Analyse the reasons for, and the consequences of, China’s attempt to modernise and overcome its weaknesses in the period 1862 to 1864.
From 1861 to 1895, China began a self-strengthening movement to modernise by adopting foreign ideas to improve their political, military, and economic state. The main reason for this was to defend themselves against future threats, from both external and internal forces. In addition, the Tongzhi Restoration from 1860 to 1874, was also a part of the self-strengthening movement, put in place with the purpose of reviving the Qing dynasty’s fading powers and halting dynastic decline. However, the movement met with limited success, due to the entrenched social-cultural ethos of the Chinese people, and the failure
…show more content…
As the Tongzhi Restoration was largely focused on developing a nation with strong Confucian values, there was a refusal to change the intellectual mindset of the climate. Even though the scholar officials were willing to adapt Western technology and methods, they were still convinced of the superiority of Chinese values. Hence, they failed to fully understand the sources of Western power, failing to assimilate their institutions and culture. Moreover, the Imperial Court was divided into the conservatives and reformers both pushing for different goals. For instance, the reforming efforts were undermined when Prince Gong, who had been willing to cooperate with the Westerners and recognised the need for change, was replaced with the incompetent and conservative Prince Chun. In addition, Empress Cixi constantly oscillated between reform and reaction, giving no consistent backing to the provincial reform efforts. Large amounts of capital for the self-strengthening movement were also diverted for her extravagant purposes, thus creating further setbacks for the modernising efforts. Therefore, the consequence of China’s political reforms was that the lack of a common vision amongst the officials led to lack of focus in changing policies, thus little change could be enacted.
In conclusion, China’s attempt to modernise ultimately failed because of the lack of coordination amongst the officials and the people. Although several structures were put in place to initiate change, the traditional intellectual mindsets persisted, which were incompatible with Western values at the time. Hence, very little progress could be made when these changes were not supported by the citizens, who could not understand the need for change, and preferred to continue living under the old Confucian
People would follow Confucian ideologies/teachings because they thought this ideology would be better for Chinese society, since Buddhism was not mentioned in Confucian texts. As Confucius’ followers would challenge Buddhist ideologies, people believed Confucianism was better because its main focus was how people in China should rule themselves. People would angrily challenge Buddhism because for them the rightful lifestyle were the teachings of Confucius, as these promoted traditional Chinese values. (Document 4) Leaders of Confucianist ideologies in the Tang imperial court in the year 819 CE would challenge Buddhist ideals. The imperial court would present Buddhists as “Barbarians” and how Confucianist ideals was the only way society could work.
Throughout the history of The Roman Empire the government has changed elected consuls to powerful emperors with intent to overall better the empire. Comparatively, China’s empire was constantly adjusted from a simpler bureaucracy to a censorate appointed to provinces, which lead it to be argued as the most unified empire. Rome and China attempted to unify their empires both similarly and very differently because of the different structures of their governments and the culture flowing through the empires. The Roman and Chinese had similar ideas of having a bureaucratic based government to centralize the people under the rule of the emperor like the censorate in China and senate in Rome. On the contrary, those political structures were both
The imperial governments of Han China and Rome after Augustus each had their own distinct characteristics, shaped by their own unique histories and the cultural and social norms of their respective times. The institutions of imperial government developed in each state were quite different from one another, with the Han Chinese government relying heavily on Confucian ideals, while the Roman government was more focused on practicality and efficiency. In order to understand why these differences exist, one must look at the historical, cultural, and religious contexts of both societies. In Han China, Confucianism was the dominant philosophy and its influence shaped the institutions of the imperial government.
It says in TCI that the Han made improvements on the Chinese governments and they softened the harsh rules and brought back Confucianism into that government. It says in the text “The government of China during this time functioned as a bureaucracy. A bureaucracy is a large organization that operates using a fixed set of rules and conditions.” this shows that the government changed because of the Hans and for that better, with a bureaucracy it was strong and effective. During this time it says in the text that “They had many responsibilities, including overseeing the maintenance of roads and canals.”
The 4 Modernizations were to modernize agriculture, industry, national defense, science, and technology. These modernizing reforms helped move China from a command economy to an economy that was closer to a market driven one. Zones for foreign investment opened up and the state decentralized with a collective leadership. Deng Xiaoping and his handpicked successors helped China become a budding economic super power while at the same time keeping a pretty low profile global
The progress differed in the ways of intervening and reform. For instance, the well-known idea “antimonopoly” which appealed to a lot. “Antimonopoly” was the fear of concentrated power,
78) that would eventually bring down the Zhou Dynasty and give way to the Qin Dynasty where it was ruled with ruthless efficiency(p.79). Another factor of how and why China succeed in unifying in contrast to India, is where there were many different views, and being opposed of things changing in India, If someone “opposed the polices of the new regime in the Qin Dynasty those individuals would be punished and
As China grew with population and technologies, so did their government. Their military was weak but they had the idea to make iron and steel weaponry. The increase of weapons allowed the Chinese military to have more power over the people. Yet, the downfall of their era was their tactics in controlling their army and the rebellious citizens. As China’s economy and population grows, so does the growth of politics and Urban life styles.
Han, China and Imperial Rome both had similarities and differences in terms of political control throughout the classical period. Both empires had major differences about their perspectives on what main element could hold their political jurisdictions together, Imperial Rome favored law codes since one would try to obey if they didn’t want to be punished for their actions whereas Han, China reinforced confucius teaching even though they had some laws as well because they thought virtues would guide everyone to follow the right path in the political system. However, both had similarities facing problems with the administration of good bureaucrats who could really reinforce tight vigorous decisions to help political power run smoothly along with
Introduction The governments of Han China and Rome after Augustus were vastly different in their institutions and practices. While both empires employed autocratic rule and relied on bureaucracy, the ways in which they developed these systems varied significantly. The Han Chinese imperial government was characterized by a Confucian meritocracy while the Roman imperial government was characterized by a strong religious framework. Additionally, Han China tended to centralize more power within a single ruler as compared to Rome's system of devolved authority through provincial governorships.
This eventually led to the decision of Chinese leaders to implement anther reform to eliminate the instability and return a comprehensive healthcare system to the people of China, leading to it’s healthcare system today (Blumenthal,
China on the other hand had more problems in its bureaucracy and civic unrest. For example, some peasants who had lost their farms had to sell their children into service. A third difference is that as previously stated, China had a successful revival while Rome did not. Rome divided and the Western half survived but was diminished by attempts to regulate the economy and decline tax revenue ’s.
The Han Dynasty in China and the Roman Empire shared many similarities and differences when it came to political rule and the nature of their political authority. The most significant difference between the two is how the Han dynasty enacted policies that were shaped to counter the wrongdoings of the previous Qin dynasty, whereas the Roman Empire enacted policies shaped to create and promote peace and stability. The difference in the two empire’s coming to power was to account for their variance in political rule. After the Qin dynasty, the Han ruled China for four centuries, enacting numerous political changes and governing one of the most efficacious dynasties in Chinese history.
By tracing trends across the Qing’s illustrious history, it allows the reader to better grasp the revisionist interpretation that he posits, instead of simplistically allocating the award of most influential factor of leading to China’s modernisation as well as the Qing’s fall to the Western powers. It is notable, however, to observe that, despite his revisionist view, Rowe still titles his book China’s Last Empire. The Great Qing. By using the term ‘last’, Rowe seems to still be close to the implicit narrative of China’s ‘failure’ as seen in other orthodox interpretations such as Frederic Wakeman’s ‘The Fall of Imperial China. Despite this seeming setback however, Rowe’s book is extremely useful in exploring the binary of historiography and history, while elaborating immensely on the Qing’s
Secondly, the Cultural Revolution and the chaos and disaster this had on the Chinese population, especially through the “Down to the Countryside movement” and finally, the Cult of Mao and what the idolisation and glorification of Mao meant for the future of China. Mao’s introduction of the Great Leap Forward policy and the impacts and effects this had on the Chinese population as well as its role in the introduction of the Cultural Revolution played a key role in shaping China into what it is today. The plan’s failure lead to Mao’s loss of power, which resulted in Mao introducing the Cultural Revolution in China. Unfortunately, Mao’s five-year plan was a disaster, and caused the death of an estimated twenty to forty