看到“對於高中本國近代史上册的幾點意見”,感到現在對於教科書的批評討論,是很需要的,這對於正在進行中的教科書編審工作,會有很大的幫助。編者宋雲彬先生誠懇地鼓勵讀者批評,虚心地接受批評者的意見,這種態度是很好的。我也認為陳高衡先生的批評多是正確的。但教科書必需儘可能的力求正確,每一問題應該仔細研究反覆討論。爲着引起读者對於這本書討論得更仔細更深入,我再就陳先生所談的範圍,提點意見。陳先生第一點意見上說“應在鸦片戰爭的民族鬥爭性質上體現出與階級鬥爭性質的交錯關系”,這意見是對的。至於陳先生說“我們認為應該肯定地依據史實說明中國反動統治者的階級利害與侵略者之間的矛盾有着統一的本質。”這句話過於籠統,民族鬥爭和階級鬥爭,存在着很複雜的問題。正當太平天國革命運動時期的第二次鸦片戰爭當中,清朝統治者對外的態度,和第一次鸦片戰爭時期已有很大的不同。就在第一次鸦片戰爭時期中的中國統治階級中,也有抗戰派與妥協派的不同。(林則徐等在禁烟抗戰這一點上,是得到當時人 Seeing “Some Opinions on the History of Modern History in Senior High Schools,” I feel it is quite necessary now to criticize textbooks. This will be of great help to the ongoing textbook reviewing work. Editor Song Yunbin sincerely encourage readers to criticize, humbly accept the views of critics, this attitude is very good. I also think Mr.Chen GAO Heng’s criticism is mostly correct. However, textbooks must be as accurate as possible, and each issue should be carefully studied for repeated discussion. In order to arouse readers’ discussion of this book in more detail and in depth, I will give some suggestions on the scope of Mr. Chan’s talk. In his first opinion, Mr. Chen said that “the interlacing relationship with the nature of class struggle should be reflected in the nature of the national struggle in the Opium War”. This view is correct. As for Mr. Chen, he said: “We think it should be affirmed that the contradiction between the class interests of the reactionary rulers of China and the aggressor has a unified essence.” This remark is too general. There are complicated national and class struggles problem. Just during the Second Opium War during the Taiping Revolutionary Movement, the attitude of the Qing rulers to the outside world was quite different from that of the first Opium War. Just as the Chinese ruling class during the First Opium War also differed from the war party and the compromiser. (Lin Zexu, who were at the time of the Anti-Japanese War Against Smoking, were the people of that time