The "New Deal" presided over by the rulers of the late Qing Dynasty and the anti-Qing revolutionary movement led by Sun Yat-sen, the pioneer of the modern democratic revolution, were two irreconcilable major events that occurred at the same time and space. They are of great significance to later generations. . As for how to view the value and role of the two, later generations also have different opinions and have various lawsuits. Once upon a time, in the research field and value system of the revolutionary historical perspective, most historians emphasized violent revolution and ignored the reform achievements of the late Qing rulers. Many treatises on the history of the Revolution of 1911 and modern general history either dismissed the "New Deal" and rarely mentioned it. , or copy the ideas of the revolutionary writer Chen Tianhua, denounce the "New Deal" as "fake reform" and "pseudo reform", at best it is a background of the Revolution of 1911, and lightly mention the "objective role" of the "New Deal" in modern capitalism . In the past ten years, based on the realistic inspiration of reform and opening up, coupled with the expansion of academic exchanges between China and foreign countries and the in-depth historical research, treatises on re-examining the "New Deal" in the late Qing Dynasty from the perspective of early development have continued to emerge. The intricate historical scenes and relevant truths have also emerged. Gradually surfaced. It can be said that in the past ten years or so, the breakthroughs in the research on the history of the Revolution of 1911 in my country’s historical circles have benefited to a certain extent from the breakthroughs in the research on the “New Deal” in the late Qing Dynasty. However, at the level of value judgment, some people prefer reform and despise revolution in the name of criticizing "radicalism" and advocating "authoritarianism" or "conservatism". They regret the interruption of the "New Deal" and accuse the violent anti-Qing struggle. It is a redundant attempt to fundamentally deny the historical necessity and rationality of the Revolution of 1911, and the academic disputes caused by this are inevitable.

To be fair, whether they unanimously deny the "New Deal" or completely deny the Revolution of 1911, although their conclusions are completely different, they have some striking similarities in the way of thinking, that is, they are all based on focusing on one thing at the expense of the other or on the other. The polar thinking of "this is this and favoring one over the other" thus ignores the temporal and spatial connections between historical events and oversimplifies complex history, leaving readers at a loss as to what to do.

It should be admitted that after the heavy blow and humiliation of the Eight-Power Allied Forces' bloodbath in the capital, the "New Deal" announced by Empress Dowager Cixi on her way to Xi'an when she fled to Xi'an was not completely without sincerity, but her hands were stained with the blood of the "Six Gentlemen of 1898". It’s not without specific measures and actual investment. Therefore, we cannot deny the "New Deal" itself because its purpose is to maintain the ruling order of the Qing Dynasty. Due to different historical conditions, there is no doubt that the depth and effectiveness of the reforms in the "New Deal" exceed those of the Westernization Movement and the Reform Movement of 1898 in the 19th century. It was through the "New Deal" that signs of China's transformation from traditional small farmers to a modern industrial and commercial society really emerged. The issuance of economic liberalization policies provided a certain institutional basis for the development of the capitalist economy; the modern army system, system and modern talent concept also began to settle; the modern system and judicial system also began to take shape, in addition to the "Articles of Association of Award Companies", " In addition to the "Trial Regulations for Trademark Registration", "General Regulations for Businessmen", "Company Law", "Bankruptcy Law", "Judge Rules", "Laws of Assemblies and Associations", etc., the "Criminal and Civil Procedure Law of the Qing Dynasty", "Criminal Law of the Qing Dynasty" "" and "Draft of Civil Code", these three laws laid the foundation for the establishment of China's modern legal system in the fields of procedural law and substantive law respectively, and their value and influence did not disappear because of the fall of the Qing Dynasty.

However, it should also be noted that the "New Deal" only started after the rulers delayed several reform opportunities in the 19th century. At the beginning of the 20th century, China was already beset by crises and riddled with holes. The climax of the anti-Qing revolution in 1911 came just when the rulers of the Qing Dynasty could no longer rule as usual. Therefore, it was not Sun Yat-sen, as some extremists said. The result of the wishful thinking of professional revolutionaries is artificial momentum.