing thought in Asia during the past thirty years,
which indeed gives ground for optimism.

Thirty years ago the idea was different. Men thought and believed that
European civilization was a progressive one-in science, industry,
manufacture, and armament-and that Asia had nothing to compare with it.
Consequently, they assumed that Asia could never resist Europe, that
European oppression could never be shaken off. Such was the idea prevailing
thirty years ago. It was a pessimistic idea. Even after Japan abolished the
Unequal Treaties and attained the status of an independent country, Asia,
with the exception of a few countries situated near Japan, was little
influenced. Ten years later, however, the Russo-Japanese war broke out and
Russia was defeated by Japan. For the first time in the history of the last
several hundred years, an Asiatic country has defeated a European Power. The
effect of this victory immediately spread over the whole Asia, and gave a
new hope to all Asiatic peoples. In the year of the outbreak of the Russo-
Japanese war I was in Europe. One day news came that Admiral Togo had
defeated the Russian navy, annihilating in the Japan Sea the fleet newly
dispatched from Europe to Vladivostock. The population of the whole
continent was taken aback. Britain was Japan's Ally, yet most of the British
people were painfully surprised, for in their eyes Japan's victory over
Russia was certainly not a blessing for the White peoples. "Blood," after
all, "is thicker than water." Later on I sailed for Asia. When the steamer
passed the Suez Canal a number of natives came to see me. All of them wore
smiling faces, and asked me whether I was a Japanese. I replied that I was a
Chinese" and inquired what was in their minds, and why they were so happy.
They said they had just heard the news that Japan had completely destroyed
the Russian fleet recently dispatched from Europe, and were wondering how
true the story was. Some of them, living on both banks of the Canal had
witnessed Russian hospital ships, with wounded on boards, passing through
the Canal from time to time. That was surely a proof of the Russian defeat,
they added.

In former days, the colored races in Asia, suffering from the oppression of
the Western peoples, thought that emancipation was impossible. We regarded
that Russian defeat by Japan as the defeat of the West by the East. We
regarded the Japanese victory as our own victory. It was indeed a happy
event. Did not therefore this news of Russia's defeat by Japan affect the
peoples of the whole of Asia? Was not its effect tremendous? While it may
not have seemed so important and consequently have had only a slight effect
on the peoples living in East Asia, it had a great effect on the peoples
living in West Asia and in the neighborhood of Europe who were in constant
touch with Europeans and subject to their oppression daily. The suffering of
these Asiatic peoples was naturally greater than that of those living in
the further East, and they were therefore more quick to respond to the news
of this great victory.

Since the day of Japan's victory over Russia, the peoples of Asia have
cherished the hope of shaking off the yoke of European oppression, a hope
which has given rise to a series or independence movements-in Egypt, Persia,
Turkey, Afghanistan, and finally in India. Therefore, Japan's defeat of
Russia gave rise to a great hope for the independence of Asia. From the
inception of this hope to the present day only 20 years have elapsed. The
Egyptian, Turkish, Persian, Afghan, and Arabian independence movements have
already materialized, and even the independence movement in India has, with
the passage of time, been gaining ground. Such facts are concrete proofs of
the progress of the nationalist idea in Asia. Until this idea reaches its
full maturity, no unification or independence movement of the Asiatic
peoples as a whole is possible. In East Asia, China and Japan are the two
greatest peoples. China and Japan are the driving force of this nationalist
movement. What will be the consequences of this driving force still remains
to be seen. The present tide of events seems to indicate that not only China
and Japan but all the peoples in East Asia will unite together to restore
the former status of Asia.

Such a tendency is clearly evident to the eyes of Europe and America. One
American scholar [1] has written a book to discuss the rise of the colored
peoples, where he maintains that Japan's defeat of Russia amounts to a
victory of the Yellow race over the White race, and that such a tendency, if
unchecked, will result in the unification of the entire Yellow race, which
will be a calamity for the White peoples, and ways and means should
therefore be devised to prevent it. Subsequently, he wrote another book in
which he described all emancipation movements as Revolts against
Civilization. In his view, emancipation movements in Europe should be
regarded as revolts against civilization; even more so should such
emancipation movements in Asia be regarded. Such views are common among the
privileged classes of -people in both Europe and America. A minority, they
oppress the majority in their own continent or country. Now they wish to
extend their evil practice to Asia, with a view to suppressing the nine
hundred million people of Asia, and treating them as their slaves. This
American scholar considers the awakening of the Asiatic peoples as a revolt
against civilization. Thus, the Westerners consider themselves as the only
ones possessed and worthy of true culture and civilization; other peoples
with any culture or independent ideas are considered as Barbarians in revolt
against Civilization. When comparing Occidental with Oriental civilization
they only consider their own civilization logical and humanitarian.

>From the aspect of cultural development during the last several hundred
years, the material civilization of Europe has reached its height while
Oriental civilization has remained stagnant. Outwardly, Europe is superior
to Asia. Fundamentally, European civilization during the last several
hundred years is one of scientific materialism. Such a civilization, when
applied to society, will mean the cult of force, with aeroplanes, bombs, and
cannons as its outstanding features. Recently, this cult of force has been
repeatedly employed by the Western peoples to oppress Asia, and as a
consequence, there is no progress in Asia. To oppress others with the cult
of force, in the language of the Ancients, is the rule of Might. Therefore,
European civilization is nothing but the rule of Might. The rule of might
has always been looked down upon by the Orient. There is another kind of
civilization superior to the rule of Might. The fundamental characteristics
of this civilization are benevolence, justice and morality: This
civilization makes people respect, not fear, it. Such a civilization is, in
the language of the Ancients, the rule of Right or the Kingly Way. One may
say, therefore, that Oriental civilization is one of the rule of right.
Since the development of European materialistic civilization and the cult of
Might, the morality of the world has been on the decline. Even in Asia,
morality in several countries has degenerated. Of late, a number of European
and American scholars have begun to study Oriental civilization and they
realize that, while materially the Orient is far behind the Occident,
morally the Orient is superior to the Occident.

Which civilization, the rule of Might or the rule of Right, will prove to be
beneficial to justice and humanity, to nations and countries? You can give
your own answer to this question.

I may cite an example here to illustrate the point. For instance, between
500 and 2000 years ago, there was a period of a thousand years when China
was supreme in the world. Her status in the world then was similar to that
of Great Britain and America today. What was the situation of the weaker
nations toward China then? They respected China as their superior and sent
annual tribute to China by their own will, regarding it as an honor to be
allowed to do so. They wanted, of their own free will, to be dependencies of
China. Those countries which sent tribute to China were not only situated
in Asia but in distant Europe as well. But in what way did China maintain
her prestige among so many small and weaker nations. Did she send her army
or navy, i.e. use Might, to compel them to send their contributions? Not at
all. It was not her rule of Might that forced the weaker nations to send
tribute to China. It was the influence of her rule of Right. Once they were
influenced by the "Kingly Way" of China they continued to send tribute, not
merely once or twice, but the practice was carried on from generation to
generation. This influence is felt even at the present moment; there are
still traces and evidences of it.

There are two small countries situated to the north of India, namely, Bhutan
and Nepal. These countries are small in size, but are inhabited by a brave,
strong, and warlike people. During the present British rule of India,
Britain often went to Nepal in search of soldiers in order to rule the
Indians. A great deal of money by way of subsidies had to be spent before
Britain was allowed to dispatch a political observer to Nepal. Even a great
Power such as Great Britain had to respect her; Nepal was, in fact, a great
Power in Asia. But what is the attitude of Nepal toward Great Britain during
the past hundred years? Over hundred years ago India was conquered by Great
Britain, and during this period Nepal was able to live peacefully on the
border of the British colony. . Although hundred years have passed, Nepal
has never sent tribute to Great Britain. Great Britain, on the other hand,
has to spend a large 'sum by way of subsidies to Nepal. But what is the
attitude of Nepal toward China? The status of China has deteriorated to such
an extent that it is now inferior even to that of a British colony. Though
far away from China Proper and separated from her by Tibet. Nepal considered
China as her suzerain State and up to 1911 Nepal sent annual tribute to
China via Tibet. In that year, however, when the Nepal commissioners reached
Szechuan and found communications interrupted, they returned to their
country. The differential attitude of Nepal toward Great Britain and toward
China is due to the difference between the Oriental and Occidental
civilization. China has degenerated during the last several hundred years,
yet Nepal still respects her as a superior State. Great Britain, on the
other hand, is a powerful country, but Nepal has been influenced by Chinese
civilization, which, in her eyes, is the true civilization, while that of
Britain is nothing but the rule of Might.

Now, what is the problem that underlies Pan-Asianism, the Principle of
Greater Asia, which we are discussing here to-day?

Briefly, it is a cultural problem, a problem of comparison and conflict
between the Oriental and Occidental culture and civilization. Oriental
civilization is the rule of Right; Occidental civilization is the rule of
Might. The rule of Right respects benevolence and virtue, while the rule of
Might only respects force and utilitarianism. The rule of Right always
influences people with justice and reason, while the rule of Might always
oppresses people with brute force and military measures. People who are
influenced by justice and virtue will never forget their superior State,
even if that country has become weak. So Nepal even now willingly respects
China as a superior State. People who are oppressed by force never submit
entirely to the oppressor State. The relations of Great Britain with Egypt
and India form a typical example. Although under British rule, Egypt and
India have always entertained the thought of independence and separation
from Great Britain. If, Great Britain becomes weaker some day, Egypt and
India will overthrow British rule and regain their independence within five
years. You should now realize which is the superior civilization, the
Oriental or the Occidental?

If we want to realize Pan-Asianism in this new world, what should be its
foundation if not our ancient civilization and culture? Benevolence and
virtue must be the foundations of Pan-Asianism. With this as a sound
foundation we must then learn science from Europe for our industrial
development and the improvement of our armaments, not, however, with a view
to oppressing or destroying other countries and peoples as the Europeans
have done, but purely for our self-defense.

Japan is the first nation in Asia to completely master the military
civilization of Europe. Japan's military and naval forces are her own
creation, independent of European aid or assistance. Therefore, Japan is the
only completely independent country in East Asia. There is another country
in Asia who joined with Central Powers during the European War and was
partitioned after her final defeat. After the war, however, she was not only
able to regain her territory, but to expel all Europeans from that
territory. Thus she attained her status of complete independence. This is
Turkey. At present Asia has only two independent countries, Japan in the
East and Turkey in the West. In other words, Japan and Turkey are the
Eastern and Western barricades of Asia. Now Persia, Afghanistan, and Arabia
are also following the European example in arming themselves, with the
result that the Western peoples dare not look down on them. China at present
also possesses considerable armaments, and when her unification is
accomplished she too will become a great Power. We advocate Pan-Asianism in
order to restore the status of Asia. Only by the unification of all the
peoples in Asia on the foundation of benevolence and virtue can they become
strong and powerful.

But to rely on benevolence alone to influence the Europeans in Asia to
relinquish the privileges they have acquired in China would be an impossible
dream. If we want to regain our rights we must resort to force. In the
matter of armaments, Japan has already accomplished her aims, while Turkey
has recently also completely armed herself. The other Asiatic races, such as
the peoples of Persia, Afghanistan, and Arabia are all war-like peoples.
China has a population of four hundred millions, and although she needs to
modernize her armament and other equipment, and her people are a peace-
loving people, yet when the destiny of their country is at stake the Chinese
people will also fight with courage and determination. Should all Asiatic
peoples thus unite together and present a united front against the
Occidentals, they will win the final victory. Compare the populations of
Europe and Asia: China has a population of four hundred millions, India
three hundred and fifty millions, Japan several scores of millions, totaling
, together with other peoples, no less than nine hundred millions. The
population in Europe is somewhere around four hundred millions. For the four
hundred millions to oppress the nine hundred millions is an intolerable
injustice, and in the long run the latter will be defeated. What is more,
among the four hundred millions some of them have already been influenced by
us. Judging from the present tendency of civilization, even in Great
Britain and America, there are people who advocate the principles of
benevolence and justice. Such an advocacy also exists in some of the
barbarian countries. Thus, we realize that the Western civilization of
utilitarianism is submitting to the influence of Oriental civilization of
benevolence and justice. That is to say the rule of Might gives way to the
rule of Right, presaging a bright future for world civilization.

At present there is a new country in Europe which has been looked down upon
and expelled from the Family of Nations by the White races of the whole of
Europe. Europeans consider it as a poisonous snake or some brutal animal,
and dare not approach it. Such a view is also shared by some countries in
Asia. This country is Russia. At present, Russia is attempting to separate
from the White peoples in Europe. Why? Because she insists on the rule of
Right and denounces the rule of Might. She advocates the principle of
benevolence and justice and refuses to accept the principles of
utilitarianism and force. She maintains Right and opposes the oppression of
the majority by the minority. From this point of view, recent Russian
civilization is similar to that of our ancient civilization. Therefore, she
joins with the Orient and separates from the West. The new principles of
Russia were considered as intolerable by Europeans. They are afraid that
these principles, when put into effect, would overthrow their rule of Might.
Therefore they do not accept the Russian way, which is in accord with the
principles of benevolence and justice, but denounce it as contrary to world
principles.

What problem does Pan-Asianism attempt to solve? The problem is how to
terminate the sufferings of the Asiatic peoples (p. 151) and how to resist
the aggression of the powerful European countries. In a word, Pan-Asianism
represents the cause of the oppressed Asiatic peoples. Oppressed peoples are
found not only in Asia, but in Europe as well. Those countries that
practice the rule of Might do not only oppress the weaker people outside
their continent, but also those within their own continent. Pan-Asianism is
based on the principle of the rule of Right, and justifies the avenging of
the wrongs done to others. An American scholar considers all emancipation
movements as revolts against civilization. Therefore now we advocate the
avenging of the wrong done to those in revolt against the civilization of
the rule of Might, with the aim of seeking a civilization of peace and
equality and the emancipation of all races. Japan to-day has become
acquainted with the Western civilization of the rule of Might, but retains
the characteristics of the Oriental civilization of the rule of Right. Now
the question remains whether Japan will be the hawk of the Western
civilization of the rule of Might, or the tower of strength of the Orient.
This is the choice which lies before the people of Japan.


--

--