查詢結果分析
來源資料
相關文獻
- 正確的抉擇或唯一的選擇:論中國共產黨人何以要加入中國國民黨(1922∼1924)
- 俄國檔案中的留蘇學生蔣經國
- 國共兩黨與共產國際關係之俄國資料介紹,一九二○─一九四○年代
- Mongolian Peoples Revolutionary Party and Guomindang: The Visit of MPRP Delegates Headed by A. Amar to Beijing and Qalgan
- 俄共的戰略與中國之命運--「十月革命」百年祭
- 從共產國際聯共(布)與中國革命的檔案看鮑羅廷與孫中山政治理念的歧異與磨合
- 民國歷史的相對性與李友邦之死
- 三大政策的辨正:論國共互爭革命正統的歷史根源
- <中國國民黨與中國共產黨>(桂崇基著)評介
- <中國國民黨與中國共產黨>(桂崇基著)讀後感
頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | 正確的抉擇或唯一的選擇:論中國共產黨人何以要加入中國國民黨(1922∼1924)=The One or the Other Choice: Why the Chinese Communists Joined the KMT in the Period 1922-1924 |
---|---|
作 者 | 克思明; | 書刊名 | 輔仁歷史學報 |
卷 期 | 13 2002.06[民91.06] |
頁 次 | 頁55-105 |
分類號 | 576.25 |
關鍵詞 | 第一次國共合作; 中國共產黨; 中國國民黨; 共產國際; 黨外聯合; 黨內合作; First KMT-CCP cooperation; Chinese communist party; Kuomintang; KMT; Comintern; Inter-party coalition; Intra-party cooperation; |
語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 早期國共關係是中國現代史上的重要課題;但長久以來,史論分歧。國民黨說是「容共」;共產黨則堅持說應當是「聯共」,並認爲與國民黨聯合是在當時歷史條件下作出的正確抉擇,也符合馬列主義的策略原則。國共雙方的歷史解釋迥異;真相如何?有待釐清。本文從共產主義運動史的角度切入,嘗試還原共產黨人所謂「當時的歷史條件」是什麼?爲什麼說和國民黨合作是正確的歷史抉擇?對共產黨而言,加入國民黨,可不可以說是當時「唯一的選擇」?一九二○年代,國共兩黨都面臨社會動員的困境;也存在革命訴求的同一性和動員需求的互補性。事實上,中共的領袖們當時已經認識到,共產黨員以個人身份加入國民黨是孫中山唯一能接受的方式。另一方面,如果說共產黨人堅決不加入國民黨,就會迫使共產國際在國共之間作出選擇,也有可能。不過,就中國共產黨人而言,走到這一步所將面臨的風險,是遠超過加入國民黨的:因此權衡利害,加入中國國民黨可以說是當時唯一的選擇。 |
英文摘要 | The early relationship between the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the Kuomintang (KMT) is regarded as an important issue in contemporary Chinese history, but the explanation of this phenomenon has differed for a long time. There is a major dispute in controversy in interpretations of this event. Some hold that the KMT "accommodated Communists," and the CCP insists that the Communists "allied with the KMT," The CCP realized that allying with the KMT was the correct choice at the time, and it was also in accordance with the Marxist-Leninist revolution strategy. Why dose the CCP say so? And what is the truth? This essay, from the perspective of the history of the Chinese Communist movement, attempts to understand what the CCP means by the "historical conditions of the time?" Why was cooperation with the KMT the right historical choice? Is it possible or not to say, from the point of view of the CCP, that joining the KMT was "the only choice?" In the 1920's, both parties were facing the difficulties of social mobilization, and there also existed the complementary interaction for revolutionary identification. In fact, the CCP leaders of that time clearly recognized that the only method which Dr. Sun Yet-sen would accept was that Communists could join the KMT as individuals, instead of as a group under the name of the CCP. On the other hand, because the Comintern was supporting both the CCP and the KMT, if the CCP did not join the KMT, the Comintern might have had to choose between the two parties. Since the danger of losing the support of the Comintern was much greater than that of joining the KMT, we may say that for the CCP, joining the KMT was in fact the one and only choice they had at the time. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。