本文是在討論「主義」由一個非中國傳統所本有而從外面引進的概念，如何一步一步成為取代新文化運動，發展成異常強大的新政治思想論述。本文分四個階段討論之。第一階段是主義作為一種「重寶」在日本誕生的過程，並討論「主義」一詞在東亞傳播。第二、是討論由「道」→「主義」的過程。在不用「主義」一詞翻譯西方的“-ism”等字眼之前，人們常使用「道」之類的字眼來翻譯，譬如社會主義譯為「公用之道」。「道」是一個比較傳統，且也比較帶有包容性的概念，「主義」從字面上看來便帶有比較濃厚的一貫性、排他性及意志論的色彩，帶有堅持特定主張與方向的意涵。第二階段是1900年以後一直到新文化運動之前，此時主義逐步取得了思想上的優勢地位。在這個階段，人們使用「主義」或談論「主義」時，基本上是以近代西方的民主政治為模型，區分現代政治與傳統政治，認為近代政黨政治是有主義之爭，現代型的政治人物是有一貫主義的政治人物。主義論述的第三階段是新文化運動及五四前後這一段時期，人們宣稱「有主義總比沒主義好」，此時出現大量「主義化」的例子。此外，還有幾種值得注意的發展：理想世界的變化、改造社會、社會革命之說壓倒新文化運動以文學、倫理革命的主軸的思維，新的社會理想，是在社會之外去創造一個新的社會，使得現實與理想之間距離拉得非常大。青年人受到辛亥革命成功的暗示，認為理想是可以透過組織的力量加以完成的，人們以為天下無難事，最美善的境界只要有人去提倡就立刻會得實現。主義論述的第四階段是1920年代以後：中國共產黨的成立，孫中山(1866-1925)以俄國為師，俄國式的「主義、黨、黨軍」三位一體，成為國民黨的新方向。全國只能有一個主義，只能有一個黨，以黨治國、以黨治軍的「新型力量」成了主義的新面目。

This paper discusses the introduction of ＂ism,＂ a concept foreign to the Chinese tradition, to China and how it gradually came to replace the New Culture movement, developing into an exceedingly powerful new discourse in political thought. This paper examines this process through four distinct phases. This paper discusses the first phase in terms of birth and development of ＂ism＂ in Japan and how it became a ＂precious treasure,＂ while also examining the dissemination of ＂ism＂ across East Asia. In terms of usage, this section will also survey the transformation from dao 道 to ＂ism.＂ Before ＂ism＂ had not translated into Western ＂-ism＂ terms, people usually employed Chinese characters such as dao to render such ideas. For instance, the general translation for socialism was gongyong zhi dao 公用之道(the socialist way). Dao is a rather traditional and inclusive concept, but ＂ism＂ on the other hand, at least from the term itself, expresses a sense of uniformity, exclusivity, and determinism, connoting stubborn advocacy and drive. The second phase began at the start of the twentieth century and ended at the dawn of the New Culture movement, during which ＂ism＂ gradually came to dominate intellectual life. When people used the term ＂ism＂ or discussed ＂isms,＂ they were essentially employing the model of modern Western democracy as a way to distinguish modern politics from traditional politics. They understood that modern party politics rested on competing ＂isms＂ and that modern political figures were politicians who adhered to a consistent ＂ism.＂ The third phase of the discourse on ＂ism＂ spanned the New Culture and May Fourth movements. During this period, people declared that, ＂having an ‘ism’ is better than not having one,＂ and many instances of ＂ism-ization＂ appeared. In addition, there were several other noteworthy developments. Changes regarding the ideal world, the transformation of society, and the concept of social revolution overtook the literary and ethical revolutions earlier propounded by the New Culture movement. As well, a new ideal of society-a new society created outside of existing society-widened the gulf between the ideal and reality. Influenced by the success of the 1911 Revolution, the younger generation believed that ideals could be realized through the power of organization, that nothing in this world is impossible, and even the most beautiful realm can become reality as long as someone is willing to advocate for it. The fourth and final stage of this discourse began in the 1920s with the founding of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Sun Yat-sen adopted the Communist Party of the Soviet Union as a model, and the Soviet trinity of ＂ism, party, and party army＂ became the new vision of the Chinese Nationalist Party (Kuomintang, KMT). The new face of ＂ism＂ thus heldthat a country can only hold a single ＂ism＂ and a single party, and that this one-party system, in which a single party rules the country and controls the army, embodied a ＂new power.＂