They cannot influence the question of Kuo-ti.  The force which drives and steers the change of one form of State or vice versa is generally not derived from mere politics.  If the time is not ripe, then no amount of advocacy on the part of critics can hasten it.  If the time is ripe, nothing the critics say can prevent it.  He who indulges himself in the discussion of the problem of Kuo-ti—­ i.e., the form of States, as a political student, is ignorant of his own limitations and capacity.  This is as true of the active politicians as of the critics; for the first duty of an active politician is to seek for the improvement and progress of the administration of the existing foundation of government.  A step beyond this line is revolution and intrigue, and such cannot be the attitude of a right-minded active politician or statesman.  This is looking at it from the negative side.

From the positive, that is, the progressive point of view, there is also a boundary.  Such actions under one form of government are political activities, and under the opposite form of government are also political activities.  But these are not questions of political principle.  For only when a man sacrifices the ideals which he has advocated and cherished during the whole of his life does the question of principle arise.  Therefore the great principle of looking to the actual state of administration of the form of government and leaving the mere form of state in the back-ground is a principle that is applicable under all circumstances and should be followed by all critics of politics.

II.  THE ARGUMENT AGAINST CHANGE

No form of government is ideal.  Its reason of existence can only be judged by what it has achieved.  It is the height of folly to rely on theoretical conclusions as a basis for artificial arbitration as to what should be accepted and what discarded.  Mere folly, however, is not to be seriously condemned.  But the danger and harm to the country will be unmeasurable if a person has prejudiced views respecting a certain form of government and in order to prove the correctness of his prejudiced views, creates artificially a situation all by himself.  For this reason my view has always been not to oppose any form of government.  But I am always opposed to any one who engages in a propaganda in favour of a form of government other than the one under which we actually live.  In the past I opposed those who tried to spread the republican form of government while the country was under monarchical government, and the arguments I advanced in support of my views were written in no fewer than 200,000 words.  Even so late as the ninth month after the outbreak of the Revolution I issued a pamphlet entitled “The Problem of the Building of the New China,” which was my last attempt to express my views respecting the maintenance of the old form of government.