requestId:684d91174a0a09.97601565.
The fundamental problem of the fundamental and political order: The theoretical revelation of the historical thinking of money and the theory
href=”https://twsweetmeet.com/”>Baobao.com rating by Ren Jing
Source: “Humanities and Circles” Baobao Pipeline2021 No. 8
Abstract: The academic community’s emphasis on the great system should pay attention to its inherent conflict, relevance and fundamental nature in modern language. In the major issue of modern China’s transformation period, it has been placed in the path of specialist theory and criticized interest-based disputes, thus in historical knowledge, it is a condition for providing for political practice. Common discussions on the great tradition may focus on the two thousand years of political tradition since the Qin and Han, or perhaps focus on the academic principles represented by Gongyang Science in “Year”. Money-Mu emphasized that “one system” and “poly system” are the basic differences between Chinese and Western political traditions, and actively reminded the system of the major system through the practical hints of historical political traditions in the general historical basis. Mo Mu’s study reminded that the history of Qin and Han before and after the two periods represented two major forms, each including two levels of national form and political and educational mechanism. The national identity formed by the civilized and economic career methods through ethnic aggregation shows a strong traditional sustainability, while political culture and education are highly flexible in the inheritance system. Taoism has deviated from the rule of law, esteem, respect for law, feudal division, county centralization, law, and law, and statute. It has derived a dynamic structure from a series of consciences, which is driven by the proof logic of the major system. Through the foundation of “state” and the great unity, Chinese civilization not only points to the beginning and direction of civilization evolution in the meaning of historical time, but also reminds the national form and the mechanism of political and educational system in terms of order construction. The transcendence and nationality that is included in the normative theory provides a more lively approach to reflecting on the civilizational landscape of world politics.
Keywords: major; statistic; money; political order; basic source; historical thinking
Contracting contract
The only event in Chinese history is the creation of the ethnic group and the country, forming a unity of the ethnic group. But foreigners don’t say this, so we don’t say it either. When foreigners say a modern country, Chinese people say that they will become a modern country. But shouldn’t the highest fantasy of modern countries be a large and unified nation? This is one thing that has been completed for a long time in China’s history. Only by this foundation can we enter the world.
———Mo Mu: “Historical Guidance” (1970) [1]
In the historical and political management discussions of modern China, a major controversial issue is undoubtedly a very controversial issue. Since the late Qing Dynasty, the praise and evaluations submitted by the Praise Network have been discussed. The ideological landscape behind this dispute is embedded in the transformation process of modern China, and it is closely related to the cognitive and discriminatory analysis of tradition and modern paths, and the differences between the forms and quality of Chinese and foreign civilizations. [2] The conflict between ancient and modern times, both in China and abroad, which was triggered by a large theme, is still showing its unexplored reproduction and connotation, and deeply affects the order structure of the current political system. The in-depth development of the modern initiation process has prompted us to further grasp the value of order from the perspective of historical and political management. The pioneering exploration of modern scholar Master Mo Mu reminds us that the fundamental problem that points to political order requires the central value between its theory and reality in dispute, and should realize its new transformation in modern challenges.
1. Modern Controversy of the Monarchy: The transformation from a specialist theory to a state-centered theory
How to understand the constructive position of the Monarchy in Chinese politics and civilization traditions, this historical knowledge problem has been closely linked to our modern transformation process since the late Qing Dynasty. In other words, historical knowledge and modern people’s era knowledge and choices about the transformation of the country are closely related and do not separate. [3]
In the era of transformation (1895-1925), accompanied by the accelerated upgrade of the political and civilized crisis, the unified discussion quickly exceeded the theoretical scope of Chinese history, and introduced a series of theories that were most popular at that time from Western learning, building a stage for ideological analysis. [4] Social evolution, progress history, federalism, politicism, civil administration, worldism, and various Utopian imaginations provide people with extremely impactful and overwhelming new thinking coordinates for their reflection on the historical traditions of their countries. The controversy of a major theme is gradually formed through this intense reflection of the interpretation of meaning. In reflection, some thoughts can be re-seeked and realistic, in line with the historical perspective, while others think from the rootThe country has expanded to the world and has entered the scope of inspection of a large-scale theory. What better represents the spirit of the times is the strong criticism and denial of the great tradition, thereby establishing the value and system of Western learning. This approach binds the major and specialist principles together. Considering that the former is an unrestrained traditional countermeasure of the Eastern people, it needs to be abandoned in modern initiation.
The author once proposed the “Liang Qishao topic” to refer to this approach. 【5】 Liang Rengong believed that the major was composed of political monarchy and civilized ideological forms, which restrained the competitive spirit of cooperation, and led to continuous setbacks after the modern transformation period. Liang Rengong’s viewpoints continued to expand and dilate from the discussions, and the impact of the times was incalculable. “The general public and the general are the fundamental nature of the country.” This strict judgment best represents this era of knowledge. 【6】
Liang Qichao’s thesis can be combined into a monolithic theory on the road of theory. Inside, it defines Chinese political tradition as a specialist system based on the specialist-ministered political type. All civilization and ethics can be interpreted in the specialist theory, and the monolithic political sympathy is regarded as a political unity. The specialist theory of historical knowledge is in response to the unrestrained choice of reincarnation. The modern intinct should be in line with the civilized energy of the Oriental modern times, and criticize and deny this disobedient historical tradition. Historical knowledge is a knowledge trajectory and companion in a certain meaning. The main thing is to strengthen the initiation plan that proves modern practical choices. After defining the modern end of a major tradition, the specialist theory is more concerned with the construction of a new policy system in political theory. Under the promotion of this strong theoretical intention, historical knowledge cannot be sufficiently extended or deepened, and the dispute is no longer ambiguous and intellectual level.
The meaning of historical knowledge in this scheming, either apparent or potential, points to the dramatic denial of historical traditions, which is very easy to slip into impartiality in the cognition of national traditions. The grand statement of Master Mo Mu is to call on the people to pay attention to the focus of the state in historical and political management in a tide of the times when the stylistic theory is prevalent. As we all know, Mo Mu has always maintained a strong preservation attitude towards the specialized criticism of China’s political tradition and has actively conducted a specific historical analysis. This seemingly defensive historical standpoint often does not conceal its more aggressive thinking approach in its argument, and the latter actually develops historical arguments about political order based on a large system.
In 1951, Yu Mu said politely in his opening speech “The Spirit of Chinese History”. Since the reaction of Xinhai, the Chinese people’s learning of the Orient has become more and more teachers, but it has been difficult to achieve success. The five thousand years of deep folding traditions are urgent and unbeatable. This is the modern eraThe most painful and most confusion in the country. The future is to treat one’s own history with tranquil wisdom. The revival of historical knowledge will determine the revival of civilized energy and ethnic energy. This is how China can truly survive independently. [7] The second speech “Politics in the History of China” open
發佈留言