本文選題：獨(dú)立協(xié)會　切入點(diǎn)：戊戌變法　出處：《延邊大學(xué)》2013年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：1898年發(fā)生的朝鮮獨(dú)立協(xié)會活動與中國的戊戌變法運(yùn)動都是在半殖民地命運(yùn)下的愛國救亡性質(zhì)的資產(chǎn)階級改良運(yùn)動。作為當(dāng)時社會的先進(jìn)階級,資產(chǎn)階級改良派為本國的救亡圖存貢獻(xiàn)了自己的力量,同時在運(yùn)動中也體現(xiàn)出了其階級本身的時代局限性和軟弱性。本文以這兩次運(yùn)動的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)階層進(jìn)行比較為中心,研究其異同點(diǎn)及其原因,探討半殖民地國家社會改良運(yùn)動的規(guī)律。 1898年獨(dú)立協(xié)會活動的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)層由屬于少壯派的中小開明官吏、歸國留學(xué)生以及青少年學(xué)生和教師組成；戊戌變法的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者出身多為知識份子、中下級官員,值得注意的是支持變法的光緒皇帝。兩次運(yùn)動在領(lǐng)導(dǎo)階層的構(gòu)成上不僅存在著許多相似之處,也有一定的不同。 作為社會改良運(yùn)動,獨(dú)立協(xié)會通過發(fā)動市民群眾的力量,采取自下而上的方式推進(jìn)社會改良；而戊戌變法由于當(dāng)時清朝最高統(tǒng)治者光緒皇帝的支持,則是自上而下地開展維新變法。在改良形式上兩者雖然存在著根本性的區(qū)別,但改良運(yùn)動的發(fā)展思路上卻有著許多相似之處。 在運(yùn)動失敗以后,獨(dú)立協(xié)會活動和戊戌變法的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者們或逃亡國外、或遭到迫害、或向封建頑固勢力妥協(xié)。出現(xiàn)這些現(xiàn)象的原因不盡一致,但其中仍存在著一定的共性。 朝鮮獨(dú)立協(xié)會活動和中國的戊戌變法作為兩國近代史上重要的社會改良運(yùn)動,對當(dāng)時的社會進(jìn)步,國家近代化發(fā)展都有著不可忽視的作用,而通過對兩次運(yùn)動的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)階層異同點(diǎn)的分析能夠使我們更為清晰地認(rèn)識東方半殖民地國家社會改良運(yùn)動。
[Abstract]:In 1898, the activities of the Korean Independence Association and the Reform Movement of 1898 in China were both bourgeois reform movements of the nature of patriotism and national salvation under the fate of the semi-colonies. They were the advanced classes of the society at that time. The bourgeois reformists have contributed their own strength to the national salvation, and at the same time they have also reflected the limitations and weakness of their class itself in the movement. This paper focuses on the comparison of the leadership of the two movements. This paper studies its similarities and differences and its causes, and probes into the law of the social reform movement in semi-colonial countries. In 1898, the leadership of the Independent Association was composed of small, medium and enlightened officials belonging to the Young School, returned students, young students and teachers. The leaders of the Reform Movement of 1898 were mostly intellectuals and middle and junior officials. It is worth noting that emperor Guang Xu, who supported the reform, not only has many similarities in the composition of the leadership, but also has some differences. As a social reform movement, the Independent Association adopted a bottom-up approach to promote social reform by mobilizing the strength of the masses of citizens; and the Reform Movement of 1898 was supported by Emperor Guang Xu, the supreme ruler of the Qing Dynasty at that time. Although there are fundamental differences between the two in the reform form, there are many similarities in the thinking of the development of the reform movement. After the defeat of the movement, the leaders of the Independent Association and the Reform Movement of 1898 fled abroad, were persecuted, or gave way to the feudal diehard forces. As an important social reform movement in the modern history of the two countries, the activities of the Korean Independent Association and the Reform Movement of 1898 in China played an important role in the social progress and modernization of the country at that time. By analyzing the similarities and differences of the leaders of the two movements, we can get a clearer understanding of the social reform movement in the Eastern semi-colonial countries.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：延邊大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2013
【分類號】：K312.41;K256.5

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 歐陽躍峰;周桃正;;張蔭桓:戊戌變法的幕后策劃者[J];安徽師范大學(xué)學(xué)報(人文社會科學(xué)版);2010年05期

2 張云峰;;再論戊戌變法中的張之洞[J];滄桑;2011年01期

3 馮帆;;從改革主體看中日改革的差距——明治維新與戊戌變法成敗緣由新探[J];湖北社會科學(xué);2009年05期

4 唐志勇;;戊戌變法魯籍重要人物王錫蕃[J];春秋;2008年04期

5 吳廷嘉;戊戌與明治時期的中日維新運(yùn)動之比較[J];世界歷史;1987年04期

6 蘇全有;試論劉光弟在戊戌變法時期的政治傾向[J];河南師范大學(xué)學(xué)報(哲學(xué)社會科學(xué)版);1988年03期

7 鄭海麟;;黃遵楷與戊戌變法之關(guān)系[J];近代中國;1998年00期

8 茅海建;“公車上書”考證補(bǔ)(二)[J];近代史研究;2005年04期

9 馬忠文;康有為自編年譜的成書時間及相關(guān)問題[J];近代史研究;2005年04期

10 茅海建;;“康有為自寫年譜手稿本”閱讀報告[J];近代史研究;2007年04期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前3條

1 李恩愛;朝鮮近代開化思想發(fā)展史研究[D];延邊大學(xué);2005年

2 寧秀艷;十九世紀(jì)末中朝兩國民權(quán)思想比較研究[D];延邊大學(xué);2006年

3 李巖;試論朝鮮近代對華觀的嬗變[D];延邊大學(xué);2007年

，

本文編號：1643751