perestroika

简明释义

英[ˌperəˈstrɔɪkə]美[ˌperəˈstrɔɪkə]

n. （20世纪80年代末苏联在政治、社会和经济方面所作的）改革

英英释义

单词用法

同义词

反义词

例句

1.So if you insist on me giving advice, I will certainly not give you a kind of menu or a timetable for change, but I do believe that what America needs is its own perestroika.

如果你们坚持要听我的意见，我也一定不会给你们列出一份改变的菜单或者时间表，但我坚信美国需要做出自身的调整和必要的改变。

2.So if you insist on me giving advice, I will certainly not give you a kind of menu or a timetable for change, but I do believe that what America needs is its own perestroika.

如果你们坚持要听我的意见，我也一定不会给你们列出一份改变的菜单或者时间表，但我坚信美国需要做出自身的调整和必要的改变。

3.The term perestroika refers to the political and economic reforms initiated in the Soviet Union during the 1980s.

术语perestroika指的是在1980年代苏联发起的政治和经济改革。

4.Many historians believe that perestroika was a crucial step towards the end of the Cold War.

许多历史学家认为perestroika是冷战结束的重要一步。

5.The policies of perestroika aimed to decentralize the economy and increase individual freedoms.

perestroika的政策旨在实现经济的去中心化并增加个人自由。

6.During perestroika, citizens were encouraged to express their opinions more freely.

在perestroika期间，公民被鼓励更自由地表达他们的意见。

7.The reform process known as perestroika faced significant opposition from hardline communists.

被称为perestroika的改革过程遭到了强硬派共产主义者的重大反对。

作文

The term perestroika refers to the political movement for reform within the Communist Party of the Soviet Union during the 1980s, initiated by Mikhail Gorbachev. This period marked a significant turning point in Soviet history, characterized by a series of political and economic reforms aimed at revitalizing the stagnant Soviet economy and opening up the political landscape. The word itself translates to "restructuring" in English, which aptly describes the essence of the changes that were being proposed and implemented. Perestroika was not merely a set of policies; it represented a broader ideological shift towards more openness and transparency, known as glasnost, or "openness." During this time, Gorbachev sought to address the inefficiencies of the Soviet economy, which had been plagued by central planning and bureaucratic stagnation. He introduced measures to decentralize economic control, allowing for some degree of private enterprise and market mechanisms. This was a radical departure from the previous strict adherence to Marxist-Leninist principles. The goal was to stimulate productivity and innovation, which had been sorely lacking in the Soviet system. However, perestroika was not without its challenges. Many party officials and hardliners opposed the reforms, fearing that they would undermine the authority of the Communist Party and lead to the disintegration of the Soviet Union. Indeed, as the reforms progressed, various republics within the USSR began to push for greater autonomy and independence, fueled by the newfound freedoms that perestroika had brought about. The impact of perestroika extended beyond economics. It also encouraged a wave of political activism among the populace. Citizens started to demand more rights and freedoms, leading to a rise in political movements that sought to challenge the status quo. This growing unrest ultimately contributed to the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, as the reforms unleashed forces that could not be contained within the existing political framework. In retrospect, perestroika can be seen as both a courageous attempt at reform and a catalyst for change that spiraled beyond the control of its initiators. While it aimed to save the Soviet system, it inadvertently paved the way for its demise. The legacy of perestroika is complex; it symbolizes both the hope for a more open and democratic society and the tumultuous transition that followed the end of Soviet rule. Today, the lessons of perestroika are still relevant in discussions about reform and governance. It serves as a reminder of the delicate balance between reform and stability, and how efforts to modernize can lead to unintended consequences. As countries around the world grapple with their own challenges of governance and reform, the story of perestroika offers valuable insights into the potential pitfalls and possibilities of transformative change.

重建一词指的是1980年代苏联共产党内部的改革政治运动，由米哈伊尔·戈尔巴乔夫发起。这一时期标志着苏联历史上的一个重要转折点，其特征是一系列旨在振兴停滞不前的苏联经济和开放政治格局的政治和经济改革。这个词本身在英语中翻译为“重组”，恰如其分地描述了所提出和实施的变化的本质。重建不仅仅是一套政策；它代表了一种更广泛的意识形态转变，走向更多的开放和透明，称为“公开性”或重建。 在此期间，戈尔巴乔夫试图解决苏联经济的低效问题，该经济长期以来受到中央计划和官僚主义停滞的困扰。他引入了一些去中心化的经济控制措施，允许一定程度的私营企业和市场机制。这是对之前严格遵循马克思列宁主义原则的激进偏离。目标是刺激生产力和创新，而这在苏联体制中是严重缺乏的。 然而，重建并非没有挑战。许多党内官员和强硬派反对改革，担心这会削弱共产党权威并导致苏联的解体。事实上，随着改革的推进，苏联各共和国开始推动更大的自治和独立，这种趋势受到了重建带来的新自由的推动。 重建的影响不仅限于经济。它还鼓励了民众之间的政治活动浪潮。公民开始要求更多的权利和自由，导致了寻求挑战现状的政治运动的兴起。这种日益增长的不满情绪最终促成了1991年苏联的解体，因为这些改革释放了无法被现有政治框架控制的力量。 回顾过去，重建既可以看作是一项勇敢的改革尝试，也可以看作是超出其发起者控制范围的变革催化剂。虽然它旨在拯救苏联体制，但无意中为其灭亡铺平了道路。重建的遗产是复杂的；它象征着对更开放和民主社会的希望，以及随之而来的动荡过渡。 如今，重建的教训在关于改革和治理的讨论中仍然具有相关性。它提醒我们改革与稳定之间的微妙平衡，以及现代化努力可能导致的意外后果。当世界各国面临自身治理和改革的挑战时，重建的故事为变革的潜在陷阱和可能性提供了宝贵的见解。