From street tabloids to the first newspaper of the Republic of China

The sounds outside the window were noisy; one could faintly hear melodious Western music mixed with the loud shouts of newspaper vendors.

However, both people inside the room felt a chill run through their bodies and were sweating profusely.

Shi Jiaxiu remained silent, realizing the crucial point.

If Lin Wangzheng really doesn't go into newspaper business, given the hatred between him and Yuan Xiangcheng, it's obvious what path he'll take.

Today's revolutionaries are extremely enthusiastic about assassinations and terrorist attacks. If they are used by others, they will be reduced to ashes.

In comparison, running a newspaper is more controllable and safer.

"Ugh."

Shi Jiaxiu finally spoke, rubbing his temples, looking somewhat tired: "This kid is right, the major newspapers certainly wouldn't dare to do such a thing, at least not openly now."

Shen Zishi lowered his eyes, lit his pipe, and said in a hoarse voice:

"Yes, this kid doesn't care about his life anymore. What can we, his uncles, do? We can only do our best to help him."

"This can be considered a way of avenging Old Lin in a literary manner."

Shi Jiaxiu returned to his seat, picked up the now-cold tea, and gulped it down in one go:

"What do you want to know?"

Shen Zishi perked up and pulled out his notebook:

"What did Goodnow do in Xia Kingdom? Who paid him? Who did he associate with? Whose interests did he represent? The more details the better."

Shi Jiaxiu nodded, took out a notebook from the drawer, flipped through a few pages, and slowly read aloud:

"Goodnow, an American, taught at Columbia University before coming to Xia Guo, lecturing on history and administrative law. Gu Weijun took his courses when he was pursuing his master's degree at Columbia University."

"In 1913, Yuan Shikai wanted a facade, so he was invited to China as a constitutional advisor and became a guest of honor of the Beiyang government."

Between 1913 and 1914, he drafted the "Draft Constitution of the Republic of China," the core idea of ​​which was to strengthen presidential power and advocate that the Republic of China needed a "strong and long-lasting government," with the president possessing executive power, the power to appoint officials, and the power to veto bills.

"During this period, he also published articles such as 'A Review of the Constitutional Draft of the Republic of China' and 'A Comparison of the Presidential System and the Cabinet System,' criticizing the excessive power of the parliament and providing theoretical support for Yuan Shikai's authoritarian politics."

"The Provisional Constitution of the Republic of China, passed last May, also known as the 'Yuan Shikai Provisional Constitution,' granted Yuan Shikai dictatorial power, and Goodnow was one of its main architects."

As he read this, he looked up:

"It could be said that he was a drummer who was extremely enthusiastic about authoritarianism."

Shen Zishi then realized how sharp Lin Wangzheng's judgment was, nodded, and gestured for him to continue reading.

The historian turned a page and continued:

"Before coming to Xia Guo, his employment contract stipulated an annual salary of US$12,000. He also received an additional US$600 per year as living expenses in Beijing, and US$1,000 for travel expenses. This amount was very high."

"Later, it was changed to a part-time consultant position, and the contract was revised to a monthly salary of US$500."

"As a foreigner who came to Xia, he did not have a wide social circle, but he had extremely close ties with the Yuan faction and represented the interests of the Yuan faction, especially Yuan Yuntai."

"In addition, the Carnegie Foundation, which recommended him, is a front for Eastern financial groups, represented by American steel magnates, to promote a multilateral international diplomatic approach."

"It could also be said that, to a certain extent, Goodnow also represented the diplomatic interests of the United States."

Having read this far, he closed his notebook.

Shen Zishi also stopped writing; his notebook was covered with dense scribbles that looked like ghostly symbols.

This is his own shorthand method, a basic skill for journalists, and only he himself can understand it.

Shi Jiaxiu said in a deep voice:

"To date, no one has publicly stood up to refute Goodnow one by one. Major newspapers dare not, and tabloids are incapable."

"If you really succeed in this, regardless of the outcome, you will be the absolute number one, and the rewards and risks will be equal. From a business perspective, this is a high-stakes gamble."

Shen Zishi swallowed, feeling a bit dry in his throat.

Shi Jiaxiu suddenly added:

"There's one more thing."

"What?"

"Goodnow is a respected figure in academia. His theories are very influential in Europe and America. If you want to criticize him, you can't just rely on insults; you have to produce something substantial."

"I believe that kid."

Shen Zishi clenched his fist.

He stood up and ate the three remaining glutinous rice balls in one go.

"I'm leaving. Just wait for it to be published in the newspapers."

Shi Jiaxiu glanced at him, said nothing more, and waited for him to reach the door, preparing to open it, when he suddenly called out:

"Old Shen!"

Shen Zishi turned around upon hearing the sound.

Shi Jiaxiu took a silver note from the drawer and handed it over:

"Take it, it's not a loan, it's a newspaper I'm sending to you."

"Should I vote for it?"

"Yes, I'll invest 100 silver dollars in the Strange News, taking a private share, but the Shen Bao won't get involved in your affairs."

"That's great!"

Shen Zishi stepped forward without any hesitation, snatched the silver note, and quickly put it into his pocket as if afraid that Shi Jiaxiu would change his mind.

Shi Jiaxiu's voice was calm:

"What that kid did deserves support. I read the report about the dockworkers three times, and every time I felt... We big newspapers don't write what we should write, but we publish a lot of 'GG' stuff, which really damages the integrity of the press, but there's nothing we can do about it."

"I can't get involved in Goodnow's matter myself. But I'll keep an eye out for news, and I'll have someone notify you if there's any movement."

Shen Zishi's nose suddenly felt a little sore, but he pretended to be fine:

"Thanks, Lao Shi."

Then he turned and walked out.

Shi Jiaxiu suddenly shouted from behind:

"Old Shen!"

"What's wrong now?"

"Next time you come, could you please knock on the door first?"

......

In the afternoon, the sun shone brightly.

Shen Zishi returned to the hotel on Dongxinqiao Street.

When the door was pushed open, choking white smoke billowed out.

Lin Wangzheng was sitting at the table polishing his writing, with the ashtray next to him piled high with cigarette butts.

Hearing a noise, he continued writing without turning his head:

"You're back? Did you get the information I needed?"

Shen Zishi closed the door and pulled up a chair to sit down:

"Got it."

"You read, I listen."

Shen Zishi took out his notebooks and recounted the messages he had received from Shi Jiaxiu one by one, which didn't take long.

After listening, Lin Wangzheng nodded, understanding the situation:

"Then there's no problem."

He then pushed the stack of manuscript papers in front of him toward Shen Zishi:

"Take a look at this article first."

Shen Zishi took the manuscript and began to read it with squinted eyes.

[A Critique of "Co-governance and Monarchy" - Mr. Goodnow, You're Wrong]

This title is straightforward, immediately highlighting the article's critical theme and writing style.

The opening is:

[Our commentator has carefully read Mr. Goodnow's article several times. Mr. Goodnow is very learned, and his reasoning sounds profound, but upon closer examination, some parts seem like he's trying to fit someone's shoes without considering the size of their foot, only praising the shoes for their appearance. Reasoning becomes clear through debate, and our newspaper is willing to engage in a discussion with Mr. Goodnow.]

Then:

[First, the statement that "the form of government is determined by custom and economic practices, not by the choice of individuals" is a simplistic view.]

The gentleman says that whether a country should be ruled by a monarch or a shared society is determined by history and "socioeconomic conditions," and that the people have no say in it, not even the most capable. This statement is both right and wrong. It's right on the surface, but wrong at its core. The "conditions" the gentleman refers to generally mean the amount of land, factories, and literate people. These are certainly fundamental, but these conditions don't fall from the sky; they are earned by people, and even more so, they are transformed through the process of people's struggle.

When a wealthy family divides its assets, who among the brothers takes charge? Is it determined by the almanac? No, it's determined by who is more capable, who wins the hearts of the people, and who can lead everyone to a better life. The same applies to the form of government. Throughout history, every change in political system has occurred because the old "methods" have become ineffective, causing suffering for the majority, which then leads to new ideas and new forces to "elect."

The gentleman says, "It's often not due to human effort," but look at France. From emperor to president, it was achieved through countless deaths. Look at us, with two thousand years of imperial rule. Wasn't it only after the Wuchang Uprising that the provinces responded, and the people's will prevailed, that we were able to achieve shared governance? This "human effort" is the will of hundreds of millions of people—the trend, the times. You say the people have no choice, but when they stand with their feet and shed their blood, isn't that a "choice"? It's just that the gentleman only sees those who have secured their rule, not the surging hearts of the people below.

"Good heavens..."

Shen Zishi raised an eyebrow, realizing for the first time that his nephew was also a good writer.

[Second, the statement "Monarchical succession is stable, while co-rule succession is chaotic" is a misconception.]

The gentleman repeatedly says that when a monarch dies and a crown prince ascends the throne, the world is at peace, without turmoil—this is a great advantage. This sounds reassuring. But has the gentleman considered whether this "stability" is for one family or for the entire nation? Was the Xuanwu Gate Incident during the reign of Emperor Taizong of Tang, with its fratricide, truly stable? Was the Tumu Crisis during the Ming Dynasty, with the emperor captured, truly stable? Even according to the European custom of primogeniture, as the gentleman praises, who can guarantee whether the eldest son will be a wise or foolish ruler, a capable or incompetent one? Qin Shi Huang hoped for a dynasty that would last ten thousand generations, but it only lasted two generations—where did this "stability" come from? The great policies of a nation cannot be governed by the legitimacy of a son's claim to power. The key lies in "virtue" and "ability," in whether one can ensure a good life for all.

[Presidential elections in a co-governance system may seem like a noisy process, but this "noisyness" itself is an open contest and compromise between various forces and local public opinion. It's a way of resolving conflicts openly, which is far more transparent than palace intrigues and fratricidal strife. It also has a greater chance of electing someone who is acceptable to all parties for the time being and who possesses some talent. You say that co-governance succession is prone to chaos, but how many times have European emperors fought wars for territory? Ultimately, whether there is chaos or not doesn't depend on whether it's a president or an emperor, but on the extent of the interests behind that "position," how clear the rules are, and how effective the oversight is. You only talk about the "chaos" of co-governance without mentioning the "bloodshed" hidden in the monarchy, which is unfair.]

Shen Zishi applauded sincerely.

In his memory, Lin Wangzheng studied in Beiping when he was a child. Although he was smart, his writing was just average.

This piece is logically rigorous, progressively unfolding, rich in allusions, and incisive. Not to mention a nineteen-year-old, even seasoned writers who have been writing political commentary for over a decade couldn't have written it.

Anyway, if it were him, he definitely couldn't have written it. I have to say I admire him.

Third, the statement that "without enlightening the people, collaborative governance will inevitably fail" is putting the cart before the horse and is an attack on their conscience.

The gentleman cited the example of South American countries, saying their education systems were inadequate, leading to chaos in co-governance. This statement only tells half the story. The root of the chaos in South America lies in the collusion between old landowners, new warlords, and foreign capital, who treated the country as their private property. Did they genuinely invest in education or enlighten the people? What they feared was the enlightenment of the people! Because once the people understood reason, they wouldn't tolerate their misbehavior. The gentleman, conversely, says that their chaos proves their low level of intelligence, thus making co-governance impossible. Isn't this putting cause and effect backwards?

It's like saying someone with their hands and feet tied can't eat and therefore deserves to starve. Public wisdom is both a result and a prerequisite of co-governance. If the people aren't allowed to experience participating in national affairs, if they aren't allowed to learn from their mistakes, where will their wisdom come from? If they're forever locked in the dark, they'll forever fear the light. The people of America weren't born knowing how to vote; they learned through the long process of independence, constitution-making, and self-governance. The people of France also learned what co-governance meant through repeated revolutions, upheavals, and even bloodshed. To expect a country oppressed by feudal emperors for two thousand years to suddenly possess the wisdom of a mature, co-governed nation is too demanding and too impatient. This isn't teaching someone to walk; it's like breaking their legs and stuffing them back into the womb because they're too slow. Such an intention is despicable.

"Great! That part was excellent!"

Shen Zishi was truly impressed.

Lin Wangzheng not only quoted extensively from classical texts, but also used "comparison" to counter "comparison," which can be considered a case of fighting poison with poison.

[Fourth, the gentleman's statement that co-governance was "too abrupt" and was due to "foreign races" is utterly absurd.]

The overthrow of the Qing Dynasty was certainly fueled by anti-Manchu sentiment. But at a deeper level, it stemmed from the fact that hundreds of millions of compatriots had suffered enough from feudal autocracy, backwardness, and the threat of national subjugation. The new path found by insightful individuals reflected the will of the people and represented an experiment for the times. Four years of this experiment did bring chaos, but the root causes of this chaos lay in the lingering poison of the previous dynasty, the superficial reforms of old bureaucrats, and the separatist rule of local powerful clans.

[Furthermore, certain external forces, for their own business, support one faction today and ally with another tomorrow, fearing that our Xia Kingdom will truly unite and prosper! Is this problem caused by the word "co-governance," or is it precisely because the true spirit of "co-governance"—civil rights, rule of law, and unity—has not been realized? Instead of delving into this, sir, let's consider this: if we hadn't abolished the emperor in the first place, and had gradually established a constitutional monarchy, things would have been much better.]

This is like saying that if someone's house catches fire, they shouldn't rush out; instead, they should first learn how to prevent fires from spreading inside. If someone is about to burn to death, is it too late to learn? The Qing Dynasty also attempted "preparatory constitutionalism" in its last ten years, but what was the result? A royal cabinet—who were they fooling? History proves it was a dead end. Our current difficulties are blocked by old forces, old ideas, and certain foreign propagandists who, under the guise of "helping," are actually eyeing our national wealth.

The final sarcastic remark directly points out the power that Goodnow represents.

This is justifiable from a moral standpoint.

[Fifth, finally, regarding your implication that "the great powers are unhappy with the military government and may intervene," we are not afraid!]

[Sir, your words, seemingly expressing concern for the nation, are actually chilling. Why must our domestic affairs always be concerned with whether the "great powers" will approve? And what if they don't? This is precisely what pains us most! The path of our nation should be decided by our own people, according to our own circumstances!]

If, out of fear of foreign interference, we were to first adapt our system to what they deem "stable" and, in reality, easily manipulated, how would we differ from puppets? Sir, you are an American; you must know that when your country gained independence, did you ever ask the King of England if he was pleased? Today, our path to self-strengthening begins with spiritual independence. If we always consider the opinions of foreigners, we will never achieve anything. We are not afraid to debate the merits of different national systems, but we are wary of any arguments that, under the guise of "national conditions" and "order," lead our country to abandon its pursuit of an independent path and revert to the old path that facilitates foreign control.

[Commentary by this newspaper: A Wake-Up Call]

The article is short, having taken less than a day to complete, and ends here with a closing note:

[Editor's Note: Mr. Goodnow, you are a great scholar, and your reasoning is well-structured and methodical. But perhaps it is precisely because you are too familiar with Western books and the stable status quo that you cannot understand the hardship and inevitability of an ancient nation stumbling and searching for a way out at a time of life and death.]

[Your "monarchical prescription," seemingly effective and "stabilizing," is actually like covering a feverish patient with a thick blanket. What we need is the courage to undergo painful but necessary reform, the perseverance to proceed gradually, and, more importantly, the determination to walk our own path and let the people be the masters. This path is one of co-governance, democracy, and the rule of law. The reason it's not progressing well isn't because the path is wrong, but because we haven't learned how to walk it properly; there are too many obstacles along the way. What we need to do is clear away these obstacles and learn to walk, not turn back to look for that old carriage, which, though stable, has already headed towards the precipice.]

You are not just wrong, you are terribly wrong.

"Did you really write this?"

Shen Zishi couldn't help but ask.

Lin Wangzheng remained unfazed:

"Otherwise what? You wrote it?"

Shen Zishi was taken aback, then looked down at it again, and the more he looked, the more he felt something was wrong.

But there are already too many strange things about this kid, so one more won't make a difference.

He put down the manuscript and asked:

Do you think Goodnow would dare to respond to you?

Lin Wangzheng leaned back in his chair, laughing unrestrainedly:

"The purpose of debate is never whether the other side is willing to accept it or not."

Shen Zishi was taken aback.

Lin Wangzheng then explained:

"The purpose of the debate is to clarify our newspaper's views to the public, defend our position, and incidentally attract centrists. Whether Goodnow responds or not is not important."

"The important thing is that someone published this article so that ordinary people could see that what foreigners say is not entirely correct, and that someone dares to stand up and say 'you are wrong'."

That's enough.

Shen Zishi sighed:

"Your rusty sword, dormant for two years, has been honed to such a sharp edge by the misty rains of Shanghai. Once drawn, it will surely shake the press!"

Lin Wangzheng shook his head and smiled, but didn't reply.

He lowered his head, picked up his pen again, and began to revise the manuscript.

Not far away on the Huangpu River, the sound of ship horns echoed, like the heartbeat of the city.

In a few days, this article will be printed in lead type and published in the "Strange News" newspaper, which will then be distributed throughout the streets and alleys of Shanghai.

Once it's sent, there's no turning back.

But he has never been afraid in either his past or present life.