The Great Qin Juzi

Today, when I was talking about Peeping Chapter, I saw a post like this. The general idea is that "feudalism" as a social system originated in Europe, and it is a misuse in China. The early teaching materials were wrong, and experts also admitted it. Regardless of whether this statement is a rumor or confirmed, in short, this post reminds me of the very hot debate on the term "national hero" a few days ago, so the fire of controversy was raging, and the 150-word reply space was simply not enough. Let's talk about the word "feudal". It's still the old rule. The following only represents the opinions of one family. If you like it, you will like it, if you dislike it, everyone will discuss the matter. The word "feudal" comes from the "Poetry. Shang Ode. Yin Wu": "The fate is in the lower country, and feudalism is blessed." The original meaning is to build a feudal state, and the extension is full of "special rights and wealth are owned by special individuals." This is what Baidu said. It is a rare definition that is accurate and unambiguous. The feudal period was based on land, so special wealth must refer to land. The private ownership and control of land is "special rights wealth". To put it bluntly, feudal society is a political form that realizes and guarantees the land privatization model in the social stage where land is the foundation of the country. Similarly, the English translation of feudalism is "feudalism". Youdao quotes the example sentence from Collins English-Chinese Dictionary as "As feudalism decayed in the West it gave rise to a mercantile class." With the disintegration of the Western feudal system, the commercial class came into being. This sentence also focuses on the fundamental wealth of society, rather than illusory institutional regulations. It can be seen that the word feudal, whether in its original or extended meaning, whether it is positioned in the East or the West, has never had anything to do with the political system. The Western lords' dictatorship can be called feudal, and the Eastern monarchy and dictatorship can also be called feudal. What's more, even in the short history of Western feudalism, lords had varying degrees of control over land, and dictatorial monarchs also appeared. Not to mention, Napoleon was still lying on the grass of the French Invalides. If an expert really thinks that feudalism is a misuse of China, how should he define the feudal period in the West? Is it necessary to specifically set aside those autocratic kings and create an intermittent feudal era? In summary, feudal originally meant to establish a state, and its extended meaning was land private ownership. The Qin Dynasty named the land boundary "feng", which is obviously the development and characterization of the meaning of the word. Kaifeng Jianqi was feudal. Although the social system that regarded slaves as core wealth began to disintegrate since the Warring States Period, the clear private ownership of land began in the Qin Dynasty. Therefore, the statement that Chinese feudalism began in the Qin Dynasty can withstand scrutiny. At least on this point, the textbook does not mislead students.

The rulers of the Qin Dynasty very much welcomed advanced production tools and technologies. If their laws did not adapt to the development of productivity, they would basically improve the law, instead of following the old ways and suppressing the development of productivity like other dynasties. This is because Qin has always been a pioneer in reform. As I said before, if new technologies and tools make rapid progress in agriculture, the government will reward the parties involved very greatly, so I think the author has handled this point well. , I feel baffled, the Qin Dynasty's idea of governing the country is not Confucian, why should the protagonist hide it?

I don't know if the cultural level is low or for some reason it seems difficult! Neither ancient nor modern, neither foreign nor native! Junk article

I would like to ask what is the point of this book? Why do I feel that the struggle for power outweighs the development of technology. For more than a hundred years I have been fighting with this person and that person in a small place. I wrote a few about the development of new technologies, but I immediately wrote about them again because the new technologies conflicted with other people's interests. If we keep writing like this, we might as well change the title to "The Fighting King of Daqin Village"

I don't know the author's setting of the protagonist as a legitimate son of a prince in trouble. If he is, he can be called a son, but if not, he cannot be called a son. The protagonist's concubines are called the protagonist. If the protagonist is the head of the family, they are called master, husband, or master. If the protagonist is not the head of the family but is the legitimate son, he is called the young master, young master, or young master. The concubines call themselves servants. The protagonist's staff calls the protagonist Lang Jun, Dong Zhu, Shao Lang Jun, and Shao Dong Zhu, and the staff calls them XX. The subordinates who are personally attached to the protagonist call the protagonist Lang Jun, Shao Lang Jun, Lang Zhu, and Shao Lang lord. The subordinates call themselves disciples and subordinates. The protagonist's subordinates who have no personal attachments call the protagonist Lang Jun or Shao LangJun. If the protagonist has an official position, they will use the official title. The subordinates call themselves XX.

The writing is okay, but the plot is old-fashioned. Do you think it's appropriate to use the novel technique to write a web novel? The villains are everywhere being led around, and a small invention is used to add various conspiracies. How is this different from the previous Stallion novels?

You have to fight to death after not doing a few things... There are too many plots about Machiavellian plots, especially the protagonist who is not good at plotting and is beaten to death by a township cadre. How can anyone like to watch it?

Chapter 20: Being a cheap person, plus intrigues, daily fun? Consider him funny! It's not until Chapter 70 that you come out to meet people, and then what? Will I be able to make a machine tool after writing 10,000 chapters? Or is it too fast? I'm looking forward to it! (I'm sure we want to see the protagonist show off his "IQ" with several village chiefs and party secretaries in a three-thirds of an acre of land)

This young master is not that young master. This young master is a young master + a son. Gong is a noun. Zi is a modifier (adjective, adverb, quantifier, verb, and other similar words). That young master is a young master. Gong is a noun, and son is also a noun. The artistic conception, environment, identity, status, and influence of the two are different, and they cannot be used indiscriminately. The same is true for the word "adult".

Why do I feel like the author is deliberately creating conflict? Even if you don't create these conflicts. Just the various problems you encounter when making various inventions are enough to irritate you. Why bother deliberately creating conflict? Moreover, the conflict you create is a bit insignificant, and it seems a bit boring to people. Your writing is not good at creating conflict. When I read the conflict in your book, I will think of those other books. I hope the author can change it, otherwise it will be too embarrassing not to be able to read many places.