用现代眼看人类文明行程都会让人叹，过去人用战争解决土地因为农耕，没有谁上人没这样做过。战胜国用钱买地已经比割地还要赔款

典在不平等条约在那个时代文明一些。两国对等谈判，学界通常叫战败 So historians describe it as war-induced territorial cession, not an “unequal treaty” in the classic sense. It was formally a negotiated treaty, not an “unequal treaty” in the classic sense. Qing treaties with Western powers (Treaty of Nanking, Treaty of Tianjin, Treaty of Shimonoseki, etc.) differ in several essential ways. The key feature of an “unequal treaty” is the loss of sovereign rights, not just losing land.

The biggest irony is this: the very people who insist that a 200-year-old treaty like the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo was an ‘unequal treaty’ are the same ones mindlessly parroting Kremlin propaganda every day today over here and urging Ukraine to give up its land to an aggressor in the 21st century. And they dare call that ‘civilization’? What a con and a joke. What a group of shameful clowns!