Great Traitor

Only one Manchu in the Qing Dynasty claimed to be the emperor of China, Yongzheng. The other emperors only regarded themselves as Manchu emperors

In addition, there are various myths, why the Soviet army did not have guns in World War II, and the West only caught up with China during the Kangxi period, how happy it is!

After reading the previous ten chapters... According to the set age, it is normal to have immature thoughts and incomplete knowledge. But I really can't bear to see such a bad character setting... It's hard to save someone who has such a bad ability. The reality is that there are many like this, but there are also teenagers who are strong-willed and (relatively) able to deal with others rationally. And this kind of character and big-mindedness are precisely the necessary conditions for success... It is said that youthful determination and character determine destiny. These are the key factors that determine the upper limit of life.

The first one actually attracted me, but when the protagonist came out, I was disgusted. And after reading 2 million words of book reviews, it was still not successful? And the protagonist traveled through time and became an old man? In one comment, all B-cell resources are in place, and the author pulled it off himself.

The author can't even understand the most basic ancient technological equipment, so he dares to write about it? At the level of a junior high school graduate!

The protagonist has always had little presence. It feels like a mascot.

???

Collectivism, putting the honor of others on oneself, and then excluding other groups, has the advantage of unity and the disadvantage of exclusion. The debate in the comments is nothing more than which elements in the set should be united and which should be excluded. The country puts the interests of the people first, which requires nationalism to unite the masses, but it is impossible to let a part of pure Han chauvinism take the lead, because if it is slightly pushed by external forces, mainland China will lose its youth. I sincerely hope that nationalists will be less aggressive and complaining. History cannot be changed. Whitewashing and hatred are meaningless. Only a strong enough present can face all history. This is fundamental. If nothing else, the autonomous region in the southwest is the most important legacy of the Manchu Qing Dynasty. This has not happened since ancient times. If you give up just for the sake of your ideas, will you complain? A dynasty can only be history forever. Just read novels and enjoy the stories. It is not worth speeding up adrenaline secretion and shortening your lifespan just for this.

The first part was okay, but when I read Chapter 80, I was really hooked.

Awesome, the first post was blocked

The author should not care about other people's opinions and just write well. There are really very few people like you who dare to write this type of writing. Other types of writing have been inactive for a long time. Come on!

What a great book. The author doesn't want a eunuch.

It's time to consider building a civil service team and open up courses to get scholars!

In China, we are still conquering the Yangtze River area and Beijing. We are still writing about Shandong, Sichuan, and Anhui. We are keeping them for fun.

A topic that has been hotly debated since modern times. ——Using various "comparisons between China and the West" to demonstrate why China failed to modernize. Because they are either stupid or bad, most of the conclusions they draw are very nonsensical: what about the bad nature of the Han people, what about the small peasant economy, and what about the noble marine civilization. Today I want to say All questions similar to this kind of "comparison between China and the West" are false propositions! The premise of this type of question is simply not true. At least three premise errors were made: Error 1 was to compare the Han one nation with the Western N nations. Mistake 2: Even if they are compared from a cultural perspective, what they are comparing is not the tradition of the Han nationality at all, but the "pseudo-tradition" of Manchu colonization. Mistake 3: The Han people must be required to "spontaneously" modernize, without considering that the technologies, industries, sciences, and even ideas of modernization can be easily obtained through learning. Including several ethnic groups in Western Europe, no ethnic group completed modernization independently. Everyone learned from each other. On the one hand, those who make this comparison have "high standards and strict requirements" for the Han people. Once the Han people fail to achieve complete spontaneous modernization, they will criticize the Han people as unworthy and worthless. On the one hand, China (Han) was allowed to single out N ethnic groups in the West, and China was also allowed to cut off an arm of itself (that is, the impact of being colonized by the Qing Dynasty was not considered). The conclusion drawn in this way is naturally that "we are too ferra, we must push everything back, and we must rely on foreign ideas and foreign rule to be saved." The so-called "Another three hundred years of colonization" "Abolition of Chinese characters and Latinization of Chinese characters" "Inviting foreign adults to exchange blood" are all products of this kind of thinking. History Buff: I've always had a question. History buffs: Why did China (Han) fail to modernize smoothly? Why did modernization happen in the West? How to solve the Needham problem? Me: First of all, we need to clearly define, what is modernization? History buffs: (Baidu...) History buffs: There is no clear definition, it probably refers to economic industrialization and commercialization, political legalization and democratization, ideological humanization, scientificization, etc... Me: If you can't give an abstract definition, can you give me a specific process? History buff: I'm not very good at history, but based on my feeling, it's probably the Renaissance, then the great geographical discoveries, the great voyages, then the foundation of modern science and technology, the Enlightenment, and finally the Industrial Revolution, right? Oh, and take into account the logic and mathematics invented by the ancient Greeks, which laid the foundation for modern technology. Me: Okay, just do it this way. Act 1: What is the essence of the West's first modernization? Me: First of all, let me make it clear that the so-called "West" and "East" are just relative geographical concepts and a virtual reference. The people of the Ming Dynasty would think that Timur and Ottoman were both "Western", while these two Muslim countries were properly "Eastern" in the eyes of the Poles and Eastern Romans. Not to mention that in the eyes of the British, Eastern Rome was almost an "ancient Eastern civilization". The so-called "West" and "East" only have a general meaning and cannot be used to analyze problems. Is there anything wrong with my statement? The remnants of Heshang who entered randomly: fart! The West is obviously a maritime civilization! Full of enterprising and pioneering spirit. The farming civilization of Fira in the east is certainly not as good as others! Me: First of all, let me clarify something. There is no such thing as marine civilization. Take France and Germany, the typical so-called "Western countries" in my impression. They are all agricultural civilizations and so-called "small-scale peasant economies." The remnants of the River War: What about Britain, Spain, and the United States? Me: Before the Great Geographical Discovery, the British (Anglo-Saxons) were still farming on the British Isles and were invaded and ruled by the Normans; the Spanish were conquered by the Moors and were still busy recovering their lost lands until the 13th century, and had nothing to do with the sea (except for fishing). As for Americans, the foundation of the founding of the United States is the farmers and craftsmen of the 13 independent states, and it has nothing to do with the ocean. Me: In fact, the "marine civilization" in your mind only lasted a few hundred years from the discovery of geography to the present. Me: In addition, I want to complain that the concept of "marine civilization" concocted by you He (Harmony) Shang faction is itself something that can't even be considered imported. There is no such phrase as ocean civilization or maritime civilization in Western historical research. If you go and search for this article, the most likely thing that will come up is an article on the Tongan Empire in the Pacific Islands (laughing)? It's a word that was invented from beginning to end to be used to make oneself look down upon, so don't talk nonsense here. Me: Back to the topic, specific issues must be analyzed in detail, and "the West" cannot be regarded as a "whole". The so-called "West" and "East" are general terms and cannot be used to analyze specific issues. Is there a problem with my statement? History buffs: No problem. From the perspective of Japan, the Ming Dynasty is still the West. It is just a relative geographical concept. There is nothing difficult to understand. But what does this have to do with what we are about to say? Me: See your question? "Why did modernization happen in the West?" History buff: Does this mean that we should not use the so-called "East" and "West" as the starting point for comparison? So what should be used? Me: Of course I use "ethnic"! History buffs: Tell us! Me: First of all, the modernization path you just sorted out is basically correct: 1. Ancient Greece invented logic and mathematics 2. Renaissance 3. Geographic Discovery 4. The foundation of modern science and technology 5. The Enlightenment Me: The Greeks invented logic and mathematics (discovery to be exact). So are the Greeks and those peoples in Western Europethe same people? History buffs: The Greeks and the Franks, Anglo-Saxons, Visigoths, etc. In Western Europe are indeed not the same people. Me: Yes, what about the Renaissance? Where did the Renaissance originate? History buffs: Northern Italian city-states. Me: The city-states of Venice and Genoa were prosperous in commerce and had been divided for a long time. This fostered a tolerant and open artistic atmosphere and brought about the Renaissance. Right? History buffs: Well, next is the great geographical discovery. History buff: I am familiar with this. It was started by Spain and Portugal. Me: What advantages do Spain and Portugal have that allow them to embark on great geographical discoveries? History buffs: First of all, it must be geography. Looking at the map, you can see that the Iberian Peninsula is the closest to the Americas. , History buffs: Secondly, Liangya is somewhat... "Centralized" in a sense. Many early navigators were heavily funded by the royal family to explore, and there is a sense of "concentrating efforts to do big things." History buffs: It should be these two points that allowed them to take the lead in opening the "Age of Discovery"! Me: That's right. We can make a scenario hypothesis - based on the conditions of the northern Italian city-states, can the New World be discovered? With the political atmosphere and geographical location of Spain and Portugal, can they lead the Renaissance? History buff: I'm afraid that's not possible... The reason I just said is that this thing requires certain conditions. However, the Renaissance provided some spiritual impetus for the geographical discovery. Me: This is what I want to say, the essence of modernization is completed bymulti-ethnic relay. It is impossible for the two teeth to lead the Renaissance, and it is difficult for Venice and Genoa to discover America. However, the two relayed each other and the process continued. The great geographical discovery brought more primitive accumulation. What is the next step? History buffs: the foundation of natural science. Me: Who laid the foundation of natural science? History buffs: It was Newton - an Anglo-Saxon. Principles of Natural Philosophy and Mathematics, published in 1687. Me: What's next? History buffs: The Enlightenment, France has the most developed civil society, so the Enlightenment first appeared there. Me: Just like the previous steps,one nation will move first, and the other nations will follow. The Renaissance spread across Europe from south to north; Ships from all Western Europe in the Age of Discovery flocked to America to participate in the triangular trade; Enlightenment ideas also spread throughout the "West" with the artillery fire of the Revolution and the Napoleonic Code History buffs: Then let me reorganize it. The so-called West took the lead in modernization, is this actually what it is? —— 1. Ancient Greeks: Invented logic and mathematics 2. Northern Italians: Renaissance 3. Iberians: Geographic Discovery 4. Angsans: Founded the foundation of modern science and technology 5. French: Enlightenment Me: Yes. In fact, a step was missed ——1.5 The existence of the Eastern Roman Empire protected the nations of Western Europe from barbarian invasions. Because if unfortunately, during the accumulation period of agricultural society, or was invaded by barbarians on the eve of modern times, resulting in a major decline in productivity, the consequences would be disastrous. History buff: Put it this way, is it true that the so-called advantages of various Western nations are that they are close to each other, have more exchanges, and learn quickly? Me: Yes, that's it. Me: To put it bluntly, the geography of the Western European countries has another advantage - it is the farthest away from the Mongolian Plateau and the Greater Khingan Mountains, the most terrifying source of barbarians in the entire Eurasian continent, and there is also the Eastern Roman nation-state of the Greco-Romans in the middle as a shield to protect them from the suffering of barbarian invasions that interrupt civilization. History buffs: Ah, it's true. The isotherms of the Eurasian continent are tilted. The colder they are toward the east, and the barbarians farther east are more savage and difficult to deal with. History Buff: Can this be explained by the slower modernization of Russia? Is it because we are a little far apart geographically? Me: That's right. History buffs: Among all the subsequent great powers, Japan was the slowest to learn. Is it because Japan is the furthest away geographically? Me: Yes, that's it. History buffs: Is it that simple? Me: It's that simple. History buffs: Then why did China (Han) fail to learn?

This is the backbone of our people

Is the protagonist SB? Not to mention that in the Kangxi Dynasty, even a few days before the Revolution of 1911, if you went to the county government to brag about revolution and rebellion, the protagonist was really not afraid of death? No normal person would do this!

During the heyday of Kangxi and Qianlong, there was rebellion. . How can you rebel if you don't have a violent soldier plug-in? ? Laughing to death

The author speeds up the progress. In 1719, the Qing Dynasty next door almost destroyed the Manchu Qing Dynasty and the whole country was unified. Stop delaying the plot. You are all the ones who killed Kangxi at the same time. It is time to unify the whole country at the same time.

In the late Ming and early Qing dynasties, I felt unhappy when I saw Lao Zhu's family! The great country of Nuo has been defeated like this by you. No matter what the reason is, whether directly or indirectly, you cannot escape the death-seeking behavior of Lao Zhu's family. You will get angry when you see it.

I'm going to do a statistical survey to see what the Qing Dynasty is in the minds of all my book friends. 1-Hate it. I think the Qing Dynasty is a shame among all the dynasties in our country. 2-Neutral, I have no opinion on the Qing Dynasty. 3-I like it and feel that the Qing Dynasty made outstanding contributions to our country. Boldly deduct the number in your mind and calculate the results in 15 days before reporting them to the general public!

Don't read it. Does anyone recommend a time-traveling one that doesn't show the modern military system? I feel really sick. Aren't the so-called staff officers just the military advisors? Will we have to create a major general, lieutenant general, or something like that later? It's funny just looking at it. The ancient system and the current system are just different names. There is no need to change 🙂🙂

The Kangxi rebellion was still a peasant uprising. It had no base and no early backbone. It was started by a few speculators and then spread to a large area. It was true that the anti-Qing government had the right starting point, but it didn't even have a brain. It's funny. During the Kangxi period, the army that fought with Zhungeer and others was not useless. The Eight Banners were not completely abolished. It is normal for you to use organization and discipline to defeat the Qing Dynasty. As mentioned in the book..., It is really good to write an anti-Qing novel. If it is bad, just start and use the stick. Who dares to say it is bad?

The Ming Dynasty should indeed perish, but the barbaric and ignorant Manchu Qing Dynasty should not take over. It can only be said that the rogue bandits were ineffective.

The author's geographical view is indeed quite strange. When occupying Yunnan, he actually wanted to attack the northwest directly from Yunnan. Sichuan Province in the middle expressed dissatisfaction.

Damn it! When it comes to issues of national equality and history, the book review area is always so lively. Although everything I wanted to say has been said, I still want to make my position clear and ask the author to face up to the feelings of the dominant nation and slaughter them when necessary!

It feels really different

It's just a fake plot. It forcibly killed a population of 100 million. The enemy increased the population by ten times, while itself reduced the population by ten times. It was inexplicably afraid of Russia. It was inexplicably steady and steady for more than 1,400 chapters and the Manchu Qing Dynasty was not destroyed. It was really a small power.

The discussion is very exciting. In fact, feudal dynasties are all the same. When they are strong, their territory increases, and when they are weak, their territory shrinks. As for why there are so many people who criticize the Qing Dynasty, the reason is also well known. A century of national humiliation is a thorn in the hearts of the Chinese people. Whenever I see these national humiliations, I feel unhappy, and I will complain when I feel unhappy. In addition, the Qing Dynasty's unification The rulers are ethnic minorities, which invisibly amplifies the unhappiness in my heart, but in the final analysis, this is not the same thing. Think about the so-called feudal dynasty, isn't it just the family of the world? One family replaces another family, and suddenly a sentence comes to mind: "The people don't know the country, and the country doesn't know the people." How could the feudal dynasty of the family ever care about the common people.

Can such a protagonist with a bright mind at the beginning successfully rebel when the Qing Dynasty is at its peak and the Manchus' fighting power has not yet declined?