Unit 8: Cold War and Decolonization
AP World History: Modern Topic 8 8:40 English narration · English + 中文 subtitles burned in
Chapters
Transcript
Two processes run through this unit at the same time: a global ideological rivalry, and the end of empire.
有两个过程同时贯穿本单元： 一场全球性的意识形态对抗， 以及帝国的终结。
Studied separately they are twice the work and half the marks, because most of the unit's questions turn on how those two interacted.
分开来学， 工作量翻倍而分数减半， 因为本单元的多数题目 取决于这两者如何相互作用。
A newly independent state did not choose its economic policy in a vacuum.
一个新独立的国家 不是在真空中选择自己的经济政策的。
It chose it inside a world where two superpowers were offering aid with conditions attached.
它是在一个 两个超级大国 附带条件提供援助的世界里作出选择。
Setting the stage for the Cold War, first.
先说冷战的舞台是怎么搭起来的。
Hopes for greater self-government were largely unfulfilled after the First World War.
对更多自治的希望 在第一次世界大战之后基本落空。
In the years following the Second, increasing anti- imperialist sentiment built momentum in colonised regions, and this time it produced independence rather than promises.
第二次世界大战之后的几年里， 被殖民地区的反帝情绪不断积聚， 这一次带来的是独立， 而不是承诺。
At the same time, the technological and economic gains made during the war by the victorious nations shifted the global balance of power.
与此同时， 战胜国在战争期间取得的 技术与经济收益 改变了全球权力平衡。
That is the historical context the CED asks for, and it is worth stating plainly: the war did not just destroy, it redistributed capability.
这正是课程大纲要求的历史背景， 而且值得直白地说出来： 战争不只是摧毁， 它重新分配了能力。
The shifted balance rapidly evolved into the Cold War: a rivalry between the democracies led by the United States and the communist states led by the Soviet Union, conducted as an ideological struggle rather than direct war between the two principals.
改变了的平衡 迅速演变为冷战： 以美国为首的民主国家 与以苏联为首的共产主义国家之间的对抗， 以意识形态斗争的方式进行， 而不是两个主角之间的直接战争。
But the CED insists that this was not a world of only two options.
但课程大纲强调， 这不是一个只有两个选项的世界。
Groups and individuals, including the Non-Aligned Movement, opposed and promoted alternatives to the existing economic, political and social order.
各种团体与个人， 包括不结盟运动， 反对既有的经济、政治与社会秩序， 并提出替代方案。
Leaving the non-aligned states out of an answer describes a two-sided world that did not exist — and putting them in lifts an answer immediately, because most answers do not.
把不结盟国家排除在答案之外， 描述的是一个并不存在的两极世界， 而把它们写进去 会立刻提升答案的质量， 因为多数答案没有写。
The rivalry produced concrete institutions and conflicts, and the CED names three.
这场对抗产生了 具体的制度与冲突， 课程大纲点名了三项。
New military alliances — NATO and the Warsaw Pact.
新的军事同盟，北约与华沙条约组织。
Nuclear proliferation, the spread of nuclear weapons to more states.
核扩散， 核武器扩散到更多国家。
And proxy wars, between and within states, in which the two blocs supported opposing sides in conflicts elsewhere rather than fighting each other directly.
以及代理人战争， 发生在国家之间与国家内部， 两大阵营在别处的冲突中 支持对立的一方， 而不是彼此直接交战。
Three named effects beat one described at length.
三个点名的影响 胜过一个长篇描述。
And the comparison this topic sets up is how each superpower maintained influence over other states — through alliances, aid, military support and intervention.
而本主题设置的比较是 每个超级大国如何维持 对其他国家的影响力， 通过同盟、援助、军事支持与干预。
Both used all four, which is why the comparison question is answerable in both directions.
两者四种都用过， 这正是这道比较题 在两个方向上都答得出来的原因。
Two examinable threads here.
这里有两条可考的线索。
First, China: as a result of internal tension and Japanese aggression, Chinese communists seized power, and the CED notes this eventually contributed to communist revolutions elsewhere.
第一，中国： 由于内部矛盾与日本侵略， 中国共产党人夺取政权， 课程大纲指出 这最终促成了别处的共产主义革命。
Second, state control of the economy.
第二，国家对经济的控制。
As in the Soviet Five Year Plans of Unit 7, the Chinese government controlled the national economy through the Great Leap Forward, implementing repressive policies with significant costs to the population.
如同第七单元里苏联的五年计划， 中国政府通过大跃进 控制国民经济， 推行压制性政策， 给人口带来巨大代价。
The CED presents those two as a matched pair, which is exactly how a comparison question will ask for them.
课程大纲把这两者 作为一对配套呈现， 而比较题正是会这样来问。
Beyond these, movements to redistribute land and resources developed within states in Africa, Asia and Latin America, some advocating communism or socialism and some not.
除此之外， 土地与资源再分配的运动 在非洲、亚洲与拉丁美洲的国家内部出现， 有些主张共产主义或社会主义，有些不是。
Keep that distinction: land reform is not the same claim as revolution.
要保持这一区分： 土地改革与革命不是同一个主张。
Decolonization after 1900 took several paths.
一九〇〇年之后的去殖民化走了好几条路。
Nationalist leaders and parties in Asia and Africa sought varying degrees of autonomy within, or independence from, imperial rule — the Indian National Congress, Ho Chi Minh in French Indochina, Kwame Nkrumah in the Gold Coast, Gamal Abdel Nasser in Egypt.
亚洲与非洲的民族主义领袖与政党 寻求在帝国统治内部 获得不同程度的自治， 或者脱离帝国统治独立， 印度国民大会党、 法属印度支那的胡志明、 黄金海岸的克瓦米·恩克鲁玛、 埃及的迦玛尔·阿卜杜勒·纳赛尔。
After the Second World War, some colonies negotiated their independence while others achieved it through armed struggle.
第二次世界大战之后， 一些殖民地通过谈判获得独立， 另一些通过武装斗争实现独立。
India and the Gold Coast are the standard negotiated cases; Angola, Vietnam and Algeria the standard armed ones.
印度与黄金海岸是标准的谈判案例； 安哥拉、越南与阿尔及利亚 是标准的武装案例。
This is the unit's highest-value comparison, and here is why: both routes end in a new state, but they do not end in the same new state.
这是本单元价值最高的比较， 原因在于： 两条路都通向一个新国家， 但不是同一个新国家。
A negotiated transfer leaves civil institutions and an electoral party in place; an armed struggle tends to leave a military-led government and a devastated economy.
谈判交接留下了 运作中的公民制度与选举政党； 武装斗争则往往留下 军人主导的政府与被摧毁的经济。
And a third strand is easily missed.
还有第三条线索容易被忽略。
Regional, religious and ethnic movements challenged both colonial rule and the inherited imperial boundaries those empires left behind — which is why so many post-independence conflicts were about borders rather than about the departing power.
地区性、宗教性与族裔运动 既挑战殖民统治， 也挑战那些帝国留下的 沿袭的帝国边界， 这正是为什么 如此多的独立后冲突 是关于边界， 而不是关于离去的宗主国。
The redrawing of political boundaries after colonial withdrawal led to the creation of new states, and in some cases to conflict, population displacement and resettlement — the partition of British India being the standard case of all three at once.
殖民者撤出之后 政治边界的重划 导致新国家的建立， 在某些情况下 还带来冲突、人口流离与重新安置， 英属印度的分治 是三者同时发生的标准案例。
Economically, governments in newly independent states often took a strong role in guiding economic life to promote development.
在经济上， 新独立国家的政府 常常在引导经济生活、 推动发展方面 扮演强有力的角色。
Notice that this is a continuity with the interwar pattern of Unit 7, arrived at from a completely different direction — and a continuity like that scores well.
注意，这与第七单元 两战之间的模式是一种延续， 只是从完全不同的方向抵达， 而这样的延续能拿到好分数。
There was also a reverse flow of people: the migration of former colonial subjects to imperial metropoles, usually to major cities, which maintained cultural and economic ties long after independence.
还有一股反向的人流： 前殖民地臣民 向宗主国的迁移， 通常是迁往大城市， 在独立之后很久 仍维系着文化与经济联系。
Global resistance to established power structures is the other half of the century, and the CED gives three patterns: non-violence, a militarised response, and violence against civilians.
对既有权力结构的全球反抗，是这个世纪的另一半， 考纲给了三种模式：非暴力、军事化回应，以及针对平民的暴力。
Mohandas Gandhi, Martin Luther King Junior and Nelson Mandela all promoted non-violence as a method of change.
甘地、马丁·路德·金和曼德拉，都把非暴力作为促成改变的方法。
Although conflict dominated much of the twentieth century, many individuals and groups — including states — opposed that trend, and the CED names three distinct patterns which should not be blurred.
尽管冲突主导了二十世纪的大部分时间， 许多个人与团体， 包括国家在内， 反对这一趋势， 课程大纲点出三种不同的模式， 不应把它们混为一谈。
Groups and individuals challenged the wars of the century, and some — Gandhi, Martin Luther King Junior, Nelson Mandela — promoted non-violence as a method of change.
团体与个人挑战本世纪的战争， 其中一些人， 甘地、小马丁·路德·金、曼德拉， 倡导非暴力作为变革的方法。
Militaries and militarised states often responded to the proliferation of conflicts in ways that further intensified them.
军队与军事化国家 对冲突的蔓延作出的回应 往往使冲突进一步加剧。
And some movements used violence against civilians in an effort to achieve political aims.
而一些运动 为达成政治目的 对平民使用暴力。
All three are examinable content, not asides.
这三者都是可考内容， 不是旁枝末节。
Finally, the end of the Cold War, which the CED also gives as a compound: advances in United States military and technological development, the Soviet Union's costly and ultimately failed invasion of Afghanistan, public discontent, and economic problems within the Soviet system.
最后是冷战的终结， 课程大纲同样给出一个复合原因： 美国军事与技术发展的进步、 苏联代价高昂且最终失败的阿富汗入侵、 公众不满， 以及苏联体制内部的经济问题。
Three of those four are internal to the Soviet Union.
这四项中有三项 是苏联内部的。
An answer that explains the ending purely as external pressure has missed the CED's own weighting.
把这一结局 纯粹解释为外部压力的答案， 错过了课程大纲自己的权重。
Six exam moves.
考试里的六个动作。
First, the Cold War was not two-sided — put the Non-Aligned Movement in.
第一，冷战不是两极的——要把不结盟运动写进去。
Second, give the effects as three named things: alliances, nuclear proliferation, proxy wars.
第二，把影响写成三个有名字的东西：同盟、核扩散、代理人战争。
Third, negotiated versus armed independence explains what the new state inherited.
第三，谈判独立与武装独立的对比，解释了新国家继承了什么。
Fourth, use the phrase inherited imperial boundaries.
第四，要用「沿袭的帝国边界」这个短语。
Give all three resistance patterns: non-violence, a militarised response, and violence against civilians.
三种抵抗模式都要写：非暴力、军事化回应、以及对平民的暴力。
And weight the ending as mostly internal to the Soviet system.
结尾的权重是：主要来自苏联体制内部。
One last thing about causation in the age of the Cold War: the reasoning task is to explain the extent to which the effects of the Cold War were similar in the Eastern and Western Hemispheres.
关于冷战时代的因果关系还有最后一点： 推理任务是解释冷战的影响在东半球与西半球在多大程度上相似。
Extent is a comparison word — it wants similarity and difference, and a judgement about which dominates.
「程度」是一个比较词——它要相似也要不同，还要判断哪一边占上风。
Now, five things to carry out.
现在，带走五件事。
First, the Cold War was not two-sided — put the Non-Aligned Movement in.
第一，冷战不是两极的， 要把不结盟运动写进去。
Second, give the effects as three: alliances, nuclear proliferation, proxy wars.
第二，把影响写成三项： 同盟、核扩散、代理人战争。
Third, negotiated versus armed independence explains what the new state inherited.
第三，谈判独立与武装独立的对比 解释了新国家继承了什么。
Fourth, inherited imperial boundaries explain post-independence conflict better than anything else.
第四，沿袭的帝国边界 比任何其他因素 都更能解释独立后的冲突。
Fifth, the Cold War ended mostly from within.
第五，冷战主要是从内部结束的。