馊主意是什么意思| 大红袍属于什么茶类| 桃花是指什么生肖| 血红蛋白是什么意思| 做梦捡钱是什么预兆| 下午四点是什么时辰| 血压偏低吃什么东西补最好| 个子矮吃什么才能长高| 心电图伪差是什么意思| 肠道消炎用什么药最好| 眼白出血是什么原因| 什么时候种大白菜| 后背发冷发凉属于什么症状| island什么意思| 什么的拼音怎么写| 主动权是什么意思| 让我爱你然后把我抛弃是什么歌| 嘴唇边缘发黑是什么原因| w是什么意思| 什么情况下喝补液盐| 一什么金鱼| 为什么不建议做冠脉cta检查| 什么是白噪音| 蜂王浆什么时间吃最好| 松树像什么| 血尿是什么原因引起的男性| 上海是什么省| 二线用药是什么意思| 鸟吃什么食物| 拉肚子可以吃什么| 伽马刀是什么意思| 斗破苍穹什么时候出的| 三五成群十双在是什么生肖| 15岁可以做什么兼职| 甲基是什么| 7.4是什么星座| 化肥对人体有什么危害| 律的右边读什么| 男生第一次是什么感觉| 五月十六是什么星座| 妇科千金片和三金片有什么区别| 不劳而获是什么意思| 红薯什么季节成熟| 心脏官能症吃什么药| 家有喜事指什么生肖| 阿米替林片是治什么病的| 人类的祖先是什么动物| 空调水滴是什么模式| 高血压注意什么事项| 油漆味对人有什么危害| 阿米巴病是什么病| 柝什么意思| 麦露迪女鞋什么档次| 妇炎康片主要治什么妇科病| 亦或是什么意思| 什么水晶招财旺事业| 喝什么汤下奶最快最多| 踏板摩托车什么牌子好| 75年属什么的生肖| 现在流行什么样的衣柜| 深海鱼油起什么作用| 一等功有什么待遇| 梦见喜欢的人代表什么| belle什么意思| 显怀是什么意思| 零和博弈什么意思| 大土土什么字| 白色和什么颜色搭配最好看| 贴切是什么意思| 胸闷是什么感觉| 嗓子突然哑了是什么原因引起的| 胎盘低要注意什么| 脚筋膜炎什么办法恢复的最快| 上火吃什么消炎药| 溜号是什么意思| 眼神迷离是什么意思| 寂寞难耐是什么意思| 氨甲环酸又叫什么名| 养生馆起什么名字好| 游山玩水是什么意思| 麒麟长什么样| 儿童办护照需要什么材料| 男人为什么喜欢吃奶| 抗核抗体弱阳性说明什么| 第一顺位是什么意思| 什么是癔症病| 本自具足是什么意思| 女人梦见搬家预示什么| 大姨妈吃什么食物好| 什么梨最好吃| dm代表什么| 无助是什么意思| 熬夜后吃什么恢复元气| 贱痣是什么意思| 腋下有味道是什么原因| 口力念什么| 穿孔是什么意思| 脾虚湿盛吃什么药| 堂哥的女儿叫什么| 下头是什么意思| 雨渐耳符咒有什么用| 跖疣去医院挂什么科室| 农历六月十五是什么星座| 过敏性鼻炎挂什么科室| 宝刀未老的意思是什么| 99朵玫瑰花代表什么| 她将是你的新娘是什么歌| newbee什么意思| 白发越来越多是什么原因造成的| 下放是什么意思| 做爱什么姿势最舒服| 青海有什么湖| 什么是纤维化| 脾大对身体有什么影响| 吃西兰花有什么好处| 夏天吃什么降火| 西梅不能和什么一起吃| 看病人送什么花| 呆小症是缺乏什么激素| 七月二十四是什么星座| 什么是健康证| 会所是什么意思| 胃肠感冒吃什么食物比较好| 杨枝甘露是什么做的| 香米是什么米| 中老年人吃什么钙片好| 牡丹鹦鹉吃什么| 可否是什么意思| 什么人不能吃茄子| 焦虑抑郁吃什么药| 孕妇肾积水是什么原因引起的| 经常头疼是什么原因| 护理员是干什么的| 佛心果是什么东西| b型阳性血是什么意思| 白玫瑰代表什么| 前列腺炎吃什么食物好| 更年期综合征吃什么药| 肾结石去医院挂什么科| 什么产品美白效果最好最快| 草字头加西念什么| 什么情况要打破伤风针| 特别是什么意思| 尿沉渣检查什么| 做些什么| 强悍是什么意思| 12点到1点是什么时辰| 久坐睾丸疼是什么原因| 什么是性上瘾| 什么时候同房容易怀孕| 不下面一个一念什么| 朱元璋是什么民族| olp是什么意思| 小孩血糖高有什么症状| 儿童抽动症挂什么科| 吃甲硝唑有什么副作用| 腺癌是什么原因引起的| 低温烫伤是什么意思| 正的五行属性是什么| 胆管结石用什么药能把它除掉| 头晃动是什么病的前兆| 做好自己是什么意思| 3月4号什么星座| 孟姜女姓什么| 什么的白塔| 鼻子流血什么原因| 窦性心律不齐有什么危害| 突然耳朵疼是什么原因| 什么时候最容易怀孕| 朝乾夕惕什么意思| 关节疼痛吃什么药| 心慌是什么引起的| vlone是什么牌子| 仙草是什么| 上海最高楼叫什么大厦有多少米高| 嘴巴发甜是什么原因| 什么是高纤维食物| 日入是什么时辰| 神经衰弱吃什么| 反酸烧心吃什么药效果好| 咖啡因是什么东西| 当归有什么作用和功效| 王八看绿豆是什么意思| 63岁属什么生肖| 维生素吃多了有什么副作用| 小鹦鹉吃什么食物| 病案号是什么意思| 三七粉做面膜有什么功效| 上海话册那什么意思| 黑鱼又叫什么鱼| 抗结剂是什么| 玉米排骨汤放什么调料| 真菌镜检阴性是什么意思| 耳浴10分钟什么意思| fa是什么| 死亡是什么感觉| 朵的第二笔是什么| 先兆性流产是什么意思| 劓刑是什么意思| 蓝色和红色混合是什么颜色| 深蹲有什么好处| 黄历破屋是什么意思| 思利及人是什么意思| 痛经吃什么止痛药| 米醋和陈醋有什么区别| 膝盖有积液是什么症状| bso是什么意思| 发高烧是什么原因引起的| 水杯什么材质的好| 夏末是什么时候| 咳嗽吃什么水果| 喉咙发炎吃什么消炎药| 爱情的本质是什么| 什么样的人不能吃海参| 朱元璋是什么朝代| 感性是什么意思| flair呈高信号是什么意思| 粒子是什么| 兆是什么意思| 吃什么补肾最好| 梦见打死猫有什么预兆| 放疗是什么意思| 为什么会得口腔溃疡| 什么是超纤皮| 己卯日五行属什么| 回苏灵又叫什么| 甲胎蛋白是什么意思| 衣原体阳性是什么病| 南方的粽子一般是什么口味| 广角是什么| 引力的本质是什么| 低度cin病变是什么意思| 开除党籍有什么后果| 为什么蚊子咬了会起包| 多发息肉是什么意思| 春运是什么意思| 被动什么意思| 娘子啊哈是什么歌| 什么是心梗| 滚刀什么意思| 照护保险是什么| 血脂异常是什么意思| 啾啾是什么意思| 脸上长疣是什么原因| 268数字代表什么意思| 青鱼又叫什么鱼| 尿素高吃什么药| 心电图是什么| 呃是什么意思| 痛风打什么针见效最快| 憩室什么意思| 桃子不能和什么食物一起吃| 孕妇腹泻可以吃什么药| prime是什么意思| 大意失荆州是什么意思| 十一月六号是什么星座| 破气是什么意思| 英雄联盟msi是什么| 1979年属什么| 艾滋病通过什么传播| 尿里加什么能冒充怀孕| 凌晨十二点是什么时辰| 姐字五行属什么| 支气管炎性改变是什么意思| 百度Jump to content

国家能源局—滚动新闻

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
百度 辞赋即大成文体的一个典型代表。

The End of History and the Last Man
AuthorFrancis Fukuyama
LanguageEnglish
PublisherFree Press
Publication date
1992
Media typePrint
Pages418
ISBN978-0-02-910975-5
Followed byTrust 

The End of History and the Last Man is a 1992 book of political philosophy by American political scientist Francis Fukuyama which argues that with the ascendancy of Western liberal democracy—which occurred after the Cold War (1945–1991) and the dissolution of the Soviet Union (1991)—humanity has reached "not just ... the passing of a particular period of post-war history, but the end of history as such: That is, the end-point of mankind's ideological evolution and the universalization of Western liberal democracy as the final form of human government."[1]

Fukuyama draws upon the philosophies and ideologies of G. W. F. Hegel and Karl Marx, who define human history as a linear progression, from one socioeconomic epoch to another.[2]

The book expands on Fukuyama's essay "The End of History?", published in The National Interest journal, Summer 1989.[3][4]

Overview

[edit]

Fukuyama argues that history should be viewed as an evolutionary process, and that the end of history, in this sense, means that liberal democracy is the final form of government for all nations. According to Fukuyama, since the French Revolution, liberal democracy has repeatedly proven to be a fundamentally better system (ethically, politically, economically) than any of the alternatives,[3] and so there can be no progression from it to an alternative system. Fukuyama claims not that events will stop occurring in the future, but rather that all that will happen in the future (even if totalitarianism returns) is that democracy will become more and more prevalent in the long term.

Some argue[who?] that Fukuyama presents "American-style" democracy as the only "correct" political system and argues that all countries must inevitably follow this particular system of government.[5][6] However, a number of Fukuyama scholars claim this is a misreading of his work.[citation needed] Fukuyama's argument is only that in the future there will be more and more governments that use the framework of parliamentary democracy and that contain markets of some sort. He has said:

The End of History was never linked to a specifically American model of social or political organization. Following Alexandre Kojève, the Russian-French philosopher who inspired my original argument, I believe that the European Union more accurately reflects what the world will look like at the end of history than the contemporary United States. The EU's attempt to transcend sovereignty and traditional power politics by establishing a transnational rule of law is much more in line with a "post-historical" world than the Americans' continuing belief in God, national sovereignty, and their military.[7]

Arguments in favor

[edit]

An argument in favor of Fukuyama's thesis is the democratic peace theory, which argues that mature democracies rarely or never go to war with one another. This theory has faced criticism, with arguments largely resting on conflicting definitions of "war" and "mature democracy". Part of the difficulty in assessing the theory is that democracy as a widespread global phenomenon emerged only recently in human history, which makes generalizing about it difficult. (See also list of wars between democracies.)[citation needed]

Other major empirical evidence includes the elimination of interstate warfare in South America, Southeast Asia, and Eastern Europe among countries that moved from military dictatorship to liberal democracies.

According to several studies, the end of the Cold War and the subsequent increase in the number of liberal democratic states were accompanied by a sudden and dramatic decline in total warfare, interstate wars, ethnic wars, revolutionary wars, and the number of refugees and displaced persons.[8][9]

Criticisms

[edit]

Political Islam, tribalism, and the "Clash of Civilizations"

[edit]

Various Western commentators have described the thesis of The End of History as flawed because it does not sufficiently take into account the power of ethnic loyalties and religious movements as a counter-force to the spread of liberal democracy, with the specific example of Islamic fundamentalism or Caliphate, as the most powerful of these.

Benjamin Barber wrote a 1992 article and a 1995 book, Jihad vs. McWorld, that addressed this theme. Barber described "McWorld" as a secular, liberal, corporate-friendly transformation of the world and used the word "jihad" to refer to the competing forces of tribalism and religious fundamentalism, with a special emphasis on Islamic fundamentalism.

Samuel P. Huntington wrote a 1993 essay, The Clash of Civilizations, in direct response to The End of History; he then expanded the essay into a 1996 book, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order. In the essay and book, Huntington argued that the temporary conflict between ideologies is being replaced by the ancient conflict between civilizations. The dominant civilization decides the form of human government, and these will not be constant. He especially singled out Islam, which he described as having "bloody borders".

After the September 11 attacks, The End of History was cited by some commentators as a symbol of the supposed naiveté and undue optimism of the Western world during the 1990s, in thinking that the end of the Cold War also represented the end of major global conflict. In the weeks after the attacks, Fareed Zakaria called the events "the end of the end of history", while George Will wrote that history had "returned from vacation".[10]

Fukuyama did discuss radical Islam briefly in The End of History. He argued that Islam is not an imperialist force like Stalinism and fascism; that is, it has little intellectual or emotional appeal outside the Islamic "heartlands". Fukuyama pointed to the economic and political difficulties that Iran and Saudi Arabia face and argued that such states are fundamentally unstable: either they will become democracies with a Muslim society (like Turkey) or they will simply disintegrate. Moreover, when Islamic states have actually been created, they were easily dominated by the powerful Western states.

However, some scholars have challenged Fukuyama's claims, arguing that his analysis underestimates the adaptability and influence of Islam in the global political landscape. Islam has consistently expanded beyond its historical heartlands, shaping cultural and intellectual movements worldwide. Moreover, political instability in some Muslim-majority nations is often attributed to colonial legacies, foreign interventions, and economic pressures rather than an inherent flaw in Islamic governance. Countries such as Malaysia, Indonesia, Qatar and the UAE etc have demonstrated political stability while integrating Islamic principles.

Additionally, the framing of Western liberal democracy as the ultimate political evolution overlooks alternative governance models rooted in justice (adl), consultation (shura), and public welfare (maslaha), which have been central to Islamic political thought. Critics argue that Fukuyama’s perspective reflects a Western-centric assumption that stability and progress must align with liberal democracy, ignoring the resilience and diversity of Islamic governance throughout history. Western democracies themselves face significant instability (e.g., political polarization, economic inequality), challenging the notion that they are the only viable political model.

In October 2001, Fukuyama, in a Wall Street Journal opinion piece, responded to criticism of his thesis after the September 11 attacks, saying, "I believe that in the end I remain right". He explained that what he meant by "End of History" was the evolution of human political system, toward that of the "liberal-democratic West". He also noted that his original thesis "does not imply a world free from conflict, nor the disappearance of culture as a distinguishing characteristic of societies".[10]

The resurgence of Russia and China

[edit]

Another challenge to the "end of history" thesis is the growth in the economic and political power of two countries, Russia and China. China has a one-party state government, while Russia, though formally a democracy, is often described as an autocracy; it is categorized as an anocracy in the Polity data series.[11]

Azar Gat, Professor of National Security at Tel Aviv University, argued this point in his 2007 Foreign Affairs article, "The Return of Authoritarian Great Powers", stating that the success of these two countries could "end the end of history".[12] Gat also discussed Political Islam, but stated that the movements associated with it "represent no viable alternative to modernity and pose no significant military threat to the developed world". He considered the challenge of China and Russia to be the major threat, since they could pose a viable rival model which could inspire other states.

This view was echoed by Robert Kagan in his 2008 book, The Return of History and the End of Dreams, whose title was a deliberate rejoinder to The End of History.[13]

In his 2008 Washington Post opinion piece, Fukuyama also addressed this point. He wrote, "Despite recent authoritarian advances, liberal democracy remains the strongest, most broadly appealing idea out there. Most autocrats, including Putin and Chávez, still feel that they have to conform to the outward rituals of democracy even as they gut its substance. Even China's Hu Jintao felt compelled to talk about democracy in the run-up to Beijing's Olympic Games."[14]

His "ultimate nightmare", he said in March 2022, is a world in which China supports Russia's invasion of Ukraine and Russia supports a Chinese invasion of Taiwan. If that were to happen, and be successful, Fukuyama said, "then you would really be living in a world that was being dominated by these non-democratic powers. If the United States and the rest of the West couldn't stop that from happening, then that really is the end of the end of history."[15]

Failure of civil society and political decay

[edit]

In 2014, on the occasion of the 25th anniversary of the publication of the original essay, "The End of History?", Fukuyama wrote a column in The Wall Street Journal again updating his hypothesis. He wrote that, while liberal democracy still had no real competition from more authoritarian systems of government "in the realm of ideas", nevertheless he was less idealistic than he had been "during the heady days of 1989". Fukuyama noted the Orange Revolution in Ukraine and the Arab Spring, both of which seemed to have failed in their pro-democracy goals, as well as the "backsliding" of democracy in countries including Thailand, Turkey and Nicaragua. He stated that the biggest problem for the democratically elected governments in some countries was not ideological but "their failure to provide the substance of what people want from government: personal security, shared economic growth and the basic public services ... that are needed to achieve individual opportunity." Though he believed that economic growth, improved government and civic institutions all reinforced one another, he wrote that it was not inevitable that "all countries will ... get on that escalator".[16]

Twenty-five years later, the most serious threat to the end-of-history hypothesis isn't that there is a higher, better model out there that will someday supersede liberal democracy; neither Islamist theocracy nor Chinese capitalism cuts it. Once societies get on the up escalator of industrialization, their social structure begins to change in ways that increase demands for political participation. If political elites accommodate these demands, we arrive at some version of democracy.

Fukuyama also warned of "political decay", which he wrote could also affect established democracies like the United States, in which corruption and crony capitalism erode liberty and economic opportunity. Nevertheless, he expressed his continued belief that "the power of the democratic ideal remains immense".[16]

Following the United Kingdom's decision to leave the European Union and the election of Donald Trump as President of the United States in 2016, Fukuyama feared for the future of liberal democracy in the face of resurgent populism,[17][18][19] and the rise of a "post-fact world",[20] saying that "twenty five years ago, I didn't have a sense or a theory about how democracies can go backward. And I think they clearly can." He warned that America's political rot was infecting the world order to the point where it "could be as big as the Soviet collapse". Fukuyama also highlighted Russia's interference in the Brexit referendum and 2016 U.S. elections.[19]

Posthuman future

[edit]

Fukuyama has also stated that his thesis was incomplete, but for a different reason: "there can be no end of history without an end of modern natural science and technology" (quoted from Our Posthuman Future). Fukuyama predicts that humanity's control of its own evolution will have a great and possibly terrible effect on liberal democracy.

Jacques Derrida

[edit]

In Specters of Marx: The State of the Debt, the Work of Mourning and the New International (1993), Jacques Derrida criticized Fukuyama as a "come-lately reader" of the philosopher-statesman Alexandre Kojève (1902–1968), who "in the tradition of Leo Strauss" (1899–1973), in the 1950s, already had described the society of the U.S. as the "realization of communism"; and said that the public-intellectual celebrity of Fukuyama and the mainstream popularity of The End of History and the Last Man, were symptoms of cultural anxiety about ensuring the "Death of Marx". In criticising Fukuyama's celebration of his perceived economic and cultural hegemony of Western liberalism, Derrida said:

...never have violence, inequality, exclusion, famine, and thus economic oppression affected as many human beings in the history of the earth and of humanity. Instead of singing the advent of the ideal of liberal democracy and of the capitalist market in the euphoria of the end of history, instead of celebrating the 'end of ideologies' and the end of the great emancipatory discourses, let us never neglect this obvious, macroscopic fact, made up of innumerable, singular sites of suffering: no degree of progress allows one to ignore that never before, in absolute figures, have so many men, women and children been subjugated, starved or exterminated on the earth.[21]

Therefore, Derrida said: "This end of History is essentially a Christian eschatology. It is consonant with the current discourse of the Pope on the European Community: Destined to become [either] a Christian State or [a] Super-State; [but] this community would still belong, therefore, to some Holy Alliance".[21][failed verification]

Split between democracy and capitalism

[edit]

Slovenian philosopher Slavoj ?i?ek argues that Fukuyama's idea that we have reached the end of history is not wholly true. ?i?ek points out that liberal democracy is linked to capitalism; however, the success of capitalism in authoritarian nations like China and Singapore shows that the link between capitalism and democracy is broken.[22] Problems caused by the success of capitalism and neo-liberal policies, such as greater wealth inequality and environmental hazards, manifested in multiple countries with unrest towards elected governments. As a result liberal democracy has struggled to survive a number of the problems caused by a free market economy and multiple nations would see a decline in the quality of their democracy.[23]

Publication history

[edit]

See also

[edit]

Notes

[edit]
  1. ^ Fukuyama, Francis (1989). "The End Of History?". The National Interest. 16: 4.
  2. ^ Glaser, Eliane (March 21, 2014). "Bring Back Ideology: Fukuyama's 'End of History' 25 years On". The Guardian.
  3. ^ a b Fukuyama, Francis (1989). "The End of History?". The National Interest (16): 3–18. ISSN 0884-9382. JSTOR 24027184. |access-date =February 21, 2024
  4. ^ Fukuyama, Francis (Summer 1989). "The End of History?" (PDF). pages.ucsd.edu. The National Interest. Retrieved February 21, 2024. Fukuyama's essay "The End of History"
  5. ^ "After the Neo-Cons: America at the Crossroads, by Francis Fukuyama". The Independent. March 24, 2006. Archived from the original on June 18, 2022. Retrieved December 28, 2019.
  6. ^ Keane, John (February 7, 2015). "Francis Fukuyama sticks to his guns on liberal democracy". The Sydney Morning Herald. Retrieved December 28, 2019.
  7. ^ Francis Fukuyama. (2025-08-05). "The history at the end of history." The Guardian. Retrieved June 18, 2008
  8. ^ "Global Conflict Trends". Center for Systemic Peace. 2017. Retrieved October 5, 2017.
  9. ^ "Human Security Report 2005". Human Security Report Project. Archived from the original on June 22, 2010. Retrieved October 5, 2017.
  10. ^ a b Fukuyama, Francis (October 5, 2001). "History Is Still Going Our Way". The Wall Street Journal.
  11. ^ "Polity IV Country Report 2010: Russia" (PDF). The Center for Systemic Peace. 2010.
  12. ^ A. Gat, "The End of the End of History", Foreign Affairs, July/August 2007.
  13. ^ Michael Burleigh, "Return of the Dog Pack" (review of The Return of History and the End of Dreams), Literary Review, May 2008
  14. ^ Fukuyama, Francis (August 24, 2008). "They Can Only Go So Far". The Washington Post.
  15. ^ "Francis Fukuyama: We could be facing the end of "the end of history"". New Statesman. March 30, 2022. Retrieved April 1, 2022.
  16. ^ a b Fukuyama, Francis (June 6, 2014). "At the 'End of History' Still Stands Democracy". The Wall Street Journal.
  17. ^ Ishaan Tharoor (February 9, 2017). "The man who declared the 'end of history' fears for democracy's future". Washington Post.
  18. ^ "The man who declared the 'end of history' now fearful of the very fate of liberal democracy". National Post. February 9, 2017.
  19. ^ a b Francis Fukuyama (January 2017). "America: the failed state". Prospect Magazine. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  20. ^ Francis Fukuyama (January 12, 2017). "The Emergence of a Post-Fact World". Project Syndicate.
  21. ^ a b Derrida, 1994.
  22. ^ ?i?ek, Slavoj (2009). First As Tragedy, Then As Farce. Verso Books. pp. 131–132. ISBN 9781844674282.
  23. ^ Reich, Robert B. "How Capitalism Is Killing Democracy". Foreign Policy. Retrieved January 14, 2022.

References

[edit]
[edit]
什么车最省油 河南的特产是什么 于文华朱之文什么关系 ami是什么 流鼻涕是什么原因
孕妇吸二手烟对胎儿有什么影响 小猫为什么会踩奶 女生额头长痘痘是什么原因 婴儿腹泻吃什么好 丝瓜什么时候种植最好
枕头底下放剪刀有什么说法 梦见铲雪预示着什么 谷雨是什么季节 来大姨妈前有什么症状 什么满天下
女生纹身什么图案好看 思的五行属性是什么 肺阴虚吃什么中成药 省长是什么级别干部 烛光晚餐是什么意思
雌二醇低吃什么补得快hcv9jop8ns2r.cn 血压低有什么危险hcv9jop7ns5r.cn 孕中期同房要注意什么hcv8jop5ns7r.cn 牙齿痛吃什么hcv7jop9ns0r.cn 07年是什么年hcv9jop2ns4r.cn
烧心是什么感觉hcv9jop6ns9r.cn 一个句号是什么意思hcv7jop4ns7r.cn 化痰祛痰吃什么药hcv8jop9ns0r.cn dr是什么hcv7jop4ns7r.cn 嗯嗯嗯是什么意思mmeoe.com
什么品牌的沙发好sscsqa.com 磷高有什么症状和危害fenrenren.com 儿保科主要是检查什么helloaicloud.com 暂住证办理需要什么材料hcv7jop4ns5r.cn 眼圈发黑什么原因hcv8jop0ns3r.cn
笔触是什么意思baiqunet.com 肺阳虚吃什么中成药hcv9jop3ns2r.cn 牙根疼吃什么药hcv7jop5ns5r.cn 梦见手机失而复得是什么意思hcv7jop7ns1r.cn 冠脉ct能检查出什么hcv8jop2ns2r.cn
百度