美国论文代写：西方的崛起
马克的“西方的崛起”是关于意外和猜想;这两个元素，根据作者，提出了一种描述西方崛起的方式，比以前的研究人员更非欧洲中心。在考虑1500-1800年政治经济和国家建设的性质时，马克思的讨论使人们明白，东方文化上更保守。像中国这样的国家有代表以不同形式的香料，银和其他商品进行贸易的方式和方法，这使得它们在过去处于经济上的良好地位，但不像欧洲那样适应可能性。马克斯还指出，像中国这样的国家，在欧洲发生了一些幸运的事故，导致其发展的同时，也被剥夺了权利，欧洲在工业起义时恰巧有必要的煤炭储备，从而帮助他们更好地建立自己的国家（分数）。马克的书写声称一个历史的唯一性位置。在历史上偶然的命运的讨论中，肯定有一个独特的元素。
在清代的讨论中，Per asty是许多研究者的结合。在介绍清朝的不同思想，扩展的边界扩张和富裕省份需要的干预的讨论中，珀德的讨论实际上提出了一个与其他研究者有很大不同的中国的图片。被欧洲同行称为“老疯狂，一流的战争人”;中国确实考虑了其国家规则中的许多战略要素，而不是西方研究人员可能信任（珀都）。网站“中国和欧洲”也提出了一个非常独特的分析，因为实际上引入了比较的当代优势。基于历史比较中国和欧洲在1500-1800年的生产力就像从现有船只绘制类似的数据集，并将它们在历史议程上进行比较，但是当在网站上绘制新的观点时，比较变得有意义。
美国论文代写：西方的崛起
Mark’s ‘Rise of the West’ is about contingencines and conjectures; both these elements, according to the author, presents a way of describing the rise of the West in a way that is more Non-Eurocentric than previous researchers. In considering the nature of political economcy and state building in the 1500-1800, the discussions of Marks leads one to understand that the East was more culturally conservative. Countries such as China are represented to have had ways and means to trade in different forms of spices, silver and other commodities which put them in economically good status in the past, but were not as contingency adapatable as Europe was. Marks furthermore states that nations such as China were also deprived when it came to some fortunate accidents motivating their development, as compared to Europe which happened to have the needed coal reserves at the time of the industrial uprisings, thus helping them better in building their states (Marks). The writing of Marks claims a historiographical position of uniqueness. There is certainly an element of uniqueness presented in the discussons of the accidental fortunes in history.
Perdue in the discussions of the Qing dynasty presents a combination of many researchers. In presenting the discussions of the different ideas of the Qing, the expansions of frontiers that were cosndiered and the interventions needed from affluent provinces, the discussions of Perdue actually presents a picture of China that is much different from what other researchers do. Called a ‘Old crazy, first rate man of war’ by its European counterparts; China has indeed considered many strategic elements in its state rule than what Western researchers might give credit to (Perdue). The website ‘China and Europe’ also presents a very unique analysis in that contemporary vantage points of comparions are actually introduced. Comparing the productivity of China and the Europe in the 1500-1800 based on history is like drawing similar data sets from existing vessels and comparing them on historical agendas, but when newer perspectives are drawn as is done on the website, the comparisons become meaningful.
