Reaching a Consensus on Our Nation's History

Reaching a Consensus on Our Nation's History
China Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
December 17, 2010

Lin Man-hung was until recently, Curator of the Academia Historica. She suddenly resigned over an online voting controversy at the museum's official website. By resigning, she proudly displayed an historian's true colors. Lin Man-hung probably still doesn't understand what she did wrong. But apparently an historian who is unwilling to tell a lie, cannot remain on as Curator of the Academia Historica, Her resignation has brought the controversy to a close. Perhaps the incident will help ensure a correct understanding of the history of the Republic of China. Perhaps it will help establish a more meaningful national consensus.

The facts are irrefutable. The Republic of China has been in existence for a hundred years. Over a third of that the time its activities centered on the mainland. During the remaining 62 years, they centered on Taiwan. They changed with the political winds. Amidst controversy over reunification vs. independence, and conflict between Blue and Green, the "Republic of China on Taiwan" has become a rare point of agreement for the public on Taiwan. But from an historical perspective, the first 38 years of the Republic of China cannot be eradicated with the stroke of a pen. As historians record the events of the past one hundred years, can they ignore Sun Yat-sen and Chiang Kai-shek? Can they ignore Mao Zedong, who nearly caused the Republic of China's downfall? Can they ignore Wang Jingwei, who established a pro-Japanese puppet government? For that matter, can they ignore Yuan Shi-kai, who crowned himself emperor? Can they ignore the warlords, Wu Pei-fu and Feng Yu-hsiang of the "八方風雨會中州?" They cannot, any more than German historians can ignore Adolf Hitler.

The Republic of China has endured for 100 years. As the authority entrusted with compiling the nation's history, the importance of the Academia Historica is self-evident. It could take on any number of tasks. It could write a history of Mao Zedong, warts and all. But the Academia Historica is not Wikipedia, It need not draw premature conclusions. It need not lay down the law. In the past, those in power wrote their predecessors' histories. They defined their predecessors' historical legacy. They also defined their own historical legacy, A century later, the history of the Qing Dynasty is still incomplete. Online voting is not what the Academia Historica should be doing.

The recent online poll provoked controversy because under "military affairs," Deng Xiaoping was ranked number one. Professionally speaking, this was not quite accurate. Deng is indeed a major historical figure. He was twice named Time Magazine's Person of the Year. But his legacy concerned the liberalization and reform of the People's Republic of China. It did not concern the Republic of China. He may have played a role in the famous Battle of the Dabie Mountains. But he was not yet one of the top ten marshals of the Red Army.

Lin Man-hung's original field was Taiwan's economic history. When former Vice President Annette Lu declared that Taiwan's status remained undetermined, Lin Man-hung forcefully articulated a comprehensive view of history. She made clear that the Sino-Japanese Peace Treaty had clearly determined Taiwan's status. Her work was appreciated by President Ma Ying-jeou, and she assumed the curatorship of the Academia Historica. But apparently the "民國百人" online voting feature was handled a little too carelessly.

When she was questioned in the Legislative Yuan, she frankly declared that she "had no prior knowledge." Legislators unexpectedly pulled out official documents she had personally signed. They denounced her as a liar, and threatened to have the Control Yuan impeach her. Those who know Lin Man-hung know how difficult is for her to tell a lie. Lin Man-hung said she heard the personnel in charge of the online voting activity say that among the key figures listed were Teresa Teng and others. As a result, she approved it. This is probably the truth. Back in the days when the two sides of the Taiwan Strait were at loggerheads with each other, Teresa Teng's songs were the first to break through the Bamboo Curtain. That process is still ongoing. Who could possibly disagree?

History is a serious matter. It may be commemorated by the government or by private citizens. Either way, it can quietly see us through difficult times. The Republic of China is Asia's first democracy. Its glorious past includes all too much pain. Political interference on Taiwan remains rampant. Political leaders have paid scant attention to the significance of the Republic of China's centennial. Less than a year remains. Government agencies have promoted all sorts of activities. The Academia Historica came up with the idea of an online voting feature, perhaps out of expediency. It never realized it had taken on a burden weightier than any other governmental or private entity.

But expedient solutions require expedient techniques. Take for example the commemoration of historic dates and historic individuals. Choose an historic figure for each year. Ask 100 historians to compile a "民國百人" chronicle. For example, in the first year of the Republic of China, the historic figure would be Sun Yat-sen. In the 11th year of the Republic, it would be Hu Shi, who promoted the use of vernacular Chinese. In the 38th year of the Republic, it would be Mao Zedong, who ended Republic of China rule on the Mainland. In the 46th year of the Repubic, it would be Yang Cheng-ning and Lee Tseng-dao, the first ethnic Chinese to win the Nobel Prize, In the 62nd year of the Republic, it would be Lin Hwai-min, who founded the Cloud Gate dance theater. In the 68th year of the Republic, it would be Shih Ming-teh, who provoked the Formosa Incident. In the 77th year of the Republic, it would be Lee Teng-hui, who was the Republic of China's first directly elected president. In the 80th year of the Republic, it would be Master Cheng Yen, who received the Maigesesai Award for global disaster relief. In the 99th year of the Republic, it would be Chen Shui-bian, who became the first president of the Republic of China sentenced to prison. What need is there for online voting?

Lin Man-hung has resigned and returned to the study of history. She continues to tell the truth. Her efforts deserve recognition. Her successor should keep in mind the lessons of this incident. Chinese dynasties that have lasted longer than a century are rare. The public will vote according to its whims. But the Academia Historica is a guardian of history. When it promotes its "民國百人" activity, it must be clear about what it is doing. It must not be merely a fireworks display. It must carefully trace the path of history. It must draw lessons from history. It must spur future developments. It must concentrate a nation's will for the coming century.

正確史觀才能鞏固國家共識
2010-12-17 中國時報

國史館館長林滿紅為「民國百人」網路票選爭議，閃電請辭下台，展現歷史學者的本色，林滿紅或許還是不能理解她到底做錯了什麼？說錯了什麼？但顯然認知到做為一個不能說謊的歷史學者，她確實不適合再留任國史館長，她的請辭為爭議事件劃下句點。更重要的，這個事件如果能為中華民國建立一個正確的史觀，並以此為基礎，鞏固全民的國家共識，或許更有意義。

不必諱言，中華民國一百年，超過三分之一的時間重點都在大陸，其餘六十二年在台灣，隨著政治形勢變遷，「中華民國在台灣」已經成為全民於統獨藍綠歧見中，少有的重大共識。但從歷史角度，中華民國是不可能將曾經發生過的卅八年一筆抹消，寫史者回顧這一百年，看到了孫中山、蔣介石，又豈能忽略讓中華民國差點亡國的毛澤東、或媚日建立偽政權的汪精衛？甚至復辟當皇帝的袁世凱、乃至軍閥割據，八方風雨會中州的吳佩孚、馮玉祥等人？就像德國寫史者再痛恨都不可能忘記希特勒一樣。

民國一百年，作為國家史料的編纂機關，國史館重要性不言可喻，在林林種種可為之事中，國史館要為毛澤東寫下正負面的歷史評價都可以，但國史館不是維基百科，出手就要拍板定案，以為是非定論，過去執政者為前朝寫史，既為前朝定位，也為自己定位，一部清史稿，一百年都還沒編纂完成，網路票選實非國史館應為之正事。

這次網路票選惹出爭議的是軍事類首選竟是鄧小平，在專業認知上也有落差，鄧小平的確是號人物，還曾兩度入選美國《時代》雜誌的年度風雲人物，但他的歷史地位在於對中華人民共和國改革開放之功，非關中華民國，儘管當年他打過赫赫有名的大別山戰役，但仍未列紅軍的十大元帥。

林滿紅本人治史專才從台灣經濟史出發，後及於台灣地位，前副總統呂秀蓮夸夸其談台灣地位未定論時，林滿紅鏗鏘有力地提出完整的史料史觀，以中日和約就是台灣地位確定的依據，得到馬英九總統的賞識，從而出任國史館長，但在「民國百人」網路票選活動的細節處理上，顯然太過粗疏。

她在立法院答詢時，直言她「事前不知情」，未料立委拿出她親簽公文，痛斥她說謊，並揚言要將她移送監察院彈劾。認識林滿紅的人都知道，要林滿紅說謊是難上加難，林滿紅指她聽承辦人員指票選名單中有鄧麗君等人就直接批可了，應該不假，當年兩岸隔絕勢同水火的年代，鄧麗君的歌聲率先衝破鐵幕，且迄今歷久未歇，誰曰不宜。

歷史是嚴肅莊嚴的事，不論政府或民間在歡欣中，都應該更沉靜肅穆地看待我們走過的坎坷路。中華民國是亞洲第一個民主國家，在輝煌歲月的背後，有太多辛酸，台灣政治干擾又多，政治領袖沒人深刻思考民國一百年的意義，倉卒地在一年不到的時間中，要求各機關用盡各種角度舉辦共襄盛舉的活動，國史館或為方便故，搞出網路票選，卻沒想到己身扛的責任迥然不同於其他政府或民間單位。

然而，便宜行事有便宜行事的辦法，隨便舉例，以紀年為經，人物為緯，一年選出一個年度人物，請一百位歷史學者為民國百人寫傳，比方說，民國元年必然是孫中山，民國十一年有推動白話文運動的胡適，民國卅八年就是終結大陸時期國民政府的毛澤東，民國四十六年還有華人首得諾貝爾獎的楊振寧和李政道，民國六十二年就是創辦雲門的林懷民，民國六十八年則是美麗島事件的施明德，民國七十七年當然是第一位民選總統李登輝，民國八十年還有全球救災濟世，獲得麥格塞塞獎的證嚴上人，民國九十九年更有第一位判刑入監的總統陳水扁…，何須網路票選？

林滿紅請辭回歸歷史研究，繼續講真話，值得肯定，後繼者則須記取此一事件的教訓。中國歷朝歷代，國祚延續百年以上者，均屬不易，民間喜歡怎麼票選都成，但作為官史重鎮，國史館要辦「民國百人」活動時，起心動念就要非常清楚，其意義絕對不能只是一場熱鬧花俏的煙花秀，而是審慎爬梳歷史的跡痕，從而以史為鑑、策勵未來，積蓄下一個百年的動能和國民意志。