|
在以往有關(guān)二戰(zhàn)的敘事中，西方學(xué)者們長(zhǎng)期認(rèn)為，二戰(zhàn)爆發(fā)的標(biāo)志性事件是1939年德國入侵波蘭。 然而，英國歷史學(xué)家理查德·奧弗里在其撰寫的《二戰(zhàn)新史：鮮血與廢墟中的世界，1931-1945》中提出了一個(gè)具有顛覆性的觀點(diǎn)。  打開今日頭條查看圖片詳情 When British historian Richard Overy set out to write about WWII from a new perspective, he was keenly aware of stepping into a field dominated with sweeping accounts and Euro-American interpretations that have long shaped historiography. 他指出，二戰(zhàn)的真正起點(diǎn)是1931年日本對(duì)中國的侵略——這不同于以往的戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)記述，挑戰(zhàn)了以西方為中心的時(shí)間線，提出了一個(gè)更加全球化、更全面的二戰(zhàn)視角。 His latest work, Blood and Ruins: The Great Imperial War, 1931-1945, challenges the Eurocentric timeline of the war and offers a broader, global perspective.  打開今日頭條查看圖片詳情 作為第一次世界大戰(zhàn)的勝利者，英國和法國在一戰(zhàn)后繼續(xù)主導(dǎo)國際秩序，統(tǒng)治著龐大的殖民帝國。然而，這種霸權(quán)地位卻激起了意大利、德國和日本等新興大國的不滿。 這些19世紀(jì)末崛起的新興國家渴望建立自己的帝國，但在全球爭(zhēng)奪中發(fā)現(xiàn)可擴(kuò)張的空間已經(jīng)所剩無幾。1929年的全球經(jīng)濟(jì)危機(jī)進(jìn)一步加劇了他們的挫敗感，推動(dòng)了侵略行動(dòng)的爆發(fā)。 These late-19th-century newcomers to the world stage were eager to carve out empires of their own, only to find little space remained for their ambitions. The global economic crisis of 1929 deepened their frustrations, fueling aggressive expansionist actions. 奧弗里指出，二戰(zhàn)的真正起點(diǎn)并非1939年德國入侵波蘭，而是1931年“九一八”事變?nèi)毡緦?duì)中國的侵略。 Overy argues that the war didn't truly begin in 1939 with Germany's invasion of Poland, but in 1931 with Japan's invasion of China. 他通過將時(shí)間線重新錨定到亞洲，賦予了中國歷史學(xué)家長(zhǎng)期堅(jiān)持的觀點(diǎn)應(yīng)有的地位——即“抗日戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)是全球大戰(zhàn)的一部分”。 By shifting the chronological anchor back to Asia, Overy acknowledges what Chinese historians have long insisted — that the war against Japan from 1931 to 1945 was an integral part of the larger global conflict. 奧弗里認(rèn)為，中國的抗日戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)不僅是全球戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)的重要組成部分，也是世界反法西斯斗爭(zhēng)的關(guān)鍵一環(huán)。 Overy argues that the Chinese People’s War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression (1931-45) was a critical part of the global struggle against fascism.  打開今日頭條查看圖片詳情 他特別強(qiáng)調(diào)，中國在整個(gè)抗戰(zhàn)期間，戰(zhàn)斗力不亞于英國或美國，成功牽制了大量的日軍。沒有中國的長(zhǎng)時(shí)間堅(jiān)持，二戰(zhàn)的格局可能會(huì)發(fā)生重大變化。 Overy highlights that throughout the war, China fielded more soldiers than the UK or the US, tying down a significant portion of Japan's military forces. Without China's prolonged resistance, the course of WWII could have shifted dramatically. 奧弗里強(qiáng)調(diào)，西方長(zhǎng)期忽視亞洲戰(zhàn)場(chǎng)，往往將焦點(diǎn)集中在美國與日本的太平洋戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)上，因?yàn)槟抢镉屑ち业念I(lǐng)土爭(zhēng)奪和戲劇性的戰(zhàn)況。然而，亞洲的戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)更為復(fù)雜，涉及的背景、力量對(duì)比和地域因素遠(yuǎn)比西方所講的更為廣泛。 'For so long, the West ignored what happened in Asia. They focused on the Pacific War — America versus Japan — because it's dramatic, with territory changing hands. The war in Asia is more complicated,' Overy explains. 通過這一全新的視角，奧弗里不僅將二戰(zhàn)視為一場(chǎng)全球沖突，更揭示了19世紀(jì)末以來帝國主義競(jìng)爭(zhēng)的根源。 By shifting the focus to a global conflict that engulfed both Asia and Europe, Overy situates the war within the broader context of late-19th-century imperial rivalries. 他指出，這場(chǎng)戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)從一開始就是反侵略的斗爭(zhēng)，席卷了從亞洲到歐洲的廣闊戰(zhàn)場(chǎng)。  打開今日頭條查看圖片詳情 He shows that from the outset, it was a struggle against aggression that involved a wide range of battlefronts across Asia and Europe. 記者：楊飛躍 China Daily精讀計(jì)劃每天20分鐘，英語全面提升！ |
|
|
