The Ming Dynasty, 1587

On the one hand, words such as "villain gets his ambition" and "bandit" were used to dwarf Li Zicheng's uprising; on the other hand, various arguments were used to dispel the justice of the peasant uprising. Finally, he simply came up with the words "Li Zicheng will rule if he doesn't want to", directly referring to "Li Zicheng" as a synonym for an ignorant, old and decadent group. Later, he further explained that he did not want to be an old empire that only protected poor peasants, but wanted to be an empire that could accommodate smart people; and then further elaborated that it had to accommodate smart people who could make money to have a future, and it could not just tolerate ignorant peasants. Between the lines, an image of a literary youth full of petty bourgeoisie fanaticism emerges. Every word nakedly shows off his unique butt filled with some kind of "brilliance" and "care". As a Marxist-Leninist, seeing this step true is hard to swallow for me. The author wrote earlier that when I see someone kneeling down, I want to rush up and pull him up. I deeply agree. This is a manifestation of the awareness of equality. But isn't it a double standard for you to treat labor eaters and brain eaters nakedly differently? What's the point of showing that you don't want to exploit farmers too much, but also looking down on them? Feudal monarchs should be afraid of peasant uprisings, and the landlord class should be afraid of tenant uprisings. On the basis of this fear, such an ass can be generated, but this is not the ass that a modern person who has received a systematic Marxist-Leninist education, although somewhat dogmatic and idolatrous, should have. It's one thing whether productivity is achieved or not, but how to achieve it is another. Since you wrote about traveling through history in an attempt to "save" something, then it depends on what exactly you want to save? Combining the philosophical and political education we have received and what we see and hear in modern society, what should we save when we return to that era? What you want to save is not a declining feudal dynasty, nor is it to save a so-called "nation", nor is it to kill according to history or to repeat the sufferings and joys that Europeans have endured. What you really want to save is always people, or in other words, what you want to save should be the people. This should be understood from the most simple humanistic care. To fight against natural disasters, fight against war and chaos, fight against acute social contradictions, and fight against the huge gap between rich and poor, we must not only fight, but we must also emphasize over and over again why we fight. You have to fight for those who have no place to stand, for those who have no food to eat, for those who cannot receive education, for those who endure the severe cold, and for those who are old and young and have no support. It is precisely because of the suffering of so many people and the blood and tears of so many people that we must continue to fight, because we cannot survive without fighting. What is it that we modern people find difficult to understand when we look at that period of history? Are you wiping tears for Chongzhen's life? Is it for that bureaucrat, that martial artist, for that gentleman and his wife, or for the landlord who was expelled from his family? What makes us unhappy is always the suffering of the people. Among those landlords, court officials, who are not rich in food and clothing, who are not wearing bright clothes and angry horses, and who are noisy in the countryside, and which one is not eating the blood and sweat of the people? Driving people from the farmlands of landlords into the factories of capitalists is not salvation, at least not the kind of salvation we want.

There seems to be something wrong with this book. The author seems to have a very low self-esteem. He is a majestic emperor and wants to send troops to help Britain fight against Spain. He uses the words "please" Queen Victoria, but he still needs to beg to help others? Translate foreign languages, write without censorship, and print books at will, thinking that this will make the people "yearn for" Western culture more and have a brighter future. The author's writing style is sophisticated, and in some places it has the flavor of Republican prose. Unfortunately, the whole text is filled with a lot of dry historical analysis, which is full of novels, and it is not like a popular novel. I suspect that the original poster looks a bit like a stranger from around the 1970s. He is an intellectual, yearns for Western life, and is not down to earth.

I couldn't stand this book after reading three chapters. The protagonist has learned nothing from modern education at all. He seems to have been brainwashed by Western happy education, and he doesn't look like he has studied politics at all.

The author has an unthinking admiration and trust in Western-style democracy, and his words are full of faith in Western-style human rights. I don't know if he is too superstitious about Western civilization and culture. The author also has little understanding of the real political world. He is superstitious about human rights and democracy. He tries to change the social and political ecology of feudal society in an idealized way and is speechless. His attitude toward the church is also ambiguous. What seems like an argument is actually an apology. I even wonder if this is a soft article mixed with Western ideology.

How could you have traveled through time like this? You are the emperor and you still want to do such a thing. Do you want to kill yourself? It's 2020, and there are still people who worship Western "democracy"? Look at what a travesty liberal democracy is in the United States now. It's not unfair at all that your novel is not popular.

This book does not conform to the mainstream, and the protagonist's thoughts do not conform to that of a time traveler. You are already an emperor. What are you afraid of? You should be arrogant when you should be arrogant. What are you afraid of? Actually afraid of women. It also advocates so-called Western democracy. If the protagonist really wants democracy, he will only become Charles I. Sent to the guillotine by his men. Because his subordinates will shout "We want democracy, the emperor is a sinner." Maybe it's not like the novel, and there will be a Cromwell.

The author is really great. He has enlightened the people and is ready to promote democracy. It is said that China is now a democratic society and has the right to vote. But have you seen the ballot? The village chief is the so-called democratically elected. As a result, I have never seen a ballot in my village in my whole life. I don't know if the author has seen it. , I understand that the author hopes that everyone will have votes and hope for democracy, but to be honest, just go and see who the village chiefs are in the village. It is so difficult to hold elections in China today in 2020. What do you want to do to enlighten the people and hold elections in an era of widespread illiteracy in ancient times? I don't know if the author is yearning for the enlightened life in Europe and the United States. He feels that the air in the West is fresher, and even breathing a breath of air in China makes him feel sick. However, reality does not allow it, so I hope to realize the ideal country in my novel. I can only say that my brother is really awesome. Admire. I hope you can truly immigrate to Europe and the United States and truly feel the air of freedom.

Reading the comments is more relaxing than reading the book, and I also learned a new word, banana man. If we continue playing like this, Daming will be finished in the protagonist's generation.

This ability to empathize is so abundant that slaves, profiteers, corrupt officials, and pirates can make you put yourself in their shoes, but you have never thought about the readers.

Hey, hey, to be honest, the author's historical skills are very good, and his writing style is also good. But I felt awkward after reading some chapters, and I read a lot of reviews and I laughed unkindly, saying what's wrong with this book. After reading many reviews, the author is really an alien missionary of freedom and democracy. The author must have a high degree of education. I guess he was indeed brainwashed by Western philosophy. Idealist, elite, literary youth, Western admirer, this is my evaluation of the author based on my own perceptions and comments. As a modern person, you travel back to known history. What are you doing? The first chapters are like 'I can't get into the show', the middle chapters are 'Women see through me and are powerless', and the latter chapters are 'Am I the Emperor of Ming Dynasty? "No, I am a foreign gentleman." Finally, "China's destiny is destined to be lost. I am a spectator, and everything belongs to the righteous foreign master." I would like to ask the author: In 1566, the Great Navigation was about to begin, Galileo and Copernicus were not yet born, and modern Western theory was still in its infancy, and it was not until the spread of Eastern learning and Western learning that it officially appeared. Can't you understand what the West's attitude towards science was at that time? Are we enlightened? You are a person with modern thinking and historical knowledge. More importantly, you are an emperor, but what are you doing? 'I can't get into the drama, I can't do anything, I am a gentleman, I want to be foreign, China is destined to fall behind' is what you are expressing. Can I ask the author to tell you what the West was like in the 16th century? Portugal's navigation school is still developing, and the Queen of England knows that there is a big country in the east. Why don't you watch "The Rise of the Great Powers"? With such unconfidence in your own civilization, lack of understanding of the process and essence of backwardness, and such lack of backbone and courage to pioneer, why are you traveling to the past? With a pair of kings and four 2s, I insisted that I must lose. I was puzzled by the author's behavior. It was only when I saw someone commenting that the author's ideas come from modern Western philosophy that I suddenly understood.