中国の民主化運動の沈滞とその理由

このQ&Aのポイント
  • 1990年代以降、中国内外での民主化運動は減少しており、それは政府の言論の自由への抑圧の増加、そしてオープンドア政策を含む経済改革によるものです。
  • その期間を通じて、政府は政治的安定に基づく経済成長を最優先とし、民主化運動は逆効果であり、政治的および経済的安定を脅かす過激主義につながると主張しました。
  • この結果、民主化運動は沈滞し、言論の自由が抑圧されるなど、民主主義の発展が制限される状況が生まれました。
回答を見る
  • ベストアンサー

和訳していただけませんか?

下の文章を和訳していただけませんか? Since the 1990s, the democracy movement has declined both within and outside China, which is due to the government's increased suppression of freedom of speech, and economic reforms including the Open Door Policy. During that period, the government gave high priority to economic growth based on political stability, arguing that the democracy movement is counterproductive and leads to radicalism that threatens political and economic stability.

  • 英語
  • 回答数2
  • ありがとう数2

質問者が選んだベストアンサー

  • ベストアンサー
noname#160772
noname#160772
回答No.2

Since the 1990s, the democracy movement has declined both within and outside China, which is due to the government's increased suppression of freedom of speech, and economic reforms including the Open Door Policy. 1990年代以来、民主主義運動は中国国内でも国外でも低迷してきたが、それは、言論の自由に対する政府の抑圧が高まったことと、「門戸開放政策」を含む経済改革とが原因である。 During that period, the government gave high priority to economic growth based on political stability, arguing that the democracy movement is counterproductive and leads to radicalism that threatens political and economic stability. その時期に、政府は、民主主義運動は逆効果であり、政治的・経済的な安定を脅かす急進主義(改革主義)に結びつくのだと議論しつつ、政治的な安定に基づく経済成長に高い優先順位を与えたのである。

a_type_phone
質問者

お礼

ありがとうございます。

その他の回答 (1)

  • sayshe
  • ベストアンサー率77% (4555/5904)
回答No.1

1990年代から、民主化運動は中国の内外で低調になりました、これは、言論の自由を政府がさらに抑えたこと、開放政策を含む経済改革が原因です。 この時期、同政府は、民主化運動は非生産的で、政治的および経済的な安定性を脅かす急進主義につながると主張して、政情安定に基づく経済成長を最優先しました。

a_type_phone
質問者

お礼

ありがとうございます。

関連するQ&A

  • 和訳していただけませんか?

    下の文の( )に入る言葉を選んで和訳していただけませんか? In the late of 1980’s, democratic reforms in the Sovirt Union began to inspire similar changes in Eastern European countries and (preserved/ fostered/ realized ) a movement toward democracy and a market economy. After several weeks of civil unrest, the East German government couldn’t suppress pro-democracy forces and announced that all East German citizens were free to visit West Germany and West Berlin. The eventual fall of the Berlin Wall paved the (track/ rail/ way) for German reunfication and the end of the Cold War. However, in the age of multi-polarization, there have been seanless conflicts around the world. We must make tenacious efforts to ensure global peace and stability beyond ideological differences.

  • 英文の和訳お願いします

    Monsanto’s unchecked power is corrosive to the health of our democracy, our wellbeing and our planet and it must be stopped. As free citizens, it is our right and our duty to protest their unlawful encroachment into the most basic and fundamental aspect of our lives, the food that we eat and the laws that govern our lives.

  • 答えられる範囲で構わないので和訳おねがいします

    >Surveillance: A Threat to Democracy > A new Washington Post-Pew Research Center poll found that a majority of Americans are untroubled by revelations about the National Security Agency’s dragnet collection of the phone records of millions of citizens, without any individual suspicion and regardless of any connection to a counterterrorism investigation. Perhaps the lack of a border sense of alarm is not all that surprising when President Obama, Senator Dianne Feinstein, the Democratic chairwoman of the Intelligence Committee, and intelligence officials insist that such surveillance is crucial to the nation’s antiterrorism efforts. But Americans should not be fooled by political leaders putting forward a false choice. The issue is not whether the government should vigorously pursue terrorists. The question is whether the security goals can achieved by less-intrusive or sweeping means, without tramping on democratic freedoms and basic right .Far too little has been said on this question by the White House or Congress in their defense of the N.S. A.’s dragnet. The surreptitious collection of “metadata”-every bit of information about every phone call except the word-by-word content of conversations ‐fundamentally alters the relationship between individuals and their government.

  • 至急和訳お願いします!!!

    Surveillance: A Threat to Democracy A new Washington Post-Pew Research Center poll found that a majority of Americans are untroubled by revelations about the National Security Agency’s dragnet collection of the phone records of millions of citizens, without any individual suspicion and regardless of any connection to a counterterrorism investigation. Perhaps the lack of a broader sense of alarm is not all that surprising when President Obama, Senator Dianne Feinstein, the Democratic chairwoman of the Intelligence Committee, and intelligence officials insist that such surveillance is crucial to the nation’s antiterrorism efforts. But Americans should not be fooled by political leaders putting forward a false choice. The issue is not whether the government should vigorously pursue terrorists. The question is whether the security goals can be achieved by less-intrusive or sweeping means, without trampling on democratic freedoms and basic rights. Far too little has been said on this question by the White House or Congress in their defense of the N.S.A.’s dragnet. The surreptitious collection of “metadata” — every bit of information about every phone call except the word-by-word content of conversations — fundamentally alters the relationship between individuals and their government

  • 和訳をお願いします。

    以下の文の和訳をお願いします。 But since Prime Minister Shinzo Abe came to power late last year and unleashed bold monetary and government reforms to jump-start the economy, Japan has gone from a global economic laggard to the fastest-growing country in the Group of 7. Winning the 2020 Games is expected to further bolster the standing of the popular Abe, who flew to Buenos Aires to lead Tokyo’s final pitch to the I.O.C.

  • 英文についての質問

    What are the bases of liberal democracy? という質問に対し The most fundamental conceptual foundation of liberal democracy is that the people are the ultimate source of power, the sovereign authority over the government, instead of the government being sovereign over the people. こちらの英文が当てはまるのではないか、と思いました。 回答としては、The bases of liberal democracy is is that the people are the ultimate source of power, the sovereign authority over the government. と最後の[instead of~]など省きましたが、質問に対する答えとなっているでしょうか? よろしくお願いします。

  • 翻訳してください

     The decade from the late 1970s to the late 80s witnessed the birth, suppression and ultimate victory of the Solidarity movement in Poland.Lutoalawski's position in relation to the events of this period is significant in that he found himself among an elite group of internationally acclaimed Polish figures in whom a kind of unofficial moral leadership became invested. なかなかきれいな訳にならず困っています。どなたか、翻訳してください。お願いします。

  • 和訳

    以下の文章の和訳をお願いします。 Democracy champion Aung San Suu Kyi declared a "new era" for Burma Monday, after her party claimed a landslide victory in Sunday's parliamentary by-elections. Although official results could take days, the opposition National League for Democracy says it won at least 43 of the 44 seats it had contested. That includes the four seats in the administrative capital, Naypyitaw, which is populated mostly by government workers and military personnel. Aung San Suu Kyi told a sea of supporters outside NLD headquarters in Rangoon Monday that she hoped the election results will force government to heed the will of ordinary citizens. "We hope that this is the beginning of the new era, where there will be more emphasis on the role of the people in the everyday politics of the country," she said. She appealed to other political parties to help bring democracy and better living conditions to the impoverished country. "We also hope that the we will be able to go further along the road towards national reconciliation," she said. "We will welcome all parties who wish to join us in the process of bringing peace and prosperity to our country.'' The Union Solidarity and Development Party, which was formed by the ruling military before it ceded power in a general election last year, will continue to have an overwhelming majority in parliament. Observers from the Association of Southeast Asian Nations issued a statement Monday saying the election was conducted in a free, fair and transparent manner. The NLD won a landslide victory in 1990 general elections, but military leaders at the time refused to relinquish power and the victors were refused entry into parliament. Aung San Suu Kyi was held under some form of confinement by the military government for most the the past 22 years. Voting took place Sunday under the watch of a small group of observers from the European Union and a regional grouping of Southeast Asian nations. However, the monitors were only given a few days to prepare for their mission, and some have said they considered themselves watchers rather than monitors. U.S. and European Union authorities have hinted that they would consider lifting some economic sanctions imposed on the former military government, if Sunday's polls are determined to be free and fair. Those sanctions were levied during the past two decades in response to widespread human right abuses under military rule.

  • 和訳について

    この英文の和訳をおねがいします。 The conservation movement is a welcome expression of people's desire to limit and control energy consumption: indeed, the vitality of the movement may be a symptom, as much as a cause, of the growing achievement of sufficient energy for personal use in society. 早急におねがいします。

  • 和訳お願いします

    Each ten years, the government conducts a national census, which is authorized by the Constitution. Most of us do not object to answering the questions that the census poses, but what if you should decide to refuse to answer the questions? Could you do so on the basis that they represent an invasion of your privacy? This has been answered by the courts, which hold that it is a proper government function and a necessary one to gather reliable statistics that have a bearing on governmental functions, and that intelligent legislation can only be formulated if the government has the facts. It is probable that people answer the census questions because they believe their answers will be kept confidential and that the information will not be used to hurt them. Census answers cannot be utilized by parties in a lawsuit and used without the consent of the party giving the answers. However, general statistics can be used, and the statistics gathered in the census have been used, for the good of all.