I think the Qing dynasty is really interesting. I've been taking a grad seminar with a Chinese history expert and we've spent a good amount of time on them, mostly on the McCartney mission, comparative global history, and Qing governance in SW China.
Just finished reading The Great Divergence a week ago and I'm curious about /his/'s reaction to the sort of exacting cliometric history Pomeranz uses to build his argument that the Qing dynasty was not inherently less disposed towards industrializing, but failed to do so because of its coal deposits and lack of colonial peripheries (in really reduced terms). Do ya'll think Qing China could have equalled Great Britain if they had been more interested in acquiring overseas markets and that they were actually a very dynamic people, or do you guys think that the letter form the Qianlong emperor where he rejects western technology wholesale is a reflection of cultural stagnancy in the Qing empire at the time?
>>77543 >Do ya'll think Qing China could have equalled Great Britain if they had been more interested in acquiring overseas markets I mean, you're changing the nature of their society if by doing that. They viewed themselves as the best and not needed to acquire more territory to prove their greatness. That sort of shock only came to them fully when it was far too late.
But there's a good chance that if they had pressed to expand more it would have forced them to innovate.
I'm still not totally convinced they however. Their corruption problem seems to me (based on a fairly light amount of studying, but eh) to be nearly endemic.
What they really needed was to flush out most of the bureaucrats and start over. It isn't as though there weren't a number of Chinese officials who understood that they needed to modernize in various ways, but they struggled to get anything done.
>>77826 Interesting, I'm actually partially inclined to agree with you that the Qing bureaucracy was a major reason they failed to "modernize". McCartney blamed the failure of the first British embassy on intransigent officials. Have you ever read Cherishing Men from Afar?
>>77654 How does it feel to not have a country of your own, Manchu nigger?
I bet it feels fucking bad to be a tiny minority in a massive country, and not have a country of your own where you can speak the Manchu language, enjoy Manchu culture, go on dates with pure-blooded Manchu cuties, eat Manchu cuisine, and cheer for the Manchurian soccer team.
You will experience absolutely none of that. You will never experience any of that.
>>77947 Pretty bad. The language is practically dead, only academics really bother to speak it. There are a few villages in North eastern Manchuria with a Manchu majority, but they do not have any Manchu culture as it was wiped out under Mao.
As a non-Han, I am pissed off that the Manchus didn't perserve their national, ethnic and cultural identity and would create better stability within East Asia and the world. They gave too much power to the Han Chinese, who claimed the lands of the Manchu enpire for themselves. An independent China proper, Manchuria, Turkestan, Mongolia, Tibet, and perhaps southern Chinese states would be much better than the huge swarth of communist Han Chinese dominated land we now know as 'China.'. Qing dynasty was the direct cause of modern day Han Chinese communist imperialism. I wish Japan made it all the way to reverse the damage the Qing and its successor the KMT had done
>>77947 Half-Manchu here, are you actually Chinese or just a troll? At this point in time, Han and Manchu are only distinguishable by whether or not big papa CCP has granted you minority status, there is literally no beef between Han and Manchu.
A country with a large bureaucracy has a harder time adapting to change and implementing new ideas. The U.S. is a prime example of a government so large that it cannot implement large changes that people view as normal in every other western nation
In some ways, the hilariously inept clusterfuck that was Qing China getting utterly owned by the West paved the way for China to want to gain greatness again, for good or bad. So there is that the Qing has going for them.
>>78042 As a non-Chinese Northeast Asian how does it feel to be associated with greasy, rude, loud, dishonorable chinks with no concept of individuality or space? Chinks are different from Northeast Asians, they did not come out of the same stock of people as the Manchus, Koreans and Japanese. Why do you accept being kekelded?
>>77543 >form the Qianlong emperor where he rejects western technology wholesale is a reflection of cultural stagnancy in the Qing empire at the time? I've had a lot of conversations with a Taiwanese friend of mine who clearly defended that the chinese always had an arrogant "ultra-centrist" view of the world that kept China from actually expanding outwards in "acquiring overseas markets" as you said. He basically said that this mentality is indeed reflected in that rejection of western technology. He used that letter as a very specific example of that mindset, and how that ended up bringing so much strife to China in his relations with the west and to social strife in China itself.
>>78155 Yeah, Manchu culture the time before the Qing was extremely distinct and rich and not as influenced by Chinese culture as Korea had been. It's a shame an entire culture and geopolitical entity as well as Tibet, the majority of Mongolia, Turkestan are basically wiped out by the cancerous Chinese hivemind. You guys could have genocided most of the Chinese when you had the chance
>>78153 >Chinks are different from Northeast Asians, they did not come out of the same stock of people as the Manchus, Koreans and Japanese
Are you kidding? Han and Manchu are literally indistinguishable, like I said. Maybe you can tell a Cantonese person apart, but not where I'm from (Beijing). Manchus are the same way as these "rude, loud, dishonorable chinks" because everyone was ruined by the Cultural Revolution. Let me guess, you're Japanese?
>>78155 Pretty much, and the Manchus haven't been around that long. Definitely not more than a thousand years. The Manchu elite willingly became Sinicized and regular Manchu people followed suit.
>>78260 I think Nurhaci said about how he said Mongols and Manchus have a similar way of life and dress, yet different languages and Koreans and Chinese had a similar lifestyles and dress, yet spoke differently. Manchus had more in common with Mongols than Koreans and Chinese.
>>78361 I mean the Manchurian identity which is still distinct from predecessors. People have been living in that area for thousands of years, remember. Many of the times, people don't even know that the Chinese have a name for them.
>>78490 Yeah, but by the time of the Qing, Manchu culture and society wasn't nomadic anymore.
>>78621 Manchu culture was not nomadic but mostly sedentary. You are confusing Manchu culture with Wild/Yeren Jurchens north of the Amur who were mixed with Paleo-Asiatics. It was an institutional change from the Qing bureaucracy, which caused an imposed caste system of an entrenched military/bureaucratic elite based in the banners that altered Manchu lifestyles from an ethnicity to more of a class
>>78743 Also have you read Mark Elliott's the Manchu Way? Manchu identity was formed in order to rule China. And they had to add Han Chinese, I guess a lot of them in order to rule under the Manchu label. Before them they were basically Jurchens and identified themselves as a distinct people than with one singular identity.
Read Bertrand Russell's essay on China. It's the most insightful and objective view of China during the 1920's by a Western academic without the Western bias.
The reason why Qing never expanded abroad was because the Chinese only love empire just a little bit. China for most of its history had no geopolitical rival with the only real external threat being the steppe tribes which were the terror of every Eurasian civilization.
Pomeranz argument for why the Qing never industrialized is faulty because it fails to factor in the motivation for industrialization. China since the Ming Dynasty was overpopulated, there was a huge pool of human capital and industries were never lacking in labor which means there was no motivation to adopt technologies that would have cut the amount of labor used for production. Hell China had a machine similar to the spinning jenny during the Yuan dynasty but abandoned it because there was no demand for the machine.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the content originated from them. If you need IP information for a Poster - you need to contact them. This website shows only archived content.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content you can contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org with that post and thread number and it will be removed as soon as possible.