“廢督裁兵”是民國初年一種流行的政治口號，尤其在1920年代，隨著國內政爭及各派系軍事對抗的加劇，廢督裁兵運動異常熱烈。身任浙江督軍的盧永祥氏與此運動關係密切，其行動在一定程度上推動了廢督裁兵運動的發展。 目前的研究多認為盧永祥提倡廢督裁兵主要是用來鞏固其統治政權的一種策略，並無實際的誠意，此亦其廢督舉動效果不彰的根源。本文將盧永祥個人性格、信仰等因素及環境力量引入考察範圍，通過若干具體問題的考察。對盧氏與1920年代浙江廢督裁兵運動之間的關係作一重新探討。並由此反省民初歷史研究中「軍閥」概念框架的缺陷。 其實，盧永祥既不適合一般所謂「軍閥」的定義，其在浙省推行的一些政策亦與一般意義上「軍閥統治」的特點不符。從其與浙省廢督裁兵運動的關係來看，盧氏倡導廢督裁兵，既有迎合民意的考量，亦與其理性思考或政治理想有關。廢督後改任督辦是浙省軍事將領及地方公團的一致意見所促成；裁兵不能實現，更與時勢的變化及軍事將領的抵觸、兵士安置的困難等外在因素有莫大關係。 “Feidu Caibing” was a popular political slogan of Early Republican China, especially in the 1920s. Along with the severity of political disputes and military conflicts between different cliques, the Feidu Caibing Movement became fervent. Lu Yongxiang, Zhejiang military governor, was closely related to the movement . To some extent, his action accelerated it. According to existing studies, Lu Yongxiang did attempt to consolidate his political position by calling for the elimination of military governorships (dujun) and the disband of troops and had supported them.. (?) But Lu’s elimination of himself the title dujun had few substantial results due to his lack of sincerity. In this article, the author emphasizes the influence of Lu’s character and belief on his actions and points out some important exterior forces which should not be ignored. Through the discussion of several issues, the author trys to review the relationship between Lu Yongxiang and Feidu Caibing Movement in the 1920s, and analyzes the limitation of “warlord” concept frame. In fact, Lu Yongxiang was different from the commonly referred “warlord”, and his policies in Zhejiang Province had few accordance with the characteristics of “warlord politics”. His advocate of Feidu Caibing not only catered to the public opinion but also was a result of his reason thinking and political ideal. He held another military governorship named “junwu shanhou duban” with the request of military officers and local groups in Zhejiang when he abdicated his position. But he could not disband the troops in the pressures of the changing situation, the opposing of military generals, and the actual difficulty for settling the soldiers.