Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > World History Forum > General History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

General History General History Forum - General history questions and discussions


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old November 19th, 2012, 01:21 AM   #101
Archivist
 
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 191

As said, different philosophy. So not comparable.
Nego is offline  
Remove Ads
Old November 19th, 2012, 02:42 PM   #102
Historian
 
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,034

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucius View Post
No problem. I am familiar with the phenomenon.



As to that, European countries were accustomed to having wars with each other every 20 years or so with only minor border fluctuations resulting. In any case, from the fall of the Roman Empire to Thomas Jefferson was 1,345 years. What is 73 years compared to that?



Yes, they would have felt a feeling. But after they had had a lie down they would have thought a thought, to wit; "How did this most unlikely turn of events come to pass? Ignorant savages have come to our Middle Kingdom from the other side of the planet and arranged our affairs to their liking. We must become like them. But more so."

The rest is history/current events.
China had been in contact with europeans for over 300 years before the opium wars, in which numerous times the europeans (portugal, the dutch, russia) were defeated. The ming dynasty also deliberately adopted and reverse engineered captured portuguese cannon after defeating them, and the qing also used cannon deaigned by jesuits in beijing against the russians at albazin.

The idea that the british suddenly came out of nowhere in 1840 and china thought they were ignorant savages is the product of western psychological projection on china. Chinese knew perfectly well who the british were, the chinese filipino community in manila helped the british seize the city from the spanish in 1762.

By the way, the disparity between china and britain's military technology was not great in the first opium war. Although british musket rifles might have a slightly higher chance of going off than a matchlock, it makes no difference in mass infantry formations. China also had artillery and gingal hand cannons. The two things britain have that china didn't were congreve metal tubed rockets and steam engines. China lost because its soldiers had low morale, and sucked after having not fought a conflict for decades. The small technological disparity was not militarily decisive. And craftsmen made lower quality weapons because of the lax attitude and corruption that spread due to the lack of conflict.

The qing emperors themselves noted the quality of the military, both manchu bannermen and green standard army had declined. The qianlong emperor noted that a hundred years before chinese bannermen were only slightly inferior to manchu bannermen, and in his time, the quality had declined drastically. The manchu bannermen also didn't train at all, their position was hereditary. The green standard army were given inferior weapons and military training in china was very lax.

This was why in the white lotus rebellion of 1794, the qing military's quality declined sharply and it took them ten years to take down a mob of rebels. In 1813 the eight trigrams rebels broke into the forbidden city and almost killed the emperor, since the military sucked so bad after lax training.

China's Last Empire: The Great Qing - William T. Rowe - Google Books

The west's military tech suddenly leaped ahead sometimes in the mid 1800s. If you looked at it on a graph, it would be a massive spike, not a gradual hill.

And the qing dynasty would have fell regardless of the opium wars, because the opium war merely exposed the massive decay and corruption which was going on in china's military. The qing dynasty did not collapse because of the west at any rate. It collapsed after a succession of massive rebellions like the taiping, nian, and other massive peasant and ethnic revolts which rocked china, and the need to retake kashgaria from uzbek andijani invaders. These rebellions led to the green standard and manchu banner armies being shuttered aside, and regional armies with local warlords st their helm took their place to crush the rebels.

As a result of these regional armies with local warlords like yuan shikai and zhang zhidong, the qing government's authority in actuallity only consisted of the capital region of zhili, with regional governors paying lip service. The xinhai rebellions delivered the coup de grace, with Yuan shikai and his regional army deciding to force the government to abdicate since they were entirely at his mercy.

It can be said without the west, the form of government after the fall of qing would have been different, it would have been another dynasty, but the qing would have fell around the same time regardless.

The reason chinese wanted to establish a republic was not because they were manhandled by military forces from a republic, but because when chinese people like dr. Sun yatsen toured western republics, they decided that its better to live under a government in which the government can't chop your head off for insulting the emperor. It was about standard of living, not because they thought they wre better militarily, because china could become militarily as strong as a despotic state like the german empire without being a democracy.

And prussian militancy was actually admired by some military figures like cai e more than a jeffersonian republic or constitutional monarchy.

And most importantly of all, the people who made china a republic were a minority, the educated class and the military generals. The vast majority of chinese did not give a flying crows foot about the form of government, illustrated in lu xun's novel "the story of ah q "

Last edited by deke; November 19th, 2012 at 04:29 PM.
deke is offline  
Old November 19th, 2012, 02:52 PM   #103

funakison's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Oct 2012
From: Between a rock and a hard place
Posts: 3,386
Blog Entries: 1

No i dont think Westerners are superior to the Chinese. There was a time when Chinese civilisation was scientificaly way ahead of the europeans, the chinese made one mistake, they were so pleased with their pretty porcelin drinking vessels they never got round to inventing glass.

No telescopes. no spectalcles no microscopes.
funakison is offline  
Old November 19th, 2012, 03:42 PM   #104
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 19,934

Just for the record, neither the Chinese nor the European/Westerners are objectively either inherently superior or inferior than let say the Inuit or the San people, or for that matter any other Homo sapiens sapiens.
sylla1 is offline  
Old November 20th, 2012, 01:27 AM   #105
MrM
Academician
 
Joined: Jul 2012
From: U.S
Posts: 75

No, there isn't a dominant or superior culture or race on this planet. Time will tell that it's always been trading on each continent who was better. Right now or for the last 300 years the Europeans have been doing pretty well and "Western" civilization is seen as dominant since not only are European countries doing well right now but they have a control on media and such. Soon it might be Chinese or " Eastern" civilization that's doing better then some African countries then middle eastern
MrM is offline  
Old November 20th, 2012, 01:38 AM   #106

Wenge's Avatar
American
 
Joined: Apr 2011
From: The True Capital of China
Posts: 8,116

Quote:
Originally Posted by deke View Post
China had been in contact with europeans for over 300 years before the opium wars, in which numerous times the europeans (portugal, the dutch, russia) were defeated. The ming dynasty also deliberately adopted and reverse engineered captured portuguese cannon after defeating them, and the qing also used cannon deaigned by jesuits in beijing against the russians at albazin.

The idea that the british suddenly came out of nowhere in 1840 and china thought they were ignorant savages is the product of western psychological projection on china. Chinese knew perfectly well who the british were, the chinese filipino community in manila helped the british seize the city from the spanish in 1762.

By the way, the disparity between china and britain's military technology was not great in the first opium war. Although british musket rifles might have a slightly higher chance of going off than a matchlock, it makes no difference in mass infantry formations. China also had artillery and gingal hand cannons. The two things britain have that china didn't were congreve metal tubed rockets and steam engines. China lost because its soldiers had low morale, and sucked after having not fought a conflict for decades. The small technological disparity was not militarily decisive. And craftsmen made lower quality weapons because of the lax attitude and corruption that spread due to the lack of conflict.

The qing emperors themselves noted the quality of the military, both manchu bannermen and green standard army had declined. The qianlong emperor noted that a hundred years before chinese bannermen were only slightly inferior to manchu bannermen, and in his time, the quality had declined drastically. The manchu bannermen also didn't train at all, their position was hereditary. The green standard army were given inferior weapons and military training in china was very lax.

This was why in the white lotus rebellion of 1794, the qing military's quality declined sharply and it took them ten years to take down a mob of rebels. In 1813 the eight trigrams rebels broke into the forbidden city and almost killed the emperor, since the military sucked so bad after lax training.

China's Last Empire: The Great Qing - William T. Rowe - Google Books

The west's military tech suddenly leaped ahead sometimes in the mid 1800s. If you looked at it on a graph, it would be a massive spike, not a gradual hill.

And the qing dynasty would have fell regardless of the opium wars, because the opium war merely exposed the massive decay and corruption which was going on in china's military. The qing dynasty did not collapse because of the west at any rate. It collapsed after a succession of massive rebellions like the taiping, nian, and other massive peasant and ethnic revolts which rocked china, and the need to retake kashgaria from uzbek andijani invaders. These rebellions led to the green standard and manchu banner armies being shuttered aside, and regional armies with local warlords st their helm took their place to crush the rebels.

As a result of these regional armies with local warlords like yuan shikai and zhang zhidong, the qing government's authority in actuallity only consisted of the capital region of zhili, with regional governors paying lip service. The xinhai rebellions delivered the coup de grace, with Yuan shikai and his regional army deciding to force the government to abdicate since they were entirely at his mercy.

It can be said without the west, the form of government after the fall of qing would have been different, it would have been another dynasty, but the qing would have fell around the same time regardless.

The reason chinese wanted to establish a republic was not because they were manhandled by military forces from a republic, but because when chinese people like dr. Sun yatsen toured western republics, they decided that its better to live under a government in which the government can't chop your head off for insulting the emperor. It was about standard of living, not because they thought they wre better militarily, because china could become militarily as strong as a despotic state like the german empire without being a democracy.

And prussian militancy was actually admired by some military figures like cai e more than a jeffersonian republic or constitutional monarchy.

And most importantly of all, the people who made china a republic were a minority, the educated class and the military generals. The vast majority of chinese did not give a flying crows foot about the form of government, illustrated in lu xun's novel "the story of ah q "
Doctor Sun not only toured western nations he was in fact an American citizen. I often play trivia games with my students and one of the questions I frequently pose is, Who is the most important American citizen born in China?
Wenge is offline  
Old November 20th, 2012, 01:50 AM   #107

dagul's Avatar
Rabbit of Wormhole
 
Joined: Mar 2012
From: In the bag of ecstatic squirt
Posts: 9,624

No human is superior over the other, thus, the Europeans are not superior over the Chinese vis-a-vis.

However, in regards to the philosophy about government and laws, I tend to be a fan of the Western schools of thought, as compared to those that hail from the Oriental East.
dagul is offline  
Old November 20th, 2012, 02:06 AM   #108

Scaeva's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 1,715

No.

I do however think that democratic forms of government, despite all their ineffeciencies, are superior to autocratic ones.
Scaeva is online now  
Old November 20th, 2012, 02:10 AM   #109

dagul's Avatar
Rabbit of Wormhole
 
Joined: Mar 2012
From: In the bag of ecstatic squirt
Posts: 9,624

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scaeva View Post
I do however think that democratic forms of government, despite all their ineffeciencies, are superior to autocratic ones.
..... yes, democracy is far from perfect but is the best form of government.
dagul is offline  
Old November 20th, 2012, 08:59 PM   #110
Historian
 
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,034

Adoption of portuguese cannon by china

Wars of the Age of Louis Xiv, 1650-1715 - Cathal J. Nolan - Google Books

After constant dutch raiding and pillaging of chinese ships in the 1620s in order to force china to trade with them occupying a base on the pescadores, they were defeated and forced to agree to china's terms to agree to trade- they vacated their fort on the pescadores and moved to taiwan which was china's original demand. Later they were expelled from taiwan in 1662.

Dictionary of Ming Biography 1368-1644..: M-Z. - Association for Asian Studies. Ming Biographical History Project Committee, L. Carrington (Luther Carrington) Goodrich, 房兆楹 - Google Books

Dictionary of Ming Biography 1368-1644..: M-Z. - Association for Asian Studies. Ming Biographical History Project Committee, L. Carrington (Luther Carrington) Goodrich, 房兆楹 - Google Books

Flow Cytometry and Cell Sorting - Google Books

Pentecost of the Hills in Taiwan: The Christian Faith Among the Original ... - Ralph R. Covell - Google Books

The Cambridge History of China: Volume 8, The Ming Dynasty - Denis C. Twitchett, Frederick W. Mote - Google Books

The Cambridge History of China: Volume 8, The Ming Dynasty - Denis C. Twitchett, Frederick W. Mote - Google Books

Amoy and the surrounding districts: compiled from Chinese and other records - George Hughes (of Amoy.) - Google Books

Maritime Sector, Institutions, and Sea Power of Premodern China - K Gang Deng - Google Books

Leyden Studies in Sinology: Papers Presented at the Conference Held in ... - Prof W L Idema - Google Books

Statecraft and Political Economy on the Taiwan Frontier, 1600-1800 - John Robert Shepherd - Google Books

Twentieth century impressions of Hongkong, Shanghai, and other treaty ports ... - Arnold Wright - Google Books
deke is offline  
Reply

  Historum > World History Forum > General History

Tags
chinese, europeans or westerners, superior


Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Gifts from King Farouk to Westerners Oskar Ancient History 4 October 10th, 2011 07:02 AM
The Europeans Reached the New World with copies of Chinese Maps? llingjie Speculative History 25 July 26th, 2011 03:32 PM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.