Examine the main currents within the revolution of 1911.

Would you agree

that the 1911 revolution represents the first phase of the China’s
revolutionary struggle?

Introduction- The Revolution of 1911 holds a significant place in the history of

China as the Manchu dynasty was overthrown during this revolution and republic
was established for the first time.

The end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century had witnessed
the growth of Chinese nationalism. According to Mary C. Wright, the emergent
Chinese nationalism had two dimensions i.e. anti-Manchuism and anti-
Imperialism. Anti-Manchu sentiments had existed ever since the inception of the
dynasty as Manchus were looked upon as foreigners by the Han race and their
attempts to strengthen their position by ruling autocratically had made them
extremely unpopular. According to I.Y. Hsu, anti-Machu sentiments had been
evident in case of the various popular uprisings whose main motive was to
overthrow the Manchu rule and replace it with a more favorable system of
governance.

As the tide of nationalism was rising, the government introduced a series of

reforms in 1898 in the field of education, army, administration and institutional
organization to promote greater centralization which was a direct threat to the
autonomy of the provincial governors. Chesneaux states that it was these very
reforms which hastened the revolution against Manchus as they gave rise to new
revolutionary currents and intensified the nationalist sentiments.

The old system of competitive examination was abolished and the new education
system was promoting a political consciousness among the students. Educational
institutions became centers of political activity and were used as staging grounds
for launching all kinds of demonstrations and protests against the Manchu
government led by the students.

The announcement of nationalizing railways became the immediate cause for the
outbreak of the revolution of 1911. In the spring of 1911, imperial government had
decided to nationalize the railway system of China which was in private hand with
the help of loans from England, France, Germany and USA. This nationalization
was met with opposition especially in the provinces like Hunan and Hupei. The
reason for this opposition was that the central government was taking charge of the
construction of the Hankow-Canton and the Hankow-Chungking-Chentgu lines
which had been started by private companies who had taken loans from the
provinces concerned.

The gentry saw this step of government as step to concentrate more power in its
hands and bourgeoisie also saw this as another attempt by the Manchus to give
more privileges to the foreign powers and thus, another means through which the
national sentiments of the Chinese had been betrayed. This had led to popular
outcry culminating in the outbreak of revolution on 10 October 1911 in Wuchang,
often called the Wuchang uprising. From Wuchang, the revolution spread to other
provinces, resulting in Manchu abdication on 12 February 1912 and the
establishment of a republic with Sun-Yat-Sen as its first provisional president.

Participants of the 1911 revolution- The new groups that had emerged during
this period including students and intellectuals, women, new military men,
overseas Chinese and the working class, along with the older social groups like the
gentry, the bourgeoisie and the masses played an important role in the 1911
Revolution.

Role of gentry and bourgeoisie-

M.C. Bergere has argued that the rise of a new social group in China i.e. the
commercial bourgeoisie was an important phenomenon. These were worst affected
by the foreign intrusion into China in port towns of China like Canton, Shanghai
etc as their interests were in conflict with that of foreign interests. The petty
bourgeoisie was also becoming disenchanted with the Manchu rule as the influx of
foreign goods had a disastrous affect on the indigenous industries. Moreover, the
inability of the Chinese government to impose tariffs on the imported goods had
led to their free and cheap circulation within the Chinese markets. Owing to these
reasons, their anti-imperialist sentiments quickly turned into active hostility against
the Manchu state and these nationalist sentiments were demonstrated strongly
throughout this period in the form of strikes and boycott of foreign goods.

Wolfgang Franke points out that the Gentry, who were earlier the allies of
Manchus, now unified with bourgeoisie because of their discontentment with the
Manchus. Thus, it can be seen that by the 20th century the increasing foreign
encroachment and the inability of the Manchus to tackle this foreign threat had
given rise to a great deal of opposition and resentment within China.

Bergere has pointed out that the “bourgeoisie ideology” was colored by
nationalism and constitutionalism and they came to play an important role in the
boycott of foreign goods, the agitation for parliamentary governments and played a
key role in mobilizing a new kind of public opinion. It is for this reason that some
scholars like Edward Rhoads have described the Revolution to be a bourgeoisie
revolution in which bourgeoisie was quite independent and extraordinarily active
in the nationalist agitations.

However, Bergere contradicts these scholars and argues that when the revolution
came, the bourgeoisie proved too weak to be able to play a leading role as they had
not yet developed a distinct class identity. Even Esherick has argued that most of
the Bourgeoisie demonstrations had taken place under gentry leadership and even
their Self-Government society was actually headed by a member of the gentry.
Thus, he believed that the distinction between the gentry and bourgeoisie was not
yet definite enough for the latter to play the leading role. In contrast to the views
held by Bergere, scholars like Ichiko Chuzo, David Buck and Robert Kapp held
that the gentry was motivated only by the desire of self-preservation and not by
any higher ideal of improving China. They argue that their role should not be
overemphasized, a point which even Joseph Esherick makes.

Students and intellectuals- According to I.Y. Hsu, modern and western ideas like
human rights, democracy, equality, independence, freedom etc were gaining
importance in China in this period. Nationalism, democracy and republicanism had
become the motivating forces for revolutionary change in China. Wolfgang Franke
states that the most important element in the revolutionary movement was the
young intellectuals and students who helped in preparing the ground for the
revolution. According to Franz Micheal, it was the students, who had studied in
Japan, USA and Europe that the first modern Chinese intellectuals had emerged.
This group realized the weakness of the Manchu Government and the danger
facing the country and the only way out according to them was revolution.

Peasantry- The traditional view dismissed the role played by the peasant class on
grounds of it being a passive, conservative and traditional class that was
disinterested in revolution as it was tied to the land. However, now historians argue
that the peasantry was deeply stirred by increasing foreign intrusion and by
increasing missionary activity. In 1909, there were 113 well-documented outbursts
of rebellion and in 1910, the number rose to 285. According to John Lust, who has
provided the strongest argument for the significance of “movements from below”,
during this period it was this constant agitation that had completely undermined the
authority and confidence of the existing establishment. Though the causes for the
uprisings were essentially traditional in character i.e. floods, famine, agrarian
discontent, unemployment as argued by Chesneaux, what was unique about these
uprisings was that they were specifically political in character i.e. overthrow the
Manchu government and the imperial system. However, Escherick has argued that
while scholars, who have worked on the role of the peasantry have been able to
challenge the elitist interpretation of the revolution, they have gone overboard in
describing the direct role that the peasantry may have played.

Role of Sun-Yat Sen- K.T.S. Sarao has argued that he was not only the promoter
but also the inspirer of the revolution. Historians of orthodox school have
highlighted the heroic role played by Sun-Yat who ushered the era of
republicanism into China. He founded Chinese revolutionary league in 1905 whose
main aim were repulsion of the Manchus, restoration of China, establishment of a
Republic and equal land ownership. Recognizing the existence of social forces
capable of bringing about a revolution, he called for the unification of all
revolutionary organizations under one head and formed the Chinese United League
of Tung-Meng Hui in 1905. The Tung-Meng Hui because of its multi-provincial
and multiclass character provided a unified central organization which served as a
rallying point for all revolutionary and progressive forces in the country. Thus,
some scholars argue that he deserves credit for bringing into the mainstream the
revolutionary movement. He succeeded in bringing secret societies to the forefront.
He also played an important role in garnering the support of the overseas Chinese
for the cause of the revolution. Sun Yat’s ideas had considerable influence on the
development of the revolutionary movement. He formulated the three people’s
principles: People’s National Consciousness or Nationalism; People’s Rights or
Democracy and People’s livelihood or Socialism.

However, some scholars have questioned the role played by Sun in the Revolution
of 1911 and to his commitment to the ideas of Republicanism. For instance-
Esherick has argued that the leadership to his party was in the hands of Yang Qu-
Yun who was more insistent on the principles of republicanism than Sun. He also
argues that Tung-Meng Hui was not as effective or unified as it was made out to
be. This viewpoint has been supported by K.S.Liew who argued that it was more a
‘federal union of the provinces’ rather than a ‘unitary organization composed of
individuals’. Harold Schiffrin throws light on some weaknesses of Sun Yat Sen
and termed him as remarkably vague and self-contradictory. Mary Wright says that
Sun Yat was not the leader needed as he had little idea of what a transfer of power
would mean and he was equally vague on the subject of China’s relation to the
West.

Conclusion- Wolfgang Franke argues that even though Sun Yat Sen and his
followers succeeded in giving a severe blow to the tottering Confucian state, they
did not really provide any conclusive program to replace the old order and it was
the reason for the failure of the revolution. Communist historians have attributed
the failure of the 1911 revolution to the weak nature of the bourgeoisie. Chen Tu
Hsiu states that the bourgeoisie was highly divided, lacked a class consciousness
and therefore not successful as a united force.

Wu Yu-Chang points out the reason for the failure of 1911 revolution. He argues
that it was the lack the lack of preparation and errors in leadership with regard to
the fundamental problems of revolutionary theory, revolutionary organization, the
revolutionary armed forces and the revolutionary provisional government. Mary
Wright also holds that the cause of the failure of the revolution was the limited
vision of the revolutionary leaders and their ability to effectively organize at both
top and local level. However, we must not forget that it was because of the lack of
time as it was felt that prolonged disorder would invite foreign intervention and
partition of the country. Thus, the leadership was handed over to Yan Shih Kai.
Yuan Shikai’s formal assumption of the office of Presidency in Beijing signaled
the failure of the revolution.

Although the revolution of 1911 failed to wipe out feudalism completely, it did
succeed in giving it a fatal blow. It overthrew the Manchu dynasty and herein lies
the greatest significance of this revolution. Mary Wright states that in a way, the
revolution of 1911 had laid a base for the second phase of the Chinese Revolution
which began with the May Fourth movement as the revolution allowed the
centrifugal forces to develop and new centres of power emerged.

In short, from different perspectives, we may get different impressions of the 1911
revolution. In its broadest sense, we may say that the revolution started as a
movement sponsored by small groups of intellectuals but finally developed into a
large scale political and social process. Zhang Kaiyun aptly summaries the nature
of the movement when he says that the revolution of 1911 was a three pronged
attack against imperialism, feudalism and an autocratic monarchy.