From the founding of the Ming dynasty in 1368 to the start of the Opium Wars in 1841, China has engaged in only two large-scale conflicts with its principal neighbors, Korea, Vietnam, and Japan. These four territorial and centralized states have otherwise fostered peaceful and long-lasting relationships with one another, and as they have grown more powerful, the atmosphere around them has stabilized.
Focusing on the role of the "tribute system" in maintaining stability in East Asia and in fostering diplomatic and commercial exchange, Kang contrasts this history against the example of Europe and the East Asian states' skirmishes with nomadic peoples to the north and west. Although China has been the unquestioned hegemon in the region, with other political units always considered secondary, the tributary order entailed military, cultural, and economic dimensions that afforded its participants immense latitude. Europe's "Westphalian" system, on the other hand, was based on formal equality among states and balance-of-power politics, resulting in incessant interstate conflict.
Scholars tend to view Europe's experience as universal, but Kang upends this tradition, emphasizing East Asia's formal hierarchy as an international system with its own history and character. This approach not only recasts our understanding of East Asian relations but also defines a model that applies to other hegemonies outside the European order.
康燦雄,美國南加州大學國際關係與貿易教授、韓國研究所主任,曾為跨國公司和政府提供谘詢服務。
陳昌煦,北京大學外交學博士,北京大學中國戰略研究中心主任助理。
有评论说本书史实错误较多,可对于业余读者而言,本书的论述还是让人耳目一新的。在西方歪风传到东亚之前,中、日、韩、越诸国大体上相安无事,基于朝贡体制的外交关系让各国互贸互利,儒家文化更是让各国的价值观趋于一同,倒是西风一吹,让各国不再淡定,特别是民族主义势头...
評分有评论说本书史实错误较多,可对于业余读者而言,本书的论述还是让人耳目一新的。在西方歪风传到东亚之前,中、日、韩、越诸国大体上相安无事,基于朝贡体制的外交关系让各国互贸互利,儒家文化更是让各国的价值观趋于一同,倒是西风一吹,让各国不再淡定,特别是民族主义势头...
評分观点还是挺鲜明的。感觉研究东亚各国关系史最大的麻烦就是是否能找出一个完全覆盖住所有时期所有事例的框架,也就是说,总是有例外出现。不过历史本身就是流动的,朝贡体制就像一件外衣,不可能时时都符合体型。 个人比较赞同东亚各国(尤其是网络上)有关历史文化的争论与冲突...
評分有评论说本书史实错误较多,可对于业余读者而言,本书的论述还是让人耳目一新的。在西方歪风传到东亚之前,中、日、韩、越诸国大体上相安无事,基于朝贡体制的外交关系让各国互贸互利,儒家文化更是让各国的价值观趋于一同,倒是西风一吹,让各国不再淡定,特别是民族主义势头...
評分观点还是挺鲜明的。感觉研究东亚各国关系史最大的麻烦就是是否能找出一个完全覆盖住所有时期所有事例的框架,也就是说,总是有例外出现。不过历史本身就是流动的,朝贡体制就像一件外衣,不可能时时都符合体型。 个人比较赞同东亚各国(尤其是网络上)有关历史文化的争论与冲突...
╮(╯▽╰)╭
评分Trade 6
评分╮(╯▽╰)╭
评分這書怎麼說,剛看瞭幾頁我就覺得這書看不下去瞭.典型一瓶子還不滿呢,半瓶子就開始咣當的部分美國學者著作的特點.作者一上來就說這不是曆史書,是本探討國際政治的書(有逃避責任的嫌疑),依據的史料大部分不是一手的,是二手的,作者本科研究生專業都是歐洲政治,自己看不懂中日文引用的資料的質和量都令人懷疑,那還搞啥朝貢體係研究.提的問題是很好,可是分析鴉片戰爭前的東亞國際政治又說這不是關於曆史的書,前後矛盾啊~結論部分做的不太好,邏輯鏈的導齣有問題~但是同意結論的觀點.
评分Trade 6
本站所有內容均為互聯網搜索引擎提供的公開搜索信息,本站不存儲任何數據與內容,任何內容與數據均與本站無關,如有需要請聯繫相關搜索引擎包括但不限於百度,google,bing,sogou 等
© 2025 book.quotespace.org All Rights Reserved. 小美書屋 版权所有