I am writing a paper on the above subject.
Finding contrast, similarity and dissimilarity between the two is the the goal of this reserach.
Anyone who can comment on this is highly welcomed.
- posted on 12/20/2006
yongtai, thanks for coming, I resized your picture, Have you looked at the link about "黄仁宇"? Please do a search in the cafe. That night was so beautiful, would like you post your findings here.
诸位,YT是在牛津的台湾学者,他对中国近代历史尤其有独到的见解。我们欢迎他参加咖啡店的讨论,希望他来给我们讲讲他在牛津堆积如山的历史资料中发掘出的宝藏。上个星期天,我们有幸听到他对中国近代历史以及两岸关系的精彩谈话,希望咖啡店成为两岸学者互相交流切磋的平台。
另外对海峡两岸关系以及中国近代历史有兴趣的朋友也请提出问题,相信YT会用大英博物馆的资料证据来给你满意的回答。 - Re: England's 'Open Field' and China's 'people's commune'posted on 12/20/2006
welcome to mayacafe,I am sure you will like it! - Re: England's 'Open Field' and China's 'people's commune'posted on 12/20/2006
欢迎 YT 老师。
上周末我也有幸见到 YT,听他讲了很多很多有意思的历史和文化故事。受益非常!他是上次 Annie 介绍的牛津学者。希望能常常在咖啡见到他。也希望看到大家多多和他交流。 - Re: England's 'Open Field' and China's 'people's commune'posted on 12/20/2006
也歡迎YT先生﹗
我問一個低級的問題﹐也是一個常見的問題。
有人說臺灣是美國的一艘不沉的航空母艦﹐望YT先生能談談。
- Re: England's 'Open Field' and China's 'people's commune'posted on 12/20/2006
YT,漂亮的咖啡店女主人你已經见过了,可愛的阿珊MM你也见过了,XW嗎,別看他自謙”低級問題”,他可也是我們咖啡店公認的”百科全書”,小心哦.J - posted on 12/20/2006
Dear XW,
First of all, I am not a politics scholar. I am an enonomic historian, and I approach history through quantitative methods.
I am not qualified to give the best answer, but I try to give my own view.
You have posted a loaded question, it seems.
But on the other hand I feel like that you have also given an answer that begs another question.
As people concerned with political tension between Taiwan and China tend to label Taiwan as USA's 'unsinkable fleet', I think they are simplifying the variables.
Many factors are lurking and confounding, such as China's domestic decision, foreign policy, Japan's economic weight, South East Asia's political balance, Taiwan's soverienty issue, USA's global strategy. They all have effect on the issue.
You can say that the USA does not wish China's taking over Taiwan. She does not expect to offend China, either.
China maintains that Taiwan is an inseparable part of China, but how badly China want to prove that? At what cost?
Ooh, are we forgetting Taiwan's own view? Not many people care about what 23 million people's thinking. Some of them still claim they are Chinese, so what is so fussy about that some others want to be away from China's rule. Even American disapproves the independence of Taiwan, why are these people make noise? Do they have a right, whatever you call that right, to make a noise that is not appealing?
As a Chinese (Taiwanese Chinese), I think we shall at least learn how to be fair. We have learned to be fair in this country where we chose to live: equal opportunity and equal obligation. Give people a chance and let them speak, like in Maya Cafe, and we listen.
The harmony can only be achieved through constant willing to understand each other. Yes, we need a constant, no matter how many variables, regardless of their respective coefficients. Taiwan can be an unsinkable ship
She should be.
YT
- posted on 12/20/2006
thanks, YT.
here is another question, probabily the only economy discussion
in Cafe:
http://www.mayacafe.com/forum/topic1.php3?tkey=1165887148
see how do you think.
and in my Spingler book, he says:
第二十章 经济生命的形式世界--金钱
经济生命
要想了解各大文化的经济史,其观点不当求之于经济层面。我们今日
所谓的“国家经济”一词,其所据以建立的前提,是明显而突出的英
国式的东西。英国是非农业国,利用世界贸易和出口工业的关系,产
生了一套特珠的经济型态--“信用贷款”,以此作为基础,而界定
了诸 如“资本”、“价值”、“价格”、“财产”等字眼。而这些
名词,又毫不费力地,传递至其他的文化阶段及生命圈层之中。此一
经济图像有创始者,是大卫休默与亚当斯密,自他们以后,每一篇讨
论他们或反对他们的文字,本身早已承认了他们的系统,所使用的结
构和方法。经济学家卡瑞和李斯特固是如此,傅立叶和拉塞雷也无不
皆然。至于亚当斯密最大的对手--马克思,无论他如何大声疾呼,
反对英国式资本主义,他本身其实已彻底浸淫在资本主义的意象之中
,他的反对,本身即是一种承认,而他唯一的目的,只是要透过一种
新的会计方式,来颠倒主体和客体的利益而已。
自亚当斯密以迄马克思,经济思想,无非是一个文化在某一特定的发
展阶段上,对其经济思考所作的自我分析而已,这彻头彻尾是唯理主
义的,它从物质及其条件、需求、动机出发,而不是从灵魂--世代
、阶级和民族的灵魂--以及其创造力出发。这种经济思想,把经济
生命,当作可由明显的因果定律而囊括无遗、当作相当机械而完全自
成一体的结构来看待,甚至,最后还认为经济与宗教及政治,有某种
的因关联--而后两者亦仍被视为是个别自足的领域。这是系统式的
看法,而非历史的旷观,故其概念与定律,表现为不具时间性的,欲
放之四海而皆准的真理,这实在只能说是一种“信仰”,而其野心仍
是欲 设定经营经济的唯一正确的科学方法。因而,一旦其所谓“真
理”面对了事实,便遭到十足的惨败。。。
&&&
请YT先生也评评,洗耳恭听。
- posted on 12/21/2006
Dear XW,
I simply posted a question, looking for assistance in my research.
Totally shocked with the question imposed on me. Now it appears that I would have to work extra hard to redeem the answer to my posted question.
I have a feeling that I need to speak on behalf of UK, whether it is economic or political issue.
To me Adam Smith's economic theory is simply universal, not derived from British culture for the sake of British interests. The invisible hands, whether is white, yellow or black, dominate the behaviors and activities of mankind. Marx's theory, as following, also applies universally, whether the Western world likes it or not.
Then we come to Scumpter, Kutznet,who advocated the GDP and government spendings and currency policies. These economists still led the world with a comprehensive view.
The Americans came to the world stage in 1960s. Keynes first, and then Freeman's total liberal suggestion not only forms Chicago Economists, but also laid out the foundation for the USA government to leave the business to run with the least intervention. Freeman's theory stands strong.(he passed away last month at age 92?) He will be remembered as a Master of economics for his unchallenged economic principle.
Economy is a worldwide and global issue, especially in today.
Everyone will be a part of the aggregate economy, no exception.
I do not know whether I have answered your question, XW.
I am pretty exhaused...still awaiting some kind scholar to assist me with "open field" and "people commune".
have some mercy, please
YT
Please paste HTML code and press Enter.
(c) 2010 Maya Chilam Foundation