政治对学术的挟持:北美“新清史”等研究中的“拉铁摩尔基因”试探  

The Hijacking of Scholarship by Politics:An Analysis of“Lattimore Gene”in the“New Qing History”and Other Studies in North America

作　　者：钟焓[1] Zhong Han

机构地区：[1]中央民族大学历史文化学院

出　　处：《中国社会科学院大学学报》2024年第2期5-26,155,F0003,共24页Journal of University of Chinese Academy of Social Sciences

基　　金：国家社会科学基金重大委托项目(20VMG040)的阶段性成果。

摘　　要：近年来,北美“新清史”学派扭曲中国的一条最主要途径就是遵循拉铁摩尔的思路,将辛亥革命以后的现代中国歪曲误读为一个保留了旧式帝国政权结构的国度,因而认为它与以美国为代表的西方社会表面上鼓吹的带有虚伪性的“民族自决”思想格格不入;与之类似的政治构陷手段也见于像卜正民这样的学者的著述中。而那种借助拉铁摩尔来为“新清史”进行辩护的论说恰恰没有注意到前者的内亚史观的巨大局限性,即始终不曾承认中国从历史到当下一直都是统一的多民族国家。In recent years,one of the main ways that the North American school of“New Qing History”has distorted China is to follow Owen Lattimore's thinking and misinterpret modern China after the Revolution of 1911 as a country that retains the old imperial regime structure.Therefore,it is considered to be contrary to the hypocritical idea of“national self-determination”advocated by the western society represented by the United States.Similar political framing can be found in the writings of scholars like Timothy Brook.However,those who use Lattimore to defend the“New Qing History”just fail to notice the great limitation of the former's inner Asian view of history;that is,they never admit that China has been a unified multi-ethnic country from history to the present.

关 键 词：拉铁摩尔 内亚史观 新清史 卜正民 

分 类 号：C956[社会学—民族学]