Re: China's wealthy bypass the banks
Ah. This is an interesting point. The Qing were 1) Manchus (ie, not Han Chinese)...they were basically a foreign occupation that stuck around for a while; and 2) (Nominally Tibetan) Buddhists. Although they of course adhered to the larger Confucian notions, they in many ways deviated from mainstream Confucian beliefs. Also, you need to get more specific about WHEN during the Qing dynasty you believed this occurred. During the 19th century this is most certainly NOT true, and there are many famous naval battles that occurred between the British and the Chinese navies (in fact, the famous Stone Boat in the Summer palace was built using funds that were supposed to pay for real ships). But perhaps you meant ocean-going boat ownership by private individuals, and that is certainly something that was a BIG no-no during many epochs of Chinese civilization. And indeed, this is probably precisely why the Chinese had to defend themselves from British attack, rather than the other way around. But this has nothing to do with Confucianism per se, but is more directly related to good old traditional Chinese xenophobia. In the end, Chinese unification was probably a devil's bargain. It created a far more stable "nation", but at the cost of human freedom. But it's not precisely like this was imposed on the populace from without...that it was successful at all in a place as large and remote as China is a testimony to Chinese dislike of "Wai Guo" culture. -TD
From: "James A. Donald" <jamesd@echeque.com> To: cypherpunks <cypherpunks@al-qaeda.net> Subject: Re: China's wealthy bypass the banks Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 10:11:09 -0800
-- ken wrote:
And when was this stagnation?
R.A. Hettinga wrote:
Two words: Ming Navy
For those who need more words, the Qing Dynasty forbade ownership or building of ocean going vessels, on pain of death - the early equivalent of the iron curtain.
--digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG Iw7Wkew4KTQWmS2lvvIMd7+fR3rWAWagnqJ4cF0k 4Ee4DcVaw474VQFVRrwVAXR4XZSXiaNtRuKXYpsBo
-- On 12 Nov 2004 at 15:08, Tyler Durden wrote:
The Qing were 1) Manchus (ie, not Han Chinese)...they were basically a foreign occupation that stuck around for a while; and 2) (Nominally Tibetan) Buddhists. Although they of course adhered to the larger Confucian notions, they in many ways deviated from mainstream Confucian beliefs.
The mainstream Confucian belief, like the mainstream legalist belief, was that the emperor should have absolute power. The Qing dynasty was successful in giving effect to this belief, and justified that effect on confucian grounds. This makes them more confucian, not less confucian, than the Sung dynasty, for the Sung were confucian merely in intent, much as the current chinese regime is communist merely in intent.
Also, you need to get more specific about WHEN during the Qing dynasty you believed this occurred. During the 19th century this is most certainly NOT true, and there are many famous naval battles that occurred between the British and the Chinese navies (in fact, the famous Stone Boat in the Summer palace was built using funds that were supposed to pay for real ships).
The Qing dynasty prohibited anyone other than themselves from owning seagoing boats - that is why I called it the equivalent of the iron curtain.
But this has nothing to do with Confucianism per se, but is more directly related to good old traditional Chinese xenophobia.
The prohibition was not against foreigners sailing, but chinese sailing, so the intent was not fear of foreigners, but as with the iron curtain, fear of chinese wandering outside government control and being contaminated with unauthorized foreign thoughts. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG QpsnWCawMTxeL36my3kdz4SvKVqTYqmGh2nPCY2E 4vCwJru3POMcSWlMD2yDlvSJWTIOuNvDNItpg37fe
participants (2)
-
James A. Donald -
Tyler Durden