作者：司空先让
编辑：周志刚 责任编辑：钟然 校对：熊辩 翻译：彭小梅
翻开中国历史浩瀚的长卷，从群雄“逐鹿中原”，秦始皇战国七雄称霸，统一中国建立封建王朝起，中国历经各朝各代，“城头变幻大王旗”，“封建君主专制”体制却一直延续至今。
那么，在已迈入21世纪人类文明的世界里，偌大的中国为什么至今还是个落后腐朽的“封建专制王朝”呢？中国，要进入“民主社会”的道路还有多长？
这个问题现在或许谁也不能立即给予答案，但国人必须反思。
1911年（宣统三年，辛亥年）10月10日，中国爆发了推翻清朝封建君主专制的革命。
从此，国人以为“封建君主专制”从中国消逝。然国人最后发现：辛亥革命推翻了封建王朝和封建制度，但是封建思想根深蒂固，力量强大，到现在仍然存在。
可以说，孙中山先生领导的“辛亥革命”埋葬的是“封建君主专制的躯体”而其“魂”却依然存在。
孙中山先生没有从根本上消灭这“封建君主专制”的“魂”，这“魂”却不知不觉地依附在了中共身上。造成了中国有史以来最大的灾难。
自中共诞生之日起，传说中的“潘多拉的盒子”被打开了，这就预示着人类将与真正的“恶魔”共舞。
翻开中共的历史，就是一部“杀人史”“暴政史”
——自中共暴政魔头毛泽东窃国后，中国人民便进入了恐怖和黑暗时代。
“三反五反 ”后。1957年的反右派运动，揪出右派反党集团、地方民族主义集团20多个。全国55万人被划为右派分子，30多万人被划为反社会主义分子。他们被送往劳改农场，被送往农村、工厂监督劳动，被判刑入狱，受难者达百万人，其中大部分是知识分子；或含冤自杀，或被折磨致死，或被以反革命罪枪杀；妻离子散，家破人亡，株连亲友逾千万人。
“大跃进三面红旗”， 执政者更是无耻和凶恶，在短短的三年时间里便制造了史无前例的3600万饿死的冤魂。
血腥“文革”、血腥“六、四”、血腥镇压“法轮功”、围堵滥捕维权上访人士…….
中共斑斑罪恶罄竹难书！
写到这里我不禁要问：
难道，中国人民注定要在腥风血雨、刀光剑影中求生？
难道，中国人民注定要生活在“封建专制”的血腥统治下？
难道，中国人民注定要任人宰割？
回答一个“不”字真的很沉重,很沉重……
那么，中国人民要享受“民主”和“自由”的生活，走向“民主社会”的路究竟还有多长？
有人说，要靠西方民主国家来帮助中国尽快走向“民主社会”。
有人说，要靠中共体制内的“改革派”来帮助中国尽快走向“民主社会”。
有人说，要靠“突发事件”来帮助中国尽快走向“民主社会”
……
我认为这些愿望都是好的。
随着冷战的缓解，尤其是随着经济全球化的发展，一些西方民主国家的政治家和企业家们，为了眼前的经济利益而放弃或减弱了对专制国家的人民在政治上和道义上的支持。有些西方政治家自作多情地主张 “经济交流带动政治改革”，甚至为了保持与专制政府的联系，而不惜迁就专制政权。对专制政权践踏人权的行径低调处理。我们能完全指望西方吗？
中共体制内也确有“改革派”的存在。我们也非常希望这些”改革派能为中国尽快走向“民主社会”发挥作用。可目前这些“改革派”的力量在中共既得利益集团内部里究竟是占极少数，力量微弱。还没形成足够的力量来推动中国走向“民主社会”。但这些体制内的“改革派”一旦得到下面民众形成的整体力量的推动，他们就会发挥巨大的作用，和广大民众一起把中国推向“民主社会”。可目前这只是一个良好的愿望。
靠“突发事件”来帮助中国尽快走向“民主社会”，那只是一种消极的等待。
鄙人认为，中国，走向“民主社会”的路，要说长也长，要说短也短。
这要看当今的中国“士大夫”阶层，能否重拾“魏晋遗风”。
谈到魏晋，总会想到嵇康，阮籍，山涛，孙登，陶潜这些历史名人，他们蔑视权贵，恣意而为。
然当今中国所谓的“士大夫阶层”，好像普遍存在“三缺”：“缺钙”（骨气）、“缺锌”（良心）、“缺睾丸”（尊严被阉割）。
从一定的角度来说，不管哪个朝代,一旦“士大夫”们的“尊严被阉割”依附权贵了，那么这个朝代就是一个最黑暗、最野蛮的朝代。
看看当今中国，看看当今中国之“士大夫”们，就不言自明了。
所以，我说，中国，要走向“民主社会”，当今的中国“士大夫”阶层，必须——
“集体补钙”（骨气），不畏权贵，敢于挺起胸来面对暴政；
“集体补锌”（良心），对得起养育自己的人民，担当起肩负社会道义的重任；
“集体补睾丸”（尊严被阉割），找回自己的尊严，用自己的人格力量去召唤民众向暴政宣战！
捷克人民心目中的大英雄，诗人、剧作家哈维尔就是最好的榜样！
如果，当今的中国“士大夫”们能自觉“三补”了，加上民众日益高涨的反“专制”浪潮，那么，中国走向“民主社会”的道路也就不远了！
How Far Is China from Becoming a Democratic Society?
Author: Sikong Xianrang
Editor: Zhou Zhigang Executive Editor: Zhong Ran Proofreader: Xiong Bian Translator: Peng Xiaomei
Abstract
Although the 1911 Revolution removed the form of monarchy, it failed to eradicate the soul of feudal despotism. Under the CCP’s rule, this feudal legacy has evolved into an even deeper tyranny. For China to truly move toward democracy, today’s “scholar-official class” must regain its backbone, conscience, and sense of dignity—and awaken the broader public to push for change.
Opening the vast scroll of Chinese history, from the warlords “contending for the Central Plains” to Qin Shi Huang’s unification of the Seven Warring States and the founding of the imperial system, one fact remains unchanged: The “imperial autocracy” has persisted through every dynasty, even as dynastic banners rose and fell like shifting shadows on the city wall.
So why, in a world that has already entered the 21st century of human civilization, does a vast country like China still resemble a backward and decaying feudal autocracy? And how far, exactly, is China from becoming a democratic society?
These are questions that cannot be answered immediately—but they are questions every Chinese must confront.
In 1911, on October 10—the year of Xuantong Three, the year of Xin Hai—the revolution to overthrow the Qing dynasty erupted.
Since then, many believed that “feudal autocracy” had vanished from China. Yet the final realization was harsh: while the monarchy and its institutions were toppled, feudal ideology remained deeply rooted, powerful, and alive to this very day.
One could say that Dr. Sun Yat-sen’s “Xinhai Revolution” buried the body of feudal autocracy, but its soul survived.
And this soul, instead of dissipating, quietly attached itself to the Chinese Communist Party, creating the greatest catastrophe in the history of China.
Since the birth of the CCP, the mythical “Pandora’s box” has been pried open signaling that humanity would now have to dance with a true evil.
Opening the CCP’s history is like opening a chronicle of killing and tyranny.
Ever since Mao Zedong, the tyrant and demon of CCP rule, seized control of China, the Chinese people have lived in an age of terror and darkness.
After the “Three-Anti and Five-Anti Campaigns,” came the Anti-Rightist Movement of 1957: More than 20 so-called “anti-party groups” and “local nationalist factions” were fabricated. 550,000 people were labeled as “Rightists,” and over 300,000 were condemned as “anti-socialist elements.” They were sent to labor camps, exiled to rural areas and factories, imprisoned, or otherwise persecuted. Millions suffered nationwide: intellectuals were targeted; countless victims committed suicide; many were tortured to death; some were executed as “counterrevolutionaries”. families were torn apart and tens of millions were implicated through guilt by association
Then came the “Three Red Banners” and the Great Leap Forward. In just three years, the regime committed an unprecedented atrocity: 36 million people starved to death.
The slaughter continued through the bloody Cultural Revolution, the massacre of June Fourth, the brutal persecution of Falun Gong, and the relentless suppression of petitioners and human rights defenders.
The CCP’s crimes are countless—far beyond what words can record.
At this point, I cannot help but ask:
Are the Chinese people destined to survive only through bloodshed, fear, and violence?Are they condemned to live forever under the bloody rule of “feudal despotism”?Are the Chinese people fated to be slaughtered like livestock?
Even answering “No” feels unbearably heavy.
So—how far is China from the life of democracy and freedom? How long is the road to becoming a democratic society?
Some say China must rely on Western democracies to accelerate its transition.Some say China must rely on “reformers” within the CCP.Some say China must rely on sudden or unexpected events.
These wishes are good—but reality is harsher.
With the easing of the Cold War and the rise of globalization, many Western politicians and business leaders began placing immediate economic利益 above political or moral responsibility. Some naïvely believed that “economic engagement would bring political reform.” Some even compromised with authoritarian regimes to maintain business ties—softening criticism of human rights abuses, turning a blind eye to repression. Can we fully rely on the West? Obviously not.
Reform-minded individuals do exist within the CCP. We sincerely hope they can play a role. But their influence is extremely small within the regime’s entrenched interests—not enough to push China toward democracy. However, if the grassroots public rises, these reformers could one day play a significant role, working alongside ordinary citizens to push China forward. But for now—this remains only a hope.
As for relying on “sudden events”—that is merely passive wishful thinking.
In my view, the road may be long, or it may be short.Everything depends on whether China’s modern “scholar-official class”—its intellectual elite—can regain the spirit of the Wei and Jin eras.
Names like Ji Kang, Ruan Ji, Shan Tao, Sun Deng, and Tao Yuanming evoke images of independence, integrity, and disdain for corrupt power.
But today’s Chinese intellectual class suffers from “three deficiencies”: a lack of calcium (no backbone); a lack of zinc (no conscience); and a lack of testicles (dignity castrated).
In any era, once the scholar-officials surrender their dignity and attach themselves to authoritarian power, that era becomes the darkest and most barbaric.
Look at China today. Look at its intellectual class. Nothing more needs to be said.
Thus, I believe:For China to move toward democracy, today’s intellectuals must—
“Collectively replenish calcium” — restore backbone; refuse to fear power
“Collectively replenish zinc” — restore conscience; fulfill their duty to the people
“Collectively replenish masculinity” — reclaim dignity; summon the people to resist tyranny
Vaclav Havel—the poet, playwright, and hero of the Czech people—is the best example of moral courage in action.
If China’s scholar-officials can awaken, and if the rising wave of public rejection of authoritarianism continues to grow, then China’s road toward democratic society will no longer be far.
