發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-03-05 18:38

  本文選題：文化維度　切入點(diǎn)：道光皇帝　出處：《青年記者》2014年28期 　論文類(lèi)型：期刊論文

【摘要】：正《天朝的崩潰》從與傳統(tǒng)觀點(diǎn)不同的角度解讀鴉片戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng):比如指出傳統(tǒng)史學(xué)道德批判的說(shuō)服力欠缺;指出鴉片戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)清政府不僅失敗在武器裝備、戰(zhàn)略戰(zhàn)術(shù)上,更失敗在思想落后、體制落后上;不存在"如果沒(méi)有‘投降派’,鴉片戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)可能勝利"的可能性。通過(guò)該書(shū)提供的豐富史料、研究思路和研究結(jié)論,我的解讀有: 1."不確定性規(guī)避"的差異。鴉片戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)時(shí)期道光皇帝"守其常而不知其變",認(rèn)為英國(guó)人和中國(guó)的少數(shù)民族并無(wú)不同,
[Abstract]:"the collapse of the Chinese Dynasty" interprets the Opium War from a different angle of view from the traditional perspective: for example, pointing out the lack of persuasiveness in the moral criticism of traditional historiography; and pointing out that the Qing government in the Opium War not only failed in weapons and equipment, but also in strategic and tactical terms. The failure lies in the backward ideology and backward system; there is no possibility that "if there were no capitulation, the Opium War would have been victorious." through the rich historical data, research ideas and conclusions provided by the book, My interpretation is as follows: 1. The difference of "uncertainty avoidance". During the Opium War, the Emperor of Daoguang "kept to himself but did not know how to change." he believed that there was no difference between the British and the ethnic minorities in China.
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：K253

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 李文娟;;霍夫斯泰德文化維度與跨文化研究[J];社會(huì)科學(xué);2009年12期

2 劉利華;;全球化下的文化維度理論與跨文化商務(wù)交際[J];全國(guó)商情(理論研究);2009年24期

3 孫妮;;跨文化交際多維空間文化差異模式研究[J];湖南醫(yī)科大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2010年03期

4 王s，

本文編號(hào)：1571461