How We Thought Through and Wrote *A Study of Foreign Religious Infiltration and the Dramatic Changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe*

The work on *A Study of Foreign Religious Infiltration and the Dramatic Changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe* began in July 2009. After four years and four months of effort, the manuscript was completed in November 2013 and submitted to the People’s Publishing House. The book was officially published in May 2015. Both before and after its publication, it received a certain degree of positive appraisal. For example, after the manuscript was submitted to the General Administration of Press and Publication, relevant experts affirmed that it “resists religious infiltration, takes a clear stand, and presents the correct view to set the record straight.” *2014 Annual National Book Topic Analysis Report*, website of the State Administration of Press, Publication, Radio, Film and Television of the People’s Republic of China, March 14, 2014. Tu Guilin, “The 2014 Annual National Book Topic Analysis Report Is Released,” China Press and Publication Network, March 14, 2014. Another example: after the book was published, well-known experts and scholars actively recommended its relevant content to readers.

《境外宗教渗透与苏东剧变研究》这项工作是从2009年7月开始的。经过4年零4个月的努力，于2013年11月完稿，送交人民出版社。2015年5月该书正式出版。该书出版前后，均受到了一定的好评。例如，该书稿上报到新闻出版总署后，有关专家肯定其“抵御了宗教渗透，旗帜鲜明，以正视听”。《2014年度全国图书选题分析报告》，《中华人民共和国新闻出版广电总局网》2014年3月14日。涂桂林：《2014年度全国图书选题分析报告出炉》，《中国新闻出版网》2014年3月14日。再如，该书出版后，有著名专家学者积极向读者推荐其有关内容。

I

一

“Why Did We Study the Dramatic Changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe?”

“我们为何要研究苏东剧变？”

In 2009, through fierce competition with more than ten university research teams, including Peking University, we won a major project of the Ministry of Education’s Philosophy and Social Sciences Research Key Projects, titled “A Study of Foreign Religious Infiltration and China’s Ideological Security Strategy.” When designing the project, we not only included the study of “foreign religious infiltration and the dramatic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe” as a sub-topic of this project but also made it a priority direction of the project. Judging from the project’s title, what we should have prioritized without doubt was the infiltration carried out by foreign hostile forces using religious forces and religious concepts against our country. So why did we make the dramatic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe a priority direction or one of the priority directions of this project? Investigating the deeper reasons, there are no more than two: first, within the topic of foreign hostile forces carrying out religious infiltration against socialist countries, the dramatic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe possess an irreplaceable typicality; second, within the domain of contemporary international ideological discourse, in the theoretical activity of criticizing the contemporary thesis of the end of ideology, rational reflection on the dramatic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe possesses an irreplaceable direct pertinence.

2009年，通过与包括北京大学在内的10多个高校课题组的激烈竞争，我们获得了一个教育部哲学社会科学研究重大课题攻关项目，其名称为“境外宗教渗透与我国意识形态安全战略研究”。在进行课题设计时，我们不仅将“境外宗教渗透与苏东剧变”的研究列为本项目研究的一个子课题，而且还将其列为本项目研究的一个优先方向。从课题的名称看，我们优先考虑的，无疑应当是境外敌对势力利用宗教势力和宗教观念对我国进行的渗透，那么，为何要将苏东剧变列为该项目研究的优先方向或优先方向之一呢？究其深层原因，无非是两条：一是在境外敌对势力对社会主义国家实施的宗教渗透这个话题中，苏东剧变具有无可替代的典型性；二是在当代国际意识形态论域中，在批判当代意识形态终结论的理论活动中，对苏东剧变的理性反思具有无可替代的直接针对性。

First, within the topic of foreign hostile forces carrying out religious infiltration against socialist countries, the dramatic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe possess an irreplaceable typicality. In the study of the issue of foreign religious infiltration, the most significant and also the most intractable problem is undoubtedly the question of whether foreign religious infiltration exists at all. Calling it the most significant is because if the problem of foreign religious infiltration simply did not exist, then socialist countries’ resistance to foreign religious infiltration to safeguard socialist ideological security would not only be groundless but would also thereby appear ridiculous. The Spanish writer Cervantes, in his famous work *Don Quixote*, once devised a joke in which Don Quixote, holding a lance, drives his horse forward, charging at a windmill to do battle with it. Throughout the entire project research, what we must strive to avoid is precisely such a laughable outcome as Don Quixote’s. From this perspective, the question of whether foreign religious infiltration exists is truly the first question that we researchers must confront. Calling it the most intractable is because foreign religious infiltration is a rather complex international political event; it often requires stripping away many false appearances and traversing many intermediate links before its truth can be brought to light before the world. Moreover, it also involves the social mentality of contemporary publics and contemporary scholars. If, from 1957 to 1976, a fundamental defect of China’s theoretical and academic circles was “preferring left to right,” then since 1977, an important malady of China’s theoretical and academic circles has been “preferring right to left.” That is, regarding matters such as foreign religious infiltration, people today tend to prefer believing it does not exist rather than believing it does. Under these circumstances, making the case for foreign religious infiltration in a way that is irrefutable and convincing is by no means an easy task. However, for our research team, this is a mission we must take on no matter what. Marx once said that for theory to “become a material force,” it must “grasp the masses,” it must “convince people.” *Selected Works of Marx and Engels*, Vol. 1, People’s Publishing House, 1995, p. 9. Yet, to “convince people,” we must first “convince” ourselves; we must not only verbally acknowledge the historical fact of “foreign religious infiltration” but also, in our hearts, in the depths of our consciousness, hold an indubitable “certainty” toward it—that is, the kind of indubitable “certainty” Descartes spoke of. Compilation by the Teaching and Research Office of the History of Foreign Philosophy, Department of Philosophy, Peking University: *Selected Readings from Western Philosophical Works* (Vol. 1), Commercial Press, 1981, p. 364. However, after understanding and sorting through many social phenomena of foreign religious infiltration, we discovered that there is one historical event that no one can easily deny: this is the existence of the “U.S.-Vatican Holy Alliance” since the 1980s and its profound influence on the Polish changes and even on the entire dramatic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe. Moreover, it was precisely the existence of the “U.S.-Vatican Holy Alliance” that reminded us of the “union” and alliance of “the Pope and the Tsar” against the “specter of communism” that Marx and Engels spoke of in the *Communist Manifesto* in 1848. *Selected Works of Marx and Engels*, Vol. 1, p. 271. Since we found in the historical event of the “U.S.-Vatican Holy Alliance” the theoretical starting point on which we could rely to advance, and obtained “certainty” regarding the historical fact of foreign hostile forces carrying out religious infiltration against socialist countries, then our entire study of foreign religious infiltration should naturally begin with the verification and research of such a historical event. In this way, the dramatic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe were, in our study of foreign religious infiltration, naturally elevated to the first position.

首先，在境外敌对势力对社会主义国家实施的宗教渗透这个话题中，苏东剧变具有无可替代的典型性。在有关境外宗教渗透问题的研究中，最重大也最棘手的问题无疑是境外宗教渗透的有无问题。说它最重大，乃是因为倘若根本不存在境外宗教渗透这个问题，则社会主义国家抵御境外宗教渗透来维护社会主义意识形态安全就不仅无从谈起，而且也会因此而显得滑稽可笑。西班牙作家塞万提斯在其名著《堂吉诃德》中曾经设计了一个堂吉诃德手持长矛、驱马向前、冲向风车与之搏斗的笑话。在整个课题研究中，我们应当极力避免的就是堂吉诃德的这样一种可笑下场。由此看来，境外宗教渗透的有无问题，实在是我们课题研究者必须正视的第一个问题。说它最棘手，乃是因为境外宗教渗透是一种相当复杂的国际政治事件，往往需要剥离许多假相，穿越许多中间环节才能将其真相大白于天下。更何况其中还关涉到当代公众与当代学者的社会心态问题。如果说在从1957年到1976年的20年间，我国理论界和学术界的一项根本弊端在于“宁左勿右”，那么，自1977年以来，我国理论界和学术界的一项重要弊病便在于“宁右勿左”。也就是说，对于境外宗教渗透这类事情，现在人们往往宁可信其无，而不愿信其有。在这种情势下，要把境外宗教渗透这件事讲得让人无可辩驳、心服口服，就绝不是一件轻而易举的事情。然而，对于我们课题组来说，这却是一件我们无论如何也必须担当起来的使命。马克思曾经说过，理论为要“变成物质力量”，它就必须“掌握群众”，它就必须“说服人”。《马克思恩格斯选集》，第1卷，人民出版社1995年，第9页。然而，为要“说服人”，我们就必须“说服”我们自己，就必须使我们不仅在口头上承认“境外宗教渗透”这一历史事实，而且，在我们的内心里，在我们的意识深处，都对之持有一种无可怀疑的“确信”，也就是笛卡尔所说的那样一种无可怀疑的“确定性”。北京大学哲学系外国哲学史教研室编译：《西方哲学原著选读》（上卷），商务印书馆1981年，第364页。然而，在经过对境外宗教渗透诸多社会现象的了解和梳理之后，我们发现有一个历史事件是任何人都难以否认的，这就是上个世纪80年代以降“美梵神圣同盟”的存在及其对波兰剧变乃至对整个苏东剧变的深刻影响。而且，也正是“美梵神圣同盟”的存在使我们想到了马克思和恩格斯1848年在《共产党宣言》里所说的“教皇和沙皇”反对“共产主义幽灵”的“联合”和结盟。《马克思恩格斯选集》，第1卷，第271页。既然我们在“美梵神圣同盟”这一历史事件中找到了我们赖以前进的理论起点，获得了对境外敌对势力对社会主义国家进行宗教渗透这一历史事实的“确信”，则我们对境外宗教渗透的整个研究也就应当从对这样一个历史事件的核实和研究起步。这样一来，苏东剧变在我们的境外宗教渗透研究中也就自然而然地被提升到了首位。

Secondly, in the contemporary international ideological domain, within the theoretical activity of critiquing the end-of-ideology thesis, a rational reflection on the drastic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe possesses an irreplaceable direct pertinence. We know that although the end-of-ideology thesis originated in the 1950s, traditional proponents of the end of ideology, such as Raymond Aron, Seymour Martin Lipset, and Daniel Bell, despite having an anti-socialist ideological tendency, at least verbally professed the dual termination of both socialist ideology and capitalist ideology. Contemporary proponents of the end of ideology, such as Richard Nixon, Zbigniew Brzezinski, and Francis Fukuyama, are different; what they seek to terminate is solely socialist ideology and its social system, with some explicitly endowing their end-of-ideology thesis with a character of "eschatology." [3]3 Eschatology: A doctrine concerning the ultimate destiny of humanity and the world, often associated with religious or philosophical theories of an end state of history. Such an end-of-ideology thesis was once all the rage; the works of these individuals even sparked a temporary "scramble" among people. In the words of the renowned French philosopher Jacques Derrida, people rushed to buy these books just as they would rush to hoard "sugar" and "butter" upon hearing rumors of war. [4]4 Jacques Derrida, *Specters of Marx*, trans. He Yi (Beijing: China Renmin University Press, 2008), pp. 67-68. Therefore, refuting such an end-of-ideology thesis has become our primary task in safeguarding the security of socialist ideology. For if such an end-of-ideology thesis is allowed to deceive and confuse people, if, as the contemporary proponents of the end of ideology claim, in our era socialist ideology has been once and for all replaced by capitalist ideology, then the issue of safeguarding the security of socialist ideology would be written off entirely, and our research project would thereby lose all its significance. But to effectively refute the contemporary end-of-ideology thesis, we must conduct a deep theoretical analysis of the drastic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, so as to explain on this basis that the drastic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe were not only an episode in the entire history of the international communist movement but also likely just an episode in the historical development process of these Soviet and Eastern European countries themselves. Only in this way can we mount a powerful counterattack against the contemporary end-of-ideology thesis and provide a profound explanation of the necessity and possibility of safeguarding the security of socialist ideology. For the so-called "historical basis" of the contemporary end-of-ideology thesis is none other than the drastic changes that occurred in the former Soviet and Eastern European countries in the late 1980s and early 1990s, that is, what they call the "great collapse of communism." [5]5 Francis Fukuyama, *The End of History and the Last Man*, trans. Huang Shengqiang and Xu Mingyuan (Beijing: China Social Sciences Press, 2003), p. 14.

其次，在当代国际意识形态论域中，在批判当代意识形态终结论的理论活动中，对苏东剧变进行理性反思具有无可替代的直接针对性。我们知道，意识形态终结论虽然肇始于上个世纪50年代，但传统意识形态终结论者，如阿隆、李普斯特和贝尔等，尽管有反社会主义的思想倾向，但至少在口头上他们标榜的是社会主义意识形态和资本主义意识形态的双重终结。当代意识形态终结论者，如尼克松、布热津斯基和福山等，则不同，他们要终结的仅仅是社会主义意识形态及其社会制度，其中有人还明确无误地赋予其终结论以一种“末世论”的性质。这样一种意识形态终结论可谓风靡一时，这些人的著作甚至引起了人们一时的“哄抢”。用法国著名哲学家德里达的话说，人们抢购这些书籍，竟然就像人们在听到战争爆发谣传时哄抢“食糖”和“黄油”一样。雅克·德里达：《马克思的幽灵》，何一译，中国人民大学出版社2008年，第67-68页。因此，批驳这样一种意识形态终结论就成了我们维护社会主义意识形态安全的第一要务。因为倘若一任这样一种意识形态终结论蛊惑人心，倘若一如当代意识形态终结论者所说，在我们时代，社会主义意识形态已然一劳永逸地为资本主义意识形态所取代，则维护社会主义意识形态安全的问题也就因此而一笔勾销了，而我们的课题研究也就因此而失去了其全部意义。但为要有效地批驳当代意识形态终结论，我们就必须对苏东剧变作出深层的理论解析，以便据此说明苏东剧变不仅是整个国际共产主义运动史上的一个插曲，而且也很可能只是这些苏东国家历史发展进程中的一个插曲。惟其如此，我们才能对当代意识形态终结论作出有力的回击，才能对我们维护社会主义意识形态安全的必要性和可能性做出深度的阐释。因为当代意识形态终结论的所谓“历史依据”不是别的，正是前苏东国家在上个世纪80年代末和90年代初所发生的剧变，也就是他们所谓的“共产主义的大面积塌方”。福山：《历史的终结与最后之人》，黄胜强、许铭原译，中国社会科学出版社2003年，第14页。

II

二

What does this book mainly intend to discuss?

这本书中主要想讲些什么？

This book, 386 pages and 460,000 characters in length, covers a wide range of content, but in summary, it primarily addresses the following three aspects:

这本书386页，有46万字，涉及的内容比较多，但归结起来，主要是下述三个方面的内容：

First, the fundamental objective of this work is to confirm and explain the political infiltration and political schemes carried out by overseas hostile forces using religion against the Soviet and Eastern European countries, to confirm and explain the historical impact of overseas religious infiltration on the drastic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, and to deduce and emphasize the absolute necessity for socialist countries to resist overseas religious infiltration in order to safeguard ideological security and national security. Admittedly, the causes of the drastic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe are multifaceted; an approach that explains these drastic changes solely through the single factor of overseas religious infiltration would violate historical facts, be naive and laughable, and be insufficient as a lesson. However, flatly denying the impact of overseas religious infiltration on the drastic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe equally violates historical facts, is naive and laughable, and is insufficient as a lesson. Therefore, in this book, we not only confirm and explain the political infiltration carried out by overseas hostile forces using religion against the Soviet and Eastern European countries, especially providing a relatively concrete and profound explanation and argumentation of the historical impact of the Holy Alliance between the United States and the Vatican on the process and outcome of the drastic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, demonstrating that overseas religious infiltration was "one" important cause of the drastic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, but we also go further to emphatically point out that actively resisting overseas religious infiltration by socialist countries is truly "one" important guarantee for safeguarding ideological security and national security.

首先，本著的基本目标在于确证和阐释境外敌对势力利用宗教对苏东国家实施的政治渗透及其政治图谋，确证和阐释境外宗教渗透对苏东剧变的历史影响，推证和强调抵御境外宗教渗透乃社会主义国家维护意识形态安全和国家安全的绝对必要性。诚然，苏东剧变的原因是多方面的，那种仅仅用境外宗教渗透这样一个原因来诠释苏东剧变的做法是有违历史事实、幼稚可笑和不足为训的。但矢口否认境外宗教渗透对苏东剧变的影响也同样有违历史事实、幼稚可笑和不足为训。因此，在这本书中，我们不仅要确证和阐释境外敌对势力利用宗教对苏东国家实施政治渗透，尤其是要比较具体而深刻地阐释和论证美梵神圣同盟对苏东剧变进程和结局的历史影响，说明境外宗教渗透是苏东剧变的“一项”重要原因，而且还要进而强调指出社会主义国家积极抵御境外宗教渗透实在是维护意识形态安全和国家安全的“一项”重要保证。

Secondly, another objective of this work is to conduct a relatively comprehensive review and summary of the experiences and lessons of the former Soviet and Eastern European countries in preventing and resisting overseas religious infiltration, to serve as a reference and mirror for our own prevention and resistance of overseas religious infiltration and for safeguarding our country's ideological security and national security. When the renowned Chinese scholar Li Shenzhi spoke about the contemporary Chinese philosopher Feng Youlan, he once said that Mr. Feng "can be surpassed but cannot be bypassed." [6]6 "Feng Youlan Passes Away, Hailed as a Philosopher Who Can Be Surpassed but Cannot Be Bypassed," *Southern Education Times*, March 13, 2015. Feng Youlan (1895-1990) was a major 20th-century Chinese philosopher known for his "New Rationalism" system, which sought to modernize and systematize traditional Chinese philosophy. His statement was made regarding "Chinese people understanding, learning, and studying Chinese philosophy," meaning that contemporary Chinese people cannot develop Chinese philosophy while disregarding Feng Youlan's "New Rationalism." Similarly, we can regard the drastic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe as "an episode in the contemporary international communist movement that can be surpassed and should be surpassed but cannot be bypassed and should not be bypassed." As we pointed out in this work, the reason the drastic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe can and should be surpassed is that the international communist movement will not come to an abrupt halt due to these drastic changes; "it should, it will, and in fact it is surpassing the Soviet theoretical model, institutional model, and path model of socialism, and is forging a new type of socialist theoretical model, institutional model, and path model." The reason this episode of the drastic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe cannot and should not be bypassed is that while the causes of these drastic changes certainly existed in the theories and practices of the Soviet Union and Eastern European countries, they also exist, to varying degrees, in the theories and practices of other socialist countries. Thus, reflecting on the causes of the drastic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe is, in a certain sense, simultaneously "a kind of self-reflection, self-education, and self-adjustment for communist parties of all countries." Without such self-reflection, self-education, and self-adjustment, "it would not only be impossible to have a genuine and profound understanding of the causes of the drastic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, but it would also be impossible to achieve self-transformation and self-transcendence for socialist countries, to fundamentally avoid the tragedy of the drastic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe," let alone advance the cause of the international communist movement. [7]7 Duan Dezhi, ed., *A Study of Overseas Religious Infiltration and the Drastic Changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe* (Beijing: People's Publishing House, 2015), p. 11. This is what is meant by "making the past serve the present" and "making foreign things serve China," and "past experience, if not forgotten, is a guide for the future."

其次，本著的另一个目标在于对前苏东国家在防范和抵御境外宗教渗透方面的经验教训作出比较全面的梳理和总结，以用作我们防范和抵御境外宗教渗透、维护我国意识形态安全和国家安全的参考和借鉴。我国著名学者李慎之在谈到我国当代哲学家冯友兰时，曾说过冯先生“可超而不可越”。《冯友兰逝世，被誉为可超而不可越的哲学家》，《南方教育时报》2015年3月13日。他的这句话是就“中国人了解、学习、研究中国哲学”而言的，是说当代中国人要了解和发展中国哲学就不能置冯友兰的“新理学”于不顾。同样，我们也可以将苏东剧变视为当代国际共产主义运动的“一个可超而不可越和应超而不应越的插曲”。一如我们在本著中所指出的，苏东剧变之所以可超和应超，乃在于国际共产主义运动不会因苏东剧变而戛然而至，“它应、它将并且事实上它也在超出苏联社会主义的理论模式、制度模式和道路模式，正在打造出一种新型的社会主义理论模式、制度模式和道路模式”。苏东剧变这一插曲之所以不可越和不应越，乃是因为苏东剧变的成因固然存在于苏联和东欧诸国的理论和实践中，但它也同样程度不同地存在于其他社会主义国家的理论和实践中。从而，对苏东剧变成因的反思，在一定意义上同时也就是“各国共产党人的一种自我反思、自我教育和自我调适”。离开了这样一种自我反思、自我教育和自我调适，“不仅不可能对苏东剧变的成因有本真的和切肤的认识，而且要实现社会主义国家的自我变革和自我超越，从根本上避免苏东剧变的悲剧也是不可能的”，更不用说将国际共产主义事业推向前进了。段德智主编：《境外宗教渗透与苏东剧变研究》，人民出版社2015年，第11页。所谓“古为今用”和“洋为中用”，所谓“前事不忘，后事之师”，此之谓也。

Finally, this work has yet another objective: to respond to and critique the contemporary end-of-ideology thesis with a certain factual basis and theoretical depth, based on the historical facts of the drastic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe and the post-drastic changes period. What the contemporary end-of-ideology thesis raises in the international ideological domain is not a minor issue but a matter of fundamental principle, a "meta-question" concerning the very existence or abolition of socialist ideology, a question that governs and constrains all other issues of socialist ideology. Consequently, it is a question that every philosophical and social science worker cannot afford to ignore. Moreover, as mentioned above, the contemporary proponents of the end of ideology base their arguments precisely on the drastic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe. Therefore, as a work studying these drastic changes, there is even less reason to evade the challenge of the contemporary end-of-ideology thesis.

最后，本著还有一个目标，这就是依据苏东剧变和后苏东剧变的历史事实对当代意识形态终结论做出有一定事实依据和理论深度的回应和批判。当代意识形态终结论在国际意识形态论域中所提出的并非一个枝节问题，而是一个大是大非问题，一个关乎社会主义意识形态存废的“元问题”，是一个规范和制约社会主义意识形态所有其他问题的问题，从而是我们每个哲学和社会科学工作者都不能充耳不闻的问题。更何况，当代意识形态终结论者，如上所述，本来就是拿苏东剧变说事的，作为一部研究苏东剧变的著作，就更没有理由来规避当代意识形态终结论的挑战了。

III

三

How exactly did we concretely implement the plan?

我们究竟是如何具体地落实计划的？

First, to concretely confirm and explain the political infiltration and political schemes carried out by overseas hostile forces using religion against the Soviet and Eastern European countries, and to confirm and explain the historical impact of overseas religious infiltration on the drastic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, we primarily undertook the following five aspects of work:

首先，为了具体确证和阐释境外敌对势力利用宗教对苏东国家实施的政治渗透及其政治图谋，确证和阐释境外宗教渗透对苏东剧变的历史影响，我们主要做了下述五个方面的工作：

First, we prominently emphasized the intrinsic connection between overseas religious infiltration and the drastic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, emphasizing and arguing that "the Holy Alliance between the United States and the Vatican and its political and religious infiltration of the Soviet and Eastern European countries" constituted "a central event in the drastic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe." [8]8 See the cited work, p. 320. The "Holy Alliance between the United States and the Vatican" refers to the coordinated political and religious strategy pursued by the U.S. government and the Catholic Church under Pope John Paul II during the Cold War, aimed at undermining communist regimes in Eastern Europe, particularly in Poland.

首先，我们突出地强调了境外宗教渗透与苏东剧变的内在关联，强调并论证了“美梵神圣同盟及其对苏东国家的政治渗透和宗教渗透”为“苏东剧变中的一个中心事件”。参阅拙著第320页。

Second, we revealed the political foundation and political schemes of the US-Vatican Holy Alliance. In discussing the political foundation of the US-Vatican Holy Alliance, we not only elaborated on “the US strategy of religious infiltration into the Soviet Union and Eastern European countries” and emphasized the Reagan administration’s anti-communist stance and its attempt to mobilize religious organizations to participate in the anti-communist “peace offensive,” but also expounded on Pope John Paul II’s “New Eastern Policy,” which changed his predecessors’ “accommodating attitude” toward the socialist countries of the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe and turned toward “a more proactive offensive posture.” See our book, pp. 210–222. In discussing the political schemes of the US-Vatican Holy Alliance, we not only repeatedly revealed, based on historical facts, its political goal of “Westernizing Eastern Europe and dismantling the Soviet empire,” but also emphasized that the US-Vatican Holy Alliance, led by the Reagan administration, aimed not only at “de-Sovietizing” Eastern European countries and resolving “the problem of Soviet dominance in the Eastern European region,” but also at “using the Westernization of Eastern European countries to dismantle the Soviet empire, thereby achieving the US foreign policy goal of global hegemony.” See our book, p. 323.

其次，我们昭示了美梵神圣同盟的政治基础和政治图谋。在谈到美梵神圣同盟的政治基础时，我们不仅阐述了“美国对苏东国家的宗教渗透策略”，不仅强调了里根政府的反共立场及其动员宗教组织参加反共“和平攻势”的企图，而且还阐述了教皇约翰保罗二世的“新东方政策”，这就是一改前任对苏东社会主义国家所持有的“迁就态度”，而转向一种“更具主动的进攻姿态”。参阅拙著第210-222页。在谈到美梵神圣同盟的政治图谋时，我们不仅依据史实反复昭示了其“西化东欧、瓦解苏联帝国”的政治目标，而且还强调指出，由里根政府主导的美梵神圣同盟，其目标不仅在于在东欧国家“去苏联化”，解决“苏联在东欧地区占主导地位的问题”，而且还在于“藉西化东欧各国来瓦解苏联帝国，以期实现美国独霸世界的外交目标”。参阅拙著第323页。

Third, based on historical facts, we relatively concretely revealed the overall strategic conception of the US-Vatican Holy Alliance in directing the dramatic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, pointing out that after the US-Vatican Holy Alliance was established in 1982, its first-step goal was to plan and manipulate the dramatic change in Poland; its second-step goal was to use the Polish dramatic change as a blueprint and breakthrough point to plan and manipulate dramatic changes in the other seven Eastern European countries; and its third-step goal was to dismantle the Soviet Union. As for how the US-Vatican Holy Alliance and other Western countries concretely implemented this “three-step” strategic conception, one need only glance at Chapters 7, 8, and Sections 2 and 4 of Chapter 10 of our book to see it clearly.

第三，我们依据史实，比较具体地昭示了美梵神圣同盟导演苏东剧变的总体战略构想，指出：美梵神圣同盟于1982年建立后，其第一步目标在于策划和操纵波兰剧变；其第二步目标在于以波兰剧变为蓝本和突破口，策划和操纵东欧其他七个国家实施剧变；其第三步目标在于瓦解苏联。至于美梵神圣同盟及其他西方国家是如何具体实施这一“三步走”的战略构想的，我们只要翻阅一下拙著第7章、第8章及第10章第2节和第4节等部分，就一目了然了。

Fourth, based on historical facts, we emphasized that the religious and political infiltration of the US-Vatican Holy Alliance into the former Soviet Union and Eastern European countries did not cease with the dramatic changes there. This is manifested, on the one hand, in the United States continuing to carry out religious infiltration in the former Eastern European countries, and, on the other hand, in the United States implementing “color revolutions” in the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) countries. Although the United States successfully directed the historical dramatic changes in the former Eastern European socialist countries, it did not let go. After the dramatic changes in Eastern Europe, the United States continued to carry out overseas religious infiltration and religious interference in the original Eastern European countries. Even Poland, which was used as a breakthrough point and testing ground for the dramatic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, was subjected to close monitoring and serious interference by relevant US agencies. See our book, Chapter 9, Section 2, Subsection 2. Moreover, after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the United States also vigorously promoted “color revolutions” in some CIS countries. Starting in 2003, it successively planned the so-called “Rose Revolution,” “Orange Revolution,” and “Tulip Revolution” in CIS countries such as Georgia, Ukraine, and Kyrgyzstan. Although the “color revolutions” it planned in countries such as Belarus and Uzbekistan did not succeed, they still caused considerable upheaval. This is not difficult to understand. The fundamental goal of the United States and other Western countries in carrying out religious infiltration into socialist countries is the wholesale export of capitalist ideology and the complete replication of capitalist society. As long as socialist ideology and its social system are not completely eliminated in these countries, they will not let go.

第四，我们依据史实，强调指出美梵神圣同盟对前苏东国家的宗教渗透和政治渗透并未因苏东剧变而停止，这一方面表现在美国继续在前东欧国家实施宗教渗透，另一方面又表现在美国对独联体国家实施“颜色革命”。美国虽然成功导演了前东欧社会主义国家的历史剧变，但却并未因此而松手。东欧剧变后，美国继续对原东欧国家实施境外宗教渗透，进行宗教干涉，即使被用作苏东剧变突破口和试验田的波兰也受到了美国有关机构的严密监测和严重干涉。参阅拙著第9章第2节第2小节。不仅如此，苏联解体后，美国还在一些独联体国家大搞“颜色革命”。自2003年起，它先后在格鲁吉亚、乌克兰、吉尔吉斯坦等独联体国家策划了所谓“玫瑰革命”、“橙色革命”和“郁金香革命”。其在白俄罗斯、乌兹别克斯坦等国策划的“颜色革命”虽未得逞，但也引起了不小的震荡。这是不难理解的。以美国为首的西方国家之所以要对社会主义国家进行宗教渗透，其根本目标即在于资本主义意识形态的全盘输出和资本主义社会的全面复制，而社会主义的意识形态及其社会制度在这些国家一日不彻底肃清，他们就一日不会放手。

Finally, although this book relatively prominently emphasizes the profound impact of overseas religious infiltration on the dramatic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, it does not therefore attribute the dramatic changes entirely to overseas religious infiltration. Rather, as we have repeatedly pointed out in this book, we examine the impact of overseas religious infiltration on the dramatic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe “within the broad perspective of the ‘theory of historical resultant forces.’” The theory of historical resultant forces was first explicitly proposed by Engels in a letter he wrote in 1890. According to this theory, the final result of history is not produced by any single will or force alone, but is formed by a “resultant force” “produced” by “innumerable intersecting forces.” *Selected Works of Marx and Engels*, Vol. 4, People’s Publishing House, 1995, p. 697. It is precisely based on this theory that we assert: the dramatic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, as a historical phenomenon or a “historical result,” were undoubtedly also formed by a “resultant force” “produced” by “innumerable intersecting forces.” This resultant force includes both domestic forces within the Soviet Union and Eastern European countries and foreign forces outside them; among the many foreign forces, it includes both the anti-communist forces of the United States and other Western countries and the anti-communist forces within the Vatican; among the many domestic forces, it includes both various political forces influenced and manipulated by foreign hostile forces and various religious forces influenced and manipulated by the Vatican. Moreover, there is no doubt that the various rightist and “leftist” errors committed by the ruling parties of the former Soviet Union and Eastern European countries during their tenure, and the rigid theoretical models, institutional models, and path models of socialism they promoted, were also an important cause of the dramatic changes. See our book, Part Three, Sections 3 and 4. We believe that this summary and explanation of the causes of the dramatic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe is historically grounded, relatively objective, and relatively fair.

最后，本著虽然比较突出地强调了境外宗教渗透对苏东剧变的深刻影响，但却并未因此将苏东剧变完全归因于境外宗教渗透，而是一如我们在本著中多次指出的，我们是在“‘历史合力论’的大视野”下来考察境外宗教渗透对苏东剧变的影响的。历史合力论是恩格斯在其1890年所写的一封信件中首次明确提出来的。按照这种理论，历史的最终的结果并非只是某一单个的意志和力量产生出来的，而是由“无数互相交错的力量”“产生”出来的“合力”形成的。《马克思恩格斯选集》第4卷，人民出版社1995年第697页。正是根据这样一种理论，我们断言：苏东剧变，作为一个历史现象或一个“历史结果”，无疑也是由“无数互相交错的力量”“产生”出来的“合力”形成的。形成这一合力的既有苏东各国的国内的力量，也有苏东各国的国外的力量；在国外诸多力量中，既包括以美国为首的西方国家的敌视共产主义的力量，也包括梵蒂冈内部敌视共产主义的力量；在国内诸多力量中，既包括受境外敌对势力影响和操纵的各种政治力量，也包括受梵蒂冈影响和操纵的各种宗教力量。而且，毫无疑问，前苏东国家执政党在其执政期间所犯的种种右的和“左”的错误，他们所推行的僵化的社会主义理论模式、制度模式和道路模式，也是苏东剧变的一项重要原因。参阅拙著第三篇第3节和第4节。我们相信，我们对苏东剧变成因的这样一种概括和说明是有历史根据的，也是比较客观和比较公正的。

That is enough on how we concretely revealed the internal connection and profound impact of overseas religious infiltration and the dramatic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe. Now let us discuss how we summarized and generalized the experiences and lessons of the former Soviet Union and Eastern European countries in preventing and resisting overseas religious infiltration. On this issue, I want to mainly discuss the following four points:

关于如何具体昭示境外宗教渗透与苏东剧变的内在关联和深刻影响，就谈这么多。下面我们就来谈谈我们是如何总结和概括前苏东国家在防范和抵御境外宗教渗透方面的经验教训这个问题的。关于这个问题，我想主要谈下面四点：

First, we prominently revealed and criticized the generally accommodating stance adopted by the ruling parties of the former Soviet Union and Eastern European countries in the face of overseas religious infiltration. Nikolai Ryzhkov, who served as Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the Soviet Union for many years, when discussing the historical tragedy of the Soviet dramatic changes, once emphasized that “relying solely on external forces, no one could have done anything to our country.” Therefore, the fundamental reason for the Soviet dramatic changes lay internally in the existence of a “fifth column” within the Soviet Union that “actually fully pursued the goals set by the Soviet Union’s enemies.” Nikolai Ivanovich Ryzhkov, *The Great Power Tragedy: The Causes and Consequences of the Soviet Collapse*, trans. Xu Changhan et al., Xinhua Publishing House, 2010, p. 3. Ryzhkov’s mention of the “fifth column” clearly targeted Gorbachev as the leader of the CPSU. Although this judgment simplifies the issue, it is not without reason. Because, as we emphasized in Chapters 3, 4, and 5 of this book, it was this same Gorbachev who not only submitted to US President Reagan and British Prime Minister Thatcher, but also visited the Vatican to seek “humanitarian” “consensus”; it was this same Gorbachev who sharply turned the CPSU’s religious policy to the right, not only completely abandoning atheistic propaganda and education among the masses and the Soviet government’s legal management of religious affairs, but also unbridledly allowing hostile forces at home and abroad to use religion to infiltrate and corrode all Party, government, and military departments, and spawned the increasingly serious politicization of religion within the Soviet Union; see our book, pp. 129–133; and it was this same Gorbachev who, on the one hand, loudly sang the Sinatra Doctrine, and on the other hand, constantly pointed fingers at the Eastern European countries, acting as a lobbyist for Western countries. The deep-seated reason why we say the Soviet Union was not only “dismantled” but can also be said to have “dismantled itself,” and why we say the Eastern European countries “lost without a fight,” lies precisely in this kind of numb attitude and accommodating stance adopted by the ruling parties of the Soviet Union and Eastern European countries in the face of religious and political infiltration by foreign hostile forces. This bloody lesson is undoubtedly one we must earnestly learn.

首先，我们着重昭示和批评了前苏东国家执政党面对境外宗教渗透普遍采取的顺应立场。担任前苏联部长会议主席多年的雷日科夫在谈到苏联剧变的历史悲剧时，曾经强调指出“只靠外部力量，谁也不能把我们国家怎么样”，因此，苏联剧变之所以发生，最根本的还在于苏联内部有一个“实际上完全奉行苏联敌人所树立的目标的‘第五纵队’”。尼古拉·伊万诺维奇·雷日科夫：《大国悲剧：苏联解体的前因后果》，徐昌翰等译，新华出版社2010年，第3页。雷日科夫谈“第五纵队”，其锋芒显然直指作为苏共领袖的戈尔巴乔夫。他的这一论断虽然把问题简单化，但也不无道理。因为一如我们在本著第三章、第四章和第五章中强调指出的，正是这个戈尔巴乔夫不仅对美国总统里根和英国首相撒切尔夫人俯首听命，而且还造访梵蒂冈，寻求“人道主义”的“共识”；正是这个戈尔巴乔夫使苏共的宗教政策急剧右转，不仅完全放弃了对人民群众的无神论宣传教育和苏维埃政府对宗教事务的依法管理，而且还一味地放纵境内外敌对势力利用宗教对党政军各个部门的渗透和腐蚀，并催生了苏联境内宗教的日益严重的政治化；参阅拙著第129-133页。也正是这个戈尔巴乔夫，一方面高唱辛纳屈主义，另一方面又不断地对东欧诸国指手画脚，充当西方国家的说客。我们之所以说苏联不仅是“被解体”，而且还可以说是“自解体”，我们之所以说东欧国家是“不战而败”，究其深层原因，正在于苏东国家执政党面对境外敌对势力的宗教渗透和政治渗透所采取的这样一种麻木态度和顺应立场。这样一条血的教训无疑是我们应当认真汲取的。

Secondly, we not only exposed and criticized the accommodating stance generally adopted by the ruling parties of the former Soviet and Eastern European countries in the face of foreign religious infiltration, but also analyzed in a relatively concrete and in-depth manner some of the reasons for this. In this work, we compared the leaders of the ruling parties of the Soviet and Eastern European countries in the 1980s with the fighters of the Paris Commune in the 1870s, pointing out: At that time, the Paris working class, under the circumstances of the Prussian army approaching the city, the French bourgeois defense government signing a surrender agreement with Prussia and deciding to fully suppress the Paris workers, not only launched an armed uprising with dauntless spirit and established the Paris Commune regime, but also defended the Paris Commune with dauntless spirit, with many of them gloriously sacrificing their lives for the Paris Commune, to the extent that Marx sincerely highly praised them, calling these "Parisians who went to their deaths with such courage," these "martyrs," who "will forever be hailed as the glorious pioneers of the new society." [10]10 Marx, "The Civil War in France," in *Marx/Engels Selected Works*, Vol. 2 (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1969), pp. 188-189. The Chinese edition cited is *Selected Works of Marx and Engels*, Vol. 3, People's Publishing House, 1995, pp. 76, 81. However, in the dramatic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, it seems difficult to find such martyrs. As we pointed out in this work, whether it was Wojciech Jaruzelski, First Secretary of the Polish United Workers' Party, or Károly Grósz, General Secretary of the Hungarian Socialist Workers' Party, whether it was Miloš Jakeš and Ladislav Urbanek, General Secretaries of the Communist Party of Czechoslovakia, or Todor Zhivkov and Petar Mladenov, General Secretaries of the Bulgarian Communist Party, whether it was Erich Honecker and Egon Krenz, Chairmen of the Socialist Unity Party of Germany, or Milan Šuvar and Milan Pančevski, Presidents of the Presidium of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia, whether it was Nicolae Ceaușescu, General Secretary of the Romanian Communist Party, or Mikhail Gorbachev, General Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee, throughout the entire dramatic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, none of them deserved the title of hero! [11]11 The reference is to the author's own work, *A Study of Foreign Religious Infiltration and the Dramatic Changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe*, pp. 332-334. See our work, pp. 332-334.

其次，我们不仅昭示和批评了前苏东国家执政党面对境外宗教渗透普遍采取的顺应立场，而且还比较具体和深入地分析了其所以如此的一些原因。在本著中，我们曾拿20世纪80年代苏东国家执政党的领袖与19世纪70年代巴黎公社的战士比较，指出：当年，巴黎工人阶级是在普鲁士军队兵临城下、法国资产阶级国防政府与普鲁士签订投降协定并决定全力镇压巴黎工人的背景下，不仅以大无畏的精神举行了武装起义，建立了巴黎公社政权，而且还以大无畏的精神捍卫了巴黎公社，其中许多人为巴黎公社光荣捐躯，以致马克思由衷地高度赞扬他们，称赞这些“慷慨赴死的巴黎人”，这些“英烈”，“将永远作为新社会的光辉先驱为人所称颂”。《马克思恩格斯选集》，第3卷，人民出版社1995年，第76、81页。然而，我们在苏东剧变中，似乎很难找到这样的英烈。一如我们在本著中所指出的，无论是波兰统一工人党第一书记雅鲁泽尔斯基，还是匈牙利社会主义工人党总书记卡洛伊，无论是捷克斯洛伐克共产党总书记雅克什和乌尔班内克，还是保共总书记日夫科夫和姆拉德诺夫，无论是德国统一社会党主席昂纳克和克伦茨，还是南共主席团主席舒瓦尔和潘切夫斯基，无论是罗马尼亚共产党总书记齐奥塞斯库，还是苏共中央总书记戈尔巴乔夫，在整个苏东剧变中统统都配不上英雄的称号！！参阅拙著第332-334页。

According to our analysis, a fundamental reason why the leaders of the ruling parties of the former Soviet and Eastern European countries did not deserve the title of hero is that they were almost all defeated without a fight, and the reason they did not fight was not entirely because they feared battle, but often because they could not find their own target of struggle, and the most fundamental reason they could not find their target of struggle was their lack of "East-West" consciousness and lack of a concept of "enemy situation." [12]12 "East-West" consciousness refers to an awareness of the geopolitical and ideological confrontation between the socialist East and the capitalist West, a term derived from the Cold War framework. At the time, Deng Xiaoping clearly emphasized that there are two major problems in the world today: one is the "East-West" problem, and the other is the "North-South" problem. [13]13 Deng Xiaoping, "Peace and Development Are the Two Outstanding Issues in the World Today," in *Selected Works of Deng Xiaoping*, Vol. 3, People's Publishing House, 2008, p. 344. It is hard to imagine that a leader of a ruling party in a socialist country, completely lacking "East-West" consciousness and completely lacking socialist consciousness, could effectively lead the country in preventing and resisting foreign hostile forces' religious and political infiltration, and effectively safeguarding socialist ideological security and national security. As we emphasized in this work, an important lesson from the dramatic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe is that to effectively prevent and resist foreign religious and political infiltration and safeguard socialist ideological security and national security, we must firmly establish "East-West" consciousness. This bloody lesson is one we must earnestly learn. Admittedly, with the conclusion of the dramatic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, we entered the so-called "post-Cold War era." In the post-Cold War era, although the East-West contradiction no longer constitutes the principal contradiction of the era and has been downgraded to a secondary contradiction of our era, a secondary contradiction is still a contradiction. Moreover, since in the current era, socialist countries are all without exception underdeveloped or developing countries, there is inevitably a "coinciding relationship" or "subordinate relationship" between the "East-West" problem and the "North-South" problem. This makes the contradiction and conflict between "Westernization" and "anti-Westernization" in our era carry a certain character that affects the overall international situation. In this sense, we can say that this historical lesson of the dramatic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe still has its indelible value for reference today.

依照分析，前苏东各国执政党的领导人之所以配不上英雄的称号，一个根本原因就在于他们差不多都是不战而败的，而他们之所以不战，也并非完全因为他们惧战，而往往是因为他们找不到他们自己的战斗对象，而他们之所以找不到自己的战斗对象，最根本的就在于他们缺乏“东西”意识，缺乏“敌情”观念。当年，邓小平曾明确地强调过当今世界存在有两大问题，一个是“东西”问题，一个是“南北”问题。《邓小平文选》，第3卷，人民出版社2008年，第344页。很难想象，一个社会主义国家执政党的领导人完全没有“东西”意识，完全没有社会主义意识，他能够领导这个国家卓有成效地防范和抵御境外敌对势力对其进行的宗教渗透和政治渗透，卓有成效地维护社会主义的意识形态安全和国家安全。一如我们在本著中强调指出的，苏东剧变给我们的一项重要启示即在于：为要有效地防范和抵御境外宗教渗透和政治渗透、维护社会主义的意识形态安全和国家安全，我们就必须牢固地树立“东西”意识。这个血的教训也是我们必须认真汲取的。诚然，随着苏东剧变的谢幕，我们步入了所谓“后冷战时代”。在后冷战时代，东西矛盾虽然不再构成时代的主要矛盾，而下降成为我们时代的一项次要矛盾，但次要矛盾毕竟也是一种矛盾。而且，既然在当今时代，社会主义国家无一不是不发达国家或发展中国家，则“东西”问题与“南北”问题之间便在所难免地存在有一种“重合关系”或“从属关系”。这就使得“西化”和“反西化”的矛盾和冲突在我们的时代带有某种关涉国际全局的性质。从这个意义上，我们不妨说，苏东剧变的这一历史教训至今依然有其不可磨灭的借鉴价值。

Thirdly, in this work, we also devoted a certain amount of space to examining the actions of Polish Academy of Sciences academician Adam Schaff during the Polish dramatic changes, emphasizing the necessity for scholars in socialist countries, especially those engaged in philosophy and social science work, to establish "East-West" consciousness. In this work, there is a section titled "The Loss and Awakening of a Communist from Eastern Europe," which discusses Schaff. [14]14 Adam Schaff (1913-2006) was a Polish Marxist philosopher and academician of the Polish Academy of Sciences. He was a member of the Polish United Workers' Party and initially supported the regime but later became critical. The *Platform Sutra of the Sixth Patriarch* says: "The previous thought being deluded is the ordinary person; the later thought being awakened is the Buddha." [15]15 The *Platform Sutra of the Sixth Patriarch* is a foundational text of Chan (Zen) Buddhism, attributed to Huineng (638-713 CE), the Sixth Patriarch. And Schaff's loss and awakening also lay in a single thought. That is to say, the reason Schaff was "deluded" in the early stage of the Polish dramatic changes was because he lacked "East-West" consciousness; the reason he was "awakened" in the later stage of the Polish dramatic changes was because, in the face of bloody facts, he became aware of the "East-West" problem and acquired the ability to consider both the "domestic" and "international" overall situations. [16]16 The phrase "considering both the domestic and international overall situations" is a standard formulation in Chinese political discourse, emphasizing a comprehensive strategic perspective. See our work, pp. 334-343. This shows that not only do leaders of socialist countries need to establish "East-West" consciousness, but even philosophy and social science workers in socialist countries also need to establish "East-West" consciousness, considering both the "domestic" and "international" overall situations. Schaff was a very famous scholar in the former Eastern European countries, and some of his academic views have also influenced me personally. In my earlier published book *Philosophy of Death*, I cited his views. [17]17 Duan Dezhi, *Philosophy of Death*, Hubei People's Publishing House, 1991, pp. 17-18. See Duan Dezhi, *Philosophy of Death*, Hubei People's Publishing House, 1991, pp. 17-18. Perhaps for this reason, when studying the dramatic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, I paid particular attention to his behavior. I believe that Schaff's loss and awakening during the Polish dramatic changes have significant reference value for us scholars.

第三，在这部著作中，我们还花费了一定的篇幅考察了波兰科学院院士沙夫在波兰剧变中的作为，强调了社会主义国家的学者，尤其是从事哲学社会科学工作的学者树立“东西”意识的必要性。在本著中有一节叫“一个东欧共产党人的迷失与觉醒”，讲的就是沙夫。《六祖坛经》说：“前念迷即凡夫，后念悟即佛。”而沙夫之迷失和觉醒也在一念之间。也就是说，沙夫之所以在波兰剧变前期“迷”，乃是因为他缺乏“东西”意识，他之所以在波兰剧变后期“悟”，乃是因为他在血的事实面前觉悟到了“东西”问题，获得了兼顾“国内”和“国际”两个大局的思考能力。参阅拙著第334-343页。这就说明，不仅社会主义国家的领导人需要树立“东西”意识，而且即使社会主义国家的哲学社会科学工作者，也同样需要树立“东西”意识，兼顾“国内”和“国际”两个大局。沙夫是前东欧国家非常著名的学者，他的一些学术观点对我本人也有过一定影响。我在早年出版的《死亡哲学》一书中就曾援引过他的观点。参阅段德智：《死亡哲学》，湖北人民出版社1991年，第17-18页。也可能是由于这个原因，我在研究苏东剧变时，特别关注他的表现。相信沙夫在波兰剧变中的迷失和觉醒，对于我们这些学者来说是有重大的借鉴意义的。

Finally, this work also relatively comprehensively summarized the experiences and lessons of religious work in the Soviet and Eastern European countries, making the generalization that "the Right ruins the country, and the 'Left' also ruins the country," emphasizing that the religious work of socialist countries must fight on two fronts, with the main purpose and standard being to actively guide religion to adapt to socialist society. [18]18 The phrase "the Right ruins the country, and the 'Left' also ruins the country" is a critique of both Rightist (liberalizing) and Leftist (dogmatic or ultra-radical) deviations in policy, common in Chinese Communist Party self-criticism. In the dramatic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, the phenomenon of religion and religious organizations in some countries "defecting" at the critical moment of the dramatic changes is very distressing. The reason for this is certainly related to the religious and political infiltration of foreign hostile forces and the Rightist religious work line implemented by the Soviet and Eastern European countries, but it is also related to the long-term implementation of "Leftist" lines, principles, and policies in the religious work of these countries. For example, the large-scale defection of the broad masses of religious believers during the process of the dissolution of the Soviet Union is not unrelated to the long-term implementation of the Leftist line by the Soviet Union, especially to the "campaign to eliminate religion" launched by the Soviet Union in the 1930s and 1950s. [19]19 The "campaign to eliminate religion" refers to the Soviet state's violent anti-religious campaigns, particularly under Stalin in the 1930s and again under Khrushchev in the late 1950s and early 1960s, involving the closure of churches, persecution of clergy, and suppression of religious practice. See our work, pp. 354-355. This also makes us realize that the religious work of socialist countries has a thousand threads and a myriad of ends, but the most fundamental thing is to properly solve the problem of religion adapting to socialist society. If we deviate from this purpose, our religious work will all be just showy tricks and superficial articles.

最后，本著还比较全面地总结了苏东国家宗教工作的经验教训，做出了“右误国，‘左’也误国”的概括，强调社会主义国家的宗教工作必须坚持两条战线作战，以积极引导宗教与社会主义社会相适应为主旨和圭臬。在苏东剧变中，一些国家的宗教和宗教组织在剧变的紧要关头出现了“倒戈”现象，这是令人非常痛心的。其所以如此，固然与境外敌对势力的宗教渗透和政治渗透有关，同苏东国家推行右的宗教工作路线有关，但也与这些国家在宗教工作中长期推行“左”的路线和方针政策有关。例如，在苏联解体过程中广大宗教信众的大面积倒戈就与苏联长期推行的左倾路线不无关联，尤其是与苏联在30年代和50年代发动的“消灭宗教运动”不无关联。参阅拙著第354-355页。这也使我们认识到，社会主义国家的宗教工作千头万绪，最根本的就是要解决好宗教与社会主义社会相适应的问题，离开了这一宗旨，我们的宗教工作便都是花拳绣腿，表面文章。

Finally, in responding to and criticizing contemporary theses of the end of ideology, we mainly did the following three aspects of work:

最后，在回应和批判当代意识形态终结论方面，我们主要做了下述三个方面的工作：

First, following the scholarly principle of the Qing-dynasty writer Gong Zizhen that “to emerge from history is to enter the Way,”[20]20 Gong Zizhen (1792–1841) was a Qing-dynasty poet, thinker, and reformist scholar. The phrase “to emerge from history is to enter the Way” expresses his view that studying history is the path to understanding the fundamental principles (the “Way”) of governance and society. we conducted a long-term historical investigation of the international communist movement, and on this basis pointed out: “Although the dramatic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe have brought enormous negative impacts on the international communist movement,” “from a long-term perspective, they are merely an episode in the long-standing international communist movement. Moreover, just as the dissolution of the Communist League, the dissolution of the First International, and the bankruptcy of the Second International all brought various losses to the international communist movement but did not cause it to cease, so too, although the dramatic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe represent an extremely serious setback for the international communist movement, the international communist movement will likewise not cease because of them; the revival or revitalization of the international communist movement is still imminent.” (See our book, pp. 6–7.) Those who preach that socialist ideology and its social system will completely disappear as a result of the dramatic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe are, if not worrying groundlessly, then certainly acting with ulterior motives!

首先，我们依据清人龚自珍“出乎史，入乎道”龚自珍：《龚自珍全集》，上海人民出版社1975年，第81页。的治学原则，对国际共产主义运动做了长时段的历史考察，并在此基础上指出：“尽管苏东剧变给国际共产主义运动带来了巨大的负面影响”，“但从长远的观点看问题，它只不过是“源远流长的国际共产主义运动史上的一个插曲而已。而且正如共产主义同盟的解散、第一国际的解散和第二国际的破产虽然也都曾给国际共产主义运动带来这样那样的损失，但国际共产主义运动却并未因此而终止一样，苏东剧变虽然是国际共产主义运动的一次至为严重的挫折，但国际共产主义运动也同样不会因此而终止，国际共产主义运动的复兴或振兴依然是指日可待的。”参阅拙著第6-7页。那种宣扬社会主义意识形态及其社会制度将因苏东剧变而彻底消亡观点的人如果不是杞人忧天，那就必定是别有用心！

Second, based on historical facts from the period of the dramatic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, and especially after them, we demonstrate that even in the former Soviet and Eastern European countries, although socialist ideology and its political system lost their dominant position during those changes, the soil for their existence and development still remains. First, in the new state institutions established after the changes, a considerable portion of the personnel who had previously held important positions in government departments in these countries remained in their original units and departments. Even Lech Wałęsa, the head of the Polish Solidarity trade union, after being elected president, retained a large number of so-called “old regime personnel.” Second, at the time of the dramatic changes, the communist parties in most Soviet and Eastern European countries were declared illegal organizations, but not long after the changes, these countries’ communist party organizations were not only able to conduct activities legally but also regained the trust of a considerable part of the population. This phenomenon was also prominent in Russia. The Communist Party of the Russian Federation was banned from activities by the authorities after the “August 19” incident in 1991,[21]21 The “August 19” incident refers to the 1991 Soviet coup attempt by hardline members of the Communist Party and the KGB against Mikhail Gorbachev’s reforms, which accelerated the dissolution of the Soviet Union. was reestablished in 1993, and in the State Duma elections held that year won 12% of the vote and 45 seats, becoming the third-largest party; in the 1995 State Duma elections, it won 22% of the vote and became the largest party. Finally, views in the former Soviet and Eastern European countries toward the communist leaders before the changes have also shifted to some extent. For example, during the process of the Soviet Union’s dissolution, Stalin became the target of unanimous condemnation by almost all Russian media, but after the dramatic changes, people’s perceptions underwent major changes. According to statistics, the proportion of Russian citizens who believed Stalin’s merits outweighed his faults was 28% in 1996 and reached 42% in 2009. (See our book, pp. 369–372.)

其次，我们依据苏东剧变中，特别是苏东剧变后的一些历史事实说明，即使在前苏东国家，社会主义的意识形态及其政治制度尽管在苏东剧变中丧失了其主导地位，但其存在和发展的土壤依然存在。首先，在剧变后所建立的新的国家机构中，这些国家此前担任政府部门重要工作人员中相当一部分依然留在原单位原部门工作，即使波兰团结工会头头瓦文萨在当选总统后，他也留用了一大批所谓“旧政权人员”。其次，苏东剧变时，大多数苏东国家的共产党被宣布为非法组织，但在苏东剧变后没过多久，这些国家的共产党组织不仅能够合法地开展活动，而且又在相当一部分群众中赢得信任。这种现象在俄罗斯也有突出表现。俄罗斯共产党在1991年“8·19”事件后被当局禁止活动，1993年重建，在当年举行的国家杜马选举中获得12%的选票，取得45个席位，成为第三大党，在1995年国家杜马选举中获得22%的选票，成为第一大党。最后，前苏东国家对剧变前共产党领袖的看法也发生了一定的变化。例如，在苏联解体过程中，斯大林差不多成了俄罗斯各媒体众口一词的口诛笔伐对象，但苏东剧变后，人们的观念发生了重大变化。据统计，俄罗斯民众认为斯大林功大于过的，1996年为28%，2009年则达到42%。参阅拙著第369-372页。

Finally, this book analyzes and critiques the contemporary end-of-ideology thesis from epistemological and methodological perspectives. In China, most scholars critique the contemporary end-of-ideology thesis from the angles and standpoints of political science and international relations. Our innovation lies in further analyzing and critiquing it from epistemological and methodological angles and standpoints. We believe that, viewed from epistemological and methodological perspectives, the contemporary end-of-ideology thesis has two fundamental defects: one is abstract logical centrism, and the other is narrow empiricism. By abstract logical centrism, we mean that proponents of the contemporary end-of-ideology thesis do not proceed strictly and directly from historical facts, but rather from logical concepts or abstract axioms of their own fabrication, engaging in syllogistic deduction. Although their theories come in many forms, the core proof is nothing more than the following syllogism: “(1) (Major premise) Liberal democracy is the goal and endpoint of human historical development; (2) (Minor premise) The capitalist system is liberal democracy; (3) (Conclusion) The capitalist system is the goal and endpoint of human historical development.” Whether it is Nixon’s “victory without war” thesis, Brzezinski’s “failure” thesis, or Fukuyama’s “end of history” thesis, they all play this same game—a thousand variations but never straying from the same principle. Francis Bacon once denounced such a method of argumentation as “sophistical” “idols of the theater.”[22]22 Francis Bacon’s “idols of the theater” are one of his four categories of intellectual errors; they refer to dogmatic philosophical systems or false theories that are accepted uncritically as if they were plays on a stage. (See our book, pp. 33–34.) As for narrow empiricism, this means that proponents of the contemporary end-of-ideology thesis do indeed cite some empirical facts from the dramatic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, but they do not conduct a theoretical analysis of these empirical facts in the spirit of seeking truth from facts; instead, they exaggerate them without limit, directly and immediately drawing the conclusion that capitalist ideology and its social system have already achieved final victory and that socialist ideology and its social system have already withdrawn from the stage of history. Francis Bacon once called this method of argumentation “empirical” “idols of the theater” and pointed out that its error lies in “leaping from particular instances to and flying off to remote axioms and almost the highest general principles,”[23]23 This quotation is from Bacon’s *Novum Organum*, where he criticizes the method of leaping from a few particular observations to the highest generalizations without intermediate steps. thereby committing the fallacy of “non sequitur.” (See our book, pp. 34–35.) In this way, from a methodological and epistemological perspective, we have exposed the “idols” and disguises of the contemporary end-of-ideology thesis, determining that their conclusions are nothing but “false propositions” and their theories nothing but a “pseudo-science.”

最后，本著从认识论和方法论的角度对当代意识形态终结论进行了分析批判。在我国，大多数学者批判当代意识形态终结论往往着眼于政治学和国际关系学的角度和立场，我们的创新之处在于我们还进而从认识论和方法论的角度和立场对之作出进一步的分析批判。我们认为，从认识论和方法论的角度看问题，当代意识形态终结论有两个根本的弊端：一是抽象的逻辑中心主义，一是狭隘的经验主义。所谓抽象的逻辑中心主义是说：当代意识形态终结论者不是严格地直接从历史事实出发，而是从他们自己杜撰的逻辑概念或抽象公理出发进行三段论式演绎。他们的理论虽然花样繁多，但其核心证明无非是这样一个三段论：“（1）（大前提）自由民主制度是人类历史发展的目的和终点；（2）（小前提）资本主义制度是自由民主制度；（3）（结论）资本主义制度是人类历史发展的目的和终点。”无论是尼克松的“不战而胜论”和布热津斯基的“失败论”，还是福山的“历史终结论”，玩的都是这一套，可谓万变不离其宗。当年，弗兰西斯·培根曾将这样一种论辩手段斥之为“诡辩的”“剧场假相”。参阅拙著第33-34页。至于狭隘的经验主义是说，当代意识形态终结论确实也援引过苏东剧变的一些经验事实，但他们并不是对这些经验事实做实事求是的理论分析，而是无限上纲，一下子从中直接引申出资本主义意识形态及其社会制度已然取得了最终的胜利、社会主义意识形态及其社会制度已然退出了历史舞台的结论。当年，弗兰西斯·培根曾将这样一种论证方法称作“经验的”“剧场假相”，并指出这种方法错谬之处在于“从特殊的事例一下跳到和飞到遥远的公理和几乎是最高的普遍原则上去”，北京大学哲学系外国哲学史教研室编译：《十六—十八世纪西欧各国哲学》，商务印书馆1975年，第24页。从而犯了“不能推出”的错误。参阅拙著第34-35页。这样，我们就从方法论和认识论的角度戳穿了当代意识形态终结论的“假相”和伪装，判定他们的论断无非是一些“假命题”，他们的理论无非是一种“伪科学”。

(Author: Professor of Religious Studies, School of Philosophy, Wuhan University)

（作者：武汉大学哲学学院宗教学教授）

Online Editor: Cai Hong

网络编辑：彩虹